Moral clarity: UN ‘Human Rights’ Council votes 29-1 to investigate Israel’s “war crimes”
posted at 8:01 pm on July 24, 2014 by Guy Benson
…with 17 abstentions, including several from our courageous European allies. The single “no” vote? The United States of America. Thank you, Samantha Power. Seriously. For all of the (deserved) “voting present” snark conservatives have directed at President Obama, his administration took a stand against the UN’s self-parodic madness and deep moral depravity last night. The Obama White House’s record on Israel has been the worst in recent memory, but even they have standards below which they won’t stoop. Then again, the only reason our delegation was present to vote ‘no’ is that Obama insisted that we join this farcical body, lending it woefully undeserved legitimacy. Our participation on the Council has featured such indignities as prostrating ourselves before a merry-go-round of crackpot regimes as they lectured us about imagined human rights “abuses.” Last night’s resolution approved an international inquiry into Israel’s supposed “war crimes” in Gaza It did not mention Hamas. Not once. Here’s the ignominious scorecard, courtesy of UN Watch:
The Brits, French and Germans couldn’t be bothered to unambiguously dissent against this sham. Slow clap, guys. Well done. Meanwhile, scrupulous defenders of human rights — including China, Cuba, Pakistan, Russia (!), Saudi Arabia and Venezuela — tripped over each other to vote in the affirmative. That’s right, all of those nations occupy seats on the United Nations’ human f—ing rights council. And in case you were curious, Iran and Syria (!!) were totally on board, too — though North Korea was evidently unavailable for comment. One of the few voices of sanity in this unhinged debate belonged to UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer, who used his testimony to absolutely lay into the gross hypocrisy and double standards at play. I challenge you to endure the stomach-turning low-light reel of complete rubbish at the beginning of the clip:
Mr. President, I turn now to the resolution upon which this Council will soon vote. The text before us denounces Israel, denies its right to self-defence, and disregards Hamas war crimes. We ask: why does this Council refuse to say that which was said only two weeks ago by the Palestinian ambassador himself? In an extraordinary moment of candor, Palestinian Ambassador Ibrahim Khraishi admitted, on Palestinian TV, that “each and every” Palestinian missile launched against Israeli civilians constitutes “a crime against humanity.” And that, by contrast, Israel’s own response actions in Gaza “followed the legal procedures” because, as Hamas spokespersons admitted on TV, “the Israelis warned them to evacuate their homes before the bombardment; but, “as for the missiles launched from our side, we never warn anyone about where these missiles are about to fall or about the operations we carry out.” Can any UN entity, or any individual, be truly for human rights when they refuse to say that which was said by the Palestinian ambassador himself? Is it possible that the true purpose of this session is to silence the true victims and voices of human rights around the world by deflecting attention from the world’s worst abuses?
Later in his remarks, Neuer was interrupted by Egypt’s representative, setting off this skirmish:
President of UNHRC Session: We have a point of order. Egypt, you have the floor.
Egypt: Mr. President, I think we are meeting today for the special session to discuss the current crisis in Gaza and the violations committed within this crisis. So, I don’t see why we have a reason to discuss other issues relating to human rights situations on other countries.
United States of America: We think it is relevant to the subject under debate, and therefore you should allow the NGO to continue to speak.
Iran: We fully support the point of order made by Egypt.
Canada: We urge you to allow the NGO to complete their intervention, which is relevant to the discussions at hand.
Israel: It is important that civil society participate in this debate, and we request that you allow this NGO to continue.
Venezuela: We support the point of order made by Egypt.
Palestine: This is not a point of order, but more a clarification. The speaker will continue along the same lines if the speaker is not stopped. I would ask you not to waste any time on this so we can conclude this meeting in good time.
Cuba: It is inconceivable that a NGO should be able to come to this Council to distract us with the little time we have to debate an issue which is of such crucial importance as the genocide being committed currently against the Palestinian people.
When Neuer mentioned the Assad regime’s murder of nearly 2,000 Palestinians, Syria’s delegate objected, requesting that this insolent truth-telling be immediately silenced. Neuer regained the floor and closed with this barb:
“Let the world note that in a session purportedly on Palestinian human rights, the government of Syria objected to us mentioning the 1800 Palestinians that they starved and murdered.”
And once again, your final score: 29-1-17. A disgrace.