U.N. experts: Israel flotilla raid broke int'l law

gimmesometruth27

ok, so now we have that ruling...a little late...so now what are they going to do about? most likely nothing :twisted:

U.N. experts: Israel flotilla raid broke int'l law
Panel says the Israeli military response to flotilla was 'disproportionate'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39311860/ns ... tn_africa/

GENEVA — A report by three U.N.-appointed human rights experts Wednesday said that Israeli forces violated international law when they raided a Gaza-bound aid flotilla killing nine activists earlier this year.

The U.N. Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission concluded that Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory was unlawful because of the humanitarian crisis there, and described the military raid on the flotilla as brutal and disproportionate.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry responded late Wednesday by saying the Human Rights Council had a "biased, politicized and extremist approach."

Israel has maintained that its soldiers acted in self-defense when they shot and killed eight Turkish activists and one Turkish-American aboard the Mavi Marmara on May 31.

"The Human Rights Council blamed Israel prior to the investigation and it is no surprise that they condemn after," said Andy David, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, referring to the 47-member body's resolution in early June condemning the raid.

Israel refused to cooperate with the panel, preferring instead to work with a separate U.N. group under New Zealand's former Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer and Colombia's former President Alvaro Uribe that is also examining the incident but has yet to publish its findings.

"Israel is a democratic and law abiding country that carefully observes international law and, when need be, knows how to investigate itself," the Foreign Ministry statement said. "That is how Israel has always acted, and that is the way in which investigations were conducted following Operation Cast Lead, launched to protect the inhabitants of southern Israel from rockets and terror attacks carried out by Hamas from Gaza."

Fawzi Barhoum, spokesman for the Islamic militant group Hamas that controls Gaza, said the report emphasized that Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories violates human rights "not only against Palestinian people but against innocent people who came to show their sympathy."

"Now it's required to be a mechanism in order to translate this report into action and to bring the occupation commanders to trial for the crimes they committed," Barhoum said.

The Human Rights Council's report was compiled by former U.N. war crimes prosecutor Desmond de Silva, Trinidadian judge Karl T. Hudson-Phillips and Malaysian women's rights advocate Mary Shanthi Dairiam. It is scheduled to be presented to the council on Monday.

Commy

Israel acts in violation of international law.


typical.

this case is especially shitty. the people in that flotilla were only trying to help, and Israel gunned them down anyway.

gimmesometruth27

Commy wrote:

Israel acts in violation of international law.


typical.

i wonder what the outcome of their own investigation will be? perhaps that they were well within their rights to attack and board that ship in international waters? it will be interesting to see how this turns out. to me the take home quote is that the UN called the blockade illegal as well...

"The U.N. Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission concluded that Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory was unlawful because of the humanitarian crisis there, and described the military raid on the flotilla as brutal and disproportionate."

redrock

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

"Israel is a democratic and law abiding country that carefully observes international law .....

Of course.... :roll: I can't understand how they can make such statements keeping a straight face.

yosi

I don't know how anyone can take the UN Human Rights Council seriously and keep a straight face. Seriously, the UN's human rights bodies have been a joke or worse for years. When you have a body comprised of some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet tasked with upholding and defending human rights, something is very wrong.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I don't know how anyone can take the UN Human Rights Council seriously and keep a straight face. Seriously, the UN's human rights bodies have been a joke or worse for years. When you have a body comprised of some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet tasked with upholding and defending human rights, something is very wrong.

Care to elaborate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nat ... il#Members

UN Human Rights Council Mmbers:

2010 Group

* African States: Madagascar, South Africa, Angola, Egypt.
* Asian States: India, Indonesia, Philippines, Qatar.
* Eastern European States: Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
* Latin American & Caribbean States: Nicaragua, Bolivia.
* Western European & Other States: Netherlands, Italy.


