EU Czech presidency: strong call to withdraw from 'Durban II' conference

"The EU will probably send its own suggestions. If the conference papers will realign with these suggestions then we will stay, otherwise there is a strong call to withdraw." (Karel Schwarzenberg)

"BRUSSELS (EJP)--- The Czech EU presidency said Monday there is a "strong European call to withdraw" from the upcoming 'Durban II' Geneva UN conference on racism if final documents do not take into consideration the EU suggestions.

At a press conference after a meeting in Brussels of the 27 EU Foreign Ministers, Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg (photo) declared: "We had a thorough discussion about the Durban II conference. The main voices were very skeptical about the direction of the final documents which are prepared".

He added: "The EU will probably send its own suggestions. If the conference papers will realign with these suggestions then we will stay, otherwise there is a strong call to withdraw".

The Geneva conference is scheduled to take place April 20-24.

Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has already announced that his country would not attend the Geneva gathering unless "radical changes" were made to the draft final text, which includes what he has called "aggressive and anti-Semitic statements."

The United States, Canada and Israel have also announced they will boycott 'Durban II'.

On Monday, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier warned the Geneva meeting "might be abused to produce one-sided statements" about the Middle East peace process and European and American policy in the Muslim and Arab world.

"I am in favor of canceling participation in the conference, unless the documents are changed substantially within the next hours and days," he said."

Source: article by Yossi Lempkowicz in EJP

Italy pulls out of "Durban 2" conference, Fiamma Nirenstein, Italian Chamber of Deputies

"Italy has kept its promise: it will not take part in an initiative spreading anti-Semitic hatred; and moreover, one that is promoted by the United Nations, which is unable to manage and monitor such hatred adequately."

Statement by Fiamma Nirenstein, Vice-president, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Italian Chamber of Deputies

"Italy’s decision to pull out of the forthcoming UN conference against racism, which is set to be held in Geneva on April 20-24, fills me with pride and satisfaction. This is in fact a courageous decision. It is the first coming from a European country, after those of Canada, Israel and the USA. We hope this decision will lead the way to a joint European position, against a conference that seeks to elevate anti-democratic and anti-Semitic hatred.

The decision taken by the Minister of Foreign Affairs Franco Frattini not only completes, but also puts into effect the resolution which, under our initiative, was voted on unanimously by the Italian Parliament on December 4, 2008 - the first time a country in Europe has taken such action. The resolution bound the Government to monitor "Durban 2" preparatory process. The documents formulated during this process have confirmed the worst expectations: as for the first Durban conference in 2001, Israel is being again slandered and defined as a racist state of apartheid, while every other effective case of racism and discrimination is being completely ignored.

Italy has kept its promise: it will not take part in an initiative spreading anti-Semitic hatred; and moreover, one that is promoted by the United Nations, which is unable to manage and monitor such hatred adequately. This gesture by the Italian Government is an important contribution in that it attempts to rescue the UN from the hands of those countries that - like in this case Iran, Libya and Cuba, who are among the States involved in the preparatory process of Durban 2 – are holding this institution hostage with their partisan and discriminatory positions.

On March 12, we will hold a conference in the Italian Parliament, promoted by the Italy-Israel Parliamentary Friendship Association, that will host lectures by the Minister of Foreign Affairs Franco Frattini, Prof. Gerald Steinberg (Bar-Ilan University, Director of Ngo-Monitor), Pierluigi Battista (Deputy Director, Corriere della Sera), Piero Ostellino (columnist, Corriere della Sera) and the board of the Italy-Israel Parliamentary Friendship Association (Enrico Pianetta, President, Rossana Boldi and Gianni Vernetti, Vice-presidents and me)."

