[JohnRawls]

@skinster

We have talked about this ad neusium already Skinsterina.

Better question what do you find an acceptable solution? 1948 borders ? If yes then how can you guarantee that Israel will not get attacked by Hamas/any other militant group for the matter? How can you guarantee that other Arab states will recognise Israel? How can you guarantee Iran won't support external forces against Israel or any other country for that matter?

[noir]

The quote is from 1943, before the Pals invented themselves as progressive cause. At that time they were on the fascist camp.

[anarchist23]

It seems that the Israeli propaganda machine is being weakened by international pressure.
The BDS campaign is getting traction and Trump had a swipe at it when he was with Netanyahu at the Press Briefing in Washington last week.

Israel is refusing to issue visas to the international staff of one of the most prominent international human rights NGOs - Human Rights Watch – accusing the group of an “extreme, hostile and anti-Israel agenda.”

The Israeli accusations against the organisation, which documents human rights abuses around the globe, follows a growth in official hostility to local human rights activists under the right wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu.

Human Rights Watch condemned the move as “ominous turn” adding it “should worry anyone concerned about Israel’s commitment to basic democratic values.”

The new policy emerged after Israeli authorities turned down a visa for its new Israel and Palestine director, Omar Shakir who is a US citizen. The rejection had been advised by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In a letter rejecting Shakir’s visa application – and seen by the Guardian - Israel accused the New York based group of “public activities and reports [and being] engaged in politics in the service of Palestinian propaganda, while falsely raising the banner of ‘human rights.’’

The group denied the claim pointing out it had written critical reports on human rights violations on both sides including the arbitrary detention of journalists and activists by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, an extrajudicial executioncarried out by Hamas’s military wing, and on executions by Hamas authorities in Gaza.

The denial of the visa was confirmed in a letter on February 20 when Israeli authorities informed it the request had been rejected because HRW is “not a real human rights group”, the group said in a statement. Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon confirmed the decision.

HRW, he said, had “demonstrated time and again it is a fundamentally biased and anti-Israeli organisation with a clear hostile agenda.”

But Nahshon added that the group was not banned and its Israeli and Palestinian employees would still be permitted to work in Israel and issue reports.

“But why should we give working visas to people whose only purpose is to besmirch us and to attack us?” he asked.

Suggesting a wider policy, Nahshon said other organisations such as Amnesty International would be assessed on a case by case basis.

Israel’s government, seen as the most right-wing in the country’s history, has been accused of putting pressure on both international and local rights organisations.

Condemning the move, Iain Levine, deputy executive director of program at Human Rights Watch said: “This decision and the spurious rationale should worry anyone concerned about Israel’s commitment to basic democratic values.

“It is disappointing that the Israeli government seems unable or unwilling to distinguish between justified criticisms of its actions and hostile political propaganda.”

Human Rights Watch added in a statement: “The decision marks an ominous turn after nearly three decades during which Human Rights Watch staff have had regular access without impediments to Israel and the West Bank. Israel, though, has refused Human Rights Watch access to Gaza since 2010, except for one visit in 2016.”

The latest moves come in the midst of a wider chilling of the atmosphere in Israel against human rights activists.

In December Israel detained at Ben Gurion airport and then deported a prominent African theologian, Isabel Phiri, over claims that the World Council of Churches, for who she works, was engaged in supported sanctions against Israel.

Last year, the Israeli parliament passed a controversial law compelling Israeli NGOs that receive most of their funding from foreign state entities to declare it in official reports.

The law did not specifically refer to left-wing organisations, but is applicable to some 25 NGOs.

Right-wing NGOs, such as those supporting Israeli settlements, tend to rely on private donations, to which the law does not apply.

Commenting on the decision to deny his visa Omar Shakir compared Israel to a list of authoritarian regimes.

