EU politicians oppose PA upgrade due to rights violations

[King_David]

"Ubiquitous child labor violations, repression of press freedom" are among abuses cited in objections to PNC's "partner of democracy" status

BERLIN – A group of French and Italian lawmakers opposed the Council of Europe’s decision last week to upgrade the Palestinian National Council to the category of “partners of democracy” because of widespread Palestinian human rights violations and a fractured Palestinian government.

The recognition of the PNC means it gets observer status at the Council of Europe.

The objections, outlined in a two-page letter to the council, was sent in advance of the decision to make the PA the second non-European body to become a partner for democracy. Morocco’s parliament was the first legislature to become affiliated with the council.

The European lawmakers, including Fiamma Nirenstein, vice president of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, wrote to the Council of Europe: “We are worried that this well-intentioned upgrading could result in the opposite of what we expect and hope for the future of the Palestinian Authority. The PA is very dramatically divided, from the political point of view, basically into two factions, Fatah and Hamas. In May 2011 there was a controversial pact of reconciliation and now, notwithstanding several disagreements, Mr. Abu Mazen is trying very hard to renew it and make it effective.”

The seven lawmakers continued, “But Hamas is listed among the terrorist organizations in the European Union and in the USA; it bases its work on an anti-Semitic and anti-Western charter in which it promises to destroy Israel; it keeps the soldier Gilad Schalit as a prisoner in a secret refuge while nobody, not even the Red Cross, has ever been allowed to get direct information about him; it keeps its population under a heavy Shari’a law.”

In addition to Nirenstein, the letter was signed by Italian lawmakers Rossana Boldi, Marco Zacchera, Giacomo Stucchi and Giuseppe Saro. French legislators Rudy Salles and Roland Blum also signed the letter.


http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=241452

[King_David]

1. 1960 Jordanian Penal Code, prohibits homosexual activity

The French and Italian lawmakers wrote, “Since the Palestinian law, based on the 1960 Jordanian Penal Code, prohibits homosexual activity, the gay community in the Palestinian Authority has a very hard life, subjected to sanctions and persecutions. Consequentially many gay people run away and seek refuge in Israel.”

[King_David]

2. Wheres all the 'progressives' here defending this bigoted homophobic country to be ?

FUCK RECOGNITION TO COUNTRIES WHO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEIR MINORITIES.




''The French and Italian lawmakers wrote, “Since the Palestinian law, based on the 1960 Jordanian Penal Code, prohibits homosexual activity, the gay community in the Palestinian Authority has a very hard life, subjected to sanctions and persecutions. Consequentially many gay people run away and seek refuge in Israel.”

[King_David]

4. Hah , thought so...

;)

[pelsar]

31. interesting view from a saudi arabian liberal....

(found this while learning about the gay rights viewpoints....)

http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1740332
From MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Insute:

. .The secret to Israel's survival, despite all the great challenges it has faced, lies in democracy and respect for the worth of the individual, regardless of racism and brutality vis-à-vis its Arab enemies. The secret to the collapse of the Arab countries, one after another, lies in dictatorship and in the oppression of the individual... It is impossible for an Arab country, a neighbor of Israel, to succeed in liberating Palestine while denying dignity to individuals ."

this holds true for any Palestinian state as well....and the record for self ruled, dictatorships (present PA/Hamas status) in becoming sustaining western democracies/minority rights is a poor bet at best......with a high cost in human lives as the stake.

its been an interesting and educational when one clearly sees, with the gay rights issue, that many put nationalism in front of minority rights as the more important value. Where i see the difference between the progressive and the liberal.



*On June 7, 2011, two Saudi columnists – the liberal Khalaf Al-Harbi, of the Saudi daily 'Okaz, and Fawaz Al-'Ilmi, of the Saudi daily Al-Watan – published articles comparing Israel's situation to that of the Arab countries. Al-Harbi opined that the secret to Israel's success lay in its democratic regime and its respect for the human rights of its citizens, while Al-'Ilmi wrote that Israel's prosperity was due to its investment in education and science. It should be noted that these articles are a rare phenomenon in the Saudi government press.

[shira]

32. Pro-Palestinian Leftists could care less about Arab liberals and their individual rights. n/t

[King_David]

3. Tough Love: Britain Will Cut Aid to 'Anti-gay' Nations

'A UK government spokesman said it is committed "to combating violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in all circumstances, in this country and abroad."

Reiterating Britain's threat of aid withdrawal, the spokesman added, "We only provide aid directly to governments when we are satisfied that they share our commitments to reduce poverty and respect human rights."