Source: Fiamma Nirenstein blog

Italy: Fiamma Nirenstein will be in the next Parliament

Say No to Human Rights: the U.N. Versus Human Rights

"The United Nations Versus Human Rights" - petition on LICRA's (Ligue Internationale contre le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme) website. To sign the petition go here. "The United Nations Versus Human Rights Will 2008 be the year when the United Nations celebrates the 60th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights and simultaneously destroys its own principles? There is, indeed, cause for great concern because the institution has lost its way in recent years, becoming a caricature of itself. In 2001, the U.N. sponsored the World Conference on Racism, held in Durban, South Africa, the city where Gandhi began his law career. The phrases "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" were chanted in the name of people’s rights. In the name of cultural relativism, all remained silent in the face of discrimination and violence against women. Alarmed by the serious problems this highlighted within its Commission on Human Rights, in June 2006, the United Nations launched a new Human Rights Council, intended to correct these profoundly disturbing trends. Today, the picture is particularly grim. As the Durban II conference-- scheduled for 2009--takes shape, it is sanctioning those same trends. What is worse, if new official standards are developed and carved into the stone of a new and very unusual Declaration of Human Rights, that will mark the death of universal rights. Through its internal processes, the coalitions and alliances that are forming, the speeches being delivered, the texts being negotiated and the terminology being used are destroying freedom of expression, legitimizing the oppression of women and systematically stigmatizing Western democracies. The HRC has become a machine of ideological warfare conducted against its own founding principles. Unknown to the major media, day after day, session after session, resolution after resolution, a political rhetoric is being forged in order to legitimize the acts to follow and the violence of tomorrow. A "triple alliance"--composed of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, represented by Pakistan; the Non-Aligned Movement, in which Cuba, Venezuela and Iran play a central role; and China, with Russia’s cynical consent--is working to launch a supposedly "multicultural" revolution. Doudou Diène, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, has thus stated that criticizing the wearing of the burka constitutes a racist attack, that secularism is rooted in a slaveholding, colonialist culture and that the French law prohibiting students from wearing religious symbols at school constitutes anti-Muslim racism, renamed "Western Islamophobia." Confusion of thought reaches new heights when any criticism of religion is denounced as racism. The U.N. is sanctioning a radical threat to freedom of thought. By likening any criticism of these abuses on the part of those speaking in the name of Islam to racism--supposedly a product of neo-colonialist thinking--the spokespeople for this new alliance are tightening the noose they have placed around the neck of their own people. They are undermining the foundations of a civility that Europe achieved, at great cost, following the wars of religion. In September 2007, Louise Arbour, High Commissioner for Human Rights, participated in a conference in Tehran dedicated to "human rights and cultural diversity." Wearing the veil, as required by law in the Islamic Republic, the High Commissioner was a passive witness to the utterance of the principles to come, which may be summarized as follows: "an offense against religious values is regarded as racist." Still worse, on the day following her visit, twenty-one Iranians, including several minors, were executed in public. President Ahmadinejad renewed his call, in her presence, for the destruction of Israel, a member state of the United Nations created by that same organization. Questioned about her silence, the High Commissioner justified her passivity as a sign of respect for Iranian law to which, as an attorney, she felt herself bound and out of a concern "not to offend her hosts." "A man’s home is his castle," said Dr. Goebbels. He used that opportunistic argument when speaking before the League of Nations in 1933 to reject all criticism from an impotent international institution, but one whose principles were, at least, respected, unlike those of the United Nations today. Great political crimes have always needed words to legitimize themselves. Speech foreshadows the move to action. Examples abound, from Mein Kampf to the Mille Collines radio station, from Stalin to Pol Pot, confirming the need to exterminate the enemy of the people in the name of the race, the emancipation of the toiling masses and a supposedly divine order. Totalitarian ideologies have replaced religions. Their crimes and unmet promises of a "radiant future" have invited God back into politics. The greatest terrorist crime in history was committed in the name of God on September 11, 2001, just days after the Durban conference ended. Confronted by that strategy, the democracies--concerned primarily about their balance of trade--demonstrate an extraordinary passivity. What does the fate of the Tibetan people matter, compared to exports to China? What is the price of freedom for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the former Dutch legislator, threatened with death after her friend, filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, was killed in 2002, accused of blasphemy for his film, "Submission"? The examples of Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, Robert Redeker and Mohamed Sifaoui prove that Islamist fundamentalism imposes its law through terror. How many Algerians, how many women in North Africa, the Near East, Turkey and Pakistan have already paid with their lives for refusing to submit to religious obscurantism? If by some misfortune, the U.N. were to enshrine such criteria, if blasphemy were to be considered racism, if the right to criticize religion were made illegal, if religious law were inscribed in international standards, that would constitute a regression of disastrous proportions and a radical perversion of our tradition of struggle against racism, which has taken place, and can continue to take place, only under absolute freedom of conscience. The December 2007 General Assembly has already begun to approve texts that condemn certain forms of expression considered as defamatory of Islam. The issue is clear and it is global: we are dealing with the defense of individual freedoms. Unless the democracies rally, following the example of Canada, which has just announced that it will not participate in Durban II, noting that the event could be "marked by statements of intolerance and anti-Semitism," and no longer abstain on or vote for resolutions contrary to the universal ideal of 1948, then religious obscurantism and its parade of political crimes will triumph--under the good auspices of the United Nations. And when words of hate turn into action, no one will be able to say, "We didn’t know."" Elisabeth BADINTER, Adrien BARROT, Patrice BILLAUD, Pascal BRUCKNER, Jean-Claude BUHRER, Chala CHAFIQ, Georges CHARPAK, Christian CHARRIERE-BOURNAZEL, Bernard DEBRE, Chahdortt DJAVANN, Jacques DUGOWSON, Frédéric ENCEL, Alain FINKIELKRAUT, Elisabeth de FONTENAY, Patrick GAUBERT, Claude GOASGUEN, Thierry JONQUET, Liliane KANDEL, Patrick KESSEL, Catherine KINTZLER, Claude LANZMANN, Michel LAVAL, Barbara LEFEVBRE, Corinne LEPAGE, Malka MARCOVICH, Albert MEMMI, Jean-Philippe MOINET, Jean-Claude PECKER, Philippe SCHMIDT, Alain SEKSIG, Mohamed SIFAOUI, Antoine SPIRE, Pierre-André TAGUIEFF, Jacques TARNERO, Michèle TRIBALAT, Michèle VIANES, Elie WIESEL, Michel ZAOUI, etc.

European Parliament conference vows to fight anti-Semitism

"Some EU parliamentarians hide behind 'Muslim pressure' instead of working toward eradicating anti-Semitism." (Paulo Casaca, Portuguese MEP, European Socialists Party)

"The mother of Ilan Halimi*, a 23-year-old French Jew murdered in a brutal attack in 2006, told a conference on anti-Semitism held at the European Parliament on Monday about the importance of fighting anti-Semitism so that her son would not become a "detail of history."

Speaking in the same chamber in which the far-right French politician Jean-Marie Le Pen said that the Third Reich's gas chambers were "a detail of history," Ruth Halimi gave an emotional account on how her son was tortured for three weeks and then killed by a gang of Muslim immigrants in a Parisian suburb in February 2006.

Halimi's poignant words were heard by members of the Parliament, diplomats, religious and communal leaders from around the continent taking part in the one-day conference organized by the European Jewish Congress, under the patronage of the Czech presidency of the European Union and Hans-Gert Pottering, president of the European Parliament.

Titled "Building Together the Future of Europe: The fight against anti-Semitism, defending European values and coexistence," the conference aimed to look at how to face the challenges posed by anti-Semitism and intolerance, and promote coexistence.

The conference called on the European Parliament to take immediate steps to combat racism and the current rise in anti-Semitism across Europe in the aftermath of Operation Cast Lead.
Opening the conference, Dr. Moshe Kantor, president of the European Jewish Congress, said Europe faced three dangers - the current economic crisis; Iran's nuclear ambitions and sponsorship of international terrorism; and the "crisis of tolerance."

"As usual, history teaches us that it does not teach anything. Europe again does not see that everything starts with Jews," he said. Kantor said that in France, Germany and Britain in January 2009 there were more anti-Semitic incidents than in all of 2008. "Europe did not demonstrate any significant reaction to this," he said.

"Today anti-Semitism has been amplified through the recent war in Gaza, through the economic and financial crisis and through societies and governments that are in search of a perfect scapegoat.

"This phenomenon is not only affecting Jews. In fact, economic and financial crisis is dangerous because it seeks out several scapegoats, creating xenophobia and racism on a larger scale, targeting and attacking minorities and foreigners.

"That is why we are here today; to create awareness of and to confront anti-Semitism in all its forms: traditional, modern, structural and contextual," Kantor said.

Jacques Barrot, vice president of the European Commission, said anti-Semitism remained a curse. "We have to mobilize in order to state our principles loud and clear. It is true that the economic crisis might make the problem more acute," he said. In reference to the UN conference on racism to be held in Switzerland, known as Durban II, Barrot said: "The EU should closely monitor the events at Durban and react immediately if there is any diversion from the agreed upon line."

He continued: "If necessary we will call on the EU member states to withdraw from the conference if we see violations of core European values in Geneva."

"We strongly insist and recommend to all the European countries to consider Durban II as a challenge to the coexistence in Europe," Kantor said.

Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos, head of the Research and Data Collection at the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, showed how anti-Semitic incidents in Europe were on the rise. He warned also said there was serious under-reporting in official data collection systems of most member states, based on police records, and showed there were flaws in the reporting of anti-Semitism in Europe. "Not all anti-Semitic incidents are categorized as such and not all anti-Semitic incidents are reported by victims," he said.

Mike Whine, director of international affairs at Britain's Community Security Trust, said reliable statistics were very rare and that countries lacked the capacity to record anti-Semitism at scientific levels. He said he thought anti-Semitic incidents were rising and remained at a high level.

Several MEPs spoke of the need to combat anti-Semitism working with the European Parliament.

Silvana Koch-Mehrin, a German MEP, said anti-Semitism was still very much alive, using anti-Zionism themes to transport ideas. "Denial of Israel's right to exist has become fashionable - this is modern anti-Semitism. This is why it would be more important that the European Parliament in its statement becomes very clear about anti-Semitism," Koch-Mehrin said.

"Some EU parliamentarians hide behind 'Muslim pressure' instead of working toward eradicating anti-Semitism," said Paulo Casaca, a Portuguese MEP from the Party of European Socialists.

Other parliamentarians said that failure to recognize the right of Israel to defend itself was indicative of anti-Semitism, as this was a basic right of every nation.

Jan Marinus Wiersma, a Dutch MEP and vice president of the Party of European Socialists group, condemned the decision to allow Le Pen to address the Parliament.

Representatives of Jewish communities across Europe presented reports about the situation in their countries.

Rony Smolar, president of the Finnish Jewish community and representative of Scandinavian countries, said that things have got worse since the 2006 Lebanon war, which he said brought left-wingers and neo-Nazis together, and that there had been a sharp rise in anti-Semitism, simultaneous with Holocaust denial and the accusation that Jews dominated global finance.

The director-general of the the French Jewish community's security services, said that in 2008 there had been 474 acts of anti-Semitic incidents, and a call for violence against the "Zionists" of France, which he said was new language. He said there has been a rise in France of support for "armed resistance," with Hizbullah flags on display everywhere.

The conference also heard from leaders of other faiths and communities who described what needed to be done to combat intolerance, racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism. Mohammed Sifaoui, a French/Algerian journalist who claimed that he managed to infiltrate al-Qaida, said extremism was a real threat today in Europe. "We democrats need to take ownership of these issues. If we were to safeguard something, we need to fight for our existence, against the evils of hatred," he said.

Closing the conference, Kantor vowed to continue the fight against anti-Semitism. "Human diversity is our treasure and should not be a source of conflict," he declared."

Article by Jonny Paul, Jerusalem Post correspondent , TJP

* The murder of Ilan Halimi in Paris three years ago

- Moshe Kantor to meet EU parliament head to press for strong resolution against anti-Semitism - European Jewish Congress calls upon European leaders for real action against anti-Semitism
- Mahmoud Abbas tells European Parliament not to work with Israel
- European Coalition for Israel warns against surge of anti-Semitism in Europe
- European Parliament: one rule for Egypt and Morocco another for Israel
- Ahmadinejad's delegation visits European Parliament
- European Parliament to host controversial anti-Israeli conference

NGO "Lawfare": Exploitation of Courts in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

"Though claiming to promote universal human rights, these same NGOs have not pursued cases against Palestinian, Hezbollah, Syrian, or Iranian officials involved in terror."

NGO "Lawfare": New monograph from NGO Monitor - Executive Summary [emphasis added]:

"The use of courts to prosecute violations of human rights has grown exponentially since the 1990s. This growth has coincided with the vast accumulation of power by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the expansion of the concept of "universal jurisdiction." NGOs claiming to promote human rights (many funded by European governments, the EU, and prominent foundations like the Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Institute) are engaged in international lobbying as well as filing civil lawsuits or initiating criminal complaints against Israeli officials for alleged "war crimes" or "crimes against humanity" in Belgium, England, Spain, Switzerland, the United States, and elsewhere.

These legal actions, ostensibly to provide "justice" to "victims," are a form of "lawfare" – a "strategy of using or misusing law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve military objectives" – intended to punish Israel for anti-terror operations, as well as to block future actions. They are also a means for actors that are not accountable to any form of democratic check to subvert a country’s foreign policy and interfere with diplomatic relations. While Israel is not the only country that has been subject to NGO lawfare (several prominent NGOs have filed similar suits against US officials in France and Germany), it is a primary target of these efforts. Though claiming to promote universal human rights, these same NGOs have not pursued cases against Palestinian, Hezbollah, Syrian, or Iranian officials involved in terror.

The strategy to delegitimize Israel using legal frameworks was adopted at the NGO Forum of the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism held in Durban, South Africa ("WCAR" or "Durban Conference"). The NGO Forum crystallized a plan in which Israel would be singled out as a "racist" and "apartheid" state and isolated internationally through a campaign of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions and explicitly adopted lawfare to advance the political war against Israel. The NGO Forum Declaration called for the "adoption of all measures to ensure [the] enforcement" of international humanitarian law, including "the establishment of a war crimes tribunal to investigate and bring to justice those who may be guilty of war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing and the crime of Apartheid . . . perpetrated in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories."

This movement is led by Palestinian NGOs such as Al Haq, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), and Badil, and aided by international NGOs including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, International Federation of Human Rights (France), and the Center for Constitutional Rights (New York). These NGOs are largely supported by European governments and receive funding from prominent foundations.

This monograph presents a number of case studies analyzing the central role that NGOs have played in the strategy of lawfare, using it to further their political campaign against Israel. The study begins with a discussion of NGO involvement in the movement to promote and expand the concept of universal jurisdiction and the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Without these legal developments, this NGO strategy would not be possible.

Second, the paper will detail anti-Israel lawfare at the international level, examining the crystallization of the tactic at the NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, alternative strategies adopted by the NGO network in lieu of criminal prosecutions of Israelis at the ICC, and the International Court of Justice case against Israel’s security barrier. As in other politicized NGO campaigns, these activities consistently draw an immoral equivalence between anti-terror operations and mass scale atrocities, minimize or omit the context of terror, exploit international legal terminology and rhetoric, level condemnations without providing proper bases or reliable evidence, and use incomplete, distorted, or inconsistent legal definitions.

Third, the monograph discusses NGO-led litigation against Israel in the national courts of Europe and the United States. Because Israel has not ratified its participation in the International Criminal Court (ICC) due to serious political and legal concerns, NGO lawfare has generally been pursued in national courts where "war crimes" statutes or other universal jurisdiction laws have been enacted. The lawsuits detailed in the study include the case against Ariel Sharon in Belgium for his alleged responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacres; the arrest warrant issued against Doron Almog in the United Kingdom for alleged "grave breaches" of the Geneva Convention; civil cases in the US against Avi Dichter for his alleged role in the targeted killing of the founder of Hamas’ military wing and against Moshe Ya’alon for his alleged participation in the 1996 IDF operation in Qana, Lebanon; and, finally, cases initiated in the US and the UK intended to block corporate trade with Israel.

