UN says Israel, not Iran, North Korea or Syria worst violator of human rights

[Arminkh]

Not sure why author thinks Israel needs to be worse than north korea to have more resolutions against it.. btw who sponsors resolution against north korea?

That's the irony here. He is trying to condemn the resolutions by implying that those resolution would place Israel behind Iran and North Korea. That is what I find funny.

So according to you, restricting anyone's ability to choose whatever he/she wants to believe, restricting freedom to choose his/her own way of dressing, restricting anyone's right to marry whoever he/she wants etc. are not violations of human rights? Only bombing from air is considered as a violation of human rights? No, these are universal human rights and should be available to anyone and restricting those rights don't improve the productivity of the country either so I don't see why they should be restricted in any case. Israel (and Lebanon to some extent) is by far the only country that guarantee these rights both constitutionally and socially so saying that Israel is the worst human right violator is laughable.

Dude, I am not specifically leaned towards western values. In the middle east section on this forum, anyone who opposes religious extremism is considered as leaned towards the west. Maybe you have forgotten to look at Far East where they have the same secular values but the political systems are far different from what you see in the west. I would absorb any positive elements in western society that make western societies productive. However, "one man, one vote" democracy is not something that buy into and I have said many times that democracy is not universal and certainly don't fit in a developing country so no I am not being pro-Western or Eastern, I try my best to be pragmatic.

Those are what YOU think have been limited in Iran. Rights are defined and justified based on the culture and beliefs of the majority in each country. There is no such thing as universal human rights unless whole world adopts the same culture and value system. Tell me what do you think about this?

Niqab bans in Canada | rabble.ca

The Muslim women is acting according to her belief and wants to wear neqab in the citizenship ceremony. Mr. Harper on the other hand thinks this is irrespectful and she shouldn't wear it. Both are acting based on their culture and beliefs. Who is right here?

You can't help being biased neither can I nor the Prime Minister of the most culturally varied country on earth which is Canada. So drop it here body. We won't get anywhere. Those who voted in favor of those resolutions are all well versed in what you are trying to say here.

 

[Azizam]

That's the irony here. He is trying to condemn the resolutions by implying that those resolution would place Israel behind Iran and North Korea. That is what I find funny.



Those are what YOU think have been limited in Iran. Rights are defined and justified based on the culture and beliefs of the majority in each country. There is no such thing as universal human rights unless whole world adopts the same culture and value system. Tell me what do you think about this?

Niqab bans in Canada | rabble.ca

The Muslim women is acting according to her belief and wants to wear neqab in the citizenship ceremony. Mr. Harper on the other hand thinks this is irrespectful and she shouldn't wear it. Both are acting based on their culture and beliefs. Who is right here?

You can't help being biased neither can I nor the Prime Minister of the most culturally varied country on earth which is Canada. So drop it here body. We won't get anywhere. Those who voted in favor of those resolutions are all well versed in what you are trying to say here.

Niqab is the exact opposite of being naked. No one is asking muslim countries to allow anyone to walk naked and in many western countries, public nudity is banned too and hijab isn't banned in the west either. Seems like you can't understand how it is to be a non-muslim in a muslim country so you bring excuses.

Yes I am biased too. In fact I would be very happy if other countries including Canada impose the same restrictions (restricting marriage, banning hijab, restricting access to education etc.) that muslims impose on non-muslims. Only then, you will realise how it is to live under such pressure.

 

[Arminkh]

Niqab is the exact opposite of being naked. No one is asking muslim countries to allow anyone to walk naked and in many western countries, public nudity is banned too and hijab isn't banned in the west either. Seems like you can't understand how it is to be a non-muslim in a muslim country so you bring excuses.

Yes I am biased too. In fact I would be very happy if other countries including Canada impose the same restrictions (restricting marriage, banning hijab, restricting access to education etc.) that muslims impose on non-muslims. Only then, you will realise how it is to live under such pressure.

