Atlas Shrugs

Incoming IAEA Chief Gives Iran Nuclear Pass, Paves Way for Nuclear war

The international community is in league with the butchers. Considering the murderous execution Iran is committing against its own people, this is a disaster.

The incoming head of the United Nation's nuclear watchdog said on Friday that he did not see any hard evidence that Iran was trying to gain the ability to develop nuclear weapons.

Even El Baradei had it better: "Current IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei told the BBC last month it was his "gut feeling" that Iran was seeking the ability to produce nuclear arms, if it desired, as an "insurance policy" against perceived threats from neighboring countries or the United States."(more here)

Armaros remarked, "I don't know what makes one qualify to work at UN agencies but surely the UN illustrates what I learned in drama classes. Comedy and tragedy are each others closest relatives".

UN "Peacekeepers" Aid Hezballah and Help Bust Israel "Spy Ring"

At some point, Israel will have to leave the UN. They are given sub class status there.  Why legitimize the soft battering ram of the Islamic jihad?

"An alien observing the United Nations' debates, reading its resolutions, and walking its halls could well conclude that a principal purpose of the world body is to censure a tiny country called Israel." (here)

UNIFIL helping to bust Israeli spy ring in Lebanon

UNIFIL peacekeepers in Lebanon, whose mandate was to ensure that Hizbullah
not be permitted to rearm or expand it's presence south of the Litani River
following the Second Lebanon War, has been engaged in an altogether
different mission - arresting those suspected of spying for Israel, Channel
10 reported on Thursday.

According to the report, during a debriefing of UNIFIL activities in
Lebanon, one Spanish UNIFIL commander mentioned that his troops had been
"looking for Israeli spies," and had in fact made a "number of arrests,
mostly in Shia areas of Lebanon."

The Spanish Inquisition Begins ... The Fruit of a Jihad Presidency

Even Orwell could not have imagined this.

The Jews have to file ..........8 million lawsuits. And that's just for starters ...

Tel Aviv has 936 lawsuits against them for Gaza assault Al Arabiya (hat tip Rut)

Israel set for blizzard of war crimes charges

Israel was set to face an avalanche of war crimes lawsuits from Palestinian lawyers who accused Tel Aviv of dozens of crimes five months after its three week assault on the Gaza Strip, the German daily Der Spiegel reported Saturday.

A group of Palestinian lawyers filed 936 lawsuits against Israel's Defense Forces (IDF) and the cases will soon be heard in Spain' National Court under universal jurisdiction, Iyad al-Alami, head of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), said.

Emboldened by Obama, UN hearings to be held on 'war crimes' by Israel

Has Dresden filed suit against the allied forces yet?
Have two million Darfurians filed suit against ... Islam?
Have the Serbs filed suit against Islam and NATO?
Have Falun Gong filed suit against China for return of their organs?
Have the raped women and children of the Congo filed suit against UN peacekeeping forces?
Have the Danes filed suit against the OIC?
Has the Burmese filed suit against Myanmar?
Has Taiwan filed suit against China?
Have the Japanese filed suit North Korea?
Has America filed suit against Iran?
Has Israel filed suit against Iran?
Has Iraq filed suit against Iran?
Has Lebanon filed suit against Iran?
Have the Jews filed suit against Chavez?
Have the Jews filed suit against Islam?
Have the Christians filed suit against Islam?
Have the Hindus filed suit against Islam?
Have the Sikhs filed suit against Islam?
Have the Zoroastrians filed suit against Islam?

Do not get me started....

Emboldened by Obama, UN hearings to be held on 'war crimes' by Israel

When will the UN's war crimes be addressed? When will the child rape, the human trafficking, the violence perpetrated by UN "peacekeepers" be addressed? When will UN Jew hatred be addressed? When will the enormous theft, pillaging and stealing be addressed? When will the victims in Darfur and Rwanda and the abject failure of the UN be addressed.

When will perpetrators of female genital mutilation, honor killings, stonings, hangings of gays be put on trial?

When will the Islamic war crimes against Christians, Jews, and non-believers be put on trial?

This is international law. This is what Obama wants and why he has nominated transnationalist Harold Koh for legal adviser at the State Department. SAY NO TO KOH.

This action by the "international community" at the UN is the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) driven and it is Jew hatred -- plain and simple.

The UN team, led by Mr Goldstone (R), has been visiting sites hit in the war

A UN team investigating possible war crimes in Gaza says it will hold public hearings with victims of the conflict in Gaza and Geneva later this month.

The team has spent the week interviewing witnesses and visiting sites damaged in Israel's three-week offensive, which ended on 18 January.

Richard Goldstone, who is heading the team, said it had hoped to hold hearings in Israel and the West Bank.

But Israel has refused to co-operate in the inquiry, accusing it of bias.

Israel charges the UN Human Rights Council - which has a record of criticising Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians - with singling it out unfairly.

Mr Goldstone said his 15-member team had visited 40 sites in Gaza and spoken to some 70 witnesses and relatives of victims. It had hoped to visit southern Israeli towns hit by Palestinian rocket fire, but was not allowed access.

Mr Goldstone said he hoped Israel's refusal to co-operate would not weaken the report, due for publication in September.

"If we haven't dealt with facts that Israel would like us to deal with, I think we can hardly be blamed for that," he added, according to news agency AP.

Previous inquiries

Several investigations into alleged violations of international law during Israel's 22-day operation in Gaza, which ended on 18 January, have now reported back.

OIC FREE SPEECH ALERT: Islamic Supremacism on the Net?

Jihad finds Andy Hardy.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference will doubtless demand the suppression of websites that "insult Islam" or "encourage hatred," and a number of European countries may well go along.

Atlas readers are well aware and sagaciously wary of the goals of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). I have, many times, outlined their nefarious goals and sinister objectives.

It was only a matter of time before Islam went after the internet and sought to impose its domination on the web. The OIC  (the global voice of the ummah - the universal Muslim community) have set their sights on suppression of free speech on the net. The OIC has already gotten passed a proposal in the UN, backed by Muslims nations, urging the passage of laws around the world protecting religion from criticism. Islam is the only religion specifically named as deserving protection.

Websites like mine are the ones that dare speak of the truth of Islam and report on the terrible human rights abuses, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu etc persecution, suppression of women and children, the murder of non-believers, brutal imposition of shariah law, Islamic supremacism, academic jihad, social  jihad, cultural jihad, shariah finance, stealth jihad and the galloping global jihad. The corrupt media are already subdued and auto-censor themselves. The net is all there is.

Expect a fierce fight. And don't expect the left to fight - despite the fact that it is a fundamental "liberal" value". The fascists on the left would like to silence the rational, the reasoned, the logical. They won't be targeted ............ not at first (but certainly at last).

Here's the latest attack on the West by the global jihad. File this move under "stealth jihad" or quiet jihad or soft jihad, though its anything but.

WHO CONTROLS THE NET Ariel Rabkin, Weekly Standard

In order to please our European allies and our Third World critics, the Obama administration may be tempted to surrender one particular manifestation of American "dominance": central management of key aspects of the Internet by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Other countries are pushing for more control. Early this year, British cabinet member Andy Burnham told the Daily Telegraph that he was "planning to negotiate with Barack Obama's incoming American administration to draw up new international rules for English language websites." It would be a mistake for the administration to go along. America's special role in managing the Internet is good for America and good for the world.

Internet domain names (such as www.google.com) are managed hierarchically. At the top of the hierarchy is an entity called IANA, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, operated on behalf of the Commerce Department. The U.S. government therefore has the ultimate authority to review or revoke any decision, or even to transfer control of IANA to a different operator.

Until now, the management of the Domain Name System has been largely apolitical, and most of the disputes that have arisen have been of interest only to insiders and the technology industry. IANA has concerned itself with fairly narrow questions like "Should we allow names ending in .info?" Commercial questions about ownership of names, like other property disputes, are settled in national courts. Political questions like "Who is the rightful government of Pakistan, and therefore the rightful owner of the .pk domain?" are settled by the U.S. Department of State

The State Department? Great.

There are persistent proposals to break the connection between IANA and the U.S. government. In these schemes, IANA would be directed by some international body, such as the United Nations or the International Telecommunication Union, which coordinates international phone networks. It is unclear what problem such proposals attempt to solve. There have been no serious complaints about American stewardship of the Internet, no actual abuses perpetrated by American overseers. But were we to abdicate this stewardship, a number of difficulties could arise.

Domain names sometimes present political questions. Which side in a civil war should control Pakistan's Internet domain? Should Israel's .il be suspended as punishment for its being an "Apartheid state"? What about Taiwan's .tw if China announces an attempt to "reabsorb its wayward province"?

Perhaps most serious, control of Internet names could become a lever to impose restrictions on Internet content. Many governments already attempt to control speech on the Internet. Some years ago, Yahoo! was subject to criminal proceedings in France for allowing Nazi memorabilia to be auctioned on its website. Britain, Canada, and Australia all have mandatory nationwide blacklists of banned sites, managed by nongovernmental regulators with minimal political oversight. Such blacklists can have unpredictable consequences: Wikipedia was badly degraded to British users for some hours because of a poorly designed censorship system targeting child pornography.

If we give control of the Internet naming infrastructure to an international organization, we must expect attempts to censor the Internet. The Organization of the Islamic Conference will doubtless demand the suppression of websites that "insult Islam" or "encourage hatred," and a number of European countries may well go along. 

Most countries lack our First Amendment tradition, and if we wish to protect the free speech rights of Americans online, we should not allow Internet domain names to be hostage to foreign standards. Many other First World countries already have government-imposed restrictions on Internet speech that we would not contemplate here. Even if Internet governance were shared only with First World democracies, they might urge and ultimately demand that domain operators impose restrictions on content.

There's much more. Go.

This must be vigorously fought. It is every American's patriotic duty to stand for our basic inalienable human rights. I know which side Obama is on -- and it's not ours.

Bat Ye'or wrote here of the OIC:

The OIC is one of the largest intergovernmental organizations in the world
. It encompasses 56 Muslim states plus the Palestinian Authority. Spread over four continents, it claims to speak in the name of the ummah (the universal Muslim community), which numbers about 1.3 billion. The OIC’s mission is to unite all Muslims worldwide by rooting them in the Koran and the Sunnah — the core of traditional Islamic civilization and values. It aims at strengthening solidarity and cooperation among all its members, in order to protect the interests of Muslims everywhere and to galvanize the ummah into a unified body.

The OIC is a unique organization — one that has no equivalent in the world. It unites the religious, economic, military, and political strength of 56 states. By contrast, the European Union represents half as many states and is a secular body only, and the Vatican — which speaks for the world’s 1.1 billion Catholics — is devoid of any political power. Many Muslims in the West resist the OIC’s tutelage and oppose its efforts to supplant Western law with sharia. But the OIC’s resources are formidable.

The organization has numerous subsidiary institutions collaborating at the highest levels with international organizations in order to implement its political objectives worldwide. Its main working bodies are the Islamic Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (ISESCO), which seeks to impose on the West the Islamic perception of history and civilization; the Observatory of Islamophobia, which puts pressure on Western governments and international bodies to adopt laws punishing “Islamophobia” and blasphemy; and the newly created Islamic International Court of Justice. As stated in its 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, the OIC is strictly tied to the principles of the Koran, the Sunnah, and the sharia. In a word, the OIC seeks to become the reincarnation of the Caliphate.

The OIC regularly reiterates its commitments to protecting the political, historical, religious, and human rights of Muslims in non-OIC states, especially Muslims who form the majority in specific regions of non-Muslim countries — such as the southern Philippines, southern Thailand, and western Thrace in Greece — as well as Muslims in places like the Balkans, the Caucasus, Myanmar, India, and China. The OIC supports Hamas and the Palestinians in their struggle to destroy Israel, as well as the Muslim fight for “legitimate self-determination” in “Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.” It has condemned the “continual Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan,” and it expresses its full solidarity with “the just cause of the Muslim Turkish people of Cyprus” and with Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, whom many hold responsible for encouraging the massacres in Darfur. The seat of the OIC is in Jeddah, but the organization regards that location as temporary: Its headquarters will be transferred to al-Kods (Islamized Jerusalem) when that city has been “liberated” from Israeli control.

In its efforts to defend the “true image” of Islam and combat its defamation, the organization has requested the UN and the Western countries to punish “Islamophobia” and blasphemy. Among the manifestations of Islamophobia, in the OIC’s view, are European opposition to illegal immigration, anti-terrorist measures, criticism of multiculturalism, and indeed any efforts to defend Western cultural and national identities. The OIC has massive funding from oil sources, which it lavishly spends on the Western media and academia and in countless “dialogues.” It influences Western policy, laws, and even textbooks through pressures brought by Muslim immigrants and by the Western nations’ own leftist parties. Hence, we have seen Kristallnacht-like incitements of hate and murder against European Jews and Israel conducted with impunity in the cities of Europe — where respect for human rights is supposed to be one of the highest values.

Jane Lute: Another Disastrous Obama Appointment

Obama enemy alert! Last week I reported that The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee hosted Jane Lute, the Obama appointee as Deputy Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Jane Lute was the former UN Asst. Sec. General for Peacekeeping, and also a former Clinton staffer.  Conservatives tried to use her miserable record at the UN to stop her, but failed. 

Sec. General for Peacekeeping. Once has to wonder what action (or inaction) Lute took in the punishment of those UN Peacekeepers who systematically raped and trafficked in children (more on that here). The child rape was rampant, recurring and disgraceful. Worse, the perps were never prosecuted; they were moved to other parts of the globe to exact their sick, perverted revenge on oppressed innocents.

Muslims Against Sharia named Lute the "Gihadi Useful Idiot".

The American-Arab anti-discrimination jihad announced Lute this way:

Deputy Secretary Lute to discuss the ongoing challenges facing law enforcement and the post-9/11 communities and the struggle to maintain and promote civil rights and security simultaneously.

Lute has a history of anti-semitism and anti-Israel actions in the UN.

For example, during the Israel/Hezbo war, Lute accused Israel of targeting intentionally a UN building -- when it was known for weeks that the building was coming under Hezb'allah fire. Evidence said otherwise -- check out an email from a victim of the bombing (from FOX News):

The email from Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener warned that the post had come under "unintentional" artillery fire and aerial bombing several times in the previous weeks, and that several Hezbollah positions were in the area of the patrol base.

"It is not safe or prudent for us to conduct normal patrol activities," wrote Kruedener in the July 18th e-mail. "(The artillery and aerial bombing) has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity."

Kruedener was one of four unarmed U.N. military observers killed in Tuesday's bombing.

"I think that e-mail is very important, because unfortunately these are practically the last words of somebody who eventually paid with his life,” said Israel's U.N. ambassador Daniel Gillerman. “He's telling his commander that Israel was not targeting them and that there is Hezbollah activity around there."

Here is Lute's testimony (CBC.ca):

In a briefing note to the UN, Jane Lute, assistant secretary general for peacekeeping operations, said the IDF had been repeatedly firing too close to the patrol base on Tuesday.

She said 21 strikes occurred within 300 metres of the base and 12 artillery rounds fell within 100 metres of it, with four hitting the base directly.

The strikes occurred despite the fact "Hezbollah firing was not taking place within the immediate vicinity of the patrol base," she said.

She lied for Hezballah during the Israel/Hezbo war? Under Bush/Cheney/Bolton? Wow. That's hardcore.

Lute said that following the hit, Israeli troops continued to fire during the rescue operation and that incidents of firing close to UNIFIL positions were still happening Wednesday morning.

But Lute later noted that UNIFIL has also come under direct attacks by small arms fire from Hezbollah.

UPDATE: OT but related: Homeland Security Trains Scouts To Fight Terrorism (hat tip Green)

Obama Joins UN [anti] Human Rights Council

It goes from bad to worse ............. check out the company Obama keeps. As promised, Obama abandons any semblance of dignity and integrity and joins the axis of evil.

The UN "human rights council" is a battering ram for the Organization of the Islamic Conference, whose objective is global Islamic domination. Go here now, and here and here.

According to Bat Ye'or, "the OIC, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which is a group that brings together 57 Muslim countries, has decided to bring into the international forefront and into the Western world, this rule of Dhimmitude that imposed the respect of Islam by non-Muslims. This is what we see now, and they have decided too, that the Muslims who are integrated in non-Muslim countries are a part of the universal Ummah, and that their rights to be respected must be applied.

[....] Unfortunately what I see now, organized in the OIC, is exactly the contrary. The OIC brings all the Muslim countries, the 57 Muslim countries, together, and I wouldn’t say the same rule of course, the same organization, the same politics, its aim at creating a block, a Muslim block, which is, it plans to unify it by rooting it in the Koran and Sharia and the Sunna. So we are going to see a stronger, even a stronger Islamic block, more fundamentalist."