As a US Court of Appeals observed, these cases seek to engage courts "in the micro-management of military targeting decisions" and are not cases such as those against "an Idi Amin or a Mao Zedong." Plaintiffs point to no cases where "similar high-level decisions on military tactics and strategy during a modern military operation have been held to constitute torture or extrajudicial killing under international law." While these cases were all dismissed in the preliminary stages, the media coverage was highly damaging, fulfilling one of the NGOs’ central goals.

As a result of these cases, several countries, notably Belgium and the UK, have amended their laws to prevent future abuse. Such amendments have included denying NGOs the ability to apply to a judge directly for an arrest warrant without consulting any government officials. Yet, these lawsuits continue to have serious political and diplomatic repercussions, including severely limiting the ability of Israeli officials to travel abroad. And the media impact remains an important element in the demonization of Israel.

This report also highlights the lack of transparency and accountability of NGOs, and their contribution to diplomatic and political tension, and even greater conflict. Analysts have noted that the "single-issue" focus of many NGOs that claim to promote human rights makes them "less concerned with the balancing of interests required of policy leaders." NGO officials use lawsuits to promote their personal ideologies and foreign policy goals, and are not accountable to a democratic polity. Instead of engaging in debate and making the difficult choices of nation-states, such as how to weigh sovereignty and security concerns with human rights, these NGOs advance their political agenda regardless of the wider impact of their actions. This self-interested view in the midst of a complex geopolitical environment, such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, entrenches conflict, and paradoxically, leads to a dilution of the universality of human rights."

Europe's Hidden Hand: NGO Monitor study on EU funding for political NGOs in the Arab Israeli conflict

Europe still funding NGOs promoting Israel demonization campaigns

It is unbelievable that the Israeli government should be devoting resources to fight hostile NGOs, some of which are being generously and cynically funded by European governments (in other words by unwitting European taxpayers).

Article by Gerald Steinberg in TJP:

"Now, as the UN and the anti-Israel NGO network prepare for the Durban Review Conference to be held in Geneva in April 2009, the Foreign Ministry has left the minimalist NGO desk empty. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has denounced the anti-Semitism of the UN's Durban process, and announced that Israel will not participate if this continues. But the Israeli diplomatic corps was surprised when the Preparatory Committee for this review conference accredited the Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign. European members of the committee simply waved them through, and no Israeli official was aware of the process.

The damage from this black hole in the Israeli diplomatic universe goes far beyond the Durban process. Some of the NGOs promoting the demonization campaigns get more then half their annual budgets from European governments, under the misleading headlines of "partnerships for peace" or projects claiming to promote democracy and Palestinian development."

Europe's Hidden Hand, NGO Monitor report

Europe's Hidden Hand, NGO Monitor report

Too many powerful and highly politicized NGOs have became masters in the art of deception: the notions of transparency and accoutability are just not for them. It is time the EU reform its NGO financing procedures and stop pretending that it either doesn't know or that it is not responsible. The EU knows and its responsibility is fully engaged.

"NGO Monitor has published a highly detailed examination of European Union (EU) funding of political NGOs in the Arab-Israeli conflict. The fifty-page report, 'Europe's Hidden Hand', provides the first in depth analysis of this important area, and reveals that between 2005 and 2007, the EU provided tens of millions of Euros from public money to NGOs whose activities directly contradict EU policy. The report also uncovers and analyzes the lack of transparency and accountability in EU funding of NGOs in this region.
Read the executive summary in English [PDF] or in Hebrew [PDF].
Click here to read the full report, Europe's Hidden Hand."

"Red-lines for NGO Funding - Durban Review Conference 2009 (pages 31-32)

To ensure that EU funds for NGOs that are designated for promoting peace, human rights, democracy, and development are not misused in ways which promote conflict and demonize, it is necessary to define and implement "red lines" demarking the limits of acceptable behavior under these frameworks. To this end, the European Commission needs to write and adopt logical political "red lines" which prohibit funding for NGOs that violate them.

Such guidelines will require a coherent policy regarding EU funding for NGOs that pursue political objectives that are inconsistent with their stated goals. [Allocations] ... go to a number of NGOs that promote the "apartheid" campaign of delegitimization. Many participated in the 2001 Durban NGO Forum and are active in implementing the strategy of divestment, boycotts and sanctions against Israel. Clear red lines are needed to prevent NGOs from engaging in such destructive activity. The need for clear guidelines with respect to EU funding is highlighted in the context of the planned Durban review conference scheduled for 2009. Will the EU learn from the experience of 2001, and require NGOs that receive funding under one of the programs discussed in this analysis to forswear any involvement in the demonization of Israel? Other major NGO funders, have adopted such guidelines including the Ford Foundation which requires its recipients to ensure that "your organization will not promote or engage in violence, terrorism, bigotry or the destruction of any state, nor will it make sub-grants to any entity that engages in these activities." Ford also clarified in this memo that "this prohibition applies to all of the organization’s funds, not just those provided through a grant from Ford."

The EU should act in a similar manner to prevent NGOs from exploiting funds designated for peace, democracy, development and human rights for use in counterproductive and damaging activities."

Israel on trial in Brussels: Iranian and Syrian Ambassadors give standing ovation to judges

A prelude to Durban II?

A Durban-style mock trial of the State of Israel was held in February in Brussels, the capital of Europe. The Court declared "the Israeli authorities in charge of the 2006 war against Lebanon guilty of the following international crimes: war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide." No less!

John Catalinotto, Miguel Urbano Rodrigues and Ángeles Maestro (who coined a new word "falsimedia" for the occasion) complained that the European "corporate" media did not report the trial implying that they take their marching orders from their imperialist paymasters (Ramsey Clark's IA Center website), whereas Al Jazeera TV broadcast the proceedings in full to Arab countries.

What they failed to say is that the progressive anti-imperialist European media and blogs have not reported the trial either. An article by Lebanese journalist Scarlett Haddad may hold the clue as to why the "progressives" thought it wiser not to trumpet their unparalled triumph.

It transpires that the Syrian and Iranian Ambassadors to Belgium were at the trial and that they gave a ten-minute standing ovation to the judges after the reading of the verdict. Such shocking news would probably not have gone down well with European public opinion.

"The Ambassadors of Lebanon, Syria and Iran, as well as the Vice President of the European Parliament, Luisa Morgantini, were among the 300 odd attendees who gave the judges a ten-minute standing ovation after the reading of the verdict", excerpt from an article "The "tribunal of conscience" harshly condemns Israel from Brussels" by Scarlett Haddad for L’Orient-Le Jour. Posted on Islam in Belgium, tag: the Empire of Evil.

