Cops welcomed with smoke bombs and flares Dublin Pride 19:57 Jul 14 0 comments Gemma O'Doherty: The speech you never heard. I wonder why? 05:28 Jan 15 0 comments A Decade of Evidence Demonstrates The Dramatic Failure Of Globalisation 15:39 Aug 23 1 comments Thatcher's " blind eye" to paedophilia 15:27 Mar 12 0 comments Total Revolution. A new philosophy for the 21st century. 15:55 Nov 17 0 comments more >>Blog Feeds
Anti-EmpireNorth Korea Increases Aid to Russia, Mos... Tue Nov 19, 2024 12:29 | Marko Marjanovi? Trump Assembles a War Cabinet Sat Nov 16, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi? Slavgrinder Ramps Up Into Overdrive Tue Nov 12, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi? ?Existential? Culling to Continue on Com... Mon Nov 11, 2024 10:28 | Marko Marjanovi? US to Deploy Military Contractors to Ukr... Sun Nov 10, 2024 02:37 | Field Empty
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail?supporter? Anthony Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland |
Mary Robinson, War Criminal?
national |
miscellaneous |
news report
Monday May 27, 2002 23:56 by Michael Rubin - Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations
An appropriate career move On September 12, 1997, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Mary Robinson as the United Nation's High Commissioner for Human Rights. On paper, Robinson is as eminently qualified as any other U.N. political appointee. For seven years, she served as president of Ireland. The website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights trumpets Robinson's "outstanding legal qualifications" and her long record in human rights. Chief among Robinson's accomplishments are her attendance and participation in many United Nations conferences and her travel. The official website crows, "Ms. Robinson was the first head of State to visit Rwanda in the aftermath of the genocide there. While in Rwanda, she met representatives of, and was briefed by, agencies on the ground, as well as by the United Nations Human Rights Monitors. She was also the first Head of State to visit the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia." What the United Nations trumpets as qualifications look like little more than empty grandstanding to anyone caught outside the U.N.'s labyrinthine bureaucracy. Nevertheless, the International Criminal Tribunal might be an appropriate place for Robinson to return, albeit for a slightly longer visit. The trouble starts with Robinson's tenure as president of Ireland. During the last four years of Robinson's tenure, the European Union donated large sums of money to the Palestinian Authority. Ireland even held the presidency of the European Union for the second half of 1996. During this time, Arafat siphoned large amounts of European aid money away to pay for terror. Robinson can plead ignorance, but documents seized during the recent Israeli incursion into the West Bank revealed that the Palestinian Authority spent approximately $9 million of European Union aid money each month on the salaries of those organizing terror attacks against civilians. While European officials like Robinson looked the other way, the Palestinian Authority regularly converted millions of dollars of aid money into shekels at rates about 20 percent below normal, allowing the Palestinian chairman to divert millions of dollars worth of aid into his personal slush fund. Remember the young boys, students, and old women killed in the rash of Palestinian bus bombings back in 1996? It's hard to believe that European politicians are so incompetent than to notice that Palestinian violence grew in proportion to their aid money. European funds enabled Arafat to purchase $50 million worth of sophisticated Iranian weaponry for use against civilians. While the world knows the story of the Karine-A's interception last January, few remember that the ship represented only one of many Palestinian weapons schemes (Remember the Calypso? The Santorini? The smuggling tunnels from Egypt into Gaza?) European leaders may claim ignorance, but Robinson should be the first to admit that indirect responsibility is no mitigation for war crimes. The sad fact is that aid given by Robinson helped build the organizations that now kill children at pizzerias, teenagers at discos, and pensioners at Passover seders, not to mention numerous American citizens along the way. Robinson's tenure at the United Nations has been little better than her record as Ireland's president. She was the driving force behind the Orwellian "World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance." At the conference, Robinson presided over little more than an intellectual pogrom against Jews and Israel. She remained largely silent as the preliminary Asian Regional Conference in Tehran (to which Israel was excluded) inserted blatantly racist statements into the conference agenda. She failed to speak out when, on the grounds of the U.N. conference itself, the Arab Lawyers Union distributed pamphlets depicting hook-nosed Jews as Nazis spearing Palestinian children. In the same tent where nongovernmental organizations depicted Israel as a "racist, apartheid state," were distributed fliers entitled, "What if Hitler had won?" The answer: "There would be no Israel, and no Palestinian bloodshed." While Robinson takes no responsibility for enabling the greatest single display of anti-Semitism in 50 years, she failed to lift a finger when the South African government denied visas to European