Last month, the leaders of Britain's three main political parties pledged their support for a new London-based gay rights organization, called Kaleidoscope, hoping to modernize gay rights in former British colonies.

The organization, which plans to leverage the UK's political clout by encouraging countries to revoke discriminatory legislation, was strongly backed by Prime Minister Cameron who said "I want Britain to be a global beacon for reform."


Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/10/10/tough-love-britain-will-cut-aid-to-anti-gay-nations/#ixzz1adBiGeJg

[King_David]

5. Kick nt

[vminfla]

6. So what happens next

Clearly, the Council of Europe erred in their decision, granting a "partner of democracy" to an organization not committed to democracy. Can this vote be undone?


It is good to see these French and Italian lawmakers fight for what is right, even if it may not be popular.

[azurnoir]

7. The last paragragh of the article spells it out quite clearly

When asked if there was a reply from the Council of Europe, a representative from Nirenstein’s office in Italy told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday, “There was not a response from the CoE, as this was not an official document, but a spontaneous initiative of MPs. We could have got more signatures, if we started to collect them earlier.”

[King_David]

8. Clearly it's the right move agains an extremely bigoted right wing government

''The French and Italian lawmakers wrote, “Since the Palestinian law, based on the 1960 Jordanian Penal Code, prohibits homosexual activity, the gay community in the Palestinian Authority has a very hard life, subjected to sanctions and persecutions. Consequentially many gay people run away and seek refuge in Israel.”

[azurnoir]

10. On that perhaps you should further investigate the link you used here on this thread

with regards to Jordan it spells things out quite clearly

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x368563#368591

you use 2 one to this thread and one to another resource called al-bab in that one Gay rights in Jordan are spelled out quite clearly including links to Jordan's GLBT magazine My Kali

[King_David]

11. No need , this paragraph spells it out quite clearly, BIGOTS( PA and Hamas)

''The French and Italian lawmakers wrote, “Since the Palestinian law, based on the 1960 Jordanian Penal Code, prohibits homosexual activity, the gay community in the Palestinian Authority has a very hard life, subjected to sanctions and persecutions. Consequentially many gay people run away and seek refuge in Israel.”



No recognition deserved and most western democracies are waking up to linking
recognition and aid to human rights. As they should.

[azurnoir]

12. so it could seem as if you do not want your own link looked at too closely?

Is that because the information you want to promote has been repeated on this thread 4 times now and something in your link disagrees that information?

[King_David]

13. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=368443&mesg_id=368565

[azurnoir]

14. you have repeated that single passage no less than 3 times on this thread why link to it?

and that does not address what I asked

[King_David]

15. cos you told me that homosexuality was legal in the West Bank

No it is not.

Fucking Bigots !!! They do not deserve a state.

[azurnoir]

16. Once again you should further investigate your own link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x368563#368591

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[azurnoir]

18. I said said you should check your own links are you denying their veracity?

I said nothing else, why do you seem to feel the need to make accusations?

[King_David]

19. it is a strange' progressive' that do not stand up for LGBT rights nt

[azurnoir]

21. once again I have said nothing but that you should check your own links

your accusations would seem to have nothing to do with this particular conversation?

[pelsar]

20. so what do you think?

do you believe western support for should be linked to minority/western type civil rights?

i.e. not supporting the creation of a new country unless its has minority rights within its founding legal documents as well as a foundation established for those rights?

or are you more of the "nationalistic" that says first comes the countries establishment and afterwards you hope they might get around to the concept of rights for their citizens......(I believe iran would fit that model).

[shira]

9. Kudos to these brave EU officials for standing up vs. vulgar PA rightwingery. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

22. Here's another quote from Ms Nirenstein

"Every Jew in the world is an Israeli even if he's not aware of it. Anyone who doesn't know it is making a big mistake."


This attitude would be enough to make it necessary to fight Zionism tooth and nail, even were it not for its treatment of the Palestinians.

Zionism and antisemitism are blood brothers - both are based on the false belief that to be a Jew is necessarily not to be a true citizen of ones own homeland.

[King_David]

23. What Rubbish

No one forces Jews to be Zionists. The vast vast majority are but the tiny minority are free to not be or to leave the fold or whatever.

The majority of Jews would probably have no problem with that statement btw.( all the ones I know anyway)

[King_David]

24. Do you think these Europeans were wrong

In attempting to protect minority RIGHTS ?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

25. No, but I think they were wrong in the way they chose to do so. N.T.

[azurnoir]

26. Surely then these politicians also opposed Morocco becoming a member

of the CoE on the same grounds as Morocco arguably has a an even worse record than the PA does in the area of Human Rights

[King_David]

27. Ha

Morroco has a Gay king FYI

[azurnoir]

28. Well then if the King of Morocco is openly Gay it wouild seem all this would change

Article 489 of the Penal Code of Morocco criminalizes “lewd or unnatural acts with an individual of the same sex.”.<2> Same-sex sexual activity is illegal in Morocco and can be punished with anything from 6 months to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of 120 to 1200 dirhams.<3><4> However, the law is sporadically enforced by the authorities,<4> with a degree of tolerance extended to homosexuality in the holiday resorts like Marrakesh.<4> Oftentimes these relationships are a form of prostitution, involving tourists. The legal status of LGBT people living in Morocco stems largely from traditional Islamic morality, which views homosexuality and cross dressing as signs of immorality.<5>

Government Policy

None of the major or minor political parties have made public statements in favor of LGBT-rights and no LGBT rights legislation has been enacted. Government attitudes towards homosexuality tend to be negative, in keeping with the cultures traditional gender roles and religious mores. It has banned books on homosexuality and required schools to teach a curriculum that "emphasises...the danger and depravity of "unnatural acts." Moreover, on 21 March 2008, a statement issued by the Ministry of Interior on 21 March revealed the full scope of the government's agenda: to "preserve citizens' ethics and defend our society against all irresponsible actions that mar our identity and culture".<6>

In terms of foreign policy, the government opposed the participation of an International Gay and Lesbian Rights Representative at the 2001 United Nations Conference on AIDS-HIV. They also opposed a United Nations resolution that would have formally condemned discriminatory anti-gay laws.<4>
Recognition of same-sex relationships

There is no legal recognition of same-sex couples.
Discrimination protections

Discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is not addressed in any civil rights laws. Most Morocco citizens were raised to believe that homosexuality and gender identity are signs of western decadence or immorality and the government has not been especially eager to formally address the issue of LGBT-rights in Morocco.<4>

This page was last modified on 11 October 2011 at 21:39.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Morocco

I' am not denying Mohammad 6 may be Gay however has he come out so to speak? on a quick Google search what I found on the subject was ugly to say the least and I would not post it here

[King_David]

29. Morrocco should be banned from the organization along with Palistine

Got it ?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

36. I think you're missing the point of the UN.

Arguably a "league of Democracies" along the lines proposed by John McCain - a kind of halfway house between NATO and the UN - would be a good thing, in parallel or instead, but that's not what the UN is for.

It's not a club the member ship of which is a reward; it's a forum for nations to talk to one another, the bad as well as the good.

[pelsar]

37. not a league of democracies"...but the UN itself

with the non democracies regulated to 2nd tier status where they're say is limited, their influence limited and their hypocrisy is limited. When they accept democracy and have its basic working foundations then they get "rewarded" by being able to have influence on the world.

they still get to talk, they just don't get to be hypocrites. (i.e. join the human rights groups etc.)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. Why would they join?

I don't think a two-tier UN is viable, because I suspect that countries who don't get to be in the first tier will sod off and start their own club.

I think an alternative club to promote democracy and human rights (and transferring some of the money given to the UN and some of the roles entrusted to it) isn't necessarily a bad idea, but that maintaining a neutral-ground talking-shop is also worthwhile.

[shira]

40. It would still be a place where nations talk to each other. But dictatorships/closed societies....

....don't get a chance to vote on resolutions - neither within human rights bodies, the general assembly, or security council - until they earn the opportunity.

But like you said, it's still a forum where they get to talk and be heard.

[azurnoir]

41. so shire lets see a list of the nations you've got in mind here that should be treated 'differently'

and no some vague well you know...... won't cut it

[shira]

42. To start with, nations that are 'not free' on the freedom house list. Here's a map...

http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2011

Nations that are 'partly free' get more privileges, but not as much voting power as free societies.

You got a problem with that?

[azurnoir]

43. just to be clear most of the 'not free' are 3rd world right?

and with the exception of Russia either Black African or Asian countries have I got that right?

and most the free countries are European along with the US and Canada and a scattering of South American countries and quite curiously India right?

[shira]

44. So? What's your point? Be clear....

You think it's racist or bigoted to penalize the elites in charge of dictatorships?

For example, it would be racist to disenfranchise the Syrian and North Korean dictators?

[azurnoir]

49. the map and the suggestion of 2 tier system

where in the full members in the top tier would be for the most part wealthy nations and the rest would second class speaks for itself as does your choice of 2 of the worst nations on earth as examples of why this would be a desirable thing, nothing like getting your across eh?

[shira]

52. Yeah, 2 tier. Genuine democracies vs. totalitarian dictatorships. I don't see why you think....

...totalitarian dictatorships deserve voting rights that could, for example, let Syria, N.Korea, Cuba, and Zimbabwe cancel out the votes of the USA, UK, and Canada.

I mean, what person in their right mind would allow one big mass of horrible totalitarian nations dictate world policy and always have an advantage in voting over secular, liberal democracies?

Only totalitarians would be for that.

=======

You're also confusing the elites in charge of those dictatorships with the lower classes. As the Arab spring proves - and it's true elsewhere in all other closed societies - the people are not one in solidarity with their oppressors who they oppose. To penalize the leadership is not penalizing the populations of those nations. So it's definitely not racist or bigoted to 'discriminate' against the poorer nations. I guarantee you the totalitarian elites in charge are filthy rich.

[azurnoir]

53. because you see the US has this little thing called a veto perhaps you can look it up sometime

there for none of the countries you mention can ever effectively cancel out anything the US wants or does not want the UN to take action on

[shira]

54. China and Russia have veto power too. You think the majority of nations that are totalitarian...

....should get their way against liberal democracies without other decent democracies like the US or UK having the ability to oppose them?

That's ideal to you?

Or unfair if it doesn't happen?

[azurnoir]

55. That's called checks and balances it means you do not always get your way

like Israel and Iran both benefit from this but in your world only Israel..........

eta even China and Russia have allowed Iran to be sanctioned by the UNSC unlike the US has Israel

[vminfla]

45. Is this some sort of idealized state of the UN

I am sorry, but the biggest human rights abuser like Zimbabwe are granted seats on the UN council on Human Rights. Are you stating that in a perfect UN, such blatant irony would not occur? Because, today, that is the de facto MO. The UN is broken.

[shira]

46. Yes, that would be the ideal as the UN today does more to hurt than help things worldwide. n/t

[pelsar]

51. they would join because thats...

where the money and power is. There are multiple organizations that have limited power and are ignored...the arab league comes to mind. Any organization with power and money will attract those that don't, since they too will want to have influence even if its "less".

creating competing intl organizations is simply creating more a political mess...with the inevitable conflicting messages

[King_David]

39. Its an opportunity to force Civilized behavior

On a place begging for recognition..

Why recognize if they don't institute basic human rights ?

[shira]

47. It's pretty clear many Leftists aren't interested in the rights of people in totalitarian societies

They're mostly anti-West and interested in bashing free democracies rather than advocating for change where people need it most.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[azurnoir]

50. what are you going on about? or can we take it that these brave politician's were ok with Morocco

being admitted to the CoE? that is what the question was about

[holdencaufield]

30. ...a Jew is necessarily not to be a true citizen of ones own homeland

You make it sound like that is a innate Jewish belief when in fact is it something that is told to Jews over, and over by people in the homelands they've assimilated in.

For 2,000 years, Jews have made homes and assimilated in widespread places like Rome, Germany, Spain, Poland, Russia, France -- you name it, sometimes living successfully for centuries, only to be rounded up and booted out the first time it's politically expeditious to whomever is in power or looking to take power.

Zionism is the offspring of Antisemitism, not its moral equivalent. Zionism is... nothing more or nothing less... that the realization that, for Jews to be free of the endless cycle of expulsions (or worse) they have to have one place on this planet where they determine their own fates and not be dependent of the whims of a protectorate.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

33. But not by significant numbers of people in the West for three generations. N.T.

[pelsar]

34. wasn't germain enlightened in the 1930's?

the "it can't happen here" is simply a blind hope usually based on nothing more than a belief....history has shown that "it can happen" its just a matter of the right circumstances.

remember those massacres in rwanda? in Srebrenica-the present massacres in sudan? those things were not suppose to happen after WWI...ooops i mean WWII.

hence your 3 generations, doesn't really carry much water..

[holdencaufield]

35. Jews in Germany...

...lived for 200 years in peace, prosperity and relative equality with the German people. How long did it all take to fall apart? The same story is repeated over and over from Russia to Sicily. Jews have been safe for quite a while in the USA -- but, when European Jews were in their greatest danger, the doors of the USA were closed to them.

What did George Santayana say about those who don't know History?