[garrulousunlawful]

UN Declares Israel As Having World’s Worst Human Rights


The U.N.’s top human rights body has officially declared Israel as the world’s worst human rights violator- beating Iran, North Korea, Russia and China for the number 1 spot.

The U.N. Human Rights Council wrapped up its latest session in Geneva on Friday, March 27 by adopting four resolutions condemning Israel. That’s four times more than any of the other 192 UN member states.

There were four resolutions on Israel. And one on North Korea — a country that is home to government policies of torture, starvation, enslavement, rape, disappearances, and murder – to name just some of its crimes against humanity.

Four resolutions on Israel. And one on Syria. Where the death toll of four years of war is 100,000 civilians, ten million people are displaced, and barrel bombs containing chemical agents like chlorine gas are back in action.

Four resolutions on Israel. And one on Iran. Where there is no rule of law, no free elections, no freedom of speech, corruption is endemic, protestors are jailed and tortured, religious minorities are persecuted, and pedophilia is state-run. At last count, in 2012 Iranian courts ordered more than 30,000 girls ages 14 and under to be “married.”

And what did that one resolution on Iran say? Co-sponsored by the United States, it was labelled a “short procedural text,” consisting of just three operative paragraphs that contained not a single condemnation of Iran.

The Israel resolutions, on the other hand, were full of “demands,” “condemns,” “expresses grave concern,” and “deplores” – along with orders to “cease immediately” a long list of alleged human rights violations.

Ninety percent of states – inhabited by 6.6 billion people – got no mention at all. Countries like China, Qatar, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. For the UN, there was not one human rights violation worthy of mention by any of these human rights horror shows.

Why not? For starters, China, Qatar, Russia and Saudi Arabia are all members of the UN Human Rights Council. Actually protecting human rights is not a condition of being elected to the Council, and thereby transforming into a UN authority on what counts as a human rights violation.

As a result, what counts fast becomes unrecognizable. Subverting human rights principles for all turns out to be the other side of the coin from subverting human rights for Jews.

Thus at this session, “death to America” Iran sponsored a Council resolution called “Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights.” It was adopted by consensus – with U.S. blessing.

The Cubans successfully engineered a Council resolution on protecting “cultural rights” – minus free expression.

The Palestinians – whose unity government includes the terrorist group Hamas – co-sponsored the resolution “effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights.”

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation – representing states where converting to Christianity is subject to the death penalty – sponsored a resolution called “combating intolerance of persons based on religion or belief.”

Playing at caring about human rights is the U.N. game. And no state does it better than Iran.

Iran’s human rights record happened to come up at the March session in the context of what the Council calls a “universal periodic review” (UPR). Touted as its leading human rights innovation, the same process is applied to every state every four years.

That means Iran and Syria get treated the same way as, say, the United States and Canada. At the end of the UPR, a report is summarily adopted containing a bunch of recommendations that the former cast of characters summarily dismiss.

It was suggested to Iran, for instance, that it stop peddling little girls as sex slaves for old men. The recommendation received this reply: “in light of Islamic teachings, a person that has reached the age of maturity and is of sound mind has the possibility of marrying.”

The Council created a human rights investigator on Iran, but Iran has never let him into the country. Recommendations made to Iran during the UPR that it cooperate, were simply ignored.

On March 19, 2014, the U.S. representative mustered all her courage and countered with this: “we note with disappointment that Iran has not addressed the issue of allowing the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran to visit the country…”

There is an alternative conclusion. We note with disappointment that the United States legitimizes this travesty and empowers the real enemies of human rights.

http://yournewswire.com/un-declares-israel-as-having-worlds-worst-human-rights/

for those who live in denial,
for those who want to paint the picture of Israel as a free, democratic advance society,
for those who say Israel is a democracy
Read it again, 4 times worse4 times worse than any other country,,,,,

[Zionist Nationalist]

Only an idiot would agree with this empty statement.

Do you seriously think that Israel have worse human rights than Syria or Saudi Arabia?

[garrulousunlawful]

Only an idiot would agree with this empty statement.

Do you seriously think that Israel have worse human rights than Syria or Saudi Arabia?

so the whole of ""UNITED NATIONS ASSEMBLY"" are idiots and you are not??

one word for you
DOGMA

[Zionist Nationalist]

The UN is useless shit organization it is heavily biased against certain countries in this case its Israel 1 country against 50 muslim countries

If the UN would one day declare that the earth is flat would you agree with them?

[garrulousunlawful]

[One Degree]

Who cares? Human rights is just an example of how liberals try to turn ideals into laws. Well intentioned, but usually unworkable because the world does not function by ideals. It amazes me how they don't understand this.

[garrulousunlawful]

Who cares? Human rights is just an example of how liberals try to turn ideals into laws. Well intentioned, but usually unworkable because the world does not function by ideals. It amazes me how they don't understand this.

He who doesn't care about human rights cannot be considered civilised.

[One Degree]

He who doesn't care about human rights cannot be considered civilised

Why should I believe in something that is imaginary and has no basis in reality. Your statement shows you do not even believe in what you are saying. How about practicing viewing other humans as equals instead of mouthing it. Those who disagree with you are uncivilized. Wow

[Ter]

Did anyone read the article in the OP?

Nobody noticed that it is a cynical text, lamenting the bias of the UN Human Right Council ?

The article mentions Iran, Saudi Arabia and others with much worse human right conditions getting much less attention because they are a part of the UNHRC and protected by fellow countries.

It is indeed a sad truth that the UN has lost its significance due to the block voting of the 57 members of the Organisation of Islamic Countries, more often than not followed by block voting by the Non-Aligned countries.

[garrulousunlawful]

Why should I believe in something that is imaginary and has no basis in reality.

It might have no basis in your country, but in my country and the country where i live now both have a solid human rights basis, in France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Portugal, New zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, San marino, Andora, Monaco, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Austria, Lichtenstein, Switzerland, Malta, Greece, Luxembourg, Croatia, etcetera. They all have solid basis of practicing human rights.

Instead of talking rubbish and bad mouthing me, stand up and change things in your country too where ever you are.

[One Degree]

Human rights is a tool of Western imperialism to force the world to accept western culture as the only one.
It has the total opposite purpose of what you seem to believe.

[anarchist23]

The UN is useless shit organization it is heavily biased against certain countries in this case its Israel 1 country against 50 muslim countries.

The thing about the atrocities that Israel has committed is that they have been none stop for over half a century. In fact UN resolutions against the apartheid regime have been ignored by Zionist government over and over again.
You didn't even know that Israeli government has previously promised to allow the Palestinian a right of return to Israel. I suggest that you read a book instead of getting your information from Israeli propaganda machine.

[noemon]

Public Announcement: Calling people 'apes' and 'hasbara shills' falls under the scope of Rule 2.
Please refrain from it.

All such references have been removed.

[One Degree]

like where?

Any country that has hate laws. You seem to be really poorly informed on this issue. You publicly violate the very laws you are trying to defend.

[Frollein]

[garrulousunlawful]

Any country that has hate laws. You seem to be really poorly informed on this issue. You publicly violate the very laws you are trying to defend.

i dont understand, do you know what human rights are?
killing, persecuting, torturing, discriminating, in Israels case (ethnic cleansing, Murder, Torture, Violence against children, Arresting children, intrusion into peoples homes)
what did i do. said something that made you feel offended?
well that has nothing to do with human rights,
Im not championing any othet country,
we hear every thursday about human rights violations in China, in Iran, in Russia, in N Korea, but Israel and the US allways seem to escape it. its time people knew that the israelis are the worst, that in the US unarmed people are being shot or beaten to death virtually every day by the police. Im surprised the US wasnt in that report

[One Degree]

i dont understand, do you know what human rights are?

I am very familiar with them, but I have serious doubts that you have actually read the UN's full list.

[anarchist23]

UN resolutions, which now number 66, contain the international community’s list of indictments against the Jewish state. The basic issues were all spelled out even before the 1967 Security Council resolution calling for a land-for-peace settlement.

Israel has unequivocally demonstrated that it does not want peace in exchange for territory. Its insistence on expelling Palestinians who oppose the occupation and on establishing Jewish settlements in the occupied territories are only the latest manifestations of its desire to retain them. Equally important in revealing its true policy is Israel’s successful record of resisting American and other peace initiatives over the years.

These include defeating such imaginative initiatives and tireless mediators as the U.N.’s Gunnar Jarring in the late 1960s, Secretary of State William Rogers’ major peace proposals of 1969, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy of the mid-1970s, the lackadaisical journeys of Secretary of State George Shultz in the 1980s, and the intense Bush and Baker efforts of 1991 and 1992. The one success was Jimmy Carter’s Camp David process.

However, the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty was unique. It came at the expense of the Palestinians, which was by Israeli design, and in exchange for Sinai, to which Israel never laid claim. Moreover, Israel received in return for signing the peace treaty with Egypt commitments from the U. S. that have now reached a level of economic and military aid unsurpassed in our history.

The result is that Israel has managed to retain what it has wanted most: East Jerusalem and the West Bank. After so many diplomatic initiatives, it seems fair to conclude Israel does not want peace on any terms but its own.

An end to expulsions is only the latest demand of the international community on Israel, whose defiance goes back to its very beginnings. There remain on the books of the United Nations a collection of resolutions criticizing Israel unmatched by the record of any other nation.

These resolutions, which now number 66, contain the international community’s list of indictments against the Jewish state. The basic issues were all spelled out even before the 1967 Security Council resolution calling for a land-for-peace settlement.

Core Issues and Major Themes

The core issues, as contained in resolutions passed before 1967, remain the Palestinian refugee problem, the status of Jerusalem, and the location of Israel’s boundaries. These are the basic issues. They spring from 1948, not 1967.

The early U.N. resolutions call for Israel to repatriate or compensate the original 750,000 refugees of 1948-9 and to renounce Jerusalem as its capital and regard it as a corpus separatum, an international city dominated by neither Arab nor Israeli. (The U. S. position on Jerusalem is slightly different and, not surprisingly, closer to Israel’s. It says Jerusalem should not be a divided city and its final status should be decided by the parties.) Finally, the original U.N. partition of Palestine awarded Israel an area only about three-quarters of its current official size. Israel’s increase was gained at the expense of the Palestinians in the earlier conquests of 1948.

Other unreconciled issues from this earlier period include such sticky situations as a demilitarized zone that Israel had shared with Syria near the Sea of Galilee. Israel forcefully and unlawfully occupied this zone in the 1950sand 1960s, in defiance of its 1949 armistice with Syria. This deception predates Syria’s complaints about Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights in 1967. The zone is now integrated into Israel’s economy and infrastructure. But Syria retains a legitimate claim to it as disputed territory to be decided only after negotiations.

Aside from the core issues—refugees, Jerusalem, borders—the major themes reflected in the U.N. resolutions against Israel over the years are its unlawful attacks on its neighbors; its violations of the human rights of the Palestinians, including deportations, demolitions of homes and other collective punishments; its confiscation of Palestinian land; its establishment of illegal settlements; and its refusal to abide by the U.N. Charter and the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.

A History of U.S. Vetoes

There is another major area, largely ignored, that at some point must be faced. It involves the serious distortion of the official Security Council record by the profligate use by the United States of its veto power. In 29 separate cases between 1972 and 1991, the United States has vetoed resolutions critical of Israel. Except for the U.S. veto, these resolutions would have passed and the total number of resolutions against Israel would now equal 95 instead of 66.

These resolutions would have broadened the record by affirming the right of Palestinian self-determination, by calling on Israel to abandon its repressive measures against the Palestinian intifada, by sending U.N. Observers into the occupied territories to monitor Israel’s behavior and, most serious, by imposing sanctions against Israel if it did not abide by the Council’s resolutions.

Such a list of resolutions passed and resolutions vetoed is unparalleled in United Nations history. The list in itself forms a stunning indictment of Israel’s unlawful and uncivilized actions over a period of 45 years and of America’s complicity in them.

Yet references to this damning record are totally absent from the vocabularies of American leaders as they go about saying they are seeking peace. If they are really serious about peace, then at some point they must act with the same firmness they displayed toward Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait. Had they approached Iraq with the same timorous tactics they are applying to Israel, Iraqi soldiers still would be in Kuwait.

The point is that aggressors have always answered the question of whether they want peace by their actions. If the United States really wants peace in the Middle East, it must insist that Israel abide by the judgment of the world community as expressed in resolutions by the United Nations. The U.S. can do this at any time simply by forsaking the use of the veto and joining the world consensus. Anything less makes a sham of the peace process, and is demeaning to leaders of a democratic country.

[Saeko]

so the whole of ""UNITED NATIONS ASSEMBLY"" are idiots and you are not??

one word for you
DOGMA

Yes. The UN human rights council is a court where the biggest and most dangerous offenders (such as Saudi Arabia) serve as judge and jury.

[garrulousunlawful]

I am very familiar with them, but I have serious doubts that you have actually read the UN's full list.

no you are wrong about that.

If this was a report about Russia, China, Iran, Syria, N korea it would be plastered in huge bold letters as major news feature on the BBC, ITN, CNN, SKY, Euronews, ABC, Reuters,
but because it is Israel its nowhere to be seen. one has to go look for it and find it himself.
that is the Irony
why are you people sooo biased?
i dont need to put up a post about human rights abuses in China, everybody knows about it, its in every single speech of any american president. its publicised until the cows come home.
but is it ever mentioned about Israel? or the US itself?

some people either cant see that or they just dont want to see it thats all

no Saeko, it changes every once a while. its called a democratic process

@anarchist23 it will come to that my friend, it will come to that