UN Human Wrongs Council

Some votes are eminently forgettable. Others are not.

Today's vote in the mistakenly-named UN Human Rights Council is the latter. Although denunciations of Israel have become commonplace in the Council, this vote provides a window into the souls of those 47 member states that currently belong to this Geneva-based body, and what we see will be long remembered.

In effect, the countries were asked a rather simple set of questions.

Could they distinguish between a democratic state, Israel, and a terrorist entity, Hamas?

Could they recall that one nation, Israel, had left Gaza completely in 2005, while another group, Hamas, had seized control two years later, ousting the Palestinian Authority and strengthening ties with terrorist-funding, weapons-supplying Iran?

Could they recognize the legitimate right of a nation, Israel, to self-defense against a non-state actor, Hamas, that openly declares a desire to obliterate it?

Could they differentiate between the arsonist in the conflict, Hamas, and the firefighter, Israel?

Could they grasp the inherent challenge for a military, in this case Israel's, to uproot a terrorist infrastructure, that of Hamas, which had deeply embedded itself in a civilian population?"

Could they acknowledge what was obvious to a top British military officer, Colonel Richard Kemp, that one party to the conflict, Israel, had gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid civilian casualties?

Could they admit that the UN Human Rights Council was so viscerally anti-Israel, as evidenced by the stunning fact that 80 percent of its resolutions adopted over the past three years have focused on Israel alone, that it could not be deemed an objective body?

Could they recognize that the mandate of Judge Richard Goldstone and his three colleagues, including one who had publicly convicted Israel before joining the group, was inherently biased, charged with investigating what were already deemed to be Israeli "war crimes," while ignoring the thousands of Hamas missile and mortar attacks that preceded Israel's entry into Gaza?

And could they accept that the resolution before them spoke only of Israel, not of Hamas?

The verdict is now in.

Twenty-five countries voted for the resolution.

In most cases, there were no surprises.

All the members of the Arab League and most of the Organization of the Islamic Conference voted in lockstep to condemn Israel. No news there.

And the worst offenders against human rights, quite naturally, supported the resolution, happy to have attention once again deflected from their own shameful records. Again, no news there.

But there were a few unhappy surprises, particularly Argentina, Brazil, and Chile.

As democratic countries, they should have known better. Was there more to gain by opposing Israel than supporting it, or, at the very least, abstaining? Or were they motivated by some fanciful notion of human rights in the abstract that was completely detached from the reality on the ground thousands of miles away in the Middle East?

Then there were the six countries - Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Ukraine and the United States - that stood up to the mob and voted against the resolution. Their moral clarity and political principle were on display. They deserve appreciation and recognition.

We should remember these six countries, just as we recall those that stood up to the herd mentality in Geneva at the so-called Durban II conference in April which similarly singled out Israel for denunciation--Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland and the United States.

And then there are the other 16 countries that did not vote in favor of the resolution, some abstaining, others absenting themselves.

In a multilateral setting, those actions can at times be acts of bravery. Not always, however.

It was regrettable that Britain and France, with their profound understanding of Middle Eastern realities, were not in the hall to cast a "no" vote. They should have been.

On the other hand, kudos to Mexico and Uruguay, the only Latin American countries on the Human Rights Council not to vote in favor.

And it was gratifying to see several African nations - Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, and Gabon - break group ranks and not endorse a one-sided resolution that even Richard Goldstone himself condemned today for its inherent unfairness.

Courage and principle are always in short supply.

When they're on display, as several countries demonstrated in Geneva, they should be acknowledged. But when they are overridden, and injustice and expediency become norms of the day, we must speak out loud and clear.

 

Comments

[califlefty]

When will the left and progressives be able to draw a line between the democratic and nondemocratic worlds? These incessant attacks against Israel are sheer lunacy.The region is populated by regimes with appalling human rights records. Israel, is has at least 80 human rights organizations, a vibrant free press, a democratically elected government, a judiciary that frequently rules against the government, an active academia, multiple political parties and, probably more journalists per capita than any other country in the world.

Meanwhile, the Arab and Iranian regimes rule over 350 million people, with brutality permitting little or no internal dissent. The left has lost critical perspective on a conflict in which Israel has been repeatedly attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah, organizations that go after Israeli citizens and use their own people as human shields. These groups are supported by the government of Iran, which has openly declared its intention not just to destroy Israel but to murder Jews everywhere. This incitement to genocide is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Hamas and Hezbollah chose to wage war from densely populated areas, deliberately transforming neighborhoods into battlefields. They know that more and better arms are flowing into both Gaza and Lebanon and are poised to strike again. And they know that this militancy continues to deprive Palestinians of any chance for the peaceful and productive life they deserve. Yet Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of criticism.

[hmp49]

Goldstone and the rest of his committee may not believe that the IDF takes extraordinary steps to avoid civilian casualties, but Hamas and Hezbollah do. Otherwise, they would not store weapons and fire rockets from civilian areas. Why place your civilians at risk if the IDF cares nothing for civilian lives?

[Mahmoud B]

It cannot be argued that if there is a truly democratic country in the Mideast (in the modern sense of the term) it would be Israel. The question here is the targetting of civilians not the democratic institutions that surely do not give a right of violating the principles on which they were founded. Hamas does use the populated areas as a base for attacks but that is -mainly- due to the fact that Gaza is one the most densely populated areas on the globe so even if Hamas was a moraly good (i don't believe that they are) liberation front (i believe that they are) there is virtually no chance avoiding the taking of bases in populated areas; That being said i believe that due to the Israeli immense technological and military development, Israel could indeed use more targetted attacks and hence minimise civilian casulaties.
Now i am not a military expert but i believe that one of the fundamental principles of modernwarfare is to destroy the resolve of the civilian population and hence forment opposition to fighting and destroying the supply centers and supply lines of the ennemy which are in this case the main Palestinian cities (germans and allies used the same tactics on occasions in WWII). War is ugly but it is what it is and there is no reason going to war and risking the death of young Israeli men if you won't do it right (which happens to be morally wrong).. .

[hmp49]

We just killed 125 Afghan civilians who made the mistake of trying to get fuel from a mired down Taliban fuel truck.

With all those Palestinians in a small territory, how many dead Palestinians do you think there would be if the Israelis "targeted civilians?" The allies killed 40,000 in a single night firebombing Dresden. The US killed 90,000 civilians in a single night firebombing Tokyo.

The Rwandans killed 800,000 in a few weeks with machetes. And you think the best the Israelis could do is 1400 dead if they were targeting civilians? Do you have any idea how absurd that is? A better question is how was Israel able to keep the civilian toll so low, since the Palestinians fired their rockets from the midst of civilian areas, and fought dressed as civilians?

How dare you compare the Israelis to the Germans in WWII. The Germans rounded up towns into synagogues and set them on fire. If the Israelis used the German WWII tactics there would be civilian casualties in the hundreds of thousands.

War is not a video game, it is not a perfect science. Life and death decisions have to be made in a split second, and mistakes get made. No country in the world has ever done a better job of avoiding civilian casualties. I defy you to find one that comes close - 2 million leaflets warning of targets, 100,000 phone calls warning.

What is it with you people? Earth to lunatics! Get real!

[Mahmoud B]

[So i believe that Israel intended and all violations alleged to it and it acted for what it sincerely believed a justifiable cause, its self defence. I am sorry if i'm writing too much on this but this is an important point: I believe that the reason the focus was on Israel and not Hamas commited similar condemnable crimes is the difference between the two entities:
i. The difference in technology, intelligence gathering and military might;
ii. The difference in mobility (the Israeli air force fleet to name one factor); and
iii. The difference in the number of casualties (which is merely the result of i. and ii. above).
Offcourse if Hamas had the means it probably would have acted in a similar fashion.
Israel could have inflicted less civilian damage, more Hamas damage, suffered less potentially legal incriminations and came out to the whole world as a a nation with "good" casue. But this did not happen because of a moment of political hysteria and drunkness on power

[hmp49]

You're right there is a difference.

Hamas does the maximum damage to civilians with the resources available to it. They have no qualms about shooting their own people or throwing them off roof tops.

The IDF does the least harm possible to civilians to accomplish its goals - compare the performance of the IDF to the US in Iraq or Afghanistan, for instance. We killed 20-30 times as many civilians in the 2nd battle of Fallujah with artillery shells as were killed in Operation Cast Lead. Numerous studies claim over 600,000 civilians were killed in Iraq.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/at-least-600000-civilians-killed-in-iraq-study-finds/2006/10/11/1160246197531.html

Anyone with any sense of reality know that if the shoe was on the other foot, the Palestinians would have killed far more civilians. One need not go very far back in history to recall the horrific suicide bombings in Israel before the construction of security wall.

[hmp49]

The (UN Human Rights) Council also heard from a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, who said war crimes accusations against the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) were misplaced.

