Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Yeah, right; because "non-partisan human rights organizations" have no agenda, eh? Like the CJPME, for example?

I'm starting to wonder if CJPME is some kind of cult. Everyone coming out of there is so brainwashed they have the exact same thought patterns and writing style.

  • Replies 637
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Yeah, right; because "non-partisan human rights organizations" have no agenda, eh? Like the CJPME, for example?

Any source that doesn't follow your line is somehow suspect, while any and every source following your line is fair-and-balanced, even when they post proven outright lies. After all the lies don't change what's happening, eh?

But yeah, do criticize my source instead of refuting what was said.

When have I posted from CPJME? Even though I have friends who are part of the organization and I have pretty much the same "Mission and Vision", I'm not a member of their organization. Not to say I don't agree with their vision of justice in the middle east.

My information usually come from various media outlets and from human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Red Cross, B'Tselem and various, non-partisan human rights organizations.

You, on the other hand, have posted from one of the slimiest lobby groups, CAMERA. In this thread, you posted comments by an Israeli lobbyist who gets paid to lobby for Israel.

You always make an effort to draw some kind of a parallel with my sharing of information with your dishonest and suspicious method of spreading information, but you fail every time.

When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi

Guest American Woman
Posted

I'm starting to wonder if CJPME is some kind of cult. Everyone coming out of there is so brainwashed they have the exact same thought patterns and writing style.

Agreed. It's almost impossible to tell one from the other. They have the same style of attack, too, and the same avoidance techniques. The claim that it's a non-biased group is ridiculous when their agenda speaks so loud and clear.

Posted

My information usually come from various media outlets and from human rights organizations such as Amnesty International...

"‘Israel is a scum state."

- Frank Johansson, (High-ranking member of AI in europe.) When asked about whether he felt the same way about other states, he didn't name any. (See: http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=185846)

So what does that say about the quality of thought by AI if one of its leaders condemns Israel like that, yet fails to condemn (for example) North Korea?

Also, recall roughly 10 years ago... Israel was accused of a "Massacre" in the city of Jenin... (From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1937048.stm) "...the Amnesty investigation has only just begun but Palestinian claims of a massacre were gaining foundation.". What was eventually found? No Massacre. The number of dead was around 55. So, the people of Amnesty International is certainly capable of making mistakes.

..Human Rights Watch...

Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective".

- Robert Bernstein (Founder of Human Rights Watch and chairman for ~2 decades)

So what does it say about the quality of evidence from a group like Human Rights Watch if the FOUNDER (i.e. the guy who actually started the organization and probably has a good handle on the concept of "human rights") has turned around and started criticizing them?

You, on the other hand, have posted from one of the slimiest lobby groups, CAMERA. In this thread, you posted comments by an Israeli lobbyist who gets paid to lobby for Israel.

Earlier I pointed out that in another thread, you were using a member of the Palestinian government as a reference.

Once again, I ask... do you consider yourself to be a hypocrite by condemning someone for referencing an Israeli lobbyist while you yourself referenced a member of the Palestinian government (and thus someone who is just as likely to be biased.)

Posted

"‘Israel is a scum state."

- Frank Johansson, (High-ranking member of AI in europe.) When asked about whether he felt the same way about other states, he didn't name any. (See: http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=185846)

I have no doubt that an organization made up of thousands of people have people whose personal views differ from the organization.

Amnesty spokeswoman Susanna Flood said, “Johansson remains as the director of Amnesty International in Finland.

“Obviously, we regret it if such a term was used by an individual whose personal views could be misunderstood as reflecting those of Amnesty International, and we disassociate Amnesty International fully and clearly from such comments and we are making this clear to Mr Johansson,” Flood told thePost. “Amnesty International has never described Israel as a ‘scum state’ or used any such terms to describe Israel,” she added.

So what does that say about the quality of thought by AI if one of its leaders condemns Israel like that, yet fails to condemn (for example) North Korea?

You should look into AI's reports on North Korea. It might give you a better understanding of how things work.

Also, recall roughly 10 years ago... Israel was accused of a "Massacre" in the city of Jenin... (From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1937048.stm) "...the Amnesty investigation has only just begun but Palestinian claims of a massacre were gaining foundation.". What was eventually found? No Massacre. The number of dead was around 55. So, the people of Amnesty International is certainly capable of making mistakes.

I'm not sure what your definition of massacre is. But killing 55 people is pretty bad. Let's see how the dictionary defines massacre:

Deliberately and violently kill (a large number of people).

Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective".

- Robert Bernstein (Founder of Human Rights Watch and chairman for ~2 decades)

So what does it say about the quality of evidence from a group like Human Rights Watch if the FOUNDER (i.e. the guy who actually started the organization and probably has a good handle on the concept of "human rights") has turned around and started criticizing them?

That's his opinion. HRW gave a response to his remark:

Human Rights Watch does not believe that the human rights records of "closed" societies are the only ones deserving scrutiny. If that were the case, we would not work on US abuses in Guantanamo Bay, police abuse in Brazil, the "untouchables" in India, or migrants in South Africa. "Open" societies and democracies commit human rights abuses, too, and Human Rights Watch has an important role to play in documenting those abuses and pressing for their end.

Human Rights Watch does not devote more time and energy to Israel than to other countries in the region, or in the world. We've produced more than 1,700 reports, letters, news releases, and other commentaries on the Middle East and North Africa since January 2000, and the vast majority of these were about countries other than Israel. Furthermore, our Middle East division is only one of 16 research programs at Human Rights Watch. The work on Israel is a tiny fraction of Human Rights Watch's work as a whole.

Earlier I pointed out that in another thread, you were using a member of the Palestinian government as a reference.

Once again, I ask... do you consider yourself to be a hypocrite by condemning someone for referencing an Israeli lobbyist while you yourself referenced a member of the Palestinian government (and thus someone who is just as likely to be biased.)

Quoting a member of government, whose job is to look after detainees and prisoner and who is commenting on the findings of an autopsy is much different than quoting someone who is a paid lobbyist.

When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi

Posted

I have no doubt that an organization made up of thousands of people have people whose personal views differ from the organization.

This individual was not just some low level volunteer going around knocking on doors, etc. He was the HEAD of one of the European branches. Yet someone with that much authority managed to get to the head of the organization despite holding such views. Doesn't really say much for their vetting of individuals working for them does it.

Amnesty spokeswoman Susanna Flood said, “Johansson remains as the director of Amnesty International in Finland.

“Obviously, we regret it if such a term was used by an individual whose personal views could be misunderstood as reflecting those of Amnesty International, and we disassociate Amnesty International fully and clearly from such comments and we are making this clear to Mr Johansson,” Flood told thePost. “Amnesty International has never described Israel as a ‘scum state’ or used any such terms to describe Israel,” she added.

You should look into AI's reports on North Korea. It might give you a better understanding of how things work.

Irrelevant. The individual quoted labeled Israel as "scum". He was a leader in the movement. The fact that the organization has issued reports on North Korea doesn't mean that the individual in question (as well as others that would let him gain power) doesn't hold an anti-Israel bias.

I'm not sure what your definition of massacre is. But killing 55 people is pretty bad.

In case you didn't know, the initial claim in Jenin was that "Hundreds/Thousands" were dead. (That was the basis for the "Massacre" label). That's what organizations like Amnesty International were claiming during the event itself.

Turns out they were wrong.

Which goes to show even your vaunted human rights organizations can make mistakes and falsely criticize Israel

That's his opinion. HRW gave a response to his remark:

So, an organization is defending itself. Wow. Who'd ever guess that an organization that was criticized would ever in a million years try to put a positive spin on itself? It just boggles the mind!

again, I ask... do you consider yourself to be a hypocrite bycondemning someone for referencing an Israeli lobbyist while you

yourself referenced a member of the Palestinian government (and thus someone who is just as likely to be biased.)

Quoting a member of government, whose job is to look after detainees and prisoner and who is commenting on the findings of an autopsy is much different than quoting someone who is a paid lobbyist.

Wow, just totally... wow. It always astounds me the amount of mental and ethical gymnasics people like you go through in order to justify your hypocrisy.

You DO realize that this person, who's job it is to look after prisoners, is still a member of the Palestinian government? You do know who they are, right? The ones who are primarily in opposition to the Israelis?

Are you assuming each and every member of the Palestinian governement is 100% honest when it issues any statement regarding the conflict? Do you think that being a member of the government makes him more honest than a "lobbyist"?

Posted

Read the timeline so that you may not make false and bizarre justifications for killing civilians that make you look like a German trying to justify Nazi actions 70 years ago.

Your calling people Nazis is typical. You come on this forum ot deliberately inflamme and incite hatred not just against Jews and Israelis but anyone who questions your rhetoric.

