Showing posts with label Human Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human Rights. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 06, 2023



The Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights just released its report of human rights violations by Palestinian authorities in the West Bank and Gaza in 2022 (it has not yet been released in English.)

Its section on violations against Palestinian human rights activists is summarized:

Concerning human rights defenders, the independent commission said: Human rights defenders are exposed to a number of violations and harassment committed by official bodies or other unofficial parties. It may lead to murder, kidnapping, arrest, torture, threats, harm to the family and defamation. Defenders of women's rights are subjected to various harassments by social movements and religious and political parties, who see their defense of women as a contradiction with religion and in line with the goals of the West and a denial of Arab values, customs and traditions.   
Those stories, about real abuse against real human rights activists, is rarely covered by the media - because it doesn't fit the narrative that Israel is the human rights violator of Palestinians and, of course, also one of the biggest human rights abusers in the world. (Apparently Israel is surrounded by an oasis of liberal progressive protectors of humanity.)

So the reality gets buried in reports no one reads while the media exaggerates and fabricates Israeli crimes. 

There are real Palestinian human rights defenders - and no one hears about them.

But there are also fake human rights defenders that get lot of coverage. Here's a story that is getting play in Arabic news sites today:

Human rights organizations have called for a boycott of Israeli companies specialized in the field of water and agriculture, prior to their participation in the United Nations Climate Summit (COP 28) scheduled for the end of next November in the UAE.

These companies work to improve their image in front of the world in light of their theft of Palestinian rights to water and the destruction of the Palestinian environment through toxic agricultural pesticides.

The companies (Mekorot, Netafim, Haifa Chemicals, and Adama) seek to present themselves during the summit with their ability to achieve sustainable solutions regarding the environment around the world, at a time when these companies steal Palestinian resources and direct them towards illegal Israeli settlements according to international law.

Human rights organizations are working to reveal the true face of these Israeli companies, and to defend Palestinian rights against climate colonialism.   
Notice anything strange?

The stories do not mention a single "human rights" organization that is calling for this boycott.

The only group I can find talking about this is, of course, BDS. They probably pretend to be a human rights organization. Yet it would not be a surprise if HRW or Amnesty indeed does call for a boycott of Israeli companies at COP28. Because "human rights" is now nothing more than a slogan, with no relationship with real human rights. 

And the real contributions that Israeli technology make to help the world conserve water are considered not as important as the political boycott of any Jewish-owned company in the Middle East. 

And real humans will be deprived of water in the name of "human rights."




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, July 23, 2023

From the Palestine Post, July 22, 1948:


Israel had a Minister of Minorities in 1948 whose job as to advocate for the Arab minority population. 

This hardly fits in with the narrative of the Israeli leaders doing everything they could to expel Arabs. 

The ministry only existed for a year, and its minister had conflicts with other government institutions, particularly the military government. But from all accounts, Bechor-Shalom Sheetrit was an able advocate of Arab rights, respected by the Arab community. A Sephardic Jew, born in Ottoman Palestine, Sheetrit spoke fluent Arabic. 

Even during the heaviest fighting of the 1948 war, Sheetrit urged fair treatment of the Arab communities and protection of Muslim holy places. 

He was mentioned in the previous Palestine Post as prioritizing the opening of Arab school in the upcoming 1948-49 school year.

And the following week, Sheetrit urged the repair of water systems damaged by the Arab Legion in Lydda during the war.



I'm not saying there wasn't bias against Israel's Arab minority in 1948 and for years afterwards. But there were conflicting opinions on how to work with Israeli Arabs, and  the desire to live up to giving Israel's minorities equal rights was a prominent feature in the early days of the State. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, June 23, 2023


 A variant of two previous posters.





This really happened.

















Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 



Wednesday, June 07, 2023

Mahmoud Abbas congratulated Algerian president Abdelmadjid Tebboune on Tuesday, on the election of Algeria as a member of the UN Security Council.

Let's take a quick look at what life is like in Algeria today.

- A law was passed in 1962 that ensured that anyone without a Muslim grandparent couldn't be a citizen. Some 140,000 Jews had to leave, and the laws, while changed, ensure that they cannot become citizens today.


- There are credible reports of torture in prisons.

- The judiciary is not independent and effectively controlled by the president.

- There are laws that restrict women's rights.

- Men who beat women can be pardoned if the woman is pressured to marry him. 

- There are laws that criminalize many forms of speech, both in mainstream and social media. Some journalists were harassed and intimidated.

