UN Claims Israel is World’s Worst Violator of Women’s Rights
At least that is the view of the UN’s top women’s rights body, the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). CSW ends its annual meeting on Friday, March 20 by condemning only one of the 193 UN member states for violating women’s rights –Israel. So who is calling the shots at the Council? A closer look at its members reveals human rights luminaries like Qatar – that bankrolls the terrorist organization Hamas – along with China, Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia. http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/20/un-claims-israel-is-worlds-worst-violator-of-womens-rights/
Worst abusers according to women's right organizations:
Congo, Iraq, Nepal, Sudan, Guatemala, Mali, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia. Afghanistan. http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/international/Ten-Worst-Countries-for-Women.html
"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." http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/UN-womens-rights-panel-singles-out-Israel-in-one-sided-resolution-394590
"Heritage Foundation scholar Brett Schaefer has pointed out, countries that together pay less than 1.3 percent of the total are able, under U.N. voting rules, to pass the budget over the objections of countries that contribute a combined 98 percent." http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-taxpayers-will-continue-pay-more-one-fifth-un-budget As of the end of November 2010, the United States owed $1.182 billion, accounting for just over a quarter of all the money due the world body. Washington paid nearly half a billion dollars of what it owed for peacekeeping, the regular U.N. budget and other items.
I really have nothing to add. My conclusion: DIVEST THE UN!
I know the future
I know what awaits them.
While watching old movies
I am cursed with knowledge.
I know what lies ahead
And the cold sadness of this knowledge envelops me
Makes it hard to watch
I know what awaits them
I know the future.
I don't want this knowledge
People in old movies
They laugh and cry, they love and hate
And that is how it should be
I don't like watching old movies
Old movies forcing me to know the future
By knowing the past
The human history
Short breaks of happiness
Between long dark stretches of tragedies and despair
The human history
Full of violence, death and destruction
I don't like watching old movies
I know what awaits them
Misery, violence and death
But the thought comes to me
What the future holds?
I know it is wrong
I should not ask this
We should not, we cannot know
So we can live
And yet I wonder
I know the past
Just live in the moment we are told
The past is gone
And the future unknown
But the past lives in me
The past is talking to me
About the future
All human suffering
The inhumane brutality and hatred
With a short respite of peace
And how quickly people forget
To live in the moment
Maybe that is how we humans survive
We want so much to be happy
But humanity gets reckless
And suffering returns again
As if punishing us for forgetting
It is so painful to remember
And yet we should not forget
We have to remember the past
In order to have the future
I watch old movies.
How to end the world's dependence on America.
Some are arguing that the US should get more involved in world affairs and be more active in keeping the peace around the world. And I totally agree. To a point.
US should not be the policemen of the world. That creates an unhealthy dependency.
This US dependence should be reduced and eventually phased out.
The world population is growing and getting richer and should and can assume the cost and responsibility for international affairs.
There is a difference between being a leader and being an enforcer.
GDP (current US$) - $16.66 trillion 2012
Population (Total) - $505.6 million 2012
It is very convenient for the EU to rely on the US. It saves money and lives...less headaches and if something goes wrong you can blame America.
Here is an indicator of a totally inept European response: “On May 8, Russia's only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, passed through the Netherlands' exclusive economic zone. Although the Dutch Navy had spotted the Kuznetsov days earlier, it was unable to provide an escort for the Russian warship as it passed through their
This failure of the Dutch to escort a Russian ship through its own territory underscores a wider failing within Europe to maintain a state of military readiness. NATO members are meant to budget at least 2% of their GDP every year on defense spending, although only four member states reached that goal in 2013.
The average defense spending of European NATO members fell from 2.5% of GDP between 1990 to 1994 to only 1.6% of GDP by 2013.
In comparison, the U.S.' defense spending remains over the NATO minimum at 4.1% of GDP.
Short-term profit over long-term security.
The recent crisis in Ukraine is a good example. European businesses do not want a confrontation with Russia because it may affect the bottom line.
