Posted tagged ‘Ban Ki-Moon’

Corruption Rears its Head Again at the United Nations

October 14, 2015

Corruption Rears its Head Again at the United Nations Bribery: Business as usual at the UN.

October 14, 2015 Joseph Klein

Source: Corruption Rears its Head Again at the United Nations | Frontpage Mag

In announcing bribery and tax fraud charges last week against former United Nations General Assembly President John Ashe, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said that “John Ashe, the 68th president of the U.N. General Assembly, sold himself and the global institution he led.” Moreover, the U.S. Attorney put the UN on notice that his investigation was not over. “We will be asking: Is bribery business-as-usual at the U.N.?” he said.

UN Secretary General spokesperson Stephane Dujarric took umbrage at the U.S. Attorney’s “business-as-usual” remark, telling reporters that “corruption is not business as usual at the U.N.” He also said that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was “shocked and deeply troubled” by the allegations against Mr. Ashe. “The Secretary-General reaffirms that there will be no tolerance for any corruption at the United Nations or in the name of the United Nations,” Mr. Dujarric added.

In view of the pervasive pattern of past corruption at the UN, including most notably the oil-for-food scandal, procurement scandals and multiple allegations of sexual exploitation of civilians by UN peacekeepers assigned to protect them, the UN has been knee deep in wrongdoing for years. The current scandal fits the pattern.  Indeed, the UN bureaucracy responded to the latest scandal with the same modus operandi it has used previously – first, to sweep it under the rug, then to pretend it is an isolated occurrence not involving the UN system and then belatedly to initiate an internal review.

The federal complaint announced by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara last week was brought against six individuals including Mr. Ashe, who served as the UN ambassador from the country of Antigua and Barbuda before taking the post of UN General Assembly president during the 2013-2014 session. The complaint charged, among other things, that Mr. Ashe received over a million dollars of cash payments, some of which he used to pay for lavish “personal expenses,” from a Chinese real estate developer, Ng Lap Seng. Mr. Ng Seng’s company, the Sun Kian Ip Group, was allegedly looking for favors to help its real estate business in Macau China. In particular, according to the complaint, Mr. Ashe was tasked to facilitate obtaining official UN approval for the building of a permanent multibillion-dollar UN-sponsored conference center in Macau that would have benefited the Sun Kian Ip Group. In exchange for the alleged bribes he received, Mr. Ashe submitted an official UN document to the Secretary General claiming there was a purported need to build the expensive UN Macau Conference Center. Mr. Ng Seng allegedly used the letter to promote his proposed conference center, which could be used to host events focused on what is known in UN parlance as South-South cooperation.  South-South cooperation is a buzzword used to describe programs among developing countries to share knowledge, skills, expertise and resources to meet their development goals through concerted efforts.  The UN has made this a priority as part of the global effort to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by world leaders at the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit on September 25, 2015. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes a set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets aimed at supposedly ending poverty, fighting inequality and injustice, promoting sustainable consumption and production patterns, promoting good governance and tackling climate change by 2030.

At first, Mr. Dujarric, the UN spokesperson, tried to distance the UN system from the allegations against John Ashe, claiming that they involved a former president of the General Assembly who does not answer to the Secretary General. The UN Secretariat, he said, did not have the power or mandate “to investigate individuals or entities that weren’t considered staff or part of the official UN umbrella.” A day later, however, Mr. Dujarric announced a change in course. He told reporters that the Secretary General had decided to request that the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) launch an audit of the interaction between the United Nations and the Sun Kian Ip Group as well as with a foundation known as the Global Sustainability Foundation, whose leader was also charged with having alleged corrupt dealings with Mr. Ashe. But before anyone thinks the UN is taking this matter seriously, consider this distinction drawn by a deputy UN spokesperson a few days later: “It’s not really an inquiry. It’s an audit.”

The UN bureaucracy is continuing to hide behind a veil of secrecy rather than demonstrate the full transparency that it lectures everyone else about. A full-fledged investigation is overdue since Mr. Ng Seng’s company through his foundation has financial ties directly with the UN Secretariat. Mr. Ng Seng may have used Mr. Ashe to facilitate his business interests involving the UN and paid him for his services. But he also put his hooks into the UN Secretariat itself.

