Palestine - UN Special Rapporteur Bans Free Speech

[Published 31 March 2013]


United Nations Special Rapporteur on “the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967” - Professor Richard Falk - has taken the extraordinary action to ban posts on his blog page “Citizen Pilgrimage”.

This has happened to myself and at least one other person when we attempted to post comments in response to an article written by Professor Falk titled ” What was wrong with Obama’s speech in Jerusalem”

My detailed comment sought to point out what was right with President Obama’s speech in Jerusalem. It had been published as an article on many Internet pages around the world and reproduced on the web sites of scores of others without editorial amendment.

I presented a considered and reasoned analysis of what President Obama had said. It was not couched in inflammatory or defamatory terms. It considered aspects of President Obama’s speech not referred to in Professor Falk’s article and came to an entirely different conclusion to the views expressed by Professor Falk.

To my amazement Professor Falk’s response to my post was:

“My blog is no longer open for this sort of polemics on the Israel/Palestine conflict. There are many other more important venues to carry on these discussions.”

My reply to Professor Falk - pointing out his decision amounted to the banning of free speech and requesting he reconsider his decision - went unanswered.

I subsequently sought to post an entirely different response to another contributor’s comment - but it was also not published.

One person who sought to post a comment to Professor Falk’s article received the following response:

“Mr. Skolnik: My blog is no longer open for this sort of polemical responses that insult either me or others who submit comments. There are many other venues for this sort of debate.”

Stangely Professor Falk had no similar qualms in publishing the following comment from one of his readers:

“I have been following events in Israel and Cyprus closely, and stand by my assertions. I find it both fascinating and terrifying that Germany is the force behind the Cypriot haircut, in which unscrupulous jewish industrialists, all of whom hold Israeli passports, are having their bank accounts seized and money transferred to Germany. Who would have predicted this turn of events, but really, once you spot the pattern, it becomes impossible to deny this jaw-dropping turn of events, and its ominous implications.”

It is clear that there are many readers of Professor Falk’s blog who would be grossly offended by this Jew-hating language - yet it was published.

I do not seek to silence these Jew-haters airing their views on Professor Falk’s blog. Better the world should be aware such views exist and are exposed to critical comment.

My articles sometimes attract such vile and repulsive comments. Never would I seek to have them expunged. I prefer to respond to such comments or let my readers do so.

But why should a UN Rapporteur concerned with human rights seek to ban the views of others like myself and Mr Skolnik - if he allows such a vile post as this to appear as a comment on the same blog page?

Intrigued by the Professor’s totally unexpected and unexplained reaction to my post - I contacted other sites where his article had been published.

One was a virulently Jew-hating web site called “Shoah - The Palestinian Holocaust” It had no problem posting the identical response that I attempted to post on Professor Falk’s web page

Another was “Ramy Abdeljabbar’s Palestine and World News” - not what one would call a pro-Israel site. It published my response to Professor Falk’s article without indulging in the histrionics and petulance displayed by Professor Falk.

A third site was “Transcend Media Service” - which describes itself in the following terms:

“TRANSCEND International is an experiment in promoting peace by peaceful means throughout the world. Traditionally, institutes have been centered around a building where the people who work together meet on a regular basis. Since many people who share common interests in helping transform conflicts nonviolently and creatively are geographically scattered and cannot usually be physically together, our solution is to create an electronic network of members. This, in addition, diminishes our carbon footprints and contributes to attenuate the global warming crisis.”

Professor Falk is a member of the Transcend Network.

Transcend saw nothing objectionable in posting my response to Professor Falk’s article

Professor Falk needs to understand that attempts by him to ban freedom of expression and free speech on his web site demean himself and his position as a UN Special Rapporteur.

Those in authority at the UN who repeatedly express their support for the protection of human rights must be prepared to act against one of their own by denouncing Professor Falk’s actions in the strongest terms with a view to ending his crass attempt to deny the inalienable right of every human being to speak out and be heard.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and members of the UN Human Rights Council - are you listening or do you endorse Professor Falk’s outrageous conduct?

Quartet Quartered, Road Map Thwarted, Palestine Aborted

[Published July 2007]

The Quartet’s Road Map has failed according to the ten foreign ministers of the European Union’s Mediterranean States - Bulgaria, Cyprus, Spain, France, Greece, Italy , Malta, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia - (“the Mediterranean Ten”).

