What should have israel done instead?

extarbags · 2010-10-01T06:56:41.000Z

Dan_Theman:

Frankly, that’s a pretty weak theory on a forum that’s discussed the merits of the US putting one of their own citizens on a hit list.

shrug

Timex · 2010-10-01T06:58:05.000Z

John Many Jars:

Hey, speaking of the aid flotilla, a US citizen on board has been found by the UN to have been killed execution-style by the Israeli commandos, shot in the face and several times in the back at point blank range.

Note that this is the UN Commission on Human Rights. It’s not really “the UN”. It’s name is somewhat misleading, too.

extarbags · 2010-10-01T06:58:10.000Z

Dan_Theman:

Frankly, that’s a pretty weak theory on a forum that’s discussed the merits of the US putting one of their own citizens on a hit list.

Dan_Theman · 2010-10-01T07:09:09.000Z

extarbags:

lol - nice pic :)

John_Many_Jars · 2010-10-01T07:48:32.000Z

Dan_Theman:

As an aside, does it really matter if it was a U.S. citizen or not?

It matters because of all the aid and “free passes” our government gives to Israel. Our fellow citizens who think Israel by definition can do no wrong have a slightly harder time justifying when it’s a US citizen who’s killed, sheltered from the US justice system, etc. They do anyway, though.

Hey, maybe that BART cop who shot the guy lying on his stomach in Oakland can get a job in the Israeli special forces!

Jag · 2010-10-01T08:00:42.000Z

“They can’t do that to our pledges. Only WE can do that to our pledges!”

Lum · 2010-10-01T08:52:04.000Z

Timex:

Note that this is the UN Commission on Human Rights. It’s not really “the UN”. It’s name is somewhat misleading, too.

This is worth repeating. The HRC is not just biased against Israel - its entire focus is Israel. Even if you believe that Israel is guilty of human rights abuses (which it is), there are quite a few countries in the world that also deserve a bit of attention. Many of whom serve on the HRC. It’s a complete joke that the UN has tried (and failed) to clean up more than once. It changed its name in 2006 thanks to the criticism but not its members nor its ‘special focus’.

en.wikipedia.org

United Nations Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is a United Nations body whose mission is to promote and protect human rights around the world. The UNHRC has 47 members elected for staggered three-year terms on a regional group basis. The 38th session of the UNHRC began June 18, 2018. It ended on July 7, 2018. The headquarters of UNHRC is in Geneva, Switzerland. The UNHRC investigates allegations of breaches of human rights in UN member states, and addresses important thematic human rights iss...

en.wikipedia.org

United Nations Commission on Human Rights | Criticism

The Commission was repeatedly criticized for the composition of its membership. In particular, several of its member countries themselves had dubious human rights records, including states whose representatives had been elected to chair the commission. Another criticism was that the Commission did not engage in constructive discussion of human rights issues, but was a forum for politically selective finger-pointing and criticism. The desire of states with problematic human rights records to be e...

The council voted on 30 June 2006 to make a review of alleged human rights abuses by Israel a permanent feature of every council session.

That pretty much says it all, really.

The few moments spent not writing condemnations of Israel are spent praising politically connected human rights abusers for abusing human rights and condemning the West for religious blasphemy.

Tim_Partlett · 2010-10-01T09:53:17.000Z

I know the HRC does a terrible job of condemning human rights abuses, but does the bias in the HRC mean that any investigation initiated by the HRC is therefore biased by association?

The reason Israel gets so many condemnations is because it doesn’t have enough friends or influence in the world to block them. Does that mean that any investigators employed to do a job for the HRC are therefore biased, without even bothering to look at their track record?

What is the anti-Israel bias you can find in the authors of the report:

Karl T. Hudson-Phillips, a Trinidanian former judge at the International Court of Justice.
Sir Desmond de Silva, a British former lawyer.
Mary Shanthi Dairiam - A Malaysian campaigner for women’s rights

Nothing about these people immediately strikes me as anti-Israel. There bios have no controversies regarding Israel either.

Do you have anything else to smear them with other than the bias of the HRC?

frank_austin · 2010-10-01T09:55:50.000Z

Well, the report just confirms the findings from the autopsy… which if I understand correctly came from the Turkish government, yeah? The big issue is the leap to “executions” from those findings.