Instead of getting personal try to understand that what you stand for is just a cultural thing. You said hejab and neqab is not banned in the West? This is the first paragraph of the article that I referred to above:

After France passed legislation in 2004 banning hijabs or headscarves in schools and then in 2011 banning the burqua (a full body covering revealing only a woman's eyes) from being worn in any public space, discussion amongst activists has come to a boil about what is reasonable accommodation in Canada.

So it is banned in west (or part of it) after all. It seems like the Muslims are going through the same challenges that you mentioned in non Muslim countries as well. They are not directly banned from education but I know many of them would rather stay home instead of removing their hejab and attend school or university.

The Human Rights is usually a tool in the hands of certain countries to put pressure on certain others. It is a cultural fight between east and west. There is no right or wrong. So live where you think its regulations are in line with your beliefs and stop condemning others since they don't necessarily share your thoughts.

 

[mohsen]

It's funny how some false flag Zionists try to misdirect the discussion from Zionist's war crimes in Palestine to its internal matters. I guess for them killing kids is no problem, as long as they are not Zionist.
also supporting Al-Nusra terrorist group (branch of Al-Qaeda in Syria) is another aspect of their kindness which shows how deeply they care about human rights, sorry misspell animal's rights.

 

[Azizam]

Instead of getting personal try to understand that what you stand for is just a cultural thing. You said hejab and neqab is not banned in the West? This is the first paragraph of the article that I referred to above:

After France passed legislation in 2004 banning hijabs or headscarves in schools and then in 2011 banning the burqua (a full body covering revealing only a woman's eyes) from being worn in any public space, discussion amongst activists has come to a boil about what is reasonable accommodation in Canada.

So it is banned in west (or part of it) after all. It seems like the Muslims are going through the same challenges that you mentioned in non Muslim countries as well. They are not directly banned from education but I know many of them would rather stay home instead of removing their hejab and attend school or university.

The Human Rights is usually a tool in the hands of certain countries to put pressure on certain others. It is a cultural fight between east and west. There is no right or wrong. So live where you think its regulations are in line with your beliefs and stop condemning others since they don't necessarily share your thoughts.

That's why I am saying they should be directly banned and all the laws should be translated into targeting them.

So to take revenge from west, you discriminate against your own people who happened to believe in a different religion from the majority? Do you think west gives a damm about those minorities? No they don't. In the end of the day, the only losers will be your own minorities including Zoroastrians who are an endangered religious. Do you think West genuinely cares about Zoroastrians? I don't think so. And yes, there is a right or wrong mate. There is something all of us that don't belonged to that religion can agree on whether we are from east or west. We are all against the religious madness.

 

[Abii]

Looks like the akhoond/mullah brigade has went full terrorist.

 

[Arminkh]

That's why I am saying they should be directly banned and all the laws should be translated into targeting them.

So to take revenge from west, you discriminate against your own people who happened to believe in a different religion from the majority? Do you think west gives a damm about those minorities? No they don't. In the end of the day, the only losers will be your own minorities including Zoroastrians who are an endangered religious. Do you think West genuinely cares about Zoroastrians? I don't think so. And yes, there is a right or wrong mate. There is something all of us that don't belonged to that religion can agree on whether we are from east or west. We are all against the religious madness.

Oh my god! What do you take Iranians for? What revenge? Seriously?

That's why I tell you you really shouldn't argue about the things that you know nothing about. Let me tell you about Zoroastrians. I had a class mate in university who was Zoroastrians. He didn't have any limitations on what he wanted to study. Unfortunately his father passed away during the time we were in the university together. All of our classmates (all of the Muslims) respectfully attended the funeral ceremony which was held according to their traditions. I even remember the female class mates were wearing white scarf to respect their traditions (Iranian Muslims wear black scarf in funerals) . We thought of him as an Iranian first and honestly nobody even cared what his beliefs were. Now he is a successful businessman in Iran. He had the opportunity to go to whatever country that he wanted to but he decided to remain in Iran. You are totally clueless about how things in Iran is.

