Beach deaths: No int'l probe

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday rejected calls for an international inquiry into a blast on a Gaza beach nearly two weeks ago in which eight Palestinians were killed.

"We will never agree to become subject to an investigation by international bodies," Olmert told ministers during a weekly cabinet meeting.

Israel denied any responsibility after the deadly June 9 incident in which seven members of the same family were killed while picnicking on the beach in the northern Gaza Strip.

An internal military inquiry into the incident, ordered by defence minister Amir Peretz, absolved Israel of any involvement.

But Palestinians and international bodies insist the blast was caused by an Israeli shell, as the Israeli army regularly bombards northern Gaza in an effort to stop Palestinian rocket fire.

Despite the criticism, Olmert rejected calls for an international inquiry although he has previously expressed regret for the civilian deaths."

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1953601,00.html

[jody]

1. Israel opposes investigation by international bodies but wants other

countries to submit. That’s hypocrisy.

[Poll_Blind]

2. This is partly why Israel will never have a vote at the U.N. or...

...get that seat on the Security Council they want so badly. Olmert has made it very clear that Israel is above International Law. The United States is a little more polished in its approach (surprisingly) but the bottom line is the same.

This is why Danny Gillerman loves John Bolton so much: Both the U.S. and Israel currently have very little respect for International Law.

If Israel wants to have a place at the table of international communities it should start acting like it gives a damn about international opinion. It's not a complex formula but one that conservative Israeli governments really have a hard time even paying lip service to.

PB

[Tom Joad]

4. So what is "progressive" about supporting these policies again?

Bolton approach to dismissing international law, and acting like they are above it... how and when can that be considered "progressive"?

Is it reactionary when Bolten, a Bush appointee does it, and then progressive when a Olmert appointee does it?

[Poll_Blind]

7. You will find more than a few here who will argue just that.

  The most charitable way to describe it is chimerical. However after other things, like the dehumanization of one of the most beloved living Democratic presidents more than once in this forum by longtime posters I am more than a little perplexed.

PB

[Behind the Aegis]

5. the other part...anti-Semitism

"If Israel wants to have a place at the table of international communities it should start acting like it gives a damn about international opinion."

Perhaps the international community can start showing respect for the country and take on the bigot countries that introduce (and sometimes pass) pointless resolutions in order to castigate Israel for some of the EXACT same shit they do!

Israel has a poor relationship with the UN based on it prior history of anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic attitudes!

[Poll_Blind]

9. You certainly have an arguable point there. Especially with the...

...inability to gain admittance to the Asian Group which is, more specifically, a reflection of certain Arab countries' opinions but not convincingly damning of the entire U.N. Being a frequent visitor to JewishVirtualLibrary, I imagine that other, broader, accusations may have similar credence.

However Israel's behavior in the Occupied Territories, among other things, is inexcusable. Conflating resolutions against that behavior with real instances of anti-Israel bias serves and persuades very few.

PB

[Tom Joad]

3. Israel does not recognize international law. It is outside that

jurisdiction.

It never signed nuclear non-proliferation treaty. No weapons inspection for this country. Yet it has a massive nuke arsenal. Another example of being outside international norms.

Is it time for sanctions? Damn right! If nations will not enforce international law, then we the people must do it ourselves.

[Behind the Aegis]

6. ...

:eyes:

[cali]

8. Then Israel should

expect reasonable people to reject the results of their investigation, and suffer the consequences of even greater suspicion.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. perhaps...

Personally, I wish there had been an international response from the get-go. However, initially, the PA didn't want to cooperate, nor did it want an investigation. That 'sentiment' has since changed. Why?

Here is what I believe would happen with an international review, at this point...

One: Israel is found "guilty" and the whole 'blame Israel' cycle starts anew.

Two: Israel is found "innocent" and there are cries of impartiality and "Israel somehow forged evidence to clear themselves."

Three: Both sides are blamed (an Israeli missile hitting a Hamas' mine). Israel is still to blame and little, if anything, will be said to condemn the other guilty party.

In all three scenarios, no matter who is to "blame," it will be Israel that bears the brunt of it. Meanwhile, this horrific tragedy is simply grist for the gleaming fangs of the anti-Israelis.

[Waya]

11. Ha, imagine my surprise..........

:puke:

[Englander]

12. 'Serbia with nukes'. n/t