There is though, commentary amongst the political savvy that the prime minister’s political instincts need improving. His reply was that he was less concerned about that than on working to achieve the goals he took to the election. To a degree he has a valid point. However, not paying sufficient attention to the aforementioned can present problems. The calling in of the Israeli ambassador to advise him that this country and indeed the world is outraged by Israel’s presumed attacks on United Nations’ peacekeepers is a case in point. I was outraged that he had done so.
The United Nations has now become something it was never intended to be when it was set up. It has gone well beyond its brief in many areas. The veto system it employs renders it completely impotent when it comes to fulfilling its initial purpose. It is now nothing more than a left-wing talkfest in the pocket of, and run by, people with questionable intentions. Instead of fulfilling its obligations to solve conflicts it takes sides. This has the effect of extending the fighting rather than finding ways to stop it.
This is exactly the situation Israel finds itself in and why I am so incensed at the prime minister’s decision to call in the Israeli ambassador. The old adage, there are two sides to every story, applies here, and I would have hoped there would have been more research on the matter before employing what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction. The action was compounded by the language used in the lecture the ambassador received. We are outraged, but not for the reasons the prime minister gave. As for the world being outraged, I’m not sure on what grounds he can speak for others.
We are outraged because firstly it has transpired that UN personnel took part in the horrific events of October 7. This is hardly within the bounds of the UN charter. In the current situation the prime minister is referring to it appears UN peacekeepers have been assisting Hezbollah in southern Lebanon by allowing or turning a blind eye to tunnels being dug right under their noses. It has been reported that these so-called peacekeepers are armed. Surely that is another breach of its charter. I call on both the prime minister and the foreign minister to look more closely at this organisation.
The objective of exterminating Israel and its people is being carried out on multiple fronts. Israel is not getting a lot of outside assistance, other than verbal platitudes, and is defending itself from intended annihilation. It is also quite possibly saving humanity from World War III, which some with knowledge on the subject are saying could be imminent. It is here that I think we, the Baby Boomers, see a problem with Christopher Luxon’s generation. I have used the term woke previously, but I am not sure that is the correct terminology in this instance.
The point I am getting at is his generation at birth were a long way from having any concepts of the effects of war. We, the Baby Boomers, born during or soon after WWII were aware of its causes and aftermath through education and how society functioned as a result of hostilities. I think this gives us a better understanding of the situation Israel now finds itself in. It sees only one answer to its circumstances and that is to overcome forever the forces of evil operating on its doorstep.
The word ceasefire, which many politicians around the world are calling for, is not in Benjamin Netanyahu’s vocabulary. He knows, as we do, that it is simply a means whereby the terrorists can rehabilitate themselves. There is a naïvety surrounding these ceasefire calls. This is a war. History tells us no war was ever won or differences solved by having a ceasefire. The Israelis have been at war often and long enough to not buy into that false narrative. It worries me greatly to think what WWIII would look like with some of our political leaders in power.
Israel is winning the current conflict thanks largely to their own brilliance in military inventiveness and strategy plus the bravery of their dedicated soldiers. They don’t need a lecture from anybody siding with a corrupt organisation that is ignoring its own responsibilities to take sides in a war it is supposed to be trying to end. The UN is past its use by date: it has outlived its original purpose. It has allowed itself, intentionally it would seem, to be used by some with nefarious purposes. It appears it has allowed a number of its employees to get involved militarily, as Israel has discovered. Why are we funding this disreputable organisation?
If anyone needs calling out it is the UN itself and the terrorist outfits sponsored by Iran and others to do their dirty work. We should be thanking Israel rather than ‘hauling it over the coals’. To take that action without appearing to be cognisant of all the facts is embarrassing and an insult to a country we should be proud to have as an ally. To align ourselves with the likes of the UN, Biden, Harris, etc, is the height of naïvety and stupidity. We must stand against terrorism in all its forms, which is exactly what the Israelis are doing on our behalf.
To call in the Israeli ambassador is a breathtakingly ill-advised move. To fund the UN, as it now presents itself, is equally so.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
The United Nations has now become something it was never intended to be when it was set up. It has gone well beyond its brief in many areas. The veto system it employs renders it completely impotent when it comes to fulfilling its initial purpose. It is now nothing more than a left-wing talkfest in the pocket of, and run by, people with questionable intentions. Instead of fulfilling its obligations to solve conflicts it takes sides. This has the effect of extending the fighting rather than finding ways to stop it.