You in fact utilize Goebbels propoganda techniques if we are to engage in the discourse you commenced.

What makes everyone else a Nazi and you so righteous?

Look at what you resort to. You use a cheap theatric stunt of showing a baby to incite emotional responses. You don't debate, you deliberately exploit the image of a baby to name call.

I am calling you out again as a propoganda agent and using a pen name.

Do you or do you not work for a government agency and in particular the government of Iran? If you want to come on this forum and continually accuse people of being a Nazi then you stand by the same standard of behaviour. Release your actual political agenda and purpose on this forum.

You want to throw out babies to manipulate emotion and call others Nazis? Pathetic. You can't get any lower in your discourse.

I come to you to hell.

Posted

I am quite willing to discourse with Hudson in Arabic if he wants. Do tell him.

Do you know Arabic?

  • Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone."
  • Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds.
  • Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location?
  • The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).

Posted (edited)

This individual was not just some low level volunteer going around knocking on doors, etc. He was the HEAD of one of the European branches. Yet someone with that much authority managed to get to the head of the organization despite holding such views. Doesn't really say much for their vetting of individuals working for them does it.

An individual's opinion, who has not worked on any reports in israel or the occupied territories, who is in an organization made up of thousands of people does not represent the organization's opinion. Especially after the organization distanced itself from his opinion.

Irrelevant. The individual quoted labeled Israel as "scum". He was a leader in the movement. The fact that the organization has issued reports on North Korea doesn't mean that the individual in question (as well as others that would let him gain power) doesn't hold an anti-Israel bias.

Has he made these comments before becoming the head of finland's branch? Does calling a country 'scum' warrant the firing of a person? Even if the person has nothing to do with that country, region or any reports that come out of it?

In case you didn't know, the initial claim in Jenin was that "Hundreds/Thousands" were dead. (That was the basis for the "Massacre" label). That's what organizations like Amnesty International were claiming during the event itself.

Turns out they were wrong.

Which goes to show even your vaunted human rights organizations can make mistakes and falsely criticize Israel

Really? Amnesty International said that "Hundreds/Thousands" were dead in Jenin? Please provide proof of this.

If anything, Amnesty International failed to follow up on reports about Jenin, where Dr. Derrick Pounder, who works with AI, said, after a visit to Jenin, that there was a “prima facie case for war crimes.”

AI failed to even do a report on Jenin. If anything, they succumbed to pressure from the U.S. and Israel and failed in what they're supposed to do.

So, an organization is defending itself. Wow. Who'd ever guess that an organization that was criticized would ever in a million years try to put a positive spin on itself? It just boggles the mind!

So you're never happy. If the organization doesn't respond to the issue, they're supporting it. If the organization does respond to the issue, they're trying to cover itself up and 'put a positive spin on itself' ?

Do you realize that less than 4% of AI reports involve Israel? Think about that for a bit.

Wow, just totally... wow. It always astounds me the amount of mental and ethical gymnasics people like you go through in order to justify your hypocrisy.

You DO realize that this person, who's job it is to look after prisoners, is still a member of the Palestinian government? You do know who they are, right? The ones who are primarily in opposition to the Israelis?

I never said the Palestinian official/doctor's conclusion from the report were final. I am interested in an independent investigation to see what happened to the prisoner who died in the hands of Israel. We will see if Israel will agree to this. They have a long history of not cooperating and allowing independent reports when it comes to questionable circumstances.

Are you assuming each and every member of the Palestinian governement is 100% honest when it issues any statement regarding the conflict? Do you think that being a member of the government makes him more honest than a "lobbyist"?

I am saying that the situations are much different and for you to try to draw a parallel or make blanket, superficial statements is not going to work.

In one, you have a paid lobbyist who was never part of any research or report on Gaza, and who was never in Gaza, making general comments about how it's not a war crime to kill civilians and then you have another person, a Palestinan official/doctor who, from an autopsy conducted in Israel, with others present, stated that the death of a prisoner was not due to a heart attack as Israel previously said (who is now backtracking saying it wasn't a heart attack), and that the bruises to many parts of his body show that the prisoner was tortured, which led to his death.

Edited by Hudson Jones

When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi

Guest American Woman
Posted (edited)

Do you know Arabic?

ظ. نعم, أجل, بلى

"AA. Yes, Yes, Yes

Translate "ظ. نعم, أجل, بلى" from Arabic"

Cool! smile.png

Edited by American Woman

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...