Tag: un

UN accuses Israel of turning Gaza hospitals into ‘death traps’

The UN Human Rights Office issued a report on 31 December condemning Israeli attacks on Gaza hospitals, saying they had become “death traps.”

The 23-page report documented various Israeli attacks on Gaza’s hospitals and the destruction of the strip’s health care system between October 2023 and July 2024.

“The destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza, and the extent of killing of patients, staff, and other civilians in these attacks, is a direct consequence of the disregard of international humanitarian and human rights law,” the report said.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, said the Israeli military had shown “blatant disregard for international humanitarian and human rights law.”

“As if the relentless bombing and the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza were not enough, the one sanctuary where Palestinians should have felt safe, in fact, became a death trap,” Turk said in a statement.

In recent days, the Israeli military escalated its attack on the Kamal Adwan Hospital in north Gaza while detaining the hospital director, Hussam Abu Safia, and hundreds of others.

Keep reading

UN Expert Urges Medical World to Cut Ties With Israel Amid Attacks on Gaza Hospitals

As Israeli forces stand accused of war crimes during attacks on multiple Gaza hospitals in recent days, Francesca Albanese – the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories – on Monday implored the global medical community to respond by cutting ties with Israel.

“I urge medical professionals worldwide to pursue the severance of all ties with Israel as a concrete way to forcefully denounce Israel’s full destruction of the Palestinian healthcare system in Gaza, a critical tool of its ongoing genocide,” Albanese wrote on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

Albanese amplified a post by Dr. Rupa Marya – one of the most vocal defenders of Palestinian human rights in the U.S. medical community – calling on Israeli forces to release Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, director of Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia.

Abu Safiya, who documented Israel’s siege and attack on Kamal Adwan and who reported last week that nearly 50 people including five hospital staff members were killed by an Israel Defense Forces airstrike on a nearby apartment tower, was among dozens of other medical staffers abducted by IDF troops on Saturday.

After besieging and attacking the hospital for weeks, Israeli forces raided the facility and rounded up 240 people, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Israel claimed without evidence that Kamal Adwan was being used as a Hamas command center. With the facility shut down and badly damaged, critical patients and their caregivers were forced to evacuate to the nearby Indonesian Hospital.

Keep reading

UN General Assembly Adopts Controversial Cybercrime Treaty Amid Criticism Over Censorship and Surveillance Risks

As we expected, even though opponents have been warning that the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime needed to have a narrower scope, strong human rights safeguard and be more clearly defined in order to avoid abuse – the UN General Assembly has just adopted the documents, after five years of wrangling between various stakeholders.

It is now up to UN-member states to first sign, and then ratify the treaty that will come into force three months after the 40th country does that.

The UN bureaucracy is pleased with the development, hailing the convention as a “landmark” and “historic” global treaty that will improve cross-border cooperation against cybercrime and digital threats.

But critics have been saying that speech and human rights might fall victim to the treaty since various UN members treat human rights and privacy in vastly different ways – while the treaty now in a way “standardizes” law enforcement agencies’ investigative powers across borders.

Considerable emphasis has been put by some on how “authoritarian” countries might abuse this new tool meant to tackle online crime – but in reality, this concern applies to any country that ends up ratifying the treaty.

Keep reading

WHO Expands “Misinformation Management” Efforts with “Social Listening”

The UN’s World Health Organization (WHO) is not the only entity engaging globally (the Gates Foundation comes to mind as another) that likes to turn to developing, or small and often functionally dependent states to “test” or “check” some of the key elements of its policies.

The pandemic put the WHO center-stage, and in many ways influenced the UN’s clear change of trajectory from its true purpose to assisting governments globally in policing speech and surveilling their populations.

The WHO is comfortable in conflating health-focused issues (its actual mandate), with what it presents as threats linked to “disinformation” and “AI.”

Keep reading

UN General Assembly to Adopt Controversial Cybercrime Treaty, Ignoring Privacy and Free Speech Concerns

The United Nations General Assembly will this week adopt the UN Cybercrime Treaty, with the US expected to be among the countries that support the controversial document.

Opponents will then have to hope that various UN member-states would eventually opt not to sign and ratify the treaty, which has variously been described as “flawed” and all the way to being “a threat to free speech and privacy” and a tool for “transnational oppression.”

Among those opponents are human rights and media organizations, as well as tech companies, while doubts have been expressed even by the UN High Commissioner for human rights, among others.

Yet governments and law enforcement agencies are among the Cybercrime Treaty’s supporters since it opens up the possibility of more effective cross-border cooperation and evidence (including personal data) gathering and sharing.

But, the final text that is about to be adopted, in many parts falls short of what are considered international human rights standards, allowing UN members who sign the document to then choose whether to build a number of these standards into their own implementation.

