Richard Falk finally goes too far even for the UN

A tireless effort by campaign group UN Watch has led to what is being described as the unprecedented international condemation of Richard Falk, who has consistently exploited his position as a special rapporteur at the UN’s Human Rights Council to justify and deny Hamas and Al Qaeda terrorism.

As the UN Human Rights Council’s permanent investigator of alleged Israeli violations in the Palestinian territories, Falk has had a largely unscrutinised position from which to satisfy his unquestioning vilification of the Israelis.  As his target was Israel he was indulged by the left wing media as his outbursts fitted their narrative.

But it now seems that after years of Falk’s rampant Israel bashing and partisan bias towards Hamas, spreading slurs and distortions and the asserting as fact claims that have later been debunked, the penny has finally dropped among his UN colleagues and the media that he is a deluded and unreliable propagandist.  It follows his promotion of 9/11 conspiracy theories and attempts to exonerate Al Qaeda of any involvement in the terrorist atrocity, instead claiming the US government was responsible for the attack.

5 Responses to “Richard Falk finally goes too far even for the UN”

  1. 1 andy baxter 27/01/2011 at 10:38 pm


  2. 2 Liberty Valence 28/01/2011 at 7:20 am

    Has he been dismissed then? Or better still, charged with criminal conspiracy (or some similar offense)? And if he hasn’t yet, will he?

  3. 3 Cassandra King 28/01/2011 at 8:00 am

    The UN human rights council?

    And just what would those human rights consist of I wonder? Running such a body that includes states with grotesque records and stances on human rights is ‘inclusive’, the aim is to represent as many different positions as possible to give the illusion of consensus and universal validity. The third world is third world for a reason, they have simply not yet reached the level of humanity required to join the 1st world family of nations, yes they should be guided and encouraged to better themselves but no they should not be allowed to pollute the UN with its backward prejudices and ignorance.

    It does not work of course, it is another example of naive utopianism and the chronic political delusion that everyone has a valid stance and must be represented. The UN rush to include everyone has led to the lowest common denominator sickness and where the most reasonable nations are picked for tiny inconsequential supposed infractions because the UN fanatics wish to show some fabricated illusion of fairness.

    This madness leads to equating the ghastly inhuman method of death torture as carried out by Iran with the US lethal injection of criminals. The first method consists of deliberate slow strangulation by slow lifting of the victim by crane which leads to the victim suffering untold pain for many minutes in front of a jeering howling baying mob and the latter is the most painless method of execution known.

    All kinds of weird and grotesque perversions creep in until the whole charade becomes unfit for its actual purpose, there is only one valid and genuine and correct interpretation of human rights, that of the 1st world Western democracies and that is the only route to the future. Until the UN changes its stance and becomes the champion of real 1st world values it will continue to degenerate.

  4. 4 Calvin Ball 28/01/2011 at 8:07 am

    Having only been a recent digger into news content I didn’t know who Falks was. I only really looked after listenting to the Today show report on the Turkell commission.

    After interviewing Mark Regev and establishing the discussion point of the weighing up the various reports that they have a “well they would say that wouldn’t they”, they went along to someone who they simply described as a UN spokesman, Richard Falks. This bloke basically said the UN HRC report was the more accurate one in law etc. As well as that they left the listener with the idea that he was just some spokesman waiting in the press room overnight.

    Only when I dug around did I find out that he was appointed to the hopelessly anti-Israel HRC and that he had some serious form accusing them of genocide, identifed suicide bombing as legitimate resistance and his leaning towards the concept of a global government

  5. 5 Rereke Whakaaro 29/01/2011 at 5:49 am

    To comment on Cassandra King’s comment:

    To say that countries are “third world”, in comparison with “first world” countries, begs the question, “where is the second world?”

    The “first world” is generally accepted as “the west”, meaning North America and Western Europe.

    But it is not an economic distinction. Rather it is a military one, signifying the United States and its allies.

    This becomes clear when we consider that the “second world” was originally the Soviet Bloc and its allies.

    The “third world” then consists of the unaligned nations.

    Admittedly the majority of unaligned nations are also poorer economically, but the correlation was, and still is, purely accidental.

    Switzerland is unaligned, but it is hardly poor economically.

Comments are currently closed.

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive

%d bloggers like this: