Showing posts with label Amnesty International. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Amnesty International. Show all posts

After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks

Labels: » » » »
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) (news.yahoo.com) Hours after U.S. President Barack Obama was re-elected, the United States backed a U.N. committee's call on Wednesday to renew debate over a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade.
U.N. delegates and gun control activists have complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as supporting the pact, a charge Washington denies.
The month-long talks at U.N. headquarters broke off after the United States - along with Russia and other major arms producers - said it had problems with the draft treaty and asked for more time.
But the U.N. General Assembly's disarmament committee moved quickly after Obama's win to approve a resolution calling for a new round of talks March 18-28. It passed with 157 votes in favor, none against and 18 abstentions.
U.N. diplomats said the vote had been expected before Tuesday's U.S. presidential election but was delayed due to Superstorm Sandy, which caused a three-day closure of the United Nations last week.
An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.
"We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.
"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.
U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.
The main reason the arms trade talks are taking place at all is that the United States - the world's biggest arms trader accounting for more than 40 percent of global conventional arms transfers - reversed U.S. policy on the issue after Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.
'MONTHS AWAY' FROM DEAL?
Countries that abstained included Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Sudan, Belarus, Cuba and Iran. China, a major arms producer that has traditionally abstained, voted in favor.
Among the top six arms-exporting nations, Russia cast the only abstention. Britain, France and Germany joined China and the United States in support of the resolution.
The measure now goes to the 193-nation General Assembly for a formal vote. It is expected to pass.
The resolution said countries are "determined to build on the progress made to date towards the adoption of a strong, balanced and effective Arms Trade Treaty."
Jeff Abramson, director of Control Arms, a coalition of advocacy groups, urged states to agree on stringent provisions.
"In Syria, we have seen the death toll rise well over 30,000, with weapons and ammunition pouring in the country for months now," he said. "We need a treaty that will set tough rules to control the arms trade, that will save lives and truly make the world a better place."
Brian Wood of Amnesty International said: "After today's resounding vote, if the larger arms trading countries show real political will in the negotiations, we're only months away from securing a new global deal that has the potential to stop weapons reaching those who seriously abuse human rights."
The treaty would require states to make respecting human rights a criterion for allowing arms exports.
Britain's U.N. mission said on its Twitter feed it hoped that the March negotiations would yield the final text of a treaty. Such a pact would then need to be ratified by the individual signatories before it could enter into force.
The National Rifle Association, the powerful U.S. interest group, strongly opposes the arms treaty and had endorsed Romney.
The United States has denied it sought to delay negotiations for political reasons, saying it had genuine problems with the draft as written.
(Editing by Xavier Briand)

Updated: Bulgarian press names bomber: Mehdi Ghezali

Labels: » » » »
(challahhuakbar) in January, Bulgaria tried to hush reports that suggested that Jews and Israelis were being targeted in the country. According to Haaretz, “Several internet sites in Bulgaria reports that government authorities ignored warnings and alerts by Israeli and Russian sources over a possible attack.”
note: we don't know is Ghezali was the killer yet. There is a lot of disinfo right now
Media_httpcdntimesofi_pgeaa(timesofisrael.com)Terrorist said to have been a Swedish citizen with a history of Muslim extremist activities. Ghezali was reportedly a Swedish citizen, with Algerian and Finnish origins. He had been held at the US’s Guantanamo Bay detainment camp on Cuba from 2002 to 2004, having previously studied at a Muslim religious school and mosque in Britain, and traveled to Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. He was also reportedly among 12 foreigners captured trying to cross into Afghanistan in 2009.(weeklystandard.com)In late 2001, Ghezali, a Swedish national, had been detained during the battle at Tora Bora, Afghanistan, handed over to the American military, and sent to the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay. According to his lawyers, he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Although he spoke none of the local languages, Ghezali told his captors, in the midst of the Taliban's retreat into the mountainous hinterlands of Afghanistan, he had crossed that country's border with Pakistan to study Islam.After an intense lobbying effort by Swedish prime minister Göran Persson--and a vague promise that the country's intelligence services would keep a watchful eye on him--Ghezali was delivered to Sweden (on the government's private Gulfstream jet). The Swedish daily (Dagens Nyhete) noted that Ghezali had achieved "rock star status" upon returning to his homeland, a native victim of America's rapacious imperialism. And after two-plus years in isolation, the emotionally fragile former prisoner would be happy to discover "that a majority of Swedes were glad that he was home."