- Laws restrict activities of any religion besides Sunni Islam.

- Gays can be imprisoned under the law for homosexual acts.

- Movies and books must be approved before being allowed into the country.

- Protests in Algiers are essentially illegal.

- Black Algerians, Black migrants and non-Muslims are widely discriminated against.

So Algeria is a racist, homophobic, misogynist, apartheid dictatorship whose citizens have no freedom and limited rights. 

One reason you don't hear much about countries like Algeria in the news is because if the media and human rights groups would judge all countries with the same standards and campaign against all abuses with the same energy, criticism of Israel would be invisible in the tsunami of actual serious human rights abuses worldwide.  And they don't want to live in a world like that. 

A set at the Security Council is a very high honor. Outside of groups like UN Watch, who is protesting giving this honor to a country as contemptuous of human rights as Algeria is?

No one cares. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, June 02, 2023

I am particularly proud of most of the memes I made this week.





























Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

The Global Slavery Index for 2023 has been released, where it rates every country for how well they combat modern slavery, which includes all kinds of forced labor and forced marriage. 

It details the horrors of the kafala system, where Arab employers import workers from poor African and Asian nations and then control their lives. 

It does not rate the West Bank or Gaza Strip because they say the split between Hamas and the PA, as well as Israel's control of parts of the West Bank, make data collection difficult. However, it says, 
Despite limited data, anecdotal evidence indicates that Palestinians experience various forms of modern slavery, including forced labour, worst forms of child labour, forced begging, and forced and child marriage. Palestinian men and boys employed in the Israeli construction sector are vulnerable to debt bondage, as discriminatory employers charge them high fees and commissions and sub-contract them to other employers illegally.[These are typically Palestinian brokers - EoZ.] Illegal workers without permits face greater risks of abuse and exploitation. Gender biases further embed women and girls’ risk of modern slavery, particularly forced commercial sexual exploitation and forced and child marriage, with risk heightened for Palestinian women and girls living in refugee camps. Palestinian government data estimates that more than 17,600 girls age 15 to 19 were married in the West Bank in 2018. In Gaza, an estimated 11 percent of women were married before the age of  18. There are also reports of women and girls being trafficked from the West Bank to the Al Naqab desert where they are forced to marry older men.
It also provides this table showing that the Palestinian Authority gives essentially no legal protection against modern forms of slavery. 


This is horrific.

And even worse is that while there are hundreds of international reporters reporting about Palestinians in the West Bank, one never sees stories about how there are next to no protections under PA law against slavery. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, April 17, 2023

There was a most interesting communication between Israel's  Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Minister Amichai Chikli and Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur for the Palestinian territories.

Albanese had recently tweeted that "Israel has a right to defend itself, but can't claim it when it comes to the people it oppresses/whose lands it colonizes." The clear implication is that Jews who are killed by Palestinians have no right to self defense as long as the murderers can claim that they are oppressed by Israel. 

Chikli wrote a pointed and detailed response to the UN, demanding that Albanese be fired.

 Over 3000 years ago, the moral imperative not to kill was established as the most fundamental commandment given to humanity within the framework of the Ten Commandments - one of the most authentic human rights charter. Throughout history, the importance of the right to life and the prohibition of murder have been developed by philosophers such as John Locke, and has been incorporated into many official documents. One of the most prominent milestones in this context is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, whose Article 3 declares that ''Everyone has the Right to life, liberty and security of person." 

Against the background of this long process of establishing the universal right to life for all individuals, I am writing to express my profound shock, condemnation and dismay at the recent comments made by formal UN employee and special rapporteur, Ms. Frances. Albanese. Ms. Albanese's reprehensible, irresponsible and terror-inciting remarks made earlier this week called into question Israel's very right to defend the lives of its citizens. 

Ms. Albanese's statement is not only outrageous but also explicitly denies the right to life and personal security of many Jewish citizens of the State of Israel. Her comments contradict the basic core foundational human rights upon which the United Nations is built, setting a dangerous precedent. It is also unacceptable for a UN representative to make such a statement, even if she thinks that part of the country is disputed territory. 

I would like to draw your attention to a concerning matter regarding Ms. Albanese's recent remarks. It appears that her words may have been intentionally influenced by the recent horrific terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians: Just last week, a British-Israeli mother, Lucy Dee, and her two teenage daughters, Maia and Rina Dee, were brutally murdered in the Jordan Valley by a Palestinian terrorist who deliberately rammed their vehicle and then shot them at point blank range. Ms. Albanese's statement seems to suggest that Lucy Dee and her daughters, three innocent human beings driving on a holiday, were not deserving of the right to be protected by the State of Israel. 

This statement is especially troubling, as it casts a dark shadow on Ms. Albanese's basic human compassion, and her ability to uphold the principles of the United Nations and carry out her duties as a representative on its behalf. 

Regrettably, this is not an isolated instance of Ms. Albanese's relentless, systematic and irrational bias against Israel and display of antisemitism. As a representative who should be applying intemational law equally for all, irrespective of their faith, background or geographic locality, this is deeply concerning. 

A particular, troubling example is her speech at a Hamas-sponsored conference in Gaza in November 2022, during which she urged her audience to "resist". Moreover, in recent years, Ms. Albanese has also accused the "Jewish Lobby" of controlling United States and Europe, supported the BDS campaign against Israel, compared Israelis to the Nazis and refused to condemn Palestinian terrorism.

Ms. Albanese's actions and statements clearly violate the impartiality and objectivity requirements outlined in the UN Code of Conduct for Special Rapporteurs. Her clear and persistent display of antisemitic rhetoric, hostility and prejudice towards Israel demonstrates that this particular rapporteur does not uphold these values. The United Nations is failing to uphold its own commitment to protecting fundamental human rights for all and applying equal treatment of all its member states by allowing Ms. Albanese to continue to spew hatred, antisemitism and incite violence. Her blindly one-sided anti-Israel mandate is unacceptable and clearly goes against the principles of the United Nations. 

Therefore, I strongly urge you to take prompt action and terminate Ms. Albanese, position's permanently. It is s essential that the United Nations uphold its own principles and convey a resolute message that antisemitism and support for violence and terrorism have no place within its organization. In this context, I would like to refer to Chaim Herzog's powerful speech at the United Nations General Assembly on November 10, 1975, stating that "It is indeed fitting that the United Nations, which began its life as an anti-Nazi Alliance, should, 30 years later, find itself on its way to becoming the world center of anti-Semitism". We very much hope that it is still possible to change this sad situation. 

Yours respectfully, 
Amichai Chikli 
Minister of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism 
Albanese did not respond to any of these points. Instead, she composed the equivalent of a schoolyard taunt:
I wonder how the 3000-year-old "moral responsibility [sic] not to kill" can be reconciled with the thousands of Palestinians killed since 2007 in oPt (4k out of conflict; 4.4k in-conflict, i.e. in Gaza: 2008/9, 2012, 2014, 2018/9, 2021, 2022).
She is saying that Israel is hypocritical on two levels: one by not adhering to the same human rights standards that Chikli is saying she is guilty of violating, and secondly of not upholding Jewish laws itself in killing Palestinians. 

Even though Albanese has already distinguished herself with her blatant bias and tacit support for Palestinian terror, this is fairly astonishing. By not defending her own words justifying Palestinian "resistance," she is saying that Palestinian terror is not even worth discussion - because Israel is worse. 

In her moral universe, two wrongs make a right. 

It is clearly a false charge. The vast majority of those killed by Israel were either legitimate targets or collateral damage when Israel was attacking legitimate targets in wartime. Some were tragic accidents. 

One is not liable for those deaths under either Torah law or the Geneva Conventions

Palestinian terrorists, including the killers of the Dee mother and daughters, are guilty of murder in their deliberate targeting of uninvolved civilians; And Palestinian terror is illegal under both of them.

Albanese ignores or condones Palestinian murders while condemning Israel's defensive wartime actions - and she cynically invokes Jewish law to make her case, including that Jews (and only Jews)  do not have the right to defend themselves against those who claim "oppression." 

In Albanese' perverted moral calculus, Israeli Jews cannot claim to be oppressed by those who daily call for them to be ethnically cleansed from their homes. Only Palestinian lives matter and Palestinian murders are "legitimate resistance;" Jewish Israelis do not have the right to claim either self defense or oppression, which is the golden ticket needed to kill anyone on the other side.

This is another case where Albanese's own words cross the line from "anti-Zionism" into antisemitism. 






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, March 08, 2023

Antisemite and supposed human rights expert Ken Roth made up a brand new rule of international humanitarian law today:

Hamas confirms that the Palestinian man who shot two Israeli brothers last month (& was just killed by Israeli forces) "had been a member of its military wing." That may transform what had been a common crime (not a human rights concern) into a war crime.
Notice how the Hamas terrorist merely "shot two Israeli brothers." Roth doesn't want to mention that they were killed, unlike the murderer himself that he says was killed by Israeli forces.