“We have little relations with governments in North Korea, Sudan, Uzbekistan, Cuba and Venezuela where there is zero appetite for human rights engagement,” Shakir said. “With this decision, Israel is joining the list.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... are_btn_tw

[Ter]

Omar Shakir: BDS Activist and Human Rights Watch Official
NGO Monitor
December 14, 2016

In October 2016, Human Rights Watch (HRW) hired Omar Shakir to serve as its New York-based “Israel and Palestine Country Director.” Shakir is a consistent supporter of a one-state framework and advocate for BDS (boycotts, divestment, sanctions) tactics, fitting the longstanding HRW practice of hiring anti-Israel activists to serve in key positions relating to Israel:

Shakir’s overt anti-Israel activism is exemplified by his May 2010 presentation at UC Irvine, “Apartheid IsReal.” In his talk, Shakir called for abandoning the two-state model as a way to eliminate Israel as the Jewish state: “Ehud Olmert is telling us where we need to go….that ‘If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses and we face a South African style struggle for equal voting rights, then as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished’.” (emphasis added)
Similarly, in his speech Shakir called on the Palestinian Authority (PA) to end its goal of “self-determination,” a euphemism for promoting the replacement of a Jewish State with a binational state. He also rejected the idea of a negotiated solution to the conflict, saying that negotiations “will do nothing but institutionalize injustice.”
Shakir compared Zionism to “Afrikaner nationalism,” and added that “It’s also an honor to be speaking at the campus that made a statement heard around the world, and the campus that officially said that we have no place here for a war criminal” (an apparent reference to the (illegal) disruption of the February 2010 campus appearance of Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren, emphasis added).

BDS advocacy

Shakir also used the UC Irvine event as a platform for promoting BDS, extolling it as “a way that each of us in this room can exercise their own form of pressure to end that unjust system and to embrace a vision for a better future.”
Before joining HRW, Shakir was a legal fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), an organization that provides legal assistance and training to BDS activists and has filed “war crimes” lawsuits (“lawfare”) against former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and former Shabak Director Avi Dichter.
At CCR, Shakir promoted BDS tactics at public events and represented Steven Salaita in his lawsuit against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In 2014, Salaita was fired by the university for posting a series of Twitter messages, including “Zionists: transforming ‘antisemitism’ from something horrible into something honorable since 1948.”

HRW’s History of Biased Officials

Shakir is not the only anti-Israel activist employed by HRW to work on Israel-related issues. Officials such as Sarah Leah Whitson (Executive Director, Middle East and North Africa Division) and Joe Stork (Deputy Director, Middle East and North Africa Division) were visible anti-Israel activists before joining HRW. Former Middle East staff member Nadia Barhoum was also an anti-Israel student activist immediately prior to being hired. Moreover, HRW analyst Marc Garlasco, who was centrally involved in allegations of “war crimes” during the 2009 Gaza conflict, was revealed to be an avid collector of Nazi memorabilia and defended by HRW as a “student of military history.”

Similarly, Amnesty International has been employing several individuals, including Kristyan Benedict, Saleh Hijazi and Edith Garwood, who have either made antisemitic statements publicly, volunteered for NGOs that have promoted antisemitic imagery, and/or have engaged in various forms of anti-Israel activity such as BDS.

HRW’s and Amnesty’s employment of such individuals severely damage the NGOs’ objectivity and credibility, and expose their true political motivations in their work on Israel.

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/omar-shakir- ... -official/

Oh the previous article was not complete..
The Israelis would be crazy to allow a BDS activist to "examine" human right abuses.
He does'nt need to come, he can just write it from home as his mind is made up

[anarchist23]

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/omar-shakir-bds-activist-human-rights-watch-official/

Oh the previous article was not complete..
The Israelis would be crazy to allow a BDS activist to "examine" human right abuses.
He does'nt need to come, he can just write it from home as his mind is made up

The Zionist government has very little influence over the BDS movement. This banning looks bad for the apartheid state of Israel and the impression is that they have something to hide. Also it's publicity for Human Rights Watch and the BDS movement as well.