"The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent," said Col. Richard Kemp, speaking on behalf of the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch.

"It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong."

He argued Israeli forces took "extraordinary measures" to give civilians in Gaza notice of targeted areas, including dropping two million leaflets and making 100,000 phone calls.

"Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes," Col. Kemp said.

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=2113471

[Mahmoud B]

Why do the words of a General suddenly have more weight that a respectable jurist that has brought justice to the bloodiest conflicts in Africa?

[califlefty]

OK, the jurist himself says he can not support his own report and urged that it should not be adopted. Now what say you? I suspect you will find an excuse.

[Mahmoud B]

Appologies for misreading Colonel Kemp's title; he is a colonel not a general. War crimes is a legal term with a strict definition; accordingly when debating the issue I would have more trust in a jurist' analysis than that of a general, a colonel or a brigadier.

[hmp49]

Smoking gun - letter to Goldstone witness to his commission:

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2044597

My name is Dr. Mirela Siderer...­.Judge Richard Goldstone, in July you invited me to testify. I told you my story. I am known by my patients -- including many women from Gaza. For me, every human being is equal.

On May 14, 2008, my life was changed forever. I was working in my clinic. Suddenly, the building was hit by a missile, fired from Gaza. I was terribly wounded...­.My patient was also wounded, and more than 100 others. Next month will be my eighth operation.

Judge Goldstone, I told you all of this, in detail. I testified in good faith. You sent me this letter, saying, "Your testimony is an essential part of the Mission's fact-finding activities­."

But now I see your report. I have to tell you: I am shocked.

...Why are there only two pages (0f 500 pages) about Israeli victims like me, who suffered thousands of rockets over eight years?... Why did you not tell me that this council judged Israel guilty in advance last January? Why did you not tell me that members of your panel signed public letters judging Israel guilty in advance?

Judge Goldstone, you, too, signed such a letter, saying you were "shocked" about Gaza. But where were you when Gaza attacked my medical clinic, in violation of international human rights and humanitarian law? Where was this council? Why were you all silent?

[Mahmoud B]

"Courage and principle are always in short supply"
True.

With regard to the issue at hand the questions no one seems to want to raise are: Can a democratic nation commit acts that go against its declared principles? Can Israel be condemned -or at least accused- for inhumane acts without these accusations become seen as hatred against Israel and jews? Does a democratic state have the right to target innocent civilians merely because it is a "democratic state"?
Can a democratic state be labelled as such even though it completely disregards the human rights of a certain category of its inhabitants?

Does democracy automatically assume blind justice?

[hmp49]

Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson (a constant critic of Israel) criticized the resolution mandating the report as unbalanced and motivated by political concerns, saying: "the resolution is not balanced because it focuses on what Israel did, without calling for an investigation on the launch of the rockets by Hamas. This is unfortunately a practice by the Council: adopting resolutions guided not by human rights but by politics. This is very regrettabl­e."

But no surprise -

As of January 24, 2008, Israel had been condemned 15 times in less than two years. The UN Human Rights Council, like its predecessor the UN Human Rights Commission, has been criticized by some Western countries for its fixation on Israel while ignoring the actions of neighboring states. This has lead to accusations of the organization being anti-Israe­li.[32] By April 2007, the Council had passed nine resolutions condemning Israel, the only country which it had specifically condemned.­[33][34] Toward Sudan, another country with human rights abuses as documented by the Council's working groups, it has expressed "deep concern."[­33]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Accusations_of_bias_against_Israel

[lbsaltzman]

I did an extensive search through Google News and could only find the brief quote by Mary Robinson used by a couple of Israeli ambassadors writing op-articles in different countries. I left with the suspicion that at best this quote is taken utterly out of context. The use of this quote in exculsively by pro-Zionist and Israeli government sources makes me suspect the quote is an Israel propaganda talking point and not to be trusted She was apparently talking about why she didn't accept the position as chair, not about the finished report. Since Judge Goldstone did include Hamas in his fact finding mission, her objection from before Goldstone got on, if the quote is even accurate, is a moot point now. Hamas actions were mentioned in the actual report.

[hmp49]

Thank you for your post, it pushed me to look for additional material. Ms. Robinson went far beyond the account given in wikipedia in her Op-Ed:

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009930story_30-9-2009_pg3_4

See also:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/conclusions-about-israels-guilt-in-gaza-were-voiced-well-in-advance-of-a-factfinding-mission-1909917.html

which not only states:

Ms Robinson objected that the mission seemed to her to be "guided not by human rights but by politics".

but goes on to say:

During its investigation, the mission did not ask its witnesses any questions relating to Hamas terrorist activity, the storage of weaponry in civilian areas or the launching of attacks from those areas. Except in one case, it failed to inquire into the widespread reports of the abuse of mosques to hide weapons and terrorist activity.

Both links make most interesting reading. I doubt you'll have anything to report back after reading them.

[Wisdo]

The author fails to distinguish between a "democratic state" and a colonial occupier with a thirst for land and a willingness to kill for it.

Its interesting that not only the HUman rights council, but virtually every NGO on earth is "wrong" when it comes to Israel's occupation, but "right": when it comes to China's human rights abuses, or Russia's or Irans (but not the US's of course).

[lbsaltzman]

You point is excellent. A country like Israel is internally democratic if you are part of the Jewish ethnocracy, but not so democratic if you are a Palestinian-Israeli citizen. And as you point out the occupation is another story altogether. The occupation of Palestine and the siege of Gaza is inherently immoral and criminal.

[hmp49]

Even non-citizen Palestinians can (and do) take their complaints to the Israeli Supreme Court (which is far more accessible than the US Supreme Court).

Complaints to Hamas are handled via a one way trip down from the top of a high rise.

"Occupation of Palestine?" You DO know that there never was an independent Palestinian "nation," that Gaza was cruelly administered by Egypt and the West Bank by Jordan prior to the Arab aggression of 1967 that resulted in Israel pushing the Arab armies back?

Interestingly enough, prior to 1967 it was the ARABS who claimed there never was such a thing as an independent Palestine nor Palestinian people (i.e. they claimed the "Arabs of Palestine" were indistinguishable from other Arabs of the ME. Only after the 1967 war made it clear they would not be able to push Israel into the sea did they reverse this position)

[hmp49]

For starters, I'll note that the while Israel's "proportional" responses to the terrorists rockets had no result, the rockets have completely stopped since January. I consider the conflict a complete success. In case no one ever told the idiot Israel haters, war is messy and imprecise. That's why you don't provoke a war (by firing rockets at civilians, terrorizing the children of Sderot throughout their childhoods - but of course those are Jewish children, so who gives a damn of 40% of them live with PTSD for the rest of their lives?)

As Bill Maher (hardly a flaming conservative said) "How long would the United States put up with rockets from Canada?"

The loss of a single life is tragic. But no country in the history of warfare conducts war as respectfully of human life as Israel. Israel drops leaflets and makes phone calls ahead of time to get civilians out of areas that will be bombed. Israeli planes have turned around when the Palestinians have taken advantage of these warnings to ring civilians around the targets. By contrast, in the second battle of Fallujah, the US indesriminately sent artillery shells into civilian areas for days, with no regard for the consequences.

The "allies" killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq. So where is the UN Human Rights Council report on that?

Where is the UN Human Rights Council on Darfur? Only Israel is singled out when there are far far worse offenders.

[Mahmoud B]

So is the argument: there are worst offenders so the Palestinian victims are not on top of the priority list. I do not believe there is a priority list; i believe that the loss of a human life is the loss of a human life and i truly can't believe that anyone can debate that.

[Macready]

great blog Wisdo . . . .

[piul05]

Well, all I can say is congratulations to Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

All three countries have a recent History of military repression, foreign intervention, looting of natural resources and human suffering.

But those sad chapters in their History, rather than make them wallow in self-pity and self-righteousness, allowed them to empathize with other people's plight and stand for what's right, moral and lawful.

It's a shame that this same lesson has been lost on I$rael.

[hmp49]

"All three countries have a recent History of military repression, foreign intervention, looting of natural resources and human suffering.­"

But if they vote against Israel, they're A-OK with you.

The reason Israel is the only country to be singled out by the UN Human Rights Council is the same reason it is silent on Darfur - 1/3 of the membership of the UN is Muslim, and the vast majority of those countries refuse to even acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Since the ruling government in Sudan is also Muslim, they are willing to overlook Muslim-on-Black Christian violence. So much for that impartial arbiter of human rights, the UN.

[Salfana]

There are many U-Tube videos of Isr. launching white phosphorus shells. Sometimes it was used at night sometimes in broad daylight as we watched on television the UN compound caught into fire. See this video of the UN compound as UN Secratary-General Ban Ki -moon was speaking five days after, the compound was still burning.

