Comment by mrexcess
6 hours ago
>It's vastly outnumbered by Muslim countries, which is why traditionally Israel has received more criticism in the UN
How is this anything but DARVO? Israel receives criticism in the UN for reasons that are easily verified and quite understandable - namely its deliriously racist, brutally violent, textbook illegal, and long-lived occupation of Palestine and attempts to annex its territory.
Blaming Muslim countries writ large for the UN complaining about Israel's blatant and continuous violation of the UN Charter and various other international laws is shockingly racist.
Many members of the UN are openly biased against Israel, many are officially against the very existence of Israel and have always been, and they happily vote on any condemnation of Israel regardless of what Israel does.
This includes countries that have ethnically cleansed their Jews, and countries that do not allow Jews to enter.
> Many members of the UN are openly biased against Israel
OTOH, why would anybody not be biased against an agressive, xenophobic theocracy bent on illegally occupying and annexing its neighbour, all the while whining that "they want to destroy us and deny the existence of the Israeli state", and then with the other side of their mouth "all Palestinians must die and their homeland belongs to us"? The mind boggles.
> many are officially against the very existence of Israel and have always been
Here we go.
> and they happily vote on any condemnation of Israel regardless of what Israel does.
Israel following up on their promise and actually applying the treaties they signed never got them any condemnation. Them doing the exact opposite obviously does.
> This includes countries that have ethnically cleansed their Jews, and countries that do not allow Jews to enter.
Someone being oppressed does not justify them then oppressing others. I can’t believe this still needs to be said.
> Someone being oppressed does not justify them then oppressing others.
That’s not the point. A country that has a history of hatred against a group, to the point of ethnic cleansing, and has not changed on the matter, has no legitimacy in critisizing or making judgments on that group.
I think this would be obvious in any other context.
Many countries were also "biased" against Apartheid South Africa, the bias was disapproval of apartheid, much like the one enacted on the West Bank and Gaza.
The bias predates the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.
The litmus test is if they were just opposed to the policies of the South African government, or did those countries also hate South Africa and South Africans?
Did they have a history of persecution of South Africans in their own country?
Were they funding armed groups to attack South Africa?
Did they believe that South Africa has no right to exist anyway?
Isn't it difficult not to be biased against an apartheid, rogue nuclear state with a history of terrorism that is currently carrying out a genocide?
> Many members of the UN are openly biased against Israel, many are officially against the very existence of Israel and have always been, and they happily vote on any condemnation of Israel regardless of what Israel does.
"regardless of what Israel does" they haven't tried ending the occupation yet; do you really think they would be condemned for doing so?
> and countries that do not allow Jews to enter.
Which countries are these exactly?
This predates the occupation.
In 2005 Israel end the occupation in Gaza by evacuating all Jews from the strip and leaving it in Palestinian Authority control.
Next came Hamas, then the rockets, then the incursions and finally October 7th.
[dead]
Muslims are not a race.
Race is an invention, people assign themselves and others to races based upon nothing but their own beliefs.
It's just a way of "othering" some group of people, which certainly seems to fit the facts, regardless of whether you personally think some set of characteristics should be called a race.
[dead]