Champion Of Terrorist Rights

In a shocking interview with the Jerusalem Post, UN High Commissioner for Human (Arab) Rights Louise Arbour implies that Israel is more culpable than Hezbollah for civilian deaths during the Lebanon war. This despite the fact that Hezbollah intentionally targeted civilians while Israel did not. This despite the fact that Hezbollah used human shields while Israel did not. Asked by the Post if there was a distinction under human rights law between missile attacks aimed at killing civilians and military strikes in which civilians are unintentionally killed, Arbour said the two could not be equated.

"In one case you could have, for instance, a very objectionable intent - the intent to harm civilians, which is very bad - but effectively not a lot of harm is actually achieved. But how can you compare that with a case where you may not have an intent but you have recklessness [in which] civilian casualties are foreseeable? The culpability or the intent may not sound as severe, but the actual harm is catastrophic."

"According to criminal law, there is very little distinction between recklessness and intent. It is a small distinction as to whether you desire the result, or you foresee it as virtually certain and you do not care. In terms of culpability there is not a lot of difference between recklessness and intent."

"When you kill civilians virtually each time [in a military attack], at some point you have to ask yourself, 'Wasn't that foreseeable that so many would be killed?" she said. "That is where I think you start having to engage in the possibility that it is somewhat culpable."

I can only imagine that the murderers in Beirut, Damascus and Teheran are laughing themselves to pieces. The UN has laid down its mandate. Terror is not so bad simply because the results are not so impressive. Forget the intent. The results are what matters.

She claims that accidental deaths caused by Israel are more criminal that the intentional deaths caused by Hezbollah.

By the way, I am shocked that an individual who is so well versed in the law can actually claim that in criminal law there is little distinction between recklessness and intent. I guess that she cannot differentiate between manslaughter and murder. I guess she will blame her son for accidentally breaking a window in her house with a baseball more than she will blame him for intentionally breaking it with a hammer. Why? Because the baseball is "foreseeable"; it has happened before.

Interesting to note the very different approach Arbour took when she was acting as the Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal. The ITC was charged to investigate alleged war crimes perpetrated by Yugoslavia and Slobodan Milosevic. At that time, Arbour, on behalf of the ITC, formally announced that there was no basis for war crimes charges to be brought against NATO for its 78 day bombing campaign in Yugoslavia in which 500 civilians were killed and civilian infrastructure was targeted. The exoneration of NATO while Germany and Russia were working towards a diplomatic solution, combined with the announcement of Milosevic's indictment effectively gave NATO a green light to continue the bombing. The message was clear. NATO was innocent, Yugoslavia and Milosevic were not.

When Arbour was asked whether she understood the ramifications of both her exoneration of NATO and the indictment of Milosevic would have on the peace process, she answered as follows;

"I am mindful of the impact that this indictment may have on the peace process," and although indicted individuals are "entitled to the presumption of innocence until they are convicted, the evidence upon which this indictment was confirmed raises serious questions about their suitability to be guarantors of any deal, let alone a peace agreement."

Highly prejudicial. A peace deal would not happen because you just can't trust Slobo, even before was convicted. Let the bombing continue.

Then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright came to the same conclusion and noted that the indictments

"Make very clear to the world and the publics in our countries that this [NATO policy] is justified because of the crimes committed, and I think also will enable us to keep moving all these processes [i.e. bombing] forward".

Arbour had given her official approval to let NATO continue the bombing which was killing civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure.

If Arbour held herself to the same standards she holds the Israelis, she would most likely have herself fitted for an orange jumpsuit.

In her never ending quest to vilify Israel, Arbour knows no boundaries. She visits the relatives of dead terrorists while refusing to meet the relatives of kidnapped Israelis. She is willing to hang the victims and exonerate the criminals. Louise Arbour is truly a shining star of the UN.

H/T to The Emperor’s New Clothes

Linked to Woman Honor Thyself Stop The ACLU Right Wing Nation 123beta

Don Surber