Apartheid analogy common among Israel's left

[groggy]

Pathetic.
.....

You are simply wrong, he is not, never has been, and never will be a UN spokesperson.

Sure, why don't you write the UN and tell them to take his reports off their news page.
Then tell them to take the UN letterhead off his reports.

Until then, you're just full of shit and trying to stop the discussion about Israel's apartheid practices.

 

[fuji]

Sure, why don't you write the UN and tell them to take his reports off their news page.
Then tell them to take the UN letterhead off his reports.

Until then, you're just full of shit and trying to stop the discussion about Israel's apartheid practices.

I have no problem with the UN, they didn't claim that it was their report or that they agreed with it. The report in fact says it was transmitted to them.

Meanwhile his mandate PROVED that he does not speak for the UN.

You are a pathetic clown.

 

[basketcase]

You are the one trying to brush off charges that Israel is apartheid by attacking the messenger.

You are just that afraid of sling that argument as well, aren't you?

The arguments have been presented time and time again and you always ignore them.

Fact is that 20% of Israelis are Arabs with full legal rights. If you didn't know, they are the same race as the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

 

[groggy]

I have no problem with the UN, they didn't claim that it was their report or that they agreed with it..

They published it on their site and regularly report on Falk's findings on the UN news page.
Its really just one of four sources, but the only one that you can attack.

The rest of the world is talking about Israeli apartheid.

Op-Ed Does the term 'apartheid' fit Israel? Of course it does.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-makdisi-israel-apartheid-20140518-story.html

You missed the boat, again.

 

[fuji]

They published it on their site and regularly report on Falk's findings on the UN news page.

Are you reading tea leaves now?

They publish everything submitted to them on their site. They publish resolutions that they reject on their site too.

Here are the definitive facts:

1. They did not endorse it

2. They did not give him a mandate to speak for them

3. The report as published on their site says it is being transmitted to them.

His mandate is definitive.

 

[groggy]

They publish everything submitted to them on their site. They publish resolutions that they reject on their site too.
.

You've been hanging out at UNWatch too much again.
All you can talk about is Falk.

He's just one of 4 UN reports or quotes calling Israel apartheid.
Imagine how much worse it could have been.
At least he was critic who was Jewish.....

He's the second rapporteur on Israel to accuse Israel of apartheid.
Its a pattern, how long before you have to go all rabid in Wibisono?

 

[fuji]

You've been hanging out at UNWatch too much again.
All you can talk about is Falk.

One at a time. None if the other three speak for the UN either, but first you admit you were lying about Falk.

I am onto you. You want to change the topic, then later you will start pretending Falk is the UN again as if you didn't lose this debate.

You lose this debate first, then we move on systematically through your other lies.

 

[groggy]

O
I am onto you. You want to change the topic,

Oh no, I'm up for discussing apartheid, you're the one trying to change the topic by attacking the messenger.

Shall we discuss apartheid walls?
Illegal by the ICJ, a war crime by the ICRC, Amnesty and a host of others, but necessary for you to build your apartheid state?

That's a good starter topic.

 

[fuji]

Oh no, I'm up for discussing apartheid, you're the one trying to change the topic by attacking the messenger.

Shall we discuss apartheid walls?
Illegal by the ICJ, a war crime by the ICRC, Amnesty and a host of others, but necessary for you to build your apartheid state?

That's a good starter topic.

I see you have stopped making the ludicrous claim that Falk speaks for the UN. Good. Whenever you mention him in the future I am glad that you will now desist from calling him the UN.

 

[groggy]

I see you have stopped making the ludicrous claim that Falk speaks for the UN. Good. Whenever you mention him in the future I am glad that you will now desist from calling him the UN.

I don't call him the UN, but he reports to and for the UN on Israeli human rights issues.
As did Dugard before him, and both found Israel to be apartheid.

But that's off topic.

Shall we discuss apartheid walls?
Illegal by the ICJ, a war crime by the ICRC, Amnesty and a host of others, but necessary for you to build your apartheid state?

That's a good starter topic.

 

[fuji]

I don't call him the UN, but he reports to and for the UN

You did call him the UN. You referred to his report with the lying phrase "The UN says", which is a total lie.

He does not speak for or on behalf of the UN, his reports are not the opinion of the UN, the UN has not agreed with his reports.

He speaks only for himself.

Once you acknowlede that you were wrong to say his reports were the opinion of the UN we can discuss your other lies.

I am not letting you change the topic to avoid losing the debate. We will systematically prove that all your statements are lies. You do not get to change the topic now so that you can pretend you didn't lose and then later try calling Falk the UN again.

 

[groggy]

You did call him the UN. You referred to his report with the lying phrase "The UN says", which is a total lie.
.

Whine whine whine.


How else to describe walls to keep one race away from another race?
That's apartheid.

 

[fuji]

Whine whine whine.

How else to describe walls to keep one race away from another race?
That's apartheid.

The topic is you lying and saying Falk speaks for the UN.

 

[groggy]

The topic is you lying and saying Falk speaks for the UN.

That's bullshit.

You are just avoiding talking about the apartheid wall.

 

[fuji]

That's bullshit.

You are just avoiding talking about the apartheid wall.

Once you agree that Falk does not speak for the UN I will be happy to discuss your new topic.

 

[basketcase]

...
Shall we discuss apartheid walls?...

Sure. What country are they in?

It seems that Arab Israelis are allowed to cross the barrier you are discussing at will. Remind us again how Israeli Arabs have a different race than West Bank Palestinians?

(the ICJ ruling mentions nothing about race or apartheid)

 

[groggy]

Once you agree that Falk does not speak for the UN I will be happy to discuss your new topic.

As soon as provide an official statement from the UN confirming I'll agree. Until then I'll read his reports off the UN site and note the UN letterhead.

Are you really that scared about talking apartheid?

 

[fuji]

As soon as provide an official statement from the UN confirming I'll agree. Until then I'll read his reports off the UN site and note the UN letterhead.

No problem, here is his definitive mandate that states the only official capacity in which he is associated with the UN:

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/EF7E1F52C06A9CB885256AD2004B1194

4. Decides to appoint a special rapporteur with the following mandate:

(a) To investigate Israel's violations of the principles and bases of international law, international humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967;

(b) To receive communications, to hear witnesses, and to use such modalities of procedure as he may deem necessary for his mandate;

(c) To report, with his conclusions and recommendations, to the Commission on Human Rights at its future sessions, until the end of the Israeli occupation of those territories;

 

[fuji]

Waiting for your promised agreement that Falk does not speak for the UN. Where is it? The proof has been provided, and you have run away.

 

[groggy]

Waiting for your promised agreement that Falk does not speak for the UN. Where is it? The proof has been provided, and you have run away.

I've already supplied UN documents showing that rapporteurs report to the UN and publicly.
Where is your apology for accusing me of lying?

But just for you:

he special procedures of the Human Rights Council are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective. The system of Special Procedures is a central element of the United Nations human rights machinery and covers all human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, and social. As of 1 October 2013 there are 37 thematic and 14 country mandates.

With the support of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), special procedures undertake country visits; act on individual cases and concerns of a broader, structural nature by sending communications to States and others in which they bring alleged violations or abuses to their attention; conduct thematic studies and convene expert consultations, contribute to the development of international human rights standards, engage in advocacy, raise public awareness, and provide advice for technical cooperation. Special procedures report annually to the Human Rights Council; the majority of the mandates also reports to the General Assembly. Their tasks are defined in the resolutions creating or extending their mandates.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Introduction.aspx