‘The UN Has Inverted Right and Wrong’, Says Expert.

April 28, 2013


‘The UN Has Inverted Right and Wrong’, Says Expert.(INN).

It’s time to re-think the United Nations, which turns Israel into a villain, says human rights scholar Anne Bayefsky.

The United Nations has been a “major disappointment” in the 21st Century and has “inverted right and wrong,” human rights scholar and activist Anne Bayefsky.
The UN “was founded in the middle of the 20th Century to offer a new world order based on peace and security and protection of human rights, and it has inverted right and wrong so that Israel becomes the villain and the victims become those who are some of the most intolerant people in the region,” said Bayefsky.
She said that a “re-thinking” about the organization is in order, adding, “I think there is some mistaken belief on the part of democracies that the UN is some kind of harmless talking shop and that the kind of anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist, anti-Americanism that goes on at the United Nations won’t have its effects. But it does.”
Two weeks ago, noted Bayefsky, “the major committee that’s been tasked with drafting a comprehensive convention on terrorism for the first time in history ended once again – as it has done year after year – in disarray, because they can’t agree to define terrorism. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation believes that there should be an exception clause for so-called ‘legitimate struggle.’”
She mentioned the remarks this week of Richard Falk, the United Nations Human Rights Council-appointed “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” Falk implied that the Boston terror attack was a justified response to U.S. policies in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
This isn’t harmless talking,” stressed Bayefsky. “When people don’t understand the difference between right and wrong it encourages terrorism to the detriment of both Israel and the United States.”


#GoldStoneReport flashback! Bayefsky – Meet the UN’s anti-Israel ‘anti-discrimination’ czar, Navi Pillay

August 11, 2011
The UN’s top human rights official, Navi Pillay, attempted on Monday to block further defections from the UN’s racist “anti-racism” bash scheduled for New York City on Sept. 22. The United States, Canada, Israel, the Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands have already announced a boycott of “Durban III,” a UN event designed to “commemorate” the 10th anniversary of the UN anti-Semitic hatefest held in Durban, South Africa, in September 2001. Pillay said she was “disappointed” with these pullouts, labeling them a “political distraction.”
The barb was no accident for a UN high commissioner for human rights who has been distracted by her anti-Israel and anti-American agenda since taking office in 2008. Pillay is perhaps best known for her unremitting defense of the notorious Goldstone report and for having questioned the legality of the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
For Pillay, championing the Durban conference and its manifesto, the Durban Declaration, is a personal crusade. A native of Durban herself, shortly after her appointment she explained to a Geneva audience that the city’s mayor asked her to “rescue the name of Durban,” given its unflattering association with anti-Semitism. In response, she helped launch both Durban II in Geneva in 2009 and Durban III.
Unfortunately, her efforts to legitimize the Durban Declaration have little to do with the most basic of human rights: equality. The Durban Declaration charges only one country with racism among all 192 UN states – Israel. It calls Palestinians “victims” of Israeli racism, a 21st century reincarnation of the Zionism-is-racism libel. When Durban II ended with an “outcome document” that reaffirmed the Durban Declaration, Pillay gloated in a news conference on April 24, 2009, that Palestine is indeed “mentioned in the Durban Declaration and the word ‘reaffirm’ carries those paragraphs into this document.”
While Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the “anti-racism” crowd at Durban II, Pillay remained glued to her seat. UN videotape shows her simply watching democratic states walk out in disgust, although she and her secretariat colleagues had a copy of his Holocaust-denying speech in advance. Despite her later scramble, when under pressure, to distance herself from his comments, she issued a flowery thank-you to the Organization of the Islamic Conference for their role in Durban II – which included warm applause for Ahmadinejad.
Pillay’s enthusiasm for the Durban “anti-racism” agenda goes hand in hand with her single-minded pursuit of the demonization of Israel throughout her tenure. In January 2009, Pillay called for the creation of what became the Goldstone inquiry. In August 2009, she issued a report that lauded Hamas for having “made public statements that it is committed to respect international human rights and humanitarian law.” After Goldstone claimed that Israel had intentionally targeted civilians, Pillay said on Sept. 30, 2009, “I lend my full support to Justice Goldstone’s report and its recommendations.” Goldstone has since recanted the veracity of his slur; Pillay has not.
In July 2010, she made a rare appearance before the Security Council on “situations where the protection of civilians has been and remains of great concern” around the world – and made only two pleas to the council, both about Israel. Referring to Gaza, she said: “I urge the council . . . to ensure the lifting in full of the blockade” – which would stymie Israel’s ability to limit the flow of arms to Hamas. And she made this plea: “I urge the Security Council to support the recommendations of the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict” – that is, the Goldstone report.
After a visit this past February to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, she said this at her final Jerusalem news conference: “The clearest manifestation of institutional discrimination is the fact that during all my meetings with government and state officials, I do not believe I met a single Palestinian citizen of Israel.” She could have easily determined that Israeli Arabs are members of Israel’s parliament, in the diplomatic corps and on the Supreme Court. The discrimination that was apparently unclear to Pillay was the institutional charter of the Hamas government in Gaza, which calls for the annihilation of the Jewish citizens of Israel, and the Palestinian Authority’s refusal to recognize the right of a Jewish state to exist at all.
The antagonism between Pillay’s political priorities and the interests of Americans was most evident in her reaction to the death of Bin Laden. On May 3, Pillay expressed concern about his treatment. She demanded to know “the precise facts surrounding his killing” for the purpose of determining its legality. According to Pillay, “counterterrorism activity . . . in compliance with international law” means “you’re not allowed . . . to commit extrajudicial killings.” And this requirement would be satisfied only if the Americans had stuck by what she claimed was their “stated . . . intention . . . to arrest Bin Laden if they could.”
Her concern for Bin Laden was remarkable both for its flagrant contradiction with the laws of war justifying lethal force in his case, and for being three times as fast as her expressions of concern in March about the victims of lethal terror in Syria.
It is little wonder, therefore, that Pillay should be a fan of Durban III. On Monday, she confirmed that she will be coming to New York to participate in Durban III, which she described as an “important event . . . to combat discrimination.” Discrimination defined by the sponsors of discrimination itself.
Anne Bayefsky
For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org.

