UN Meltdown: Human Rights Champion Gaddafi Embarrasses Useful Idiots, LSE Director Resigns

Gaddafi, Human Rights Champion

UN Praises Gaddafi’s Human Rights Record

When watching moonbats flush the world down the toilet becomes too depressing, you can always turn to the United Nations for a little comic relief:  (Moonbattery)

Canada also extolled the horrific Libyan regime, apparently out of sheer moonbattery.

Gaddafi: Fashion pioneer and UN human rights hero.

Meanwhile, money stolen from your paycheck keeps the whole charade rolling along.

At least it must be some solace to the Libyans being bombed by their own government that their human rights have not been violated.

Libya and the LSE: Large Arab gifts to universities lead to ‘hostile’ teaching

Sir Howard Davies, the director of the London School of Economics, has at last done the honourable thing and resigned from the university’s governing council. The LSE’s shameless prostituting of its good name in return for Muammar Gaddafi’s blood money (as the Tory MP Robert Halfon has rightly called it) is as great a betrayal of the spirit of a university as there has ever been in Britain.


But while it will take the LSE quite some time to regain a seat at the table of respectability, it is not the only university that has reason to feel ashamed. The LSE is said to have received no more than £300,000 of the £1.5 million it was due from Libya.  (Telegraph/full post below the fold)

Sir Howard Davies Resigns

Harry’s Place

Just the tip of the iceberg. A hundred more to go. Georgetown’s Islam promoter & clown-in-chief John Esposito should be next:

The London School of Economics once had a global reputation. The Libyan revolution wiped it away as easily as if it was mist on a window.

I cannot find precedent for the collapse in liberal and academic standards Howard Davies, the LSE’s director, presided over. The Cambridge spies met at Cambridge University, as their name suggests. They did not, however, work for Stalin with the blessing of the university’s chancellor, vice chancellor, senate and masters of its colleges.The LSE’s hierarchy sold itself to a tyrant for a handful of silver. If you doubt me, watch this video of Alia Brahimi, a research fellow at its Gaddafi-funded Global Governance Centre, simpering and gurning  as she introduces Gaddafi to her students by reading a welcome message from Davies worthy of Malvolio or Uriah Heep:

Alia Brahimi hosts a Gaddafi apologists’ ‘love-in’ at the LSE PART 1/4

Davies resigned tonight, and good riddance. He was warned by the late LSE academic Fred Halliday, one of the most intelligent and principled writers on the Middle East, about the nature of his new business partner, but chose to ignore a wiser and better man.

Thilo Sarazzin, who was falsely smeared as an anti-Semite and who’s ‘safety could not be guaranteed’ when he was supposed to speak at LSE, should be pleased. Perhaps he gets another chance now.

“Why Did You Not Speak Out?”

UN Watch Asks Rights Chief: “Why Were You Silent on Qaddafi’s Crimes?

Around the globe, the Qaddafis were kings. No longer. The head of the London School of Economics has just resigned over his ties to the Qaddafi regime. Rock stars Beyonce, Nelly Furtado and Mariah Carey are expressing remorse for paid peformances at Qaddafi family parties. Former Egyptian minister of culture Gaber Asfour renounced his 2010 “Qaddafi International Award for Literature.”

Yet at the U.N., no one is willing to take the slightest responsibility for the world body’s tight embrace of the Qaddafi regime. In the plenary of the UN Human Rights Council yesterday, UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer urged U.N. rights chief Navi Pillay to begin the soul-searching. She refused to respond. Click here for video. The text follows below.

UNW’s Hillel Neuer Asks U.N. Rights Chief: “Why Were You Silent on Qaddafi’s Crimes?”

Pamela Geller has much more.

Money talks.

But they were not the only ones dancing for the dictator:


Yet, on the most conservative estimate, other British universities have received hundreds of millions of pounds from Saudi and other Islamic sources – in the guise of philanthropic donations, but with the real intention of changing the intellectual climate of the United Kingdom.

Between 1995 and 2008, eight universities – Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, University College London, the LSE, Exeter, Dundee and City – accepted more than £233.5 million from Muslim rulers and those closely connected to them.

Much of the money has gone to Islamic study centres: the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies received £75 million from a dozen Middle Eastern rulers, including the late King Fahd of Saudi Arabia; one of the current king’s nephews, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, gave £8 million each to Cambridge and Edinburgh. Then there was the LSE’s own Centre for Middle Eastern Studies, which got £9 million from the United Arab Emirates; this week, a majority of the centre’s board was revealed to be pushing for a boycott of Israel.



While figures since 2008 have yet to be collated, the scale of funding has only increased: such donations are now the largest source of external funding for universities by quite a long way. The donors claim that they want only to promote understanding of Islam – a fine goal for any university.

But the man who gathered the earlier figures, Prof Anthony Glees, argues that their real agenda is rather different: to push an extreme ideology and act as a form of propaganda for the Wahhabist strain of Islam within universities. They push, he says, “the wrong sort of education by the wrong sort of people, funded by the wrong sorts of donor”.

