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

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??

yosi

Fine "they did" do things worthy of criticism. That in no way alters my point. The council's mandate is to cover human rights across the globe, and yet, despite violations all over the place, the council's ONLY TARGET FOR CRITICISM IS ISRAEL. If that is not a sign of bias, I don't know what is.

Commy

there is a direct correlation, almost 1:1 between US aid to a country and its level of human rights abuses.



Israel, leading the list in US aid, is no exception to that fact.

yosi

What does that have to do with anything?

gimmesometruth27

Commy wrote:

there is a direct correlation, almost 1:1 between US aid to a country and its level of human rights abuses.



Israel, leading the list in US aid, is no exception to that fact.

so then does that mean the us is indirectly funding the blockade?

i would have to agree if that is what you are saying...

i mean we are already giving them planes at a reduced cost, so we are definitely enabling their military actions..

Pepe Silvia

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e26434.htm

Israel Used 'Incredible Violence' Against Gaza Aid Flotilla, Says UN Human Rights Council

Israeli troops broke international law by storming an aid flotilla bound for Gaza, according to a UN inquiry, which found that the killings of activists on-board were comparable to "summary executions".

By Jon Swaine in New York and Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem

September 23, 2010 "The Telegraph" - - The sharply critical report found there was "clear evidence to support prosecutions" against Israel for "wilful killing" and torture committed in the raid on the flotilla on May 31. Nine activists on a Turkish ship were killed as they attempted to breach the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza.
However, Israel brushed aside the findings of the UN Human Rights Council, which it has consistently denounced as biased against the Jewish state.

A spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry accused the body of having a "politicised and extremist approach," adding: "The Human Rights Council blamed Israel prior to the investigation and it is no surprise that they condemn after."

The investigation mounted by the Council has largely been superseded by a separate inquiry launched by Ban Ki-Moon, the UN secretary general, which has won the backing of the United States, Britain and much of the international community.

This investigation, which is being headed by Geoffrey Palmer, the former prime minister of New Zealand, has yet to report its findings.

In an unprecedented move, Israel agreed to co-operate with Mr Palmer's inquiry in August, largely in an attempt to diminish the credibility of the Human Rights Council investigation.

Israel maintains that its soldiers acted in self-defence after coming under attack from activists wielding clubs, axes and metal rods.

However the report found that Israeli commandos' response to the flotilla was disproportionate and "betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality".

"The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence," the report said.

"The circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner consistent with an extralegal, arbitrary and summary execution," it added.

The 56-page report also said that the Israeli blockade was itself unlawful, because of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, meaning Israel's claim that it was entitled to use force to defend the blockade should be dismissed.

The Human Rights Council, a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly, has courted controversy for its excessive focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

While it has passed over a dozen resolutions condemning Israel since it was created in 2006, the council has been more reluctant to censure states such as Sudan, which has been accused of serious human rights violations in Darfur.

The United States withdrew from the council in 2008 but rejoined when President Barack Obama became president last year.

Israel, which has also launched its own domestic inquiry into the raid on the aid flotilla, refused to co-operate with the council's probe.

But Hamas, the Islamist group which controls Gaza, welcomed the inquiry's findings and called on the international community to take action by bringing Israeli commanders involved in the raid to trial.

The inquiry was completed by Karl Hudson-Phillips, a former judge of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Desmond de Silva, a former chief prosecutor of the Sierra Leone War Crimes Tribunal, and Shanthi Dairiam, as Malaysian human rights expert.

Pepe Silvia

saw shimon peres on hannity friday or saturday....naturally he blamed the report on being anti-semetic and therefor shouldn't be believed. he went on how there are things that happen in iraq, darfur, south america....so why only focus on what happens with israel? because there's an anti-israel agenda in the un, duuuuuuuuh

Pepe Silvia

http://mondoweiss.net/2010/09/un-two-me ... -shot.html

UN: Two men killed on ‘Mavi Marmara’ were holding cameras when they were shot

by Philip Weiss on September 25, 2010

We've failed to post anything on the United Nations Human Rights Council's report issued three days ago on the Israeli raid on the Gaza flotilla last May that found that Israel had committed grave violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law. But big deal we're late--the mainstream media have largely ignored the report.

I have to read the report through. But here's the UN link. I see that the report describes the operation as disproportionate, with "unnecessary and incredible" violence, and "an unacceptable level of brutality."

And glancing at the narrative, the report finds that two of the 9 men killed in the raid, including American Furkan Dogan, were holding cameras and using them to film the Israeli invaders when they were shot. Additionally-- despite the sticks and catapults that some passengers used on the commandos-- the four people killed on the lower, bridge deck were not posing any physical threat to the raiders, who were then on the top deck, and in fact were trying to get out of the way.

Also notice the description of Gaza conditions as an unacceptable disgrace in the 21st century and the poetical language about Jewish victimhood (as I read it anyway) near the end-- Jews must find the strength to pluck from their memory rooted sorrows. Excerpts:

The Mission does not find it plausible that soldiers were holding their weapons and firing as they descended on the rope [from the helicopter]. However, it has concluded that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.... Further, the Mission finds that the Israeli accounts so inconsistent and contradictory with regard to evidence of alleged firearms injuries to Israeli soldiers that it has to reject it..

At least one of those killed [on the top deck, American Furkan Dogan] was using a video camera and not involved in any of the fighting with the soldiers....

Israeli soldiers fired live ammunition both from the top deck at passengers on the bridge deck below and after they had moved down to the bridge deck. At least four passengers were killed,73 and at least nine injured (five with firearms injuries) during this phase. None of the four passengers who were killed, including a photographer who at the time of being shot was engaged in taking photographs [Cevdet Kiliclar] and was shot by an Israeli soldier positioned on the top deck above, posed any threat to the Israeli forces. There was considerable live fire from Israeli soldiers on the top deck and a number of passengers were injured or killed whilst trying to take refuge inside the door or assisting other to do so...

The Mission is not alone in finding that a deplorable situation exists in Gaza. It has been characterized as ‘unsustainable’. This is totally intolerable and unacceptable in the 21st Century. It is amazing that anyone could characterise the condition of the people there as satisfying the most basic of acceptable standards. The parties and the international community are urged to find the solution that will address all legitimate security concern of
both Israel and the people of Palestine both of whom are equally entitled to “their place under the heavens”. The apparent dichotomy in this case between the competing right of security and the right to a decent living can only be resolved if old antagonisms are subordinated to a sense of justice and fair play. One has to find the strength to pluck from the memory rooted sorrows and to move on....

It is hoped that there will be swift action by the Government of Israel. This will go a long way to reversing the regrettable reputation which that country has for impunity and intransigence in international affairs.

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Commy wrote:

there is a direct correlation, almost 1:1 between US aid to a country and its level of human rights abuses.



Israel, leading the list in US aid, is no exception to that fact.

so then does that mean the us is indirectly funding the blockade?

i would have to agree if that is what you are saying...

i mean we are already giving them planes at a reduced cost, so we are definitely enabling their military actions..

yes. thats exactly what it means. when you enable oppressive behaviour you are indirectly responsible.

Pepe Silvia

catefrances wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Commy wrote:

there is a direct correlation, almost 1:1 between US aid to a country and its level of human rights abuses.



Israel, leading the list in US aid, is no exception to that fact.

so then does that mean the us is indirectly funding the blockade?

i would have to agree if that is what you are saying...

i mean we are already giving them planes at a reduced cost, so we are definitely enabling their military actions..

yes. thats exactly what it means. when you enable oppressive behaviour you are indirectly responsible.

weren't the white phosphorous rounds used in operation cast lead traced back to the us? technically it's illegal for the us to give aid to israel because of their secret, undeclared nuclear program and its human rights abuses against civilians with weapons we sell them

catefrances

Pepe Silvia wrote:

weren't the white phosphorous rounds used in operation cast lead traced back to the us? technically it's illegal for the us to give aid to israel because of their secret, undeclared nuclear program and its human rights abuses against civilians with weapons we sell them

illegal... its such a subjective word dont you think???