In fact, Mr. Ng Seng, who himself was arrested last month for lying about his plans for $4.5 million in cash he had brought into the U.S. over several years aboard private jets, had six months earlier signed a funding agreement with the Director of the UN Office for South-South Cooperation at the time,  Mr. Yiping Zhou. Under the agreement, Mr. Ng Seng’s company (or the foundation bearing his company’s name) would contribute $5 million a year for three consecutive years to a UN multi-partner trust fund to be set up by the UN Office for South-South Cooperation.  In August, just a month before his arrest, Mr. Ng Seng appeared along with Mr. Zhou, who called the Sun Kian Ip Group foundation “our partner,” and with Mr. Ashe, the foundation’s honorary co-chairman, at a co-branded High-level Multi-stakeholders Strategy Forum on South-South Cooperation for Sustainable Development held in Macau. The United Nations used $1.5 million contributed by the Sun Kian Ip Group to help pay for the conference.

The UN Office for South-South Cooperation is now trying to play damage control. According to an Associated Press report, the office is rejecting the remainder of the $15 million total offer from the Sun Kian Ip Group. The UN office also claimed it sent a team to Macau in April 2015, a month after it had signed the funding contribution agreement, to do due diligence on the foundation and found nothing unsuitable. However, this is very curious considering that the UN Global Compact, a self-declared voluntary initiative based on CEO commitments to implement universal sustainability principles and to take steps to support UN goals, had expelled the Sun Kian Ip Group in early April for failing to report its activities two years in a row.

The Sun Kian Ip Group foundation does not appear to have filed tax forms in the U.S., even though it has maintained a New York City address. At minimum, the UN Office for South-South Cooperation should have checked the public record to confirm whether appropriate tax forms were filed by a foundation maintaining a New York City address before agreeing to accept monies that might have been derived from illicit activities and conceivably contributed to the UN office at its New York City headquarters for the purpose of buying influence.

In contrast to the UN Office for South-South Cooperation’s minimal due diligence, the Las Vegas Sands Corporation had commissioned a background investigatory report on Mr. Ng Seng as far back as 2010.  Sands was advised in the report to be wary of “red flags” regarding Mr. Ng Seng and to proceed with “extreme caution” in any dealings with him. As mentioned in the report, large donations he had reportedly made to President Bill Clinton’s team in the 1990’s were reportedly later returned. This may have been because of concerns raised in the media about the origin of the funds, which were said to have possibility been linked to criminal activities including the international slave prostitution trade, although Mr. Ng Seng did not have a past criminal record.

Now the law has caught up with the UN’s donor, Mr. Ng Seng, who was arrested last month in the United States on charges of bringing monies into the United States under false pretenses. Most disturbingly, the UN Office for South-South Cooperation appears to have done nothing to re-examine its relationship with Mr. Ng Seng’s company or foundation between the time that Mr. Ng Seng was arrested in September and when the criminal complaint against the former president of the UN General Assembly and his ties to Mr. Ng Seng were made public last week. The UN office was afforded an opportunity to explain this apparent lapse, which would have been included in this article, but it failed to do so despite multiple requests. It is reasonable to infer from the UN’s business-as-usual attitude that it was prepared to take the entire $15 million from the Sun Kian Ip Group and pretend nothing had happened until that stance was no longer tenable in light of the revelation of the criminal complaint linking Mr. Ng Seng to the former president of the UN General Assembly.

Jorge Chediek, the current Director of the UN Office for South-South Cooperation, did tell the Associated Press that his office is conducting an internal review of “all details of relationships” with the Sun Kian Ip Group foundation as well as with the Global Sustainability Foundation. According to the Associated Press report, “Chediek said the [Sun Kian Ip Group] foundation’s $15 million offer was ‘never operational’ beyond the $1.5 million his office used. He said all of the $1.5 million had been accounted for, with no evidence found of misuse.” Mr. Chediek added that “we are reviewing our whole partnership strategy.” That is little more than closing the gate after the horse has left the barn.

The UN’s “partnership strategy” to date has evidently been to take money for its causes from any source, no questions asked. A for-profit Las Vegas hotel-casino company had enough concerns to mount a background check on Mr. Ng Seng before entering into a potential business relationship with him five years ago. The investigation report raised “red flags” and advised “extreme caution.” Yet the UN Office for South-South Cooperation, which operates under the aegis of the Secretary General, blindly accepted contributions from Mr. Ng Seng’s foundation. In doing so, the UN system quite possibly helped him to disguise the source of monies that might have been derived from criminal activity if any, potentially evade taxes on business income and at the same time buy influence at the UN for his personal business benefit.

One of the UN’s targets in meeting its highly publicized Sustainable Development Goals is to “substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms.”  Another target is to “develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The UN establishment would do well to lead by example. The latest corruption scandal indicates it is woefully unprepared to do so.