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wbH03z1plk&feature=player_embedded#

Another Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZQ0gwcmv1M

This link shows WP shells dropped in broad daylight from an helicopter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGy9YqEjD1o&feature=player_embedded#

[beeingactive]

I guess using children as shields - literally dragging them - is nothing and I saw the "white phosphor" videos and it certainly isn't conclusive! What is conclusive is that launching (on camera) rockets from schools, UN compound, hospitals and mosques is human rights abuse in itself (read the charter!)

[Salfana]

It may have been conclusive if the Isr. Authority would have let the international press into Gaza. It was pure luck that some journalist, NGO's and Human rights watch were already in there to record the horrors. Isr. authority shot themselves in the foot in not allowing the press in. Now you are kicking and screaming and inventing a rumor with no grounds or evidence of what you are affirming and this is not in the Goldstone report. Isr. made it very difficult to let the UN investigative team to go in. Isr. did not cooperate with the UN team. Because of the lack of cooperation the consequences are that you may get just on side of the story. It is entirely Israel's fault that it came to this report.

Well in conclusion maybe it is just as well that Isr. did not let the press in, because the list of war crimes would probably be much worse and with more evidences.

[Salfana]

I must concede that what you said about the Palestinian children being dragged by Hamas might have happened, but the reverse might as well occurred as this article in the Haaretz titled: "Gazans: IDF used us as 'human shields' during offensive.­"

Link: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1065594.html

In the Goldstone Report both Hamas and the IDF are targeted for war crimes.

[vklizs]

Wow! This is the first time I have ever heard of someone using the fact that Hamas fanatics were using innocents as human shields so we are going to use "white phosphorus" and wherever it lands is ok because, Hey....Ham­as is "everywhere" and the innocents are just "unfortunate casualties" as a defense!
And everyone knows Hamas has to answer for its part in Gaza and they have agreed to further investigations and movement through International Law. Israel has not. Plain and simple...
Why not be forthcoming and open about Israel's actions in Gaza? What can it hurt? Israel wants recognition on the global stage and this is a golden opportunity to be recognized as a democratic state and Jewish nation! Whay can't Israel stand up and say this is what we did in Gaza, this is our reasoning, and although we may have made some mistakes, we are here! We are not going anywhere and as a member of the U.N. we demand to be recognized as a democratic state and Jewish Nation!
See...as long as Israel continues to keep her actions in Gaza unanswered for, she will almost certainly block her path to recognition in the global arena while continuing to draw opposition globally.

[shotei]

I'm sure you're aware that white phosphorus is not illegal. What is illegal is how it is sometimes used.

[beeingactive]

Tholin - just for accuracy's sake as far as I know the perpetrators of Sabra and Shatila were Lebanese Christians not Israeli soldiers!! (and just a short story: some years ago I had the (unfortunate) occasion of coming face to face with one of those who led the Phalangists into the camps (the second to Eli Hubeika the leader of the forces who slaughtered 2500 men women and children) who boasted about the fact that they managed to fool (his words) the IDF. He also boasted about their "heroic" deed.) That not withstanding I guess the 400,000 people demonstrating in Tel Aviv is nothing (it certainly is more than most democracies have to show for themselves and that's not even about something Israelis did...)

[hmp49]

Absolutely correct - the IDF had worked with Eli Hubeika before, and it was reasonable for the IDF to accept his assurances that they Phalangists were only there to engage to Palestinian combatants who had sought refuge in the camps.

[beeingactive]

Lewis Carroll must be turning in his grave! A so called human rights committee populated by some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet investigating human rights abuses. In this Alice In Wonderland reality killers become investigating judges dispensing sentences. No wonder every reputable, honest, human rights advocate turned down heading the investigation. For 8 years Israeli children (and adults) lived in constant peril, the only defense against death and destruction the shelters and defenses they built. You watched terrified toddlers fleeing for their lives, school children studying in shelters, a young boy gravely wounded his limbs amputated, a businessman helplessly inspecting the rubble of the small plant he worked so hard to maintain, a family homeless after their home was destroyed. There was no UN resolution or a sanction of the perpetrators, none when Hamas slaughtered hundreds of Fatah men (and women) and FILMED evidence was discarded of Hamas men FORCIBLY dragging children to shield behind during the Gaza operation, launching rockets from schools, hospitals even from the building where media organisations reported from (watch on you tube.) This isn't just a travesty of justice it's a joke! The tragedy is that the UN, what it stands for and meant to protect, is disappearing into irrelevanc­e.The danger is that we will not be able to defend ourselves against the nutters. To all the idiots who believe they hold any kind of moral highground - it's history they ought to ponder and facts! Real not imagined.