NEW YORK — A researcher with Human Rights Watch was denied entry into Israel earlier this week with the country’s government calling the human rights organization “propaganda.”
Omar Shakir, HRW’s Israel and Palestine director, learned officially on Monday that he had been denied a visa to enter Israel after months of waiting for news about his application. Visa applicants are told that they will receive a decision at most 60 days after they submit their paperwork to Israeli Ministry of the Interior, which screens people attempting to enter the country.
Shakir was hired last July, when his visa application was submitted, and was meant relocate to Israel to start his work on the ground in October. But the lengthy wait has caused him to hold off on digging into his research, keeping him in temporary housing in New York City, and forcing him to cancel scheduled meetings with Israeli officials.
“We have had Israeli counsel throughout process in Tel Aviv who’ve been checking in periodically, and we were given updates as to where it stood, but nothing substantive,” Shakir told BuzzFeed News in a phone interview.
Last week, he was told unofficially that his application had been rejected. Then on Tuesday, the group received a letter from the interior ministry, citing the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that gave them the reason behind the rejection.
“The opinion received from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that, for some time now, this organization’s public activities and reports have engaged in politics in the service of Palestinian propaganda, while falsely raising the banner of ‘human rights,’ and therefore recommended denying the application,” an English translation provided to BuzzFeed News of the ministry’s letter, which was originally written in Hebrew, read.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately respond to a BuzzFeed News request for comment.
Mark Toner, acting State Department spokesperson, told BuzzFeed News in an emailed statement that he “would note that every country sets its own immigration and visa laws.”
“That said, we strongly disagree with that characterization of HRW,” Toner continued. “HRW is a credible human rights organization and even though we do not agree with all of their assertions or conclusions, given the seriousness of their efforts, we support the importance of the work they do. We reference HRW reports in our own reporting, including our annual human rights reports.”
“This decision and the spurious rationale should worry anyone concerned about Israel’s commitment to basic democratic values,” Iain Levine, deputy executive director of program at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement provided to BuzzFeed News. “It is disappointing that the Israeli government seems unable or unwilling to distinguish between justified criticisms of its actions and hostile political propaganda.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the denial for Shakir’s visa. Shakir is a US citizen and has traveled to Israel three times in the past prior to his work with Human Rights Watch.
Human Rights Watch now has 45 days to file a challenge or petition in district court, Shakir said, a move that the group intends to make.

[Ter]

The Guardian article in the OP does not mention that this person is a BDS activist.
Does anyone believe this person can do neutral research in the matter ?
How can HRW chose a biased person like that ?

Of course people can repeat the mantra "Apartheid" as often as they like, that does not change anything.

It is surreal.

[noir]

His grandchildren will pay for his Islamophilia.

[anarchist23]

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) called the sentence “excessively lenient” and said that it is “unacceptable."

Israeli politicians have slammed the UN for its criticism of the sentence handed down to Elor Azaria, the soldier who killed a wounded Palestinian in Hebron last year, Arabs48.com reported on Friday. An Israeli military court sentenced Sergeant Azaria to just 18 months in prison for the “manslaughter” of the already incapacitated Abdel Fattah Al-Sharif.

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) called the sentence “excessively lenient” and said that it is “unacceptable.”“We are deeply disturbed at the lenient sentence given by the Tel-Aviv Military Court earlier this week to an Israeli soldier convicted of unlawfully killing a wounded Palestinian in an apparent extrajudicial execution of an unarmed man who clearly posed no imminent threat,” said UNHRC spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani.

Ignoring the fact that Israel always claims to be a democratic state, and should thus be judged as such, Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman used Facebook to describe the UNHCR as “a council not of human rights but hatred of Israel.” The right-wing extremist sought to divert attention from Israel’s abuse of human rights by pointing to what is happening elsewhere in the Middle East. “Again it has been proven that in the distorted moral compass of the human rights’ council, one bullet fired by Azaria at a terrorist is worse than the millions of bullets killing innocents in Syria, in Libya, in Iraq and in Yemen,” he claimed.

