Skip to comments.Deported BDS bigot Omar Shakir uses 'apartheid slur'
Posted on 04/27/2021 2:49:47 PM PDT by Conservat1
I just received news, that NPR/NYtimes reported that bigoted BDS promoter Omar Shakir who somehow sits on HRW used the "apartheid" slur on worried Israel of racist Arab attacks... The guy is vengeful too, after being deported from Israel in 2019.
Omar Shakir [Omar S. Shakir] was deported from Israel in November 2019 for promoting anti-Israel boycotts while serving as the Israel and Palestine Country Director for Human Rights Watch (HRW).
Shakir has defended terrorists, whitewashed violent protests and demonized Israel.
Shakir was the 2011-2012 co-president of Students for Palestinian Equal Rights (SPER), a forerunner to Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at Stanford University (Stanford). As an alumnus, Shakir has defended SJP and has been a featured speaker at SJP events.
In 2015, Shakir represented anti-Israel activist Steven Salaita in his lawsuit against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). In 2014, Salaita was fired by UIUC for posting a series of anti-Israel tweets.
Shakir is a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. Shakir promoted and advocated [00:06:21] for divestment bills while a student at Stanford. In 2013, he introduced a BDS resolution to the undergraduate senate at Stanford which failed to get the required two-thirds approval. https://canarymission.org/individual/Omar_Shakir
Abbas wants 'not a single Israeli' in future Palestinian state
Jul 29, 2013 — proper functioning of our website (such as prompting the cookie banner and remembering your settings, to log into your account, to redirect ...https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE96T00920130730
HRW’s “Apartheid” Publication: Demonization, BDS, and Lawfare
April 25, 2021
In this Report:
Topics in this Report
NGOs in this Report
NGO Monitor received advanced copies of a Human Rights Watch (HRW) publication, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution,” scheduled to be released on April 27, 2021. The following analysis highlights the salient themes and fundamental flaws in HRW’s publication.
The document adds to decades of HRW’s obsessively singling out of Jews and Israel, and rejection of the legitimacy of a Jewish nation state, per se and regardless of policies or borders.
The contents reinforce the warning of HRW founder Robert Bernstein, in the New York Times, who wrote: HRW “has been issuing reports on the Israeli-Arab conflict that are helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state.”
In the “apartheid” claim, the HRW publication makes repeated denunciations of what they sinisterly term Israel’s demographic policies, including the 1950 Law of Return that was enacted in the shadow of the Holocaust.
HRW’s report is part of a concerted NGO campaign over the past 18-months to interject the term “apartheid” into discourse about Israel. Indeed, HRW reiterates, cites, and quotes many of these NGOs in its publication.
For more than a decade, HRW has played a predominant role in lobbying the ICC to open an investigation against Israel. In supporting the March 2021 decision by the ICC Prosecutor to proceed, HRW demands that she “Investigate and prosecute individuals credibly implicated in the crimes against humanity of apartheid or persecution.”
The claims made regarding Israel and the definition of apartheid under the Rome Statute are fundamentally political, and rejected by many legal experts as distortion and slander.
To exploit the apartheid claim, HRW and the other NGOs erase the basic nature of the South African regime, which was characterized by systematic, institutionalized oppression, particularly in the realm of political and civil rights.
The recommendations to the international community repeat the claims HRW has made for 20 years in promoting BDS campaigns against Israel and targeting companies that do business in Israel. Recently, HRW was active in (failed) BDS attacks targeting Airbnb and FIFA, as well as in lobbying intensively for the UN BDS Blacklist.
Omar Shakir is listed as the author of “Threshold”. He has devoted many years to delegitimizing Israel, and in 2019, his Israeli work visa was not renewed because of his involvement in BDS campaigns, in violation of Israeli law.
HRW denies Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state and reduces all security policies to “demographic objectives.”
HRW dismisses Israel’s concerns and policies on security in the context of ongoing terror, falsely asserting that security is used “as a justification to advance demographic objectives.”
Wish we could deport our Omars!!!
Human Rights Watch was the group that pressured Jordan to release the Iraqi [with connections to the 1993 World Trade Center bombers and to Saddam Hussein’s regime] who had driven two of the future 9/11 hijackers to the Malaysia Terrorist Summit in Kuala Lumpur- that meeting concerned plans to bomb the USS Cole. According to one report those two future hijackers stayed at an Iranian diplomat’s apartment while in Malaysia.
Those two hijackers were associates of Imam Anwar al Aulaqi / Awlaki, who was leader of al Qaeda’s Falls Church VA Cell and who later became Emir of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula [Yemen] and inspired the terrorist who committed a mass shooting at Ft Hood as well as Abdulmutallab the underwear bomber who tried to bring down a Detroit-bound jet.
Ilhan or Rachid are no true progressives like Cortez. But use that platform to promote their racist goals.
George Soros gives $100 million to Human Rights Watch
Ilhan or Rachid are no true progressives like Cortez. But use that platform to promote their racist goals.
Deport them all.. By the way they are not progressives they are commies!!
As one of the world’s best-known human rights groups, such a report ought to carry significant weight with its accusations that Arab people are systematically denied basic rights granted to Jews. But these accusations come from various human rights organisations frequently and face counter-accusations of bias, so the impact will be limited.
Israeli authorities immediately rejected the accusations as the usual type of antisemitic propaganda they face. A realisation is spreading internationally that anti-Israel propaganda has become the latest form of antisemitism, and it is often disguised as concern over human rights.
NGO Monitor is an organisation set up to hold non-governmental organisations to account, and it quickly published a rebuttal of this latest HRW report. A few key points are listed here:
As usual, international media organisations have written at length about the HRW report. The BBC’s news article covers some of the main accusations at length before quoting international human rights lawyer, Philippe Sands, as saying the report ‘was a balanced and rigorous wake-up call by a serious and authoritative organisation.’
Thankfully, they also quoted Gerald Steinberg, founder of NGO Monitor, right at the end of their article as saying the HRW report was part of a “vindictive vendetta ... against Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.”
He highlighted the fact that HRW had chosen to “completely ignore and erase deliberately decades of terrorism and the need for counter-terror measures.”
President of the British Board of Deputies, Marie van der Zyl, said the HRW report was a “sham which puts rhetoric above fact.”
“They consistently ignore or downplay the fact that Israel’s security measures in the West Bank and around Gaza are the response to well-documented terror activities. The ridiculous ‘apartheid‘ slur in this report is belied by the fact that, as it stands, Israel’s next government may well rely on the support of Arab parties, voted for by the country’s fully-enfranchised Arab citizens.”
Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Seth J. Frantzman notes that Israel’s human rights record regarding treatment of the Palestinians has improved in recent decades. ‘Clashes between Israeli forces and Palestinians rarely result in the death of civilians, a major change from how events unfolded during the First and Second Intifadas.’
He also emphasises the fact that an entire generation of Palestinians has grown up educated in Palestinian Authority schools in the West Bank and under Hamas rule in Gaza. Someone born when the Palestinians first began to administer their own affairs in a new authority under the Oslo Accords is now 25 years old.
Thus, the war of words over human rights in and around Israel continues.
If anyone doubts the claims of bias in the accusations levelled against Israel, one only has to look at the way the country is singled-out for criticism at the United Nations to realise that there is a significant international problem.
Facts of racism in the area and the intolerance of casting fear as "racist"
A Jew cannot buy or rent in an Arab settlement. And even in those mixed communities where there was a Jewish minority, Peki'in village is an example where, Jews fled the terror of Arab racism.
That Jews fear going through certain Arab villages, is practical fear.
Arabs targeting Jews, as identifying them as Jews, is sheer Arab racism and Islamists bigotry.
That certain leadership in Arab political and religious sphere incite against Jews is not rare.
The Palestinian Authority's death sentence for anyone who sells real estate to a Jew. And moderate (relatively to genocidal Hamas) Mahmoud Abass' 2013 open declaration of no Jew to be in future [judenrein, ethnic cleansed] "palestine" state, now that is raw racism.
Denying genuine worry of Israelis and casting it as just intolerance, is in and of itself intolerance. No matter if it's Arab racism by Arab "activists" including bigoted BDS pushers abusing Human Rights org. [Enter Omar Shakir, et al] casted in "human rights" phrases/frames or anti-Jewish Haaretz/Btselem's Hagai El-Ad who by focusing its denouncements in the international arena and ignoring real human rights abuses on the Arab side (whether Arab leadership inside Israel or "palestinian") and Arab racism against Jews, proves the campaign's real agenda - defamation, at any costs, truth or not, misrepresentation or what have you. Not progress.
Despite latest "drama," nothing major has really changed since 2006, when Jimmy Carrter (who, besides misrepresentations and white washing Arab violence) admitted that Israel is an equal democracy for all but his "criticism" was about "territories", plus the language was to "provoke debate."...
Is is not "apartheid" when calculations is risk assessment.
Nor is there a difference between the "race" of Israeli-Arabs and "palestinian"-Arabs.
Nor is it "apartheid" when Arab representation is very powerful in all areas, including in Knesset.
Re Jimmy Carter’s 2006 “book”:
Kenneth Stein, director of the Institute for the Study of Modern Israel, resigned Tuesday as Middle East Fellow of the Carter Center of Emory University, stating in his resignation letter that “President Carter’s book on the Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments.”
“The purpose of the book should be to try to bring people together, to try and reconcile them. He published in the LA Times because his book tour is going in that direction,” Stein said. “I’m a historian, I believe in the integrity of my profession, I believe that things should be written accurately, even if you disagree with them.”
... “I think the point of the book is to be hostile to Israel,” Hier said. “I think he deliberately did it.”
Hier said the book sides with the Palestinian cause and blames Israel for troubles in the Middle East.
“The reason he wrote this book is because he has become a spokesman for the Palestinian cause,” Hier said. “Having read the book, I can tell you these are not the words of a person who is objective, who is trying to see a way out of this. He has come down 100 percent on the Palestinian side.”
From Carter’s own words:
“The book is devoted to circumstances and events in Palestine and not in Israel, where democracy prevails and citizens live together and are legally guaranteed equal status.”
The title makes it clear that the book is about conditions and events in the Palestinian territory and not in Israel. And the text makes clear on numerous occasions that the forced separation and the domination of Arabs by Israelis is not based on race.” Carter explained that he is not using the word to describe racism....
It’s not based on racism.
...critics say it’s got an anti-Israel slant... The former president said
he meant to provoke debate but he also acknowledged that such a provocative term may be counterproductive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.