2011 Group

* African States: Burkina Faso, Gabon, Ghana, Zambia.
* Asian States: Bahrain, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea.
* Eastern European States: Slovakia, Ukraine.
* Latin American & Caribbean States: Argentina, Brazil, Chile.
* Western European & Other States: France, United Kingdom.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I don't know how anyone can take the UN Human Rights Council seriously and keep a straight face. Seriously, the UN's human rights bodies have been a joke or worse for years. When you have a body comprised of some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet tasked with upholding and defending human rights, something is very wrong.

I'm sure that anyone who takes a look at the history of Israel's human rights abuses will place the above in it's proper context. Just in the past year alone it's been charged by every human rights organization, along with the U.N, of crimes against humanity and war crimes.

But then the U.N is anti-Semitic, Amnesty international is anti-semitic, Human rights Watch is anti-semitic, Physicians for Peace is anti-semitic, the U.N is anti-semitic, and every country that supports U.N 242 (every country on the planet except the U.S) is anti-semitic, right?

yosi

B, what is it with you and antisemitism? You just can't stop talking about it.

Commy

that label has been thrown around a lot on this board lately.

yosi

Actually, I don't think it has. Yes, antisemitism is mentioned very often on this board, but aside from the one thread that was locked, virtually all of the mentions have been in the context of people complaining about being branded antisemites, or accusing others of silencing dissent through bad-faith claims of antisemitism, without anyone ever actually calling anyone an antisemite.

Commy

you're right actually, instead its always backhanded comments and snide remarks about "true feelings" and similar. no one has the balls to actually come out and say it, instead they insinuate, and make backhanded comments, and post things that hint criticism is actually hiding antisemitism.

yosi

Again, I don't think that's true. Even granting that one "true feelings" instance (which, again, I don't read the same way you do) there are far and away more accusations of accusations of antisemitism then there are actual accusations of antisemitism.

catefrances

yosi wrote:

Again, I don't think that's true. Even granting that one "true feelings" instance (which, again, I don't read the same way you do) there are far and away more accusations of accusations of antisemitism then there are actual accusations of antisemitism.

probably.

TriumphantAngel

yosi wrote:

Actually, I don't think it has. Yes, antisemitism is mentioned very often on this board, but aside from the one thread that was locked, virtually all of the mentions have been in the context of people complaining about being branded antisemites, or accusing others of silencing dissent through bad-faith claims of antisemitism, without anyone ever actually calling anyone an antisemite.

that's not true. actually that's a lie.

prfctlefts has accused me personally of it on at least two occassions.

rafie has openly stated it.

rafie wrote:

I think that as long as there is Antisemitism in the world (it even exists on this forum with certain members)

and you have said this in the past, i can search some more if you like, those only took me two minutes.

yosi wrote:

That is not to say that criticism of Israel is invalid, only that not everyone who is criticizing is doing it for noble reasons. Is this really that hard to understand? Triumphant, I do not think you are an antisemite. Period. But I would not be surprised if some of the other people on this thread are. They may not even be aware of how their views are shaped by prejudice. But to my ear the criticism of Israel by certain people on this thread sounds at times so shrill and hysterical that I can't help but wonder what is going on.

yosi wrote:

I haven't accused everyone who disagrees with me of being an antisemite, as is clear from the multiple times I have explicitly said as much. And I have not made accusations of antisemitism BECAUSE anyone disagreed with me. I have made these accusations (and really I've tried to be clear that they are more suspicions than accusations) because I believe them to be (possibly) true.

gimmesometruth27

it seems that everybody critical of israel's government and policies is labeled or has been labeled anti semitic on this forum at one point or another....does that label apply to the "self hating" jews that people talk about as well??

am i antiamerican because i criticize my own country's policies?

the bottom line is that the international community has found the blockade and the raid on the flotilla to be against international law. that is not antisemitism, that is anti blatantly breaking international law...