Lieberman’s cabinet colleague, Education Minister Naftali Bennett, also took to Facebook, with some degree of sarcasm, to criticise the UN body. “Among the 500,000 people murdered by Assad, the people decapitated by Islamic State and the people hanged by Iran, this must be the central problem in the Middle East.”Former Finance Minister Yair Lapid, meanwhile, described the UNHRC as a “council of terrorist rights” and claimed that there is only one country in the entire Middle East where a soldier can go to prison for having killed a wounded enemy. “Only one country with the rule of law, but the council of terrorist rights is concerned about us.”

One London-based commentator pointed out that these politicians appear to be ignoring the “Core values” of the Israel Defence Forces in order to score some political points: “The IDF and its soldiers are obligated to protect human dignity. Every human being is of value regardless of his or her origin, religion, nationality, gender, status or position.”

Abdel Fattah Al-Sharif was already wounded, lying on the ground and no threat to anyone when Azaria took deliberate aim at him and shot him in the head. “How this has been determined as ‘manslaughter’ and not murder is beyond comprehension,” added MEMO’s Senior Editor Ibrahim Hewitt.

middleeasrmonitor

[Ter]

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) called the sentence “excessively lenient” and said that it is “unacceptable."

UNHRC , hmmm, isn't that the puppet theatre where Saudi Arabia has the Chairmanship ?
I am just looking how that politicised puppet theatre has any moral or legal standing. Oh, they have none. OK.

The shooting of that wounded terrorist was absolutely unnecessary.
My best guess is that it was an emotional moment. Those soldiers had been attacked and had to be suspicious of every Arab on the road or in a car, so this happened, unfortunately.

But it is cute how a few people are soooooo badly hurt when something happens to an Arab terrorist. Oy gevalt !

In the mean time, in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, In Somalia, in Sudan, in Myanmar, in the DRC, in CAR, in Nigeria, literally thousands of INNOCENT civilians are getting butchered and raped.

Oh well.

[Decky]

It is called Burma. Myanmar is silly.

[anarchist23]

UNHRC , hmmm, isn't that the puppet theatre where Saudi Arabia has the Chairmanship ?
I am just looking how that politicised puppet theatre has any moral or legal standing. Oh, they have none. OK.

The shooting of that wounded terrorist was absolutely unnecessary.
My best guess is that it was an emotional moment. Those soldiers had been attacked and had to be suspicious of every Arab on the road or in a car, so this happened, unfortunately.

But it is cute how a few people are soooooo badly hurt when something happens to an Arab terrorist. Oy gevalt !

In the mean time, in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, In Somalia, in Sudan, in Myanmar, in the DRC, in CAR, in Nigeria, literally thousands of INNOCENT civilians are getting butchered and raped.

Oh well.

UNHCR was formed in the early fifties and it was supposed to be temporary, for only three years.
It must of saved many millions of lives since its inception including in most of those countries you named. If you and your family were safe, tucked away in a UNHCR refugee camp you wouldn't be so dismissive. Nothing is perfect and UNHCR is all we've got.

Meanwhile in the Middle East..

The data source of all of these publications seems to be the UN High Commission of Refugees (UNHCR) itself, which notes that over 4,000,000 refugees have been registered by the UNHCR in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey.

Edit..

There are other threads on other countries rather this one. (of the Zionist scum bags). Here is a couple...

Burma

viewtopic.php?p=14751863#p14751863

Syria

viewtopic.php?p=14777149#p14777149



.

[noir]

It doesn't matter what was in the 50's, today it's chaired by Human Rights champion like Saudi Arabia


Bad news for Muslim dominated-UN.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/02/tr ... ti-israel/

[anarchist23]

UNHRC , hmmm, isn't that the puppet theatre where Saudi Arabia has the Chairmanship ?

It doesn't matter what was in the 50's, today it's chaired by Human Rights champion like Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia was not appointed to the chair of the Human Rights Council.