No west doesn't care about Zoroastrians but we Iranian do not only because they are Iranians but because it is one of the most ancient religions and Iran is their holy land.

Your last sentence about right or wrong or religious madness is more bout things that are happening in ISIS and Taliban controlled areas and to a lesser degree in KSA. Good for you but I'm specifically talking about Iran.

 

[gau8av]

No west doesn't care about Zoroastrians but we Iranian do not only because they are Iranians but because it is one of the most ancient religions and Iran is their holy land.

wonder what so many of them are doing in India, then ?

 

[Arminkh]

wonder what so many of them are doing in India, then ?

What? Is India such a horrible place to be that you are wondering why they are there?

What are so many Indians doing in Canada? Are they running away because of poor human right? You see, everything about Iranians is interpreted differently.

 

[gau8av]

What? Is India such a horrible place to be that you are wondering why they are there?

What are so many Indians doing in Canada? Are they running away because of poor human right? You see, everything about Iranians is interpreted differently.

just kidding, I wasn't bashing Iran, but they did migrate to here all those centuries ago. I see it as a part of Iran and India's old cultural ties.. besides, they bought good food and pretty women, cant complain

 

[Arminkh]

just kidding, I wasn't bashing Iran, but they did migrate to here all those centuries ago. I see it as a part of Iran and India's old cultural ties.. besides, they bought good food and pretty women, cant complain

Lol, actually I had got the same ready for my next reply but you beat me to the punch.

Good food, nice people and pretty women. Sounds like Indians

 

[Azizam]

Oh my god! What do you take Iranians for? What revenge? Seriously?

That's why I tell you you really shouldn't argue about the things that you know nothing about. Let me tell you about Zoroastrians. I had a class mate in university who was Zoroastrians. He didn't have any limitations on what he wanted to study. Unfortunately his father passed away during the time we were in the university together. All of our classmates (all of the Muslims) respectfully attended the funeral ceremony which was held according to their traditions. I even remember the female class mates were wearing white scarf to respect their traditions (Iranian Muslims wear black scarf in funerals) . We thought of him as an Iranian first and honestly nobody even cared what his beliefs were. Now he is a successful businessman in Iran. He had the opportunity to go to whatever country that he wanted to but he decided to remain in Iran. You are totally clueless about how things in Iran is.

No west doesn't care about Zoroastrians but we Iranian do not only because they are Iranians but because it is one of the most ancient religions and Iran is their holy land.

Your last sentence about right or wrong or religious madness is more bout things that are happening in ISIS and Taliban controlled areas and to a lesser degree in KSA. Good for you but I'm specifically talking about Iran.

It's not the society. Constitutionally they are meant to be wiped out of Iran since it forbids conversion to Zoroastrianism and marrying Zoroastrian males etc. Is it that hard to understand? There is a reason why Zoroastrianism is considered as a dying religion in the world. If Iran gives freedom for people to convert from Israel to some other religion, Zoroastrianism would rise again. Whether you like it or not, that's the constitution of Iran and you are spitting on your own history. That's why I said, Iran as a society is relatively tolerant but the constitution is the same as other Sunni countries in the region.

 

[Arminkh]

It's not the society. Constitutionally they are meant to be wiped out of Iran since it forbids conversion to Zoroastrianism and marrying Zoroastrian males etc. Is it that hard to understand? There is a reason why Zoroastrianism is considered as a dying religion in the world. If Iran gives freedom for people to convert from Israel to some other religion, Zoroastrianism would rise again. Whether you like it or not, that's the constitution of Iran and you are spitting on your own history. That's why I said, Iran as a society is relatively tolerant but the constitution is the same as other Sunni countries in the region.

Lol, you just contradicted yourself there. Then based on what you say it is more a limitation on Muslim Iranians than Zoroastrians. Because it is Muslims who are banned from changing their religion not the Zoroastrians. Which is true. And I as a Muslim don't want that freedom because I wouldn't change my religion. It is a personal preference. My religion, like my family name was passed to me by my parents and will remain the same until I die. How many Iranians outside Iran do you know who have used this freedom and changed their religion?