In an open letter to the Quartet’s new negotiating supremo Tony Blair, they state unequivocally and without any diplomatic nuances :

“Topping this analysis - we might as well admit it straight away - is the recognition of a shared failure we can no longer ignore: the “road map” has failed. The status quo which has prevailed since 2000 is leading nowhere, as we know.”

[http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/open_letter/2007/07/the_road_map_has_failed.html ]

This unusually frank admission heralds the end of the European Union’s involvement with America, Russia and the United Nations in the Road Map jointly sponsored by the four of them in 2003.

Four years of intense international diplomacy in the Middle East by the world‘s most powerful negotiating team ever assembled to achieve what the Mediterranean Ten call “an idea“ - the creation of a new Arab state between Israel and Jordan in 6% of historic Palestine - has finally been recognised as a total waste of time and effort.

This idea has never really progressed beyond an idea since its conception 70 years ago - due to continuing Arab intransigence at every point of time that it has been proposed.

But undaunted by this spectacular failure, the Mediterranean Ten have not yet given up on making this idea a reality.

They now hope to get there by laying down four “revised objectives” in a new European Union Road Map that are totally impossible to achieve - and which guarantee that this latest version will also be shredded into the waste paper basket like its many predecessors.

These four revised objectives include:

1. Negotiations without prerequisites on the final status, embracing such issues as refugees and borders.

What is there to negotiate about ?

On refugees, - the Palestinian Authority will not and cannot agree to compromise its demand that millions of Arabs be allowed to go and live in Israel. It would be dead in the water if it did.

On borders - the Palestinian Authority wants every square metre of the West Bank and Gaza - having rejected an offer of 92% in 2000. Do the Mediterranean Ten really believe the Authority would be prepared to accept less than 100 % after years of international arm twisting has failed to get it to moderate its demand?

2. Consider sending in a “robust international force”

Even the Mediterranean Ten acknowledge the risks are high and that this objective is predicated on the condition that “it must operate alongside a peace plan without taking its place…”

How can a peace plan ever emerge if the first objective hits a brick wall?

3. Get Israel to help Mahmoud Abbas by releasing the thousands of prisoners without blood on their hands, and by freezing Israel’s settlement policy.

The Mediterranean Ten are surely on the road to dreamland - displaying naiveté and stupidity that should forever disqualify them from holding their positions as Foreign Ministers for their respective countries.

Are they unaware of the damage, carnage and havoc that can be wreaked by just one of these convicted terrorists successfully making it through Israel’s tight defences next time? Are they blind to what has happened in America, Iraq, Afghanistan, Spain, Bali, England and Scotland?

And the Mediterranean Ten still seek to maintain the Quartet’s racist and discriminatory policy to halt Jews populating and copulating in the West Bank. What international outcry would there be if the Mediterranean Ten suggested Arab residents similarly refrain?

4. Don’t push Hamas to up the stakes - reopen the border between Gaza and Israel.

In other words - reward terrorism and rejectionism, open the gates to enemies who are sworn to wipe you off the earth and are not prepared to change their mindset.

Incredibly the Mediterranean Ten believe these four objectives are within their grasp. Their arrogance and dictatorial attitude display a total lack of understanding of what the conflict is really about.

Seven of these ten Mediterranean countries were members of the League of Nations which in 1922 unanimously endorsed the creation of the territory of Palestine with defined borders for the first time in history - and voted in favour of the Jews being granted the right to reconstitute their national home there.

They were also parties in agreeing to postpone or withhold the right of the Jews to live in 77% of Palestine just less than two months later to appease Arab demands - which ultimately led to an independent Palestinian Arab State being created in that area in 1946 that is today called Jordan.

Are their Foreign Offices ignorant of their countries’ acquiescence in this process?

Do they seriously believe the idea of a State between Israel and Jordan is ever likely to happen after 70 years of trying have resulted in abject failure every time?

The Mediterranean Ten need to understand that the real key to resolving this conflict is two states - not three states - in former Palestine - one for the Arabs, one for the Jews.

This can be achieved by redrawing the boundary between Israel and Jordan so as to divide sovereignty in the West Bank between them.

This will give the Jews about 20% of historic Palestine and the Arabs about 80% of historic Palestine.

This solution will not require any negotiations on the four objectives proposed by the Mediterranean Ten.

This is an idea that can quickly become an achievable reality. Anything else is surely certain to fail.