Ban Ki-moon, Obama work to Humiliate Israel

October 3, 2015

Ban Ki-moon, Obama work to Humiliate Israel, Breitbart, Pamela Geller, October 3, 2015

GettyImages-490838840-640x480Andrew Burton/Getty Images

There has been such a mass (or maybe mess is more fitting) of bad news this week that it is not surprising that a number of shocking news items fell through the cracks — which is always the case with the running dogs in the media when the news reflects so very dreadfully on the community organizer in the White House.

Barack Obama was upstaged, upended and usurped by Russia’s Vladimir Putin this week, when, in one fell swoop, by his actions in Syria and speech at the United Nations, Putin took over the leadership role in the Middle East. Once again, Obama was “caught off guard.” That has become the rallying cry of his presidency.

Obama’s response? To further humiliate and denigrate our one steadfast and true ally.

Breitbart News reported that Obama actually went so far as to call Secretary of State John Kerry and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, into a video conference just before Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his historic and courageous speech to the UN General Assembly last Thursday.

The remnants of the U.S. delegation that did attend the speech pointedly did not applaud. The lowlife administration struck again. Obama was casting pearls before swine.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon broke protocol and summarily left when Netanyahu came to the lectern. Deputy UNSG Jan Eliasson slipped into the chair. The UN Secretary General is always present when a head of state addresses the General Assembly. But they broke the rule to humiliate the Jewish people. He left. There is no way that Ban Ki-moon would have shown such disrespect had he not been given the idea or, at the very least, the sanction, by the Jew-hater in the White House.

Why? Why would Obama publicly snub our tried and true ally in the hottest region in the world? Because he is evil. He embodies the hatred of the good for being the good.

Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin has seized the initiative. After announcing that it was beginning operations against the Islamic State (ISIS), Russia is bombing our allies, Bashar Assad’s enemies, in Syria — not ISIS at all. “It’s one thing for us to be humiliated, but another for it to be shown to the world,” said Charles Krauthammer.

Put a fork in him: Barack Obama is done, and he has taken the United States, our allies, and freedom-loving peoples around the world with him. Now that Putin has so thoroughly shown him up, Obama’s only option now is to grovel. And he is groveling assiduously.

Obama’s surrender to the Russians this week has overturned the order of the Middle East and, by extension, the order of the entire world. He relinquished American hegemony in the Middle East–right after paving the way for a nuclear Iran. Obama’s subordinate role to the Russians in the “deconfliction” talks was stunning. Putin had Obama begging for “deconfliction” talks–and how quickly he turned over the deconfliction codes!

Deconfliction codes keep aircraft or missions apart to reduce the likelihood of so-called friendly fire. Has America ever done that before? According to Daniel Dombey in the Financial Times: “Two prior administrations, one of which was seen to be extraordinarily favourably disposed toward anything Israel, declined to do that.” That is, they declined to turn over the deconfliction codes to Israel at the start of the American invasion of the Iraq war and later. But when Russia demanded them, Obama jumped.

I don’t think that Bashar Assad should go. I never have. He kept the Christian and religious minorities safe, and if he goes, the Islamic State is the primary force in place to benefit from his fall. On Assad’s remaining in power as a bulwark against the Islamic State, Putin is right. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

But this is much bigger than Assad. Obama’s turning the Middle East over to Russia and Iran is one of those terrible moments in history that you can point to, shaking your head in horror and saying, “If only…” Turning over the Middle East to Russia is a major historical blunder. That said, Putin is killing jihadists. Obama whines that Putin is killing the “opposition,” “our allies.” Who is Russia bombing? The 5 recruits that cost the US 500 million to train? “Moderate al Qaeda”? Jabhat al Nusra? #silverlining

The build-out of the Russian air base at Latakia has Russia flexing its muscles. Previously, Israel had a fairly free hand to carry out strikes against arms shipments that go from Iran through Syria to the Iranian-backed jihad group Hizb’Allah in Lebanon. But now the Russian presence in Syria severely limits Israel’s freedom of action.

What the future might hold as a result of Obama’s fecklessness, perfidy, and betrayal of Israel is anyone’s guess, but the catastrophic consequences of the Russia-Iran-Syria axis are far-reaching. The Islamic State is likely not only to survive, but to grow–and Ambassador John Bolton predicts that Putin and Iran’s Hassan Rouhani will eventually make a deal with them, reaching a modus vivendi with the Islamic State.

Catastrophe upon catastrophe, all courtesy of Barack Hussein Obama.

NATO Calls Emergency Meeting at Turkey’s Request Over ISIS, PKK

July 27, 2015

A full emergency meeting of NATO has been called for Tuesday in Brussels by Turkey over threats it faces from ISIS and the PKK.

By: Hana Levi Julian

Published: July 26th, 2015

via The Jewish Press » » NATO Calls Emergency Meeting at Turkey’s Request Over ISIS, PKK.

Ambassadors of all 28 member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have been called to an emergency meeting on Tuesday in Brussels at the request of Turkey.

The allies were summoned under Article 4 of NATO’s founding Washington Treaty, according to a statement released Sunday by NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg.

The request came in the wake of last week’s attacks on two fronts, one by Da’esh (ISIS) and the other by the outlawed Kurdish separatist PKK terror organization, which has fought for autonomy since 1984.

“Turkey requested the meeting in view of the seriousness of the situation after the heinous terrorist attacks in recent days, and also to inform allies of the measures it is taking,” NATO said. “NATO allies follow developments very closely and stand in solidarity with Turkey.”

Under the treaty, Turkey has the right to request military assistance,, surveillance aircraft to monitor activity along the Syrian border, or even to call for establishment of a “safe zone” in northern Syria. The latter has been under discussion for several days.

Article 4 reads: “The parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the parties is threatened.”

Turkey has invoked Article 4 twice before, in 2003 and 2012.

A week ago Monday a Da’esh (ISIS) suicide bomber attacked a cultural center in the southeastern Turkish town of Suruc, killing 32 Kurdish youth activists who were engaged in sending aid across the border to the Syrian Kurdish city of Kobane, six miles away. Kurds blamed Turkey for not patrolling the porous 500-mile border with Syria.

And the outlawed Kurdish PKK separatist terror organization retaliated – not against Da’esh, but against Turkey — with a deadly car bombing. Two Turkish soldiers were killed in the predominantly Kurdish southeastern Turkish province of Diyarbakir on Saturday night. Four other soldiers were wounded in the attack. Turkey said PKK terrorists also attacked a police station in the province.

Late Sunday, Turkish F-16 fighter jets struck back, aiming at PKK terror targets in the northern Iraqi town of Hakurk, according to Turkish security sources.

Turkey’s military operations will continue as long as there is a threat, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told United Nations secretary-general Ban Ki-moon. The U.S. backed Ankara’s air strikes in Iraq, according to a report in the British newspaper The Telegraph.

Talks between the Kurdish terror group and Ankara that led to a cease-fire in 2013 have not resulted in a formal agreement. However, the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) garnered 12 percent of the votes in this past parliamentary election, entering the governing body for the very first time.

The UN’s Anti-Israel Children and Armed Conflict Report

June 10, 2015

The UN’s Anti-Israel Children and Armed Conflict Report, Front Page Magazine, June 10, 2015

(Please see also, Legal Experts Slam IDF for Over-Warning Gazans. — DM)

UN_Secretary-General_Ban_Ki-moon_-_Flickr_-_The_Official_CTBTO_Photostream_13-431x350

According to the New York Times, citing unnamed diplomats, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon bowed to “unusual pressure from Israel and the United States” in deciding not to include either Israel or Hamas on a list of “armies and guerilla groups that kill and maim children in conflicts worldwide.” The list is included in an annex to an annual report by the Secretary General entitled “Children and armed conflict,” which he just released for 2015. The list, as its title states, is intended to identify specifically the entities that “recruit or use children, kill or maim children, commit rape and other forms of sexual violence against children, or engage in attacks on schools and/or hospitals in situations of armed conflict.”

Ban Ki-moon considered the recommendation of his special representative for children and armed conflict, Leila Zerrougui, to include both Israel and Hamas on this list as a reflection of their actions and the deadly consequences to children arising from the Gaza conflict last summer. The list already includes such Islamic jihad terrorist groups as the Islamic State, the al-Nusra Front, Boko Haram, the Taliban, Al Shabaaba, Al-Qaida in the Arab Peninsula and the Houthis, as well as government forces of the Syrian regime, Yemen, Sudan and Afghanistan.

While the Secretary General rejected his special representative’s recommendation, leaving both the terrorist jihadist group Hamas and Israel off the list in a display of moral equivalence, the body of the report is far more condemnatory of Israel than of Hamas or other Palestinian militants. There were more than three times as many paragraphs devoted to alleged Israeli violations of children’s rights relating to the Gaza war than devoted to the actions of Hamas or other Palestinian terrorists. When there was any criticism of Palestinian actions, it was stated in the mildest of terms. Israel, on the other hand, received the full brunt of the Secretary General’s censure:

“I am deeply alarmed at the extent of grave violations suffered by children as a result of Israeli military operations in 2014. The unprecedented and unacceptable scale of the impact on children in 2014 raises grave concerns about Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law, notably the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution in attack, and respect for international human rights law, particularly in relation to excessive use of force.” (Paragraph 110)