anti-slavery activists critical of human rights in Islamic nations like the Sudan, where over two million people have perished in a war since the regime in Khartoum declared a jihad against non-Muslims in 1983. Either black Sudanese are less worthy of concern to the human-rights commission, or it would be inexcusably politically incorrect to actually protest human-rights! violations conducted in the name of Islam. Robinson's post-Durban record is little better. On April 15, Robinson's commission voted on a decision that condoned suicide bombings as a legitimate means to establish Palestinian statehood (six European Union members voted in favor including, not surprisingly, France and Belgium). The vote came after Robinson initiated a drive to become a fact finder to investigate the now-famous massacre in Jenin (also known as "the massacre that never happened"). Curiously, in the months preceding Israel's incursion into the U.N. refugee camp in Jenin, suicide bombers launched from the camp wearing explosives likely bought with European money killed more than 100 Israeli civilians. However, for Robinson, a massacre is the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians in a war zone (47 Palestinian militants and 23 Israel soldiers also died). The deaths of more than 100 Jewish civilians by suicide bombers is worthy of little more than deafening silence interrupted by an occasional pithy statement of moral equivalence. The world still waits for Robinson to use her bully pulpit to call for an investigation of the terrorist murder of Jews (but then again, such an inquiry might lead uncomfortably close to UNRWA and European Union officials). Of course it's farcical to believe that Robinson will ever be brought before the International Criminal Tribunal, or that she even should be. With her double standards, amazing ability to look the other way, and her record at the Human Rights Commission, Robinson has done more than any other international official to demonstrate that international courts, commissions, and agencies are more about politics than ethics, human rights, or morality, and therefore should never the legitimacy of U.S. endorsement. The charge of indirect responsibility for crimes against humanity is a reasonable charge so long as it is levied against those whom the chattering classes in Europe wish to condemn. Otherwise, dozens of Dutch peacekeepers would be in prison now for handing countless Muslim men and boys to Serb gunmen in a so-called U.N. safe haven. U.N. peacekeepers might be defending their actions in The Hague for working feverishly to avoid taking any action in Rwanda as all hell broke loose. UNIFIL observers might need to explain under oath why they helped cover up Hezbullah's kidnapping of Israeli soldiers from across a border the secretary general himself certified. Speaking of the secretary general, he might wish to explain, at least as a witness, why he saw fit to meet with and legitimize Hezbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah just two months after Nasrallah declared, "Jews invented the legend of the Nazi atrocities." UNICEF director Carol Bellamy might want to explain why slaves (oops.. " abductees" in U.N. and E.U. parlance: We mustn't antagonize the Sudanese government) liberated by UNICEF in Sudan never returned home, but ended up dead at government check points a day after UNICEF representatives crowed triumphant and foreign journalists departed. Then again, with UNICEF workers in West Africa trading emergency food and medical assistance for child sex, why question a few dead Sudanese so long as the photo-op was successful? The European Union and the United Nations are sick with self-righteousness, moral equivalence, and appeasement, but Mary Robinson is just one symptom. Worthy international causes have been hijacked for narrow political agendas. Accountability has become a dirty word. And looking the other way, especially regarding terrorism, has become a form of art. But then again, why reform if bashing Israel and sponsoring forums to promote anti-Semitism can reinforce your credentials in the eyes of your peers? |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (11 of 11)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11Sharon is by any defination of law,a war criminal and the hysterical screaming of hard right zionists cannot change what people see for themselves. Illegal and brutal occupation of another's land,media overkill by propagandists. Suggest you read naom Chomsky and the many other Jewish intellectuals who are as appalled by brutal occupation of palestine.
Utter nonsense, very poor propaganda, I could critise Mary Robinson on some issues but a war criminal, crazy. Incidentally who supplied the F-16's, the Apaches and other weapons that were used in Jenin ?
I'm no great fan of Mary Robinson, but the writer of the above article hasn't got a clue. The position of President of Ireland is purely a titular one. The President has very little power. He or she may refer legislation to the Council of State if s/he believes it may be unconstitutional. But as for having a say in EU matters the President of Ireland has none whatsoever. The President of Ireland must get permission from the Irish Government to make a speech of political import or to travel outside the country. So, even accepting the writer's demented claims, which I do not, there would be no responsibility whatsoever on the former Irish President for actions over which she had no say or control.
