Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

[Agent Ferris]

The general use of the term "anti-Israel" around here is that is does not blindly accept what Israel says and does. You need to actually document that the summit was truly anti-Israel, not just claim it.

I take it you've never heard of the Durbin Review Conference which was explicitly anti-Zionism, tried to link Zionism to racism, and was thus necessarily Israel. But hey if you don't think it was anti-Israel then you're in good company with Hezbollah, Hamas, and Ahmadinejad, but nearly the entirety of the free world boycotted or protested the conference because of its explicitly anti-Israel theme.

But hey if you want to ignore the undeniable fact that the UNHRC is under the thumb of the Arab Bloc with a decidedly anti-Israeli bias that's your call, I and most others will continue to live here in reality. This is the ****ing council that investigated Israel in both the incursions into Gaza and Lebanon but explicitly prohibited investigations into Hezbollah and Hamas actions they don't even try to hide their bias.

That's like investigating a killing and not investigating whether or not the person who killed did so in self defense. It's a farce, a joke, a complete bloody disgrace.

 

[Apocalypse]

If they were in international waters, as long as the flotilla wasn't engaging in piracy, there was zero grounds to board the vessel. The order of blockade does not have any power in international waters. Israel should have waited until they entered the blockade region and then boarded.

Back that up.
According to international law, a ship can be boarded in international waters if its declared intention is to run a blockade and if it was warned before it.
I fear you're simply speaking in accordance with what you perhaps believe perhaps wish to be the law, but that is certainly not the law.

 

[Redress]

I take it you've never heard of the Durbin Review Conference which was explicitly anti-Zionism, tried to link Zionism to racism, and was thus necessarily Israel. But hey if you don't think it was anti-Israel then you're in good company with Hezbollah, Hamas, and Ahmadinejad, but nearly the entirety of the free world boycotted or protested the conference because of its explicitly anti-Israel theme.

But hey if you want to ignore the undeniable fact that the UNHRC is under the thumb of the Arab Bloc with a decidedly anti-Israeli bias that's your call, I and most others will continue to live here in reality. This is the ****ing council that investigated Israel in both the incursions into Gaza and Lebanon but explicitly prohibited investigations into Hezbollah and Hamas actions they don't even try to hide their bias.

That's like investigating a killing and not investigating whether or not the person who killed did so in self defense. It's a farce, a joke, a complete bloody disgrace.

And I am supposed to take your word for all that?

 

[Apocalypse]

Re: Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

Israel will accept international role in flotilla probe, officials say - CNN.com

Israeli officials said Friday they will accept international participation in their investigation into the deadly boarding of the Turkish flotilla ship destined for Gaza.​

Damn ain't that somethin?
Even Israel is "anti-Israeli"

For me this shows the lack of knowledge by you and those who thanked your post regarding Israel and regarding the international playground in general.

I shall explain:

This article you're referring to mentions an Israeli agreement to an international involvement in the Israeli investigation.
The op's article, on the other hand, is mentioning the Obama administration working towards an international investigation.
Clearly those two are two completely different investigations.
One is managed and controlled by Israeli judges and is observed by international entities, while the other is simply controlled and managed by international entities.

 

[Apocalypse]

And I am supposed to take your word for all that?

You can run your own research into the UNHRC and the Durbin conference, and I trust you'd reach the same conclusions yourself.

 

[Tashah]

And I am supposed to take your word for all that?

Perhaps you will accept mine. The US and most Western governments withdrew their representatives from the Durban II conference because it's agenda was little different than the infamous Durban I.

 

[Redress]

Perhaps you will accept mine. The US and most Western governments withdrew their representatives from the Durban II conference because it's agenda was little different than the infamous Durban I.

I am not saying either of you are wrong, only that if he is going to make such statements, he should be able to back them up with something concrete.

 

[Tashah]

I am not saying either of you are wrong, only that if he is going to make such statements, he should be able to back them up with something concrete.

Very well. Take a look...

US withdraws from Durban II - Google Search

 

[Apocalypse]

I am not saying either of you are wrong, only that if he is going to make such statements, he should be able to back them up with something concrete.

I would first ask you to back up your claim that the Israeli independent law system cannot be trusted.
It has proven itself very efficient and capable of performing independent investigations into the state's actions a countless times in the past, and I could give you craploads of references to such Israeli committees that were reaching an anti-Israeli-government conclusion.
Yet here you are simply claiming that it cannot be trusted, not offering anything to base your opinion on.

 

[Tashah]

If that isn't enough, try this...

Cascade of countries withdraw from Durban II | EuropeNews

 

[Gardener]

And I am supposed to take your word for all that?

You are supoposed to be well versed enough in the subject matter to be able to submit an informed opinion.

 

[Tashah]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week | The Weekly Standard

'We didn't endorse UN flotilla probe'
Obama administration officials deny 'Weekly Standard' report.
By JPOST.COM STAFF
06/11/2010 21:2

US officials on Friday denied reports that the Obama administration plans to support the establishment of an international UN-monitored commission to investigate last week's flotilla raid.

“We know of no resolution that will be debated at the UN on the flotilla investigation next week," one senior administration official told The Jerusalem Post. He stressed that Washington continues to support "an Israeli-led investigation into the flotilla incident that is prompt, credible, impartial, and transparent."

The official added, “We are open to different ways of ensuring the credibility of this Israeli-led investigation, including international participation, and have been in intensive talks with our Israeli partners in the past few days on how to move forward."

Source: JPost.com

Either the Weekly Standard is in error, or the Obama administration is being less than forthright.

We shall see.

 

[justabubba]

If that isn't enough, try this...

Cascade of countries withdraw from Durban II | EuropeNews

durban (World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance) dealt with the actions of israel, which came under significant critical scrutiny
therefor, anything undertaken thereafter by the UN must be biased against israel, and has nothing to do with legitimate criticisms of israeli activities, no matter how egregious those israeli actions were

getting weary of the self indulgences bestowed on yourselves

 

[Tashah]

durban (World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance) dealt with the actions of israel, which came under significant critical scrutiny therefor, anything undertaken thereafter by the UN must be biased against israel, and has nothing to do with legitimate criticisms of israeli activities, no matter how egregious those israeli actions were getting weary of the self indulgences bestowed on yourselves

Most Western nations were shocked and stunned at the vilification and demonetization directed towards Israel by the Arab bloc at Durban I. After noting the mirror agenda for Durban II, virtually all withdrew their representatives from the Durban II farce.

 

[alexa]

From the original post:


I don't think that qualifies exactly as a "kiss your sister" investigation by only Israelis.

Hmm then maybe this

The truth that Netanyahu wishes to bring out involves the identity of the flotilla's organizers, its sources of funding and the knives and rods that were brought aboard. He does not intend to probe the decision-making process that preceded the takeover of the ship and the shortcomings that were uncovered. As far as Netanyahu is concerned, it will be enough for television channels to broadcast footage of dark-suited jurists, and politicians addressing them, to present the semblance of an "examination."

But Netanyahu's panel will have no powers, not even those of a government probe, and its proposed chairman does not believe in such a panel. In an interview to Army Radio, Tirkel said there is no choice but to establish a state committee of inquiry. He opposed bringing in foreign observers and made clear that he is not a devotee of drawing conclusions about individuals and dismissing those responsible for failures. When a Haaretz reporter confronted Tirkel about these remarks, the former justice evaded the question saying, "I don't remember what I said."

The public has a right to know - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

or the fact that one of the 'independedt' observers David Trimble is a member of the just launched 'Friends of Israel' project

Aznar, Trimble to launch new pro-Israel project. 'Friends of Israel | Jerusalem Post Newspaper | Find Articles at BNET

Does not inspire much hope.

 

[donsutherland1]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

Source: JPost.com

Either the Weekly Standard is in error, or the Obama administration is being less than forthright.

We shall see.

Tashah,

I suspect that The Weekly Standard is probably incorrect. U.S. support for an international investigation would run counter to U.S. interests, undermine the U.S.'s ability to be constructive in the peace process, set a bad legal precedent, and undercut the Administration's own previously-stated position on the issue.

 

[Agent Ferris]

durban (World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance) dealt with the actions of israel, which came under significant critical scrutiny
therefor, anything undertaken thereafter by the UN must be biased against israel, and has nothing to do with legitimate criticisms of israeli activities, no matter how egregious those israeli actions were

getting weary of the self indulgences bestowed on yourselves

It wasn't a conference against racism, that was the cover, it was a convention against Zionism and thus against Israel by attacking the very legitimacy of the state itself, it attempted to link Zionism with racism and accused Jews of benefitting from the holocaust, it was a racist summit under the guise of anti-racism and that is why the entire free world boycotted it or walked out in protest.

 

[Tashah]

Does not inspire much hope.

More hope than the non-existent Turkish probe. Ooops :doh

 

[Redress]

Perhaps you will accept mine. The US and most Western governments withdrew their representatives from the Durban II conference because it's agenda was little different than the infamous Durban I.

Some things I have learned this morning:

1: 9 countries boycotted Durban II. That is not most western governments.

2: the UN reaction to the words of Ahmadinejad was negative and condemning. One quote: "We call on the Iranian leadership to show much measured, moderate, honest and constructive rhetoric when dealing with issues in the region, and not this type of vile, hateful, inciteful speech."

3: One of the points of contention countries had with Durban II was that it would not deal with discrimination against gays.

4: The conference does not prove, or even offer particularly credible evidence of the UN as anti-Israel.

 

[Tashah]

4: The conference does not prove, or even offer particularly credible evidence of the UN as anti-Israel.

My deepest apologies. Shame on me for even contemplating such a blasphemy.

 

[alexa]

More hope than the non-existent Turkish probe. Ooops :doh

I thought we were discussing Obama wanting the UN to do it's own enquiry.

Turkey could not have an inquiry into what happened as Israel has almost all the evidence, though I think Turkey wanted a wider UN enquiry so it will be happy if the topic of this thread comes to fruition.

The enquiry as described by the quote and link I gave is one sided, that is why it gives little confidence, when a so called 'independent' witness is a member of a recently formed, after the flotilla attack, 'Friends of Israel, his independence of mind in this is compromised as he appears to have a bias.

I think I now understand a lot of what has gone on in threads. Israeli's or pro Israelis do not want to look at the actions of Israel in the flotilla attack. Does not sound like an enquiry to me at all. When the Chair of that inquiry further does not believe in it or in 'independent' observes it's credibility is further weakened.

 

[Redress]

My deepest apologies. Shame on me for even contemplating such a blasphemy.

This is why it is so hard to have discussions involving Israel. The over the top emotional reactions. I put some real time into looking up the claim, discovered that it was not what it was presented to be, and pointed this out. That is not the action of some one taking something as a religious belief. Out of respect to you I want and put my time into checking unsourced claims by others. I did not go into it with an assumption I was right, I went into it with the intention of learning.

What Durbin II shows is that some countries are anti-Israel. I have never claimed otherwise. It also shows that when a country attacks Israel unfairly, the UN will speak out against attacks. Since however any investigation of the actions of the Flotilla incident would not be set up as a conference, any comparison to Durbin is invalid, and using Durbin to claim that the UN is anti-Israel(something I have been called on these boards for saying I was going to wait until the facts where known before I judged a situation).

The terms anti-Israel and anti-semite and terrorist apologist are thrown out far too often around here. There is good reason to question those claims.

 

[justabubba]

My deepest apologies. Shame on me for even contemplating such a blasphemy.

apology accepted

 

[donsutherland1]

FWIW, the UN Human Rights Council has already prejudged the flotilla incident before any investigation was initiated. The UNHRC declared that it "Condemns in the strongest terms the outrageous attack by the Israeli forces against the humanitarian flotilla of ships which resulted in the killing and injuring of many innocent civilians from different countries."

If, in fact, the soldiers opening fire was in self-defense, then the incident was neither "outrageous" nor an "attack." If certain individuals onboard were seeking to provoke violence, then the flotilla was not entirely humanitarian in nature. If individuals had attacked the soldiers, then the attackers cannot be described as civilians under international law. Yet, the UNHRC rushed to judgment.

Sadly, that's par for the course. One can find the UNHRC's various pronouncements concerning the Israeli-Palestinian dispute at: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vEntity?OpenView&Start=1&Count=150&Expand=7.43.1#7.43.1

How much effort is devoted to addressing the threats posed by Hamas, Hamas' continuing to hold Cpl. Shalit and its denying the Red Cross access to him, weapons flows into the Gaza Strip, etc.? Very little. How much effort is devoted to condemning, criticizing, and incriminating Israel? The overwhelming share.

Against that backdrop, Israel cannot reasonably be expected to have any confidence in an investigation that would be placed under the auspices of an institution that has all but rushed to judgment as to the nature of the incident.

 

[alexa]

FWIW, the UN Human Rights Council has already prejudged the flotilla incident before any investigation was initiated. The UNHRC declared that it "Condemns in the strongest terms the outrageous attack by the Israeli forces against the humanitarian flotilla of ships which resulted in the killing and injuring of many innocent civilians from different countries."

If, in fact, the soldiers opening fire was in self-defense, then the incident was neither "outrageous" nor an "attack." If certain individuals onboard were seeking to provoke violence, then the flotilla was not entirely humanitarian in nature. If individuals had attacked the soldiers, then the attackers cannot be described as civilians under international law. Yet, the UNHRC rushed to judgment.

Sadly, that's par for the course. One can find the UNHRC's various pronouncements concerning the Israeli-Palestinian dispute at: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vEntity?OpenView&Start=1&Count=150&Expand=7.43.1#7.43.1

How much effort is devoted to addressing the threats posed by Hamas, Hamas' continuing to hold Cpl. Shalit and its denying the Red Cross access to him, weapons flows into the Gaza Strip, etc.? Very little. How much effort is devoted to condemning, criticizing, and incriminating Israel? The overwhelming share.

Against that backdrop, Israel cannot reasonably be expected to have any confidence in an investigation that would be placed under the auspices of an institution that has all but rushed to judgment as to the nature of the incident.

I doubt if anyone really expects to get an inquiry which would satisfy. This seems to be the EU approach

European officials made plain that they were concentrating on the measures to ease the blockade rather than on the inquiry into the attack. The aim was to make a repeat of the attack on the flotilla impossible.

EU raises doubts on Gaza raid inquiry but hopes grow of blockade easing | World news | The Guardian

It was an international flotilla and people were killed. I think that there would always have been a strong reaction regardless of who it was. Obviously the situation would be a bit different depending on who it was. That is inevitable in politics. If it was China over Tibet for instance, people might demand an enquiry but there would not be one.

However it was an International Flotilla of people from countries who are in reality Israel's friends. They have to respond and demand an enquiry.