bookbanner
CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR'S BOOKS

Friday, July 08, 2011

UNCARTOON

"Don’t forget the second part: 'Never rule out malice.'"

Readers here know I'm inclined to kick the UN in the teeth as they so richly deserve. Any benefit of the doubt I was inclined to give the organization was erased by the Oil for Food scam that apparently no one is ever going to pay a price for. Still, this latest scandal isn't really one, I think. Richard Falk is on the UN Human Rights Council, a pack of human rights abusers who spend their time trying to find ways to condemn Israel and the United States. On his blog he ran a cartoon that looks like this:


The site UN Watch called him on the cartoon for its anti-Semitic nature, and Falk claimed he'd done no such thing, then deleted the cartoon later. Yet when I saw the cartoon I had to look closely to find the yarmulke on the dog If there hadn't been any arabic script at the top (which a commenter says reads "blind justice"), I wouldn't have even thought about it. I think Falk did the same thing I did, and presumed that the dog was the US. Its clearly labeled 'USA' in usual political cartoon style.

I figure he thought it was about the USA whizzing on justice as it chewed people up. In fact, I think it still is; the Yarmulke is a tribute to the "Joos control the US" nonsense bit that is common in Arabic cultures. Nobody at UN Watch seemed to care that the US is being kicked in the pills here, only if something Jewish is remotely attacked.

I have a problem with that. First off its not necessarily anti-Semitic to criticize Israel or Jews, even in a heavy handed way like saying they urinate on Justice and chew up bloody bones. Its anti-Israel but that doesn't mean they're opposed to Jews as an ethnic group. Its almost certain the guy that did this cartoon is, but that's in his heart, not the image. The reaction of Jews to images is as bad as Muslims sometimes: you cannot do anything we dislike!

Second, why isn't it bad that the US is depicted poorly here? Is it okay to say the United States is a murdering dog that disrespects justice, as long as its not Jewish? Would these same people be able to generate even close to the level of outrage at this concept? Somehow I doubt it.

By all reports this Falk guy is a hard left sort, which is not exactly a shocking characteristic in a UN drone. The organization attracts hard leftists by its very nature. Its a leftist dream of a world where murderous thugogracies and peace-loving democracies can come together and discuss things equally and intelligently. Only a leftist would believe that could possibly work.

And its hardly surprising this guy would shower hate upon the US, given that the UN tends to do that regularly and he's a leftist. That's their favorite passtime, after lighting incense and watching Michael Moore movies. We've gotten sort of used to it in the US, that's just how it is in the world. Even if the US was the most virtuous, perfect, and loving nation on the planet - and it is certainly not - people would hate it because its the richest, most powerful nation and that basic jealousy will never go away; it just shifts to the next big nation.

Its just sad that people shrug at hating the US and gnash their teeth at the slightest interpretation of being disagreeable to Israel. Especially when Americans do that.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are mistaken. UN Watch has objected from the start to the cartoon's incitement of hatred against Americans. See UN Watch's original July 6 letter to UN rights chief Navi Pillay.

Moreover, it was UN Watch in January that exposed Falk's obscene 9/11 conspiracy remarks, which effectively let off the hook Al Qaeda for those attacks.

Finally, it was UN Watch that published a major report on UN expert Jean Ziegler's anti-American actions.

3:04 AM, July 10, 2011  
Blogger Christopher Taylor said...

... what am I mistaken about? I noted that UN Watch had a problem with the cartoon from the beginning.

7:43 AM, July 10, 2011  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home