UN Human Rights Chief takes Front row seat to hear Ahmadinejad in Tehran

[Nemesis6]

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, traveled to Iran this week to take a front row seat and listen attentively to Holocaust-denier Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The occasion was billed as a human rights meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), currently chaired by Cuba.

While Arbour was hobnobbing with anti-semites, butchers and anti-democratic forces from around the world, Iranians were being prepared for public hangings. Arbour was reported by the Islamic Republic News Agency as having "expressed pleasure with being at the NAM meeting and described Iran's representation office in the UN in Geneva as "very good." In an unusual move, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has so far neglected to put her official statement on their website.

The day after Arbour left Iran the government felt sufficiently buoyed by their UN stamp of approval, that they executed 21 prisoners. People are executed in Iran for charges like "enmity against God" or "being corrupt on earth."

Iran need not worry about the UN reaction after-the-fact either. Arbour is quoted by Iranian news sources as telling participants: "The new method of considering issues related to human rights is comprehensive and not selective and the UN Human Rights Council is ready to present technical and consultation assistance to Iran." "Non-selective" is UN code for refusing to name states that violate human rights, let alone taking action to stop them. "Technical assistance" is UN code for helping the state avoid criticism by pretending the problem is some kind of infrastructure glitch. It has been clear for some time that the new UN Human Rights Council is bent on eliminating all country-specific criticism, (not directed at Israel of course). Now, apparently, Arbour agrees.

Just what was Arbour listening to so closely inside those Tehran meeting halls anyway? Ahmadinejad delivered his signature statement about the illegitimacy of Israel's existence, ranting about "the Zionist regime's occupation" since the day it was created "60 years ago." He then went on to blame the US for a litany of evils. Referring to the US, Iranian news agencies report that his speech included: "They know quite well that the Islamic Revolution wants to prepare the ground for materialization of the promised `big event' (reappearance of the Imam of Age);...We are against rule of the non-righteous individuals....[R]evolutionary Iran aims at global government and a genuine Islamic culture so as to gain a loftier position worldwide."

Arbour?s visit was kept a little-known secret. According to the National Council of Resistance of Iran, as soon as she arrived in Tehran members of families of political prisoners and those on death row, tried to contact her, some rushing to Tehran for the mere chance to see the U.N. chief on human rights, and to deliver their personal appeals. But after spending an hour outside the U.N. building in the hopes of meeting her, they were attacked by the State Security Forces (SSF).

The next day, 21 people were executed. 21 people killed executed after the UN Human Rights Chief visited to hear a raving lunatic complain about Israel! Nice one, United Nations! I guess this is what we can expect from an organization that makes Cuba the guard-dog of international human-rights! :thumbs:

http://www.eyeontheun.org/editor.asp?p=383&b=1

 

[kirovman]

Abolition of the Death Penalty should be a prerequisite to UN membership.

 

[Nemesis6]

How about abolition of the persecution of political dissidents?

 

[kirovman]

That also.

 

[JNightshade]

The next day, 21 people were executed. 21 people killed executed after the UN Human Rights Chief visited to hear a raving lunatic complain about Israel! Nice one, United Nations! I guess this is what we can expect from an organization that makes Cuba the guard-dog of international human-rights! :thumbs:

http://www.eyeontheun.org/editor.asp?p=383&b=1

First off, your source discredits your entire argument. Find a half-decent source of news and come back.

Second, since when is dialogue a bad thing, you incomprehensible dolt?

 

[kirovman]

Yeah the source is a bit Tom Bearden.

 

[Nemesis6]

First off, your source discredits your entire argument. Find a half-decent source of news and come back.

Second, since when is dialogue a bad thing, you incomprehensible dolt?

Ahmadinejad delivered his signature statement about the illegitimacy of Israel's existence, ranting about "the Zionist regime's occupation" since the day it was created "60 years ago." He then went on to blame the US for a litany of evils.

We're talking about a madman who supports the destruction of a country of over 6 million people. Dialogue? Excuse me when I tell you that talking with people like this is not dialogue you ****ing idiot. Israel-bashing is not dialogue. It's a typical U.N conferance on racism(Durban), but in this case, it's just a standard conferance in Iran. The fact that the U.N takes part in such a conferance is testimony to the deep corruption within it. Or at the very least, indicative of an agenda. But then again, the U.N doesn't deny that. Here's an example: The U.N human rights commission denounces

"The attempts to identify any culture with terrorism, violence and human rights violations."