So the Europeans let Putin do whatever he pleases right under their noses.
“The head of one of the biggest German engineering companies, Siemens, went to Moscow the week after the annexation of Crimea and met with Putin assuring him that they would continue a long term relationship with Russia. And that was a signal to me that the German business community is clearly concerned about maintaining its investments and even broadening them in the future.
Time to share the responsibility.
“The former Solidarity leader(Lech Walesa) said that when he meets Obama in Warsaw, he wants to tell him that the U.S. should inspire and encourage the world into positive action.
"The point is not in having the States fix problems for us or fight somewhere, no," Walesa said. "The States should organize us, encourage us and offer programs, while we, the world, should do the rest. This kind of leadership is needed."
The U.S. military alliance with Japan no longer serves the best interests of either country. Washington subsidizes Japan's defense at the expense of the American taxpayers. That subsidy, which has amounted to approximately $900 billion (in 1995 dollars) since the early 1950s, is a powerful incentive for the Japanese to continue their free ride on this U.S. security guarantee. And Japan's much-touted host-nation support of $5 billion a year actually pays only a small fraction of the total cost of the U.S. security commitmen
There is another consideration. USA superiority on the seas is based in large part on the aircraft carriers. Only a few countries in the world can afford this type of vessel. But there is a high probability of the air carriers becoming obsolete.
So smaller faster ships with advanced weapons will be much more effective and much cheaper so America's allies will be able to afford them.
I am not advocating a new arms race. But countries do need their own defense capabilities that will serve as a deterrent and more responsible relations between neighbors.
The US will remain the preeminent military force for now, but it is getting increasingly difficult and costly for the US to bear responsibility for the world.
Diplomacy in close cooperation with it's allies and rapidly coordinated military deployment and action capability should replace
dependence on the only superpower.
Besides, a smaller US defense budget will improve the economical situation in the country. That will free resources for a peaceful influence around the globe.
It is kind of hard to apply pressure on China when we owe China a trillion dollars.
Speak softly and carry a big stick? Well it is true. But as a team, not a lone giant.
“Some experts, such as Micah Zenko, have suggested that any U.S. decision to give (very limited) weapons to Ukraine would have either no effect or a highly negative one by escalating the conflict. But non-lethal aid, others argue, could help reduce civilian casualties in the region by allowing the Ukrainian military to operate more safely.”
To give or not to give?
Let's suppose the conflict will not be “escalated”
What exactly does this mean?
Is the never ending slow burning conflict better?
If the answer is yes – then why and for whom??
Why is the never ending pointless, slow-grinding of Ukraine better than helping Ukraine to protect itself against the enemy, whose sole purpose is to keep the conflict going in order to ruin, to fully destabilize, Ukraine and to stay in power.
That is exactly what Putin needs: to keep the war at a low intensity in order to keep the support of the fooled Russian population and to stay in power.
Putin whose bombers are constantly testing the NATO allies and the submarines are provoking the Baltic countries; Putin that talks about “nuclear armed” Russia is not afraid to provoke and antagonize NATO.
And yet Europe and the US are very hesitant to do anything to stop Russia's reckless bullying because it might “antagonize Russia” and upset Putin.
And if the Europeans and Obama think that sanctions will deter Putin from further aggression or will force him to retreat, they are just delusional.
It would be interesting to consider how an alternative history of WWII would have ended if the main allies' strategies would be not to antagonize Hitler and to operate “more safely”.
Berlin carpet bombing comes to mind and a couple of nuclear devices in Japan.
Yes, Ukraine is in big trouble and its economy is in shambles. And that is exactly what Putin wants for Ukraine in order to control it. He knows that if Ukraine turns to the West, it just might succeed in improving its economy and the life of its people. And then it will be lost forever.
I am really disgusted and ashamed of the inept and lazy Europe that sold Czechoslovakia to Hitler before and is now selling Ukraine to Putin.
Europe that allowed the Holocaust before and is doing nothing to prevent another Holocaust that is fast approaching.
