UN Rights Council Condemns Israeli Offensive In Gaza

[tekisui]

Source: AFP

GENEVA (AFP) — The UN Human Rights Council on Monday adopted a resolution condemning Israel's offensive in the Gaza Strip and accusing it of "grave" human rights violations against Palestinians.

The resolution setting up a fact-finding mission to investigate Israeli violations against Palestinians was passed after a split opened up between Western countries and the others over the wording.

Thirty-three African, Asian, Arab and Latin American countries voted for the resolution. Thirteen European states abstained, while Canada was the only country to vote against.

The 47 member states in the UN's human rights assembly normally take their decisions by consensus.

Some Western countries said the resolution put forward by Arab and African states was too one-sided and failed to clearly recognise the role of rocket attacks launched by Palestinian militant in triggered the offensive.

The resolution released by the UN Council "strongly" condemned the Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip, saying it had "resulted in massive violations" of the human rights of Palestinians.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g5WJYV-fltEjKhSXM_EC2at92HeQ

_____________________________________________________________________

The Human Rights Council's 47 members voted 33 in favor and 1against the resolution that also accuses Israel of systematically destroying Palestinian infrastructure and of targeting civilians and medical facilities.

European Union countries abstained and Canada voted against the resolution.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=64836

[cali]

1. Unfortunately the UNHRC has little credibility - and that's entirely

their own doing. There's a reason that European countries abstained- and it's NOT support of Israeli actions.

[peacetalksforall]

2. This vote is not a surprise. Canada leaders lock step with the U.S. and Israel leaders.

Where is Australia. New Zealand. And Europe is not a surprise. All white partners Intelligence partners. And some of them are tightly knit propaganda partners. In for the oil and their version of a one world.

[peacetalksforall]

3. Unfortunately, the US, Israel, UK, France, Canada have little credibility.

[cali]

4. Sorry, that's just wishful thinking

in terms of the global politics, the U.S. is still a major power. The UNHRC has not done a good job. It's a shame.

[iconicgnom]

7. military/economic power doesn't equate to "credibility".

[LeftishBrit]

5. Whereas China, Russia and Saudi Arabia do have credibility, I suppose?

I'm against Israel's actions here too; but talk about hypocrisy on the part of some of the members!

[iconicgnom]

8. Who suggests that they do?

[LeftishBrit]

9. Anyone who invests this organization with much credibility.

[iconicgnom]

10. They're only part of the organization, but I agree that UN organizations have a long ways to go.

However, it's important that people across the world recognize the necessity of UN councils, that there at least be a semblance of dialogue re. the most important issues of war, human and national rights, and so on. It's important that the concepts that we bring to these discussions continually broaden and deepen, and likewise for our expectations. In that sense it's a GOOD thing that we're very critical of these organizations, of how they operate and represent the issues. E.g. I don't agree with John Bolton and others who would diminish the importance of these organizations and councils, either because they don't and can't live up to some ideal or because one is ideologically opposed to communication.

[Barack_America]

6. LBN link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3686159

[Arrowhead2k1]

11. WTF is up with Canada?

They're almost as bad as neocon rethugs now.

[iconicgnom]

13. Canada is led by a conservative minority,

which in turn is led by a "reform party" type from Alta., and these are VERY right wing people (similar to Sarah Palin, for one). On the other hand, it's the nature of the case that they aren't going to be more right wing than whatever the current US gov't, since "right wing" in Canada first and foremost means "slavish to the US", amongst other things.

Canada is seen as somewhat "progressive" by some in the US primarily because of universal health care. Also, there's still a strong legacy of Lester Pearson's work on peacekeeping, tho' that was long ago.
From wiki (circa 1963):
"Pearson never had a majority in the Canadian House of Commons, but he nevertheless managed to bring in many of Canada's major social programs, including universal health care, the Canada Pension Plan and Canada Student Loans, and established a new national flag, the Maple Leaf. This was due in part to support for his minority government in the House of Commons from the New Democratic Party, led by Tommy Douglas. His legislation included instituting the 40-hour work week, two weeks vacation time and a new minimum wage."
Canada has done little that would be considered "progressive" since.

There's nothing the conservative/reform bloc would like more than to get rid of that entire legacy, but that isn't politically viable at the moment. The best they can do is chip away at it, which they do, relentlessly. People in the US should be aware of the fact that even should they introduce a half decent universal health care program, or other such "progressive" reform, the right will NEVER stop trying to end it, they'll use every trick they can imagine, and it's MUCH MUCH EASIER to put an end to such programs than it is to bring them into being.

[Behind the Aegis]

12. I am shocked!

Next they will be telling us water is wet!

In other news, Klan condemns African-Americans.

[iconicgnom]

14. Hmmm. You seem to be in your glory.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. And, sadly, you aren't in yours.

[iconicgnom]

15. Hmmm. You seem to be in your glory. n/t