Guterres’ Anti-Semitic Paradox

Guterres’ Anti-Semitic Paradox

The UN Secretary-General condemns the Iranian attack, which “paradoxically doesn’t help the Palestinians,” but in the same breath reveals two far more disturbing paradoxes.

By: Anat Vidor, President of WIZO

Photo credit: Salvatore di Nolfi EPA

Once again, it’s Antonio Guterres, the man and the vacuum, Secretary-General of the world and chief anti-Semite on the planet, who leaves other Jew-haters in the dust and steals the show this week. The Iranian missile attack on Israel didn’t leave him indifferent, and as soon as the Iranian ground-to-ground missiles finished launching, Guterres fired his own imagination-to-ground missile in the form of a feeble, weightless condemnation.

Guterres expressed concern about the escalation and demanded a ceasefire, but forgot to mention that the escalation was one-sided, and that Iran was the aggressor while Israel was the victim. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz rightly responded by declaring Guterres persona non grata in Israel, and the unwelcome figure himself rushed to correct his original condemnation with a new one, worse than its predecessor.

Anyone who acquired their news through Guterres’ reactions would be sure that Jews are the source of evil, Israel is the axis of evil, and Iran is a peace-loving country that supports the Palestinians’ freedom struggle – an innocent people who love science, education, culture, and sports.

“Israel is conducting a cruel military campaign,” Guterres had previously declared regarding the situation in Lebanon, and it’s a wonder he himself hasn’t been revealed as a Hezbollah beeper carrier. He didn’t bother to mention that Israel’s “aggression” is against a terrorist organization that has been firing missiles at it for a year, and that the purpose of the “aggression” is to liberate an entire region that was expropriated from its residents to create an infrastructure for killing Israelis.

Let’s return to the corrected condemnation statement of the Secretary-General of the universe and its branches, in which he unsuccessfully tried to convey balance. First, Guterres stated that the missiles were fired towards “Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories,” and even if we ignore the fact that there have never been unoccupied Palestinian territories in history, he’s even taking away Israel’s right to be a victim. After all, the missiles were aimed at hitting Israelis, and if some of them got a bit tired before reaching Tel Aviv and accidentally fell near Jericho, still, it’s not the Palestinians, who were celebrating in the streets at that time, that were the ones under attack.

Further in the statement, Guterres, a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, it should be noted, tries to sound like the responsible adult: “These attacks, paradoxically, do nothing to support the Palestinian people’s struggle or alleviate their suffering.” End quote. Guterres, the last person in the world who still believes that the Palestinians matter to the Iranians, manages to find an interesting paradox here – violence against Israel that paradoxically doesn’t help the Palestinians!

Behind this gibberish stands Guterres’ true intention: violence against Israel is good, as long as it helps the Palestinians, but this time, lo and behold: paradox! The Iranian attack didn’t help the Palestinians at all, so there’s no point to it.

A paradox is a logical fallacy, and in Guterres’ declaration of a discovered paradox, there indeed is one: condemning the missile attack while demanding a ceasefire perpetuates the achievement of the aggression without demanding a price for it. What practical meaning is there to a condemnation that serves to protect the aggressor?

And if we’re really looking, an even bigger paradox hides in our story: World War II ended with a decisive victory of the good guys over the bad guys, without a ceasefire and without a chaperone to calm things down and perpetuate the fronts. Then the UN was established to maintain world stability. Since then, a body whose purpose is this has been operating in the world: ceasefires instead of permanent solutions, indecision and endless rounds of the same war, instead of short campaigns with clear decisions.

The UN doesn’t help world stability, and since its establishment, wars have only multiplied, cold and hot, and the only things that have remained stable are antisemitism and terrorism.

And here, 80 years after its establishment, the UN Secretary-General, a persona non grata who was once a failed prime minister in the picturesque country of Portugal, stands and serves as a diplomatic crutch for the axis of evil and the great protector of anti-Israeli terrorism. Now that’s a paradox!