Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Anne Bayefsky on Amnesty International

When Anne bayefsky speaks, you sit and listen. Or at least, I do, and you should too.
The final declaration of the forum of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) said Zionism, or the self-determination of the Jewish people, equals racism and went downhill from there. On the final day prior to the adoption of this declaration, international NGOs, including Amnesty, deliberated about their position as one caucus. As a representative of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists I was about to enter our meeting place [at the U.N. World Conference Against Racism that took place in August and early September 2001 - Ed] along with the president of Amnesty, Irene Khan, when the chief representative of Human Rights Watch, Reed Brody, turned to me in the presence of the others and told me I was not welcome and had to go. Said Brody, to the objection of no one (although I had worked professionally with many of them for years), I represented Jews and therefore could not be trusted to be objective.
Just when you thought it couldn't possibly get any worse...
Durban ended three days before 9/11. It is no surprise that the cowards and hate-mongers of Durban should be on the wrong side of history in the war against the violence that racism and intolerance breed. International human-rights organizations, with Amnesty at the helm, have cast the war on terror on one side and protection of human rights on the other.
Anne Bayefsky was barred from the final deliberations because she "represented Jews and therefore could not be trusted to be objective.". Irene Khan is a Muslim. Muslims it seems have no such bias troubles. If you believe Amnesty. But then, what sane person would?


Post a Comment

<< Home