Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Amnesty’s U.S. Chief Says Israel Shouldn’t Exist ‘as a State For the Jewish People’

Amnesty’s U.S. Chief Says Israel Shouldn’t Exist ‘as a State For the Jewish People’

Amnesty U.S. Director Paul O’Brien: “We are opposed to the idea … that Israel should be preserved as a state for the Jewish people.”

More than a month after releasing a biased anti-Israel report, Amnesty International’s U.S. Director declared that Israel shouldn’t exist “as a state for the Jewish people.”

Addressing the feminist group in Washington D.C. on Wednesday, Amnesty’s U.S. chief Paul O’Brien said that that his organization was “opposed to the idea — and this, I think, is an existential part of the debate — that Israel should be preserved as a state for the Jewish people,” Jewish Insider and other media outlets reported.

O’Brien, who is not Jewish, also claimed that majority of American Jewish do not want Israel to remain a Jewish state, but want it be “a safe Jewish space” with “core Jewish values.”

The Times of Israel reported Amnesty official’s remarks:

An Amnesty International official reportedly said that the organization is opposed to Israel continuing to exist as a Jewish state.

Paul O’Brien, the human rights monitor’s US director, later denied making the comments.

“We are opposed to the idea — and this, I think, is an existential part of the debate — that Israel should be preserved as a state for the Jewish people,” O’Brien reportedly said in a luncheon with the Women’s National Democratic Club in Washington. (…)

O’Brien’s initially reported comments immediately drew a torrent of condemnation from Jewish groups.

“If there was any doubt about Amnesty’s credibility as a legitimate voice of authority, it is now abundantly clear that they are firmly entrenched in the cadre of extremist anti-Israel provocateurs,” William Daroff, the CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said Friday in an interview. Earlier he had tweeted that O’Brien’s remarks were outrageous. “It is clear that their true vision is a Middle East without Israel as a Jewish state.”

O’Brien’s remarks questioning the existence of Israel as a Jewish States comes after Amnesty’s UK office released a report accusing Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, of being an “apartheid state.” The 300-page reported was repleted antisemitic libels and propaganda peddled by the Palestinian terrorist groups, the analysis of the document showed.

The Jerusalem-based watchdog NGO Monitor, which reviewed the Amnesty document, found that it “manipulates and distorts international law, Israeli policy, and events on the ground, as well as denies the Jewish people their right to sovereign equality and self-determination.”

The NGO Monitor’s analysis exposed the deep-seated hostility Amnesty activists like O’Brien hold towards Israel. The Israeli watchdog concluded that the report “can be considered antisemitic according to the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which notes that: ‘Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.’”

O’Brien tired to backtrack, but his remarks clearly reveal how Amnesty has morphed from being a human rights group to a leftist ideology-driven outfit. “Taking a position on whether and how an established state should continue to exist is unusual for organizations with responsibilities limited to monitoring compliance with international laws governing freedoms and human rights,” The Jerusalem Post noted on Saturday.

Israel blasts Amnesty’s ‘false & antisemitic’ report

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Did he praise darkness and burn incense for Satan, too? God damned heathen.

The Gentle Grizzly | March 14, 2022 at 8:04 pm

Maybe Me. O’Brien shouldn’t exist.

Fortunately, Israel doesn’t give a royal fig what some useless American “amnesty chief” thinks about its existence.

Steven Brizel | March 14, 2022 at 8:35 pm

This is woke anti Semitism in its rawest form

What did the frog say to the crocodile?

Oh! Come on now.
It’s not all that difficult – just follow the money – uh! that would be جنيه فلسطيني

“We are opposed to the idea — and this, I think, is an existential part of the debate — that Israel should be preserved as a state for the Jewish people,” O’Brien reportedly said.

Substitute Japan and Japanese.

What is it about Jews and Israel that so enflame the hatred of leftists, fascists and Nazis?

Having been made an unofficial, honorary Jew, I can say that there is little to distinguish them except hard work and strong family. Maybe it is the “chosen people” belief that irks them. I can’t think like a leftist.

At any rate, they are far too conveniently abused as scapegoats by the left.

Is this either surprising or frankly news to anyone?

“O’Brien, who is not Jewish, also claimed that majority of American Jewish do not want Israel to remain a Jewish state, but want it be “a safe Jewish space” with “core Jewish values.”

What does this mean? It sounds like he wants Israel to be Disneyland for Jews, but not actually run by Jews. Is there some other interpretation?

“Paul O’Brien, the human rights monitor’s US director, later denied making the comments.”

Can’t we go to the replay?

Hang on just a moment. It is a respectable position to say that one opposes the entire concept of a nation-state, and thinks that states should simply be governmental units with convenient geographic boundaries, that exist equally for anyone who happens to live in those boundaries, without regard for nationality, ethnicity, culture, or anything like that. Pretty much the way US states are today; an “Oklahoman” is anyone who happens to live within those arbitrary borders. One becomes one by moving in, and stops being one by moving out, and there are no restrictions on either movement.

If one believes that, then one is against the continued existence in their current form of all states that define themselves as being primarily for one nation, even if they also allow people from other nations to live there and be citizens. States such as Germany, Japan, and Israel. If one believes France should not be for the French, nor Greece for the Greek, then it’s reasonable to also say that Israel should not be for the Jews but for everyone who happens to live there at any given time. Such a belief is not antisemitic.