, yet they're very concerced with

"Expressing deep concern on the cultural uprooting which is continuously unfolding in the Palestinian occupied territory and the occupied Syrian Golan on the basis of such doctrines by the occupying power."

This is contained in their "declaration of human rights". So you see, the Muslim countries are not associated with terrorism, but Israel is. This is called hypocracy.

But very well, here's the original article: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzYyZjJjNGQ3MWIzZjA5Y2FjMTQwMDIwMjIzZmVkMmQ=

Bad source too? I don't know, but the fact that you are willing to dismiss it so easily implies that you are a just another idiot who dismisses any criticism of the U.N.

 

[Tagaziel]

This is Nemesis. Just like with the one from RE3, don't ask for meaningful dialogue.

 

[Nemesis6]

Actually the name originates from the second one. Besides, the third one kinda sucked.

 

[Nemesis6]

You overestimate this part of the forum. There's not much discussion. If you agree with whatever thread you'll post the standard "yeah, lol", "lol bush suks", etc, but if you don't know what to say / disagree, you'll post bullshit like Mikael did. Still, it's an alright place when discussion actually occurs. The "meaningful dialogue" can't go on because people like Nightshade resort to trolling because they have nothing to say. Well, the topic is still debatable

 

[Sulkdodds]

I'm not sure that you are really in a position to lecture anybody on meaningful dialogue. Although you are getting better.

this is what we can expect from an organization that makes Cuba the guard-dog of international human-rights!

I have to admit that this is pretty stupid.

But whatever you might say, I'm not sure you can actually blame the UN for talking to these people. That is, after all, its point - to be a bridge between nations, even if all that bridge carries is the tanks of disagreement (ooh yeah!). I'm not sure that the presence of actual diplomacy constitutes any kind of agenda. I'm sure the UN does have agendas, but then again it's impossible for any person not to have an agenda.

The article is also very sketchy. It implies that the 21 were executed for religious reasons, but it doesn't actually tell us what their crimes were. That's probably important. That said, Iran IS fairly high on the list of executions-per-year.

1. USA ? 300 million people ? 60 executions per year = 20 per 100 million
2. Vietnam ? 80 million people ? 60 executions per year = 75 per 100 million people
3. Iran ? 70 million people ? 160 executions per year = 230 per 100 million people
4. China ? 1.3 billion people ? 3,500 executions per year = 270 per 100 million
5. Saudi Arabia ? 25 million people ? 80 executions per year = 320 per 100 million
6. Singapore ? 4 million people ? 30 executions per year = 750 per 100 million people

People are executed in Iran for charges like "enmity against God" or "being corrupt on earth."

Needs backup. Personally I don't find it implausible.

"Non-selective" is UN code for refusing to name states that violate human rights, let alone taking action to stop them. "Technical assistance" is UN code for helping the state avoid criticism by pretending the problem is some kind of infrastructure glitch.

Majorly needs backup.

 

[Solaris]

Nemisis, just becuase the Human Rights woman was talking to Iran, does not mean she condones what they do.

She talks to the hot dog vendor to buy a hotdog, does not mean she approves his human rights record.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Lol, I read this as UNhuman rights rather than UN human rights.

 

[Nemesis6]

I'm still not called Nemisis, Sloraris. Listen, if I knew the local hot-dog vender was a white supremacist, I wouldn't go there. Simple ethics. Simple ethics which she seems to lack. She should never have been there as it sets a terrible example. Generally, "conferances" in Iran is not much different than the "Durban Conferance on Racism" of the U.N... Hey, maybe that was why she went there?

 

[Solaris]

I'm still not called Nemisis, Sloraris. Listen, if I knew the local hot-dog vender was a white supremacist, I wouldn't go there. Simple ethics. Simple ethics which she seems to lack. She should never have been there as it sets a terrible example. Generally, "conferances" in Iran is not much different than the "Durban Conferance on Racism" of the U.N... Hey, maybe that was why she went there?

It's the UN. Countries have to work together, if only the good countries talked with each other, there would be nobody.

 

[Nemesis6]

They have to work together... How is that working out for them? All they seem to be talking about is the destruction of Israel. If the U.N was a decent organization, they would stay far away from these "conferences", but then again, as I've said before: They do it themselves.... I guess there's really nothing to be shocked about when I see the U.N taking part in this...

Besides, what happened the last few times they worked together? Yep, they got their asses rightfully kicked.

 

[Solaris]

Yes, because that's all the UN does, talk about destroying Isreal. They really don't do anything else. At all.

 

[Nemesis6]

Well, you're right: They do other things like talk about Sudan, and celebrate the "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Day_of_Solidarity_with_the_Palestinian_People
Something tells me they don't hold the same for Israelis.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

But whatever you might say, I'm not sure you can actually blame the UN for talking to these people.

I can.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.
His comments were the first time in years that such a high-ranking Iranian official has called for Israel's eradication, even though such slogans are still regularly used at government
rallies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo&mode=related&search=
http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816

He wants an entire group of people annihilated and the UN's ambassadors are going to sit with this man and have coffee amidst a sea of political and religious executions. That should have some sort of impact -- so yes, I can blame the UN for its conduct of giving sanctuary to religious bigotry, unabated. That includes my countries complacency.

It implies that the 21 were executed for religious reasons, but it doesn't actually tell us what their crimes were. That's probably important.

Why are you suspicious about the terms?

Needs backup. Personally I don't find it implausible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_laws_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Iran

 

[99.vikram]

The Iran issue aside, why is holocaust denial a crime? A man who denies the holocaust is stupid, at most. Definitely not a criminal. Not unless he actually says anti-Semitic stuff.

 

[Nemesis6]

Yeah, it it stupid to criminalize it, though I can't say I have any sympathy for anyone stupid enough to get convicted for it.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

The Iran issue aside, why is holocaust denial a crime? A man who denies the holocaust is stupid, at most. Definitely not a criminal.

Holocaust denial a crime? Never heard of it that way. We should implement the system around here -- as Obi Wan Kenobi said:

"It was as if a million bigot voices cried out but then were suddenly silenced."

 

[Solaris]

Holocaust denial a crime? Never heard of it that way. We should implement the system around here -- as Obi Wan Kenobi said:

"It was as if a million bigot voices cried out but then were suddenly silenced."

He never said the bigot bit.

 

[kirovman]

Yes. I'm quite sure Kerberos just added that himself without any disclaimers!

 

[No Limit]

21 people executed the day after that happened? Pretty shitty. Then again I wonder how many people my country has kidnapped, tortured, and killed that same day. But when we do it we hide behind the label of democracy, so that must clearly be okay.

So nemesis, how do you want to handle this? Never talk to Iran? Invade them? What do you want to do with them since you seem to know everything?

 

[Nemesis6]

Finally you realize the truth. My solution: No single one, but do not attend their pathetic conferances. Especially if you're a member of an organization that's allegedly against everything they stand for.

 

[HunterSeeker]

So she should have done what? Pretend it does not happen? Talking is much better then doing absolutly nothing.

 

[Nemesis6]

You don't attend conferences that center around the advocacy of racism. Especially when it's held in the country most famous for killing political dissidents. It's that simple: You just don't.

 

[No Limit]

Finally you realize the truth. My solution: No single one, but do not attend their pathetic conferances. Especially if you're a member of an organization that's allegedly against everything they stand for.

NAM has over 100 member nations, including almost all of south america, all of central america, almost all of Africa, most of the middle east, and many asian countries. But I guess we should all just pretend they don't exist, because they chose Iran as the place to meet this year? You make it seem like this even was there to praise Iran when it wasn't, it was simply hosted in Iran this year. So again, what the hell is your point? We are talking about a conference with over 100 nations, it seems like common sense for the united nations to listen to what they have to say.

 

[Nemesis6]

It wasn't simply hosted by Iran. The conference was the standard Israel-bashing fest that we're used to at the U.N, just held by a country whose leader says "Death to Israel". No one in their right mind should have attended this farce of a conference.

Just what was Arbour listening to so closely inside those Tehran meeting halls anyway? Ahmadinejad delivered his signature statement about the illegitimacy of Israel's existence, ranting about "the Zionist regime's occupation" since the day it was created "60 years ago." He then went on to blame the US for a litany of evils. Referring to the US, Iranian news agencies report that his speech included: "They know quite well that the Islamic Revolution wants to prepare the ground for materialization of the promised `big event' (reappearance of the Imam of Age);...We are against rule of the non-righteous individuals....[R]evolutionary Iran aims at global government and a genuine Islamic culture so as to gain a loftier position worldwide."