Let's see what two individuals Pierre Galand and Jean Bricmont who are well known for their obsessive anti-Israeli militancy did or rather did not do:

Pierre Galand is the head of the Belgian-Palestinian Association, which specialises in the most outrageous vilification of Israel. There is no mention whatsoever of the event on the association’s website.

One would be hard put to find a fiercer (and more ludicrous) critic of Israel than Jean Bricmont, a Professor at the Catholic University of Louvain. Unsurprisingly, not only was he a member of the Peoples' Court Executive Committee but he also "gave political statements on the issues before the court". Bricmont too has kept silent about the whole pantomime. For someone who relishes the anti-Israeli limelight it is strange indeed.

On the Kangooroo Court:
Lebanon war mock tribunal condemns Israel and U.S.
Israel on trial in Brussels - a prelude to Durban II?

WikiLeaks: US diplomats find Norwegian anti-Israel FM arrogant and not smart

"How could it not occur to Mr. Støre, that constantly changing tack – without consulting senior partners – that, one day having tea with Hamas, another day, choosing foolishly, and as the only Western representative, to sit and listen to Ahmadinejad’s foul ranting at UNs Durban 2 conference in Geneve in 2009, would have a very high political price?"

Source: Norway, Israel and the Jews (All is fine in my little belly button, sulks Støre)

Our FM Jonas Gahr Støre reacts with incredulity to WickedLeaks that US embassy crew find him not smart, arrogant, in it for himself and with an attitude problem. "Sincerely, I have not heard any of this conveyed to me in Washington", he says – adding that perhaps this might have been the case for US diplomats during the Bush Administration, because they interpreted any sign of independent thinking as something inherently bad.

Too bad for him, then, that US diplomats posted in Oslo in the reign of Obama, continue to sound alarms that all is not well with Norway’s foreign policy. A diplomat wrote in 2009 this about Støre: "Although smart and dynamic, some people wonder if his arrogance might not work too well in negotiations".

Ouch! And with that zinger, the bubble vision he wanted to present to us, of himself as a worldly leader, standing up to the big wigs, burst – and there he was, left with his tiny fig leaf, too small to cover the bald patches where normally you would have expected to see experience, political clout, and maybe even integrity.

'Ottawa Protocol' draws the line on anti-Semitism, by Norma Greenaway

Most (all ?) European media completely ignored the conference. No wonder, Europeans, while acknowledging that anti-Semitism is a problem in Europe, they never identify any anti-Semites.  In other words, in Europe there is anti-Semitism without anti-Semites.  Quite an achievement. (Drawing: "Happy Hanukka" by Belgian cartoonist Ben Heine)

Full text of the Ottawa Protocol HERE

Source: National Post

Stepped-up efforts within Canada and around the world are needed to combat rising anti-Semitism, says an international declaration designed to stamp out the "most enduring of all hatreds."


The declaration, known as the Ottawa Protocol, was released yesterday after a two-day meeting of parliamentarians and experts from about four dozen countries in Ottawa.

"We are alarmed by the explosion of anti-Semitism and hate on the Internet, a medium crucial for the promotion and protection of freedom of expression, freedom of information and the participation of a civil society," the declaration says.

Irwin Cotler, chairman of the international coalition and a noted human rights activist, told a news conference the protocol breaks new ground. For the first time, it provides detailed definitions of what constitutes anti-Semitism and puts in writing what the group sees as the distinction between anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of the state of Israel, the Liberal MP said.

"Let it be clear: Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is wrong," the protocol says. "But singling Israel out for selective condemnation and opprobrium -- let alone denying its right to exist or seeking is destruction -- is discriminatory and hateful, and not saying so is dishonest."

Amnesty International and HRW "experts" in international law in armed conflicts

"When the Cold War ended, HRW and its London-based twin - Amnesty International - adjusted their agendas to maintain influence and donations. They redefined themselves by claiming expertise they do not have on international law in armed conflicts, and their obsessive condemnations of Israel endeared them to the UN, while keeping HRW in the headlines."

Helsinki Watch (now Human Rights Watch) was established in New York by Robert Bernstein in 1978, primarily to lead the struggle on behalf of prisoners of conscience caught behind the Iron Curtain, including Soviet Jews like Anatoly (now Natan) Sharansky. Bernstein and his colleagues were liberal Democrats, and this was a bold move in this environment. One can easily imagine the attacks in speeches and columns (this was long before the Internet and blogosphere) from unreformed Stalinists on the far left condemning Bernstein's ideological treachery, and labeling Helsinki Watch as a Nixonian anticommunist tool.

But the world has changed, and HRW officials and their die-hard supporters are today's ideological dinosaurs. When the Cold War ended, HRW and its London-based twin - Amnesty International - adjusted their agendas to maintain influence and donations. They redefined themselves by claiming expertise they do not have on international law in armed conflicts, and their obsessive condemnations of Israel endeared them to the UN, while keeping HRW in the headlines. They were embraced by the anti-Zionist post-colonialists who maintain the flame and adrenalin in the Left-Right battles that raged during the Cold War.

These primitive Manichean ideologues have now come to the defense of HRW, after the NGO's leaders have been exposed for using biased and inaccurate "research reports" slamming Israel to solicit funds in Saudi Arabia. Now, as in the Cold War days, the main strategy is to ignore the substance and defame opponents, real or artificial.

Read the whole piece here (op-ed by Gerald Steinberg in JPost

- Amnesty Anti-Israel Obsession Continues to Undermine Moral Principles
- Did HRW and Amnesty protest at giving Ahmadinejad a platform at Durban II?
- "Amnesty ... let the Jews down in Durban", Simon Wiesenthal Center
- Amnesty International: Abolishing Israel's Right to Self Defense
- Amnesty’s obsession with Israel
- European NGO Amnesty International: relentless and disproportionate focus on Israeli "violations"

Germany honors Israeli 'Israel hater'

Only in Europe ... and in Germany of all places. The obvious difference between the US and Europe is here for all to see. President Barack Obama, unlike President Horst Köhler, would never award the highest national honour to someone who hates Israel and admires Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"Langer, 79, who left Israel in 1990, frequently compares Israel with apartheid in South Africa, and praised the speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the Durban II UN conference on racism in Geneva in April."

""An aggressive verbal attack on the Jewish state is rewarded for the first time by the German state. Is that really the intention?" (Dr. Dieter Graumann, vice president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany)

"Critics in Austria and Germany assert that Langer's efforts to delegitimize Israel meet the criteria outlined in the European Union's working definition of anti-Semitism."

German President Horst Köhler issued on Thursday the Federal Cross of Merit, first class - the country's most prestigious award - to Israeli attorney Felicia Langer, a vociferous critic of Israel who lives in Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg.