I'm convinced that you don't know anything about Zoroastrians in Iran. They are a closed society and they have chosen to be so. Yes they can't marry Muslim Iranians but they can marry people from other minority groups in Iran. But knowing many of them, they like to ONLY marry Zoroastrians who share their values and beliefs. It is a natural preference which shouldn't be that hard to understand, even for you. So it is more a limitation that they have put on themselves not the constitution. On the other hand, if they really think their existence is in danger in Iran, they can move out of Iran and try to expand their religion outside, but they don't do that either. In how many occasions have you seen Zoroastrians actively try to add to their followers outside Iran? Are they as active as Christians and Muslims? To spread your religion, you need to be active. You can't just sit in a corner, do nothing and then blame the government or constitution for what is happening to you.

You see, if Iranians wanted to wipe any of the minorities out, they would have been wiped out during the past 1300 years. An example is what Muslim Turkey did with Armenians. They just killed them all.

Stop spreading these lies. Iran was the first nation in the world that enacted human rights regulations back in 500 BC when many of today's so called advocates of human rights either didn't exist or didn't know what right is to begin with. Killing or hurting the weak is considered the worst unethical thing in our culture. If you don't believe me, go to Iran and insult a kid, a woman or an elderly. Before police gets there, the rest of the people walking by will teach you a lesson that you won't forget for the rest of your life. While bullying is a big issue in Western schools, you won't see that in Iran because the other students won't let that happen. Our laws may not taste good to Westerners which is fine but genocide is not what we do.

 

[Solomon2]

The Opinion Pages | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
The U.N.’s War on Israel
By RON PROSOR MARCH 31, 2015

Credit Joohee Yoon

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year. It was intended to be a temple of peace, but this once great global body has been overrun by the repressive regimes that violate human rights and undermine international security.

In 1949, when the United Nations admitted Israel as a member state, it had 58 member countries and about half had a democratic orientation. Today, the landscape of the organization has changed drastically. From 51 member states at its founding in 1945, the institution has grown to 193 members — fewer than half of which are democracies.

The very nations that deny democratic rights to their people abuse the United Nations’ democratic forums to advance their interests. The largest of these groups comprises members from the 120-member-strong bloc known as the Non-Aligned Movement. Since 2012, the bloc has been chaired by Iran, which has used its position to bolster its allies and marginalize Israel.

In March, the United Nations closed the annual meeting of its Commission on the Status of Women by publishing a report that effectively singled out just one country for condemnation: Israel. The commission apparently had nothing to say about the Sudanese girls who are subjected to female genital mutilation. It also had nothing to say about the Iranian women who have been punished for crimes of “adultery” by stoning. These oversights may have something to do with the fact that both Iran and Sudan sit on the 45-member commission.

Then there is the United Nations Human Rights Council (the body that replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006). Its membership includes Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Venezuela — nations where you risk life and liberty if you express dissenting opinions. Yet these governments stand in judgment on the rest of us.

In 2007, Sudan chaired a committee overseeing human rights — even as its president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, was being investigated for crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur, for which the International Criminal Court later issued arrest warrants. Saudi Arabia — a regime notorious for public executions and floggings like that, most recently, of the blogger Raif Badawi — sits on the Human Rights Council, despite regularly receiving the worst possible ratings on civil liberties and political rights from the independent watchdog Freedom House.


In 2013, Iran was elected to the committee responsible for disarmament — even as it continued its nuclear expansion, support for terrorism and the destruction of Israel. Last year, an Iranian served as a vice chair of the General Assembly’s legal committee, an inexplicable choice given that Iranian citizens are routinely denied due process and fair trials.