My question would be, “Do you denouncing all other nation-states, and call them apartheid states? And if so, have you been doing so long before you turned your attention to Israel, or did you discover this belief of yours only after you started hunting around for grounds on which to oppose Israel?
Oh, and one more thing: Do you also oppose the creation of a ‘Palestinian’ state? Because that would be a nation-state too, and one that would not allow people from other nations (such as Jews) to live there as citizens and equals.” If you’re consistent then I respectfully disagree with you. But if you’re not consistent in this, then you’re a ****ing antisemite and trying to hide it.

Ditto for those who are true anarchists and believe no states should exist. If so, then of course Israel is a state and so they legitimately oppose its existence. But of course they would have to also oppose the creation of a “Palestinian” state for the same reason. If they don’t, then their “anarchism” is exposed as merely an excuse for antisemitism.

The same applies to those who are complete pacifists, and oppose any use of force, even in self-defense. If you truly believe that when a band of Indians attacks your village you should let them cut your throats rather than raising a hand against them, then you are entitled to criticize Israel for using force to defend itself. But of course you must denounce even more strongly the Arab violence against which Israel defends itself. If you don’t, then you’re not a pacifist, you’re an antisemite.

    Rand in reply to Milhouse. | March 15, 2022 at 6:57 am

    Yes. Well reasoned and well said.

    Paul O’Brien expounds on what Jews in the United States “really want.” Give me a fucking break. He is our enemy, an ignorant bigot, spouting invidious propaganda with his own political axe to grind, with no interest in rational dialogue or reasoned debate. He speaks for nobody but himself and his fellow ass-hats.

    I thank God that Israel has shown such an implacable resolve to defend itself against all the attempts at annihilation.

    oldvet50 in reply to Milhouse. | March 16, 2022 at 6:59 am

    You bring up an interesting point. Can we, as states, restrict the ‘permanent’ movement of others into it? You can visit all you want, but it should require some type of allegiance to become a resident, or voter, in and of that state. If we are not destroyed by WWIII, I fear we will lose all the Red States through migration (or carpetbagging).

      Milhouse in reply to oldvet50. | March 16, 2022 at 6:05 pm

      Not without a constitutional amendment we can’t. The constitution is clear that any US citizen who resides in a state is automatically a citizen of that state. No license or permit required.

We are living in the end times.

He wears his Leftism and ( redundant almost every time) antisemitism on his chest. From Amnesty Int. but but doesn’t want a country smaller than Nrw Jersey to exist.

So let me see if I’ve got this right. The world’s burning down around us, Russia is killing Ukranians just because, Chinese are depriving [insert name of people here] of their rights, women are treated as cattle through many parts of the Middle East etcetera etcetera but these mental midgets are worried about Jews having a safe haven all of their own?

Fucking mental midgets!

2smartforlibs | March 15, 2022 at 10:45 am

There regime members are some sick individuals

MAYBE MOSSAD will pay a visit to such TURDS as this and have the final say to their exitance?

There will be no place for Jews in the coming Fourth Reich.

Given the under… overwhelming eyewitness and video evidence: Pallywood, dual-use civil centers, indiscriminate bombing, and an apartheid-like climate (i.e. Arafat’s Fatah vs Hamas a la Mandela’s Zhosa vs Zulu and everyone else is collateral damage), how can it be otherwise?

    n.n in reply to n.n. | March 15, 2022 at 2:34 pm

    Hutu vs Tutsi. Kenyan elite vs deplorables. Ukrainian West vs Ukrainian East. Urban vs flyover. The ever popular sacrificial baby for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes. Diversity, inequity, and exclusion.

fscarn: Substitute Japan and Japanese.

Ethnicity is not a basis of Japan’s constitution.

Milhouse: France should not be for the French, nor Greece for the Greek

Neither have native ethnicity as a basis for their systems of government. France, in particular, has a long history of accepting as French anyone who adopts French culture.

mailman: Chinese are depriving [insert name of people here] of their rights

Should China be only for the Han? That’s not a policy to be recommended, not if you value human freedom.

Milhouse: Do you denouncing all other nation-states, and call them apartheid states?

Only if they define the law based on a certain ethnicity, and then segregate people of other ethnicities. In the case of Israel, their basic law defines Israel as a Jewish state, and there is a vast network of fences and checkpoints that essentially lock in Palestinian residents of the West Bank.

There is always a tension between ethnicity and ethno-nations. There is always going to be ethnic mixing along the margins. Ukraine has a significant Russian population. UK is a mix of English, Scottish, and Irish. Should Australia be a Brit-state?

In an ideal world, there would be no need for an explictly Jewish state. In the real world, historical forces require accommodation.

For Israel to remain Jewish *and* democratic, it can’t incorporate the people of the West Bank into Israel. That means the Palestinians have to be granted statehood at some point, or they will remain lesser citizens.

I’ll reconsider his arguments after he convinces all the Arab countries that there shouldn’t be Arab or Muslim countries!

“O’Brien, who is not Jewish, also claimed that majority of American Jewish do not want Israel to remain a Jewish state, but want it be ‘a safe Jewish space’ with ‘core Jewish values.'”

This is the same O’Brien who is featured in George Orwell’s 1984.

Since he was speaking at the request of Women’s National Democratic Club, has anyone asked them why he was asked to speak? Did the U.S. head of the Neo-Nazi group have a prior engagement?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode