“I deeply appreciate the valuable work performed by UN Watch. Informed and independent evaluation of the United Nations’ activities will prove a vital source as we seek to adapt the Organization to the needs of a changing world.” — Kofi Annan, United Nations Secretary-General

Only one thing is sure: You will continue never to say a word about the gross and systematic human rights abuses of Xi Jinping's Chinese Communist regime.

PALESTINAN MEN ATTACK THEIR WIVES—U.N. BLAMES ISRAEL: In Gaza there was a 61% surge in sexual violence and 123% increase in early and forced marriage. The U.N. is not pointing the finger at Palestinian men, but rather Israel—citing “the acute stress of displacement and poverty.”

The next time anyone cites the UN on “Israeli genocide,” tell them whom it chose to write the report: an official who distorts the Holocaust. And the entire UN human rights establishment—including the commission of inquiry—has embraced her. The UN's credibility is below zero.

This is sinister, untrue and absolutely nuts.

Francesca Albanese says that Palestinians have a right to military resistance, yet she wants to strip Ukrainians of their defences and leave them exposed to Russia’s brutalities. She is a shameless hypocrite with no moral code beyond “West is bad! West is bad!”

Nobel Peace Prize laureate Oleksandra Matviichuk said she was shocked by UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese’s call to stop weapons supplies to Kyiv: doing so would mean “no peace, only rape and torture.” Albanese should be ashamed of herself. open.online/2026/09/23/oleks…

SHAME: 🇬🇧 British Foreign Secretary @Ed_Miliband just shook the hands of Iranian Regime Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi — hands which have on them the blood of tens of thousands of innocent Iranian civilians slaughtered in January for protesting.

Take note: Francesca Albanese in this interview is not explaining antisemitism; she is completely rewriting its meaning, and in the process distorting the history of the Holocaust. Her remarks reveal astonishing ignorance, and malice. First, Antisemitism was not coined to describe hatred of “Semitic peoples,” or of Middle Easterners whom Europeans regarded as foreign. When Wilhelm Marr introduced the term in 1879, he meant hostility to Jews, expressed it in the racial language of his time. “Semitic” denotes a family of languages. It does not make antisemitism a general category of prejudice that can be reassigned to other peoples. Second, the Nazis likewise targeted Jews as Jews. They did not begin, as Albanese suggests, with a broad campaign against “the non-white, the impure, the non-Christian” that later happened to “crystallize” into hatred of Jews. Her account takes a campaign of extermination directed at Jews and makes its victims sound interchangeable. Third, Albanese's claim about Jews being called “Muslims” as they were taken to the gas chambers is especially grotesque. Primo Levi, who survived Auschwitz, explained that Muselmann was camp slang for “the irreversibly exhausted, worn-out prisoner, close to death.” It described a prisoner’s condition. It did not mean the Nazis regarded Jews as Muslims, or sent them to the gas chambers under that identity. Indeed, Albanese’s theory cannot explain why Hitler welcomed and collaborated with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem. The two met in Berlin in 1941, and the Nazi regime financed the Mufti’s antisemitic broadcasts to Muslim audiences. The SS enlisted the Mufti to help recruit Bosnian Muslims into its Handschar division. Addressing the division’s imams, he called Nazi Germany their ally and identified “World Jewry” as a common enemy. That is the historical record Albanese’s theory cannot accommodate: Nazi leaders recruited Muslims to their cause while pursuing the extermination of Jews. Criticism of Israeli policy requires none of these falsehoods. Albanese first stretches antisemitism until it ceases to identify hatred of Jews, then claims that invoking it is a device to “silence debate.” Her argument depends on stripping the word of its meaning before dismissing those who use it. This is the same Francesca Albanese who wrote in an open letter to her family priest that America was “subjugated by the Jewish lobby.” Only when later confronted, she called her words “infelicitous, analytically inaccurate and unintendedly offensive.” Yet now she offers a definition under which antisemitism is no longer specifically hatred of Jews. How convenient. These remarks distorting the Holocaust and the meaning of Jew hatred are appalling from anyone. From a United Nations human rights mandate holder, they demand a public answer. We are calling on all UN member states to denounce Albanese’s distortion of antisemitism and the Holocaust. In particular, we are calling on the member nations of the Human Rights Council, including France, the Netherlands, Italy, Czechia, Estonia, Switzerland, Spain and the United Kingdom. The Council must not allow someone speaking under its authority to erase the identity of the Jews murdered by the Nazis.

"Arabs/Muslims are Semites, too" is silly at the best of times when discussing antisemitism. In the Nazi context, it's just a wilful lie: Hitler was very favourable towards Islam, and Muslims were not consigned to the camps but enlisted in vast numbers into the SS.