             US Wins Seat on UN Rights Council

The United States won a seat on the UN Human Rights Council for the first time along with four countries accused of serious human rights violations - Cuba, Saudi Arabia, China and Russia.

Former President George W. Bush's administration boycotted the council over its repeated criticism of Israel and its refusal to cite flagrant rights abuses in Sudan and elsewhere. (AP)

Previously at Atlas:

1. Atlas Shrugs: ANTI-HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL VOTES AGAINST ISRAEL ... Jan 13, 2009 ... G-d bless Harper. Shame, shame shame on us. "GENEVA — The top UN human rights body has condemned Israel's military offensive in Gaza.
   
2. Atlas Shrugs: Iran and the "New and Improved" UN Human Rights Council Iran, the worst violator of human rights, is up for a seat on the "new" (sounds old - very, very old) Human abuse Rights Council. This is beyond the pale.
   
3. Atlas Shrugs: UN sub Human Rights Council: To Adopt Barbarian Agenda UN Set to End Scrutiny of Cuba and Belarus, Indict Israel; 27 NGOs Protest "UN's last chance to save the Human Rights Council from itself," says UN Watch ...
   
4. Atlas Shrugs: IRANIAN ASSASSIN ON UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL While Kofi takes the time out of his busy pilfering and extorting schedule to smear Israel with the Gaza beach Pali Arab murders, see who is sitting on the ...
5. Atlas Shrugs: UNSC to Mirror UN "Human" Rights Council? Jun 25, 2008 ... At the Human Rights Council, for instance, they charge that the OIC has protected allies, ganged up against Israel, and pushed measures ...
   atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/06/will-the-unsc-m.html
6. Atlas Shrugs: No Dice on the UN [anti] Human Rights Council Continuing in the grand tradition of John Bolton, today we put America's values first. The US decided not to seek a seat on the UN's Human Rights Council.
   atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/03/no_dice_on_the_.html
7. Atlas Shrugs: OBAMA TO JOIN ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-ISRAEL OIC DRIVEN ...

Badges? They Don't Need No stinking Badges!

What is particularly galling is that the left does this all the time. The hecklers, protesters are always of a leftist/Islamist stripe. Were the Muslim delegates and NGO's who tormented Elie Wiesel stripped of their badges?
Was Ahmadinejad stripped of his badge for filthy rhetoric and calls for genocide?
I am sure they'll replace the old badges with these new badges.

U.N. pulls badges from Jewish NGOs JTA (hat tip China Confidential)

GENEVA (JTA) -- The United Nations pulled credentials from a number of Jewish activists who disrupted a speech by the Iranian president at the Durban Review Conference. 

Of the 46 badges that were pulled this week for disruptive behavior, the vast majority were from individuals accredited through Jewish organizations. Notably, the French Union of Jewish Students lost 21 badges.

Credentials were stripped as well from four members of the European Union of Jewish Students and one B'nai Brith member. Between them, the French and European Jewish student groups had 370 members accredited, amounting to more than one-third of all the NGO activists at the conference. 

U.N. officials said they believed Jewish activists who already had their credentials pulled swapped badges with members of another group, Coexist.

"It seems they were in league with each other," said Rupert Colville, a U.N. spokesman.

Some of those who lost their credentials were ejected after they donned rainbow wigs and clown noses and rushed the podium during the speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Others were barred because they were found to be hiding clown paraphernalia and plotting a second disruption, said Colville.

The United Nations is still investigating how many other individuals may have been involved, with the U.N. accreditation of entire groups possibly revoked if they were found to have coordinated the disruptions. No charges are expected to be filed against individuals. 

"I don't think that throwing a nose is a criminal offense," Colville said. 

Two members of an Iranian group were expelled for distributing "offensive materials" and an Israeli journalist was sent out for "screaming racist comments" from the gallery, according to Colville.

On Holocaust Remembrance day, Survivor Wiesel Abused at UN Durban Conference: ZIO-NAZIS! UPDATE: OVER 100 COUNTRIES CONDEMN ISRAEL

How bad is it? How failed is the UN? Look at this.

Elie Wiesel Verbally Abused as "Zio-Nazi" by Ahmadinejad Entourage at Durban II (hat tip Chad)

If you haven't read Wiesel's Night -- read it. It is Wiesel's  testimony and memories, a child of the Holocaust, the nightmare world of the death camps. This video is painful to watch. Horror.

He is seeing it all happen again -- in a worldwide jihad Jew hating conspiracy.

UPDATE: OVER 100 COUNTRIES AFFIRM DURBAN I ISRAEL CONDEMNATION J Post

The Rise of the Fourth Reich: Ahmadinejad's Blistering Attack on Israel and America at Durban

Evil unleashed. This is what happens when you sanction evil.

Ahmadinejad Attacks Israel, US as Nations Walkout of UN's 'Durban II' FOX News

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unleashed a blistering attack Monday against Israel and the United States, calling the Jewish state "racist" and lashing out at Americans for their support.

Ahmadinejad called Israel the "most cruel and racist regime." He followed by blaming the United States, Europe and Israel for the world's financial crisis. Protestors stormed the stage when Ahmadinejad began speaking and several Western delegates walked out of the room after the Iranian president said Israel was created on the "pretext of Jewish suffering" from World War II.

A wigged protester shouting "Racist! racist!" threw a soft red object at Ahmadinejad, hitting the podium and interrupting his speech. Meanwhile, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the world Monday to rally against the threat that intolerance could rise as a result of the economic crisis, saying "the time is now" to stamp out racism. Ban, opening the global body's first racism conference in eight years, said racism including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia needed to be tackled...He also said he regretted the absence of the United States and eight other Western nations that have pulled out because of fears Muslim nations will dominate the conference with calls for to denounce Israel and for a global ban on criticizing Islam...The administration of Barack Obama, America's first black president, announced Saturday it would boycott the weeklong meeting because it makes reference to a declaration made in 2001 at the global body's first racism conference in Durban, South Africa. That document was agreed after the United States and Israel walked out over attempts to liken Zionism — the movement to establish a Jewish state in the Holy Land — to racism.

UN asshattery amidst all this hate:

"There comes a time to reaffirm our faith in fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of us all," Ban told the gathering of thousands of ministers, diplomats and dignitaries at the U.N.'s European headquarters in Geneva.

UPDATE: Ah Shoot has more on the anti-Ahmadinejad protesters that the corrupt media did not want you to see.

CRETINS CONFERENCE: POLAND! NEW ZEALAND BOYCOTT! More & More Countries Pull Out of Durban, Jew Hating Durban

Poland just pulled out  of the annihilationist conference, and so did New Zealand.

New Zealand pulls out of UN racism conference

New Zealand won't take part in this week's United Nations conference on racism, which it fears could descend into the same rancor as one in South Africa in 2001, Foreign Minister Murray McCully said Monday.

And so begins the OIC driven Jew hatefest Durban II on the eve of Hitler's Birthday - how sick.

New Zealand joined the US, Germany, Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy in boycotting the conference out of concern that it could be used by Muslim countries to criticize Israel and to limit free speech when it comes to criticizing their religion.

The line in the sand is drawn - this is now officially The Cretins Conference.

This is what living to hate looks like. (hat tip Gloria)

As UN Blocks Palestine-Related Side Events at Durban Review Conference Palestinian Civil Society Launches “Israel Review Conference” in Geneva on the Eve of Durban Review

Representing over 170 Palestinian civil society [ha!]organizations, the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC) launches its Israel Review Conference under the title: “United Against Apartheid, Colonialism and Racism: Justice and Dignity for the Palestinian People.” The conference takes place in Geneva between the 17th and 18th of April 2009 on the eve of the United Nation’s Durban Review Conference.

At the conference, internationally renowned legal experts, researchers, academics, and activists from five continents will discuss legal strategies to hold Israel accountable for its illegal policies and practices of racial discrimination. Participants at the conference are also scheduled to discuss strategies for linking global struggles against racism, and concrete steps to challenge Israeli apartheid within the framework of the rapidly growing global movement calling for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it complies with international law.

DURBAN II: WILL OBAMA SANCTION THE JIHADI, RACIST ANNIHILATIONIST CONFERENCE?

“Things have sunk so low that the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.” Orwell

If Obama reverses course, abandons the the Durban boycott and sends a US representative, then we know.
Durban opens on Hitler's birthday. Durban II is racism.

This is the real UN. Less than 50% of members are fully democratic.There are 192 members of the general assembly. 117 belong to the so called non aligned movement (NAM). And the largest single voting bloc of the NAM is made up of the 57 nations of the Organization of the Islamic conference."

Hitler called the Jews unza "our  misfortune", then it was "Ungluck." Now it is "Naqba". The prelude to the Holocaust was sounded by the order "Kaufen nicht bei Juden" - "Buy Not from Jews". Today it is "BDS"......  Protocols of Durban have replaced the protocols of Zion. 

STATEMENT BY ANNE BAYEFSKY AT THE THIRD SUBSTANTIVE PREPARATORY MEETING OF THE DURBAN REVIEW CONFERENCE

April 17, 2009
United Nations, Palais des Nations, GENEVA, Switzerland

The eyes of millions of victims of racism, xenophobia and intolerance are upon YOU, the representatives of states and the United Nations. And instead of hope you have given them despair. Instead of truth you have handed them diplomatic double-talk. Instead of combating antisemitism you have handed them a reason for Jews to fear UN-driven hatemongering on a global scale.

The Durban conference – allegedly dedicated to combating racism, antisemitism and other forms of intolerance – will open April 20th on the anniversary of the birth of Adolf Hitler without agreement on even so much as remembering the Holocaust and the war against the Jews. Your draft words on the Holocaust – the very foundation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – have been narrowed to the barest mention from previous versions. And if the minor reference survives at all – it will be a testament to your interest in Jews that died 60 years ago, while tolerating and encouraging the murder of Jews in the here and now.

Furthermore, the draft before you demonizes the Jewish state of Israel and then has the audacity to pretend to care about antisemitism in a single word buried among 17 pages. Antisemitism means discrimination against the Jewish people. Since it is evident that almost none of you have the courage to say it, the face of modern antisemitism IS the UN – your – discrimination against Israel, the embodiment of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination.

Over and over again we have heard a massive misinformation campaign about the content of these proceedings and the draft before you. We have heard the tale that this draft does not single out Israel, that the hate has been removed, that the fault of the antisemitism at Durban I was that of NGOs while states and the UN were blameless.

Perhaps you think that journalists and victims will not bother to read for themselves the Durban Declaration adopted by some governments. There is only one state mentioned in it – Israel. There is only one state associated with racist practices in it – Israel. And yet the very first thing that this draft before you does is to reaffirm that abomination, abomination for Jews and Arabs living in Israel’s free and democratic society, and for all the victims of racism ignored therein. Lawyers call it incorporation by reference when they hope nobody reads the small print. The propaganda stops here. We have read it. We understand the game. And we decry the ugly effort to repeat the Durban agenda to isolate and defeat Israel politically, as every effort to do so militarily for decades has failed.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Chair of this Preparatory Committee also told us this week that the Durban Declaration in all its aspects is a consensus text. Perhaps they are unfamiliar with the Canadian reservations made in Durban in 2001 which state categorically that the Middle East language was outside the conference’s jurisdiction and not agreed. Perhaps they failed to notice that one of the world’s greatest democracies, the United States, voted with its feet and walked out of the Durban I hatefest? The Durban Declaration has never represented a global consensus among free and democratic nations. When the head of the Islamic conference treats Durban as a bible, in their words, it is more accurately a defamation of religions.

This week you decided which states ought to serve in a leadership role at next week’s conference. Among them are some of the world’s leading practitioners of racism, not those interested in ending it. You have also decided to hand a global megaphone to the President of a state which advocates genocide and denies the Holocaust.

So in a state of shock and dismay we address ourselves not to the human rights abusers that glorify the Durban Declaration or its next incarnation, but to democracies -- and we ask: Will Germany sit on Hitler’s birthday and listen to the speech of an advocate of genocide against the Jewish people and grant legitimacy to the forum which tolerates his presence? What about the United Kingdom, the birthplace of the Magna Carta? Or France that helped to ship last generation’s Jews to crematoriums?

You could have fought racism. You chose instead to fight Jews. You could have promoted the universal standards against racism already in existence. You chose instead to diminish their importance in the name of alleged cultural preferences. You could have protected freedom of expression. You chose instead to undermine it by twisted concepts of incitement. You could have brought victims of racism together in a common cause. You chose instead to pit victims against each other in an ugly struggle for meagre recognition. For those democracies that remain under these circumstances you are ultimately responsible for what can only be called an appalling disservice to real victims of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance around the world.

President Hussein Leans in Favor of Attending Jew Hate Fest Durban II

In an utterly snake-like move, Obama is reversing direction and floating his next heinous Islamic-groveling move - US attendance in Durban II. It is unfathomable. This conference mirrors the Wannsee conference, in which Nazi officials met and would eventually plan the Holocaust, the final solution. Was Hussein Obama's faux pullout of the conference a three card monte switch? A ruse for the Jews (the 78% of the jewicidals who voted for the jihad sympathizer)?

Ahmadinejad has recently announced that he too will be attending. Obama must be anxious to bow to the poison dwarf as well.

U.S. leaning toward taking part in Durban 2 summit Haaretz Correspondents

Senior U.S. officials in Washington and New York are leaning in favor of participating in the "Durban 2" UN-sponsored anti-racism conference scheduled to take place on April 20 in Geneva, diplomatic sources said on Sunday.

The diplomats, who share a close working relationship with the American delegation to the United Nations, informed leading Jewish officials in New York that Washington has increasingly become convinced of the need to dispatch representatives to the conference. 

Why would Hussein want to legitimize an opportunity to further spread hate?

RALLY FOR ISRAEL & AGAINST DURBAN II

Remember the Holocaust and Protest Against the Jew Haters/Israel Haters at “Durban II” (UNazis) who want to finish what Hitler started.
Join Shalom International at “Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day.”

When & Where:
IN NEW YORK CITY:

April 19, 2 p.m. across from the UN at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, 47th Street and First Avenue.

Contact: Bruce S. Ticker - 215... or Bticker@comcast.net

April 20, at Noon, at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, sponsored by Stand With Us.
Contact: Avi Posnick - 212...

IN GENEVA, SWITZERLAND:
April 20 in the late afternoon (we join others)
April 21 at 12 - 2 p.m., sponsored by Shalom Int’l.
April 22 at 5 to 7 p.m. for the “Support Israel Rally”

Palaise de Nacions, Geneva, Switzerland

Remember the Holocaust when 6 million Jews and 5 million others were slaughtered by those with the same mentality as those cowards pushing Durban II. REMEMBER: FROM HITLER TO HAMAS, HEZBOLLAH, SAUDI ARABIA, SYRIA AND IRAN, ETC., THE HOLOCAUST CONTINUES.

UN SECURITY COUNCIL KICKS PRESIDENT HUSSEIN TO THE CURB WILL DO NOTHING ABOUT NORTH KOREAN MISSILE LAUNCH

The UNSC has given President Shaft the shaft.

Now that Obama promised to nuclear disarm America in response to North Korea and Iran building nuclear weapons, how did his adoring friends in the international community thank him? By kicking him to the curb. They have defanged America - what did Obambi expect? No one respects the weak and the craven.
They met in emergency session and decided to do nothing.

This is his strong response? Disarming us?

"This provocation underscores the need for action"

Yes, BHO, your international friends backed you up on that. 

"Rules must be binding"

"Violations must be punished?
Words Matter"

Kim Jong Il is ROTFLHAO.

NOW'S THE TIME FOR A STRONG INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE

The UNSC's response? Do nothing - not even the strongly worded letter.

"All nations must come together to build a stronger global regime".

WTF is a "gobal regime"?

"We believe in dialogue"

Good luck with that, asshat.

When America had spine. FLASHBACK 2006

Is it possible that this was just two years ago?

It feels like a wake doesn't it?

UN MAKES IT A CRIME TO INSULT ISLAM: RESPECT VIOLENT IDEOLOGY OR JAIL

The UN passed a resolution calling for criminalization of criticism of Islam. As Obama plans to stock his administration with Muslims, it will be telling how he handles the implementation of OIC strategy to impose Islamic supremacism on the world. What will Obama do and say about this resolution, which seeks to protect Islam and criminalize criticism of it (as determined by the OIC)? Dr. History points out that nothing is said about Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Ba’hai, Zorastrianism, Buddhism etc.

And considering how anti-semitic the Quran is, as are Islamic teachings, does this legitimize Jew hatred and make it a crime to speak out against it?

Islam is the only religion specifically named as deserving protection. India's Ambassador Gopinathan Achamkulangare said the resolution "inappropriately" linked religious criticism to racism.

UN passes resolution calling for criminalization of criticism of Islam Jihad watch

And that includes, of course, any honest examination of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to make recruits. So not only does this herald the death of free speech, but it also leaves us mute and defenseless before the advancing global jihad.

"UN body OKs call to curb religious criticism," by Frank Jordans for AP, March 26 (thanks to Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi):

GENEVA (AP) — The U.N.'s top human-rights body approved a proposal backed by Muslims [sic] nations Thursday urging the passage of laws around the world protecting religion from criticism.

The proposal by Pakistan had drawn strong criticism from free-speech campaigners and liberal democracies.

A simple majority of 23 members of the 47-nation Human Rights Council voted in favor of the resolution. Eleven mostly Western nations opposed it and 13 countries abstained.

Cowards.

The resolution urges states to provide "protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general."

It sounds good until you realize that "incitement to religious hatred" includes such acts as quoting the Qur'an passages that jihadists use to recruit and motivate terrorists.

"It is individuals who have rights and not religions," said Canadian diplomat Terry Cormier. Canada's criticism was echoed by European Union countries, all of which voted against the proposal.

That's good, and unexpected.

The council is dominated by Muslim and African countries. Muslim nations have argued that religions, in particular Islam, must be shielded from criticism in the media and other areas of public life. They cited cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad as an example of unacceptable free speech.

"Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism," the resolution said.

By Muslims. By Islamic jihadists. But it is not they who are targeted by this initiative.

A coalition of more than 100 secular and faith groups had called on governments to oppose the resolution, warning that it could lead to accusations of defamation among different faiths.

The United States did not vote on the resolution because it is not a member of the council. The Bush administration announced it was virtually giving up on the body and would participate in debates only if absolutely necessary because of the council's anti-Israel statements and its failure to act on abuses in Sudan and elsewhere.

That will doubtess be reversed soon.

India, which normally votes along with the council's majority of developing nations, abstained in protest at the fact that Islam was the only religion specifically named as deserving protection.

India's Ambassador Gopinathan Achamkulangare said the resolution "inappropriately" linked religious criticism to racism.

WAKE UP! WAKE UP!

Did you read this urgent post over at Atlas the day before yesterday? Commit it to memory: BLUEPRINT FOR US SURRENDER TO ISLAM: THE US MUSLIM ENGAGEMENT

Frank Gaffney has more on the stealth creep of Islamic supremacism here and worldwide over at Family Security Matters:

SHARIAH'S BROTHERHOOD

On Friday, President Obama reiterated for the umpteenth time his determination to develop a "new relationship" with the Muslim world. On this occasion, the audience was the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Unfortunately, it increasingly appears that, in so doing, he will be embracing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization dedicated to promoting the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam

calls Shariah and that has the self-described mission of "destroying Western civilization from within."

 

As part of Mr. Obama's "Respect Islam" campaign, he will travel to Turkey in early April. While there, he will not only pay tribute to an Islamist government that has systematically wrested every institution from the secular tradition of Ataturk and put the country squarely on the path to Islamification. He will also participate in something called the "Alliance of Civilizations."

Bat Ye'or said the following of the Alliance of Civilizations  in a speech given at the Counter Jihad conference in Brussels in 2007: The Alliance of Civilizations, created to oppose the clash of civilizations, that is jihad, hasalso added pressure. On 13 November 2006, the High-Level Group of the Alliance ofCivilizations presented its report which sums up the request of the OIC at its Mecca Summit in 2005, after the Cartoons affair. First, it adopts the Islamic view of history and politics byclaiming that everything was fine between the three monotheistic religions until the 19thcentury, when the evil of European colonialism and Zionism destroyed this harmony. Then itaffirms that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main source of Christian-Muslimantagonism, not the jihadist war and ideology that deny for others the right to exist. It proclaims that this conflict “remains one of the gravest threats to international stability” and formulates recommendations that again echo the OIC requests. Such views mirror Hitler accusing the Jews of fomenting World War II, or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, praisedin the Hamas charter, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood which denies Israel’s right to exist.

The recent meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (and here) (OSCE Conference on intolerance and discrimination against Muslims, Cordoba, 9-10 October 2007) is much of the same, a charter of dhimmitude. It examines the means to condition Europeans to respect Muslim immigrants and accept their culture. Although racism against Muslims as well as against any other should be punished, nowhere do we see in any of these texts a genuine desire to understand the fears of Europeans aggressed in their own country by local jihadist cells, their anger at the Muslim scriptures and history loaded with anti-Jewish and anti-Christian stereotypes which they bring into Europe, the continual incitement to hate and war against the infidels, particularly against Israel and America, the inferiority of women and the legal oppression of non-Muslims. The accusations of Islamophobia totally overlook these facts as if they emerge from a vacuum. The Eurabian moral dishonesty that incriminates Israel’s self-defense in order to exist is now projected onto Europe, guilty when protecting itself against Islamic terrorism. Our self-defense is considered an aggression that victimizes Muslims. We are in fact in a logic of dhimmitude within Europe.

There's more - read Bat Ye'or's remarks here.

Back to Gaffney:

The Alliance is a UN-sponsored affair that reflects – as, increasingly do most things the United Nations is involved in – the views of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC is made up of 57 Muslim-majority nations. Thanks to support from Saudi Arabia and its proxies, the Muslim Brotherhood has become a driving force within the Conference and their agendas largely coincide.

 

For example, in 2005 a communiqué issued after a summit in Mecca declared: "The Conference underlined the need to collectively endeavor to reflect the noble Islamic values, counter Islamophobia, defamation of Islam and its values and desecration of Islamic holy sites, and to effectively coordinate with States as well as regional and international institutions and organizations to urge them to criminalize this phenomenon as a form of racism." 

The logic of dhimmitude.

Ominously, as part of its bid to "criminalize" Islamophobia, the OIC is seeking "deterrent punishments." It insists that not only freedom of expression but all human rights be circumscribed by the OIC's 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which concludes with the caveat that, "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah." Translation: Liberties enshrined in the UN's foundational Universal Declaration of Human Rights are largely rendered null and void.

 

The demand that no criticism of Islam be permitted is the preeminent feature of the Muslim Brotherhood's efforts in the West. In fact, it is but the leading edge of the Brothers' bid to suppress public awareness of the threat posed by their program in societies that pride themselves on religious tolerance, thereby facilitating seditious penetration and influence operations by the Shariah-adherent.

 

A playbook for the latter can be found in a publication issued last fall by the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project that is being aggressively promoted to the Obama administration and Congress by a number of its non-Muslim participants. Notably, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright recently effusively presented the Project's book entitled Changing Course: A New Direction for U.S. Relations with the Muslim World to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Former Congressman Vin Weber did the same at Grover Norquist's weekly meeting of conservative activists last week.

 

Underwritten largely by George Soros' and other left-wing foundations, Changing Course seems to reflect predominantly the recommendations of groups the government has established are Muslim Brotherhood fronts, such as the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Both are represented in the Engagement Project's "Leadership Group." Accordingly, its book calls for:

 

• "engagement with groups that have clearly demonstrated a commitment to nonviolent participation in politics" (read: the Brotherhood);
• "not equat[ing] reform with secularism, nor...assum[ing] that reformers who advocate some form of Shariah as the basis for the rule of law will inevitably abuse human rights or adopt anti-American policies";
• "not supply[ing] additional ammunition to extremists by linking the term ‘Islam' or key tenets of the religion of Islam with the actions of extremist or terrorist groups";
• Launching "an education program comparable in scale" to "the more than $7 billion" invested in the "post-Sputnik U.S. commitment to math and science education" to "education on Islam and Muslims, sustained over a decade or more, focused on teacher training and curriculum in middle and high schools, and colleges."

Emboldened by the promise of this influence operation and the apparent willingness of the Obama administration to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda – in part, if not in its entirety – the organization's assorted fronts in America are becoming ever more audacious. In response to a long-overdue decision taken by the FBI last year to terminate "sensitivity training" of its agents by one of the most prominent of these fronts, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), assorted Brotherhood groups and operatives reportedly intend to announce that Muslims will henceforth cease any and all cooperation with U.S. law enforcement until CAIR is rehabilitated.

 

Such a step would not only call into question the patriotism of the many Muslims in America who do not embrace the Brotherhood's Shariah agenda – something that would, presumably, be as offensive to them as it would be troubling to the rest of us. It could also expose those engaged in it to criminal charges of "misprision of felony," conspiring to withhold information from the authorities concerning terrorist operations and activities in the Muslim community.

Thereby killing any hope, any hope at all of real reform of Islam.

The message should go forth: Friends of the Muslim Brotherhood are no friends of America. We follow their guidance at our peril.

Wiggle Room

"Durban II" is an upcoming United Nations "anti-racism" conference intended to update a 2001 conference held in Durban, South Africa. Ostensibly designed to find common global ground against racism, Durban I instead focused on isolating and delegitimizing Israel as "racist." By joining preparatory work for Durban II, the White House has proven not only naive, but destructive. The Obama administration has now effectively admitted its mistake by withdrawing from the Durban II preparations. But why did it get involved in the first place? John Bolton here

The Jewish Genocide conference, aka Durban II, has altered its text. I suspect it's to give President Hussein the opportunity to rejoin the new nazi conference. He did leave wiggle room.

Durban II: Diplomats Amend UN Racism Text - Stephanie Nebehay
Following an EU threat to boycott next month's "Durban II" UN conference on racism in Geneva, diplomats have removed references to Israel and religious defamation from the draft declaration in an amended text circulated on Tuesday. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said, "it would seem that precise improvements have been made." (Reuters)

BAT YE'OR LIVE IN NYC: CANDOR OR RESPECT, TALKING ABOUT ISLAM

 

On February 26th, Bat Ye’or, the Egyptian-born British historian who specializes in the history of Christian and Jewish dhimmis and is the author of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis; Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide; and The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude, took part in a panel discussion at Columbia Law School entitled “Candor or Respect? Talking About the Religion of Others.”

Because everything Bat Ye'or says is of such import, I have covered her remarks to the best of my and KGS's ability. Much thanks to KGS who  helped me enormously.

Bat Ye'or is the world's foremost leading scholar on Islam. Period. Bernard Lewis is notorious for stealing from her.

Here are her remarks:

I would like first to thank Prof. Philip Hamburger, for having invited me to participate in this panel and for having chosen a subject that suddenly emerges in the 21th irreligious century. There are reasons for the sudden international gravity of this topic and maybe we could touch a bit on that too in the discussion. I want to remind the participants that this is not just a theoretical problem, because there are people who have been assassinated, killed, and who live in fear and terror, their whole lives destroyed by what is called blasphemy.

There are reasons why this problem of blasphemy has taken on such importance. I want to say that it will take on more and more of importance, and if we don’t try to solve the problems, the questions, the issues which are related to the problems of blasphemy, of religious respect and so on, the whole of western civilization might be changed and even destroyed.

So why are religious issues such a touchy subject? Well, religions are very important for several reasons.  Religions eliminate man’s metaphysical anxiety; it structures one’s life around a creed shared by others and practices through collective rituals; it provides consolation in time of grief and the comforting feeling to be a link in a chain that transcend time, and more than anything else, it gives the illusion to men that he can escape, he can be saved from death.

Criticizing religions therefore weaken the affective equilibrium of the person, and his own identity. Every believer gets angry when his religion is attacked, but they do not react all in the same way. Religion is not a touchy subject for everyone. In fact in Europe, a minority take religions seriously. It considers that it is a component, certainly a major one, of a general culture, with its good and bad aspects, that are in the public domain, under continual scrutiny and discussion in a civilized and polite manner where everyone can discuss and expose his arguments. Since religions are composed of several components: faith, ethic, legend, history, laws, art, rituals – it is clear that suppressing from discussion this major field of human history is tantamount to promoting illiteracy. Of course, different opinions, even insulting and choking ones can be heard by the faithful, but this is the democratic game which allows a pluralism of opinion and everyone accept it.

That said, we can ask, why for some, religions is so touchy? I do not know if it is so touchy for the Buddhists, the Hindus, but it is certainly so for Muslims. Are their specific reasons particular to this religion that provokes reaction to the extent of killing for a criticism? Well I think there are and I will explain why.

In my view this situation results from the character of the Koran. Contrary to the Bible, the Koran is considered uncreated and therefore consubstantial to Allah. Hence criticizing the Koran or holding opinions contrary to its principles is a blasphemy and a direct attack against Allah.

The other point is the particular character attached to prophethood and therefore Muhammad. The figure of Muhammad is like his revelation, he is considered the perfect model and therefore the Sunna, the compilation of his words and deed, are infallible. Any criticism is considered a blasphemy.

The third point relates to history, law and sociology. Muslims lived as an Umma, a religious community convinced, because of its military conquests worldwide and its power, of its superiority which is affirmed anyway in its sacred texts. The Umma developed around its religion not only its whole jurisdiction, historical myths, the feeling of grandeur, superiority and mission – but also its world cohesion. You can argue that Jews and Christians also feel that they belong to a religious group. But they have other pole of interest and of social cohesion, like nationalism, which in a way, competes with religion and is a secular concept. But nationalism came very late to the Muslim world, and it was a European initiative whereas the Muslim sense of unity was the Caliphate, a religious construction.

Any attack or doubt on the validity of its religion might destroy the whole structure. Islam developed through continuous wars and conquests. It has elaborated a code of war, jihad, which is integrated in its religion through the Koran, the Sunna and the biography of the Prophet. This war is justified by its doctrine of religious superiority and perfection. The feeling that Islam has the duty to govern the world is very pregnant today. This implies contempt for non-Muslims and their vilification. Dhimmis, non-Muslims were always obliged to exhibit signs of respect to Muslims. This behavioral obligations imposed upon death sanctions, form an important body of laws and social customs from the beginning of Islam till today, this is what I call dhimmitude. So what we are seeing now is the OIC policy to prohibit the West to criticize Islam in an effort to establish the rules of dhimmitude in the international arena. This objective motivates the fight against Islamophobia that has been declared a central element in the OIC policy.

My conclusion is that the OIC, the Organization of the Islamic Conference,which is  a group that brings  together 57 Muslim countries, has decided to bring into the international forefront and into the Western world, this rule of Dhimmitude that imposed the respect of Islam by non-Muslims. This is what we see now, and they have decided too, that the Muslims who are integrated in non-Muslim countries are a part of the universal Ummah, and that their rights to be respected must be applied.

There is another aspect also - which I do not have the time to expose – this is Islam theological relationship to Judaism and Christianity.

The Q&A

Question: Concerning your personal accounting of Islam, and I’d like to ask two relating questions. Do you think that Islam can undergo the kind of changes or reformation that has been the case in Christianity and Judaism over the past three centuries, and if so, how long it might take. And connected with that, in view of your own views, would you agree with the idea, of Sam Huntington’s idea the Clash of civilizations?

Bat Yeor: Yes actually Islam can change. It has to find in itself the instruments to help the modernist Muslims to change. Unfortunately what I see now, organized in the  OIC, is exactly the contrary. The OIC brings all the Muslim countries, the 57 Muslim countries, together, and I wouldn’t say the same rule of course, the same organization, the same politics,  its aim at creating a block, a Muslim block, which is, it plans to unify it by rooting it in the Koran and Sharia and the Sunna. So we are going to see a stronger, even a stronger Islamic block, more fundamentalist. But I hope that Muslims, others inside the OIC or in Europe will challenge that, this return to the caliphate, in order to oppose the West, and that will find a way to collaborate on equal terms with other populations, and accept the other populations as equals. This is my hope. And because I always hope  in human nature, I am positive and an optimist.

The other question was?

Question: The idea which was made probably by Samuel Huntington, of the Clash of Civilizations .....

Bat Ye’or: Yes, and also how long it will take, and how long the change, the evolution in the Muslim world will be. Well, it depends upon us, on the non-Muslims. How can we help the Muslims? Because there are many modernist Muslims, as I have said before  that are living under a terrible threat, and because they want to challenge that order, and they want to bring another Islam. So how can we help them to achieve this change? We are together, we are in solidarity with them, to bring this renewal, this change.

How long will it take? Well we  have to also take our responsibility and I think that our host did very well  in bringing this subject up into the open. Now we are certainly in a clash of civilizations, and I don’t understand why we have to hide it. It is the OIC  position to deny that we are in a clash of civilizations. Because the OIC position is even to deny that there are different civilizations, because the Muslim position is to say we are only one civilization. So I think that we have to recognize the truth that we are in a clash of civilizations and of values, and we have to solve that, because if we deny it, we shall never solve it. So it is better to discuss the problems that separate us in order to find solutions.

Questioner: How can we stop this progression of intolerance in the international legal community. I mean how can we stop the influence of the OIC at the UN?

Bat Yeor: About the reform... there are Muslims who are contesting the fact that the Koran is an uncreated  book. They are trying to contextualize some verses by saying that is of this period, but now this version is different..... in fact what was done with the bible.  And also others who say but the hadiths were written two centuries afterward  so they doubt the veracity of the hadith.There are Muslims who are working within the possibility of Islam to change the rigidity that has inhabited for centuries .... so we have to help them and hope that this will change.

Now about the OIC, what can we do? This debate is related to this. How can we speak to Islam? How can we speak about religion? How can we avoid offending people? Do we have to be civilized and polite? Then we are missing candor and so on. I think we need candor in some situations where for instance where religions prescribe the death of people. Where religions are very aggressive and  manifests an aggressivity towards other people and want to destroy their system. So we have to be candid about it and fight back.

The problem is that, in the West, the situation is not very well understood and also there is a great challenge of terrorism, indigenous terrorism in Europe. You don't have it here in America. But we are very much afraid of European terrorism and also foreign terrorism and also economical boycott, which is very imortant. So for all these reasons we are not bringing a different or necessary answer to the challenges of our time

There is more of the Q&A - but I wanted to get this to you.

HUMAN RIGHTS LEADER LITTMAN OUTRAGED AFTER DEBATE CUT: "We are constantly stopped by points of order by (Muslim) delegates, It is very depressing to be censored this time by the Canadian chairman"

I interviewed David Littman here a couple of weeks back:

The spectacular David Littman is singular in his decades-long fight for human rights and against the overwhelming islamisation of the UN and the UN human rights council in particular. Littman, meticulous in his research, is relentless in his pursuit of truth, justice and accountability. He is forever holding the UNHRC's feet to the fire. G-d bless that man.

Check out the latest episode to shut the truth up. Truth - the new hate speech.

Jewish speaker outraged after debate cut short Ottawa Citizen hat tip Fred

UNITED NATIONS — Canada's top diplomat at the United Nations in Geneva used his position as debate chair to cut short an accredited speaker as he detailed anti-Semitism in Islamic-sourced books.

The action by Ambassador Marius Grinius took place in the UN's Human Rights Council, where Muslim and Arab countries regularly deliver harangues against the "Zionist Entity" — a term many of them use to describe Israel.

He said David Littman, delivering a joint statement for the Association for World Education and the World Union for Progressive Judaism, had been "off topic" as the chamber debated a series of human rights reports.

Littman said his bid to call for a "universal condemnation" of defamations of Judaism was appropriate because a report dealing with freedom of expression and hate speech had been at the top of the agenda list.

"There was no valid reason for me to be stopped by the chair," he wrote in a letter of protest to Grinius Monday.

"We are constantly stopped by points of order by (Muslim) delegates . . . It is very depressing to be censored this time by the Canadian chairman."

The office for Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said it was looking more closely at what happened during the debate, which took place Friday. Officials said a preliminary inquiry suggested UN procedural officials had been consulted.

"This was a procedural ruling and in no way indicative of the views of the Government of Canada on either the content of Mr. Littman's remarks or on the issue of defamation of religions," said Catherine Loubier, spokeswoman for Cannon.

Littman said in an interview Grinius knew that what he was saying was "incendiary" for Muslim and Arab countries in the 47-member council, which last year ruled references to Islamic Shariah law were prohibited in debates.

"Our statement revealed the incitement to religious hatred in the Muslim world, which indicates that only Islamophobia is considered a subject for debate, and not Christianophobia or Judiophobia," said Littman, who regularly addresses the human rights body as a representative of non-governmental organizations approved by the UN's Economic and Social Council.

Though Canada holds a vice-president position at the council, Grinius sat as chair because the Nigerian president had been absent.

The first interruption came at two minutes into Littman's statement, after he had spoken of two books he said were anti-Semitic, but which were available on UN premises in Geneva during a December event organized by the 56-member Organization of the Islamic Conference.

After telling Littman he could continue only if he stopped "straying off the subject matter," Grinius cut short the statement after about another minute — ahead of its conclusion.

"This was a very troubling interruption of a speech protesting the distribution at the UN of a vile anti-Semitic book," said Hillel Neuer, UN Watch executive director. "We're used to seeing NGOs interrupted . . . by Iran, Pakistan, and Egypt. But diplomats from democracies need to resist, not accommodate, the forces of censorship and intolerance."

Read the rest.

UPDATE: Much thanks to Atlas reader Earl who sends us the asshat Mr. Marius Grinius's email addy: genev@international.gc.ca

UNRWA, BAN KI MOON: THE NORMING, THE FUNDING OF ISLAMIC SAVAGERY

Claudia Rosett captured this screenshot of UNRWA (the wildly corrupt and Islamic tool - United Nations Relief and Works Agency) webpage. She writes,"with Ban Ki Moon soliciting donations for Gaza via (scroll down) the Commercial Bank of Syria, a bank under U.S. sanctions for money laundering and links to Hamas, Hezbollah, Oil-for-Food illicit cash and Al Qaeda. There's also a link to the site in column below. But saved here just in case UNRWA changes its web site home page". hat tip banafsheh
Freedom's Edge

Can We Give To Gaza Without Giving To Hamas? Claudia Rosett

If stuffing billions worth of aid into the Palestinian territories could end Islamist terrorism out of Gaza, it might be worth the money. That seems to be President Obama's gamble, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jetting to a donors' conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, this past Monday, to chip in $900 million on behalf of U.S. tax payers. All told, more than 70 countries, cheered on by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, pledged a whopping total of $4.5 billion in fresh aid to the Palestinians.

The focus was largely on repairing damage to Gaza, after Israel's recent three-week battle to shut down mortar and rocket attacks out of the terrorist-controlled enclave. But, as Clinton described it, this is a nuanced effort. The broad aim is to bypass the Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists who control Gaza, and shovel resources for strictly humanitarian uses into the enclave "in coordination with" the Palestinian Authority, which is run by the U.S.-favored Fatah faction, Hamas' rival, based in the West Bank.

Thus the long and winding title for the Sharm el-Sheikh powwow: "The International Conference in Support of the Palestinian Economy for the Reconstruction of Gaza." Thus, also, the confusion and contradictory news accounts over how much of the multiple billions in aid will flow to the West Bank, how much to Gaza, when and how this will happen, and who will decide.

[,,,]

On the matter of how exactly the "safeguards" will work, the State Department has been stunningly vague. At a State Department press briefing on Monday, while Clinton was in Egypt making her pledge, a spokesman said that up to $300 million would go for Gaza's "urgent humanitarian needs" as identified by the U.N. and the Palestinian Authority. Those funds, he said, would flow via United States Agency for International Development "in coordination with U.N. agencies, international organizations and USAID grantees" and "through the State Department for the U.N. agencies, [International Committee of the Red Cross] and other humanitarian organizations."

That's just the U.S. agenda, before we get to the even less transparent donations, such as the $1.65 billion pledged by the Gulf Arab States, to be handled out of the Saudi capital. To explore every rabbit hole on this list could be the work of an entire career. But let's go down just one of the big ones.

Looking for further hints about what this three-ring aid circus might entail, I pulled up the Web site on Tuesday of the U.N.'s lead agency in Gaza, the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, best known as UNRWA. There, on UNRWA's home page, as of this writing, is a photo of the U.N.'s Ban Ki-moon, standing in a damaged UNRWA warehouse, backlit by what appear to be rays of the sun, during his visit in January to Gaza. Next to Ban's photo is a blurb about his appeal for "crucial funds needed for Gaza's reconstruction after the recent Israeli offensive."

But just below Ban's photo is where it gets interesting. The same Web page lists several banks, complete with Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) codes and account numbers through which benefactors are invited to send money to UNRWA for its "Special Gaza Appeal."

One of them is the state-owned Commercial Bank of Syria, headquartered in Damascus, which is an intriguing choice for Ban and UNRWA to condone, because for the past five years this bank has been under sanctions by the U.S. Treasury as an institution of "primary money-laundering concern."

In 2004, Treasury imposed sanctions on the Commercial Bank of Syria, alleging it had laundered illicit proceeds from the U.N.'s Oil-for-Food program in Iraq, and had also handled "numerous transactions that may be indicative of terrorist financing and money laundering." According to Treasury, this included two accounts "that reference a reputed financier for Usama bin Laden."

In 2006, Treasury finalized its rule, which is still current, against the Commercial Bank of Syria. Under-Secretary Stuart Levey alleged that the bank had been used by terrorists to move money, and "as a state-owned entity with inadequate money laundering and terrorist financing controls, the Commercial Bank of Syria poses a significant risk of being used to further the Syrian Government's continuing support for international terrorist groups." Among the terrorist groups cited as examples of such clients were Hezbollah in Lebanon, and such denizens of Gaza as Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Hamas.

UNRWA's choice of this bank is all the more curious in light of the lifestyle choices of a number of Hamas leaders, such as Khaled Meshal, who are based not in Gaza, but work "in exile" in Damascus. According to a Council on Foreign Relations backgrounder released in 2006, Meshal has served Hamas from Damascus as head of the terrorist group's politburo, and as chief strategist and fundraiser. In 2006 he was alleged by Israeli then-Vice Premier Shimon Peres to have ordered the kidnapping into Gaza of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has not been released.

OBAMA SURPRISE: US PULLS OUT OF DURBAN II

Excellent news.

It must have called for a final solution. The agenda must have been vile. Perhaps it's to offset the appointment of Freeman - he is the most egregious of Obama's appointments.

U.S. pulling out of Durban II conference

The Obama administration has decided to boycott the so-called Durban II conference out of concerns for anti-Semitism. Multiple sources on a conference call with the White House on Friday told JTA that the Obama administration had opted not to attend any further preparatory meetings ahead of the planned U.N. conference against racism in Geneva in April.

Continue reading »

For more news coverage, visit JTA.org.

DAVID LITTMAN VIDEO INTERVIEW: OVERWHELMING ISLAMISATION OF THE UN

Please listen to David Littman, historian, Human Rights commission NGO Geneva. He is a leading authority on human rights and the capitulation of the UN to the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

And the Egyptian 'stache said, you must not speak of sharia!

Read this document: PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS, CIVIL, POLTICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT

It is David's work, shining sunlight on the ugly truths of Islamic law and the Islamic takeover of the UN that has OIC member countries frothing at the mouth and trying to get him censored and banned.

This document peels back the cloak of Islamic world domination.

The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam

3. On 5 August 1990, the then 45 member states of the OIC adopted The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam5. In this document all rights are seen as derived from God. The preamble states that “no one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend them in whole or in part or violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commandments”.

4. At the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, Iran, supported by several other Islamic States, pressed for the acceptance of the Cairo Declaration as an alternative to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This objective was partly achieved in 1997 when the Cairo Declaration was included by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights as the last document in Human Rights: A Compilation of International Instruments: Volume II: Regional Instruments

[...]
15. The Cairo Declaration goes further however in making this freedom subject to the Shari’ah. Under Article 22 of the Cairo Declaration a person may only express their opinion in a manner “as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah”, and freedom of expression may not be used to “weaken faith”. 16. On 18 December 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution “Combating Defamation of Religions” by 108 votes to 51 with 25 abstentions. Similar resolutions had been adopted since 1999 by the Commission for Human Rights and by the new Council. This was the first time however that such a resolution had been passed by the General Assembly. The resolution expresses once again “deep concern about the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief”. But the only religion mentioned by name is Islam. The resolution emphasizes that whilst everyone has the right to freedom of expression, this should be exercised with responsibility – and may therefore be subject to limitations, inter alia, “for respect for religions and beliefs”. 17. Many delegations, however, opposed the resolution. The Portuguese delegate, speaking for the European Union, explained clearly why:

“The European Union does not see the concept of ‘defamation of religions’ as a valid one in a human rights discourse. From a human rights perspective, members of religious or belief communities should not be viewed as parts of homogenous entities. International human rights law protects primarily individuals in the exercise of their freedom of religion or belief, rather than the religions as such.” 18. Notwithstanding these objections, those opposing the resolution found themselves on the losing side of a two-to-one majority in favour.

How the Shari’ah limits Human Rights
9. Under Shari’ah law, Muslim women and non-Muslims are not accorded equal treatment with Muslim men. The Shari’ah, therefore, fails to honour the right to equality

guaranteed under the UDHR and the international covenants, and thus denies the full enjoyment of their human rights to those living in States which follow Shari’ah law. 10. By limiting rights to those permitted by the Shari’ah the Cairo Declaration, rather than complementing the UDHR and the international covenants, undermines many of the rights they are supposed to guarantee. (See references 6 7 8 for additional documentation on this issue.)

Limiting Religious Freedom

11. Religious freedom is limited under the Cairo Declaration. Article 10 states: “Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism.”

Since it is a generally accepted view in the Islamic world that only compulsion or ignorance would lead anyone to abandon Islam, conversion from Islam is thus effectively forbidden.

12. It is notable that under Shari’ah law in many countries apostasy and any actions or statements considered blasphemous are harshly punished, in some States by death. 13. At the 6th session of the Human Rights Council in December 2007, the European Union tabled a resolution on the elimination of discrimination based on religion or belief.

On December 14, the Pakistani delegate, again speaking for the OIC, said that differences remained in the wording of this resolution on, inter alia, respect for all religions and beliefs, and respect for national laws and religious norms about the right to change one’s religion. “Hence, we dissociate ourselves from operative paragraph 9 (a) because of its phrase ‘including the right to change one’s religion or belief’”. Yet this fundamental human right is clearly guaranteed under Article 18 of the UDHR and Article 18 of the ICCPR.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN BARES HIS TEETH: HELPS TO PLAN GENOCIDAL CONFERENCE DURBAN 2

DURBAN WATCH
I did not think such blatant anti-semitism was possible by an American President - Jews were warned. Canada is boycotting the conference and Israel's Foreign Ministry has tried in recent months to convince European Union countries to also avoid participating.

The first Durban conference: The Durban Conference held in 2001 was supposed to help the international fight against racism.

Instead, it degenerated into an Israel-bashing session and the U.S. delegation, as you know, walked out.

Colin Powell, who was then Secretary of State, had it right when he said, “You do not combat racism by conferences that produce declarations containing hateful language, some of which is a throwback to the days of ‘Zionism equals racism’; or supports the ideas that we have made too much of the Holocaust; or suggests that apartheid exists in Israel; or that singles out only one country in the world, Israel, for censure and abuse.”

U.S. fends off Israeli pressure, decides to help plan 'Durban 2 Haaretz hat tip jane

The Obama administration said late Saturday it would participate in planning a United Nations conference on racism, despite concerns the meeting will be used by Arab nations and others to criticize Israel.

The U.S. will decide later whether to participate in "Durban 2," the second UN-sponsored World Conference Against Racism.

The State Department said it would send diplomats next week to participate in preparatory meetings for the World Conference Against Racism, which is set to be held in Geneva, Switzerland in April and which some countries including Israel have already decided to boycott.

In a statement released late Saturday, the State Department said the U.S. delegation to the planning discussions would review current direction of conference preparations and whether U.S. participation in the conference itself is warranted.

Officials in Jerusalem expressed concern that Israel and Barack Obama's administration are on a collision course over the U.S. decision to participate in the conference.

The Foreign Ministry has sought to block efforts by senior U.S. officials to convince Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to alter American policy set during the Bush administration not to attend the conference, which is regarded by Israel as a forum of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli vitriol.

Israel is boycotting the conference because a declaration equating Zionism with racism is expected to be made there. In addition, it is expected that the organizers and participants will charge that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians, and, like before in Durban, will make anti-Semitic statements.

The Bush administration agreed with Israel last year that the U.S. would not participate unless it received guarantees that the conference would not become a stage for anti-Semitism and one-sided criticism of Israel, as occured during the first Durban meeting in 2001.

Canada also announced that it was boycotting the conference and the Foreign Ministry has tried in recent months to convince European Union countries to also avoid participating.

The Foreign Ministry received confidential telegraphs from Israel's embassies in Washington, the United Nations and Geneva, about a possible change in the policy of the new U.S. administration regarding "Durban 2."

"Iran and Arab countries will once more take over the conference, and if the U.S. participates in 'Durban 2,' it will be a major blow," a senior Israeli diplomat told Haaretz. "This will pull the rug from under us and will lead to the participation of many more countries in the conference."

In one of the telegrams, a number of Obama officials reportedly pressed Secretary of State Clinton to announce the U.S. would participate in the conference.

One of the leading officials pressuring Clinton on "Durban 2" is the new U.S. ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, who was Obama's close campaign adviser.

Rice is also pushing for the U.S. to join the UN Human Rights Council, which is based in Geneva. The body had been boycotted by the U.S., in part because of its one-sided criticism of Israel.

President George Bush had accused the HRC of opting to focus on Israel instead of dealing with the genocide in Darfur.

The other official pushing for American participation in "Durban 2" is Samantha Power, another Obama adviser at the National Security Council.

