Watch: UN gets F for performance, A for Israel-bashing

The UN is supposed to protect humanity. But the UN has a problem. It doesn’t do that. It fails.

It ignores the bad guys. It condemns the good guys.

For example, if you’re a Jewish nation, you are not protected. Israel, the world’s only Jewish State, is also the only democracy in the Middle East. Its Arab population has more legal rights than Arabs have in any Arab nation in the world. But Israel is nonetheless condemned at the UN’s Human Rights Council more than all other nations combined. The UN ignores Arab countries where Rights violations are far, far worse than anything found in Israel.

If you’re a Christian, you are not protected. We know this because Christians are harrassed and abuse by 151 countries (Nelson Jones, “Are Christians really the world’s most persecuted religious group?”, NewStatesman, April 10, 2014). Among these, there are 50 countries—perhaps 25 per cent of the planet—where  the persecution of Christians is particularly severe and often unrelenting (World Watch List, opendoorsusa.org, 2015).

The Palestinian Authority persecutes Christians. It's on the list of the 50 worst countries (World Watch List, above). It ranks 26^th for persecuting Christians (ibid). Israel does not appear on that list.

But at the UN, the PA is not condemned for abusing Christians. Israel is condemned (Benjamin Weinthal, “UN report blasts Iran for persecution of Christians, other religious minorities”, FoxNews, March 21, 2014).

The UN fails to protect Christians. It fails to condemn the bad guys.

If you are a woman, you are not protected. Around the world, women face serious abuse issues (“The World's Women 2010, Trends and Statistics”, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, United Nations, 2010, pp 127-138). Women in many nations are repeatedly subjected to violence (ibid).

Israel is not one of those nations where violence against women is a significant problem. But Israel is the only nation in the world to be condemned by the UN over women’s rights (Itamar Eichner, “Israel only nation condemned in UN for women's right violations”, YNETnews, March 20, 2015).

This week, we saw the UN at work once again abusing the world’s only Jewish state—while ignoring the bad guys. In a new press release, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC)  shows how it ignores Arab terror and expresses ‘serious concern’ over Israel’s right to defend itself (“Press briefing note on Burundi, Israel / Occupied Palestinian Territory, Cuba and High Commissioner speeches”, United Nations Human Rights Council, ohchr.org,  December 15, 2015).

In this press release, the UNHRC says it continues to be “gravely concerned” at the unrelenting violence it sees in Israel and in Judea-Samaria (ibid).

This sounds appropriate. Jews in Israel know exactly what ‘unrelenting violence’ means. In a single 120-day period ending December 13, 2015, Jews in Israel saw 169 violent Arab attacks against Jews (Tova Dvorin, “In numbers: 22 dead, 252 injured in 3 months of terror”, Arutz Sheva, December 15, 2015). That adds up to more than one violent attack every day for three months straight.

During this same 120 days, Arabs attacked Jews with rocks more than 24 times per day (“Ari Yashar, “2,225 rock attacks in the last three months”, Arutz Sheva, December 16, 2015).

These are good definitions of ‘unrelenting violence’ against Jews. But that’s not what concerns the UNHRC.

The UNHRC press release acknowledges that the current wave of Arab stabbings, shootings and car rammings against Jews is unacceptable (ibid). But that’s not what concerns the UNHRC.

The UNHRC press release acknowledges that Jews have been murdered by Arabs at an alarming rate (ibid). But that’s not what concerns the UNHRC.

What concerns the UNHRC is what you see in this video:

The Arab ‘youth’ in this video slashes at IDF soldiers with intense aggressiveness, great speed and unpredictable movements. He only stops his attack when he is shot and killed.

Generally, police and security personnel are trained to shoot until the attacker stops (“The use of deadly force”, chiefsview, March 5, 2013). That’s exactly what you see in this video. Yes, he is shot multiple times. But if you look closely at the tape, he continues to move while on the ground—until he stops moving. That’s when the shooting stops.

Was this ‘excessive force’? Or, was it legal 'lethal force'? Does the UNHRC know the difference?

The UNHRC says this type of response from Israeli security forces has resulted in “alleged” (sic) attackers being killed and injured (ibid). The UNHRC adds that it voices “deep concern over reports of excessive use of force by Israeli forces” (ibid).

What is 'excessive force'? Does the UNHRC have the training and expertise to define ‘excessive force’ for such a close-quarters-aggressive attack as you just saw? 

Have you ever been confronted by an aggressive, slashing, fast-moving attacker who has already stabbed the man standing right next to you? Do you know the police protocol for that scenario? Does the UNHRC? 

The UNHRC applies a ‘20/20 hindsight’ thought-process to an extraordinarily intense and dangerous situation. That is not how ‘excessive force’ is determined.

A knife can be as deadly as a gun. An edged weapon "can amputate body parts, puncture entrails, slice arteries and veins, and with a hard thrust the point of an edged weapon can penetrate body armor as simply as a butter knife slices through butter”, (Paul Pawela, “Rethinking Knife Training”, policemag, September 17, 2009).

As you saw in this video, the attacker didn’t just display a deadly weapon. He pulled out that weapon and stabbed a soldier. Then he lunged at the other soldiers. He stabbed while moving with speed and unpredictable changes of direction.

These soldiers faced a situation that was violent, life-threatening and rapidly evolving. The attacker posed an immediate threat to the safety of each soldier he attacked. Each of these soldiers had to make a split-second judgment as to how much force to use against someone who gave them no space or time for safety. In such a dynamic situation, they had the right to shoot (“Edged weapon defense: is or was the 21-foot Rule Valid?”, usadojo.com, 2014)--and to shoot multiple times.

One has legitimate grounds to argue that those soldiers have the right to shoot until the attacker stops moving.

Has the UNHRC redefined this standard? Who accepts such a redefined standard--human rights activists or national security forces?

Does UNHRC have the expertise to redefine security force law--or is it simply using its bully pulpit to question Israel’s right to follow accepted security protocol to defend itself?

The UN does not protect humanity. It certainly doesn’t protect Jews—or Christians. It defends and shields the bad guys.

The UN fails.