Greetings:

"interference in ... internal affairs" is right out of the Commie playbook.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Posted by: 11B40 at May 29, 2007 1:33 PM

Islamia has no need of foreign folk coming in and teaching human rights to Muslims.

Because Islam permits NO human rights except for one: the right to tyrannize other people (which Muslims make ample use of).

As for Amnesty International and the UN Human Rights Watch they are now jihad propaganda tools exclusively. There are no human rights to be taught through them-- just jihad.

Posted by: pythagoras at May 29, 2007 1:57 PM

The Muslims are afraid that the more we look , the more we find...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at May 29, 2007 2:04 PM

Human Rights Watch should be renamed Muslim Male Rights Watch.

Because that's all that matters, right?

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at May 29, 2007 2:44 PM

I used to wonder at the lack of logic Arab nations used to condemn the West while practicing atrocities on their own soil to non muslims. Then it occurred to me: Muslims consider non-muslims as sub-human. So there you have it! Since you are torturing animals, no human rights are being violated. Until the West recognizes this "logic", we will always have problems with Muslim Arab leaders.

Posted by: never_submit at May 29, 2007 3:55 PM

Repeat after me:

Being Muslim means never
having to say
you're sorry.

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at May 29, 2007 4:12 PM

Another outfit of perfidy: Oxfam

http://ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n09/v2n09-4.htm

Update - Oxfam UK Targets Israel's Right to Self Defense

Previous editions of NGO Monitor have profiled Oxfam International, an organization with an annual budget of over $300 million, and its political activities and impact in the conflict. These analyses highlighted Oxfam�s political condemnations of Israel, the tendency towards silence on human rights abuses committed by Palestinians, including the use of children for acts of terror (Abuse of Palestinian Children � NGO Monitor March 2004), and failure to condemn Palestinian suicide bombings (Majority of International and Palestinian NGO�s Fail to Condemn Jerusalem Suicide Bombing � NGO Monitor Feb. 2004). As shown below, the British branch of Oxfam has expanded this political campaign to Israeli security policies against terror attacks.

On 21 April 2004, Britain�s Guardian newspaper reported that �Oxfam will today demand that the government reveal if British companies have supplied components for Apache helicopters to Israel, the kind that were used to assassinate two Hamas leaders� (�Oxfam Calls for Clarity on Apaches�) This news article quoted Ed Cairns, senior policy analyst at Oxfam: �It's clear that the government has licensed all sorts of components to Israel without giving us the details." Mr Cairns said it was time the government came clean, stating: "Until they do, people will continue to suspect the government of undermining its bold public statements with secretive arms deals."

While Oxfam�s actions could be seen within the context of its ongoing campaign against British governmental involvement in global arms sales, the organization�s emphasis on Israeli Apache helicopters highlights Oxfam�s ideological agenda. It is clear that Israel has employed such weaponry in order to carry out pinpoint strikes in self-defense against terrorist leaders, with the aim of protecting Israeli lives while minimizing civilian casualties. Nonetheless, Oxfam has seen fit to attack the British government for selling weapon component parts to a fellow democratic nation fighting terrorism. Oxfam is also exhibiting a double standard, condemning Israel�s legitimate security while failing to mention massive British arms sales to Middle Eastern states such as Saudi Arabia as well as other countries with abysmal human rights records.

In addition, as reported by NGO Monitor in April 2004 (Sharon�s disengagement plan � NGOs rush to reject Gaza withdrawal), Oxfam, in partnership with Christian Aid and Cafod, expressed its opposition to Prime Minister Sharon�s Gaza disengagement plan in a letter to British Prime Minister Tony Blair. It is clear that Oxfam continues to advocate for the Palestinian cause, including efforts to influence the political views of the British government and its stance towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Oxfam won't condemn Darfur genocide or Mugabe's famine, but Israel is another story...

My previous post was a link to a Nick Cohen interview with Barbara Stocking, the head of Oxfam, that included a brief but very interesting history of the founding of the organization. It seems that Oxfam was created in response to the Greek famine during that country's tragic occupation by Nazi Germany. This relief effort was in direct opposition to the Churchill administration's ban on aid to Greece, which was put in force to prevent aid from going to the Nazis themselves instead of the intended recipients. Oxfam defended their continuing Greek famine relief on the grounds that they were apolitical and neutral on issues not related to their mission, which was to feed the hungry.

This logic is also how Oxfam justifies their current refusal to criticize nations where their relief efforts might be threatened if they were to be honest about the crimes against humanity those nations commit. So Oxfam does business with the dictators of the Sudan and Zimbabwe, and says nothing of the causes of genocide and famine in those countries. That's just not their reason for being, they say, and to do so would endanger their mission.

But they make an exception of this rule for one nation. What nation could that be?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 29, 2007 5:32 PM

Human rights violation, I simple love that one, they will of cause be taking there standpoint from the Cairo deceleration on Human rights which most of the Islamic countries signed in 1990 where Sharia law gets to decide. They are of cause so arrogant and superior, that they think the rest of the world should dance to their tune. Well we do don't we, we need there oil. It has always seem rather irrelevant to me to have an Islamic deceleration of Human rights, when most of the world signed up to a UNIVERSAL declaration of Human in 1948. I don't know what the word UNIVERSAL means to you, but it means one size fits all to me, something on the lines of a supper elastic condom. Saudi Arabia was the only muslim country to sign up to that one. That makes me laugh, the Saudi delegates must have been suffering from an hangover when they signed that piece of paper. That of cause would give them good reason to abrogate that treaty, tempted by Satan and the Infidel we can't have that. This of cause would be funny if it wasn't so tragic

Posted by: Holger Dansker at May 29, 2007 5:41 PM

"The UN's Human Rights Council is the star of the show. In its brief history, it has only found cause to condemn Israel. Many times."

Come on , that's funny .

Posted by: ewha1 at May 29, 2007 9:49 PM

I worked for some years in Saudi Arabia, in the health field and saw first hand the humanity of Saudi and islam.
Not a good thing to see,.... and the feeling all around as you live and work there is not pleasant.
They did not inspire me with a love of their people or their cult.

Posted by: marilyn at May 30, 2007 1:55 AM

After Saddam's deposal in March 2003, Amnesty and HRW both admitted that they were aware of all the human rights abuses and torture going on, but said they kept their yaps shut as to expose these abuses would surely result in their workers being expelled from Iraq, in which case they could do even less to help. Of course neither organizations could point to any good that they were doing by being there, and heaven only knows that were the broader public aware of the truth that it would not have had any impact on suppport for Saddam's overthrow.

Creeps. Hypocrits of the same degree as the so-called nuclear disarmament movements that think it's OK for Iran to acquire nuclear capacity, as, heaven knows, they can be trusted to use it only for peaceful purposes and to handle these materials safely, without harm to life or the environment.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at May 30, 2007 9:14 AM

If the Saudis keep this up eventually Mecca, the no-go capital of islam, is where they'll keep all the prisoners. There will be no outside inspections and no information on prisoners will be forthcoming other than the routine anouncement of executions. The simile of totalitarianism that is islam will have been perfected.

Posted by: Emerson Twain at May 30, 2007 10:21 PM