Beyond that, Roth claims, incredibly, that the execution style murder of Hallel and Yagel Yaniv as they were driving was not considered a war crime and was not even a "human rights concern" until yesterday, when Hamas proudly said that he was a member of that group.

Indeed, as far as I could tell, Roth never tweeted about their murder. 

Human rights, by definition, is concerned with protecting the lives and welfare of humans. But when the human victims are Jews, then - according to Roth - we have an additional prerequisite for something to be a human rights concern: the attacker must belong to a known militant group. Otherwise, they don't care.

He apparently is assuming that until a group like Hamas takes responsibility, Israelis who are murdered by Arabs might just be victims of a drug deal gone bad, or a misfired bunch of shots at their heads and bodies.

Does this new international law work the other way around? Of course not. Jewish settler actions are definitely of  concern to human rights activists even though they are not members of any organized groups or militias. In those cases, the fact that the attackers or alleged attackers are Jews is quite enough evidence for Roth and the human rights community. 


But Arabs killing Jews? Those situations have to clear a much higher bar before "experts" and defenders of "human rights" will deign to give them any attention. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, March 02, 2023

(Based on a Twitter thread.)

Amnesty International tweeted:



"Human rights" organization Amnesty International  is openly advocating the forcible removal and ethnic cleansing of 670,000 Jews from their homes. 

Normally, that's a war crime. 

They have never insisted on that  in Western Sahara or Northern Cyprus or anywhere else. 

Only for Jews.

The Encyclopedia of Human Rights says settlers have human rights and ethnically cleansing them wholesale is clearly a violation of those rights.

It was talking about Northern Cyprus.


"Human rights" groups are saying, of course, Turkish settlers have human rights and compelling reasons to stay where they are - but Jews don't.

And remember, there are thousands of Arab "settlers" - Israeli Arabs  who have moved over the Green Line in Beit Safafa, Beit Hanina, French Hill and elsewhere. 

Amnesty never calls them "settlers."

No, the only people in the WORLD they want to ethnically cleanse are Jews!
.
When Jews have a different set of rules than everyone else, that is the definition of antisemitism. And Amnesty is guilty.

There is another proof of Amnesty's antisemitism in Amnesty's tweet.

Even though most Jews in Judea and Samaria do not support the violence in Huwara, Amnesty wants to use the event as an excuse to collectively punish all Jews who live in Judea/Samaria.

Yes, the most prestigious human rights organization is stereotyping all Jews who live across the Green Line as if they are the same - and wants to punish the peaceful ones because of the actions of a tiny minority.

That is classic bigotry. 

Organizations like Amnesty and other "human rights" organizations that insist that the only people in the world who must be forcibly removed from their homes are Jews. For everyone else, it is a crime, but to remove Jews who have lived in their homes for three generations now - it is obligatory.

How can you explain this without antisemitism? What kind of hoops must one jump through to figure out some crazy distinction that makes it a mere coincidence that Jews are the only people on Earth who must be ethnically cleansed - under "international law"?
.






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 


Thursday, January 12, 2023

Sunjeev Bery is the Executive Director at an NGO called Freedom Forward. He was advocacy director for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) at Amnesty International USA from 2011-2017. he's been interviewed on TV as some sort of expert.

For the past few days, Bery has been tirelessly tweeting his support for Ken Roth in the Kennedy School story - and going after Roth's critics.

Including me.

Which makes for some very entertaining reading.

Roth tweeted, "Harvard's Kennedy School says it 'welcomes new ideas—even unpopular and controversial ones." Its curriculum "encourages students and faculty to talk openly and effectively about difficult and highly charged issues.' Except for Israel, Dean Elmendorf?"

I responded to Roth, "Perhaps @Harvard @Kennedy_School has a policy against hiring obsessive liars? In 2014 I compiled a list of Ken Roth's Twitter lies over just a few months, and documented why they were wrong. He of course never corrected [any of] them. See for yourself," linking to a list of dozens of lies and distortions that Roth tweeted during and after the 2014 Gaza war.

Sunjeev Bery was very upset, apparently, at the tone of my list. "I started reading your "document" @elderofziyon, and it became clear within 10 seconds that it's a flimsy prop that enables you to just claim that people are liars. You are selling something that is far less than it actually is and using it for propaganda purposes."