Given Saudi Arabia’s record, the rage is understandable—it would get to recommend experts who may not be experts, or whose understanding of human rights is at variance with the vast majority of those who care for human rights.
But the global fury is directed at the wrong target. Agnes Callamard, director of Columbia University’s Global Freedom of Expression and Information initiative (disclosure: I am part of its team of experts), told The Daily Beast: “What has happened is that Saudi Arabia is now a member of the advisory committee that produces recommendations to the president of the Human Rights Council who makes final decisions regarding the appointing of mandate holders. The composition of the advisory group is five representatives from all regions. It is a rotation within regions, so nobody appoints anybody. The real problem is that Saudi Arabia was appointed to the Human Rights Council and its being a member of the advisory committee is just a logical consequence. And the UN is not responsible for the appointment in any way.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... uncil.html




.

[noir]

The UN is dominated by Muslim states.

[anarchist23]

The UN is dominated by Muslim states.

I don't think so.

Christianity dominates the United Nations and more diversity is needed to increase non-Christian representation in world peacemaking, according to a study.

Research undertaken by Prof Jeremy Carrette, with colleagues from the University of Kent's department of religious studies, has revealed that more than 70% of religious non-government organisations (NGOs) at the UN are Christian, and that there is historical privilege in allowing the Vatican a special observer status, as both a state and a religion.

The report, called Religious NGOs and the United Nations, calls for greater awareness, transparency and equality in the way religious NGOs operate within the UN, and more emphasis on religious tolerance.

The report also asks for greater understanding of how religions enhance and constrain human rights. It provides evidence that funding limits other religious traditions from establishing NGO work at the UN.

Islam, is represented more significantly through a collective of states (the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation) rather than civil society NGOs, which are dominated by Catholic groups, according to the report.

Asian religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, are under-represented and funding is a major issue in preventing their equal access, it said.

Carrette said: "It would seem there needs to be more of a 'global goodwill' to make the UN system work for all religions equally, and for religions to follow and share equally UN goals for peace and justice.

"The report highlights that while all religions are represented in some way in the peacemaking system of the UN, there are structural and historical differences that need to be addressed.

"It also shows that religions form an important part of international global politics and that in a global world we need to establish a new pluralistic contract for equal access for all religions to the UN system.

"This must also entail religious groups working towards the ideals of the UN, in terms of human rights, fairness and justice for all men and women."

The report questions claims by the Christian right that new age cults run the UN , saying evidence suggests these are greatly misjudged and erroneous.

It also shows the number of inter-faith and new age NGOs is very small, and religious NGOs in total form only 7.29% of the total of consultative status NGOs at the UN.

But despite their small size, some religious NGOs can have a far greater influence, the research suggests. Among the most active religious NGO groups are Catholics, Quakers and the Baha'i faith, which have some of the highest number of meetings with UN diplomats.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ ... ian-report

[noir]

So Nikki Haley is wrong?

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an umbrella organization created in 1969, now bringing together fifty-six Muslim or Muslim majority states and the Palestinian Authority. The number of member states, which will increase, makes it, according to its representative, the second largest intergovernmental organization after the United Nations.

The OIC’s preponderance at the UN and in all international organizations—especially through the 118-state Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

[anarchist23]

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an umbrella organization created in 1969, now bringing together fifty-six Muslim or Muslim majority states and the Palestinian Authority. The number of member states, which will increase, makes it, according to its representative, the second largest intergovernmental organization after the United Nations.

There are aprox 200 countries in the UN and 57 Muslim countries is not exactly a majority. Christianity dominates the UN as stated.

Christianity dominates the United Nations and more diversity is needed to increase non-Christian representation in world peacemaking, according to a study.

The Muslim countries account for less than half that are in the NAM which has a total of 118 countries.

And the Permanent members of the Security Council don't include any Muslim countries.

[Zionist Nationalist]

Many Christian countries are taking the Muslims side for political interests and money (oil)

Russia and China are on the Muslim side

African countries are having Muslim Problem (Ethiopia,Nigeria) so they dont anger the Muslims by voting against them in the UN

[noir]

Muslims and Non-Aligned states make the majority

[noir]

Seems the Pals don't like Trump

Shoes

And spit