The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas

william the wie

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
16,667
Reaction score
2,385
Points
280
Calling the UN bureaucrats crooked as a dog's hind leg is an insult to dogs.
 

montelatici

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
18,686
Reaction score
2,076
Points
280
You mean those same bureaucrats that gave away the land of Christians and Muslims to the European Jews, those that condoned renewed European colonization when colonization had already fallen in disrepute?
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
You mean those same bureaucrats that gave away the land of Christians and Muslims to the European Jews, those that condoned renewed European colonization when colonization had already fallen in disrepute?



Where is the evidence that the land was owned by arab muslims prior to 1920 ?
 

montelatici

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
18,686
Reaction score
2,076
Points
280
Only know that in 1943 the Jews owned less than 5% of the land. The rest was owned by the Christians, Muslims and the Churches.
PalestineLandOwnership.jpg
PalestineLandOwnership.jpg
 

MJB12741

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
12,740
Reaction score
2,174
Points
280
You mean those same bureaucrats that gave away the land of Christians and Muslims to the European Jews, those that condoned renewed European colonization when colonization had already fallen in disrepute?
Eh, Monte, got news for you. No deeds or titles, no land ownership. Just stolen land.
 

montelatici

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
18,686
Reaction score
2,076
Points
280
But of course, the Survey revealed that the land records showed that the Europeans owned less than 5% of the land even in 1943. So it was stolen by the Europeans in 1948. Thanks for the laughs.

PalestineLandOwnership.jpg
 

Challenger

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
723
Points
245
Location
United Kingdom
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
 

Challenger

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
723
Points
245
Location
United Kingdom
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.
 

fanger

Gold Member
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
5,745
Reaction score
498
Points
130
Location
Fuck israel
Richard Goldstone should have Also refused point blank because of a conflict of interest
 

montelatici

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
18,686
Reaction score
2,076
Points
280
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.

There is no negative bias against Israel. In fact, any other country behaving as Israel does would be under sanctions or would have been invaded to effect regime change. There is a positive bias towards Israel.
 

Challenger

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
723
Points
245
Location
United Kingdom
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.
I'll let the man answer that for himself:
"The word “biased” gets thrown around a great deal in this discussion. Some people seem to think that it is the same thing as having an opinion that is contrary to their own. But bias refers to someone who is asked to provide an impartial judgment and who is incapable of doing this because of personal views. Someone without bias is someone who is capable of putting their personal views aside in order to reach an objective, neutral and impartial position. There is lots of evidence that, in the past, I have expressed views that do not correspond to those of the government of Israel. But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so. I think most of those who have criticized me for “bias” really only want to have a commission composed of people with views that lean in their direction. Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
Richard Goldstone should have Also refused point blank because of a conflict of interest


True and then the Palestinians might not have got the result they wanted and only they being accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.

There is no negative bias against Israel. In fact, any other country behaving as Israel does would be under sanctions or would have been invaded to effect regime change. There is a positive bias towards Israel.




ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDA BULLSHIT any other country facing what Israel faces would have bombed gaza back to the stone age after telling the UN to take a hike. Then told abbass to think seriously about peace talks and mutual borders if he did not want the same treatment.
By the way who would invade Israel after the combined arab league forces failed 5 times to manage it. They are down 5 out of 8 participants so don't have the military strength.
The ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDISTs like you have a very negative ANTI SEMITIC NAZI LEW HATRED bias towards Israel, and will LIE and LIBEL your way to demonising them every day.
 

Phoenall

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
39,171
Reaction score
2,094
Points
1,115
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.
I'll let the man answer that for himself:
"The word “biased” gets thrown around a great deal in this discussion. Some people seem to think that it is the same thing as having an opinion that is contrary to their own. But bias refers to someone who is asked to provide an impartial judgment and who is incapable of doing this because of personal views. Someone without bias is someone who is capable of putting their personal views aside in order to reach an objective, neutral and impartial position. There is lots of evidence that, in the past, I have expressed views that do not correspond to those of the government of Israel. But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so. I think most of those who have criticized me for “bias” really only want to have a commission composed of people with views that lean in their direction. Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And yet he has spoken out in the past in anything less like neutral words about Israel. He has accepted evidence that painted Israel blacker than black, but never withdrawn his words when the evidence was later proven to be false and Islamic propaganda. That in itself shows an unhealthy bias towards not only Israel but the Jews.
 

Billo_Really

Litre of the Band
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
31,149
Reaction score
2,596
Points
1,115
Location
Long Beach, Ca
The man hailed by defenders as a world-class jurist didn’t think that having been paid to provide a legal briefing for the PLO might constitute a conflict of interest.

The indelible stain on the UN committee once chaired by William Schabas - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

Here we go, folks.
This is nothing but a bullshit hit piece. His business with the PLO had nothing to do with Israel. Therefore, it's not proof of bias. That's just what you're trying to frame it as. As far as I'm concerned, you can stick that "perception management" crap where the sun don't shine. Israel committed war crimes. You don't have to be bias to see that.

As far as your links reference to Goldstone and his report, he merely said it would be written differently. He didn't recant any of his allegations. And the 4 other members of that committee have never wavered from their conclusions. They still stand by that report.

Israel thinks its above the law and will trash anyone that thinks otherwise.
 

Challenger

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
723
Points
245
Location
United Kingdom
Well that's the Hasbara version. Here's the reality, "My work for the PLO consisted of being sent five questions by email and providing a written response. I was given no documents by the PLO. I have had no relationship with it either before or after this brief request for an opinion in October 2012. I was not involved in advocacy or in campaigning for the PLO. I merely gave a technical legal answer to technical legal questions. There are many, many examples of judges sitting in cases where at some point in the past they were involved in providing legal advice to one of the parties. --William Schabas Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News


Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.
I'll let the man answer that for himself:
"The word “biased” gets thrown around a great deal in this discussion. Some people seem to think that it is the same thing as having an opinion that is contrary to their own. But bias refers to someone who is asked to provide an impartial judgment and who is incapable of doing this because of personal views. Someone without bias is someone who is capable of putting their personal views aside in order to reach an objective, neutral and impartial position. There is lots of evidence that, in the past, I have expressed views that do not correspond to those of the government of Israel. But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so. I think most of those who have criticized me for “bias” really only want to have a commission composed of people with views that lean in their direction. Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News



And yet he has spoken out in the past in anything less like neutral words about Israel. He has accepted evidence that painted Israel blacker than black, but never withdrawn his words when the evidence was later proven to be false and Islamic propaganda. That in itself shows an unhealthy bias towards not only Israel but the Jews.
His response: "But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so."
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top