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

it seems that everybody critical of israel's government and policies is labeled or has been labeled anti semitic on this forum at one point or another....does that label apply to the "self hating" jews that people talk about as well??

am i antiamerican because i criticize my own country's policies?

the bottom line is that the international community has found the blockade and the raid on the flotilla to be against international law. that is not antisemitism, that is anti blatantly breaking international law...

not saying that i havent but i cant remember having the antisemitic label aimed at me personally.

polaris_x

sooo ... yosi - are you going to dismiss these findings because you think the countries that make up this council are hypocrites?

yosi

I'm going to wait and see what the investigation that actually has access to Israel's side of the story, and that isn't acting on behalf of a body that condemned Israel before even launching its investigation, has to say.

gimmesometruth27

yosi wrote:

I'm going to wait and see what the investigation that actually has access to Israel's side of the story, and that isn't acting on behalf of a body that condemned Israel before even launching its investigation, has to say.

nice deflection..

yosi

Unlike some I try not to jump to conclusions.

gimmesometruth27

yosi wrote:

Unlike some I try not to jump to conclusions.

well i think i would be more inclined to believe the UN investigation over a seperate one consisting of 3 countries, one of which being the country accused of breaking international law....

when i read statements from israeli government officials in the days leading up to the raid on the ships stating that "the flotilla will not reach it's destination" it gives me pause and tells me of their intentions all along....

also it was concluded that not only the flotilla incident, but the blockade as a whole were both against international law. of course israel is going to conclude that the blockade is legal and their flotilla raid was justified. the legal wrangling to defend this is going to be so outrageous it will be like watching johnny cochran defending OJ.

yosi

Some history on the UN Human Rights Council:

The Council was created by the GA in march 2006 to replace the Human Rights Commission as the UN’s main human rights body. The Commission in its early years gave the world the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the system of independent Un human rights experts that still exists today. However, the Commission became discredited over time by its poor membership and performance. In its later years, its members included such notorious human rights violators as Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan. In 2003, Libya was elected as chair. Its annual meetings ignored most of the world’s worst abuses while focusing selectively on a handful of countries. In the Commission’s last few years, a full 50 percent of its resolutions condemning specific states were against israel.

The situation had so deteriorated that, in march 2005, Secretary-General Annan, following a report by a high- level panel of eminent figures, declared the Commission to be suffering from a fatal “credibility deficit”—one that was casting “a shadow on the reputation of the United nations system as a whole.” Mr. Annan cited the Commission’s declining professionalism and decried a reality where countries sought membership of the Commission “not to strengthen human rights but to protect themselves against criticism or to criticize others.” The Commission, said Annan, was undermined by the “politicization of its sessions” and the “selectivity of its work.” Accordingly, Mr. Annan proposed far-ranging reform and the replacement of the Commission with a new body. When the Council began its inaugural year, Mr. Annan explicitly urged the Council not to focus on israel alone.

Regrettably, the Council has failed to meet the basic standards set by Mr. Annan and its own founding resolution. The membership still includes persistent violators like China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. And unlike the Commission’s and the GA’s heavy focus on Israel, the Council in its first year focused exclusively on Israel. From June 2006 to June 2007, 100 percent of its condemnatory resolutions were against israel, making it the only country in the entire world to have been criticized by the Human Rights Council.

Maybe the reason why Israelis feel that the UN is biased against them is, well, that there is a documented bias in the UN against Israel. I'm just saying, Israel commits human rights abuses, but 100% is more than a little uneven in terms of attention.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

Some history on the UN Human Rights Council:

The Council was created by the GA in march 2006 to replace the Human Rights Commission as the UN’s main human rights body. The Commission in its early years gave the world the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the system of independent Un human rights experts that still exists today. However, the Commission became discredited over time by its poor membership and performance. In its later years, its members included such notorious human rights violators as Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan. In 2003, Libya was elected as chair. Its annual meetings ignored most of the world’s worst abuses while focusing selectively on a handful of countries. In the Commission’s last few years, a full 50 percent of its resolutions condemning specific states were against israel.

The situation had so deteriorated that, in march 2005, Secretary-General Annan, following a report by a high- level panel of eminent figures, declared the Commission to be suffering from a fatal “credibility deficit”—one that was casting “a shadow on the reputation of the United nations system as a whole.” Mr. Annan cited the Commission’s declining professionalism and decried a reality where countries sought membership of the Commission “not to strengthen human rights but to protect themselves against criticism or to criticize others.” The Commission, said Annan, was undermined by the “politicization of its sessions” and the “selectivity of its work.” Accordingly, Mr. Annan proposed far-ranging reform and the replacement of the Commission with a new body. When the Council began its inaugural year, Mr. Annan explicitly urged the Council not to focus on israel alone.

Regrettably, the Council has failed to meet the basic standards set by Mr. Annan and its own founding resolution. The membership still includes persistent violators like China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. And unlike the Commission’s and the GA’s heavy focus on Israel, the Council in its first year focused exclusively on Israel. From June 2006 to June 2007, 100 percent of its condemnatory resolutions were against israel, making it the only country in the entire world to have been criticized by the Human Rights Council.

Maybe the reason why Israelis feel that the UN is biased against them is, well, that there is a documented bias in the UN against Israel. I'm just saying, Israel commits human rights abuses, but 100% is more than a little uneven in terms of attention.

I know you didn't just type this. So where's the link?

yosi

Are you disputing the facts?

catefrances

yosi wrote:

Are you disputing the facts?

just cite your reference yosi. its not difficult. that way we can extrapolate on the points using your reference as a jump off point for our own research.

redrock

Yosi's cut and paste is not inaccurate, though most of it deals with the Human Right's Commission and only the penultimate paragraph relates to the Council.

It is true that some of the members of this council have a less than desirable human rights record, but that includes the US. But trying to use that to deflect on the 'shortcomings' of Israel is a bit much. In the Human Rights index (ie violations by country), the four that Yosi mentions are ranked below Israel. The US is just under Cuba but before Russia....

Maybe there is a reason for this focus on Israel. What happened during and after the raid was exposed to the world. No way anyone can say it was not a breach...

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

From June 2006 to June 2007, 100 percent of its condemnatory resolutions were against israel

Though you were pretty busy during this period, what with invading Lebanon and massacring over 1000 Lebananese civilians, blowing up a Palestinian family on a beach, carrying out extra-judicial assassinations and home demolitions in defiance of international law, and an outright assault on the civilian population of Gaza during 'Operation Sumer Rain'.


http://www.btselem.org/english/press_re ... 061228.asp
28 Dec. 06: 683 people killed in the conflict in 2006

B'Tselem publishes its 2006 annual statistics. This past year, we witnessed a deterioration in the human rights situation in the Occupied Territories , particularly in the increase in civilians killed and the destruction of houses and infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. At the same time, there was an improvement regarding violations of the right to life of Israeli civilians.

...According to B'Tselem's research, from January to December 27, 2006, Israeli security forces killed 660 Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and in Israel . This includes 141 minors. At least 322 of those killed did not take part in the hostilities at the time they were killed. Another 22 were targets of assassinations. In the Gaza Strip alone, since the capture of Cpl. Gilad Shalit, Israeli forces killed 405 Palestinians, including 88 minors. Of these, 205 did not participate in the fighting when killed.

Palestinians killed 17 Israeli civilians in 2006, both in the West Bank and inside Israel . This includes 1 minor. In addition, Palestinians killed 6 members of the Israeli security forces.

House Demolitions

Israel demolished 292 houses military operations in the Occupied Territories , 279 of them in the Gaza Strip. These were home to 1,769 people. Some 80 of these demolitions were conducted after the home-owners received advance warning to the demolition. In addition, Israel demolished 42 homes in East Jerusalem that were built without a permit. These were home to about 80 people.

Checkpoints and restrictions on movement

Deep within the West Bank, Israel currently maintains 54 permanent checkpoints, staffed most of the time. 12 other checkpoints are within the city of Hebron . In addition, according to UN OCHA, there are on average some 160 flying checkpoints throughout the West Bank every week. In addition to the checkpoints, the Israeli military has erected hundreds of physical obstacles such as concrete blocks, dirt piles and trenches to restrict access to Palestinian communities. Palestinians have restricted access to some 41 roadways in the West Bank . Israelis have unlimited access to these roadways.

Prisoners and Detainees

As of November, Israel held 9,075 Palestinians in custody, including 345 minors. Of these, 738 (22 minors) were held in administrative detention, without trial and without knowing the charges against them.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5951.shtml
The increase in Palestinians killed in 2006 reversed the downward trend from 2005, the year with the lowest number of both Palestinian deaths (197), and Israeli deaths (50) during this uprising. In April 2006, with Hamas taking power, Palestinian deaths climbed back to 2004 levels. From July 1 - November 3, 2006, Israel has killed an average of 93 Palestinians per month, the highest monthly average since Israel's reinvasion of the West Bank in March/April, 2002.

In 2006, unable to support the usual claim that it is responding defensively to the killing of Israelis, the Israeli government has offered various unconvincing explanations for the large numbers of Palestinians it is killing. But Israel's intensified violence seems intended to punish Palestinians for voting Hamas to office in democratic elections, and to restore Israeli self-esteem that was damaged by the failure of the war with Lebanon.

...Hamas has largely maintained a ceasefire since early 2005, even as Israel and western governments demand that Hamas renounce violence and recognize Israel, and the western media simplistically repeats that Hamas is "committed to the destruction of Israel." In the meantime, Israel is actually destroying the Palestinian people and any hopes for a Palestinian state through heightened violence and land seizure. But the world has been silent about Israeli actions.

The dominance of the Israeli narrative and of Israeli voices in the US media is one factor that allows Americans to maintain this hypocrisy. Rather than providing comparable information about both sides, Palestinian attacks and weaponry are over-emphasized, and the Israeli government line repeated. Comparative figures and analysis of the overwhelming numbers of Israeli missiles and bombs fired at Gaza and Lebanon,[6] of Israel's vast weaponry, and of the numbers of Palestinians killed, are typically harder to find.

For example, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Washington Post, three of the largest and most respected US newspapers, all describe the current crisis as beginning with the capture of an Israeli soldier, erasing history prior to June 25, 2006. Israel's heightened assault on Gaza began with heavy shelling in late March, resulting in the killing of large numbers of Palestinians in Gaza before June 25, including gruesome attacks like the June 9 shelling of a Gaza beach which killed seven members of the family of 12 year-old Huda Al Ghalia...'

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

Are you disputing the facts?

What facts? It reads like an opinion piece and I'm interested in knowing who's opinion it is. Why don't you just provide links to the articles you post?

gimmesometruth27

Byrnzie wrote:

yosi wrote:

Are you disputing the facts?

What facts? It reads like an opinion piece and I'm interested in knowing who's opinion it is. Why don't you just provide links to the articles you post?

i agree. i thought it read as an opinion piece as well.

was that from wikipedia??

yosi

What does it matter where it was from? So you can attack the author rather than the case made? And yes, perhaps there were Israeli actions during that year worthy of criticism, but are you really going to try to claim that nothing else happened in the world that would have merited the council's attention? Please! :roll:

gimmesometruth27

yosi wrote:

What does it matter where it was from? So you can attack the author rather than the case made? And yes, perhaps there were Israeli actions during that year worthy of criticism, but are you really going to try to claim that nothing else happened in the world that would have merited the council's attention? Please! :roll:

if you would have provided a link in the first place people would not be questioning you about it...

and "perhaps" is reeeeeeaaaaly stretching it, don't you think??