Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ article on UN’s Gaza report strains to demonstrate equivalence in suffering

on 42 Comments

The UN Human Rights Council has issued its report on last summer’s war in Gaza, and the New York Times story about it just went up: “U.N. Report on Gaza Finds Evidence of War Crimes by Israel and by Palestinian Militants.”

The Times article is filled with numbers, but there is one conspicuously missing statistic in Jodi Rudoren’s quick summary of the long-awaited U.N. report. While she points out that 2251 Palestinians died, she leaves out the numbers of Israeli dead: 72.  (Of these, 67 were Israeli soldiers.)

The Times fails to fill the picture in because doing so would have undermined the article’s strenuous effort to equate Israeli and Palestinian war crimes.

In the same vein, the article fails to note the starkly different numbers of children killed during the conflict — more than 500 Palestinians, and one Israeli — but it enthusiastically enumerates the number of Israeli air strikes and the number of Palestinian rockets launched, as if the attacks were equivalent:

Along with more than 6,000 Israeli airstrikes on Gaza, the report counted 4,881 rockets and 1,753 shot by Palestinians toward Israel between July 7 and Aug. 26.

By my rough count, the article includes six paragraphs that are pro-Israel/designed to undermine the report:

Israeli officials have since pointed to what they see as prejudgments in the commission’s founding resolution, which “condemns in the strongest terms the widespread, systematic and gross violations of international human rights and fundamental freedoms” involved in the “Israeli military assault” on Gaza, saying it “involved disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks.”. .

Naftali Bennett, Israel’s far-right education minister, went further, calling it “a report with blood on its hands,” and Avigdor Lieberman, the ultranationalist former foreign minister, said “the picture will always be one-sided” and “parts of the facts there are simply not true.”

These six paragraphs actually come before most of the seven paragraphs that do talk exclusively about Israel’s crimes.  In other words, the Times tries to discredit the U.N. human rights report before telling the reader what is actually in it.

The two photos that accompany the article also try to create more fake “balance” — one showing each side’s suffering. Beit Hanoun reduced to rubble, Israelis taking refuge in a concrete pipe.

Again, though, no accounting of how many children/civilians died on each side.

Palestinian and Israeli children were “savagely affected by the events,” the report said in a distinct effort at evenhandedness, adding that children on both sides “suffered from bed-wetting, shaking at night, clinging to parents, nightmares and increased levels of aggressiveness.”

James North

James North is a Mondoweiss Editor-at-Large, and has reported from Africa, Latin America, and Asia for four decades. He lives in New York City.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

42 Responses

  1. on June 22, 2015, 10:46 am

    Just so consistently and massively dishonest when it comes to Israel. What do these hasbarists tell themselves that allows them to operate in such a manner?

    • amigo on June 22, 2015, 11:47 am

      It is too bad the NYT does not get the same severe drubbing for it,s biased reporting on the I/P issue ,it received from Irish people who read it,s outlandish article which attempted to place the blame for the Berkeley accident on the students by focusing on a few instances where some students on previous J1 trips went a bit crazy.

      The NYT is hardly the flavour of the month in political or social circles in Ireland.What is notable is two of the top honchos at the NYT are Irish (by name at least) namely , Margeret Sullivan–public editor and Eileen Murphy–Corporate communications V,P. Interesting they were sent out to calm the waters on the Irish sea.

      It is easy to understand why the NYT always prints lop sided articles that favour Israel.

      The three top people a t the times are Jewish , two of them Ashkenazi Jews.Arthur Salzberger , (Chairman) , Micheal Golden ( Vice Chairman ) and Andrew Rosenthal , (Editorial page Editor).

      I know , I am counting Jews but it is hard to discount the facts in the case of the NYT when trying to understand their bias in favour of Israel.

      I could be wrong and these three folks are of no relevance but I am not ready to make that leap, quite yet.

      • CigarGod on June 23, 2015, 9:14 am

        Don’t be shy about it, Amigo…and no need to aplogize.
        Dishonesty, criminal propaganda, that aids and abets war crimes…should be called out, no matter who is doing it.

  2. a blah chick on June 22, 2015, 10:55 am

    “…she leaves out the numbers of Israeli dead: 72.”