[tholin]

Surprised? Really now, do google Sabra and Shatila or something.

[Archie1955]

This article strikes me as out and out Zionist propaganda. Why should a South African be biased against Israel? There are many reasons of course for Arabs to be biased but not for the great bulk of members. Please don't respond that "anti-Semitism" had a part in any of this. That kind of knee jerk response has lost its power. Today it simply means the party repeating it has no real argument to prove its case. Palestine is an entity that has been refused the right to be a country once a large part of its territory was confiscated by the UN for Zionist purposes. If it had been a country although much reduced it would probably have reached an accord with Israel to allow peace in the region. Both sides have to negotiate in good faith in order for anything of value to come out of the process. Israel has never had to before because the US was always standing behind it to protect it no matter whether or not it negotiated for peace or didn't. That now has to change. There have to be good reasons for both parties to want peace.

[FairuzGhowar]

Me too I;m shocked HP allows itself to be used this way.

[TheLonelyGod]

Yeah, what a shock that they allow people who disagree with you to post their opinions. There oughtta be a law banning such things!

[TheLonelyGod]

"Why should a South African be biased against Israel?"

Maybe he holds Israel to a higher standard than it's enemies or than any other nation?

[Tony Andrews]

Well, LonelyGod, if he has been biased against Israel (and he hasn't) it would be because Israel does, honestly, and as a truly unbiased observer, present itself as THE most honourable state on the planet.
It has, after all, and by its own reckoning, behaved better toward Gaza than any other state on the planet would, given similar circumstances.
If a state promotes itself as being so perfect in its activities as does Israel it can hardly complain when it is called to justify its "perfection", and it isn't anyway, it is merely asked to coduct credible investigations of allegations.
Let's get it clear.
Neither Hamas nor Israel has one single thing to be proud of.
Goldstone has reported what was available for him to report.
It is really stupid for Israel and its proponents to refuse to cooperate with the Goldstone Report and then claim it is unbalanced. They had the chance to add balance, chose not to do and now complain.
Stupid is an understatement.

[Fireslayer]

You are probably right that I and many hold Israel to a higher standard. No other nation, bar none has received as much support through the years from the United States and the developed world community through the past 60 years.

As the Bible says, to whom much is given much is expected.

It is with sadness that I must confess to knowing and loving a number of Israelis who I count amongst the most humane, decent and civilized people on the planet. Unfortunately, they do not rule the roost.

For the past decade the extreme rightist regime has been emboldened by support from the arch-spoiled brat nightmare of Bush II. His Republican culture of lies, wing-nut fundamentalist extremism and delusion that parallels the current deluded view of the Israeli government that they can expand with impunity without accountability and gain acceptance of self-serving propaganda as an alternate reality.

If we want peace, currently hostage to the countless miseries inflicted by the IDF/settlers on the hapless, public relations challenged and logistically, but not humanly inferior Palestinians then Israel will have to start treating them as brothers and strive for justice and healing.

Knee jerk support of militarism is no path to peace. Only justice for the Palestinians will bring long overdue peace to the region and acceptance of Israel.

[Macready]

great blog Archie . . . you are so right . . . it reads like out and out zionist propaganda . . .

[Nhad53]

Your article is devoid of ideas and does not bring any news compared to the official report.
Ranting and making absurd statement as facts are dreams that are gone. UN group is democratic and political. It is just that the wind is changing.

[FearlessFreep]

If you employ terror tactics, you're a terrorist entity even if you're also a democratic state.

[Archie1955]

That applies to the US also and its CIA agency.

[Macready]

well said Archie 1955

[nyoped]

"Could they distinguish between a democratic state, Israel, and a terrorist entity, Hamas?"

Most people agree that Israel is a democratic state and Hamas is a terrorist organization. That's why people are surprised. Israel, just like Hamas, has no respect for lives of thousands of civilians.

[hmp49]

Israel has no respect for the lives of thousands of civilians? No other army in the world, now or in human history, shows the respect for human life that the IDF does:

The (UN Human Rights) Council also heard from a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, who said war crimes accusations against the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) were misplaced.

"The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent," said Col. Richard Kemp, speaking on behalf of the Geneva-based monitoring group UN Watch.

"It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong."

He argued Israeli forces took "extraordinary measures" to give civilians in Gaza notice of targeted areas, including dropping two million leaflets and making 100,000 phone calls.

"Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes," Col. Kemp said.

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=2113471