Israeli official 'not sorry' Tutu's probe into Beit Hanun strike canceled

[Poll_Blind]

From Ha'aretz:

Israeli diplomatic sources said Monday night they were not sorry that the United Nations' fact-finding mission to investigate Israeli-Palestinian violence in Beit Hanun was canceled.

The mission, headed by Nobel laureate and former Cape Town archbishop Desmond Tutu, came to investigate the killing of 19 Palestinian civilians in Beit Hanun at the beginning of November.

--snip--

The sources said Israel wanted the mission members to enter as tourists, probably because a tourist status would not oblige Israel to recognize the mission's work. The UN, however, insisted they come as diplomats, that is, as representatives of the UN. The sources said negotiations were still in progress.

--snip--

"We canceled important commitments to make ourselves available for this task," Tutu said, adding that he had left the bedside of his wife, who was in a hospital.

--snip--

PB

[Tom Joad]

1. Another blow to human rights and fairness in the Middle East.

[Poll_Blind]

2. Yep. Not even a counterfeit message of "deep regret". n/t

PB

[Englander]

13. No point in doing even that, really.

Since the chances of it being believed are pretty non-existant. Might as well be honest, & insult,
& waste the time of one of the greatest political/moral campaigners of the last century.

Profile: Archbishop Desmond Tutu
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3743389.stm

[Solo_in_MD]

3. The UN should have chosen someone with better credentials

which would have made it harder for Israel to rebuff.

[IntiRaymi]

4. Yes, the UN should have nominated John Bolton for this job!

[idontwantaname]

5. safe to say the israeli govt has something to hide. n/t.

[Behind the Aegis]

6. Or at least someone who hadn't already proclaimed guilt.

[IntiRaymi]

7. Israel is guilty as hell.

The evidence is overwhelming.
You are only whining about the rubber stamp on what is already well known: That Israel is willfully committing gross violations of human rights.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Perhaps you should be the "investigator."

:eyes:

You would find Israel guilty no matter what was presented. Had Israel been exonerated, I am sure you would have claimed "conspiracy." But, I guess we will never know...unless the negotiations allow for a more open-minded group to investigate.

[IntiRaymi]

9. You are making a mistake.

Anthropomorphizing a country. It is a bureaucracy, not a person.
Get a grip.

[everythingsxen]

10. That may in fact be one of the single funniest arguements I have ever read on DU

IntiRaymi (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-11-06 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Israel is guilty as hell.
The evidence is overwhelming.
You are only whining about the rubber stamp on what is already well known: That Israel is willfully committing gross violations of human rights.


Behind the Aegis (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-11-06 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Perhaps you should be the "investigator."
You would find Israel guilty no matter what was presented. Had Israel been exonerated, I am sure you would have claimed "conspiracy." But, I guess we will never know...unless the negotiations allow for a more open-minded group to investigate.


IntiRaymi (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-11-06 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You are making a mistake.
Anthropomorphizing a country. It is a bureaucracy, not a person.
Get a grip.

You should do stand up comedy. You are telling BTA to get a grip for, in your words "anthropomorphizing a country", when you, minutes before (12 minutes in fact), did the exact same thing.

[Behind the Aegis]

12. And still entitled to justice and a "fair trial."

[Englander]

11. Suggestions?

Name names, please.

[UndertheOcean]

14. I think they'd prefer a bush type...

n/t

[eyl]

15. So let's see

The UN Human Right's Council - a body which, throughout it's six-month existence, has almost exculsively condemned Israel and Israel alone - after issuing a resolution condemning Israel for the incident, then chooses to send a team to investigate what happened, headed by a man who has also already condemned Israel for the incident he's supposed to be investigating.

And yet you expect Israel to welcome the team with open arms? Under the circumstances, IMO, it would take a miracle for the team to reach a conclusion fair or favorable in any way to Israel regardless of what the facts actually are. So why should Israel cooperate with them?

[idontwantaname]

16. is bribery dead?

what happened to casual persuasion or things like this? plus wouldnt it be better to just let the guy in and let him do some condemning then say gee that wasnt unique and move on? why draw out the process?