Maybe we will wake up -- but it may be too late.
History repeats itself for those who need one more lesson.
To antagonize: to cause (someone) to feel hostile or angry; to irritate or upset (someone)
And that is exactly what Russia is doing now.
Putin Uses Ukraine, Iran to Antagonize the West
By continually testing the global community with his actions in Ukraine, Putin has shown to the world that the West is not willing to help Ukraine defend itself. Though the United States and the European Union have tried to inflict economic pain on Russia in the form of sanctions, for Putin, these measure don’t go far enough.
But the West is afraid to antagonize Putin
Other U.S. and NATO military officials, though, are wary of antagonizing the Kremlin. Speaking Thursday at an alliance gathering in Brussels, U.S. Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, NATO’s top commander, said delivering weapons to Ukraine “could trigger a more strident reaction from Russia.”
NATO member Poland offered this week to provide arms to Ukraine. Merkel, however, has argued that the conflict needs more diplomatic intervention, not more guns. Hollande, in a stop to Russian President Vladimir Putin, said before embarking on the trip with Merkel that he opposed NATO membership for Ukraine.
The West tried to appease Hitler before WWII
Leading up to World War II, Germany, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, participated in many aggressive actions which violated the Treaty of Versailles. France and Great Britain, in an attempt to maintain peace in Europe so soon after The Great War, gave in to many of Germany’s demands and actions. The policy of giving in to Germany’s demands in order to maintain peace was known as appeasement. http://www2.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/history/pattonwq1.htm
The appeasement failed. The European cowardliness resulted in WWII and millions of lives lost.
Putin Rejects Attempts to Contain Russia After Peace Talks Fail.
Merkel, in a speech at the Munich meeting, repeated her opposition to supplying weapons to Ukraine. “The progress Ukraine needs won’t be achieved with more weapons. I have a lot of doubts,” she said.
If Europe, the US and the rest of the civilized world will not stop Russia now it will embolden Putin to even more reckless behavior.
Every time Putin escalates the bullying and Europe does nothing practically ensures the bullying to continue. And increases the possibility of the big war between NATO and Russia.
Ukraine run by "miserable" Jews: rebel chief. Anti-Semitic sentiment remains widespread in Ukraine, where leaders are commonly labeled as Jewish by those seeking to discredit them.
The comments by Zakharchenko, who was flanked by the leader of the neighboring rebel-held region of Lugansk, Igor Plotnitsky, were carried live by Russian news channel Rossiya-24. http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-run-miserable-jews-rebel-chief-202600090.html
Putin: Ukraine is run by anti-Semites. According to Vladimir Putin, the revolution that dislodged former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukoyvch this winter was not a popular movement for democracy, European integration and honest government. It was, rather, he told the world, a “coup executed” by “Nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes and anti-Semites” who “wanted to seize power and would stop short of nothing.” http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/168504/kirchick-putin-ukraine
Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves. With its accusations, Russia also turned back attention on itself, with an anchor on a state-funded TV channel implying that Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.
The questions are "based on age-old stereotypes about Jews, including classical stereotypes about Jewish power, loyalty, money and behavior."
Russia and Ukraine are about equal
Overall, in Ukraine, 38 percent of those polled could be considered anti-Semitic and in Russia, 30 percent.
Jews have too much power in business. In Eastern Europe, the survey notes that the most widely held anti-Semitic stereotype is that "Jews have too much power in the business world." In Ukraine, 56 percent agreed with that statement and 49 percent of Russians. http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-more-anti-semitic-than-russia/25384493.html
Anti-Semitism in mainstream media. The mainstream media has been obsessed with demonizing Israel for decades. HonestReporting has been documenting the media bias in reporting on Israel and it is without question that this bias has helped lead to anti-Israel indoctrination across the globe.
Jews are accused of controlling the world media. But if you can read and are able to read without getting sick, you would find millions of articles accusing the Jews of controlling the world media. So how these two statements work side by side?
Jews are responsible for Middle East violence. “But many critics of Israel’s policy would suggest that the Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands as well.” A confused Hava responded that “We cannot do an amalgam between--” before Willcox cut her off. “But you understand,” he said, “everything is seen from different perspectives.” http://tabletmag.com/scroll/188231/bbc-anchor-suggests-french-jews-to-blame-for-palestinian-suffering
The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world. In 2006, an inebriated Mel Gibson allegedly said this: “The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.” There followed the predicable storm of anti-Semitism, ad hominem attacks and various other slanders against Gibson’s character. But virtually no one asked the question: Is he right? Or rather this: To what degree could he be right? http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2013/volume_5/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars.php
Communist Jews are being blamed for killing Christians in the Soviet Union.
These Christians are but a few of the 100,000,000 Christian innocents who were exterminated by the Anti-Christian Jewish Red Commissars in Russia under the orders of Trotsky, the Jewish Commissar of Commissars. Yet Spielberg will never direct a "Schindler's List" Movie for them or their genocide. Why is that? Because Jews did it. http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-occupiedgovernments-USSR.html
Stalin accused Jews of anti-Soviet activities. Stalin claimed that Jewish doctors, under American direction, were deliberately and systematically killing off Soviet leaders by falsely and wrongly diagnosing their ailments, thereby causing their deaths. The press media referred to the accused as "criminals in white coats." http://vho.org/tr/2004/2/Michaels227-231.html
Hitler blames Jews for starting the war. Hitler showed no remorse. Instead, he blamed the Jews for the war he himself had started. "It is untrue that I, or anyone else in Germany, wanted the war in 1939," he stated. "It was desired and instigated solely by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/holocaust/peopleevents/pandeAMEX87.html
So to summarize.
We Jews should be extremely proud.
One out of every 514 people in the world is Jewish, less than 0.2 percent of mankind.
Approximately 193 of the 855 Nobel Prize winners have been Jewish (22%). Jews make up less than 0.2% of the global population.
The list of Jewish scientists, artists, actors, philosophers who changed the world is long. But here are some you might have heard of: Niels Bohr, Carl Sagan, Robert Oppenheimer, Gustav Mahler, Charlie Chaplin, Lauren Bacall, Baruch de Spinoza, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, Abraham, Jesus.
The whole world is watching the Jews. The whole world is aware of Jewish influence in every aspect of human life. And yet the Jews still rule the world... according to all anti-Semites of the world.
And yet these all-powerful Jews that “rule the world” allowed the Holocaust while the world did nothing.
So what do these fact tell us about the Jews?
And about the rest of the world?
Should I say any more?
John Adams: "I will insist the Hebrews have [contributed] more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist and believed in blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations... They are the most glorious nation that ever inhabited this Earth. The Romans and their empire were but a bubble in comparison to the Jews."
“A letter sent from the Oxford University Press (OUP) to an author warning not to include "pigs plus sausages, or anything else which could be perceived as "pork" in their book.
The move meant not to "offend" Muslims comes after British Sky News refused to show Charlie Hebdo's latest cover that features Mohammed, in a surprising act of censorship that comes as world media has in general rallied to support freedom of speech after the attack.” http://virtualjerusalem.com/culture.php?Itemid=15672
A letter from the Three Little Pigs to the Oxford Press.
We, the Pigs, are offended that the publisher banned us from their publications. We the Pigs are outraged at being discriminated against by the Oxford University Press
We sacrifice ourselves and are made into sausages for the benefit and well-being of the fine members of the Oxford publishing community who love to consume our brothers and sisters, especially in the form of sausages.
So it is totally unfair to ban us Pigs, loyal and peaceful citizens, from this enlightened publishing house especially considering that we, the pigs, do not threaten anybody and never seduced innocent Muslims or Jews. Nor are we planning to do so considering that we, the Pigs, have plenty of fans ready to enjoy our company and our sausages.
Signed: Big Bad Wolf
Signed for the Three Little Pigs who are busy building their house.