Not knowing (or caring) who he was, I answered, "You are invited to tell me where I am wrong."

Instead of doing that, Bery wrote, "Many of the statements you make in your documents are simply claims and represent your beliefs. You seem to be adopting the posture that your claims are The Truth, and that those you disagree with are The Liars. Your intent is propagandistic."

Ah, so it isn't my facts - but my intent - that offends him. Good to know that human rights professionals are as little interested in the truth on Twitter as they are when they write their reports.

Then he hit me with what he considered his real zinger - which he used on other critics of Roth on the thread. "But here's the real question that tests your intentions: What are YOUR human rights criticisms of israel?"

It was already clear now that he was playing a game and had no interest in any semblance of truth, so I said I was done with the conversation: "So you cannot find a single example where Roth was correct and I was wrong.  Out of several dozen.  And then you want to accuse me of being disingenuous? Bye."

But this human rights professional brought out his inner teenage troll and kept trying to goad me. "Nice try buddy. Again @elderofziyon, what are YOUR criticisms of Israel?." I ignored him. 

Another tweeter answered him, "He asked you a question in direct response to your criticism and you still didn’t answer.  You should answer his question before you move on."

Bery answered him or her, "Wrong, buddy. If he can't say anything critical of Israel then he is ultimately a propagandist and a pro-government partisan arguing in bad faith."

I gave in and finally responded:
I'm not here for your amusement.  I don't pretend to be anything but a pro-Israel site; I provide a tiny bit of counterweight to the tsunami of anti-Israel information out there. I am not a newspaper that pretends to be balanced. That being said, I strive to be 100% truthful.

To me, "bad faith" is accusing me of something and not being able to back it up, and instead changing the subject. THAT is a propaganda technique that the anti-Israel crowd does all the time; reframing the conversation instead of admitting mistakes. 
I don't play those games.
After repeating himself for some reason, he gave me his one example of where my criticism of Roth was off-base to him with this screenshot:

By your own admission, you say that Ken Roth uses "the best available data" but because he doesn't include the caveats, you claim he is lying.

This is a totally bad faith argument on your part, and it is one of many many such examples in the document.

And so your overall document @elderofziyon lacks the substantive content necessary to justify your overall claim. 

My reaction to the content of your document is that it serves the purpose of creating a propagandistic and misleading headline.

 That is why I ask if you have any criticisms of Israel's policies that you are willing to state here publicly?

This is the test for differentiating an honest critic from a propagandist. A propagandist promotes a government and avoids mentioning any criticism whatsoever.

OK, at least he said something specific, even if it made no sense. I responded:

My 2014 article says "dozens of them were flat-out false, and others were knowingly deceptive." Your example is one of the deceptive ones - Roth stated the statistics AS FACT without saying "reportedly" or any other word newspapers would use.

Of course, he never corrected.

To defend that, and to cherry pick that out of all my examples that show how Roth DID lie multiple times, shows that YOU are the one who is being a propagandist. Is this the standard you accept for a human rights leader you have defended so energetically?  That's pretty sad.
Bery:
No, I pointed out one example of many lies within your document in response to your request. There are many more examples of similar exaggerations.

But once again, you have failed to answer my question:

What are YOUR criticisms of Israeli policies?

The answer seems to be none.
Obviously he did not point out a single mistake or lie of mine. But I decided to answer his main question:
I defend my family publicly. I criticize them privately.

Everyone has biases. Every media outlet does, too.  I admit mine -and the goal of my writings - upfront. Call it propaganda if you want, but I insist on honesty and transparency - which is much more than most media.
To Bery, this was the smoking gun! After a rehash of earlier arguments, he wrote, "Here's the reality, @elderofziyon.  You are self-admittedly engaging in pro-Israel propaganda. You clearly state that you avoid making any public criticism of Israel, and that your only public comments on Israel are to defend its policies. "

Uh, yeah. 

Yes. It is no secret. Wikipedia calls me a pro-Israel blogger. Not sure why that bothers you. 

Ken Roth is also a propagandist, as I proved. But he insists there is no bias, which I have comprehensively shown he has. 

And you are cool with that.
Bery's response to this graphic is priceless:

I bet many of Ken Roth's tweets regarding Israel are because he feels pressure to respond to propaganda accounts like yours constantly flooding Twitter with false claims.
So the only reason Roth treats Israel like the worst violator of war crimes is because people like me bother him!

Only then did I look Sunjeev up - and propaganda is his middle name. 

Pot, meet kettle.

Sunjeev worked at Amnesty USA during the 2014 Gaza war. AI-USA said that Amnesty would correct any errors in their "Gaza Platform." I pointed out SCORES of them, calling terrorists "civilian." They ignored it.

Who is a propagandist?
His hilarious response was to paste my tweet where I admitted that I am a pro-Israel blogger. So damning!

Then I noticed that this "human rights professional" "Liked" a tweet that was pretty much at his maturity level:

So....it is propaganda when I defend one side, but it is perfectly OK to pretend to be an objective head of an NGO while "Like"ing tweets that say  "Zionists love smelling their own farts"?
Bery then fell apart - yet defended it!

1. Zionists and Jews are not the same thing. It is anti-Semitic to conflate the two.

2. There are Christian and Hindu zionists. There are Jewish anti-zionists.

3. You are part of an organized troll strategy of amplifying your propaganda tweets, which I do liken to flatulence.

The guy who was trolling me for hours says I'm the troll!

I responded with my own numbered list:

1. Your Like proves that you are not the least bit objective. Just like your hero Roth.

2. If you don't know what objectivity means, then your defending Roth as objective is far funnier than a fart joke.

3. I wrote a book describing how today's anti-Zionism is a modern form of antisemitism.

4. This thread has proven to any observer that you have zero intellectual honesty.

He then said that I didn't answer him, presumably his non-sequitur that Zionists and Jews aren't the same: "Once again, you didn't respond to anything that I said. But that's cool. Keep up the propaganda! 👍 Your audiences are getting smaller and smaller 😊"

So I finished him and the thread off:

I never once claimed that Jews and Zionists are the same.  Your reading comprehension is about the same level as your objectivity. 

This thread will make a great post, though. Making a fool of a supposed human rights expert to the entire world is always fun!

His final response after bring proven a hypocrite with not the slightest interest in truth?


 The troll couldn't handle being made a fool of.

But the most bizarre part is that while it is obvious that he said nothing at all to contradict a single one of my facts, ... he thinks he won!

Bery's entire argument is that to have any credibility, every Zionist must criticize Israel publicly and constantly. Obviously, he has no similar criteria insisting on "balance"  for the anti-Israel zealots he admires and quotes.

I'm actually complimented that he keeps calling my writings "propaganda." Here is his response to the 2009 NYT op-ed by Robert Bernstein decrying how the organization he founded, Human Rights Watch, had gone off the rails by going after democracies like Israel that have checks and balances and downplaying the evil of the real human rights violators of the world:

I'll gladly share the insult with a true human rights giant.

The NGO Bery currently heads, "Freedom Forward," says it "seeks a world in which all people have the benefit of living in societies that are anchored in democracy and respect for human rights."  It doesn't appear to actually do anything besides create "campaigns" against Israel and US Arab allies.

I wonder who funds it. The site is not very transparent about that. 

Bery himself seems to have a soft spot for that bastion of democracy and human rights, Turkey




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, December 19, 2022

Salah Hammouri, who was deported to France today, is a terrorist.

There is no doubt about that. He has admitted it. 

While newspapers say that he denied having anything to do with a plot to assassinate Israel's Sephardic chief rabbi, and that he was even a member of the PFLP, he admitted to the plot in his plea bargain. Moreover, he essentially admitted to and justified the plot in this PFLP website, no longer online, from 2011, which also calls him a member of the group ("comrade.")

 

Moreover, this PFLP website listed him as one of their members, #8, who participated in a hunger strike only this past September (autotranslated):



But this would-be assassin is labeled a "human rights defender" by the UN, by the International Federation of Human Rights, and Amnesty International

Which can only mean one of two things. Either these "human rights" organizations consider murdering Jewish Israelis to be a human right, or they don't believe that Jews in Israel are human to begin with. 

Either way, calling Hammouri a "human rights defender" proves that the term "human rights" has lost all meaning, and indeed means the opposite of its original definition.

In this, they agree with the PFLP itself, which makes that equation between murdering Jews and "human rights' explicit, as one of their officials said ten years ago:
We reaffirm our commitment to our goals, principles, and inalienable Palestinian national rights. Some of which have been recognized and approved by international norms, principles, agreements, resolutions, international law and human rights. The first of these rights is the right of the Palestinian people to resist the occupation by all means and methods.
Every Palestinian understands "all means and methods" to include terrorism against civilians. 

"Human rights organizations'" defense of Hammouri indicates that they agree.


(h/t GnasherJew)




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive