From DG:
1) More regrets for Durban III
Anne Bayefsky reports that Czechoslovakia has decided that it will not participate in the Durban III "anti-racism" conference this fall. (via memeorandum)
The Czech Republic’s move comes three days after U.N. negotiators quietly circulated a draft of the final declaration that will be adopted at the conclusion of Durban III. Although the writing had been on the wall for a very long time, the alarm bells could no longer be ignored. The “political declaration” focuses particularly on what it calls “victims of racism.” And the Durban Declaration emanating from South Africa names only one state victimizer – Israel. The Palestinian people are listed as victims of racism.
The Zionism-is-racism mantra, the Durban formula being its most recent incarnation, has been circulating around the U.N. for decades. It is the cornerstone of the effort to delegitimize the Jewish state and invoke lethal politics when other weaponry falls short. These days, the campaign is headquartered in a working group of the U.N. General Assembly that is tasked with squaring the circle: reaffirming the contemptible message of the Durban Declaration under a veil of human rights gibberish.
Britain and France are still going.
Still other European Union countries like Britain and France have expressed a willingness to go the cover-up route, although their verbal gymnastics defy imagination. In June the General Assembly adopted a resolution on the organization of Durban III that stated: “the closing plenary meeting will comprise…the adoption of a short and concise political declaration aimed at mobilizing political will.”
That’s an odd sentence apparently ending in mid-stream. It was the EU’s idea to omit the words which came after “political will.” In December 2010 the General Assembly resolution promoting Durban III referred to mobilizing political will “for the full and effective implementation of the Durban Declaration.” When the EU floated the idea of not finishing the sentence or of incorporating a technical reference to the December resolution that nobody would read, the meeting’s co-chair gave them a nod and said he appreciated
their interests in subterfuge.
Whatever rhetorical devices are contrived behind closed doors, the bottom line remains: Durban III is all about commemorating an event that is forever tainted with anti-Semitism and intolerance. The admirable decision by the Czech Republic is a wake-up call for other democracies still pretending otherwise.
At the end she reports that Italy and Holland have also sent their regrets.
2) Israel sends message of support to Norway
Israel expresses its shock at the revolting terror attacks in Oslo, which have taken the lives of innocent victims. Nothing at all can justify such wanton violence, and we condemn this brutal action with the utmost gravity.
We stand in solidarity with the people and government of Norway in this hour of trial, and trust Norwegian authorities to bring to justice those responsible for this heinous crime.
Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. We send our condolences to the bereaved families, and our wishes for prompt recovery to the injured. We remain at the Government of Norway's disposal for any assistance it may require.
* * *
President Shimon Peres sent a special condolence letter to the King of Norway and the Norwegian people.
In the letter the President wrote: "The people of Israel are shocked and share the grief of the people of Norway on the despicable murder of innocent civilians and innocent youth. Our hearts are with the bereaved families who have lost that which is most dear to them. We pray for the speedy recovery of the wounded."
3) PM Netanyahu addresses Arab audience
And some observers say that direct talk has become necessary: If the old pattern of relations between Israel and the Arab world involved settling things discreetly through top channels, the Arab spring, an expressly bottom-up phenomenon, has changed that. The Arab public now has a say, and Israel realizes -- or should -- that
it needs to talk to that public, these observers say.
4) Buying off the population
5) Walter Reich on Yale again
Ordinarily, when universities review programs and find deficiencies, those programs are given time to remedy themselves. In this case, the institute was simply clamped shut, based on an investigative report that the administration declared confidential.
The report provoked a new round of excoriations, this time from the institute’s supporters. Again, the Internet went wild with accusations, at which point Yale administrators – instead of admitting that their judgment was hasty and that they might have made a mistake – triumphantly announced a new institute. The make-up of the new institute, and Yale’s behavior with regard to the old one, don’t inspire confidence.
Some of Yale’s critics have claimed that the university’s administrators shut down its first anti-Semitism institute for venal reasons – that it’s seeking large donations from Arab sources. I don’t believe that for a minute. I think it’s simply very hard for Yale, or any other university, to focus honestly and responsibly on contemporary anti-Semitism, because doing so invites accusations of “Islamophobia,” and universities simply cannot tolerate such accusations.
6) Iran vs. the Arab Spring
Beyond the active involvement of Iranian elements in the repression, it was reported that Iran also provided Syria with logistical equipment, sniper rifles of its own make, and advanced Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN)10 devices for disrupting Internet activity, which allow the identification of activists who converse by phone or use the social networks on the Internet. Iran has accumulated great experience in the use of such equipment for monitoring sensitive events (religious and national holidays, student days, various remembrance days), the mapping and detention of activists, the infiltration of social networks, the blocking of sites, and the dismantling of cellular networks. Recently, after an in-depth inquiry using open sources, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that Iran had not been sold equipment for "monitoring, filtering, and disrupting information and communications flows." It also stated, among other things, that while NSN had in the past sold Iran technology for its cellular telephone network, "Iran's need to obtain monitoring and filtering technology from outside sources may be lessening as it develops indigenous censorship and surveillance capabilities, possibly in response to sanctions against Western companies selling it sensitive technology."11 If so, and given the longstanding security cooperation in sensitive security areas, it was easier for Iran to transfer such systems to Syria (which could also use them for surveillance of Israel).
After the repression of the protest in Iran, some Iranians boycotted NSN and even sued it for selling listening and monitoring equipment to the Iranian government, which led to the arrest of many Iranians who used cellular phones and social networks. The company admitted that in 2008 it had sold Iran a monitoring system called the Lawful Interception Management System (LIMS).12 Nobel Prize winner and human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, who is subject along with her family to persecution by the Iranian authorities, accused NSN of funneling equipment, technology, and software for monitoring cellular phones and SMS messages to the repressive Iranian regime, which used these for the surveillance and detention of demonstrators.13 Some Tehran residents have vandalized Nokia advertisements and splashed them with green paint - the color of the reform movement in Iran.14
Technorati Tag:
Israel and
Middle East.
No comments:
Post a Comment