Anne Bayefsky wrote:

Iranian-led Durban II "anti-racism" negotiations end in total disgrace:

Zionism is racism, apartheid Israel and questioning the Holocaust
are now on the Durban II negotiating table

Intensive negotiations last week in Geneva have resulted in a new version of the "Draft Outcome Document" for Durban II - released yesterday. Iran - a Vice-Chair of the executive committee for Durban II - played a leading role in the drafting process, speaking more often than any other single state. The result? Now on the negotiating table: Jewish self-determination or Zionism is racism. Israel is guilty of apartheid and the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust is questionable.

Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, commented: "this "anti-racism" manifesto is much worse even than its predecessor. Islamic and other rights-abusing states had a field day preparing for Durban II. European states were totally unable to introduce the modifications necessary to protect human rights standards or change the clear intent of the conference."

Here are some of the features now part of negotiations according to the new draft:

• the "law of return" - the core of the self-determination of the Jewish people or Zionism - is racist
  
• Israel is guilty of crimes against humanity and "a contemporary form of apartheid"
  
• Israel's security fence is a "segregation wall"
  
• a provision condemning Israel's actions in Gaza
  
• while Israel is repeatedly condemned, not one of the other 191 UN states is mentioned
  
• a proposal to delete reference to the numbers of Jews murdered in the Holocaust - on the grounds that it is questionable
  
• a claim that "religions" - as opposed to individuals - can be "defamed"
  
• provisions curtailing free speech - "abuse of freedom of expression"
  
• efforts to limit and govern the media by "a code of ethical conduct"
  
• creation of a hierarchy of victims, with Muslim minorities on top - "most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia"
  
• efforts to trump universal rights and freedoms by references to cultural diversity, "cultural particularities," religious and cultural "identities"
  
• undermining counterterrorism activities by alleging they increase racism
  
• challenges to any responsibility for the trans-Saharan slave trade and the slave trade in the Indian Ocean
  
• introducing "anti-Arabism" as intolerance against a religious minority
  
• attempting to introduce laws against "projecting negative, insulting and derogatory images of religions and religious personalities"
  
• calls for new laws endangering rights and freedoms, such as, laws on "respect for human rights and reputation, public morals, and incitement to racial and religious hatred and freedom of expression".

The snail's pace of negotiations prompted the drafting committee to add still more preparatory meetings. Meetings now scheduled, in Geneva, are the Intersessional Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group: 16-19 February + 6-9 April 2009, the Preparatory Committee - Third Session: 15-17 April 2009; and Durban II: 20-24 April 2009.

The continued participation of the European Union and Australia in the Durban II forum is legitimizing a global discussion of the veracity of the Holocaust, the legitimacy of a Jewish state, and broad restrictions on freedom of expression - all in the name of "human rights".

President Obama, it is time to announce the United States will stay away from Durban II, together with Canada and Israel.

President Hussein Seeks US seat on Islamic Anti-Human Rights Council

The Human Rights council has become laughable................. The Human Rights Council exists for one purpose and that is to support nations that violate human rights." Herb London

Why would President Hussein be seeking a seat on the notoriously anti-semitic, anti-American UN "human rights" council? His seeking such an appointment is an abomination - an affront to human rights and the very things America stands for and holds dear. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. This, yet again, speaks to who and what President Hussein really is. Three weeks in office and it's all bad. This is a travesty.

When John Bolton was Ambassador to the UN and Bush was President, in the waning days of a free America, the U.S. refused to join the new Human Rights council (here). It was a moral imperative. In an interview I conducted with Ambassador Bolton back in March 2006, he said:

But [the Human Rights Council]  now so encrusted in this management and corruption. It is so out of our control. That's what this reform effort is all about, you can see it  now, if you follow-- and I think you have -- this debate over the human rights commission, the so called reform is so bad even The New York Times and The Washington Post support our position to vote against it.

The U.S. took a stand and would not sanction to a council that abused human rights, moved pedophiles and rapists around the globe and was responsible for all kinds of horrendous behavior.
The US had strongly endorsed reform of the current 53-member Commission on Human Rights [UN backgrounder], but supported a smaller commission than the 47-member body proposed and wanted to remove certain members with poor human rights records (more here at The Jurist).

The UNHRC has never condemned Islamic barbarity. Sudan? Darfur? Egpyt? The Organization of the Islamic Conference holds enormous influence at the UN's highest human rights body -- as is made clear by the council's obsession with the "defamation of Islam" resolutions they have imposed on the world.

"The UN human rights system has been irrevocably hijacked, corrupted and lost to those who stand to gain the most from its demise. The death throes have been evident for some time. But in many ways, events, only this last Friday, plumbed new depths of depravity. The General Assembly committee charged with humanitarian affairs whose decisions are rubber stamped by the Assembly plenary declared that Israel would be the only UN member state subject to permanent agenda item of the  human rights council." Anne Bayefsky

"The U.N. human rights commission was founded in 1946 in response to the Nazi atrocities, and so it is tragic that some are now perverting its principles and denying its history," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch.

U.S. eyes bid for U.N. rights council Washington Times  (hat tip Rut)

The Obama administration is weighing a bid to join the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC), a decision that would reverse Bush administration policy and underline a more favorable U.S. attitude toward international organizations.

Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has discussed joining the organization with fellow ambassadors at U.N. headquarters in New York.

"The U.S. is very interested in joining the Human Rights Council," an ambassador from one European country quoted Ms. Rice as saying. The ambassador requested anonymity because he was repeating details of a private conversation.

The U.S. mission in New York declined to comment, saying no decision has been made. But it referred a reporter to earlier comments by State Department spokesman Robert Wood.

"My expectation, although I have no inside knowledge of this, is that the Obama administration will reverse that policy," Mr. Wood told reporters.

"It's hard to improve [the HRC] from the outside," Mr. Wood said.

This is dishonest. The US participation would merely give the imprimatur of legitimacy to a depraved and morally ill organization whose objective is to advance Islamic supremacism.

The Human Rights Council was established in 2006 amid a push by the United States to reform its discredited predecessor, the U.N. Human Rights Commission.

Many countries criticized for human rights violations - including China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia - have since won election to the council.

[...]

Washington would have to compete with other Western nations for one of two available seats on the body, which includes 47 member states.

"Competing" for a seat with barbarians.

President Obama has emphasized human rights during his first month in office, as well as a desire to work with multilateral organizations such as the United Nations. His administration has indicated a willingness to support prosecution for war crimes of the president of Sudan, Lt. Gen. Omar Bashir, by the International Criminal Court - a body that the Bush administration sometimes gave cooperation but refused to join.

[...]

The Bush administration said repeatedly that HRC members undermine human rights by protecting violators and excessively focusing on Israel while treading lightly on abuses by Zimbabwe, Iran, Belarus and other nations.

Human Rights Under Assault UN Rights Watch (July 2007)

At its recent June 2007 session, the UN Human Rights Council concluded its lengthy reform process by voting, first, to drop Belarus and Cuba from its blacklist. New restrictions were imposed on the independent experts who report on country violations. The ability to introduce resolutions that name abusers was curbed.  And Israel was singled out for permanent indictment—subjected to the council's only agenda item on a specific country, and to the only investigation that examines only one side, presumes guilt in advance and is immune from regular review.

This 5-minute video offers a glimpse into how the UN's highest human rights body—dominated by the worst abusers of human rights—is tragically being turned on its head, to attack democracies, destroy mechanisms of human rights protection, and assault the very idea of human rights.

Previously at Atlas:
ANTI-HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL VOTES AGAINST ISRAEL

OUT OF THE UN NOW UN Ends Scrutiny of Cuba and Belarus, Indicts Israel

Hijacking Human Rights: The Demonization of Israel by the United Nations

U.N. rights body condemns "defamation" of Islam

Hatred of the Good for Being Good

Iran and the "New and Improved" UN Human Rights Council

Obama's New World Order - Caroline Glick

US study: IDF didn't violate rules of war..... as if

There was never any doubt that Israel is/was defending itself. What this is is an attempt to make it criminal, to make it illegal for the Jews to defend themselves. There are no rules for Muslims conducting jihad -- no laws. But if barbarians in three piece suits pass resolutions like this, every Western nation will be held to the same impossible standard, while the countries of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) will be free to pursue their global objectives.

US study: IDF didn't violate rules of war  (YNET) From Israpundit hat tip Terri
Israel pursued legitimate military objectives in Gaza despite humanitarian cost, study says Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – Israel did not violate the rules of war during its recent Gaza operation, a new US study says, while praising the IDF's "impressive improvements" since the war against Hizbullah in 2006.

Israel "deliberately used decisive force to enhance regional deterrence and demonstrate that it had restored its military edge," wrote Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "These, however, are legitimate military objectives in spite of their very real humanitarian costs."

Hamas not bound by laws of war (Photo: Reuters)

The study notes that "political efforts to manipulate the "rules of war and humanitarian considerations have become a key weapon in asymmetric warfare, and are often used as a basis for propaganda and gaining political leverage in this type of conflict."

"Real suffering is translated into exaggerated charges and numbers that cannot be validated by reliable data or methodology," the study says. "In practice, even if Israel had agreed to all of the conventions involved, they are severely limited and often difficult or impossible to apply to the realities of war — even one fought with restraint and a focus on military targets."

UPDATE: Petition to UN to charge HAMAS as war criminals (hat tip Somer) Sigh and forward.

IRANIAN DURBAN II: WTF IS AMERICA DOING THERE?

Ann Bayefsky reports on this unspeakable war crime in the making. The world has gone off the rails:

Iranian-led Durban II "anti-racism" negotiations end in total disgrace:

Zionism is racism, apartheid Israel and questioning the Holocaust
are now on the Durban II negotiating table

Intensive negotiations last week in Geneva have resulted in a new version of the "Draft Outcome Document" for Durban II - released yesterday. Iran - a Vice-Chair of the executive committee for Durban II - played a leading role in the drafting process, speaking more often than any other single state. The result? Now on the negotiating table: Jewish self-determination or Zionism is racism. Israel is guilty of apartheid and the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust is questionable.

Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, commented: "this "anti-racism" manifesto is much worse even than its predecessor. Islamic and other rights-abusing states had a field day preparing for Durban II. European states were totally unable to introduce the modifications necessary to protect human rights standards or change the clear intent of the conference."

Here are some of the features now part of negotiations according to the new draft:

• the "law of return" - the core of the self-determination of the Jewish people or Zionism - is racist
  
• Israel is guilty of crimes against humanity and "a contemporary form of apartheid"
  
• Israel's security fence is a "segregation wall"
  
• a provision condemning Israel's actions in Gaza
  
• while Israel is repeatedly condemned, not one of the other 191 UN states is mentioned
  
• a proposal to delete reference to the numbers of Jews murdered in the Holocaust - on the grounds that it is questionable
  
• a claim that "religions" - as opposed to individuals - can be "defamed"
  
• provisions curtailing free speech - "abuse of freedom of expression"
  
• efforts to limit and govern the media by "a code of ethical conduct"
  
• creation of a hierarchy of victims, with Muslim minorities on top - "most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia"
  
• efforts to trump universal rights and freedoms by references to cultural diversity, "cultural particularities," religious and cultural "identities"
  
• undermining counterterrorism activities by alleging they increase racism
  
• challenges to any responsibility for the trans-Saharan slave trade and the slave trade in the Indian Ocean
  
• introducing "anti-Arabism" as intolerance against a religious minority
  
• attempting to introduce laws against "projecting negative, insulting and derogatory images of religions and religious personalities"
  
• calls for new laws endangering rights and freedoms, such as, laws on "respect for human rights and reputation, public morals, and incitement to racial and religious hatred and freedom of expression".

The snail's pace of negotiations prompted the drafting committee to add still more preparatory meetings. Meetings now scheduled, in Geneva, are the Intersessional Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group: 16-19 February + 6-9 April 2009, the Preparatory Committee - Third Session: 15-17 April 2009; and Durban II: 20-24 April 2009.

The continued participation of the European Union and Australia in the Durban II forum is legitimizing a global discussion of the veracity of the Holocaust, the legitimacy of a Jewish state, and broad restrictions on freedom of expression - all in the name of "human rights".

President Obama, it is time to announce the United States will stay away from Durban II, together with Canada and Israel.

Islamic Countries Ban TV Crew from UN meeting on Freedom of Expression

You just can't make this stuff up:

TV crew expelled from UN meeting on freedom of expression  Expatica (hat tip Jeffrey)

 The journalists were working on a documentary on how the issue of human rights is debated at the United Nations.

Geneva -- A television production crew was expelled Thursday from a United Nations meeting discussing freedom of expression and defamation of religions.

Two journalists from the French-German cultural channel ARTE were asked to leave a meeting room at the UN's European headquarters during a public session of a human rights body preparing for a racism conference in South Africa later this year.

The journalists were working on a documentary on how the issue of human rights is debated at the United Nations.

According to a diplomatic source, the expulsion announced by the chairman of the session, Russian representative Yuri Boychenko, was requested by the Organisation of Islamic Conference and by the African group of states. "It is regrettable that he was not informed of the procedures that allow a public session to become a private one," Marie Heuze, chief spokeswoman at the UN in Geneva said.

The expulsion took place when the debate was raging on freedom of expression and the defamation of religions, two issues which are proving particularly sensitive in a proposed declaration for the conference in Durban, South Africa.

According to Muslim participants, human rights should take into account defamation of religions, while the Europeans are opposed to its inclusion.

A British delegate said any mention of this concept in the resolution "damages the prospects" of a successful conference in Durban.

According to a diplomatic source, at least three European countries -- Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands, have threatened to boycott the conference if the resolution is accepted.

The United States, Canada and Israel have already said they would not attend the event, which is scheduled to take place April 20 to 24.

The earlier 2001 Durban conference on racism, held just a few days before the September 11 attacks on the United States and against the backdrop of the second Palestinian intifada, ended in acrimony amid accusations of anti-Semitism.

UN WANTS TO PROSECUTE BUSH, RUMSFELD FOR WAR CRIMES AGAINST TERRORISTS AT GITMO

Things are going down fast. The UN, unconcerned with the enormity of their sexual crimes, graft, corruption, and rampant criminal activities are going after the good guys. They sanction the barbarity, the violence and misogyny of Islam and instead go after the good guys. They relate to the murderers at Gitmo? The UN really must go.

Bush, Rumsfeld should be pursued for torture: UN rapporteur AFP

BERLIN (AFP) — The UN's special torture rapporteur called on the US Tuesday to pursue former president George W. Bush and defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld for torture and bad treatment of Guantanamo prisoners.

"Judicially speaking, the United States has a clear obligation" to bring proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak said, in remarks to be broadcast on Germany's ZDF television Tuesday evening.

He noted Washington had ratified the UN convention on torture which required "all means, particularly penal law" to be used to bring proceedings against those violating it.

"We have all these documents that are now publicly available that prove that these methods of interrogation were intentionally ordered by Rumsfeld," against detainees at the US prison facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Nowak said.

"But obviously the highest authorities in the United States were aware of this," added Nowak, who authored a UN investigation report on the Guantanamo prison.

Bush stepped down from power Tuesday, with Barack Obama becoming the 44th president of the United States.

Asked about chances to bring legal action against Bush and Rumsfeld, Nowak said: "In principle yes. I think the evidence is on the table."

At issue, however, is whether "American law will recognise these forms of torture."

A bipartisan Senate report released last month found Rumsfeld and other top administration officials responsible for abuse of Guantanamo detainees in US custody.

It said Rumsfeld authorized harsh interrogation techniques on December 2, 2002 at the Guantanamo prison, although he ruled them out a month later.

The coercive measures were based on a document signed by Bush in February, 2002.

French, German and US rights groups have previously said they wanted to bring legal action against Rumsfeld.

UN WORKER CAUGHT WITH CHILD PORN

I just ran this heinous post: AFTER DECADES OF SEXUAL CRIMES: UN SEX-FOR-FOOD SCANDAL.
These lawless animals answer to no one.

Human rights worker with United Nations ties, Clarence Dias, caught with child pornography NY Daily News hat tip rut

A high ranking human rights workerwith ties to the United Nations was nabbed at Kennedy Airport Tuesday with kiddie porn in his suitcase, officials said.

Clarence Dias, 65, president of the International Center for Law in Development, whose offices are located at the UN, had the smut in his carry-on bag as he passed through security on his way to a flight bound for Bangkok, Queens District Attorney Richard Brown said.

Transportation Security Administration officials doing a random bag check around 8:20a.m. allegedly found a DVD whose cover featured an apparently underage nude boy and an adult male in Dias' handbag, prosecutors said.

The video's title - "Winner Pub Pattaya" - apparently refers to a beach resort in Thailand, authorities said. There were also other lewd photographs in the bag, authorities said.

Dias - who holds a doctorate in law from Bombay University and Cornell Law School and has taught at Boston College of Law - claimed the porn was for research, authorities said.

"He admitted it was his - but tried to play it off. He said he was doing research on how to better make sure kids' rights were not abused," a police source said. "Yeah, sure. It's always research."