Nevertheless, Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations, was not satisfied. He issued a blistering statement declaring that “It is without doubt that Israel, the occupying Power, flagrantly, systematically and grossly commits human rights violations against Palestinian children constituting grave violations that qualify it for such a listing in the annex to the Annual Report on Children and Armed Conflict. The UN’s inaction, submitting to the inordinate pressures exerted, sends a most regrettable signal that the same criteria do not apply in all situations for all children, undermining the credibility of the UN system as a whole…”

As usual, Mr. Mansour stands the truth on its head. Indeed, Ban Ki-moon should have accepted his special representative’s recommendation to include Hamas on the annex list. Hamas and its other jihadist allies, not Israel, belong on the list alongside their Islamic State and al Qaeda brethren. They use children as human shields, deliberately store weapons in schools, homes hospitals and mosques where they know children are likely to be, and recruit children for jihad including the establishment of youth military training camps. They prepare children for the glory of martyrdom, extolling the virtues of suicide bombings that kill Jews.

Ban Ki-moon properly rejected his special representative’s recommendation to include Israel on the annex list. Israel does not belong on the same list as non-state and state entities that deliberately kill children with abandon, recruit children as soldiers, abduct and rape little girls, and kill their parents before their very eyes. To the contrary, the Israeli armed forces took great pains to minimize civilian casualties. It took the unprecedented step of warning civilians in advance of impending attacks on facilities that Hamas was using as launching pads from which to fire rockets at Israeli population centers and from which they were building their terrorist tunnels to sneak their fighters into Israel for the purpose of killing Israeli civilians, including women and children.

However, putting the annex list aside, Mr. Mansour should have been happy that the Secretary General reflected the institutional bias of the United Nations against Israel in the body of his report. In a crucial paragraph urging corrective actions to remedy the report’s catalogue of alleged violation of children’s rights – mostly said to be committed by Israel – the report focused solely on what Israel should do:

“I urge Israel to take concrete and immediate steps, including by reviewing existing policies and practices, to protect children, to prevent the killing and maiming of children, and to respect the special protections afforded to schools and hospitals. An essential measure in this regard is ensuring accountability for perpetrators of alleged violations. I further urge Israel to engage in a dialogue with my Special Representative and the United Nations to ensure that there is no recurrence in grave violations against children.” (Paragraph 111)

As usual, nothing is asked of the Palestinians. They are not urged to stop storing weapons in schools and hospitals. They are not asked “to protect children, to prevent the killing and maiming of children,” which they could begin to do by not using children as human shields, and not deliberately conducting rocket attacks against Israeli civilians including children and conducting other military activities from areas where they know Palestinian children are likely to be. They are not asked to close the youth military training camps or stop the online propaganda that indoctrinates Palestinian children into believing that martyrdom through jihad against Jews is the way to paradise.

We should not be surprised. Such anti-Israel bias is par for the course at the United Nations. Its Human Rights Council passes more resolutions condemning Israel than all of the other 192 member states combined. The Human Rights Council’s agenda item 7 requires that Israel’s – and only Israel’s – record of human rights be debated at every session. Investigations launched by the Human Rights Council and the UN Secretary General of alleged human rights and other international law violations in Gaza during the repeated wars there initiated by Hamas’s terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians are blatantly one-sided against Israel.

Israel was the only country in the world to be named as a violator of “health rights” during the UN World Health Organization’s annual assembly in May 2015. Never mind about Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, or North Korea where basic medical care and health services are scarce, if existent at all. Israel facilitates the delivery of humanitarian aid and takes care of the sick and injured, whether they be Palestinians or not. The Syrian regime prevents humanitarian aid including medical supplies from reaching besieged civilians, including Palestinian children trapped in Yarmouk. Yet the World Health Organization chose to ignore all this and adopt a resolution focusing solely on health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the Golan Heights, for which Israel is held responsible.

The UN Commission on the Status of Women, whose latest annual meeting concluded on March 20, 2015, marched to the same anti-Israel tune. The only country it condemned for its women’s rights record was Israel, presumably because of its alleged treatment of Palestinian women.

“If anyone had any doubt that there was demonization of Israel at the United Nations, here is the entire truth before our eyes,” said Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor. “There are 193 member states in the UN, and they include countries that butcher men and women, jail both male and female journalists, execute female oppositionists and legislate laws against women. All of these countries receive immunity in the UN. The UN Commission on the Status of Women is itself comprised of some of the worst violators of women’s rights, including Iran and Sudan, two of the more moderate members by comparison.”

