Is the U.N anti Semitic.?

Question

The U.N has condemed Israel several times as well as the US but has not condemed the slaughter in Rwanda, war in Yugoslavia, and the 3 wars all started by Arab nations against Israel unless it condems Israel after it won the wars. Please post your oppinions and no fanatism

Answer 1

Sure it is, although I don't know why anymore since the Muslims have certainly given the world more aggravation than the Jews in the last 1000 years. There are millions more Muslims and no Jewish attacks in countries that Israel hasn't been at war with, no Spanish attacks, no English bombing, no French riots, not one Jew has donned a suicide vest to bomb a Bali nightclub, or killed and dismembered a Sudanese citizen. I don't understand the endless anti Jewish sentiment, is it just knee-jerk or are the predominately Muslim oil interests hoping if they can just keep us involved in hating Jews we won't notice that the enemy reads the Quran?

Answer 2

UN membership has been shown to be anti-Israel yes. Many, I should say most of UN members are not now and never have been democratic and yet they have a VOTE at UN. Many member nations, or I should say states, are maybe the size of Pittsburgh, and vote anti-Israel in blocs - that's a common muslim state strategy. Non-binding Resolutions against Israel are everyday yawners, because they know they won't get Binding Resolutions passed - all they can do is badmouth and whine at what is ultimately results of their own behavior, since actions have consequences.

Basically the UN is a club, a US-hosted playground where the kiddies get to see how the grownups act, and to a large extent bill US taxpayers while they play. BUT at least they get together.

Answer 3

Weather they are or aren't I have no idea. What I do know is the U.N. is useless, all it's members could careless about the world as a whole, they care and act only for the benefit of there respective countries.

The U.N. has been a catastrophic failure, since the UN's inception the US has paid their bills, provided the most troops and has bailed out each of the other member countries from countless issues in there individual countries. If I were you I wouldn't put too much stock in what the UN has to say.

Answer 4

You're misinformed. The Rwanda and Yugoslavia genocides were condemned.

This isn't about "hating the Jews." The UN, like the US, is beholden to Big Oil. Many predominately Arab Middle Eastern countries are Oil producing nations, or have ties with ones that are.

If there were no massive oil reserves in the Middle East, then no one at the UN would care what Israel did, but because Israel's actions in the Middle East could result in a spike in the price of Oil, they get a lot more scrutiny than they would otherwise receive.

Answer 5

The UN actually did condemn the slaughter in Rwanda and Yugoslavia. They just didn't do anything about it, successfully.

You are correct about the Arab nations, however. They only condemn Israel when it comes to the Muslims.

I do believe the UN is anti-semitic.

Answer 6

Definitely.

Due to the Arab nations, Israel is not part of the Middle Eastern group at the UN. It was "temporarily" put into the group called Europe and Other Areas, which includes Europe and the USA. Because that is a "temporary" arrangement, Israel is the only nation in the entire UN that can not sit on the Security Council. The ONLY nation. If that is not bias against Israel, tell me what is?

Also, the UN files non-binding resolutions all the time. The greatest bulk of those resolutions are condemnations of Israel. If that is not bias, tell me what is?

Now in regards to ZERO1's confused comments. While ZERO1's understanding of the word "Semite" is correct, his understanding of "Anti-Semitic" is not. He is trying to invalidate an accepted definition of a word so as to render it unusable.

He commented, """since most people, including college graduates, are so dense that they apparently can't open up a dictionary many people commonly misunderstand the meaning of the word and either allow or participate in it's misuse.""

He himself is included in his own diatribe as he failed to look up the definitions. I shall do the work for him since he can't open a dictionary and will look up both "Semite" and "Anti-Semitic" to show that indeed, the UN is Anti-Semitic.

First, Semite. (Yahoo Education, Reference, Dictionary)

1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
2. A Jew.
3. Bible A descendant of Shem.

In that definition, ZERO1 was correct...

Now, Anti-Semitic. (Yahoo Education, Reference, Dictionary)

1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism.
2. Discrimination against Jews.

It is clear ZERO1 was way off the mark. Anti-Semites is a term that specifically refers to discrimination against Jews. His comment trying to invalidate the definition is just smoke.

The UN is clearly Anti-Semitic as it is clearly against Israel.

Phillip L's comments below are also evading the issue. Those who know anti-Semitism is wrong disguise what they want to say by attacking Israel. They think no one will see through their little shell game.

If they can not say "Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth", somehow they think it is OK to say "Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth." For the Jews, how is one any different than the other?

If Israel were just another Muslim nation, or just another Christian nation, it would not be getting attacked repeatedly, both physically and verbally. But since it is the only Jewish nation and has few defenders, pretty much everyone thinks it is OK to attack Israel, claiming their attacks are not anti-Semitic because they are not directly attacking Jews.

They seem to think the whole issue is about land. It is not, it is about Muslims wanting to drive out Jews from their nations. If you do not believe me, check out how many Jews lived in Arab Muslim nations in 1948 and how many fled to Israel from the attacks of the Muslims. It is not about the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Even before Israel captured those lands from Egypt and Jordan there were those in the Arab world, such as the PLO, who wanted to destroy Israel. Today, the leaders of Palestine do not want peace. They have renounced all past agreements with Israel and still call for its complete destruction. And you can not destroy Israel without destroying the Jews.

Changing definitions does not change the facts. The UN is anti-Semitic and so are those who attack Israel.

Answer 7

If criticizing Israel means anti-semitism then yes. However, it does not. Israeli partisans cry "anti-semitism" every time Israel is condemned. It is the equivalent of being accused of being anti-white when condemning South Africa's apartheid.
But the Israeli lobby loves linking criticism of Israeli policies with being pro-Hitler, pro-terrorism. Israel is a law unto itself and can attack, assasinate, kidnap at will. No other nation in the world get's a free hand as Israel has at violating international law.

Answer 8

It could be possible. The most successful politicans are Jewish people. The race with the most enemies are unfortunately- the Jews. During WW2 the allies knew of the Nazi camps as early as 1942. However, they did nothing to silence the madness.

Answer 9

No. A Semite is a person who can be of either Jewish or Arabic descent. So to be anti-Semitic would mean that you are against both Jews and Arabs. It's a misuse of the term but since most people, including college graduates, are so dense that they apparently can't open up a dictionary many people commonly misunderstand the meaning of the word and either allow or participate in it's misuse.

Answer 10

yes IMO they are.

the only country they keep condemning over and over is Israel.

the UN has lost all credibility with thinking people, as they ignore actual genocide and atrocities taking place the world over to obsess over Israel and if they're farting in the direction of Lebanon. pitiful.