If the NAM is such a nice union, perhaps its members shouldn't sit around listening to a raving psychotic. It's kind of like the U.N: If they really were honest and sincere, they wouldn't ban Denmark from their Human Rights council because of Cartoons, and they certainly wouldn't put ****ing Cuba as in the lead.

It's just another anti-American, anti-Israel conference in Iran, and anyone with decency stays the **** away from any "conference" on racism, etc within Iran, because they're all distractions. That's how dictatorships work: The problem isn't us, it's America, it's Israel, it's the Jews. By keeping up these inanities, they keep inciting people toward everything else than their theocratic, tyrannic rule. And as witnessed here, they're capable of sucking in some idiotic Westerners, too.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Nemesis are you from Isreal? Just curious.

 

[CptStern]

It's just another anti-American, anti-Israel conference in Iran, and anyone with decency stays the **** away from any "conference" on racism, etc within Iran, because they're all distractions. That's how dictatorships work: The problem isn't us, it's America, it's Israel, it's the Jews. By keeping up these inanities, they keep inciting people toward everything else than their theocratic, tyrannic rule. And as witnessed here, they're capable of sucking in some idiotic Westerners, too.

how ironic ..that's exactly how you and your ilk behave as well ..the problem isnt with the occupation, the problem isnt with the disporportionate support israel recieves from the west while palestine or what's left of it is smouldering in perpetual ruin, the problem isnt with indiscrimate retaliatory attacks that primairily kills innocents ..it's the palestinians, be they terrorist or innocent, it is they who are solely to blame ..israel is innocent of all wrong doing ..you/they are convinced the other side is wrong and you/they are right

once you and your ilk realise this the sooner you'll take real steps towards peaceful co-existence because whether you like it or not you/they are there for perpetuity ..learn to deal with it ..the choice is either the olive branch or the sword ..or more precisely complete anniliation

 

[Nemesis6]

Sure enough Israel sees the lack of support for its existence troubling in times like this, but I haven't heard of Israel whining about it to the extent that the Muslims do in the U.N... wait, hold on... Come to think of it: Israel is the only country in the U.N that's not actually a full member. That's kind of strange. Besides, the Islamic countries use the U.N as a tool. The sheer amount of resolutions against Israel alone proves that beyond any doubt, and to further substantiate that: The Durban Conferance is a good example of how the U.N is manipulated.

 

[CptStern]

Sure enough Israel sees the lack of support for its existence troubling in times like this, but I haven't heard of Israel whining about it to the extent that the Muslims do in the U.N...

sigh ..you're hopeless, you dont even realise you're doing it again

wait, hold on... Come to think of it: Israel is the only country in the U.N that's not actually a full member. That's kind of strange.

ya it's a conspiracy against the jewbs :upstare:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ambassadors_to_the_United_Nations

you're a permanent member


I think the problem is due to your ignorance in the matter you confuse membership in the UN with membership in the UN Security Council ..there are only 5 members and oddly enough ..

The Council seated five permanent members who were originally drawn from the victorious powers after World War II:

they all have veto power ..which is why israel cozies up to some of those members ..they have power in the security council by proxy which is why resolution after resolution against israel has been vetoed and swept under the carpet, or least the most criticals ones ..but you fail to recognise this because it's not reported in your little alarmist rag Little Green Footbals or taught to you by the extremists in your life ..all you see is the other side

 

[No Limit]

If the NAM is such a nice union, perhaps its members shouldn't sit around listening to a raving psychotic.

So its not only Iran and the UN you have the problem with, its over 100 countries that are part of that union that you have an issue with.

So I'll ask you again, what are you going to do to them for them being a part of this? If nothing then what the hell is the point of this thread? But I see stern stepped in so I'll leave you 2 alone, he's much better at exposing your bullshit than I am.