The five Israelis killed in Wednesday’s terror attack are Amir Menashe, 27; Itzik Kolengi, 27; Maor Harush, 26; Elior Priess, 26 and Kochava Shriki, 42, Israel announced Thursday evening.
The five fatalities from the attack were set to be flown home on Thursday evening. A ceremony was being planned for their arrival, with Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov set to represent the government.
(Israel releases the names of the five victims of the Burgas terror attack | The Times of Israel)

Amnesty's mendacious use of language to demonize Israel

Labels:
Media_http2bpblogspot_jjmqg(EOZ(h/t Erik)) Amnesty International has published another broadside against Israel, this one in Huffington Post. It lists a long line of supposed Israeli crimes, without giving sources.
Here is just the first sentence:

As the Quartet celebrates the resumption of bilateral negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians in Jordan this month, a record number of Palestinians find themselves out in the cold this winter due to illegal home demolitions by Israeli authorities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
Lets examine this sentence.
Its main point - repeated in its press release from December, released along with some twenty other NGOs - is that "a record number of Palestinians " are displaced.
What is this record number?

The figures show that since the beginning of 2011 more than 500 Palestinian essential structures were destroyed in the OPT, with over 1,000 Palestinians displaced -- doubling the number displaced over the same period in 2010, and the highest figure since at least 2005.
Amnesty's definition of a "record" is apparently "the most in the last seven years." That is not what the word "record" means.
And note that they aren't saying 500 homes, but 500 "essential structures." These include illegally built wells - wells that threaten the entire region's water supply. Amnesty is claiming that Palestinian Arabs have the right to damage everyone's access to water, and Israel has no right to stop them in territory they define as "occupied."
But if Israel is occupying the territory, as Amnesty claims, then Israel's responsibility is precisely to administer natural resources according to the Hague Convention - which presumably includes water.
Certainly, under the laws of occupation, Israel would be obligated to continue applying Jordanian law that applied to the areas before 1967, and it seems difficult to believe that Jordan did not enforce any zoning laws in the territory it occupied or that it tolerated the wanton illegal construction of housing. Amnesty pointedly does not address that issue - can any (Arab) who desires build anywhere they want in occupied territory?
Now, are the people who previously lived in these illegal structures out in the cold? Are they homeless? The NGOs give no evidence in that regard. This is Amnesty's hyperbole meant to demonize Israel and they have no basis in fact.
The real fact is that in 2011, the Palestinian Authority built or was expected to build 33,822 dwelling units. In just that one year. Israeli "record demolitions" are less than one percent of the total new construction last year. (In fact, the PA constructed more new units than Israelis did -not in the territories, but in Israel itself!)
And yet again, Amnesty - along with the UN and every other NGO - refers to the territories as "Occupied Palestinian Territories."
When international law scholar Eugene Kontorovich spoke at NYU last month, I asked him a question afterwards about Jordanian and Palestinian Arab claims to the West Bank. He stated:

If you think that the competing claims to the West Bank are Israel and its previous occupant, Jordan, then you would think that Israel would enjoy undisturbed title, and then this group of Palestinians organized themselves to challenge that title, it would have to be  a retroactive challenge, which is the difficulty of it.
When Newt Gingrich said that the Palestinians were an "invented people," he was much criticized. Some people said, and I think quite rightly, that even if they are invented, it doesn't really matter, because you can invent a people - people can be invented. If a group of people decide to think of themselves as a nation, that can actually have real force. Who's to stop a people from inventing themselves?
I completely agree with that. There is nothing wrong with being an invented people; every people is in some sense invented.
The only question is: what's the date of that invention? If it is a post-'67 phenomenon, it seems hard to understand how that can make territory, whose status changed in 1967, "Palestinian Territory" retroactively.
I have never seen any real legal opinion that describes exactly how Palestinian Arabs can be described as the presumed legal owners of the West Bank. As with the UN, Amnesty seems to be using the term "Occupied Palestinian Territories" as a catchphrase, without any legal basis. It has become part of the discourse based on repetition and wishful thinking, not based on fact. Calling Area C and perhaps Area B "occupied" is defensible from a legal standpoint, but not calling them "Occupied Palestinian Territory."
This single sentence in the Huffington Post shows four separate examples of how Amnesty is less interested in truth than in demonizing Israel. For people who believe that Amnesty is the paragon of impartiality, this should be troubling indeed.

Amnesty urges Canada to arrest and prosecute George W. Bush

Labels: » »
Somehow I don't think Amnesty International is going to be watching the World Series
From Amnesty International: 12 October 2011...Amnesty International today urged Canadian authorities to arrest and either prosecute or extradite former US President George W. Bush for his role in torture, ahead of his expected visit to Canada on 20 October.
“Canada is required by its international obligations to arrest and prosecute former President Bush given his responsibility for crimes under international law including torture,” said Susan Lee, Americas Director at Amnesty International.
“As the US authorities have, so far, failed to bring former President Bush to justice, the international community must step in. A failure by Canada to take action during his visit would violate the UN Convention against Torture and demonstrate contempt for fundamental human rights.” A failure by Canada to arrest former President Bush demonstrates contempt for human rights?
I have never seen Amnesty urge any Western nation to arrest Mahmoud Abbas, whose Palestinian Authority has been found to - surprise! - torture prisoners. Similarly, I cannot find any Amnesty calls to arrest leaders of Hamas or other terror groups. (Egypt, for example, is a signatory to the Convention Against Torture and Amnesty did not urge Egypt to arrest any Palestinian Arab terrorist or political leader responsible for torture when they are in its territory.)
Amnesty, it will be remembered, has defended a supporter of the Taliban as a "human rights defender" and suspended an employee who disagreed.
If anyone needed any more evidence of the twisted priorities of Amnesty International, this pretty much seals the deal.
(h/t CHA, Daled Amos and EOZ
I have my differences with G W Bush myself (for the opposite reasons)... but I find this amusing. It is awesome to see how far gone this organization is. It was rather recently that I merely disagreed with them, but still respected them... after all I used to like some of the songs by U2 and Bono... and The Chocolate War (which is dedicated to Amnesty International) is one of my favorite movies. It was with great pain that I disagreed with this group... but the more the facts came out, the more I realized that Amnesty International was beyond the pale.

Shalit Agreement Shows Moral Failure of International Human Rights Frameworks

Labels: » » » » » » » »
(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.

Amnesty seizes on Palmer's criticism of Israel, ignores rest of report

Labels: » »
video
To its credit, the Netanyahu government has not accepted the advice of the Left and has refused to apologize to Turkey or pay compensation to the families of those killed aboard the Marmara. Moreover, the government has wisely used Turkey's behavior as a means of building strong bilateral ties with other victims of Turkish aggression. Over the past two years, Israel has strongly upgraded is strategic ties with Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Romania. Israel should add to these accomplishments by strengthening its ties to Armenia and to the Kurds of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.
Amnesty International has come out with their comments on the Palmer Report. Curiously, they are only on video. What is not surprising is:



  • They seize on the one relatively small part of the report critical of Israel and completely ignore the other parts of the report - including those critical of Turkey and the flotilla organizers.




  • They do not address, at all, the parts of the report that completely contradict Amnesty's own legal reasonings.




  • They continue to call the Turkel report a "whitewash" even though the Palmer report was much closer to the Turkel report in most important matters, and Turkel himself recommended that the testimony of soldiers be made public - the exact opposite of a "whitewash."




  • They never responded to Turkel's not Palmer's, extensive legal arguments.

  • Truth does not seem to be what Amnesty is interested in. - EOZ
    I'm sure you are tired of me pointing this out again... but I don't understand why anyone would call the behavior of the IDF excessive when they showed up on the ship with paint guns and only switched to bullets when there was serious violence on the ship. One of the IDF soldiers had his ear cut off. What was excessive at that juncture? defending your life is excessive? One thing the Palmer Report pointed out was that the blockade was legal... (of course that was just ignored by Amnesty above), but if the blockade was really found to be legal then why didn't anyone in the world flinch when Turkey announced that their Navy would give a military escort to the next flotilla? If the blockade is legal then the threat of a military escort is an act of war. Instead of this game of smoke and mirrors, Amnesty is going to have to owe up to some reality sooner or later because there are unbiased third parties and they will lose the ear of these people. The photos and video from the flotilla are hard to obscure. There is a limit to how much spin you can put on the event. You would think that Israel's enemies would be well advised to move on to the next event, because logic leads to proof of Israel's righteousness on the flotilla issue. Turkey thinks the blockade's legality is an opinion, but sea law just doesn't work that way. What does sound opinionated is when soldiers show up on a hostile ship with paint guns and are attacked by people out of Quentin Tarentino film with actions like cutting an IDF soldier's ear off... and then Amnesty and the UN call the IDF's response excessive. I sometimes think this is all just designed to piss us off for the sake of controversy... and possibly if we ignore it... it will just go away, because the claims are so hypocritical that one might think it is all jesting.

    unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial involved with Amnesty International event.

    Labels: » » » » » » » » » »
    Americanhaters
    Amnesty International is hosting an event on May 23 entitled “Complicity in Oppression: Does the Media Aid Israel?” which is being co-organized by the openly Islamist group, MEMO. 
    Per Israelinurse:
    Daoud Abdullah, who is the director of MEMO as well as deputy secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and a senior researcher for the Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Palestinian Return Centre, has two major claims to fame. The first is his lead of the MCB’s boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day in the UK. The second is his signing of the Istanbul Declaration which potentially endorsed terrorism against British service personnel.
    Senior editor of MEMO is Ibrahim Hewitt, who also heads ‘Interpal’ – the charity which has been the subject of three investigations by the Charity Commission and named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial in the United States, as well as having been banned in Israel because of its Hamas connections.
    That Amnesty would even consider hosting an event organized by such extremists is highly disturbing and, as with their alliance with Moazzam Begg, a supporter of the Taliban, demonstrates how far the once respected international human rights group  has fallen. 
    We ask that you consider signing the following petition asking Amnesty to cancel the event. 
    http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/tell-amnesty-no-to-the-memo-event/2829
    H/T Harry’s Place
    As Israelinurse noted previouslyimage via bokertov.typepad.com

    via cifwatch.com

    Human Rights Watch and the selling of Gaddafi

    Labels: » » » » » » » » » » » » »

    Gerald Steinberg and Anne Herzberg March 10, 2011 Jerusalem Post

    To read the original article, click here.