Langer, 79, who left Israel in 1990, frequently compares Israel with apartheid in South Africa, and praised the speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the Durban II UN conference on racism in Geneva in April.

When asked about the award and the parallels she has drawn between Israel and South African apartheid, she told The Jerusalem Post that the Federal Cross of Merit was a "recognition of my work," and "what Israel is practicing in the occupied territories is apartheid." In an interview with the Junge Welt, a Berlin-based Stalinist daily, she termed Israel "the apartheid of the present" and "the Israeli regime."

Asked about her interview with the Muslim Markt Web site, in which she argued that Defense Minister Ehud Barak, as well as other leading Israeli politicians and generals, should be convicted of war crimes at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Langer told the Post that she considered Israeli officials "war criminals" and stood by her comments. She also said the "official translation" of Ahmadinejad's threat to "wipe Israel off the map" did not contain a statement advocating the obliteration of Israel.

When asked why Köhler had awarded Langer with Germany's highest distinction, his press spokesman, Stefan Schulze, declined to comment and deferred the matter to the State Ministry in Baden-Württemberg.

In an e-mail to the Post, Uwe Köhn, a spokesman for the state of Baden-Württemberg, wrote, "The honor bestowed on Felicia Langer recognizes her humanitarian service, independent of political, ideological or religious motivation. Most important is her dedication to people in need, regardless of nationality or religion, given her own background as massively affected by the Holocaust. The decision to present the Order of Merit was made on the recommendation of the lord mayor of Tübingen, where Ms. Langer lives, with confirmation from all the usual departments involved in bestowing such honors, including the Foreign Ministry. The honor will be conferred by President Köhler and presented by Undersecretary [Hubert] Wicker."

Read the full piece here
Source: article by Benjamin Weinthal in JPost

Amnesty Anti-Israel Obsession Continues to Undermine Moral Principles

“Amnesty’s publications in the region portray Israel as among the worst human rights violators in the Middle East (second only to Iran). In 2008, Amnesty issued more in-depth reports (9) and “Wire” articles (22) on Israel than any other country.”

Amnesty in 2008: Anti-Israel Obsession Continues to Undermine Moral Principles (NGO Monitor)

* In 2008, Amnesty again focused disproportionately on Israel’s response to aggression from Gaza, and led the NGO campaigns accusing Israel of “collective punishment” and “war crimes.”

* Amnesty’s publications in the region portray Israel as among the worst human rights violators in the Middle East (second only to Iran). In 2008, Amnesty issued more in-depth reports (9) and “Wire” articles (22) on Israel than any other country.

* The data indicate that media attention and ideology, in contrast to universal human rights, drive Amnesty’s agenda. Amnesty’s anti-Israel press releases consistently reflect the organization’s role in influencing international public opinion.

* Amnesty International’s 2009 Annual Report (for events in 2008) further demonstrates the NGO superpower’s highly biased approach. Amnesty grossly distorts the conflict, selectively reports events to erase the context of terrorism, ignores human rights issues not consistent with the political agenda, and repeats un-sourced and anecdotal claims.

* Amnesty promotes an overwhelmingly Palestinian narrative of events, blaming Israel for the end of the Gaza ceasefire and the weapons’ smuggling tunnels under the Egyptian border.

* The section on “Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories” employs highly exaggerated language and absurd allegations. Amnesty accuses Israel of “unprecedented use of force” in Gaza, “virtual imprisonment,” and bringing the Palestinians to the “brink of human catastrophe,” and charges that “impunity remained the norm for Israeli soldiers.”

Full report here

- Did HRW and Amnesty protest at giving Ahmadinejad a platform at Durban II?
- "Amnesty ... let the Jews down in Durban", Simon Wiesenthal Center
- Amnesty International: Abolishing Israel's Right to Self Defense
- Amnesty’s obsession with Israel
- European NGO Amnesty International: relentless and disproportionate focus on Israeli "violations"

Did HRW and Amnesty protest at giving Ahmadinejad a platform at Durban II?

"Prior to Ahmadinejad’s speech, international NGOs including HRW, Amnesty, and others did not protest the giving the Iranian leader a platform, despite his Holocaust denial and Iran´s dismal human rights record."

HRW and other NGOs press for US participation, ignoring the real problems of the conference

While Canada, the US, Italy, Holland, Germany, Israel and other Western democracies decided not to participate, having decided that the Durban process could not be salvaged, and the principles should not be compromised for political expediency, Human Rights Watch (HRW) condemned these countries for "undermining" the conference. HRW also claimed (without credibility) that there was "no justification for the decision," and pressed for "engagement." Prior to Ahmadinejad’s speech, international NGOs including HRW, Amnesty, and others did not protest the giving the Iranian leader a platform, despite his Holocaust denial and Iran´s dismal human rights record. HRW, for instance, merely stated that his attendance raised "concern" and blandly calling Ahmadinejad a "divisive figure" for his "controversial" statements on Israel and the Holocaust. This lobbying helped legitimize Ahmadinejad´s absurd presence at a conference against racism.

Even after his hate filled speech, while HRW admitted that it "contradicted the spirit and purpose of the conference" and "Iran´s record of repressing peaceful dissent does great injustice to the struggle against racism and discrimination," the NGO continued to advocate that governments "should respond by staying." This language echoes Commissioner Pillay´s attempt to downplay the impact of such language used under the façade of human rights.

Remarkably, HRW drew a parallel between Ahmadinejad and the Western democracies that did not attend, claiming that their rhetoric was similar, while reiterating that the conference "was earlier undermined by the refusal of the United States to participate, which prompted walkouts by Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Poland." They have thus confused effect (the walkout) with the cause, which is corruption of human rights, aided by the radical NGO network."

Source:
NGO Monitor: UN tries to avoid NGO incitement, but gives Ahmadinejad a platform

- Amnesty International: Abolishing Israel's Right to Self Defense
- Amnesty’s obsession with Israel
- European NGO Amnesty International: relentless and disproportionate focus on Israeli "violations"

Amnesty International: Abolishing Israel's Right to Self Defense

"This continues Amnesty’s leading role in the Durban Strategy designed to isolate Israel and prevent self-defense."

Another rich and powerful European NGO (funded among others by the European Union) dedicated to the demonization of Israel. Reports such as the one Amnesty issued take months to prepare and require highly sophisticated military expertise totally absent from the report, which took Amnesty barely a few weeks to finalize ... Who is going to take them seriously ?

Source: NGO Monitor

- In a February 23, 2009 publication, Amnesty International calls on the UN Security Council to impose an arms embargo on Israel. This continues Amnesty’s leading role in the Durban Strategy designed to isolate Israel and prevent self-defense.

