There is lots before this. UN official posts clearly Nazi era antisemetic cartoon. UN official publishes apology to Jewish people, as well as dogs with the overall effect of simply heaping more insults to Jewish people. The same UN official has a history of anti-Israel remarks which go well beyond normal political criticism.
UN Watch Calling for Richard Falk to be Fired
GENEVA, July 7 — After the UN Human Rights Council’s special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories finally admitted to posting a “strongly anti-Semitic” cartoon on his blog, in which Jews and Americans were depicted as bloodthirsty dogs, UN Watch today called on UN rights chief Navi Pillay to lead efforts to fire him. Click here for Falk statement and timeline.
Richard Falk’s “apology” raises serious questions that go to both his judgment and his character. Finding himself in a corner of his own making, he states that, “I oppose any denigration of a people based on ethnicity, race, religion,” as if this were a special badge of honor, and then adds to ethnicity, race, religion, “stage of development”—which is not a human rights issue.
Even stranger is the banality that follows, “We must . . .. treat animals with as much respect as possible.” Falk here appears not only to be equating animals with human beings, but to be apologizing for his cartoon’s insult to Jews as well as dogs. Do these mutterings truly befit someone the UN Human Rights Council has chosen to employ as an expert on human rights?
This is only the latest of several Falk blog posts this year which have harmed the reputation of the UN as a whole.
In January he implied American complicity in the 9/11 attacks—Falk is a revered figure among proponents of the 9/11 conspiracy theory—while last month he called UN chief Ban Ki-moon a shameless secretary-general.”
Richard Falk clearly lacks the judgment required for a credible human rights figure and moral authority. His support for the Hamas terrorist group is so strong that, as he himself disclosed to the Ma’an news agency, the Palestinian Authority last year urged him to quit. In 1979, he endorsed Ayatollah Khomeini in a New York Times op-ed. These days he offers apologetics for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Osama bin Laden.
According to UN procedure, only the 47-nation Human Rights Council can fire Falk, but in practice this is unlikely to happen unless Navi Pillay, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, leads the call.
In January, after Falk suggested a 9/11 cover-up, Ban Ki-moon denounced Falk before the council plenary. “I condemn this sort of inflammatory rhetoric,” Ban told the assembled delegates. “It is preposterous—an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in that tragic terrorist attack.”
US Ambassador Susan Rice said Falk’s comments were “despicable and deeply offensive.” She called for him to be fired, saying that the cause of human rights “will be better advanced without Mr. Falk and the distasteful sideshow he has chosen to create.” However, according to UN sources, Falk’s term was quietly renewed in March.