Total Pageviews

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Alfred de Zayas: UN Human Rights Blunder

Nadene Goldfoot
The UN must stay up nights trying to think up ways to gang up on Israel.  Yesterday they adopted a resolution ratifying 22 resolutions against Israel and only 4 against others in the world. they have also  appointed in March another special Rapporteur, Alfred de Zayas as the Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, which is an anti-West mandate written by Cuba's Communist regime.  Of course he's Cuban-born. This makes him eligible to be on a UN committee of Human Rights, comprising such countries  as" Congo, China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia, and has as its Vice President a country, Mauritania, that is considered the world’s worst enabler of modern slavery."

Zayas, born May 31, 1947 in Havana, Cuba and a Roman Catholic, came to America with his family after the Cuban Revolution and grew up in Chicago,  and graduated from Harvard Law School.  He also has  a doctorate of philosophy in modern history from a Georg-August University of Gottingen, Germany.  He attended other schools in Germany, such as in Heidelberg, Braunschweig and Tubingen, Baden-Wurttemberg.  He was an American corporate lawyer with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett from 1970 to 1974, and a retired member of the Florida Bar, writer, historian and leading expert in human rights and international law as well as a retired high-ranking UN official from 1981-2003 in Human Rights..  This explains their stand against Israel which has become the rule rather than the exception.  He now lives in Geneva, Switzerland, teaching there at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and International Relations.

How does he feel about Jews and Israel and America?  He said that "Israel emerged out of terrorism against the indigenous population " and its representatives should be denied UN accreditation.  America bears "responsibility for the destabilization of...countries in the Middle East."  George W. Bush and Tony Blair are Pharisees."  Thoughts on the Bible and WWII are also shocking.  "He expounded that "The Old Testament is characterized by "cruelty" and "profound unreligiousity," its patriarchs equipped with divine legitimacy and justification to take our promised Lebensraum by force."  "Moses had such a rough time bringing the Jewish people across the Red Sea because half of them were busy picking up pretty shells." World War II shows what side he has been on with, "Churchill and Roosevelt connived at "a form of genocide" against the Germans.  World War II Allies who fought Nazi Germany should have been prosecuted for "barbarous" and "gruesome" crimes;  the Nuremberg court that judged Nazi war criminals had "hardly any legitimacy."  "Nurembuerg was an exercise in hypocrisy.  A continuation of hate and war...a corruption of legal norms and procedures, a pollution of philosophy, a truly Pharisee tribunal."   Doesn't he fit the seat at the Human Rights table, though, to judge others.

A German historian, Dr. Bernward Dorner who specializes in anti-Semitism said that Zayas ignores decades of research in his quest to absolve the Germans of having known about the Holocaust, and his evidence and reasoning are faulty.  Professor Frank M. Brucher said in the 1993 issue of German Studies Review article that Zayas "makes no attempt to integrate his work with that of existing historiography on WWII, Nazi Germany or war crimes in general."  Another article of September 17, 2011 by Willi Van Ooyen, "Main-Taunus-Kurier, said that "Controversial international law expert Alfred de Zayas operates in the discourse of the extreme right."  German historian Wolfgang Wipperman accused him of historical revisionism in the Frankfurter Rundschau, "Revanchismus an Schulen: Vertriebenen-Thesen fur Abendgymnasien."

"The Commission was also criticized for bias against Israel. In 2002 Anne Bayefsky, a professor of international law at York University in Toronto, wrote that "commission members seek to avoid directly criticizing states with human rights problems, frequently by focusing on Israel, a state that, according to analysis of summary records, has for over 30 years occupied 15 percent of commission time and has been the subject of a third of country-specific resolutions." On April 15, 2002, the Commission approved a resolution affirming the "legitimate right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation in order to free its land and be able to exercise its right of self-determination.  In so doing, the Palestinian people was declared "fulfilling its mission, one of the goals and purposes of the United Nations".

Of the 53-member commission, 40 countries voted yes, five voted no, and seven abstained. Although widely reported that the resolution condoned resistance to Israel by "all available means, including armed struggle," the resolution itself does not contain those words.Alfred Moses, a former United States ambassador to the commission and now chairman of the monitoring group UN Watch, said that "A vote in favour of this resolution is a vote for Palestinian terrorism"In a letter to the UNHRC on November 15, 2002, following an attack by Palestinians on Israelis in the town of Hebron, Nabil Ramlawi, the permanent observer for Palestine at the U.N., appealed to the resolution as justification for the attack.

When Zayas, considered a Holocaust deniers' hero,  was confronted about his attitude, he expounded that he had only received positive comments from professors hitherto.Indeed, British Ambassador Peter Booderham was supposed to represent the interests and values of Western democracies, but failed to do so.  Britain, France, Germany and the USA are now in peril if they worry about this Human Rights committee. Israel already is the main scapegoat.

This appointment reflects the values of Human Rights of the UN's morality.

UN watch

No comments: