US tax dollars also funding #radical Leftist #Israeli #NGO's like #Keshev and #BTselem

(Carl)And you thought that it was only European governments that were using taxpayer money to fund radical Israeli NGO's. No. It turns out that the United States of Obama is also funding radical Leftist NGO's in Israel. This is Caroline Glick.

According to the report, in accordance with the NGO Transparency Law which requires NGOs to report on donations received from foreign governments, three Israeli NGOs received funding from the US.

Keshev, a radical leftist "media watchdog" group run by some of Israel's most outspoken, and radical journalists and writers received NIS 492,452 in direct aid from the US government. To understand how subversive Keshev is, it suffices to note that they criticized the Israeli media for rushing to judgment about Fatah's unity deal with Hamas. That is, the group the US supports believes we should not criticize Fatah for joining forces with a genocidal jihadist movement committed to the obliteration of Israel that is in cahoots with the Iranians.

Through Catholic Relief Services,the US also gave NIS 220,304 to the anti-Israel pressure group B'Tselem. The money was used to fund B'Tselem's video project. B'tselem's video project involves the distribution of video cameras to Palestinians to film snuff films that portry Israelis as aggressive bullies who seek to harm the Palestinians for no reason.

Numerous examples have already been reported of how those film clips have falsely portrayed events.

Finally, the US government donated NIS 15,474 through the Foundation for Middle East Peace to the far left internet outlet Social TV. To a certain degree, Social TV can be -- and has been -- portrayed as the anti-Zionist answer to Latma, the Hebrew-language media criticism site that I run. But Latma is wholly funded by private contributors and foundations.

It would have never occurred to me to ask a foreign government to fund the project. It never would have occurred to me to ask a foreign government to get into the media watchdog game in Israel. But then, from reading the report it is clear that the aim of the US government is not, in fact to help Israeli media outlets do a better job reporting on events. Rather, the report indicates that the US government has decided to use radical Israeli NGOs to wage political warfare in Israel. The aim of this campaign is to convince the public that Israel is to blame for the absence of peace with our neighbors.

Read the whole thing.

Dishonest. Benghazi spin is just the surface. Weapons and public relations going to terrorists. What is really going on is hostility. America and Israel are at each other's throats. This is a cold war.

Lawfare Defeat for NGOs at ICC doesn't make me feel safe at all

(h/t israpundit) Prosecutor’s Office rejects jurisdiction of “Palestine,” and echoes NGO Monitor’s legal brief
JERUSALEM – In a key defeat for NGO “lawfare” in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) today decided that it does not have jurisdiction to begin an investigation over cases related to the 2008-09 Gaza War because “Palestine” is not a state. In January 2009, the Palestinian Authority (PA) filed a letter with the Court, purporting to accept the ICC’s jurisdiction in order to bring war crimes cases against Israeli officials, notes Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor, which was involved in the case from the outset.

“Throughout this process, the ICC – created to punish the worst perpetrators of war crimes and mass murder – was exploited by several EU- and European-government funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which intensively lobbied the OTP as part of their campaign to attack the legitimacy of the State of Israel,” says Anne Herzberg, legal advisor for NGO Monitor. “The NGOs Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Al Haq, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l´Homme (FIDH), and Adalah campaigned at the ICC in support of the Palestinian Authority’s political goals. This clearly was contradictory to the spirit and substance of peace negotiations.”
On behalf of NGO Monitor, Herzberg submitted a legal brief on the case. The brief argued that the ICC’s jurisdiction is defined by the 1998 Rome Statute, which makes clear that only states can accept the Court’s jurisdiction. The Statute was adopted after years of careful diplomatic negotiations, and allowing the PA to fall under the Court’s jurisdiction would have essentially amounted to a re-writing of the Statute. In addition, the brief argued that, contrary to claims by NGO proponents of the PA initiative, the ICC was not established as a court of universal jurisdiction, and NGO attempts to transform it into such would be legally improper. The OTP used similar arguments to support its decision.
“The fact that the case even proceeded this far was clear legal overreaching, but it shows the strength of NGOs that lead the de-legitimization and demonization campaigns against Israel,” adds Herzberg. “The OTP’s decision today is a strong rebuke to these NGOs, their political agenda, and their campaign to isolate Israel from the international community,” notes Herzberg. “International arenas are routinely hijacked for political purposes, but today’s decision was markedly different.”

it should of never come down to a technicality like this. Jews have a right to protect themselves even if it were a state. Shortly it will be the Muslim Brotherhood running things in Egypt. If Israel defends it's civilians from rocket fire it is their right to do so. Technically speaking... the rules of this court are obscene. During the Holocaust the Jews did not have a state. Is the court saying that this technicality could of been used to protect Nazis if the legal precedent of today existed during World War II? It's a little obtuse. People that initiate violence through terror... should be responded to as Israel did, regardless of the civilians they hide behind.

Palestinian Leadership: It Is Forbidden to Normalize Relations with Israel

Israeli and Palestinian peace activists who planned to hold a conference in Jerusalem and Bethlehem this week were forced to cancel the event after receiving threats from Palestinians.

The conference was organized by the Israeli Palestinian Confederation, a group that seeks to promote peace and coexistence between the two peoples.
The organizers of the conference were hoping to hold elections for a new "parliament" that would consist of Israelis and Palestinians and that would offer itself as a third government to the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority.
The first conference, which was supposed to take place at the Ambassador Hotel in Jerusalem, was cancelled at the last minute after angry Palestinian protesters demonstrated in front of the hotel. The protesters shouted slogans denouncing the event "because it promotes the culture of peace" and is designed to "normalize" relations between Israelis and Palestinians.
The demonstrators also shouted slogans strongly condemning Al Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh, who was supposed to be one of the main speakers at the conference. Because of the protest and out of fear for his safety, Nusseibeh decided not to come to the hotel.
The Palestinian protesters later stormed the conference hall, forcing the frightened Israeli representatives to leave the hotel.
The following day, a similar "anti-normalization" demonstration forced the Israeli and Palestinian peace activists to cancel an event that was scheduled to take place in the town of Bet Jalla near Bethlehem.
The protesters later explained that their move was in line with the Palestinian Authority's policy of banning any form of normalization with Israel. This is the same authority that signed the Oslo Accords with Israel and whose senior leaders carry Israeli-issued VIP cards that enable them to move around freely – a privilege denied to most ordinary Palestinians.
Some Palestinians said that the demonstrations were in fact initiated by top Palestinian officials in Ramallah who do not want to see Israeli and Palestinian representatives working together to promote peace and coexistence.
By banning such public gatherings, the Palestinian Authority leadership is further radicalizing Palestinians.
This was not the first time that the Palestinian Authority or some NGOs had come out against activities that supposedly promote normalization between Israelis and Palestinians. Over the past few years, they have cancelled many events of this type under the charge that it is forbidden to normalize relations with Israel.
The Palestinian Authority and these NGOs are also coordinating their activities with other "anti-normalization" groups in the Arab world, specifically Jordan and Egypt.
At the end of the day, it is such activities that drive Arabs into the open arms of Muslim fundamentalists. The "anti-normalization" campaign also serves to undermine the minority of moderate Arabs who still believe in coexistence and peace.
The Palestinian leadership in the West Bank is shooting itself in the foot. In the future, its representatives will be afraid to return to the negotiating table or conduct dialogue with any Israel out of fear for their lives. If Palestinian academics such as Nusseibeh are afraid to appear in public with Israelis such as Uri Avineri, Ruth Dayan and Shlomo Ben-Ami, this speaks volumes about where Palestinian society is headed.