Knowing this history, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that, in the 2014-15 session alone, the General Assembly adopted about 20 resolutions critical of Israel, while the human rights situations in Iran, Syria and North Korea merited just one condemnation apiece. Day after day, member states turn a blind eye to the most deplorable crimes.

Iran? Just one hostile resolution for a nation that, on average, executes citizens at a rate of two a day for “crimes” that include homosexuality, apostasy and the vague offense of being an “enemy of God.”

North Korea? Just one negative resolution even though it has imprisoned more than 200,000 citizens, throws children into forced labor camps and subjects its population to food shortages and famine as a result of government policies.

Syria? Again, just one resolution for a government that has pursued a war against its own people that has caused the deaths of at least 220,000 men, women and children — many by torture, starvation, chemical weapons and barrel bombs dropped on markets and schools.


Christians now number among the world’s most persecuted religious groups in Muslim countries, yet this human rights crisis is almost completely ignored by the United Nations. Instead, Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and an area in the region where the Christian population is actually growing, often seems to be the only nation the United Nations cares about.


Nowhere is anti-Israel bias more obvious than in the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. The council addresses the human rights abuses of all countries in the world under a program known as Agenda Item 4. That is, all countries but one. Israel is the only nation that is singled out for criticism by virtue of a special program, known as Agenda Item 7. A result, according to the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch, is that more than 50 percent of all condemnatory resolutions are directed at the Jewish state.

Following last summer’s conflict in Gaza, the Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry and selected William Schabas, a Canadian law professor, to chair the investigation. In February, Mr. Schabas was forced to resign after documents came to light revealing that, in 2012, he had done consulting work for the Palestine Liberation Organization. Surprisingly, this fact slipped Mr. Schabas’s mind during his vetting process.

It was clear from the outset that Mr. Schabas was not an impartial arbiter since he had a record of public statements suggesting that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the former president, Shimon Peres, should face trial at the International Criminal Court. When Israel protested, however, the United Nations ignored it.

I am often asked how I can stand the tide of hatred aimed at Israel. Our response to the United Nations’ accusations is to speak tirelessly for those who are denied a voice in most of the Middle East — women, minorities, the L.G.B.T. community — and to fight daily efforts by totalitarian regimes to undermine democratic societies. Based on the fact that Israel is a thriving society, I believe we are winning.

Later this year, chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement will transfer to Venezuela, Iran’s ally. For the foreseeable future, we can expect more of the same.

The problem with the United Nations is that the leaders of many of its member states do not rule with the consent of the governed. Instead, they use the body as a forum to deflect attention from their own ruthless rule. In so doing, they turn a stage for courageous statecraft into a tragic theater of the absurd.

Ron Prosor is Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations.

 

[Arminkh]

The Opinion Pages | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
The U.N.’s War on Israel
By RON PROSOR MARCH 31, 2015

Credit Joohee Yoon

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year. It was intended to be a temple of peace, but this once great global body has been overrun by the repressive regimes that violate human rights and undermine international security.

In 1949, when the United Nations admitted Israel as a member state, it had 58 member countries and about half had a democratic orientation. Today, the landscape of the organization has changed drastically. From 51 member states at its founding in 1945, the institution has grown to 193 members — fewer than half of which are democracies.

The very nations that deny democratic rights to their people abuse the United Nations’ democratic forums to advance their interests. The largest of these groups comprises members from the 120-member-strong bloc known as the Non-Aligned Movement. Since 2012, the bloc has been chaired by Iran, which has used its position to bolster its allies and marginalize Israel.

In March, the United Nations closed the annual meeting of its Commission on the Status of Women by publishing a report that effectively singled out just one country for condemnation: Israel. The commission apparently had nothing to say about the Sudanese girls who are subjected to female genital mutilation. It also had nothing to say about the Iranian women who have been punished for crimes of “adultery” by stoning. These oversights may have something to do with the fact that both Iran and Sudan sit on the 45-member commission.

Then there is the United Nations Human Rights Council (the body that replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006). Its membership includes Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Venezuela — nations where you risk life and liberty if you express dissenting opinions. Yet these governments stand in judgment on the rest of us.

In 2007, Sudan chaired a committee overseeing human rights — even as its president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, was being investigated for crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur, for which the International Criminal Court later issued arrest warrants. Saudi Arabia — a regime notorious for public executions and floggings like that, most recently, of the blogger Raif Badawi — sits on the Human Rights Council, despite regularly receiving the worst possible ratings on civil liberties and political rights from the independent watchdog Freedom House.


In 2013, Iran was elected to the committee responsible for disarmament — even as it continued its nuclear expansion, support for terrorism and the destruction of Israel. Last year, an Iranian served as a vice chair of the General Assembly’s legal committee, an inexplicable choice given that Iranian citizens are routinely denied due process and fair trials.

Knowing this history, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that, in the 2014-15 session alone, the General Assembly adopted about 20 resolutions critical of Israel, while the human rights situations in Iran, Syria and North Korea merited just one condemnation apiece. Day after day, member states turn a blind eye to the most deplorable crimes.

Iran? Just one hostile resolution for a nation that, on average, executes citizens at a rate of two a day for “crimes” that include homosexuality, apostasy and the vague offense of being an “enemy of God.”

North Korea? Just one negative resolution even though it has imprisoned more than 200,000 citizens, throws children into forced labor camps and subjects its population to food shortages and famine as a result of government policies.

Syria? Again, just one resolution for a government that has pursued a war against its own people that has caused the deaths of at least 220,000 men, women and children — many by torture, starvation, chemical weapons and barrel bombs dropped on markets and schools.


Christians now number among the world’s most persecuted religious groups in Muslim countries, yet this human rights crisis is almost completely ignored by the United Nations. Instead, Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and an area in the region where the Christian population is actually growing, often seems to be the only nation the United Nations cares about.


Nowhere is anti-Israel bias more obvious than in the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. The council addresses the human rights abuses of all countries in the world under a program known as Agenda Item 4. That is, all countries but one. Israel is the only nation that is singled out for criticism by virtue of a special program, known as Agenda Item 7. A result, according to the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch, is that more than 50 percent of all condemnatory resolutions are directed at the Jewish state.

Following last summer’s conflict in Gaza, the Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry and selected William Schabas, a Canadian law professor, to chair the investigation. In February, Mr. Schabas was forced to resign after documents came to light revealing that, in 2012, he had done consulting work for the Palestine Liberation Organization. Surprisingly, this fact slipped Mr. Schabas’s mind during his vetting process.

It was clear from the outset that Mr. Schabas was not an impartial arbiter since he had a record of public statements suggesting that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the former president, Shimon Peres, should face trial at the International Criminal Court. When Israel protested, however, the United Nations ignored it.

I am often asked how I can stand the tide of hatred aimed at Israel. Our response to the United Nations’ accusations is to speak tirelessly for those who are denied a voice in most of the Middle East — women, minorities, the L.G.B.T. community — and to fight daily efforts by totalitarian regimes to undermine democratic societies. Based on the fact that Israel is a thriving society, I believe we are winning.

Later this year, chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement will transfer to Venezuela, Iran’s ally. For the foreseeable future, we can expect more of the same.

The problem with the United Nations is that the leaders of many of its member states do not rule with the consent of the governed. Instead, they use the body as a forum to deflect attention from their own ruthless rule. In so doing, they turn a stage for courageous statecraft into a tragic theater of the absurd.

Ron Prosor is Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations.

I wonder why it is not called a war when they pass resolutions left and right against Iran. War is a very strong word to be used in this case, don't you think?

Tell me, is taking everything personal a Jewish thing or an Israeli one? Here is another example. This poor comedian has not even started his new carrier and is already under fire from Jews! Funny thing is he is half Jewish himself!

Come on, relax and look at yourselves before pointing at others.

Daily Show's Trevor Noah under fire for Twitter jokes about Jews and women | Culture | The Guardian