- Amnesty’s inability to distinguish between aggression and defense, and its artificial focus on very narrow aspects of international law are immoral and make a mockery of the foundations of the legal process.

- Amnesty exploits the façade of a "research report" to make baseless accusations, misrepresent international humanitarian law (IHL), and promote an immoral and indefensible equivalence between Hamas and Israel.

- Amnesty officials, including Malcolm Smart (director for the Middle East) and Colm Ó Cuanachain (head of the Irish branch), have been promoting an arms embargo against Israel for years, and this publication is a vehicle for their agenda.

- In accusing Israel of "war crimes," the authors cite weapons found "on the streets, in school playgrounds, in hospitals and in people's homes." Under any standard of law and morality, such "evidence" is meaningless, particularly in the context of response to the thousands of rocket attacks launched from these same areas.

- Amnesty’s attempt to equate the transfer weapons to Israel for legitimate defense, with clandestinely smuggled arms to a terrorist organization, is defamatory, immoral, and absurd.

- As in past publications, officials, including Donatella Rovera, use false claims, rely on unreliable eyewitness reports, and omit evidence that contradicts their ideological goals. While claiming to have seen secret IDF documents regarding Israeli arms, the quotation and source reference an article in Haaretz, in which an Israeli official comments on the use of illegal weapons by Hamas.

- Officials of Amnesty International responsible for abusing human rights claims in preparing this publication should resign.

Full report here

- Amnesty’s obsession with Israel
- European NGO Amnesty International: relentless and disproportionate focus on Israeli “violations”
.

Spain: more hidden European government funding for anti-Israel NGOs

The funding by the Spanish government of anti-Israel NGOs is all the more worrying considering that a 2007 ADL report revealed that anti-Semitic stereotypes are shared by half of the Spanish population – a much higher proportion than that found in other European countries: "47 percent of Spanish respondents answered "probably true" to at least three of the four anti-Semitic stereotypes tested". This compares with 20 percent in Germany; 22 percent in France; and 32 percent in Italy.

.

NGO monitor has the all too familiar story:

.

"In a July 18, 2008 posting on the Israel Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) website, Jeff Halper (the leader of this highly politicized group) announced the support of the Spanish government for ICAHD’s Summer Camp. The posting claimed that "the Spanish government is paying for the construction of an entire Palestinian home, plus the expenses of 18 members of Spanish NGOs who will join the camp." According to ICAHD, which often promotes demonization of Israel and uses terms such as "apartheid", the house in question was demolished by Israel.

.

In a phone conversation, NGO Monitor confirmed the controversial funding for ICAHD with Eva Suarez, Project Manager for the Spanish Cooperation Office in Jerusalem, but she refused to answer specific questions related to the home building project and the scope of funding to ICAHD, which is inconsistent with EU transparency policies. For example, she would not provide information on the amount of funds involved, the names of the Spanish NGOs participating in the project and how the NGOs and funds were authorized by the Spanish government.

.

ICAHD, an anti-Israel NGO funded largely by European Union, falsely accuses Israel of ethnic cleansing and state terrorism. It also participates in conferences and campaigns that promote a radical pro-Palestinian position, such as those held by Sabeel. In an August 2007 conference, Jennifer Loewenstein from ICAHD referred to "Israeli crimes, including its bloody and sadistic actions in Gaza and its atrocities….," and declared that "with every action, Palestine was becoming increasingly invisible, a non-entity for non-people." These are clearly partisan positions that are entirely outside the framework of universal human rights.

.

NGO Monitor will continue to press Spanish government officials involved in funding such controversial NGOs to provide the missing details, and act in a fully transparent manner."

.

Related:

Durban redux? Vitriol may follow Israel to Geneva
Europe still funding NGOs promoting Israel demonization campaigns
Europe's Hidden Hand, NGO Monitor report
Durban II: Just Say "Non", Judeosphere

Europeans exporting hatred of Israel to South Africa

"The tribunal coordinator, former Belgian senator Pierre Galand, said the tribunal would compare Israel to apartheid South Africa, putting questions to the Jewish state about crimes against humanity."

Ben Levitas, another vice chairman of the South African Zionist Federation, told JTA that the Jewish community has expressed great concern about the tribunal.

“This is not a court that reflects public opinion," Levitas said. "They have been very selective in their choice of witnesses.”

The anti-Israel kangaroo court is the idea of a radical anti-Zionist Belgian Pierre Galand who says that Israel is a "rogue state" (for more on his anti-Israel militancy click HERE).   Among the "tribunal" patrons there is another Belgian, François Houtart, a priest, former professor at the Catholic University of Louvain and Israel hater, who was accused of having molested a young boy from his family: "In 2009, Houtart signed the Appeal for the removal of Hamas from the EU terror list and he became instrumental in the Russell Tribunal against the state of Israel. In 2010, a cousin of Houtart (female) filed an anonymous complaint to the Adriaenssens commission that her brother was sexually abused by Houtart, while he stayed at their house. The priest admits having inappropriately touched his cousin twice around 1970." The cousin decided to come forward when she heard that his supporter were working to nominate him for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize.  See also: Francois Houtart, Belgian Activist Priest, Admits Sexual Abuse.  This fact doesn't seem to embarrass the "tribunal" crowd.

JOHANNESBURG, South Africa (JTA) -- Ten years after the notorious U.N. anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa, that devolved into an Israel-bashing frenzy, anti-Zionist forces are mobilizing again to hold another anti-Israel conference in South Africa. This time, Israel will be on trial.

The Russell Tribunal on Palestine -- a standing organization that held two tribunals against Israel last year in Barcelona and London -- has been called for Nov . 5-6 in Cape Town “to probe whether the treatment of Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories meets the criteria of the United Nations convention against the crime of apartheid.”

The South African Zionist Federation has called the event, which is to involve prominent South Africans and already is making national headlines here, “an irrelevant talk shop.”

“Despite its name, the Russell Tribunal is not an impartial, accountable judicial body,” a vice chairman of the South African Zionist Federation, Ben Swartz, told JTA. “Rather it is a loose association of lobbyists pushing a narrow, one-sided political agenda, in this case the delegitimization of the State of Israel.”

He called it “a pointless political smear campaign by a self-appointed group of anti-Israel activists.”

But because of the attention it is receiving in South Africa, the tribunal is likely to be a damaging public relations exercise against Israel. The event has won several key endorsements in the country, including from South Africa’s leading federation of trade unions, the ruling African National Congress party, the South African Communist Party, and Zackie Achmat, the AIDS activist and Nobel Peace Prize nominee.

While the tribunal said it invited Israel, Dov Segev-Steinberg, the Israeli ambassador to South Africa, denied the claim.

Another European Union and United Nations 'serial assault' against Israel

The Centre lamented that the message "included no mention of terrorism and, in fact, endorsed a designated terrorist organisation on the UN's own watchlist", also stressing that "the meeting showed its true colors by studiously ignoring our proposal for a balanced resolution, calling 'for peace between the Arab State of Palestine alongside the Jewish State of Israel.'"

All signs point to this Israel-bashing exercise having been organised by a group of influencial and determined Belgian French-speaking Israel-bashers: Pierre Galand (Socialist, Université Libre de Bruxelles, founder of the Russell Tribunal for Palestine), Véronique De Keyser (Euro MP, Socialist).  Other guests include (well known for their anti-Israel rhetoric) Neve Gordon, Avraham Burg, Clare Short.

"Brussels Meeting on the Role of Europe in Advancing Palestinian Statehood is a 'serial assault'"

Source: CENTRE SIMON WIESENTHAL - EUROPE

"General Assembly September vote on Palestinian status should be conditioned on prior dismantling of pernicious UN Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People"

In a letter to UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre's Director for International Relations, Dr. Shimon Samuels, described his experience as the only Jewish NGO attending the Brussels meeting on "The Role of Europe in Advancing Palestinian Statehood and Achieving Peace Between Israelis and Palestinians."

Samuels noted that "this title was nothing but a political euphemism to campaign for the 27 States of the European Union - and the European Institutions themselves - to endorse the September UN General Assembly vote on a Palestinian unilateral declaration of independence", adding "behind that smokescreen, however, the gathering was yet another 'serial assault' against the State of Israel."

The letter listed "campaigns that were discussed, resonant of a 'Third Intifada', - calls for mass demonstrations, beginning in July, by Israeli Arabs and Palestinians in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and by support groups in Europe and North America under the title, 'United for Palestine Independence': -Veiled threats made by delegates e.g. 'this mother of all conflicts can bring violence to all the nations of the world'; 'Palestine will be liberated by a huge anti-apartheid campaign of global civil society'... 'After the vote, we must move from anti-occupation to anti - oppression in a one-state solution'... 'The boycott must be effectively imposed...'"

The Centre suggested, "perhaps we should not be surprised, as this Brussels meeting - following similar initiatives in Latin America and Africa - was organized by the "United Nations Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People", a monster born in the murky shadows of the notorious 1975 Zionism = Racism resolution, which should have been disbanded with that resolution's repeal in 1991.

US Congress rejects Goldstone report - Jewish group lobbying European governments

"The fact that the person who is pushing the Goldstone Report onto the General Assembly agenda is the Libyan President of the General Assembly, Ali Abdesselam Treki, speaks volumes about the so-called concern for human rights. Nations like Libya, Iran and Pakistan, who are ranked among the worst offenders of human rights and racism, fight for power and control in the United Nations system not to serve humanity, but to deflect any criticism aimed at their authoritarian leadership." (Moshe Kantor)

Hopefully the lobbying is successful and Europe follows the U.S. in its rejection of the Goldstone report.

1. US Congress condemns UN Goldstone Report, 344 to 36; full text & voting breakdown
(UN Watch)
______
2. Jewish group lobbies European governments to vote against Goldstone report at UN

PARIS (EJP, article by Maud Swinnen)---The European Jewish Congress (EJC) is actively lobbying European governments to vote against the Goldstone Report on the Gaza war when it is discussed on Wednesday in the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

The EJC, which is a body representing Jewish communities across Europe, called on European and other democratic nations to challenge the ‘automatic tyrannical majority’ in the UN.

Thus far no European nation has voted for the Goldstone Commission Report, either during the resolution for its mandate nor when voting for its ensuing resolution in the United Nations Human Rights Council.

"I hope that this trend will continue and that Europe can enlist like-minded nations to ensure that no democratic nation votes for a resolution on the Goldstone Report," EJC President Moshe Kantor said. "We need a coalition of decent democratic nations to combat the automatic tyrannical majority that can impose its views at will by sheer weight of numbers and nothing else," he added.

The EJC said it is "deeply concerned" that the United Nations structure is being hijacked by nations who want to use their voice to suppress true human rights.

"The fact that the person who is pushing the Goldstone Report onto the General Assembly agenda is the Libyan President of the General Assembly, Ali Abdesselam Treki, speaks volumes about the so-called concern for human rights," Kantor said. "Nations like Libya, Iran and Pakistan, who are ranked among the worst offenders of human rights and racism, fight for power and control in the United Nations system not to serve humanity, but to deflect any criticism aimed at their authoritarian leadership."

The EJC feels that many of the United Nations institutions like the Human Rights Council, the General Assembly and the Durban process do not serve the purpose they were built for. "Unfortunately, the original and moral mandate of the UN is being hijacked for political agendas at the cost of millions of people who desperately seek its help."

Made in Europe: How government funded NGOs shaped the Goldstone report

Source: NGO Monitor

The Goldstone report is primarily based on statements, publications, and submissions from highly politicized and biased non-governmental organizations (NGOs), many of which are funded by European governments. This broad reliance on secondary sources lacking credibility contrasts with the claims to have conducted a "fact finding mission", and to have subjected claims to critical examination. Beyond adopting the flawed methodologies and false claims, the funding provided for these NGOs links European governments to the Goldstone report, and its contribution to anti-Israel demonization.

The 575-page preliminary report, issued 15 September 2009, contained over 500 direct references to and quotes from NGOs, as well as over 120 references and quotes from United Nations agencies, such as UNOCHA, which generally rely on NGOs as sources. (See below and NGO Monitor’s reports Goldstone Report: 575 pages of NGO "cut and paste" and House of Cards: NGOs and the Goldstone Report for examples and more details.)

The highly biased allegations, and the visibility they receive, are enabled by the same European government funding for NGOs that propels other aspects of the Durban Strategy. This intense effort is based on the exploitation of the rhetoric of international law and human rights to promote demonization of Israel. Similarly, European-funded political NGOs – such as PCHR, Al Mezan, Al Haq, and Adalah – are at the forefront of the "lawfare"campaigns that abuse the universal jurisdiction provisions in the legal codes of a number of Western countries using allegations of "war crimes." As with the attempt to secure an arrest warrant against Ehud Barak in the UK (led by Al Mezan and Al Haq), the goals are negative publicity for and delegitimization of Israel, not "justice."

The following NGOs are used as sources in the Goldstone report. (Funding information is followed by an excerpt from the report and testimonies based on each NGO; these examples are not exhaustive). As seen in many of the excerpts, the NGO allegations were often unconnected to the conflict in Gaza or to the inquiry’s mandate, but were included in NGO submissions and the report’s text as part of a wider effort to condemn Israel and remove the context of terrorism.
Read the full report HERE