via hudson-ny.org

Prof. Gerald Steinberg, IBA English News, Shalit and Failure of Human Rights NGOs - YouTube

Shalit Agreement Shows Moral Failure of International Human Rights Frameworks

(NGO Monitor) JERUSALEM – While welcoming the agreement to release kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit as an important humanitarian act, Professor Gerald M. Steinberg, president of human rights watchdog NGO Monitor, noted that this episode further exposes the moral bankruptcy of international human rights mechanisms.
“Throughout the five years of Shalit’s captivity in Gaza, during which every human rights obligation was blatantly violated, organizations such as the UN Human Rights Council, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), Gisha, and the International Red Cross demonstrated very little interest,” Steinberg stated. “Similarly, the report of the UN Fact-Finding Commission on the Gaza War, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, downplayed Shalit’s captivity in blatant violation of international law. This moral stain will never be erased.”
In addition, NGO Monitor noted that the agreement to release hundreds of terrorists, responsible for heinous crimes, and tried and convicted according to due process of law, highlights the continued erosion of international legal principles. Instead of serving their time for these convictions, the murderers have been freed under extreme duress and compulsion, adding to the incentives for similar actions in the future. Organizations dedicated to human rights have an obligation to condemn such immoral extortion.

Gilad Shalit. It was worth it! 1000 terrorists that Israelis humanely have to pay for versus one hostage that the NGO community was ignoring and was abused is completely worth it. further it allows the Israelis to now shoot those they had to care for before. There is no loss here. Had Bibi waited a month there would of been no Egypt as we know it to negotiate with. It is a hard pill to swallow, but think of the outrageous torture Gilad would of endured that Amnesty International and the Red Cross would of ignored. it's another example of how comparing the numbers is irrelevant. If we were to compare numbers there would be no Israel at all. We can only compare numbers when we make the assumption that the enemy captives are treated like Israeli captives. This would be a prime example of denying the correlative.

NGO Monitor: NIF Network's Campaign on September Protests

Naomi Chazan

This NIF seems to go to a lot of trouble to claim they are not involved with things. They left a comment on my blog and it isn't like I'm a big fish. They must have a huge social media campaign financed by who knows? What I do know is that it costs a lot of money to go to supposedly Conservative blogs, which is something I really am not (can't you tell by the raunchy offensive jokes?), but the NIF assumes I am because I support Israel and think totalitarianism is a nightmare.

B'Tselem's report on Nabi Saleh a pretense to discuss September JERUSALEM (Daled Amos)
In advance of the Palestinian "September initiatives" at the United Nations, the New Israel Fund (NIF) network of organizations are conducting a coordinated campaign that accuses Israel of "infringing" on the "right to demonstrate" and ignores Israel's legal obligations to maintain public order. As a pretense to promote this agenda and pre-judge Israeli responses to predicted mass demonstrations, B'Tselem today published a politically motivated "report" on "Weekly Demonstrations in a-Nabi Saleh," according to Jerusalem-based research institute NGO Monitor. "The timing of the B'Tselem report suggests that the objective is to undermine the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel," noted Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor. "Along with Adalah, Mossawa, Yesh Din, CWP, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), and other members of the NIF network, B'Tselem is perpetuating the myth that these protests are non-violent." In its report, B'Tselem alleges that "security forces denied the residents their right to protest the infringement of their rights, and completely prohibited them from demonstrating...even in the absence of any violent act by the demonstrators." To match its political aims, this NGO also claimed that "forces made excessive use of crowd control measures." NGO Monitor notes that, in addition to this B'Tselem publication, ACRI sent an open letter (to generate publicity) in August to Defense Minister Ehud Barak alleging that "military legislation governing protests and demonstrations in the West Bank denies Palestinian residents the right to demonstrate." Similarly, ACRI and Adalah pubished a joint letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Minister of Internal Security, and the Chief of Police entitled "Police Preparation for the Expected September Demonstrations" (August 28). And, in June 2011, Mossawa released an inflammatory statement condemning Israel for preparing for possible violence in September, satirically entitled "Mossawa Center calls [on Israel] not to send security forces to train in Daraa [Syria] and Tripoli." The comparison between Israel and the regimes of Assad and Qaddafi is particularly odious. In addition, Yesh Din, Adalah, Physicians for Human Rights - Israel, Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP), and the Public Committee against Torture in Israel (PCATI) are hosting a "Lawyers workshop for representing arrested demonstrators" on September 15, 2011. This workshop, run by NIF-funded groups, is being held in order to counter an alleged policy of "police repression of demonstrators." "The aim of these statements and activities is to constrain the Israeli government, and distort the legitimate responses to violence, by painting these actions as non-violent. In actuality, extensive evidence shows that many of these confrontations, such as in Bilin, Nilin, and Nabi Saleh, include significant acts of violence by protesters," continued Steinberg. "If the planned demonstrations include or exceed these levels of violence , or that of the 'Nakba' and 'Naksa' riots of earlier this year, Israeli security services are required to act to protect civilians from injury." "NGOs claiming to promote human rights and the rule of law are wrong to erase the very real threats to public safety and human life," said Steinberg. "In media campaigns pre-condemning the Israeli response, the NIF network is attempting to handcuff Israeli security forces." Examples of this campaign: * On September 12, 2011 B'Tselem published a report titled "Show of Force Israeli Military Conduct in Weekly Demonstrations in a-Nabi Saleh." * ACRI sent a letter to defense Minister Ehud Barak titled "The Proper Security Forces Preparation for Expected Palestinian Protests and Rallies in September" (August 8, 2011). * ACRI and Adalah sent a joint letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the minister of interior security and the chief of police titled "Police Preparation for the Expected September Demonstrations" (August 28, 2011). * Yesh Din, Adalah, Physicians for Human Rights - Israel, Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP), and the Public Committee against Torture in Israel (PCATI) are hosting a "Lawyers workshop for representing arrested demonstrators" on September 15, 2011. * "Mossawa Center calls [on Israel] not to send security forces to train in Daraa and Tripoli" (June 14, 2011).

New Israel Fund Continues to Fund BDS Groups

NGO Monitor

• In July 2011, New Israel Fund (NIF) published its 2010 Financial Statement. This document details NIF funding for Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP) in 2010, and indicates that funds were also earmarked for 2011. (CWP is a leader of anti-Israel BDS campaigns.)
• The statement reveals that in 2010, NIF authorized an additional $20,130 for CWP, and disbursed $36,503, including $16,373 authorized in previous years that had not been transferred. (NGO Monitor reports show that NIF provided approximately $300,000 to CWP in previous years.)
• On May 12, 2011, an official NIF statement declared that “NIF provided its last direct grant to CWP in 2008” and subsequent transfers were “donor advised.” NIF’s financial statements do not distinguish between direct and donor advised grants, making NIF’s claim unverifiable.  Nevertheless, under U.S. tax law, and as reflected in NIF’s 2009 and 2010 financial documents, “donor advised” grants are within the sole discretion of the NIF Board of Directors.  No money may be distributed to any grantee without the approval of the NIF board, and donors are notified in advance that disbursements require that approval. NIF has full responsibility – morally, legally, and financially – for the 2010 $36,503 disbursement to CWP.
• NIF’s May 12, 2011 press release was headlined: “NGO Monitor attacks New Israel Fund based on information it knew to be wrong.” NIF’s release of its 2010 funding information unequivocally reaffirms the accuracy of NGO Monitor’s reports. (NIF has not apologized.) 
• In a May 20, 2011 statement, NIF-Australia head Robin Margo declared that CWP “has received no further funding from NIF since 2009” and criticized Dr. Ron Weiser (Zionist Council of New South Wales, Australia) for “suggesting publically... that funding may have continued into 2010.”
• According to the NIF financial statement, $6,000 remained to be granted to CWP in 2011. This is consistent with CWP’s statement that NIF continued to provide funds in 2011. (NIF later claimed that “Due to a clerical error, $100 was processed to CWP in May.” NIF did not relate to the $6,000 amount.)

via challahhuakbar.blogspot.com

Jewish Agency co-sponsors anti-Israel event with New Israel Fund... for the last three years

Once again there are suspicious goings on at the JCC in Manhattan in cahoots with the radical Leftists, anti-Israel New Israel Fund. But this time the Jewish Agency is a co-sponsor, and the program has been going on for three years. A press release from JCC Watch.

DENIAL FALLS APART:

THE JEWISH AGENCY (MAKOM)

PARTNERED WITH AND SPONSORED

ANTI-ISRAEL EVENT WITH NEW ISRAEL FUND

FOR PAST THREE YEARS

New York - "Love, Hate and the Jewish State 4.0: Airing the Dirty Laundry," an event recently held at the JCC in Manhattan, a beneficiary of the UJA-Federation of New York, met with controversy when the Jewish Agency (MAKOM) denied any involvement with the event. Evidence, however, clearly shows otherwise.

Last week, JCCWatch.org charged that the Jewish Agency (MAKOM) had cosponsored the program along with the New Israel Fund, J Street, and other organizations. The Jewish Agency spokesman, Haviv Rettig Gur, speaking to the Israeli press, denied any such alliances. JCCWatch.org has discovered notices that clearly list the Jewish Agency (MAKOM) as a sponsor. These prove the sponsorship of not only this year's event, but also last year's and, based on evidence in articles still found online, at least as far back as 2009.

JCCWatch.org's founder, Richard Allen, calling "Love Hate and the Jewish State 4.0: Airing the Dirty Laundry" a "bash-Israel event," stated that it "trains the younger Jewish generation to hate the Jewish state. There is nothing at all positive being taught at these political bash-Israel sessions. In fact, the program might be better called 'Love to Hate the Jewish State 4.0.'" He went on to condemn the JCC in Manhattan, a beneficiary of the UJA-Federation of New York, for hosting yet another event put on by groups that fund and support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. "There are clearly elements within the American arm of the Jewish Agency (MAKOM) that have established links to these nefarious organizations."

"The Jewish Agency (MAKOM) and the JCC in Manhattan should not be utilized as a sponsor or a gathering place for those who work to delegitimize Israel," Allen continued.
"NGO-Monitor has proven that, for some time now, the New Israel Fund has directly funded groups that support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel. J Street, the George Soros-funded group, has also partnered with efforts to further the insidious BDS movement.

"We once again call on the JCC in Manhattan's board of directors to establish firm and serious guidelines to prevent the JCC in Manhattan from becoming a hotbed of bash Israel activities. The Jewish Agency must also supervise their American arm, MAKOM, and establish better oversight to prevent sponsorships of anti-Israel activities."

For more information, contact

JCCWatch.org at (917) 434-3480
h/t Israel Matzav

that is the last time I ever go to Makom. How come liberal parties are so uptight?

Gaza to receive 7.5 TIMES more US aid per head [ $ 579.95 ] than Haiti [ $77.47 ]

This astounding Haiti-Gaza comparison does not get much media or political or NGO notice.

This story is even much worse than it seems - when you look at both the populations and deaths involved.

CIA estimate is [ 2009 ] 1,551,859 people in Gaza, but 5,035,536 in Haiti.
This means that PER HEAD, Gaza gets $579.95 but Haiti only $77.47.

Gaza was thus pledged 7.5 TIMES as much per head after the IDF operation as Haiti after the devastating earthquake.

If you also look at the death toll, Haiti lost an estimated 230,000 on Jan 12, 2010, which equals US aid of $3,043.48 for every fatality.

The highest allegation of the Gaza death toll is 1,417 which would equal US aid of $ 635,144.7 per fatality.

For US aid, every Gaza death is worth 209 TIMES as much as one in Haiti.

Gaza lost at most under 0.0913 % of its population, but Haiti lost 4.568 %, or 50 times more.

Gaza lost 1 in every 1,095, but Haiti lost 1 in every 22 people.

But then Haiti is neither Arab nor Muslim.
And no oil-rich tyrants or suicide-bombers need to be appeased.

The UNDP Human Index Rankings also expose the myth of Palestinians as the *wretched of the earth*. Of 182 areas surveyed, Palestine is 110, in that ranking which looks at not only income but human well-being in many fields such as literacy and life expectancy.

In its *Medium Human Development* group, Palestine ranks above countries like Indonesia at number 111,
Bolivia at 113,
Vietnam at 116,
Egypt at 123,
South Africa at 129,
Morocco at 130,
India at 134,
Yemen at 140,
Pakistan at 141,
Haiti at 149,
Sudan at 150,
Tanzania at 151, and
Nigeria at 158.

Palestinian Life Expectancy at 73.3 years is same as EU member Hungary, while their Adult Literacy at 93.8% exceeds Philippines at 93.4%. As regards Children Under-weight By Age, it is like Russia where 3% of those are under 5, while Palestinian Incoming Remitances are $149 per head, compared with $150 in Israel, $101 for Egypt, $125 for Arab states overall, and $135 for Ireland.

Odd priorities at work in international aid ?
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Tom Carew via middle-east-analysis.blogspot.com and image via newsone.com

Anne Bayefsky: Behind the story--U.S. Pulls Out Of Durban III

The Liberal Lynch Mob Comes for the Jews Again...

The United Nations and the Goldstone Report:
Where Does It Go From Here?

With President Obama’s anti-Israel hostility becoming an increasing liability for Democrats, the administration finally decided Wednesday to pull out of the U.N.’s upcoming Israel-bashing extravaganza known as “Durban III.” Believe it or not, the notorious U.N. world summit on racism is coming to New York City in September with the purpose of “commemorating” the ten-year anniversary of the racist “anti-racism” conference held in Durban, South Africa in 2001.
Mr. Obama's latest lead-from-behind foreign policy move comes seven months after Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government first declared “we will not be part of this event, which commemorates an agenda that promotes racism rather than combats it.”

The decision appears to be a clear reaction to the negative political fallout surrounding Mr. Obama's recent veiled attempt to shove indefensible borders down Israel’s throat.
During Obama’s speech to the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC on May 22, he specifically referred to his decision not to attend the “Durban II” or “Durban review conference,” which was held in Geneva in 2009. But he made no mention of of U.S. participation in the 2011 Durban III event, though it would have been an ideal audience for such an announcement had he already reached a decision on it.
In 2009 President Obama decided -- just 36 hours before the meeting began -- that there was something wrong with a conference on xenophobia and intolerance headlined by Iranian President Ahmadinejad.
It was a costly delay, which saved the U.N. from even more embarrassment, as many other states would have acted in tandem with the United States and boycotted Durban II with sufficient planning.
Evidently, on May 22 the president still thought he could pull the same dawdling stunt again.
But with Democrats scrambling to recover from the president’s profound alienation of large numbers of voters deeply sympathetic to Israel, the June 1 announcement was made and dressed up as a response to a letter “from Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.” The old letter from last December was actually signed by 9 Democrats, 8 Republicans, and 1 independent, and post-dated a boycott call of the racism summit made by Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in November.
The better-late-than-never decision is not as simple, however, as it seems.
First, the U.N. General Assembly is currently negotiating a resolution on the “modalities” of Durban III. In plain English, there has been a difficult and protracted debate behind-the-scenes about the organization of the summit. The European Union, in particular, is looking for procedural dodges that will help it avoid the split that occurred during Durban II, when some EU states boycotted and others did not.Unfortunately for EU pencil-pushers, there is no escaping that the substance of the meeting is irrevocably poisoned.
By virtue of a 2010 General Assembly resolution, the purpose of Durban III is to celebrate a world conference that reveled in anti-semitism and to adopt a final declaration that reaffirms the original Durban Declaration. That’s the Declaration supposedly to combat racism, xenophobia and related intolerance but that somehow manages to charge just one of the 192 UN members with racism, namely, Israel.
The Obama administration has given no indication that it will encourage EU allies to break ranks and boycott Durban III, by insisting on a vote on this resolution and voting against.
Second, the U.N. Human Rights Council is poised to hold an event in Geneva on June 15 also “in the context of the tenth anniversary of the Durban Declaration.” With the Obama administration on the Council it appears set to attend events over there hoping nobody will notice over here.
But the Council and U.N. High Commissioner Navi Pillay – a native of Durban and chief champion of the Durban Declaration – have planned a three-hour panel discussion featuring seven carefully-selected speakers. They include, for instance, extremist Mireille Fanon-Mendes. As recently as April 25 of this year, Fanon-Mendes told the “Electronic Intifada” that Israel was an apartheid state and she supported the first and second Palestinian intifadas as well as blockade-running flotillas and the international prosecution of Israelis as war criminals.
The Durban illness runs deep. The U.N. human rights system, led by the High Commissioner and Human Rights Council, has perverted the fight against racism into a fight against the Jewish state, a democratic freedom-loving home to more than a million Arabs and a bulwark against the ravages of anti-semitism for all Jews.
Remember that the streets of Durban pulsated with signs reading “for the liberation of Quds, machine guns based on FAITH and ISLAM must be used” and “the martyr’s blood irrigates the tree of revolution in Palestine,” while the gross intolerance inside the Durban meeting halls ended on September 8, 2001. Given the inextricable connection between hate and violence, shunning Durban III on September 22 in New York City just days after the tenth anniversary of 9/11 was a no-brainer.
Now comes the hard part. U.N. demonization of Israel serves to justify Palestinian rejection of negotiations and coexistence, which in turn fuels U.N. support of a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood.
The cycle will only be broken if Palestinians and their U.N. enablers are made to face real consequences for attempting to reap the rewards of hate-mongering.

For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org.
U.S. pulls out of Durban III: Behind the story: This article by Anne Bayefsky appears today on Fox News. via daledamos.blogspot.com

The role of “civil” society in Durban I is best remembered for producing out-of-control NGO mobs. These gangs broke into the one NGO session on combating anti-Semitism, forcing it to end. After threats of violence, they necessitated the closure of the Durban Jewish Community Center, which had been the meeting place for Jewish NGOs attending the conference. They disrupted a press conference of Jewish NGOs who were seeking to raise alarm bells. They required Jewish representatives from all over the world to flee the final session with a police escort because their safety couldn’t be guaranteed if they remained. In the end, the alleged “anti-racism” NGO community deleted from their declaration multiple references to combating anti-Semitism and added that the self-determination of the Jewish people, or Zionism, was a form of racism.

via weeklystandard.com

The United Nations is planning to hold “Durban III” in New York City in September 2011, marking the tenth anniversary of the 2001 Durban conference, and the non-governmental forum which preceded it, held in Durban, South Africa in 2001.

Durban I produced the infamous Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA), which charges Israel with racism but names no other state in the world. Durban II, held in Geneva in April 2009, was headlined by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who saw the occasion as ideal for issuing another denial of the Holocaust and an endorsement of genocide against the Jewish state. Timing Durban III for the annual opening of the General Assembly is meant to guarantee the extensive involvement of presidents and prime ministers, most of whom eluded organizers of Durban I and II.
The U.N. will now be marking the 10th anniversary of Durban I at the same time and place as the 10^th anniversary of September 11, 2001. Durban I, the platform for violent, pro-terrorist, and anti-Semitic rhetoric that included such speakers as Yasser Arafat and Fidel Castro, ended just three days before 9/11.
The intergovernmental working group charged with preparing next year’s commemoration session just wrapped up its first planning meeting in Geneva. It adopted a series of “conclusions and recommendations” and indicated that Durban III is intended to “reaffirm that the DDPA provides the most comprehensive UN framework for combating racism.” The U.N. General Assembly is now occupied with the delicate matter of finalizing “the modalities” of Durban III, and New York-based diplomats are hard at work negotiating the details.

via weeklystandard.com

Swiss freeze funds for pro-Palestinian BADIL

Legislator say BADIL supports ‘worst anti-Semitic propaganda.'

....Holland financing groups
calling for Israel boycott

...and funding Ashraf Ahmad Ghareeb,
the cartoonist who drew the anti-Semitic picture seen above

BERLIN – The Swiss government froze its funding stream for a pro-Palestinian NGO because an anti-Semitic cartoon appeared on its website, according to a report in the Swiss daily Tages-Anzeiger on Wednesday. Switzerland, Holland, Sweden and Denmark, which together fund the NGO Development Center (NDC), have contributed $270,000 since 2008 to BADIL: Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights. “By stopping funding to BADIL, NDC is acknowledging that NGOs sometimes misuse foreign government funding to pursue radical political agendas,” wrote Gerald Steinberg, the head of the Jerusalem-based watchdog organization NGO Monitor, in an e-mail on Saturday to The Jerusalem Post. The cartoon, which was posted in Fall 2010, shows a caricature of a Jewish man holding a blood-soaked pitchfork and keys while standing over a dead Arab child. BADIL, founded in 1998, advocates a boycott, sanctions and divestment (BDS) strategy against the Jewish state. Amjad Audeh, a BADIL spokesman, told Tages- Anzeiger that the publication of the cartoon was a “slip up.” The Swiss government has not ruled out future monies for BADIL. The four EU countries are seeking new conditions from the Bethlehembased organization in order to continue their financial support. According to Steinberg, BADIL is in the middle of a three year, $575,000 grant from the NDC. “They are a leader in the BDS movement, they published an anti-Semitic cartoon on their website and they reject multiple peace initiatives. These actions are clearly out of step with their European funders, and the funding has rightfully been frozen,” Steinberg said. He said an independent public analysis of the “antipeace and anti-human rights NGOs” that are funded by European governments is needed. “The damage done by irresponsible funding under the NDC has been very costly,” Steinberg said. BADIL said a posted text from the Australian Holocaust denier Frederick Töben on its website in 2008 was also an oversight. Theophil Pfister, a member of the Swiss People’s Party in the National parliament, submitted a legislative query about the Swiss funds being used to fund BADIL. Pfister, chairman of the Swiss-Israel parliamentary group, termed the work of BADIL as the “worst anti- Semitic propaganda.” According to an extensive 2006 Eye on the UN report, titled, “The UN-NGO Connection: Spreading the Message of Hate and Terrorism,” BADIL is listed as “advocating the end of the Jewish state” and equating “Zionism with racism.”

via jpost.com

image via eyeontheun.org

Holland financing groups calling for Israel boycott

...'Holland financing groups calling for Israel boycott'
...and funding Ashraf Ahmad Ghareeb,
the cartoonist who drew the anti-Semitic picture seen above.

Dutch FM says he’ll work to stop funding estimated at 10m. euros organizations calling for divestment, boycott, denying Israel's right to exist.
BERLIN – According to a ground-breaking report obtained by The Jerusalem Post last week from The Haguebased Center for Information and Documentation on Israel

(CIDI), the Dutch Foreign Ministry has allocated at least 10 million euros over a five-year period to organizations urging a boycott of Israel.
Uri Rosenthal, the Dutch foreign minister, wrote to CIDI last month, saying “Intervention will occur in cases of organizations acting against Dutch policy.”