This is exactly the situation Israel finds itself in and why I am so incensed at the prime minister’s decision to call in the Israeli ambassador. The old adage, there are two sides to every story, applies here, and I would have hoped there would have been more research on the matter before employing what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction. The action was compounded by the language used in the lecture the ambassador received. We are outraged, but not for the reasons the prime minister gave. As for the world being outraged, I’m not sure on what grounds he can speak for others.
We are outraged because firstly it has transpired that UN personnel took part in the horrific events of October 7. This is hardly within the bounds of the UN charter. In the current situation the prime minister is referring to it appears UN peacekeepers have been assisting Hezbollah in southern Lebanon by allowing or turning a blind eye to tunnels being dug right under their noses. It has been reported that these so-called peacekeepers are armed. Surely that is another breach of its charter. I call on both the prime minister and the foreign minister to look more closely at this organisation.
The objective of exterminating Israel and its people is being carried out on multiple fronts. Israel is not getting a lot of outside assistance, other than verbal platitudes, and is defending itself from intended annihilation. It is also quite possibly saving humanity from World War III, which some with knowledge on the subject are saying could be imminent. It is here that I think we, the Baby Boomers, see a problem with Christopher Luxon’s generation. I have used the term woke previously, but I am not sure that is the correct terminology in this instance.
The point I am getting at is his generation at birth were a long way from having any concepts of the effects of war. We, the Baby Boomers, born during or soon after WWII were aware of its causes and aftermath through education and how society functioned as a result of hostilities. I think this gives us a better understanding of the situation Israel now finds itself in. It sees only one answer to its circumstances and that is to overcome forever the forces of evil operating on its doorstep.
The word ceasefire, which many politicians around the world are calling for, is not in Benjamin Netanyahu’s vocabulary. He knows, as we do, that it is simply a means whereby the terrorists can rehabilitate themselves. There is a naïvety surrounding these ceasefire calls. This is a war. History tells us no war was ever won or differences solved by having a ceasefire. The Israelis have been at war often and long enough to not buy into that false narrative. It worries me greatly to think what WWIII would look like with some of our political leaders in power.
Israel is winning the current conflict thanks largely to their own brilliance in military inventiveness and strategy plus the bravery of their dedicated soldiers. They don’t need a lecture from anybody siding with a corrupt organisation that is ignoring its own responsibilities to take sides in a war it is supposed to be trying to end. The UN is past its use by date: it has outlived its original purpose. It has allowed itself, intentionally it would seem, to be used by some with nefarious purposes. It appears it has allowed a number of its employees to get involved militarily, as Israel has discovered. Why are we funding this disreputable organisation?
If anyone needs calling out it is the UN itself and the terrorist outfits sponsored by Iran and others to do their dirty work. We should be thanking Israel rather than ‘hauling it over the coals’. To take that action without appearing to be cognisant of all the facts is embarrassing and an insult to a country we should be proud to have as an ally. To align ourselves with the likes of the UN, Biden, Harris, etc, is the height of naïvety and stupidity. We must stand against terrorism in all its forms, which is exactly what the Israelis are doing on our behalf.
To call in the Israeli ambassador is a breathtakingly ill-advised move. To fund the UN, as it now presents itself, is equally so.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
5 comments:
A point well made. To add to the PM's stance on NZ's Maori issue which will do him great harm as the poisonous situation becomes more charged.
Proof that leadership is multi-pronged: political, economic, social, cultural. Mr Luxon must cope with all these aspects.
What a refreshing read. The UN has never been held accountable for its historic failures and continues to exist by promoting its original charter that it has never delivered upon. Each new leader fails by predictively joining the same club fearful that original thought would unleash condemnation from the protectors of insanity, the left leaning MSM.
"The old adage, there are two sides to every story, applies here..."
Except of course, when anyone criticises Israel or Israelis, in which case the critic is clearly wrong possibly want to see Jews exterminated.
The pro-Zionist case is so completely one-sided and dismissive of the other side of the argument (in fact, they deny that there even is another side of the argument), that when they invoke the "always two sides" principle it is completely hollow and laughable.
Oh, please. I'm no fan of the UN at all, but the argument here (an argument many Jews have advanced since world opinion has turned so sharply against them subsequent to October 7th) is basically that if the UN, or any other body, criticises or inhibits Israel, it is not fit for purpose and it must go.
The United Nations is nothing but a trap-door to the “Globalists” world's immense concentration camp. The enemy is not coming. The enemy is here.
Anon at 9:28 has read the runes correctly. The UN is not a friend of sovereign nations, as it now shows, spectacularly, with its promotion of more ‘pandemic’ plans. The WHO is a very dangerous organisation, intent on seizing power for its own nefarious purposes. The quicker we can exit, the better.
Post a Comment