The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)passed a resolution last week that nullified all Jewish and Christian ties and connections to the Western Wall (The Kotel) The Temple Mount, The Ma'Harat Machpelah (The Cave Of The Patriarchs, where Avraham and Sarah are buried) as well as Rachel's Tomb and other holy sites revered by Jews the world over for centuries.
The resolution not only erased any Judeo-Christian connection to these sites, but referred to them by their Muslim names, usually derived from the names of mosques that were built over them or near them centuries later during the brief Arab conquest. Here's how ridiculous this sounds:
This abomination also referred to all of East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria as 'occupied Jerusalem' and Israel as the 'occupying power.' It also 'deeply condemned' Israeli 'aggressions and illegal measures against the Awqaf Department and its personnel, and against the freedom of worship.'
'Aggressions?' 'Freedom of Worship?' You mean like this?
In spite of what the caption says, those stones are also used to target Jews worshiping below at the Kotel. This is how the Israelis are rewarded for doing something they had no imperative to do other than trying to seek peace by sharing these holy sites with the Muslims. So it's freedom of worship, all right. For Muslims and only Muslims.
Yes, believe it or not, after the massacres that drove the Jews out of Hebron, after the Arab attempt to commit genocide in 1948, after the 19 year occupation by Jordan that denied Jews any access to this holy place, one of the first thing the Israelis did was to attempt to share these shrines and the Cave of The Patriarchs shrine with the Muslim Arabs whom call themselves 'Palestinians', and who likewise claim Abraham as a father.
Israel's reward for this unbelievable generosity was repeated desecration of the shrine by the Arabs and of course, constant incidents of terrorism and murder, including the deliberate shooting by a PA sniper of 10-month-old Shalhevat Pas in her stroller.
UNESCO has along history of anti-Israel rulings and activities. After they crossed a final red line by breaking their own rules and allowing a non-existent country named 'Palestine' to join as a full member, the U.S. and several other countries cut funding for the agency, which President Barack Hussein Obama restored after his 2012 re-election.
Voting in favor were: Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chad, China, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan and Vietnam.
Voting against were: Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States
Abstaining were: Albania, Argentina, Cameroon, El Salvador, France, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, India, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Nepal, Paraguay, Saint Vincent and Nevis, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Ukraine.
Absent were: Serbia and Turkmenistan.
So what does this mean in the real world
Even the head of UNESCO, Irina Bokova received death threats after publicly criticizing this resolution. As we know by now, that's how Islam plays the game. Not only doesn't Islam not play well with others, they want the others entirely out of the playground…or else.
Mexico's envoy to UNESCO, Andres Roemer who is Jewish was fired from his post over his reluctance to vote for this atrocity and his attempt to force a revote over Mexico's decision (along with Brazil) to change their yes vote to 'abstain.'
So, what does this mean in real life?
First, the Israelis not only aren't going to comply with this, but it underlines for them the futility of any kind of negotiated settlement. Area A of Judea and Samaria is entirely under Arab control and so is Gaza, without a single Jew being present in either place.And the Israelis have bent over backwards to be fair in allowing Muslim access to these sites. But if Israel is still being referred to as 'the occupying power' by the UN at this point, why should believe that any concessions they make are going to change that no matter how much land they give up? Why bother?
The truth is that the entire 'occupation' label is pure fiction because no such country as 'Palestine' ever existed and it had no sovereignty as a state over anything, not in 1922, not in 1948, not in 1967, never. No other country would be considered an occupying power in the circumstances except Israel, the Jew among nations. But if the notion of perpetual 'occupation' is so deeply ingrained that the UN continues to abuse it, why would Israelis expect it to ever disappear no matter how much land for 'peace' they give up?
So this is merely yet another attempt to try and legitimize this nonsense in what passes for 'international law' in certain quarters. At least in Turtle Bay.
Second, this is just a run up to a coming UN Security resolution regarding not just the erasing of Judeo-Christian ties to the holy sites but all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Those areas are now to be Judenrein and ceded to Islam and 'Palestine.'
In deference to President Obama and Secretary John Kerry who have been involved in the planning stages, this one will come after the 2016 elections no matter who wins, during Obama's lame duck period, a parting shot at Israel.
The United States voted against the UNESCO resolution because it's election time. But Obama will see to it that the US votes for or abstains from vetoing the second one, which will make the UNESCO one moot anyway. If Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem are to be ethnically cleansed of 500,000 Jews who have lived there for decades, Jews wont have any access to their holy sites anyway.
No sovereign nation would put up with this and Israel won't either. But it will legitimize the idea of Israeli 'occupation' and help to further distance Israel from the U.S. if Mrs. Clinton is the president.
Personally, if I were Netanyahu I would inform Secretary Kerry that if the United States abrogates Oslo and the Road Map in this way, Israel will no longer be bound by those agreements either and will feel free to resolve this situation unilaterally in a way of its own choosing.
In the end, that's what going to happen anyway. Facts on the ground will always trump the bigoted nonsense coming from the UN. Any ethical or moral authority it once had left a long time ago.