James Taranto ponders John Bolton's tenure so far at the UN. He also links to pictures of this UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People where Kofi Annan celebrated along with UN officials in front of a map of the Middle East where Israel was no longer on the map. As Taranto says,

The Simon Wiesenthal Center issued a press release Friday in which it "condemns the participation" of the secretary-general in a conference that denies the existence of a U.N. member state.

We would like to know where the 43 senators--42 Democrats plus the lachrymose George Voinovich--who blocked a vote on Bolton's confirmation, forcing President Bush into a recess appointment--stand on all this. One could wave away such outrages, and indeed we're inclined to do so, on the ground that the U.N. is a hopelessly corrupt and worthless institution whose expressions count for nothing. But that is an awkward position for Bolton's detractors to take, since they claim to believe in the U.N.

They don't really believe in the U.N., of course. As we noted in April, in 1991 many of them voted to defy the U.N.'s request for troops to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein's Iraq. They are "pro-U.N.," it seems clear, only when the U.N. is anti-U.S. But again, if the U.N. has "moral authority" when it takes Saddam Hussein's side over ours, how about when it seeks the obliteration of Israel?

I hadn't heard of this story. I guess the UN putting their stamp of approval on the end of Israel does not rank as major news. What is the difference between such a map and what the President of Iran has said that he hopes for? I guess if the Palestinians started talking about moving the Israelis to Europe, we'd begin to hear from UN officials and European leaders about how inexcusable such rhetoric is. Otherwise, who cares?