Keep reading

Many Preppers and 2nd Amendment Proponents Believe That the Arms Trade Treaty Will First Lead to Registration of All Firearms

The UN’s Arms Trade Treaty which covers everything from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships – came into force on 24 December 2014. This treaty has not been ratified by our Congress but had the support of our Secretary of State, John Kerry who signed it and Our president at that time, who without expressly mentioning the treaty, said in a speech at the UN that all nations “must meet our responsibility to observe and enforce international norms.” The problem with that statement and this treaty is that we the people aren’t in control of what those ‘international norms’ are and as we have seen time and time again, those international norms might be detrimental to our country.

Many preppers and 2nd Amendment proponents believe that the Arms Trade Treaty will first lead to registration of all firearms and when that happens, historically the next step is confiscation through some means. Technically, no treaty can be put into action in the United States unless it has been ratified by a 2/3 majority of the senate. This fact is what most people cite when they are trying to refute any legitimate concerns about the UN Arms Trade Treaty or any other treaty’s potential effect on our country. This sounds well and good and serves to placate some, but for this fail-safe to have any weight you would first need to have a government that followed the letter of the constitution and additionally, that government would need to follow the wishes of the citizens they are representing.

Our government has proven time and time again that following the constitution is simply not something they feel they have to do when it stands in their way. For example, the senate has never voted on the Kyoto Protocol but that hasn’t stopped the EPA from enacting rules complying with the main goals of that treaty. Coal plants are being shut down left and right while the US and China agreed in 2014 to let China keep growing their output of carbon emissions (with coal power plants) until 2030. There are many examples of policies that are enacted that fall well outside the bounds of Constitutional limits on power but that doesn’t stop our representatives does it? On any issue there is more brainpower spent on finding ways around the Constitution than actually following it with the seeming goal of every single facet of law being finally decided by the Supreme Court. It’s as if in our society, the rules we decided long ago to set for ourselves are only as good as the interpretations of people today and if every single thing can be challenged (and in some cases changed), we don’t really have a Constitution at all. What we have is a framework for legal arguments that only establishes a baseline which can be over ruled completely by a simple majority of ideology on the bench.

As for a government that listens to their constituents, that long gone relic of thought is promised by every single person running for office. “I feel your pain” The truth of the matter is that in this day and age, every politician is a benefactor of the same special interests. There are no democrat and republican sides whenever both are receiving money from the same companies. The elected politicians, by overwhelming majority do not care what you say or want because they don’t answer to you. Their actions directly contradict election results, polls and public outcry. The 2014 mid-term elections  held should have sent a very strong signal to the leadership of both parties that the country wasn’t on-board with the policies of the current administration and the direction of affairs with the Congress, however; Obamacare and Amnesty both remain intact without so much as a whimper from our newly elected majority who promised for years to repeal it as soon as they were ‘in power’. To add insult to injury, the Republicans just released a 1 trillion budget proposal just over 24 hours before a procedural vote on it knowing that nobody would have time to read it. Same tricks but a different face is behind the podium. Why should we expect anything different from what we have been seeing?

Keep reading

War On Drugs Has ‘Completely And Utterly’ Failed, United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Says

The United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Human Rights is calling on the international community to move away from punitive, criminal drug policies, saying that the global war on drugs “has failed, completely and utterly.”

“Criminalisation and prohibition have failed to reduce drug use and failed to deter drug-related crime,” Commissioner Volker Türk said on Thursday at a conference in Warsaw that included leaders and experts from across Europe. “These policies are simply not working—and we are failing some of the most vulnerable groups in our societies.”

Türk urged a shift to a more evidence-based, human rights-centered approach to drug policies “prioritising people over punishment.”

“We need to start treating the person, not punishing the drug use disorder,” he said, according to a UN press release. “Historically, people who use drugs are marginalised, criminalised, discriminated against and left behind—very often stripped of their dignity and their rights.”

Rather than ostracize or punish drug users, Türk said their perspectives should be included in discussions about how to craft policies that minimize harm. “We are destined to fail unless we ensure their genuine participation in formulating and implementing drug policy,” he said.

Keep reading

Henry Lamb: The UN’s 1995 ‘Global Neighbourhood’ plan for a One World Government

Henry Lamb was a renowned expert on global governance and its implications on individual freedom and private property rights. He was the author of ‘The Rise of Global Governance’. He was also the author of the article ‘The UN and Property Rights’, the report ‘Global Governance: Why? How? When?’ and a columnist for Renew America.  And chairman of Sovereignty International, a non-profit organisation dedicated to promoting individual sovereignty and limited government, founder of the Environmental Conservation Organisation and Freedom21, Inc.

In 1996, Lamb gave a t talk on the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Wildlands Project at the Granada Forum.

“All of the conspiracy theories that you’ve ever heard about ‘One World Government’, about the UN takeover of the world, all of those conspiracies have now been laid to rest,” he said.  “There’s nothing conspiratorial about it.  It’s all published!”

“The UN-funded Commission on Global Governance began meeting in 1992, in earnest … and last fall released their final report.  It is entitled ‘Our Global Neighbourhood’,” he said.

After briefly describing the 1995 document, he goes on to talk about Agenda 21, the Biodiversity Treaty, The Wildlands Project and the Global Biodiversity Assessment.

Keep reading

UNESCO’s New Mission: Train Influencers About Combatting Online “Misinformation”

The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is now incorporating teaching influencers how to “fact check” into its activities.

UNESCO claims that influencers have become “primary sources of news and cultural information” around the world – which prompted it to carry out a survey into how these online personalities verify the “news” they present.

Citizens in UN member-countries may or may not be happy that this is how their taxpayer money funding the world organization is being spent these days. But UNESCO is not only conducting surveys; it is also developing a training course for said influencers (which are also interchangeably referred to as content creators in press releases).

It’s meant to teach them not only to “report misinformation, disinformation and hate speech” but also to collaborate with legacy media and these outlets’ journalists, in order to “amplify fact-based information.”

The survey, “Behind the screens,” was done together with researchers from the US Bowling Green State University. 500 influencers from 45 countries took part, and the key findings, UNESCO said, are that 63 percent of them “lack rigorous and systematic fact-checking protocols” – but also, that 73% said they “want to be trained.”

This UN agency also frames the results as showing that respondents are “struggling” with disinformation and hate speech and are “calling for more training.”

Keep reading

UN “Climate” Deal OKs “Carbon Markets”

“Commitments must quickly become cash.” Well, of course: cash talks, B.S. walks. No wait. it’s ‘B.S. talks and cash walks.” The South has been plundered for decades, and this is just another scam. They will get pennies on the dollar as kleptocrats along the way make the cash disappear into their own pockets. Technocracy News & Trends Editor Patrick Wood

Posted By: Alex Newman via Liberty Sentinel

After two weeks of negotiations at the 29th annual United Nations “climate” summit, the UN and its member governments agreed to rules for a global “carbon market” led by the global body. The scheme will put a price on emissions of the gas of life, carbon dioxide (CO2), and allow carbon credits to be traded. UN bosses called it a “base to build on.”

The final deal, inked over the weekend, also saw Western governments pledge $1.3 trillion per year in “climate” wealth transfers by 2035. The money for Third World kleptocracies and climate profiteers will come from what remains of the middle class in the West. These reparations are to compensate for “loss and damage” supposedly caused by Western CO2, the UN claims.

Of that sum, about $300 billion annually will be in the form of grants and low-interest loans for “climate reparations,” starting immediately. That represents a tripling of previous pledges. The rest of the funding will come from government-backed “investments” and potential new international taxes on fuels or aviation in the years ahead.

Trading Emissions of CO2

The most important part of the deal involves the UN’s “carbon market” schemes. “This will be a game-changing tool to direct resources to the developing world and help us save up to $250 billion a year when implementing our climate plans,” explained COP29 boss Yalchin Rafiyev, deputy foreign minister for the Islamo-Marxist regime of Azerbaijan.

“When operational, these carbon markets will help countries implement their climate plans faster and cheaper, driving down emissions,” he continued. “We are a long way from halving emissions this decade. But wins on carbon markets here at COP29 will help us get back in that race.”

Deal a “Base on Which to Build”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres, former leader of the Socialist International, also said the deal was a good start. “I had hoped for a more ambitious outcome — on both finance and mitigation — to meet the great challenge we face. But this agreement provides a base on which to build,” he said in a statement after the deal was signed.

“It must be honored in full and on time,” continued Guterres, touting “multilateralism” (better known to Americans as globalism). “Commitments must quickly become cash. All countries must come together to ensure the top-end of this new goal is met.… I appeal to governments to see this agreement as a foundation — and build on it.”

UN climate boss Simon Stiell emphasized that the agreement is merely the next step on the road to even more grandiose grabs for money and power. “This is no time for victory laps,” said Stiell. “We need to set our sights and redouble our efforts on the road to [COP30 in the Brazilian city of] Belém.”

In his final statement on the summit, Islamo-Marxist dictator Ilham Aliyev boasted of success. “I consider the ‘Baku breakthrough’ as a triumph of multilateralism,” he said, celebrating the confab’s approval of rules for the UN’s “carbon markets” and wealth redistribution. “The COP29 is a turning point in the climate diplomacy.”

Keep reading