    In 2009, Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch (HRW), visited Libya, where she claimed to have discovered a “Tripoli spring,” led by Muammar Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam. In two articles, she praised him for creating an “expanded space for discussion and debate.”
    As a top official of a prominent human rights watchdog, Whitson’s endorsement gave credibility to this fictitious reform movement. Two years later, and weeks after the rebellion began and the Gaddafi regime had killed hundreds, if not thousands, Whitson belatedly reversed course, and in a February 24 Los Angeles Times op-ed acknowledged the façade of Saif’s human rights “reforms.”
    In contrast to her earlier praise, Whitson wrote that “most Libyans we spoke with never had much faith that Muammar Gaddafi would learn new tricks, or that the announced reforms were anything more than an endless loop of promises made and broken.”
    Clearly, this reversal came far too late to help the Libyans, and reflects the wider moral failure of HRW in the Middle East. In her wildly misnamed “Tripoli Spring,” (Foreign Policy, May 27, 2009), Whitson extolled Saif – who has since vowed to “fight until the last man, the last woman, the last bullet” against the Libyan protesters – as “the real impetus for transformation” via his Gaddafi Foundation and two semi-private papers.
    Her embrace continued after a second visit in December 2009, when she referred to Gaddafi’s heir-apparent as one of the “forces of reform,” comparing his foundation to HRW (“Postcard from... Tripoli,” Foreign Policy in Focus, February, 11, 2010). Although HRW officials were placed under constant surveillance, and its press conference was cut short by government agents and ended in “pandemonium,” Whitson still spun her trip in a positive light.
    In January 2010, when the regime imposed censorship on the Internet and blocked access to YouTube, Whitson was silent. At the same time, the government established a body to monitor journalists, and closed the two semi-private papers lauded by Whitson in “Tripoli Spring.”
    But no correction was issued by HRW.
    Whitson’s blindness was further reflected in the case of Fathi Eljahmi, Libya’s most prominent dissident, imprisoned, tortured and killed in 2009. His brother condemned both Amnesty International and HRW for hesitating “to advocate publicly for Fathi’s case” for fear they would “antagonize Gaddafi.”
    He reserved special condemnation for Whitson’s reference to Saif ’s charity as a “spring,” observing that the foundation “is actively menacing my brother’s family. Some family members continue to endure interrogation, denial of citizenship papers and passports, round-the- clock surveillance and threats of rape and physical liquidation.”
    But Whitson and HRW chose to remain silent.
    In contrast to Whitson’s promotion of the “reformer” façade, others were not taken in. Journalist Michael Totten, who also visited Libya, compared the country to North Korea and Turkmenistan, pointedly noting that Saif “is ideologically committed to preserving his father’s prison state system... Gullible diplomats and journalists may sincerely believe he’s a reformer, but a close look at his own statements proves that he’s lying when he passes himself off as moderate.”
    Whitson’s endorsement of Gaddafi’s son is not the only example of her cozying up to repressive regimes. In May 2009, Whitson led a fund-raising trip to Saudi Arabia where she marketed HRW’s work combating pro- Israel “pressure groups” to solicit funds from “prominent members of Saudi society” including the ruling Shura Council (the religious police).
    In May 2010, Whitson had a meeting with Hamas Minister of Justice Faraj Alghoul. As in the Libyan and Saudi cases, Whitson took the soft approach to massive human-rights violations. Instead, she assured Alghoul that she was visiting Gaza “to listen to all parties directly so she will prepare more objective and impartial reports,” and promised that HRW’s next report would allege Israeli violations of international law.
    Beirut was next on Whitson’s itinerary, and during a November 2010 trip she praised “the Lebanese sophistication for human rights.”
    In contrast, HRW Lebanon director Nadim Houry condemned the lack of effectual and accountable state institutions, and the absence of political will to implement change. Two months after Whitson’s proclamation of support, Hezbollah took control of the government to block cooperation with the UN tribunal investigating the murder of prime minister Rafik Hariri in 2006.
    In each of these cases – Libya, Saudi Arabia, Gaza and Lebanon – Whitson has displayed behavior completely lacking in moral leadership required for any organization claiming to support human rights. In addition, copying the strategy of the Arab dictatorships, year after year HRW has maintained an obsessive focus on allegations directed at Israel. Its website includes only 10 pages on Libya, but more than 40 on Israel.
    As HRW founder Robert Bernstein stressed, the “plight of 350 million people” ruled by the most “brutal, closed and autocratic” regimes, “who would most benefit from the kind of attention a large and well-financed international human-rights organization can provide is being ignored as Human Rights Watch’s Middle East division prepares report after report on Israel.”
    As long as ideologues like Whitson are responsible for HRW’s agenda in the Middle East, the spin will continue, at the expense of universal human rights.
    Gerald Steinberg is on the faculty of Bar-Ilan University and president of NGO Monitor, the Jerusalem-based research organization. Anne Herzberg is NGO Monitor’s legal adviser.

    BONO supports a song calling for white farmers to be murdered

    Labels: » » »
    when musicians get a big head from their politics is when their music usually starts to suck.
    (Really... killing white people isn't cool... it isn't moral.)
    Bono’s dogooderism doesn’t apply to white farmers in South Africa.
    Think about what you are supporting when you give money to ‘Live Aid’.
    Bono cares. He really, really cares.
    Could Bono tell us the right context for advocating racial murder?


    (Andrew Bolt has videos you should watch!)

    Irish pop singer Bono caused a stir in South Africa on Sunday after expressing support for the singing of an anti-apartheid struggle song that includes the lyrics “shoot the farmer”…
    The U2 frontman, who is in Johannesburg ahead of a Sunday night concert for the band’s 360 Degrees Tour, said in an interview with South Africa’s Sunday Times that struggle music like the “shoot the farmer” song has a place.
    “I was a kid and I’d sing songs I remember my uncles singing… rebel songs about the early days of the Irish Republican Army,” he said, proceeding to sing a song whose lyrics spoke of carrying guns and readying them for action.
    “We sang this and it’s fair to say it’s folk music… as this was the struggle of some people that sang it over some time,” he told the newspaper.
    But the rocker went on to say such songs shouldn’t be sung in the wrong context…
    “It’s about where and when you sing those songs. There’s a rule for that kind of music.”
    Boner probably likes the right-on communist roots of the song. Or perhaps he thinks the 3000 murdered farmers deserved it.
    BONO is a disgusting man. murder is not justified. the Boer are facing a genocide.
    the ANC are all about identity politics. identity politics is all about attacking the other. The Nazis understood all about this... they were the poor and oppressed and the Jews were all bankers to them. it just doesn't change... we just make hate acceptable in the new context of leftism and feminism.