Dan_Theman · 2010-10-01T10:03:58.000Z

Tim Partlett:

I know the HRC does a terrible job of condemning human rights abuses, but does the bias in the HRC mean that any investigation initiated by the HRC is therefore biased by association?

I think you may be mistaking an assertion that something should be taken with a grain of salt as saying it is definitively biased.

If you had suspicions that a group has an agenda and they present something which supports it, then you would likely want to independently review the facts before jumping to the conclusion the report is spot on.

frank austin:

Well, the report just confirms the findings from the autopsy… which if I understand correctly came from the Turkish government, yeah? The big issue is the leap to “executions” from those findings.

Agreed.

ReptileHouse · 2010-10-01T10:09:18.000Z

Dan_Theman:

If you had suspicions that a group has an agenda and they present something which supports it, then you would likely want to independently review the facts before jumping to the conclusion the report is spot on.

Yup. This exactly.

Kalle · 2010-10-01T10:21:06.000Z

frank austin:

Well, the report just confirms the findings from the autopsy… which if I understand correctly came from the Turkish government, yeah? The big issue is the leap to “executions” from those findings.

The report is also based on interviews with slightly over a hundred witnesses. No Israelis though. The Israeli government did not want to cooperate with the investigation, which shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

Jag · 2010-10-01T11:33:08.000Z

I thought they didn’t want to cooperate with that investigation. They agreed to a UN investigation not headed by that group.

Lum · 2010-10-01T13:00:35.000Z

Tim Partlett:

Do you have anything else to smear them with other than the bias of the HRC?

I think the incredibly blatant bias of the HRC alone is enough to start from a position of skepticism. For example the Goldstone report came from the auspices of the HRC but was fairly even-handed and accurate. However this wasn’t due to the HRC but due to Goldstone himself. And by the way, just in case there wasn’t enough evidence that the HRC solely exists to bash Israel, Goldstone’s report, which thoroughly documented both disproportionate force by Israel and terror attacks by Hamas, resulted in a condemnation of Israel only, a result criticized by Goldstone himself.

Not knowing anything from this latest “Israel TOTALLY EXECUTED HELPLESS PROTESTORS!!!” report other than it originated from the HRC, yes, I do think some skepticism is called for until its bona fides are proven elsewhere. Much the same way as a report originating from the CIA regarding Iran’s human rights abuses would probably elicit some skepticism.

Cubit · 2010-10-04T05:34:40.000Z

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Palestinians accused Jewish settlers of setting fire to a mosque in the occupied West Bank on Monday, an incident that coincided with U.S. efforts to save peace talks stalled by a dispute over settlement building.

Fifteen Qurans and the mosque’s carpet were burned, said Ali Thawabti, a municipal council official in the village of Beit Fajjar. It was the fourth time since December that a West Bank mosque had been vandalized in an attack blamed on settlers.

“When people saw the blaze, they rushed to extinguish the the fire,” Thawabti said. “Settlers got into their white Peugeot and sped away.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39495185/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

Kareem · 2010-10-04T15:09:24.000Z

That’s not as big a problem to peace talks as the refusal to extend a settlement freeze in the midst of the first direct negotiations in over a year. No, you cannot negotiate over land that is being taken away from you illegally that very moment.

It was kind of funny, actually, when the latest peace talks were announced. Our newspaper had a short-lived, ultimately doomed quest to find an optimistic Palestinian.

Timex · 2010-10-04T16:57:40.000Z

No, you cannot negotiate over land that is being taken away from you illegally that very moment.

It would seem that the alternative is to have that land taken away from you, and not negotiate… which hardly seems preferable.

Eric_T_Cheng · 2010-10-04T17:22:17.000Z

So could someone explain to me why are there Israeli settlers in the West Bank in the first place?

John_Many_Jars · 2010-10-04T17:40:34.000Z

Eric T Cheng:

So could someone explain to me why are there Israeli settlers in the West Bank in the first place?

Shut up, you goddamn Nazi.

AaronSofaer · 2010-10-04T21:05:56.000Z

Eric T Cheng:

So could someone explain to me why are there Israeli settlers in the West Bank in the first place?

Religious nutcases are religious nutcases, News at 11.