info@eyeontheun.org
August 10, 2011 For Immediate Release:
This article by Anne Bayefsky appears on NY Daily News

via calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com


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

April 8, 2011

The namesake of the infamous U.N. Goldstone Report, Richard Goldstone, suddenly confessed this past weekend in an article published by The Washington Post, that he had made a mistake. In September 2009, he and his U.N.-sponsored team made the wild accusation that Israel set out to murder civilians in the Gaza war rather than protect its own citizens from an unremitting genocidal campaign prosecuted for years by Palestinian terrorists.


Despite Richard Goldstone’s thirteenth hour confession, his diabolical legacy demonizing the state of Israel lives on at the United Nations. The body that created the Goldstone inquiry in 2009, the Human Rights Council, and the various entities that the Council has directed to implement his blood libel, have no intention of backing down. The facts be damned.
As of today, the U.N. system expects the Goldstone Report to be implemented as is. Four different follow-up activities are still percolating. These requirements emanate from a Human Rights Council resolution on the report that was adopted just a few weeks ago on March 25. Goldstone published his confession only after the Council once again pushed forward the implementation of his report – timing he would have known well in advance.
First, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights is required to “submit a progress report on the implementation of the [Goldstone report]…to the Human Rights Council at its 18th session of September 2011.” High Commissioner Navi Pillay will no doubt do everything in her power to keep it alive, since she was a main figure in sponsoring the report in the first place.
Prior to the decision of the Council in January 2009 to create the Goldstone inquiry, she first declared Israel guilty of “egregious violations of human rights” and then demanded “credible, independent, and transparent investigations … to identify violations and establish responsibilities.” After the report was issued Pillay became Goldstone’s lead champion, repeating dozens of times the words she first wrote in the Huffington Post shortly after the report’s release: “I lend my full support to Justice Goldstone’s report and its recommendations.”
Pillay even took the report to the U.N. Security Council. On July 7, 2010 Pillay was asked by the Council to address the issue of “situations where the protection of civilians has been and remains of great concern.” After noting the millions affected by atrocities around the world, the only plea she made in her statement to the Security Council on behalf of the peoples of this earth was: “I urge the Security Council to support the recommendations of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict,” a.k.a., the Goldstone report.
Pillay, a native of Durban, South Africa who is similarly a lead champion of the Durban Declaration despite its deep-seated anti-semitism, is inextricably connected to the Goldstone report and its perjury against the Jewish state.

Second, the Secretary-General is required “to present a comprehensive report on the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations of the [Goldstone Report]…by all concerned parties, including United Nations bodies… to the Council at its 18th session of September 2011.” This mandate means the U.N. secretariat is required to ask large numbers of U.N. bodies for a report on what they in turn have done to implement the Goldstone Report, thus further spreading the report’s tentacles across the U.N. system.
Third, the Human Rights Council has “decide[d] to follow up on the implementation of the [Goldstone Report] …at its 19th session of March 2012.” So the Goldstone Report will come back to the Council next year.
Fourth, the Human Rights Council has asked the General Assembly to become more involved in promoting the report; it “urges the Assembly to submit that [Goldstone] report to the Security Council for its consideration and appropriate action, including consideration of referral of the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court…”
Truth and falsehood have never been reliable attributes of the U.N. human rights system. And undoubtedly, the U.N. Human Rights Council – which has expended so much effort to create and keep this scurrilous and bogus report alive – will not skip a beat. The Obama administration has run out of excuses for remaining on the Council and forcing Americans to pay for it.   The Facts from www.EYEontheUN.org

image via foxthepoet.blogspot.com
This article by Anne Bayefsky appears today on Fox News.
For Immediate Release:
April 5, 2011
Contact: Anne Bayefsky
anne@hudsonny.org
(917) 488-1558