    He isn't just a frontman for U2... he is a frontman for Amnesty International and their bias

    Columbia University's New Center For Palestine Studies

    Labels: » » »
    The October launch of Columbia University’s Center for Palestine Studies (CPS), the first institution at an American university specifically dedicated to the study of Palestinian Arabs, received surprisingly little notice.
    here are signs that politics have already infiltrated the CPS. Take, for example, the fact that Joseph Massad (the professor accused of bullying students in 2004) is associated with the center. Massad’s body of work is a postmodern mash-up of high-minded critical theory and base innuendo. His book Desiring Arabs theorizes that homosexuality is a western construct that imperial powers imposed upon the Middle East and that a “gay international” cabal (consisting of groups like Amnesty International and the Human Rights Campaign) uses the rhetoric of minority rights to unfairly vilify Muslim regimes.
    Columbia University seems to have become infested with parasites. It is almost every other post is about the place's flaws. obviously the campus is very ill. I wouldn't send my child there. I believe they even were getting donations from Iran through the Alawi Foundation recently.

    Soros’s Anti-Human-Rights Agenda - Anne Bayefsky

    Labels: » » » » » »

    Why, then, did George Soros deem it worthy of the largest gift he has ever made?
    Because Soros has recognized what Republicans ignore at their peril — namely, the power of human-rights claims, legitimate or not.
    Soros, logged as one of President Obama’s frequent White House guests, appreciates that a human-rights mantra, particularly when amplified with the U.N.’s global megaphone, is a formidable tool for manipulating public policy. A tool, mind you, and not a principle.
    noahdavidsimon's posterous

    ...Soros’s acquisition of Human Rights Watch, coupled with his legendary support of the Democratic party and the United Nations, creates the perfect storm. He has brought together the unelected, unaccountable NGO claiming to represent “civil society,” the Democratic party and its sitting president, and the world’s chief global organization, each supportive of the others in a plethora of financial and personal interrelationships, and all sharing common goals: diminishing American power and mothballing the idea of unadulterated universal values. 

    Solomonia: Salman Rushdie Criticizes Amnesty International

    Labels: »

    Rushdie has become the latest to speak publicly about Amnesty's difficulties: Salman Rushdie: Amnesty International is morally bankrupt
    THE Booker prize-winning author Salman Rushdie has accused Amnesty International of "moral bankruptcy" for working with a former terror suspect from Britain.
    Rushdie, whose plight was championed by Amnesty when he was placed under a fatwa by the Iranian regime for his novel The Satanic Verses, said the charity had done "incalculable damage" to its reputation by collaborating with Moazzam Begg, a former inmate of Guantanamo Bay, and his organisation Cageprisoners.
    His accusation follows the suspension this month of Gita Sahgal, a senior Amnesty official, who raised concerns about the organisation's links to Begg and Islamists.
    "It looks very much as if Amnesty's leadership is suffering from a kind of moral bankruptcy and has lost the ability to distinguish right from wrong," said Rushdie.
    Kate Allen, director of Amnesty UK, said it took criticism "seriously" but would continue to press for "universal respect" for human rights.
    [Via Noah Pollak]
    The statement in full is here:
    Amnesty International has done its reputation incalculable damage by allying itself with Moazzam Begg and his group Cageprisoners, and holding them up as human rights advocates. It looks very much as if Amnesty's leadership is suffering from a kind of moral bankruptcy, and has lost the ability to distinguish right from wrong. It has greatly compounded its error by suspending the redoubtable Gita Sahgal for the crime of going public with her concerns. Gita Sahgal is a woman of immense integrity and distinction and I am personally grateful to her for the courageous stands she made at the time of the Khomeini fatwa against The Satanic Verses, as a leading member of the groups Southall Black Sisters and Women Against Fundamentalism. It is people like Gita Sahgal who are the true voices of the human rights movement; Amnesty and Begg have revealed, by their statements and actions, that they deserve our contempt.

    Translate