This is not simply scare-mongering. The management committees of the Islamic Studies centres at Cambridge and Edinburgh contained appointees hand-picked by Prince Alwaleed. Other universities have altered their study areas in line with their donors’ demands. And it works.

A study of five years of politics lectures at the Middle Eastern Centre at St Antony’s College, Oxford, found that 70 per cent were “implacably hostile” to the West and Israel. A friend of mine, a former Oxford academic, felt that his time was largely spent battling a cadre of academics overwhelmingly hostile to the West, in an ambience in which students – from both Britain and abroad – were presented a world-view that was almost exclusively anti-Western.

Although much of the money is claimed to be directed towards apolitical ends, this can often be misleading. The gift by foreign governments of language books, for instance, can have a significant effect on what is taught; in one case, the gift of an art gallery was found to have had a direct impact on teaching and admissions policy.

This is all so easily done because there is no requirement for serious scrutiny of either the source of funding or its impact on research. As a report from the Centre for Social Cohesion puts it, our universities “are now effectively up for sale to the highest bidder”. If the LSE’s actions have a saving grace, is that they could help to expose the wider scandal surrounding the behaviour of UK universities.

2 thoughts on “UN Meltdown: Human Rights Champion Gaddafi Embarrasses Useful Idiots, LSE Director Resigns”

  1. Quote: Alia Brahimi hosts a Gaddafi apologists’ ‘love-in’ at the LSE

    A love-in? Its far more personal then that.

  2. Fitzgerald:

    The UN: Thoroughly infiltrated and taken over by Muslims at every level

    It is hard to think of an organization that has been more thoroughly infiltrated and taken over by Muslims at every level, than the United Nations. It has for decades been filled with such willing collaborators as Edward Mortimer, the former Chief Speech Writer and Senior Adviser, as he billed himself, to Kofi Annan — and for all I know, perhaps he’s still senior-advising and chief-speech-writing for that Innocent Abroad Ban Ki-Moon, especially when it comes to Muslim matters.

    This infiltration can be seen everywhere, from the actual staffing of the U.N. secretariat, to the power of the Islamic bloc, which is the last sizable voting bloc left now that the Soviet bloc has dissolved. What should be the bloc of enlightened democracies has lost its way — not least because of the effect of the anti-Israel atmosphere with which the United Nations is suffused, and the atmosphere of apologetics for Islam with which it is also suffused. And then of course there are those Western countries whose elites are terrified of offending the aggressive and dangerous Muslims who are now living in their very midst, and about which they have not a clue as to what to do. At the United Nations, Islam, or the Organization of the Islamic Conference, whenever Israel or Darfur or anything to do with Islam comes up, effectively calls the tune.

    Why, almost half the time of the U.N. and its succursales, such as that comic organization supposedly devoted to Human Rights in Geneva, is dedicated to the proposition that Mighty Israel, the vast Empire of Israel, is the single most important topic, and of course threat, in the world today. The Geneva Human Rights council is that one whose deliberations are sometimes interrupted by the voices of steady sanity of David Littman and Roy Brown, and a few others like them. But even there the Muslim delegates have so intimidated, with their aggression and their sheer craziness, so many of the others, even Western European delegates, that even the most intelligent representatives of Western Europe shrink from confrontation with the primitive representatives of primitive peoples, made primitive, it must be said, by Islam itself.

    And on the East River, the usual inmates of bedlam try to outdo one another in paying obeisance to Muslim countries. Of course, if those Muslim countries had no oil, they would have nothing. And had they not had, more than a millennium ago, a certain number of Christians and Jews and Zoroastrians in their recently-conquered lands, they would surely not even be able to claim what little they can claim as “Islam’s contributions to civilization.” An ideology that is all-encompassing, that encourages the habit of mental submission, that restricts so severely the varieties of artistic expression, that discourages in every way the spirit of critical inquiry, that mistreats women and, most important of all, mistreats all non-Muslims but insists on loyalty only to Islam and to fellow members of the Umma — it is the adherents of this who dare now to demand even more.

    The U.N. is now perilously in the position of the League of Nations. The League of Nations, or, as the French call it, La Societe des Nations (and society it was, with lots of elegant socializing) could do nothing about Fascism and Nazism. And even though the odd American veto can prevent the most egregious and absurd of resolutions passed by the Yesterday’s Men who are the current diplomats at the United Nations from so many of the now-threatened Infidel lands, the U.N. remains a corrupt and corrupting institution.

    Fortunately, just in time, the Muslims have overplayed their hand, with too many attacks in too many places. Now the spectacle of violent mobs of keffiyehed Muslims in European cities has impressed upon many Europeans the notion that these Muslims in their midst, and their local fellow travelers, are a menace that will not go away. That realization is dawning. It is being helped along not so much by what non-Muslims have done or said, but in the main by what Muslims have done and said. And they will continue, in their violence and aggression and impossible demands, to alert the non-Infidel world to what they are and what they are doing. And so that Infidel world is slowly, as if out of a deep sleep, shaking its locks, and coming, fitfully and by slow degrees, awake.

    There is also the “Tribute to Edward Mortimer” if you scroll down….

Comments are closed.