As for EU funding to Palestine, I don't think they gave half enough and it pales into absolute significance to the massive funding given openly for weapons to Israel by the United States government. Ariel Sharon is at this time the worlds No.1 terrorist and not far behind him is George W. Bush. Guess we'll never see the likes of them before tribunals which are set up not for war criminals, but for people who buck the international financial and banking arrangements of modern global capitalism.
Person or persons unknown are bombarding Indymedia.ie with hardcore Zionist propaganda which contains no news whatsoever. I want to know why the site is publishing this shit? It is pure opinion and gets more ridiculous by the day (see above). Apart from the fact that it's not original material, just copied from idealogue sites.
It's not to invite accusations of censorship to suggest that Indymedia.ie weed out stuff that contains no news content. I find it disturbing that any group of hardcore right-wing spammers are targetting our little site when they leave most of the other Indymedia sites alone, the least we can do if stop giving them an outlet for their hatred.
In response to Sean, I think we should publish this material for two reasons:
The peer review system works well on Indymedia.ie - articles like this one don't go unchallenged and the responses are quite often v. effective. Seeing an argument refuted is good.
Indymedia can't censor on the basis of political bias - since nearly everything posted can be said to have a bias, this means the site would have to take a political stance - which is against the principles of open publishing.
If it's abusive / racist / spam it does get deleted - if, like this, it's nonsense then the comments deal with it.
(Just my opinion)
If you criticise Israel you're anti-jewish. What a way to avoid responsibility. Following on from that line of argument, criticism of the Stormont Government during the 1960's was anti Protestant and criticism of the republic's government was anti-catholic.
Sometimes, you just can't win.
Sean, if you want to set up a left wing site, go get some webspace and work on it yourself.
In the meantime, this is Indymedia. We have enough trouble with actual spam and racist abuse. We get long and copied articles from both sides re the Middle East. Are you foolish enough to suggest that we should screen out one side of the argument?
The editorial group has already started to hide articles that are cross-posted, i.e. sent to all the newswires across the globe. We also try to discourage copying of articles from other websites IRRESPECTIVE OF THE CONTENT. You argue that the article is irrelevant, based in part on your objections to the political content. This is the road to Indymedia becoming a propaganda machine.
If you don't like the content, use the comments link. Don't just close your eyes and hope that some all-powerful editor will take it away.
a) The EU gave $9m in aid to the PA, much of it used for terrorism, you say. How about the billions of US dollars that the Israelis spend on terrorism each year?
b) If the Israelis are allowed to purchase arms from the US, Britain, etc, then surely the PA is allowed to buy arms from Iran. Morally, there is no difference...
c) at least 20 of the 52 Palestinians known to have been killed in Jenin were civilians, not seven...
d) The reason the Palestinians are killing Israelis is because the Zionist state has stolen their land, their sons and their dignity. The reason the Israelis are killing Palestinians is to prolong the illegal occupation of Palestine and to keep the Palestinian population subservient. Which cause is just and which is oppression???
The above article claims to be from the The Leonard Davis Institute For International Relations, whose site is at http://davis.huji.ac.il/
No sign of this article in their online record of publications, although the ones they do have up seem to keep within accepted U.S./Israeli doctrinal limits, with plenty of mentions of Israeli 'peacemaking'.
As to the idea we should delete it, that's foolish. Quite apart from the idea (adequately demonstrated here) that peer review will give quite a wide scope of context and discussion, there is the issue of free speech, which must be guaranteed to all if it is to be truly free in any way. Ideally the racist posts and spam should be left too.
OK, we have peer review and we have loads of principles - but leaving spam and racism, IMHO, is silly.
I observed the death of usenet under the weight of porn site spam and other 'noise'. This site has guidelines - they are to remove 'noise' and leave any remaining signal.
The rules are we don't try to influence the signal, by deleting something because of what it says, but we do make it clearer by deleting the abuse and the noise that stops it being worth reading this.
Another rule is that this discussion (about what to leave / delete) has to be ongoing and has to be public - or else you're just another media cabal.
See
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-ireland-newswire/
or join
http://lists.indymedia.org/listinfo/imc-ireland-editorial
to say your piece.
Otherwise, in a nice non-abusive manner, feel free to show people like the above poster the error of their ways.
C.
one of Indymedia.ie
Terrorists or Freedom Fighters?
Words still mean something...