Calls to Dias' office went straight to voicemail Tuesday.

The humanitarian group calls itself "a Third World NGO [nongovernmental organization] concerned about human rights in the development process."

Development in what? Puberty?

This is the latest sex scandal to roil the UN.

THE POLITICS OF SUFFERING AND ANTISEMITISM

Gaza: Hamas' camera-ready victims - Great oped in Pocono Record (no, seriously). Please read it all. hat tip Stan

Every innocent human life lost is a tragedy and a horror. But to watch the news in Brussels or Boston and certainly in Islamabad or Caracas, you will get the distorted impression that the Palestinian plight is the worst on earth — an impression that is reinforced almost daily by the United Nations. We in the United States pay almost no attention to the resolutions, findings, and advocacy of the U.N., regarding it as a font of gasbaggery, stinking hypocrisy and cant. But the rest of the world does pay attention. According to Eye on the UN (www.eyeontheun.org), in 2008, 68 percent of General Assembly resolutions regarding violations of human rights targeted Israel. Afghanistan was cited in 4 percent of the resolutions along with Azerbaijan, Georgia, the United States and a few others. Russia, Sudan, China and Saudi Arabia, just to name a few, were not cited at all. In 2007, 32 countries were mentioned for human rights violations, though most just barely. Israel once again topped the list with 121 actions taken against her. Sudan came in second with 61, Myanmar third with 41. The United States was No. 4, with 39 actions, tied with the Democratic Republic of the Congo!

Regarding the plight of Gaza, remember this: Between 1948, when Israel was created, and 1967, when Israel captured Gaza in a defensive war, the Gaza Strip was administered by Egypt. During those 19 years, the Egyptians never offered citizenship to the Palestinians living in Gaza, nor did they permit them free transit from the Strip into Egypt proper. They did nothing to encourage the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. In fact, in 1958, Egypt's President Nasser formally annulled the so-called "All Palestine Government" — a remnant of the Palestinian state the Arabs rejected in 1948. Egypt, like all of the other Arab states and, importantly, the U.N., chose to keep the Palestinians bereft and stateless — a permanent and growing dagger aimed at Israel.

Even more instructive is this: When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Gaza's residents had a golden opportunity to begin to build the sort of state they have claimed to desire. The Israelis even left behind the infrastructure to give the Palestinians a start: roads, houses, swimming pools, fish farms, nurseries, orchards, and factories. The Palestinians chose to kill each other (see Jonathan Schanzer's new book, "Hamas vs. Fatah") and to fire missiles across the border at Israel instead. Apologists like Columbia's Rashid Khalidi protest that Israel continued to control sea lanes, borders and air space around Gaza and cut off aid after the Palestinians elected Hamas. Well, Hamas didn't seem to have any trouble importing longer and longer-range Iranian missiles despite Israel's blockade. And in any case, despite the advice of some hardliners in Israel, the Israeli government continued to permit humanitarian supplies through.

Since the start of 2007, 16,000 civilians have been killed in fighting. Not in Gaza, so you may have missed it. It was in Somalia, where an Islamist movement is fighting Ethiopian troops. This is the 18th year of civil strife in that country.

In Sri Lanka, some 70,000 people have perished in a civil war that has flared on and off since 1983. The regime in Myanmar (formerly Burma) has killed thousands and forced an estimated 800,000 into involuntary servitude.

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire) 45,000 people are dying every month. Nearly 5 and a half million have died since 1998 in a conflict that grew out of the violence in Rwanda and spread. Half of those deaths were of children under the age of 5, according to the International Rescue Committee. The violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has caused more human devastation than any conflict since World War II.

In Darfur, Sudan, more than 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million made homeless by violence.

To cite these sad data is not to suggest that suffering is tolerable in any particular case — but merely to observe that the world is strangely blinkered in the tragedies to which it responds.

AFTER DECADES OF SEXUAL CRIMES: UN SEX-FOR-FOOD SCANDAL

These sexual crimes committed by UN personnel have been going on for years, decades. They are never prosecuted, never punished. The perpetrators are merely moved to another  country to rape, molest and traffic women and children in other places. Obama wants to triple our taxpayer dollars to this house of depravity.

And big media? SILENT! Dogs, I tell you.  Their objective is to slam the Jews, advance Islam and crush freedom.

THE UN SEX FOR FOOD SCANDAL Washington Times

The United Nation's "sex-for-food" scandal continues to spread. As the human rights group Save the Children documents in a new report, U.N. peacekeepers in the war-torn, refugee-rich Liberia have been accused of selling food for sex from girls as young as 8. They are the latest victims in a growing tragedy that includes girls from Burundi, Ivory Coast, East Timor, Congo, Cambodia and Bosnia, proving correct a prediction made last year by the assistant secretary-general at the United Nations for peacekeeping operations. "We think this will look worse before it begins to look better," she said last May after efforts to investigate peacekeepers in Congo had fallen short.

The report found abuse at all age levels from 8 to 18, though the victims older than 12 were identified as being "regularly involved in 'selling sex'." But "all of the respondents clearly stated that they felt that the scale of the problem affected over half of the girls in their locations," the report said.

Similar to other U.N. missions, the scandal in Liberia seems to be the result of inadequate training, zero threat of punishment and collusion with top mission officials and NGO workers. "In all the [refugee] camps where discussion groups were conducted, the Camp Management Committee and block leaders were implicated," the report found. What's more, parents of the abused children typically have refrained from complaining since selling their children for sex is the only way to get food.

Despite being aware of the abuse for some time, the United Nations appears to be operating at its usual sluggish pace. A U.N. humanitarian coordinator in Liberia, Jordan Ryan, told the Associated Press that the report was "outdated" and that "much has improved since then." "There are good things that are now happening in Liberia," he said, adding that those caught engaging in "sex-for-food" are fired.

That, unfortunately, hasn't been good enough. It took U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan nearly a year of similar allegations from the mission in Congo before telling reporters that he was taking the matter seriously. When the United Nations finally did act, a handful of peacekeepers were fired. But the scandal continues to spread, suggesting that a more serious overhaul of hiring and training practices needs to be implemented.

Toward that end, the United States needs to exert greater pressure. Congress should take the place of an unconcerned U.N. bureaucracy and hold hearings to investigate how and why young girls continue to be at the mercy of U.N. workers. At the very least, such hearings would shine a much-needed light on these tiny victims, whose lives have been shattered by the peacekeepers in blue helmets.

Very sick, very debased, very United Nations. The UN peacekeepers are back at it:

Aid Workers Are Said to Abuse Girls May 2006
girls are being sexually exploited by United Nations peacekeepers, aid workers and teachers, according to a new report.

This is hardly new. Here are just a few previous cases I wrote about in the Atlas sphere:

• UN Sanctioned Heinous Sex Crimes of UN Workers, Covered and Protected the RAPISTS KNOWINGLY!  May 2005 (this blog was 2 months old)
  

• UN peacekeeper sex abuse still "unacceptably high"

• Rape and Sexual Violence continue

• 150 charges of sexual misconduct some of it abuse of children

• AUSTRALIAN soldiers drew arms to protect themselves from peacekeepers after a discovering ' sexual abuse of East Timorese boys here


• A French UN worker accused of child rape in Congo says there is an organized network of pedophiles at the UN mission: Explicit Photos Fan U.N. Sex Scandal. UNITED NATIONS
• Atlas Shrugs: UN Pervs Still Committing Sex Crimes
• "Big Powers" Get in the way of Rape and Pillaging

Back in February 2006, when John Bolton was Ambassador to the UN, he  called the problem here "one of the greatest stains on U.N. history."

• Sex Abuse in Congo by U.N. Troops Continues, Report Says Jan 08, 2005
• Congo Sex Scandal Prompts Efforts for Reform in U.N. Dec 18, 2004
• U.N. confronts another sex scandal Dec 15, 2007
• 150 Cases Found in U.N. Sex Abuse Inquiry in Congo Nov 23, 2004
• Sexual-Misconduct Problems Found Prevalent in Army Sep 12, 1997

Very sick, very debased, very United Nations. The UN peacekeepers are back at it:

Aid Workers Are Said to Abuse Girls May 2006
girls are being sexually exploited by United Nations peacekeepers, aid workers and teachers, according to a new report.

This is hardly new. Here are just a few previous cases I wrote about in the Atlas sphere:

• UN Sanctioned Heinous Sex Crimes of UN Workers, Covered and Protected the RAPISTS KNOWINGLY!  May 2005 (this blog was 2 months old)
  

• UN peacekeeper sex abuse still "unacceptably high"

• Rape and Sexual Violence continue

• 150 charges of sexual misconduct some of it abuse of children

• AUSTRALIAN soldiers drew arms to protect themselves from peacekeepers after a discovering ' sexual abuse of East Timorese boys here


• A French UN worker accused of child rape in Congo says there is an organized network of pedophiles at the UN mission: Explicit Photos Fan U.N. Sex Scandal. UNITED NATIONS
• Atlas Shrugs: UN Pervs Still Committing Sex Crimes
• "Big Powers" Get in the way of Rape and Pillaging

Back in February 2006, when John Bolton was Ambassador to the UN, he  called the problem here "one of the greatest stains on U.N. history."

• Sex Abuse in Congo by U.N. Troops Continues, Report Says Jan 08, 2005
• Congo Sex Scandal Prompts Efforts for Reform in U.N. Dec 18, 2004
• U.N. confronts another sex scandal Dec 15, 2007
• 150 Cases Found in U.N. Sex Abuse Inquiry in Congo Nov 23, 2004
• Sexual-Misconduct Problems Found Prevalent in Army Sep 12, 1997

JIHAD USES UN COMPOUND TO FIRE AT ISRAEL ISRAEL RETURNS FIRE

Here is blatant media bias. The headline on yahoo front page: ISRAEL AIRSTRIKES DESTROY THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF FOOD FOR REFUGEES and when you click on the article, the headline is Israel Forces shell UN headquarters in Gaza.

The UN is the global arm of the jihad. Of course, the UN will use this to excoriate Israel and demand a hudna, when in fact they allow the jihad to wage war on UN facilities so that they can demand the Jews stop defending themselves. Has the UN commented on the Israeli Airstrikes aborted to protect civilians? Have the Muslims ever done that?

Israel Strikes UN Agency in Gaza as Ban Seeks Truce (Update2) Bloomberg

Jan. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Israeli armed forces struck the headquarters of a United Nations  relief agency and a hospital in Gaza City as UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was in Israel lobbying its leaders to accept a cease-fire.

Ban, who visited Egypt and Jordan yesterday, said diplomats are closer to reaching a truce between Israel and Hamas after 20 days of fighting. He expressed “strong protest and outrage” over the Israeli strike on the UN site and said Defense Minister Ehud Barak had told him it was a mistake. The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees suspended operations after its Gaza compound was shelled, setting a warehouse ablaze.

“I hope the Israeli government will heed this call of the Security Council and the international community that the fighting must stop,” Ban said at a Tel Aviv news conference.

Hours later, at a dinner at the residence of Israeli President Shimon Peres, Ban said he understood that “Israel will make an important decision on a cease-fire” today. “I hope it will be the right one,” the UN chief said.

As fighting escalated in Gaza, with more than 1,000 Palestinians killed since Israel’s opening air assault on Dec. 27, representatives of Israel and the militant Islamic Hamas movement met separately with Egyptian mediators. Israel is still weighing whether it has met its goals of stopping Palestinian rocket fire on its southern towns and cities and restoring deterrence, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said.

“Israel will keep its right to give an answer to any type of threat,” she said at the news conference with Ban. “We need to decide when to stop.”

I am sure the Jews will replace the food, they always do.

OT related: UN Agency That Runs School Hit in Gaza Employed Hamas and Islamic Jihad Members - Joel Mowbray

ANTI-HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL VOTES AGAINST ISRAEL EXCEPT CANADA

G-d bless Harper. Shame, shame shame on  us.

"GENEVA — The top UN human rights body has condemned Israel's military offensive in Gaza. (hat tip Nic)

Thirty-three of the UN Human Rights Council's 47 members voted in favour of the resolution.

Canada was the only country to oppose the resolution outright.

Thirteen mostly European countries abstained, citing the one-sided wording of the text.

The resolution says the Israeli offensive has "resulted in massive violations of human rights of the Palestinian people and systematic destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure."

[...].

Israel's ambassador in Geneva, Aharon Leshno-Yaar, dismissed the vote as irrelevant, saying the resolution would provide no tangible relief to the Palestinians and did not reflect realities in Gaza.

Israel, like the United States, is not a member of the council."

In Canada besides Prime Minister Stephen Harper, even our new (Liberal) leader of the Opposition is supporting Israel and keeping (so far) a lid on the anti-Israel sentiments of some members of his caucus.

UPDATE: Sigh the Petition to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon: The UN Can No Longer Be Silent About The Abuse of Children in the Gaza Strip

Video evidence now leaves no doubt that countless children in the Gaza Strip are being abused and exploited by radical Muslims associated with Hamas. Children as young as one year old dressed in suicide belts and paraded about; kindergarten children being taught to kill; children being used as human shields to protect terrorists from opposing fire. The following three minute and thirty second video, posted on YouTube, provides dramatic evidence that children in the Gaza Strip are being brainwashed, trained for terrorist activities, and used as human shields.

Hamas Shows A Booby Trapped School (Eng.) 11/1/09 حماس مفخخه مدرسة

Where is the moral outrage and the UN rapporteurs and the rest of the full of shitniks? Where are the rallies screaming for "justice!" 

hat tip Baron

UPDATE: Hamas Booby-Trapping Abandoned Homes

UN HITS NEW LOW IN DEPRAVITY, KEEPS DIGGING

That collective negation of humanity strikes again:

Israeli strike on civilian house may be 'war crime' says UN Telegraph hat tip wolf
The United Nations has called for Israel to be investigated for war crimes over the shelling of a house full of Palestinian civilians which left dozens dead.

Is installing rocket launchers in a civilian house a 'war crime'?
Is shooting the homeowners in their feet so they cannot flee (as Hamas does) a 'war crime'?
Is staging fake blood libels with the help of the UN a 'war crime'?
If the UN is helping Islamic jihad commit war crimes, are they fit to conduct an investigation?
If the UN is aiding and abetting Islamic jihad, should they be tried for 'war crimes'?
Is rigging a UN school to blow up and make it look like Israel did it a 'war crime'?
Is the UN guilty of 'war crimes' if they allow Hamas to use UN schools to fire missiles?

The only humanitarian crisis in Gaza is the one created by Hamas. The humanitarian response is what Israel is doing - surgically removing the brutal choke hold of Hamas.

DEPRAVED UN, MEDIA MULES MANUFACTURE JEWISH BLOOD LIBELS: GIN UP THE JEWHATE

Remember, Muhammad said, "War Is Deceit."

There is a dangerous recklessness to all of the lies and misinformation that the Islamic jihadists, along with left, the internationalists, the media and other useful idiots, are trafficking in to smear the Jews. One after another, report after erroneous report of some Jewish crime (crimes that the jihad has committed) are published with no back up substantiation or merit. Hoaxes, lies, all of it - deliberately fueling an invigorated wave of anti-semitism. If you are in 'journalism' or any responsible position of news dissemination, you cannot look at the depraved Jew hating insanity sweeping the globe and not say to yourself, "I must be responsible in what I print, I must be accurate in my reportage. There is a mental illness, a moral depravity spreading like a cancer through besieged societies. I have seen this before. I know where this leads. I must be responsible". But we are witnessing the opposite taking place. The media can't throw enough kerosene on the the growing fire.

The key weapons in the propaganda war - suppression, disinformation and fauxtography.

Hamas fires rockets from schools. The link to the rocket launch from a "Palestinian" school shows the video has been removed "due to terms of use violation". Is Google trying to suppress the news? Don't ask Atlas that. More on those little-reported facts here.

Check on the latest blood libel being peddled by Hamas's public relations organization - the UN. First this from Atlas reader Chuck:

I was listening to a ton of talk radio yesterday during a 13 hour drive.  The top-of-the-hour news (PBS I think) at about 7pm had an Irish-sounding spokesman for the UN, located somewhere in Gaza. The "reporter" asked him if he knew for sure that it was an Israeli soldier that fired on a UN worker.  He said that yes, he knew that absolutely - it was a fact.

The reporter then asked him how he knew this.  His reply was that that was because he was told by "eyewitnesses", and that nobody from Israel was talking to them about.  Reporter asked, "you mean that nobody from Israel has neither confirmed nor denied their involvement?"  The Irishman hesitates, and then says, yes, that's true, and that that was how he knew that they were guilty.  And then the reporter quickly ended the "interview" with a, "and this is bla bla bla reporting live..."

So ALL DAY yesterday the only thing that the top-of-the-hours (CBS, FOX, etc.) were reporting on news radio stations in four states (OH, IN, KY, TN) was that Israel had attacked and killed a UN worker. 

Where's the damned apology, Pamela?  These are the same jackasses that tell our skulls full of mush that the West is bad, that we need to try to understand Islam, that it's possible for a peaceful solution if only big bad Israel will just stop.

Yes, Chuck, you have nailed the latest chapter in the long and painful opus -"Jewish Blood Libels". KGS fleshes it out here.

New Blood Libels in the Making.......

The UN and other international organizations working in the Gaza area are clearly in the bag for the Hamas, so it stands to reason that they will be only too willing to shove a few shivs into the back of Israel whenever given the chance.

We have been hearing quite a lot lately about UN vehicles and trucks delivering aid supposedly coming under fire from Israeli ground forces, but when pressed a bit further, the "neutral parties to the conflict" are forced to admit that they can't say with certainty that Israel is to blame.

 

All this leads me to ask the question, "if these neutral parties observing the conflict from the side are truly neutral, why then are 100% percent of their claims being leveled at one side only, Israel? All of the reports are being filed by Palestinians, most likely Hamas supporters or affiliates that have every reason to embellish, stretch the truth or outright lie to the Western media and international organizations, in an attempt to cast Israel as the chief evil doer.

 

Even Norwegian doctors are in on the fix as well, with Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse shilling for Hamas every chance they can get. The media is willingly allowing itself to be set up, and to hell with the truth, and in the event they are caught with their pants hanging around their ankles, well, just shove the faulty report down the memory hole and act as if nothing happened at all.

 

Blood libel 1:

Uncertainty shrouds UN driver's death

J'Lem Post: Who killed the Palestinian driver of an aid truck and wounded two others as their convoy made its way into the Gaza Strip through the Erez crossing during Thursday's "humanitarian cease-fire?"

According to the foreign media, who based their information on UN sources, IDF tank shells blasted the truck. According to the Magen David Adom medic who claimed to have taken the Palestinians to an Israeli hospital, the truck actually came under Hamas sniper fire.

The medic, who asked not to be named, said he got his information from soldiers in the field, but by press time - some eight hours after the incident - the IDF Spokesman's Office was still unable to provide a response or to establish contact with the relevant sources in the field.

Adding to the confusion, the Palestinian Red Crescent Society said it had evacuated the victims, but the MDA medic said soldiers told him they had gone in, at great personal risk, to evacuate the wounded Palestinians. What is certain is that there is one dead Palestinian, and two others being treated at Ashkelon's Barzilai Medical Center for gunshot wounds.

The incident occurred Thursday afternoon at the Erez crossing into northern Gaza, the main entrance used by aid agencies to funnel badly needed food and medical supplies into the Strip.

[...]

John Ging, the director of operations in Gaza for UNRWA, said via video link that "the verbal assurances have run out in terms of credibility."

"We cannot rely on firm commitments given from the Israeli side," Ging told reporters. "To have Israeli forces on the ground firing at and now hitting convoys that have been specifically cleared - this is real-time clearance?"

Ging acknowledged, however, that he could not be absolutely certain that the attacks came from IDF forces, telling a reporter who asked whether other combatants may have been responsible, "There is a conflict going on.

[...]

For at least seven hours, the international media were quoting a version of events that claimed the Palestinian truck driver was killed by an Israeli shell.

[...]

According to MDA, the driver and two others, Palestinian civilians contracted by the UN, suffered gunshot wounds to the chest and upper body. In response to a Post query, a spokeswoman from Barzilai confirmed that the two surviving Palestinians were being treated for gunshot wounds.

Blood libel 2

UN: IDF shelled evacuated civilians

Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says Israeli forces evacuated about 110 Palestinians into Gaza house which they then repeatedly shelled 24 hours later, killing about 30 people. IDF: UN claims unreasonable

Military officials said in reponse to the accusation that "from initial examinations in the IDF there is no knowledge of any incident in which IDF forces moved people from one building to another.

"Furthermore, the claim that the building was attacked on January 4, in 24-hours after the IDF entered the Gaza Strip is unreasonable since the IDF forces had not yet reached the areas in question on this date.

"An Israeli television network examination of the matter with hospitals in the area showed the hospitals had no knowledge of such an incident."

The fix is in, and it's something that more and more people are becoming aware of, hence the lack of outrage coming from across the board. It's for the most part coming from all of the predictable places, the Lefty blogs, the gullible and/or the willingly led by the nose media and Palestinian propaganda outlets.

Read it all.
Does this need ginning up?

OSLO: ANTI-ISRAEL RALLY TURNS VIOLENT: ISRAEL SUPPORTERS, POLICE ATTACKED BY MUSLIMS/LEFTISTS

TEENAGE JEWISH GIRL ATTACKED IN PARIS

DENMARK SCHOOLS RECOMMEND NO JEWISH CHILDREN ENROLL

HOLLAND: Kanker joden (Cancer Jews) of Kanker Israel (Cancer Israel)

THE UK'S JIHAD AGAINST THE JEWS: 'Kill Jews' and 'Jews are scumbags'

PARIS ANTI-JEWISH RIOTERS ROB, STEAL, PILLAGE

DENMARK: MUSLIM THAT OPENED FIRE ON JEWS IN MALL, "SUDDEN JIHAD SYNDROME"

ATTACK ON JEWS: MUSLIMS OPEN FIRE IN COPENHAGEN, INJURE TWO
AP MAKES NO MENTION OF ISRAEL/"PALI" CONNECTION

VIDEO: ANNE FRANK'S HOLLAND: "Jews to the Gas"

DENMARK: 'JUST KILL JEWISH"

J'ACCUSE FRANCE2: BROADCASTS 2005 HAMAS ROCKET EXPLOSION AS ISRAELI GAZA ACTION 

VIDEO TORONTO PRO-HAMAS RALLY: "HITLER DIDN'T DO A GOOD JOB"

TIMES SQUARE NYC: PRO-HAMAS RALLY, UGLY, HATEFILLED

ATLANTA MUSLIMS PROTEST CNN BUT LOVE AHMADI NEJAD

PRO HAMAS RALLY IN OBAMALAND, CHICAGO

Muslim attacks Jewish counter protester in DC

FLORIDASTAN: ISLAMIC ANTI JEW, PRO-HAMAS RALLY - THE HATRED OF THE GOOD

ROUND-UP: UGLY PRO-HAMAS, ANTI-JEWISH RALLIES ACROSS AMERICA

MUSLIM ANARCHY IN THE UK

CNN HOAX: JEWISH BLOOD LIBELS

ISRAEL SAYS NO, WILL NOT LAY DOWN AND DIE

Baruch Hashem! ISRAEL SAYS NO - no one is going to tell the Jews that we can't defend ourselves.

The world is acting as a Hamas lobbyist [but] will understand, despite the UNSC resolution, that we must act with all our force to achieve our goals, to bring quiet to the South," said Yishai.

And anyway, who listens to the UN? Iran, North Korea? Only Israel. Time to stop being the doormat for the world's (thrown) shoes.

Israel Rejects United Nations Resolution To Stop The Fighting

Prime Minister Olmert has issued the following statement:

Israel's reaction to diplomatic developments & UNSC Resolution 1860 (Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Following is Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's reaction to diplomatic developments and UN Security Council Resolution #1860:

The State of Israel has never agreed that any outside body would determine its right to defend the security of its citizens.  The IDF will continue operations in order to defend Israeli citizens and will carry out the missions with which it has been assigned in the operation.  This morning's rocket fire against residents of the south only proves that the UN Security Council Resolution #1860 is not practical and will not be honored in actual fact by the Palestinian murder organizations."

One Jerusalem comment: It should be noted that the United Nations resolution does not mention that Hamas has terrorized Israeli civilians with thousands of rockets nor does it mention the kidnapping of Gilad Shalid.

UPDATE: Bruce exclaims:

Can you believe the UN resolution on the Gaza war does not mention HAMAS once...not even ONCE!!!!!!!!!!
The UN is simply and completely a useless piece of a sh*t.  there's no other way to describe it except perhaps as a "terrorist-assisting piece of sh*t" text of resolution: here is the text.
The UN is UNdemocratic, UNabashed in its anti-Israel allignment, UNbelieveable and Worse than UNhelpful. what a failure.

OH and btw, the Hamasavages rejected the ceasefire.

UPDATE: From a Atlas commenter picked up at the Weekly Standard:

A well informed source tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD that Vice President Cheney had urged a veto of the resolution, while Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice argued the United States should support the resolution. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley suggested a compromise -- abstention -- that was ultimately supported by the President.

US "ABSTAINS" ON VOTE ON ISRAEL

Well that's a first - and a shocka. G.W. couldn't go out with his head held high -- he submitted to Islam. How ironic that his presidency began with the Islamic attacks of 9/11, when Bush was unbowed, and ends with him caving into the arch villainous  barbarians. iN 2001, he was quintessentially American - proud, tough, courageous. He came in like a lion and went out like a frickin zebra.

Look at him now, he couldn't go out like a man. I ashamed of him --- shakes head, walks away.

UN Council Calls for Gaza Cease-Fire; US Abstains Bloomberg Hat tip Cobra.

Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) -- The United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution calling for an “immediate, durable and fully respected” cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, “leading to the full withdrawal” of Israel’s forces from the Palestinian territory.    

The U.S. abstained from the vote, and the resolution passed, 14 to 0.   

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the U.S. supported the resolution, though abstained to await a possible Israeli- Palestinian cease-fire stemming from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s mediation.

Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said earlier today the Jewish state would continue its military operation in the Gaza Strip because Hamas rocket assaults haven’t been halted. Israeli forces again struck targets today throughout Gaza from the air, land and sea, while Palestinians fired rockets at Israel.    

“Responsibility for the current hostilities lies squarely with Hamas,” Gabriela Shalev, Israel’s ambassador to the UN said after the vote. “The international community must focus its attention on the cessation of Hamas’s terrorist activity and make clear that a terrorist organization can never be a legitimate leadership.”    

We can only hope that Israel will ignore this farce of a "resolution" by the insecurity council, and keep fighting until they have achieved their objectives.

If the spineless and gutless Olmerde/Barak/Livni cabal is calling the shots - the Jews are screwed. The only silver lining to a ceasefire is Kadima would be kicked out and Likud would win handily because the Jewish people want to defend themselves. They want to live.

Sultan remarked this morning: (hat tip Kap)

When terrorists attack, even when they aim for soldiers, in truth they aim for the glass spines of politicians, whom they can always count on to bend when trouble comes. In politics there are always a shortage of Theodore Roosevelts and Churchills, and an excess of Murthas and Obamas. And that is what makes terrorism so successful, because you cannot terrorize men of courage and principle, but if you spread enough terror and make the cost of the battle high enough, you can always count on politicians to cut and run. It has worked for the terrorists time and time again, and it's still working for them today.

Update: Spencer adds:

The US abstained. Not, "The U.S. stood up and stoutly defended the right and necessity for Israel to defend itself against jihad attacks from Hamas." Oh, no. Instead, the U.S. abstained, and Rice spoke out in favor of the ceasefire resolution. Did anyone speak of how anything short of destroying Hamas would only restore the status quo ante, and lead to the resumption of jihad attacks upon Israel from Gaza? I doubt Rice did. I doubt anyone did.

UPDATE: ISRAEL SAYS NO - no one is going to tell the Jews that we can't defend ourselves.

The world is acting as a Hamas lobbyist [but] will understand, despite the UNSC resolution, that we must act with all our force to achieve our goals, to bring quiet to the South," said Yishai.

UN/HAMAS SHELLING ISRAEL FROM UN SCHOOL

The video below shows Hamas using a UN  school to fire mortars in October 2007.

Today Israel fired a on a UN School in Gaza, killing 40, including some children. According to the IDF, early reports suggest that there were mortars fired upon them from the school. Hamas has a history of using this school as a launching point for mortars, and the students as human shields. (hat tip yidwithlid)

The UN is not even a poser. They are working with Hamas. The objectives set forth  in the UN charter is scorned and reviled by the jihad body of dhimmis and Islamists. OUT OF THE UN NOW - it is the collective organization for the axis of evil.

And Israel is going to agree to UN forces in Gaza in the vent of a hudna. Ree-duck-a-lis.

WHEN IS THE UN GOING TO TAKE A STAND AGAINST ISLAMIC TERRORISTS THAT USE SCHOOLS, WOMEN AND CHILDREN AS HUMAN SHIELDS?

IDF: Mortars fired from bombed school

While UN spokesman reports at least 30 casualties from attack near UNRWA school in Jabalya, army claims strike targeted terrorists firing mortar shells from structure moments earlier

Global news agencies have decried the Israel Defense Forces strike near a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday, in which dozens were killed, and Palestinian sources said the casualties were mostly civilians.

The Israeli army, however, claimed that terrorists were firing mortar shells from the school just moments before the strike. The IDF stated that a number of Hamas gunmen were inside the school, among them Imad and Hassan Abu-Askar, who are known to the IDF as Hamas operatives.

UPDATE:Israel's Official Response to the UN School Bombing

WORLD JEW HATE REACHES FEVER PITCH

THE REAL STORY ISRAEL'S COUNTER ATTACK IN GAZA

First, pray for the brave Jewish fighters battling the jihad in Gaza. We have many fronts in this ugly war. Every news organization that has ignored the relentless rocket fire in to Israel is aflame with antisemitic coverage of Israel's counter attack.

The international communitay yawned while Hamas rained rockets and mortars down on defenseless Jews in Israel. During World War II, it was Europe that furiously "cleansed" Europe of its Jews, now we have the entire world attempting to rid the world of the Jews. The damn cowards of the  UN Security Council members are meeting to discuss the crisis.
Video: UN blasts Israel over Gaza massacre

UN chief calls for immediate halt of violence in Gaza, southern Israel (hat tip Michael)

The emergency meeting was called at the request of Libya, the only Arab member of the council, the AFP news agency said.

"Our main objective is an immediate ceasefire," Libya's deputy ambassador to the UN, Ibrahim Dabbashi, told the agency.

Just before the Security Council gathered, Israel's ambassador to the UN, Gabriela Shalev, repeated Israel's stance that it was taking action to "protect its citizens from further terrorist attacks". (more here)

Over at Jihadwatch:

The Saudis have told Bush to jump. Will Bush say, "How high?"

"Bush, Saudi King talk amid Israel-Gaza bloodshed," from AFP, December 27 (thanks to Michael):

CRAWFORD, Texas (AFP) — Saudi King Abdullah told US President George W. Bush by telephone on Saturday that major countries must take action to halt Israel's attacks on Gaza, the Saudi state news agency SPA reported....

But SPA reported that King Abdullah had discussed "the Israeli aggression against Gaza" and the "implications of continuing Israel's policies of blockade, occupation and torture against the Palestinian people all over the Occupied Territories."

The king also called for "the major countries to shoulder their responsibilities to stop this Israeli attack and save the lives of the innocent and remaining infrastructure in the Palestinian territories."

Abdullah made the call after a meeting in Riyadh with Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas.

As far as the Saudis go, listen, let's chip in and send Abdul-lah a couple of little camel jockeys (Hillary can be helpful with that) and I am sure we won't see hide nor hair of him for at least a week.

America should stay out of it. We have no right to attempt to stop free people from defending their people and their land.

GO ISRAEL!

UPDATE: Dan Maloney of GoV writes:

You know, I'm looking through the news this morning on yahoo, goggle, Fox, CBS, ABC, etc. and seeing nothing but HUGE headlines about "thousands protest Gaza attacks", Gaza death toll mounts, Gaza injuries massive, the "deadliest ever" attack on Gaza, a second day of Israeli attacks on Gaza, photos of Gaza carnage. 

I went back to see how much news coverage had been given to why Israel has gone on the offensive and about the best I could find is "US urges Hamas to halt bombing of Israel".  NO pictures of the damage or carnage caused by the Hamas rockets and missiles, NO demonstrations against Hamas, NO global outcry, NOTHING . . . it makes me sick.   

UPDATE: WHERE IS THE WORLDWIDE OUTRAGE? Hamas will not allow the wounded medical treatment. Where is the vile jihad loving media and dhimmis at the UNSC on this? LIARS. JEW HATERS.

Hamas 'bars injured leaving Gaza'

Egypt says the Hamas militant group, which controls Gaza, is preventing hundreds of wounded Palestinians from leaving for treatment in Egypt. Cairo says dozens of empty ambulances are at the Rafah crossing - the only one to Gaza which avoids Israel.

UPDATE: Russia has the nerve to talk this trash: Russia asks Israel to end Gaza attacks, let in aid

What about Hamas not allowing the people to get medical aid. How benevolent was Russia in Georgia?

UPDATE: Gulf leaders to discuss Gaza at economic summit

All that blood and tresure in Iraq: Suicide bomber hits Iraqi Gaza protest (how ironic)

Iraq's government also condemned Israel's airstrikes on Gaza, which began Saturday. In a statement, government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said ....blah blah blah 

THE UN VOTE AGAINST FREEDOM OF SPEECH, WHO VOTED HOW

This nonsense about not insulting totalitarianism, misogyny, murder in the name of conversion was voted on at the UN. It is not surprising that the old Soviet bloc nations voted against it - they have lived under the scourge of a totalitarian regime.

New Islamic-sponsored U.N. resolution against free speech: Who supported it, who opposed it, and who stood on the fence

The newest Islamic-sponsored resolution on "Combating defamation of religion" (A/C.3/63/L.22/Rev.1) was adopted Thursday by a vote of 86 to 53, with 42 abstentions, as follows below. Selected votes of interest are in bold.

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain: Argentina, Armenia, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Nauru, Nepal, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Zambia.

Absent: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Kiribati, New Zealand, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Seychelles, Solomon Islands

THE WORLD MUST BOYCOTT ANTI JEW DURBAN II

I cannot for the life of me, understand why any country would associate itself with a Jewish genocide conference. Is this still being batted about? Why isn't the world boycotting Durban II? Proof of the struggle between good and evil. Over at Tundra Tabloids ....

The Dutch Threaten to Boycott Durban II.......

"FM Verhagen won’t attend ‘propaganda circus’..It seems like the sole intention is to criticize Israel and condemn the West for slavery and its colonial history,"

The Tundra Tabloids of course applauds the Dutch FM's statements, the Geneva conference slated to take place next year in Switzerland, aptly dubbed "Durban II" for a reason, will be most certainly used as a platform by the Islamic led block at the UN, to exclusively criticize Israel and the West.

Holland’s foreign minister Maxime Verhagen told Dutch radio yesterday he "will not be involved in anti-Semitism" by attending “a propaganda circus." "It seems like the sole intention is to criticize Israel and condemn the West for slavery and its colonial history," Verhagen said.

Ottowa and Jerusalem have already decided to withdraw their official participation. The United States has protested the conference, but incoming president Barack Obama has not indicated yet if he will send a delegation.

At the initial racism conference in Durban, South Africa in 2001, Israel and the United States walked out midway because of a draft resolution equating Zionism with racism. Verhagen fears a repeat performance in Geneva, and said the Dutch will withdraw unless the proposed resolutions are changed.

Some Jewish and human rights organizations have suggested holding an alternative conference at the same time to provide a more balanced platform at which to address the issues of racism and xenophobia.

The Tundra Tabloids has already proved that the OIC will most certainly be using that forum to scape goat Israel, the head of that organization, Sec-Gen Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu is only interested in pushing the bogus issue of "Islamophobia", and not interested in the every day phenomenon of Islamic anti-Semitism, of which the Sec-Gen "does not believe that any Muslim good or bad could be guilty of."

Over at The New English review Jerry Gordan writes:

Former US UN Ambassador John Bolton considers the upcoming Durban II conference in April 2009 at the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) in Geneva the first test of the Obama Administration foreign policy. This is a matter that Secretary of State designee, Sen. Hillary Clinton will have on her desk soon after Senate Confirmation. Bolton noted that Israel and Canada have rejected attending Durban II and that European countries were deliberating as to whether they should attend. This is because of the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic diatribes from UN General Assembly President Brockman of Nicaragua and the 57 nation Organization of the Islamic Conference.

UPDATE: And while we are on the subject: The U.N. Can Go to Hell Liberty Sphere

UN HOAX: BARBARIANS MASQUERADE AS HUMAN BEINGS

The UN is nothing more than an international club wielded to bat the West into submission to Islam. Nothing more. The US which funds just under 25% of their budget (with President-elect Hussein promising billions more. This is nothing more than paying the jizya and funding our own demise.

Where are the rational warriors? Where are the great Americans who will stand up against this oppression, Islamic supremacism, and hate. I know where eight of us, where the hell is everybody else? The UN is a shrine to evil.

The UN Hoax: The World's Worst Violators of Freedom of Religion Given a UN Global Megaphone to Masquerade as Believers in Religious Liberty   Watch video here. The UN Interfaith Dialogue Hoax - Video(1) November 12&13, 2008: The Culture of Peace; Saudi Arabia & Iran Watch video here. The UN Interfaith Dialogue Hoax - Video (2) November 12&13, 2008: The Culture of Peace; Sudan, Palestinian Observer, Libya & Yemen Watch video here. The UN Interfaith Dialogue Hoax - Video (3) November 12&13, 2008: The Culture of Peace; Pakistan, Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar & Morocco Watch video here. The UN Interfaith Dialogue Hoax - Video (4) November 12&13, 2008: The Culture of Peace; Indonesia, China & Cuba

EYEontheUN videos are produced by Anne Bayefsky and Lana Zizic.

NUTS! UN'S DEATH KNELL FOR FREE SPEECH

You have to ask yourself, what does the West stand for? What does the US stand for? If not free speech, than we are finished. We stand for nothing. "Defamation" or "insulting" a cult, a dogma whatever is entirely subjective and dangerous.

UN anti-blasphemy measures have sinister goals, observers say
Steven Edwards ,  Canwest News Service

UNITED NATIONS - Islamic countries Monday won United Nations backing for an anti-blasphemy measure Canada and other Western critics say risks being used to limit freedom of speech.

Combating Defamation of Religions passed 85-50 with 42 abstentions in a key UN General Assembly committee, and will enter into the international record after an expected rubber stamp by the plenary later in the year.

But while the draft's sponsors say it and earlier similar measures are aimed at preventing violence against worshippers regardless of religion, religious tolerance advocates warn the resolutions are being accumulated for a more sinister goal.

 

It provides international cover for domestic anti-blasphemy laws, and there are a number of people who are in prison today because they have been accused of committing blasphemy," said Bennett Graham, international program director with the Becket Fund, a think tank aimed at promoting religious liberty.

"Those arrests are made legitimate by the UN body's (effective) stamp of approval."

Passage of the resolution is part of a 10-year action plan the 57-state Organization of Islamic Conference launched in 2005 to ensure "renaissance" of the "Muslim Ummah" or community.

"Renaissance"

While the current resolution is non-binding, Pakistan's Ambassador Masood Khan reminded the UN's Human Rights Council this year that the OIC ultimately seeks a "new instrument or convention" on the issue. Such a measure would impose its terms on signatory states.

"Each time the resolution comes up, we get a measure of where the world is on this issue, and we see that the campaign has been ramped up," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch.

While this year's draft is less Islam-centric that resolutions of earlier years, analysts note it is more emphatic in linking religion defamation and incitement to violence.

That "risks limiting a broad range of peaceful speech and expression," Neuer argues.

The 2008 draft "underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national regional and international levels."

It also laments "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism."

But Western democracies argue that a religion can't enjoy protection from criticism because that would require a judicial ruling that its teachings are the "truth."

"Defamation carries a particular legal meaning and application in domestic systems that makes the term wholly unsuitable in the context of religions," says the U.S. government in a response on the issue to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

"A defamatory statement . . . is more than just an offensive one. It is also a statement that is false."

THE GREAT PEACE MAKING DEVICE: JEW HATRED

Jews, stay away from the trains no matter where they tell you they are going

But remember, the 78% of American Jews who voted for Obama get on the trains first, it's only fair. The NJD C First!

In "Defining Jew-Hatred Down: The curious response to Ahmadinejad at the U.N." in The Weekly Standard of November 17, Matthias Küntzel wonders at the spectacle of the Thug-In-Chief's genocidal and jihadist Jew-hatred having become so...fashionable. Jihadwatch  (Thanks to Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi.)

It is a topsy-turvy world: At the United Nations--an organization born out of the struggle against Nazi Germany and intended to embody the lessons of the Holocaust--a head of state openly spouts anti-Semitic propaganda in an address before the General Assembly. Granted, he takes the trouble to denounce "Zionists" and avoid the word "Jew," but this dodge is transparent to any student of the Nazis. His speech is greeted with acclaim, and neither the U.N. secretary general nor any Western head of government bothers to object. The media are mostly silent. It happened on September 23, and the speaker was Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A familiar figure at the U.N., Ahmadinejad has a history of using his turn at the rostrum to sermonize about his yearning for the return of the Shia messiah. This time, he went further, drawing inspiration also from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

The Zionists, he told the assembly, are the eternal enemy of "the dignity, integrity and rights of the American and European people" (this is the English translation of his remarks on the U.N. website). Although they are few in number, the Zionists "have been dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers of some European countries and the United States in a deceitful, complex and furtive manner."

Indeed, so influential are the Zionists around the world that even "some presidential or premier nominees in some big countries have to visit these people, take part in their gatherings, swear allegiance and commitment to their interests in order to attain financial or media support." In particular, even "the great people of America and various nations of Europe" are caught in the clutches of Jewish power: They "need to obey the demands and wishes of a small number of acquisitive and invasive people. These nations are spending their dignity and resources on the crimes and occupations and the threats of the Zionist network against their will."

Read it and weep. For the past and the future.

"Coptic Christians, women and other minorities" Victims of Increasing Islamisation in Egypt

Where are the dhimmi whores of the UN on the extermination of non-Muslims?

Italy: Copts the victims of Islamisation says prize-winning Egyptian author ADNKronos (hat tip Banef)

Otranto, 10 Nov. (AKI) – Coptic Christians, women and other minorities are paying the price of increasing Islamisation in Egyptian society, leading author and intellectual, Tarek Heggy, has told Adnkronos International (AKI). The fundamentalist opposition Muslim Brotherhood was one of the groups responsible and was indoctrinating young people through its welfare work, Heggy said.

“I believe the major problem for the Copts in Egypt is related to the overall cultural environment. The more radical society becomes, the worse the situation gets. This is also true for Bahaiis,” Heggy said, referring to a smaller religious minority in Egypt which now numbers only a few hundred people.

Heggy was speaking in the southern Italian coastal town of Otranto where he was awarded the prestigious 2008 Grinzane Terra D’Otranto prize for dialogue, tolerance, solidarity and integration.

Loving the eye-talians.  They have testes.

Copts - who form some 10 percent of Egypt's population and the largest Christian community in the Middle East - have been the target of periodic attacks by Muslim hardliners in recent years.

The Islamisation of education in recent decades is a major cause of an intolerant mindset that has developed in Egypt, which the Muslim Brotherhood has helped create under the guise of aid to local communities, Heggy argued.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is well regarded by the average Egyptian, who equates the government with autocracy, corruption and repression,” Heggy said.

Read it all

The Global Network Initiative - a loss of religious freedom

Global Network Initiative - a loss of religious freedom? by Randall Rathbun

If 57 nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have their way in the United Nations, and the "Defamation of Religions resolution" is approved, it may be a crime, soon, to publish material on the internet deemed to advocate "religious hatred".

This document states that it is wrong to associate Islam with human rights violations and terrorism, and that it is deplorable to use the internet to incite xenophobia, or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam (and any other religion) and that defamation of Islam and Muslims must be effectively combatted.

One is forced to ask what motive is guiding terrorists, if not a religious one, which they have said in their very own words?

So how does this affect the internet?

Simple, on October 28, 2008 the Global Network Initiative was publically announced, in their own words "a consortium of companies, civil society organizations, investors and academics" with a "comprehensive collaborative approach to regulate the Information & Communications Infrastructures worldwide for the express purpose of protecting and advancing freedom of expression."

This organization has quietly met for 2 years hammering out an agreement binding upon their members.  These members include Microsoft, Yahoo and Google and other major IT players on the world stage.

While proclaming that protection of privacy is their foremost concern and that the GNI advances fundamental human rights, one must read the fine print buried in their "Principles".

What is not apparent is that if the GNI intends to abide by the United Nations "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR] and article 20 item 2 of the ICCPR which states  "Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall  be prohibited by law." then it will be illegal to post such material on the internet, period!

It appears that a chilling silencing of religious expression on the internet is about to occur, if the Defamation of religion resolution is approved and the GNI promises to abide by its founding principles subservient to the ICCPR articles.

We need to remember that Yahoo was accused of assisting the Chinese government in supplying the identity of "political dissidents".  One does not need to imagine what might be next on the horizon.

Caveat Lector!

UN PRAYS FOR AN OBAMA WIN AND AN END TO AMERICAN HEGEMONY

“Whoever you are, you who are hearing me now, I am speaking to whatever living remnant is left uncorrupted within you, to the remnant of the human, to your mind, and I say: There is a morality of reason, a morality proper to man, and Man’s Life is its standard of value." (Atlas Shrugged)

The collective negation of humanity otherwise known as the "UN" is positively giddy over the prospect of an Obama one worlder presidency. That, in and of itself, should be the kiss of death on his prospects of winning. America knows who and what the UN is.
They are smacking their lips in anticipation of your money in their grubby, corrupt hands.

At the U.N., Many Hope for an Obama Win WaPo

UNITED NATIONS -- There are no "Obama 2008" buttons, banners or T-shirts visible here at U.N. headquarters, but it might be difficult to find a sliver of territory in the United States more enthusiastic over the prospect of the Illinois senator winning the White House.

An informal survey of more than two dozen U.N. staff members and foreign delegates showed that the overwhelming majority would prefer that Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, saying they think that the Democrat would usher in a new agenda of multilateralism after an era marked by Republican disdain for the world body.

Obama supporters hail from Russia, Canada, France, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Indonesia and elsewhere. One American employee here seemed puzzled that he was being asked whether Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was even a consideration. "Obama was and is unstoppable," the official said. "Please, God, let him win," he added.

"It would be hard to find anybody, I think, at the U.N. who would not believe that Obama would be a considerable improvement over any other alternative," said William H. Luers, executive director of the United Nations Association. "It's been a bad eight years, and there is a lot of bad feeling over it."

Bug off! Get your teeth our of our neck, parasite.

"The fact is that most conservatives, most Republicans don't worship at the altar in New York, and I think that aggravates them more than anything else," said John R. Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "What they want is the bending of the knee, and they'll get it from an Obama administration."

Bolton would know better than anyone, eh?

[..]

We do not consider him an African American," said Congo's U.N. ambassador, Atoki Ileka. "We consider him an African."

We don't consider him American either.

UPDATE: The End of America Amir Taheri (hat tip Banef)

In political and academic circles interested in global strategy, every season brings its specific theme. These days the theme is that of "the post-American world." Earlier this month we heard it repeated in a hundred different ways at the first World Policy Forum, a geopolitical jamboree held in the French lakeside resort of Evian and attracting president and prime ministers from more than two dozen countries. Russian President Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev was licking his lips as he was declaring the end of American domination.

Kenya's Prime Minister Raila Odinga, was even more gleeful when harping on the same theme and expressing the hope that his half-Kenyan "cousin" Barack Obama, as President of the United States, would help America adopt a "more modest profile."

Odinga here.

Former French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine was even more emphatic: the American "hyper-power" was on its way out.

During the summer, Tehran played host to an international conference dealing with the same theme, albeit in a characteristically more aggressive tone. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced the emergence of "a world without America." Last week, Spanish Foreign Minister' Miguel-Angel Moratinos took to the road to disseminate the same theme: the "unipolar", that is to say US-led, global was coming to an end.

Read it all.

Didn't they already remove them?

International community tries to remove Israelis from peace process

In the 1940's Europe decided to rid the continent of the Jews

In the 2000's, the world decides to rid the world of Israel.

STOP AHMADINEJAD'S VISA!

 

From the Jerusalem Prayer Team:

I began a campaign to stand against the U.S. granting a visa to allow Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to enter the U.S. Our team shared this vision with the sponsoring Senators; they have taken up the torch and have encouraged other Senators to sign the letter asking Condoleezza Rice to deny the entrance visa to Ahmadinejad and his entourage. Click here to read a copy of that letter.

THUS FAR, visas have NOT been granted, so time is of the essence as he is scheduled to speak at the U.N. on Tuesday, September 23. You can be sure that the U.N., EU, Arab League, Cuba, Venezuela and all God-hating liberals, leftists and liars are lobbying Rice to grant Ahmadinejad a visa.
It is absolutely critical that you rally everyone you know to sign the letter to Dr. Rice immediately. It is absolutely critical that you send this to EVERYONE YOU KNOW right now, and ask them to sign the letter today. The Senators have taken up the torch in response to a meeting with members of our Jerusalem Prayer Team, please do the same.

Please click here to sign the petition. Your response will go directly to the White House.

Dear Dr. Rice:

I have read the letter from twelve U.S. Senators asking the U.S. State Department not to grant a visa to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or to any members of his entourage. I agree with the Senators that:

"President Ahmadinejad is a clear adversary of the United States, and other democratic nations that uphold liberty and freedom."

Please do not grant an entry visa to a terrorist leader who is openly and blatantly hostile to both the United States and Israel.

Kindest regards,

Click here to add your signature to the letter to Secretary of State Rice.