Every day it seems that there is new proof of the demonization and attempts to delegitimize the Jewish state of Israel at the United Nations. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s report on “children and armed conflict” is but the latest example. There will certainly be more to come.

“Unity”? About What Exactly?

January 22, 2015

Unity”? About What Exactly? The Gatestone Institute, Jeremy Havardi, January 22, 2015

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia tried to fool the world by joining France’s “Unity March” for free speech just two days after a young Saudi blogger, Raif Badawi, received the first installment of 50 lashes — out of the 1000 he is to get — “very severely,” the lashing order says. Badawi still has 950 lashes to complete.

Mahmoud Abbas, whose genocidal, jihadi partner, Hamas, was just declared not a terrorist group by the European Union, joined the forefront of the “Unity March” at the same time as a Palestinian human rights groups published a report accusing the Palestinian Authority of “waging war” against university students in the West Bank.

What “Islamophobia” motivated the killing of Jewish customers in a kosher supermarket? What had those victims done to deserve that?

We may like to imagine that this is not Islam, and that the faith promotes peace and nothing else. But the murderers say it is Islam, and they act accordingly.

Much of the media has offered up a context for these killings that is false.

The real story is that despite a few sporadic incidents, there has been no backlash against the Muslim community.

The recent rally for free speech and against the terrorism in Paris initially appeared to have generated a surge of defiance and resolve, not just in France but around the world. People were actually talking about a turning point in the battle against terrorism and radical Islam.

If only it were true.

The reality is that much of the political class and media remain in denial about the events in Paris.

Ban Ki Moon explained that the tragic events had nothing to do with religion. Signing a condolence book for the victims of the attacks, he said: “This is not a country, a war against religion or between religions… This is a purely unacceptable terrorist attack – criminality.”

France’s President François Hollande said that the Charlie Hebdo fanatics had “nothing to do with Islam,” and he was joined in this view by commentators on France24, as well as the German Interior Minister, Thomas de Maizière.

The Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland condemned the actions of a “handful of wicked fanatics against the rest of us.” The implication was that they merely acted in the name of Islam — purely coincidentally, as it were.

In the Daily Mail, Piers Morgan wrote that the perpetrators were “not ‘real’ Muslims” and that this was “not a religious war.” Why he thought he could act as the arbiter on that question is still unclear.

As for President Obama, he has effectively outlawed the term “Islamic terror.”

The United States, in what was widely seen as a snub, was only represented at the rally by the U.S. Ambassador to France, Jane Hartley. Since the President had declared in 2012 that “[t]he future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” — the implication was that they were not acting purely coincidentally.

There is in those comments a mixture of political correctness, wishful thinking and staggering ignorance. It is understandable and commendable not to lump a majority of law-abiding, patriotic and peaceful Muslims together with their violent counterparts. But calling for “unity” in a march leaves one asking: Unity about what exactly?

To pretend that there is a complete disconnect between Islam and terror is to ignore reality. Jihadis are gaining ideological succour from the tenets of their faith, drawing upon teachings promulgated by imams, including the late Anwar al Awlaki. We may like to imagine that this is not Islam, and that the faith promotes peace and nothing else. But the murderers say it is Islam, and they act accordingly.

To confront this problem properly, the ideological underpinnings of jihad need to be tackled comprehensively at source.

It is not enough to unite against terrorism, as every community must. We need to know what we are uniting for — free speech. And we need to know what we are uniting against — namely the militant war of extremist Islamism.

It is equally inaccurate to describe these jihadis as “lone wolves.” They will have spent time gaining combat experience abroad, perhaps in Yemen, Syria or Iraq, and will have received ideological indoctrination and funding from a network of other jihadis. They are recruits in a theocratic, totalitarian death-cult spread across the planet. It comes in different forms: Boko Haram, which slaughtered 2,000 people in Nigeria the weekend before last; the Taliban, which murdered schoolchildren in Pakistan; Hamas with its genocidal doctrine and many years of bombings, and the Islamic State, which seems busy ethnically cleansing nearly everyone in Syria and Iraq.

The murders in Paris, therefore, were merely the latest salvo in a global confrontation between jihadist Islam and its declared enemies, this time in the West.

Much of the media has offered up a context for these killings that is false. Within hours of the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, the Telegraph led with a feature on the growing problem of “Islamophobia” in France. The Guardian, too, weighed in; one story headlined: “Muslims fear backlash after Charlie Hebdo deaths as Islamic sites attacked”. The Spectator spoke of the killings as an “attack on Islam;” and Robert Fisk in the UK Independent referred to the legacy of the Algerian war as a motive for the attackers. Other news outlets voiced fears of a “backlash” against Muslims in France and elsewhere.

But the real story is that while there have been some sporadic incidents against mosques and Muslim owned businesses in France following the Charlie Hebdo attacks, there has been no backlash against the Muslim community. Muslims across France even joined in the unity rally, an act that would have been impossible were there a climate of widespread public hostility.

The majority of hate crimes in France, as in a number of other countries, affects the Jewish community. It was a Jewish supermarket that was attacked. This does not mean that there will not be attacks — all of them naturally deplorable — against Muslim innocents, only that fears of a major widespread assault seem highly exaggerated. The same fears of widespread attacks against the Muslim community also proved unfounded after the 7/7 London bomb attacks.

Lumping terrorism and “Islamophobia” together ignores the real motivation of the latest killers in France. One of them, Amedy Coulibaly, pledged allegiance to the Islamic State in a video address prior to the supermarket attack. This hardly suggests a rant against perceived intolerance or racism. Invoking racism here also suggests, in a shifting of blame, that we in the West are somehow at fault for the violent behaviour of these Islamist terrorists. What “Islamophobia” motivated the killing of Jewish customers in a kosher supermarket? What had those victims done to deserve that?

Another reason this is no turning point is that the press continues to engage in self-righteous self-censorship. Not one broadcaster — including the BBC, Fox, NBC and CNN — showed any of the Charlie Hebdo images that had been deemed provocative. Those outlets were joined by the Associated Press, which deliberately cropped a photograph of the magazine’s now-dead editor to avoid showing an image of the Prophet Muhammad. In a cringe replicated across almost all of Europe, not one major British newspaper published any of Charlie Hebdo’s satirical images of Islam, and only The Guardian showed the full front cover of the edition that the survivors published after the attack.

Big mistake. These newspapers and broadcasters are denying the public a dispassionate view of what the killers themselves say is causing them to kill. Worse again, by drawing a line against possibly offending Muslims — many of whom seem to have no problem offending Jews and Christians, among others, if not killing them — the media have acted as if there is already in place an unofficial blasphemy law: the terrorists’ key demand.

A violent mob, disastrously undermining Western values, is effectively dictating the boundaries of free speech.

It is all very well to praise Charlie Hebdo as an icon of free speech, but after the riots that followed the publishing of Muhammad cartoons in Denmark’s Jyllands Posten in 2006, Charlie Hebdo was virtually alone in reprinting them, and it was condemned widely for doing so.[1]

Time magazine, in 2011, likened Charlie Hebdo’s reprinting the cartoons as “the right to scream ‘fire’ in an increasingly over-heated theater.” In other words, the “Islamophobic” cartoonists were to blame for their own misfortune. There is a notion permeating Europe, that if you speak out, not only can you can be put on trial — as is the Dutch MP, Geert Wilders[2] — but that it will also, in an Orwellian twist, be your own fault; if you had just kept quiet, nothing unpleasant would be happening to you. Try telling that to the four Jews lying murdered on the floor of the French supermarket. What did they ever say?

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia tried to fool the world by joining France’s “Unity March” for free speech just two days after a young Saudi blogger, Raif Badawi, received the first installment of 50 lashes — out of the 1000 he is to get — “very severely,” the lashing order says. He was taken after Friday prayers to a public square outside a mosque in Jeddah. His declared “crime” is “insulting Islam,” for writing thoughts such as, “My commitment is to reject any repression in the name of religion… a goal we will reach in a peaceful and law-abiding way.” Badawi still has 950 lashes to complete. If he lives. There is no medical help.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas — whose genocidal, jihadi partner, Hamas, was, in a burst of surrealism, declared not a terrorist group by the European Union — joined the forefront of the Unity March in Paris at the same time as a report was published by a Palestinian human rights group, accusing the Palestinian Authority of “waging war” against university students in the West Bank.

883World leaders link arms at the Paris anti-terror rally on January 11, 2014. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas stands at the far right of the front row. (Image source: RT video screenshot)

Turkey, “named the world’s biggest jailor of journalists in 2012 and 2013” according to theWashington Post, was also there. Turkey “ended 2014 by detaining a number of journalists … including Ekrem Dumanli, editor in chief of Zaman, a leading newspaper” with links to an opposition movement.

Meanwhile, between January 8 and January 14, as over three million copies of Charlie Hebdowere selling out and four million more being printed, there was already talk in France of hardening its laws against free speech. So this may not be a turning point either for free speech or against radical Islam. So it may be a while before we can truly say, “Nous sommes Charlie.”

Jeremy Havardi is a historian and journalist based in London. His books include The Greatest Briton, analytical essays on Churchill.