The Foreign Ministry under Rosenthal has begun to institute sweeping reforms to stop Dutch charities from funding anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) activities and NGOs that deny Israel’s right to exist. The 15-page CIDI report named Palestinian and Dutch NGOs that were dependent on subsidies from the Dutch Foreign Ministry, including the Ramallah-based NGO Development Center (NDC) and the Interchurch Organization for Development Cooperation (ICCO), Oxfam Novib Cordaid and IKV Pax Christi in the Netherlands. In the letter to CIDI Executive Director Ronny Naftaniel, Rosenthal wrote, “I would like to thank you for drawing my attention to the report by CIDI entitled ‘Dutch government unknowingly funding Israel-boycott and one-state solution initiatives,’ which lists Palestinian NGOs which are active in the Palestinian Territories and which are supported [financially] by the Dutch government. I would like to begin by saying that I share your concerns regarding BDS activities.” The CIDI report said that “one such Palestinian NGO, Badil [the Bethlehem-based Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights], was shown to promote virulent anti-Semitic incitement. The report showed that Badil received $100,000 from a larger Palestinian NGO named NDC, which is heavily funded by the Dutch government. Since 2008, The Hague has allotted no less than $8 million to NDC. “In the framework of a cartoon competition, Badil – which promotes a boycott of Israel – gave in May 2010, $600 to Ashraf Ahmad Ghareeb, the cartoonist who drew the anti-Semitic picture seen above. Following the publication of the CIDI report, Badil removed the link on its website to the picture.” Rosenthal further noted in his letter to Naftaniel, “This message has been conveyed to Palestinian and Israeli partners, the Dutch aid organizations active in the Palestinian Territories and NDC in Ramallah, and during your meeting on March 22, 2011, with the director of the Dutch Foreign Ministry’s North Africa and Middle East department. “The department, the Dutch embassy in Tel Aviv and the Dutch representative office in Ramallah are acutely mindful of the political sensitivities connected to the funding of NGOs operating in Israel and the Palestinian Territories. A meticulous reappraisal of subsidy applicants remains necessary,” Rosenthal said. According to the CIDI report, “Due to lacking transparency standards on the part of most NGOs reviewed, CIDI believes its findings give only a partial view of the true extent of the use of Dutch taxpayer funds for the support of initiatives which contradict the policy of Dutch governments, and which reject peace settlements which observe Israel’s right to exist. “The report focused entirely on such organizations and initiatives. The substantial Dutch funding for the host of organizations that display a merely bias against Israel was not reviewed.” CIDI also noted that its “report gave special attention to a Dutch organization with the misleading name of Plant een Olijf Boom [Plant an Olive Tree]. The study proved that this initiative, which is funded by Cordaid, ICCO and IKV Pax Christi is in fact a front for a Palestinian organization which promotes a boycott of Israel known as JAI [the Joint Advocacy Initiative of the YMCA-YWCA, Jerusalem].” The Dutch ICCO charity – which was revealed last year by the Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor watchdog organization to have funded events by the radical pro-Palestinian website Electronic Intifada (EI) and its Executive Director Ali Abunimah – was also the subject of the CIDI report. NGO Monitor president Prof. Gerald Steinberg told the Post earlier this year that “EI is a leader in the demonization of Israel, including the anti- Semitic BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) campaign, and frequently compares the Israeli military to Nazis. EI executive director Ali Abunimah labels Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad as ‘collaborators,’ and PA participation in peace talks as ‘collaboration.’” CIDI’s new investigation of ICCO showed “that ICCO had more than funded the front office, but actually set up its website, and is possibly paying the salary of the front’s chief coordinator, who is actively involved in boycott promotion.” The northern European countries, said CIDI, are also funding the same NGOs as the Dutch Foreign Ministry. Norway, Denmark, Sweden are key financial providers of anti-Israel groups. Switzerland was also cited by CIDI.
By BENNY WEINTHAL,  JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT 
05/15/2011 03:30 via jpost.com

Leftists Visit, Hug Mother of Fogel Murderer

Nuf Awad on Al-Hayat al-Jadida: 'he couldn't slaughter a chicken'

...Several_ultra-leftist groups organized a visit to the Arab village of Awarta on Saturday,April16,in support of the villagers and against the IDF's activities there in the search for the murderers of Ruth and Rabbi Ehud Fogel and their children Yoav (11), Elad (4) and Hadas (three months).

The leftists visited several homes in the Samaria village, including that of the Awad family, which spawned the murderers. The identities of the confessed murderers were released for publication on Sunday, the day after the visit. The murderers were already in IDF custody at the time of the leftists' visit and their arrest - including the fact that they are relatively young - was already widely rumored and hinted at by the press.

A photograph from the visit which can be viewed here, posted by one of the activists on her Internet blog, shows Raya Yaron, spokeswoman of Machsom Watch, comforting a woman described as being 37 years old and "in a deep depression." The blogger explained in her post that the woman fainted during the leftist women's visit and was distraught over the arrest of her husband, her two sons and a daughter.

The woman is easily recognizable as Nuf Awad, mother of Hakem Awad, whose photograph was featured on the front page of Arab newspaper al-Hayat al-Jadida Monday.

"It is impossible that my son did this," she is quoted by the paper as saying. "My son doesn't know how to slaughter a chicken" (the translation is from the Seventh Eye media-watch website). The two murderers confessed, however, to slaughtering five human beings and investigators reported that they expressed no remorse, and even said that had they realized there were two more children sleeping in the house, they would have killed them as well. They saw no problem in slitting baby Hadas's throat, they explained, since she was a Jew.

Another leftist visitor, Yaakov Manor of the Center for Alternative Information, described the visit thus on the AIC's Hebrew website: 

"The horror that we witnessed at the home of the family of Muhammad Awad cannot be described as anything but a pogrom - a primitive and brutal act of revenge intended to strike fear and awe into the hearts of the residents..."

"The father, Muhammad, 45, the son Majdi, 20, a third year university student, the son Amjad, 19, a freshman university student, and the son Hakem, 17, were arrested."  

At about the same time that Manor wrote the post, a court lifted a gag order and allowed the press to publish the names and photos of the murder suspects. One of them was 17 year old Hakem Awad. The other was his cousin, Amjad Awad, who is apparently not the same Amjad mentioned above as brother of Hakem.

Machsom Watch is a women's group that interferes with soldiers looking for weapons and explosives at checkposts and is a member of the Women's Coalition for Peace. Both are radical groups that espouse a pacifist, anti-religious and anti-Western brand of gender feminism, and both received considerable funding from the New Israel Fund as recently as 2007, according to NGO Monitor. 

Despite allegations of siding with Israel's enemies, the New Israel Fund is still perceived as a legitimate body by many liberals in Israel and outside it.

As reported on Arutz Sheva, Israel Online Ambassadors said Sunday that these leftist groups had crossed a red  line. “The time has come to make leftist groups that support murderers illegal. Whoever supports baby killers has no place in a democratic society,” the group said in a statement.

via israelnationalnews.com

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Obama’s U.N. Debacle: The Obama administration’s big hopes of reforming the Human Rights Council from within are in shreds

(NRO) President Obama’s decision to place the United Nations at the center of his foreign policy took another hit Friday as the U.N. Human Rights Council ended its latest session in Geneva. One of the president’s primary justifications for joining the notorious council shortly after he assumed office was its mandatory five-year review process; if the U.S. was a member, the administration claimed, it could influence this process. The process, which quietly unfolded in back rooms in Geneva over the past six months, has been exposed to be a total fraud, taking the administration’s cover down with it.
Starting last fall, the Obama team was a very active participant in a working group of the council that had been set up to tackle reform. At the end of February, the working group produced a document summarizing its decisions, and on Friday the council passed a resolution adopting that document by consensus — that is, without a vote. Regardless of the fact that every serious recommendation of the United States was rejected, Obama’s diplomats refused to call for a vote on the resolution so that they could vote against it.
They did play a little game intended to fool uninformed listeners by claiming to “dissociate” the administration from the resolution. However, since the resolution has been adopted by consensus, it will proceed unimpeded to the General Assembly, where it will be rubber-stamped. The U.S. could not have stopped the resolution, but an American vote against the measure would have been a major blow to the credibility of the Human Rights Council. It also would have set up the U.S. to leave the council as a logical consequence of the failure to reform it.
The slap in the face to President Obama is painfully clear from a short list of American demands for reform and the council’s responses.
The council has an official, permanent agenda that governs all its meetings and consists of only ten items. One of those items is reserved for condemning Israel, and another is assigned to human rights in the other 191 U.N. member states. This session, for instance, produced six resolutions condemning Israel, one resolution each on four other states, and nothing at all on the remaining 187 countries. The American delegation huffed and puffed that this obvious discrimination — which characterizes every meeting of the council — must come to an end, and proposed that the two agenda items be rolled into one. The proposal was rejected.
The American delegation proposed creating easier trigger mechanisms for convening special sessions on specific countries when serious human-rights concerns arise. The proposal was rejected.
The American delegation proposed abolishing the council’s make-work “Advisory Committee.” It is currently populated by such human-rights luminaries as former Sandinista leader and suspended priest Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann. (Brockmann once served as president of the U.N. General Assembly and is best remembered for a series of anti-Semitic outbursts and for coming down off his podium to hug Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.) The proposal was rejected.
The American delegation proposed making public pre-screened complaints of gross and systematic violations of human rights that are received by the council. Specific cases, which have poured into the U.N. for over half a century from poor souls around the world, have never been revealed. The proposal was rejected.
The American delegation proposed expanding the time allocated to discussions of abuses in specific countries. The proposal was rejected.
The American delegation proposed that states running for a seat on the council should engage in a public dialogue with General Assembly members on their human-rights record, as measured by specific criteria. The proposal was rejected.
In all, the U.N. reports that 42 proposals were put forward by the American delegation orally and in writing. Only three were accepted. Those three addressed minutiae. For instance, the Obama team proposed allowing all states that wish to speak during the council’s “universal periodic review” (UPR) to be permitted to do so. The UPR is the procedure in which the council considers the human-rights record of every state, but the council tightly controls the time spent on each country. Council members are allotted three minutes’ and non-members two minutes’ worth of comments, regardless of the scope of the issues. Since the total time is fixed, would-be commentators are frequently silenced by ending up too low on the speakers’ list. The “reform” that was proposed and accepted? Keep the total time the same and reduce the allotted time per speaker. Thirty-second critiques of human-rights abuses, here we come.
Instead of admitting their complete inability to accomplish their mission of reforming the council, however, Obama’s representatives are scrambling to sweep the disaster under the rug. Admitting their error would no doubt strike at the heart of the president’s U.N. chorus line.

via eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Guardian approved anti-Semitic cartoonist, Carlos Latuff, graces the halls of UN Human Rights Council

At a recent session of the UN Human Rights Council a UN-accredited NGO with terrorist affiliations (IHH) distributed a publication containing the following picture:

This image (published during the flotilla incident in June) – of a demonic Israel, with the swastika substituted for the star of David on the Israeli flag, as an octopus strangling freedom-loving innocents – was created by the notorious anti-Semitic cartoonist Carlos Latuff.
Latuff is an extreme left-wing political activist who won second place in the notorious Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Competition, and is one of the more prolific anti-Israel cartoonists on the web, with a staggering amount of work dedicated to advancing explicitly anti-Semitic political imagery  - and frequently illustrates comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany.
(Also, of note, a regular blogger at the site, Mondoweiss, posted, in early June, the very same “Octopus” cartoon shown above.)
As we noted previously, Latuff’s work has been posted on various radical left websites and blogs, as well as several terrorist affiliated websites such as ‘The Islamic Front for the Iraqi Resistance’ (JAMI) magazine.
So Latuff’s hateful depictions have been employed by quite a wide range of extremists: the anti-Zionist Jewish left, radical Islamist NGOs, and even publications of Islamist terrorist movements.
Latuff is also the same “artist” published by the Guardian during their “Palestine Papers” series to depict Mahmoud Abbas as a gun-toting sinister-looking Orthodox Jewish “settler”, to advance the view that Abbas was a traitor for allegedly showing a willingness to make concessions with Israel – a cartoon which reinforced the abhorrent pejorative depictions of Orthodox Jews used frequently in anti-Semitic caricatures throughout the Middle East.



Here’s Latuff’s Tweet of the cartoon:

The Guardian sure keeps very interesting company.

via cifwatch.com

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

JCC Watch rips JCC of the Upper West Side

For those of you wondering why the
JCC logo has been censored, go here.

At a press conference in New York on Sunday, JCC Watch ripped the JCC of the Upper West Side of Manhattan for cooperating with organizations that promote boycott, divestiture and sanctions (BDS) against Israel.

The JCC of the Upper West Side, notes the watchdog group, is a beneficiary agency of the UJA-Federation. BDS was launched in 2005 by various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which seek to demonize, delegitimize, and ultimately destroy Israel by the spread of misinformation, incitement, and promotion of various boycotts.
In a news conference held Sunday afternoon in front of the JCC offices, JCC Watch reported that the organization is partnering with a number of pro-BDS organizations.
Among those listed were the leftist organizations New Israel Fund, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, and J Street.
JCC Watch founder Richard Allen called on the JCC board of directors to establish public and transparent guidelines regarding BDS.
“It’s time that the board of directors of the JCC in Manhattan take action. It’s simple: all they have to do is stop supporting groups that partner with, fund, or support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel,” Allen said.

read more via israelmatzav.blogspot.com

I know the rabbi of that JCC. I had my Bar Mitzvah at a Reconstructionist Synagogue called B'nai Keshet in Montclair NJ.  Joy Levitt is a very sick woman. this is not political for me. this is personal.
Joy had me thrown out of Hebrew school at B'nai Keshet ...if I remember correctly. I drew a picture of my teacher when I was 13 years old. for the record I was wrong... and it wasn't a female teacher it was a male teacher, but I was 13 years old. I had to train for my Bar Mitzvah with the Orthodox because the Reconstructionist synagogue would not allow me to go to Hebrew school. These women are out to hurt Western men. It is their agenda. The girls are coddled and groomed and the boys are given hairy eyeballs. I have pictures of girls dancing with each other at my Bar Mitzvah party. at the time it didn't mean anything to me. now I realize they were reinforcing Anti-Social behavior. Very few of the kids still talk to each other. Just about every girl who was in my Bar Mitzvah class is now a lesbian. The one straight girl there in my class was known to be promiscuous. when they elected Obama president... it felt like Montclair NJ started running the government. I used to get beat up by black kids and my parents would take me to a shrink and the guy would say... "you don't know how to read people". yeah right... I read the hate just fine

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

BDS sewer system

This week (actually it's two weeks - from March 7-20) is 'Israel Apartheid Week' on college campuses around the world. 'Israel Apartheid Week' is designed to depict Israel as an apartheid state and to promote the BDS (boycott, divest, sanction) movement against Israel.
To help college students respond to 'Israel Apartheid Week,' NGO Monitor has mapped out the BDS sewer system (pictured above). Here are more details about it.

The “Sewer System” responds to the needs of Israel advocates, especially on college campuses, representatives from NGO Monitor said. “Students and faculty need accurate and relevant information to combat Israeli Apartheid Week and other delegitimization campaigns they face on campus,” says Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor, a research institution that tracks NGOs. “IAW essentially is a series of ‘mini-Durban’ events – based on the strategy adopted at the 2001 Durban Conference that exploits human rights language to isolate and demonize Israel. This “Sewer System” map details and explains the complex network of non-governmental organization (NGOs) and their funders that lead this campaign. Most importantly, it is a tool for students to demonstrate the illiberal and ‘anti-human rights’ nature of the movements they face on campus.”
...
The Sewer System analysis presents a visual, connecting network of pipes between funders, NGOs, and tactics that sustain the BDS movement, NGO Monitor explained. Explanations are provided for each aspect of the movement, including the Durban Strategy, the history of BDS, and how this information can effectively be used.
The graphic of the Sewer System depicts the European Union, various governments, foundations and religious charities as providing the incentives and funds for NGOs, who then spread their ideas through mainstream, fringe, unionized and church group outlets.
“In some instances, the funders share the anti-Israel political agendas of their grantees,” the literature reads. “In others, the governmental and private sources assign funds ostensibly to promote human rights, humanitarian aid, democracy and civil society. However, NGOs divert this support to bolster BDS activity and pursue their own political agendas. Due to an absence of strict guidelines, oversight, accountability and evaluations of decision making, the funding continues year after year.”

Read the whole thing.

via israelmatzav.blogspot.com

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

EXPOSED: Sarah Leah Whitson, the head of 'Human Rights Watch

NGO Monitor has called on Sarah Leah Whitson, the head of 'Human Rights Watch's Mideast and North Africa division, to resign, on the grounds that she misled the public regarding the nature of the Gadhafi regime in Libya and the intentions of Gadhafi's son, Seif al-Islam.

Following Human Rights Watch's (HRW) neglect of brutal human rights violations in Libya and false claims and cover-ups about prospects for reforms there, NGO Monitor today called for the immediate resignation of Sarah Leah Whitson, HRW's director of its Middle East and North Africa (MENA) division. HRW's MENA division failed to devote the necessary resources to speaking out against human rights violations by oppressive Middle East regimes, including Saudi Arabia, Hamas, Lebanon, and most notably, Libya. Recent statements by Whitson regarding Seif Islam, a son of Moammar Qaddafi, demonstrate that she consistently whitewashed the reality in Libya and further embarrassed her organization.
"Human Rights Watch, and specifically MENA director Sarah Leah Whitson, has soft-peddled Qaddafi's oppressive acts and offered no help to the Libyan people," says Anne Herzberg, legal advisor for NGO Monitor, a research institution that tracks NGOs. "Whitson was well aware of the atrocities committed by the Qaddafi regime, but she chose to present the façade that Qaddafi's son was prepared to implement 'reforms.' The events in Libya over the past weeks reveal Whitson's gross incompetence. She has failed to retract her previously misleading statements. She cannot continue to head the MENA division, and we call for her immediate resignation."
NGO Monitor notes that Whitson held a press conference last year in Libya that was abruptly halted and ended in "pandemonium." Yet, Whitson spun her trip and the event in a positive light in her 2010 "Postcard from Tripoli," in which she said that Libya had a "moment of opportunity." Even more egregious is Whitson's enthusiastic marketing of the Qaddafi regime from 2009's Tripoli Spring (published in Foreign Policy):

For the first time in memory, change is in the air in Libya. The brittle atmosphere of repression has started to fracture, giving way to expanded space for discussion and debate, proposals for legislative reform, and even financial compensation for families of the hundreds of men killed in a prison riot a decade ago.
Many Libyans say the changes were unavoidable in the face of the open satellite and Internet access of the past decade.

These assessments differ sharply from the Libya Whitson now admits she saw, as part of her attempts to rewrite the record. In contrast to the earlier fiction, she recently wrote "most Libyans we spoke with never had much faith that Moammar Qaddafi would learn new tricks, or that the announced reforms were anything more than an endless loop of promises made and broken."
"What Sarah Leah Whitson admits she knew about the Qaddafi family's fraudulent reform agenda completely contradicts statements during her Tripoli trip," says Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor. "Reform was never on the horizon and Seif Islam was simply seeking to validate the eventual transfer of power to his hands, using allies like Whitson. Her attempts to give a facelift to MENA's treatment of Libya is indicative of the division's approach to many of the repressive regimes in the region, including Saudi Arabia, Syria, Hamas, and others."

Maybe Whitson was just trying to raise money from the Libyans. She's really good at that.
Read the whole thing.

via israelmatzav.blogspot.com

Another Feminist BITES THE DUST!

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Out of Context... but that is the point.  EXPOSED in a good way.  NOT in a stinky globalist way image via Daniel Ortega Muñoz