 

[CptStern]

nah I'm tired of it ..it's like talking to a wall ..he literally regurgitates half-baked information without a shred of personal insight ..there's no use reasoning with that

 

[Nemesis6]

Speaking of walls: You're the one rationalizing the head of the U.N human rights commission listening to the leader of one of the biggest human rights abuser in the world talking about how bad the only democracy in the Middle East is. That's hypocracy, and it's just stupid, but hey, anything to seem "culturally sensitive" and to give "them a chance" to express their views, too... *COUGH*Durban*COUGH* Did I say Durban? Sorry, I didn't mean to say Durban. I just coughed and it accidentally sounded like Durban. Hey, "Durban"... that reminds me - The U.N held a "Durban Conferance Against Racism", and the entire conference was manipulated and ultimately, all that came of it were enumerable resolutions against Israel(Zionism was legally declared racism in a resolution passed.), and America. It got to the point where these two member states left the conference. I guess my point in mentioning this is that this example of their Human Rights Chief not giving a damn about human rights is actually a minor example of the futility of the U.N..

 

[CptStern]

Speaking of walls: You're the one rationalizing the head of the U.N human rights commission listening to the leader of one of the biggest human rights abuser in the world talking about how bad the only democracy in the Middle East is.

point out exactly where I rationalise anything

That's hypocracy, and it's just stupid,

again, point out exactly where I rationalise anything ...you're clutching at straws and putting words in my mouth in a vain attempt to ignore every point I made ..you're very transparent Nemesis

but hey, anything to seem "culturally sensitive" and to give "them a chance" to express their views, too... *COUGH*Durban*COUGH* Did I say Durban? Sorry, I didn't mean to say Durban. I just coughed and it accidentally sounded like Durban. Hey, "Durban"... that reminds me - The U.N held a "Durban Conferance Against Racism", and the entire conference was manipulated and ultimately, all that came of it were enumerable resolutions against Israel(Zionism was legally declared racism in a resolution passed.), and America. It got to the point where these two member states left the conference. I guess my point in mentioning this is that this example of their Human Rights Chief not giving a damn about human rights is actually a minor example of the futility of the U.N..

? that's "kicked in the head by a mule" logic ..Israel has on occasion violated human rights, from torture to unlawful incarciration, therefore by your logic the UN human rights chief doesnt give a damn about human rights because he's held conferences with israeli authorities

 

[Nemesis6]

The way I see it - You have a habit of not actually giving your opinion on things, but rather sidetracking the issue to discuss irrelevancies - For example arguing semantics like you do here. It seems I'll have to ask you for your opinion then. What is your opinion? Anyway, my point still stands: The U.N participating in another farce of a conference is nothing compared to its own racist conferences, and no matter how you spin it, you shouldn't associate yourself with Islamist supremacy sentiments if you can help it, and that is where the U.N has failed. In fact, it endorses it through "resolutions" against the "enemies of Islam" and the lack thereof against the Muslim countries. The number of resolutions passed against Israel contra any other country speaks for itself.

Did I mention Durban? Yeah, I think I mentioned Durban.

 

[CptStern]

The way I see it - You have a habit of not actually giving your opinion on things,

yes that would be called "effective debating" ..facts not opinions Nemesis

but rather sidetracking the issue to discuss irrelevancies - For example arguing semantics like you do here.

do you know what the word means? I dont think you do ..I'm not arguing anything besides the fact that you are deluded

It seems I'll have to ask you for your opinion then.

doesnt mean I'll give it but ask away

What is your opinion?

i dont have one, this topic bores me to ****ing tears, you bore me to tears

Anyway, my point still stands:

yes because you either dont understand how you're being a hypocrite and jumping to conclusions and I'm not about to explain it to you for the 3rd time ...explaining for a 4th 5th even a dozen times wont clarify it for you ..you're just too dense

The U.N participating in another farce of a conference is nothing compared to its own racist conferences, and no matter how you spin it, you shouldn't associate yourself with Islamist supremacy sentiments if you can help it, and that is where the U.N has failed.

so when they associate with regimes that torture that's ok? or does that logic only apply to muslim groups and not jewish groups because ..they're jewish. You're a hypocrite

In fact, it endorses it through "resolutions" against the "enemies of Islam" and the lack thereof against the Muslim countries. The number of resolutions passed against Israel contra any other country speaks for itself.

Did I mention Durban? Yeah, I think I mentioned Durban.

you dont understand hypocrisy do you? anyways, you bore me because absolutely nothing sinks in, what's worse is that you ignore my points all together ..like I've mentioned before there's no reasoning with someone who's pov is shaped solely by idiotic right wing blogs written by idiots for idiots