[1] Ezra Levant, who reprinted the cartoons in Canada, was then compelled to appear before the Alberta Human Rights Commission to defend their publication, because of a complaint lodged by Syed Soharwardy of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities.

[2] As also was Lars Hedegaard (for speaking in his own drawing room), Suzanne Winters, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, or at the very east need round-the-clock-bodyguards, such asFrench journalist Eric Zemmour, for saying that France might be facing a virtual civil war.

Anti-Semitic Text on UNRWA Website Claims ‘Jews Promoted Social Corruption’‏ (VIDEO)

October 14, 2014

Anti-Semitic Text on UNRWA Website Claims ‘Jews Promoted Social Corruption’‏ (VIDEO), Algemeiner, Dave Bender, October 14, 2014

(There’s little new here, mainly more of the same from Ban Ki-Moon and the U.N. Rocket Warehouse Agency. To expect, even to hope, for objectivity is to be deluded.– DM)

ban-ki-moon-netanyahu-300x194Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon meet on Tuesday in New York. Photo: UN Photo/Evan Schneider.

Ban, speaking at a Gaza reconstruction conference in Cairo on Sunday, and in Ramallah a day later, said Israel was at fault for “a restrictive occupation that has lasted almost half a century, the continued denial of Palestinian rights and the lack of tangible progress in peace negotiations.”‎

**************

Investigative pro-Israel blogger, Elder of Ziyon, on Monday uncovered a report, in Arabic, posted on the the United Nations Refugee Works Agency (UNRWA) website, that accuses Jews of supporting “social corruption.”

Entitled, “The Historical Development of Human Rights Throughout History,” the document purports to be a summary of human rights policies held by a number of civilizations over the ages, including Jewish thought on various aspects of Mosaic prohibitions against “murder, adultery and theft.”

While the article begins by praising Judaism as “a heavenly religion revealed to the Prophet of Allah Musa [Moses], peace be upon him included human rights through its focus on the goal of liberating the individual and the community. The right to freedom from oppression is a supreme value highlighted in Jewish holy books (Rashidi: 2005: 60). The commandments of Moses, peace be upon him, include prohibiting murder, adultery and theft.”

But soon enough, the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel stereotypes kick in.

“But if we look around us at communities supposedly protecting human rights and at well-known oases of democracy we do not see [human rights] but instead charges that the victim was a terrorist or supporter of terrorism, and also pornography justified freely as rights. We see monopoly and fraud justified by the right of ownership and earnings in any form (Mokbel: 2005: 5) All of this happened as a result of distortion and misinformation by the Jewish clergy. The Jews in the sixth and seventh centuries promoted social corruption (1981: 39), and the claim that they are God’s chosen people demonstrates that the Jews did not know anything about human rights,” the author claimed.

In a related development, both the Bnai-Brith and the Anti Defamation League on Tuesday criticized recent remarks by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon holding Israel almost exclusively responsible for the summer’s clashes with Hamas in Gaza.

Ban, speaking at a Gaza reconstruction conference in Cairo on Sunday, and in Ramallah a day later, said Israel was at fault for “a restrictive occupation that has lasted almost half a century, the continued denial of Palestinian rights and the lack of tangible progress in peace negotiations.”‎

In response, Bnai-Brith demanded that Ban “refrain from making biased, inflammatory remarks perpetuating a false image of Israel as an occupying aggressor. Ban, in his comments, did make mention of Hamas rocket attacks that were ‘fired indiscriminately causing fear, panic and suffering.’ However, he does not account for anti-Israel terrorists’ role in igniting and sustaining conflict—a stunning and inexplicable omission.”

The group said that “the open fanaticism, terrorism and armament of Arab extremists is the patent ‘root cause’ of recurring conflict with Israel.”

Donor nations pledged some 5.4 billion dollars – 1.4 billion more than the Palestinians themselves had requested – at the session.

The ADL, for its part, expressed “deep dismay” at what they termed Ban’s “stunning lack of objectivity” in remarks made alongside Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah in Ramallah, and in Jerusalem with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Mr. Ban’s failure to publicly call on Palestinians to reject violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist and avoid actions which might undermine the hope for reconciliation sends precisely the wrong message,” ADL National Director Abraham Foxman charged.

“It encourages Palestinian unilateral steps and conveys to Hamas there are no consequences for its murderous terrorism,” he said.

Ban “consistently places the onus on Israel,” according to Foxman, who contended in a statement that “such a one-sided characterization of the ‘root causes’ undermines the Secretary General’s credibility as an unbiased observer.”

Watch a video of Ban’s meeting with Israeli President Reuven Rivlin at the Presidential Residence: