"The Simon Wiesenthal Centre gives its 2005 tolerance award to a torturer. It also gave the Sudanese government its 2005 award for ethnic harmony."
Via the Angry Arab.
The Centre, according to its website, is:
"...an international Jewish human rights organization dedicated to preserving the memory of the Holocaust by fostering tolerance and understanding through community involvement, educational outreach and social action. The Center confronts important contemporary issues including racism, antisemitism, terrorism and genocide and is accredited as an NGO both at the United Nations and UNESCO."
Speaking of praising false prophets, read this astounding report into the brutal Ethiopian government and the British government support.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown care about Africa, do they? Pull the other one.
Via the Angry Arab.
The Centre, according to its website, is:
"...an international Jewish human rights organization dedicated to preserving the memory of the Holocaust by fostering tolerance and understanding through community involvement, educational outreach and social action. The Center confronts important contemporary issues including racism, antisemitism, terrorism and genocide and is accredited as an NGO both at the United Nations and UNESCO."
Speaking of praising false prophets, read this astounding report into the brutal Ethiopian government and the British government support.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown care about Africa, do they? Pull the other one.
6 Comments:
Tony:
You are even dumber than you look. You took literally what your friend the 'Angry Arab' meant in sarcasm.
Do you really think that the Weisenthal Center presented an award to the Sudanese government? Are you really that much of a drongo?
A quick check of the Weisenthal website would have saved you some embarrassment.
Moreover, adherence to a few of the fundamental principles of journalistic ethics would prevent you from casting about assertions that you leave unsupported. Abdullah a torturer? Perhaps. But don't expect me to take your word for it. You might want to make the effort to provide some evidence that would substantiate your contention. Otherwise all we have is you quoting some other blogger. Hardly a prima fascia case.
Er, I SO knew it.
Hello, sarcasm?!!!!
JESUS, wake up...
Tony baby, please, stop making such an equine posterior of yourself.
The Wiesenthal Center never gave an award to Sudan in 2005. Go to their website, scroll through their press releases and look for yourself.
They give awards all the time, and each one is trumpeted by a press release. Is there anything about an award to Sudan on the website? Nada. Zero. Nutin' from nutin'
Your bile towards the mainstream Jewish institutions is so overwhelming that you have long since lost any ability to reason critically on the subject.
Angry Arab was joking. He was being 'funny'. Coming after Jordan's leader, it was pretty obvious. Except to you, perhaps.
Of course the Sudan government wasn't given an award. Except their intelligence chief was welcomed recently by Washington to discuss the "war on terror".
And that's not a joke...
Ant, Anon, I can't tell whose sarcasm metre is more broken. But hey, it's Friday, and Dr. Shab's prescription is for you two guys to forget your differences and mix up a nice pitcher of saketinis!
Ah Tony, slick, but not nearly slick enough.
At the beginning of this thread I pointed out your obvious and undeniable credulity towards Angry Arab's Simon Weisthenthal quip.
And your initial response was to reiterate your confidence in that assertion:
"Er, I SO knew it.
Hello, sarcasm?!!!!
JESUS, wake up...
But then it seems that YOU are the one who has woken up: to the fact that you were making an unadulterated ass of yourself by swollowing hook line and sinker what was obviously a sarcastic comment by Angry Arab.
And now, in a desperate attempt to avoid further embarassment, you are now adopting the tactic of inversion, acting as though I was the one who believed that the Angry Arab quip was genuine, rather than you.
Nice try, Tony. But that dog won't hunt.
And then you try the tactic of deflection, by bringing in a new, and totally irrelevant point about American spooks meeting with their Sudanese counterparts to discuss the campaign against al-Qaeda.
I have news for you, Tony. Inter-governmental contacts like that go on all the time, even with unsavoury regimes. An unpublicized meeting of intel chiefs doesn't translate into diplomatic endorsement. America's attitude towards the Sudan and Darfur has been clear. The Americans have been pushing for sanctions, but European and Chinese oil interests have stymied any attempt to punish the Sudenese at the Security Council. And Kofi kept denying the genocide was taking place. So if you are looking for blame on Darfur, you'll find it in Paris and Beijing, not Washington.
Intelligence is by nature a dirty business. As a case officer your job is to seduce people into betraying their country. So I guess you would preferably adopt a holier than thou attitude, spurning information from sources that didn't meet your standards of moral virtue.
Sorry, Tony, but the real world is not black and white, but made up of shades of gray. And if the Sudanese intel chief had important info on al-Qaeda activities, then you meet with him on the QT, but that doesn't translate into endorsement or support for the Sudanese government. Case in point the way in which the US has continued to beat up on Khartoum diplomatically.
Post a Comment
<< Home