    I’m convinced that the actual count of Israeli casualties is much higher. During the Gaza war I saw a report that they had over 700 people in hospital at one time. They’ve lied about everything else so why wouldn’t they lie about this?

    • Robert Brooks on June 23, 2015, 9:06 am

      The vast majority of those cases were from “shock,” and a few heart attacks .

    • Kay24 on June 23, 2015, 10:44 pm

      Out of the 72 only a few were civilians, according to the UN report.

      I agree they have a nasty habit of lying. The first thing that comes out of their mouths is a lie, then when they are caught, they make lame excuses and give a weak apology when forced to do so.

  3. NickJOCW on June 22, 2015, 11:06 am

    They probably also imagine they are in line with the DOS statement on the subject a couple of weeks back.

    MR RATHKE: …the United States strongly opposed the creation of the Gaza commission of inquiry. There is unfortunately a long history of anti-Israeli bias in UN resolutions and mechanisms, including at the Human Rights Council, which persists in an unbalanced focus on Israel by singling it out with a permanent agenda item, for example. So we’ve opposed the commission of inquiry reports – the creation of the commission of the inquiry, excuse me.

    However, it is one thing to oppose the creation of the inquiry and quite another to question its findings. The report is and will be covered extensively elsewhere, particularly in Europe, and few if any media reports are likely to follow the NYT into that particular cul-de-sac.

  4. Donald on June 22, 2015, 11:34 am

    On the slightly positive side, they did allow comments on this article.

    • on June 22, 2015, 12:30 pm

      They didn’t allow mine.

      • jenin on June 22, 2015, 6:01 pm

        i also tried to post several comments–mostly in response to other readers’ comments, but none were posted

      • echinococcus on June 23, 2015, 3:47 am

        Well, you can’t really fault them –MW has similar habits. Rules or no rules, the owner decides.

      • Donald on June 23, 2015, 6:05 pm

        I didn’t check to see I mine went through. In the past they posted some, but not all. But I have seen some really good comments from others go through, though the NYT never picks the best comments as its favorite– they usually favor boring bland stuff along with defenses of Isael.

  5. David Green on June 22, 2015, 1:56 pm

    I agree of course that this was an effort at faking balance. But it’s also telling that they picked those 2 photos, which clearly undermine that effort, consciously or unconsciously, except for the most hardened supporters of Israel.

  6. Donald on June 22, 2015, 3:09 pm

    I haven’t read it, but from what Jerome Slater says and fro what I just read at 972, I think maybe the problem is that the NYT accurately conveyed the attitude in the report. It may be the report itself which has the false balance ( not that I object to condemning Hamas crimes, but they simply aren’t on the same level as Israel’s) .

    • NickJOCW on June 22, 2015, 3:57 pm

      Donald, You are doubtless right. The issue is similar to the Catholic concept of sin which baffles so many. Something is either a war crime or it isn’t, that’s like saying things are ‘against the Law’ or that they constitute a sin while not implying they are equal in a world where Laws and moral norms establish the progression from the relatively harmless to the death deserving. Parking in a restricted zone is against the law as is murder, and one has to be able to make that point while leaving the value judgement to a more appropriate authority.

  7. amigo on June 22, 2015, 3:53 pm

    This ought to get the zionist,s gander up.

    ” UN commission finds evidence of war crimes by Israel, Hamas during 2014 Gaza war
    Commission chair urges international community to act on conclusions of the report – primarily by supporting an investigation by the International Criminal Court in The Hague in to the status of the occupied Palestinian territories.”

    An independent United Nations commission of inquiry on Monday released its report on Operation Protective Edge, finding evidence that both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes during the war in the Gaza Strip last summer and calling the devastation caused in the Palestinian territory “unprecedented.”

    The members of the commission, which was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, hinted in their report that the upper levels of the Israeli political echelon were responsible for the policies that led to some of these war crimes.

    “The extent of the devastation and human suffering in Gaza was unprecedented and will impact generations to come” said the commission’s American chairwoman, Justice Mary McGowan Davis. “There is also on-going fear in Israel among communities who come under regular threat.”

    The chairwoman of the commission urged the international community to act on the conclusions of the report – primarily by supporting an investigation by the International Criminal Court in The Hague in to the status of the occupied Palestinian territories. ” Haaretz

    No pay wall.

    Oddly enough , the Haaretz article states the following!!.

    “The commission determined that 1,462 Palestinian civilians were killed by IDF fire during the hostilities, a third of who were children. In contrast, Hamas fired more than 4,800 rockets and over 1,700 mortar shells, which killed 6 civilians and injured 1,600 others.”

    I thought the figure was nearer to 2200 Palestinians killed and 72 on the other side of which 65 were IDF.Haaretz must have used the wrong number.1462 was the number killed in Cast Lead.

    • just on June 22, 2015, 4:09 pm

      I guess it’s difficult for them to keep the massacre numbers straight, amigo. There’s been so many, after all.

      Here’s Shalev:

      “UN report on Gaza will further embed Israelis in their isolated bunker

      The all-out diplomatic assault against the inquiry’s findings will safeguard Israel’s self-imposed repression of last summer’s atrocious carnage.

      Israel and its automatic defenders, from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on down, have come out all guns blazing against the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) report on last summer’s Gaza campaign. The report is hypocritical, biased, one sided, distorted, a capitulation to terrorist groups and a “rape of the truth”, as Netanyahu noted.

      Very few people will be reading the report, anyway – including those who will be voicing very strong opinions about its contents. Israel bashers will maintain that it proves once and for all that the Israeli army is guilty of war crimes. Israel advocates will respond that it proves once and for all that the United Nations is morally bankrupt. Most people will make do with a few headlines and tweets. …”

      no paywall here @

    • WH on June 22, 2015, 5:45 pm

      No, the 2200 figure is for all Palestinians including militants, while the 1462 are civilians.

      • on June 23, 2015, 2:50 pm

        Yes, and we all know that any male between the ages of @ 16 and 60 is automatically called a militant.

    • Shingo on June 23, 2015, 7:51 pm

      In contrast, Hamas fired more than 4,800 rockets and over 1,700 mortar shells, which killed 6 civilians and injured 1,600 others.”

      What air find sickening is that number if rockets fired is always mentioned but no mention of the number of bimbs, shells, missiles thecIsraelus fired at Gaza.

      For example, according to Mark Perry, s U.S. Defence Department report recalls that the IDF fired 7,000 artillery shells at residential areas in the district the night of Jul. 19, including 4,500 shells in the space of just seven hours.

      In other words, Israel fired as many wheels in 7 hours as all the rockets Hamas fired during the entire war. Why is this always omitted?

      • oldgeezer on June 23, 2015, 7:57 pm

        I agree. And that disparity doesn’t even factor in the great explosive capacity of Israeli munitions versus the homemade explosives largely used by Hamas. You would have to be within a few feet of a Hamas rocket to be killed. Better chance of being killed if it lands on your head from the impact than by the explosion. Probably a block away from a 1 ton bomb dropped by Israel.

      • CigarGod on June 23, 2015, 9:11 pm

        Great numbers, guys.

      • Kris on June 23, 2015, 11:30 pm

        Great points, Shingo and oldgeezer.

  8. just on June 23, 2015, 7:57 am

    “ retweeted
    Jodi Rudoren ‏@rudoren 2h2 hours ago
    Thoughtful @IlenePrusher piece on IDF’s “roof knock” and UN Gaza report …”

    A shame that Rudoren can’t write one of her own…

  9. just on June 23, 2015, 8:52 am

    worth a mention:

    “Israel withdraws video cartoon that mocked foreign correspondents

    The Israeli government has withdrawn an animated video that mocked the way in which foreign journalists covered last summer’s Gaza incursion, reports Ynet.News.

    The South Park-style video, which suggested that international correspondents who covered the conflict were guilty of naive reporting, outraged members of the Foreign Press Association (FPA).

    Posted ahead of a United Nations report on Israel’s conduct in Gaza (which was released today), it was condemned by a New York Times writer as “a ludicrous spoof of western journalists”.

    It satirises international coverage of the military incursion into Gaza by showing a foreign journalist figure being interviewed on his perspective while the reality of the situation unfolds behind him. …

    …A spokesman for Israel’s foreign ministry, Emmanuel Nahshon, said the video was “poking gentle fun at the phenomenon” of Hamas allegedly using “human shields” during fighting and only “partial reporting” of this by international media.

    But the FPA issued a statement deploring the video, saying it was “surprised and alarmed” by the video cartoon. It continued:

    “At a time when Israel has serious issues to deal with in Iran and Syria, it is disconcerting that the ministry would spend its time producing a 50-second video that attempts to ridicule journalists reporting on a conflict in which 2,100 Palestinians and 72 Israelis were killed.

    “Israel’s diplomatic corps wants to be taken seriously in the world. Posting misleading and poorly conceived videos on YouTube is inappropriate, unhelpful and undermines the ministry, which says it respects the foreign press and its freedom to work in Gaza”. …

    • can of worms on June 23, 2015, 10:03 am

      Ha. “Posting misleading and poorly conceived videos on YouTube is inappropriate.”

      No more posting poorly conceived videos for you! From now on, you can’t post another youtube video in which you peddle Zio-junky stereotypes about Palestinians (Violent), homosexuals (Fruit) and pre-modern primitives (Subway-Transportation-Deprived)!

  10. just on June 23, 2015, 3:13 pm

    Somewhat related, and by Ilan Pappé. An excerpt:

    “New evidence from 1967 war reveals Israeli atrocities

    …Evil repertoire
    This 48th commemoration of the 1967 war coincided with the 67th commemoration of the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine before and after Israel’s founding in 1948. There is more than a symbolic connection here. The evil repertoire confessed by the soldiers in the new film reminds us of the atrocities perpetrated 67 years ago on a much larger, though similarly horrific, scale.

    The 1948 atrocities were ignored by the international community and for a long time the entire Nakba was denied while the Holocaust memory seemed to provide carte blanche to Israel to continue the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

    No wonder then, when in 1967 Israel’s territorial appetite was satisfied with the occupation of the whole of historic Palestine, as well as large territories from Egypt and Syria, it was achieved with the help of similar inhumane ethnic cleansing operations of expulsions and massacres.

    There was one difference between the two chapters of atrocity committed in the two wars. In 1967, Israel was less secure about possible global, and even American, complacency in the face of its cruel methodologies on the ground and therefore attempted to hide them from prying eyes. The wall of secrecy Israel built, however, nearly cracked, when the US navy ship USS Liberty eavesdropped on the communications between the troops in the Gaza Strip on 8 June 1967, revealing probably both the summary execution of Egyptian prisoners of war and Palestinian civilians. The ship was destroyed on the same day from the air by the Israeli air force.

    Later on, the atrocities were substantiated by eyewitnesses and came to the fore when mass graves were exposed in 1995 in the al-Arish area in Sinai, straining Egypt’s relations with Israel, as CNN reported at the time.

    The network interviewed, for the first time, relatives and survivors of these war crimes who recalled the massacre of hundreds. The link between the unprovoked assault on the USS Liberty and the wish to hide the massacres and executions was thoroughly investigated by James Bamford in his 2001 book Body of Secrets.

    Thus, the newly released tapes corroborate atrocities already known and told by those who were their victims (in this case, including 34 American navy personnel). This was very much in the same way as Israeli documents declassified in the 1980s corroborated the Palestinian oral history and testimonies of the Nakba.”…

    There’s so much more @

    • RoHa on June 23, 2015, 8:27 pm

      “in 1967 Israel’s territorial appetite was satisfied”

      What make you think that?

      “The link between the unprovoked assault on the USS Liberty and the wish to hide the massacres and executions was thoroughly investigated by James Bamford in his 2001 book Body of Secrets.”

      I haven’t read the book, but it seems a bit unlikely that Israel would risk the ire of the US over so inconsequential a matter as the massacre of a bunch of mere Arabs. Israel had already got away with so much; why not a little more?

      • just on June 24, 2015, 8:52 am

        These gluttons are never “satisfied”.

    • Kris on June 24, 2015, 12:20 am

      Thanks, just. I really appreciate all of your great comments and links.

      Most Americans would be disgusted and angry to learn that not only did Israel attack the USS Liberty in order to hide the war crimes Israel was committing (executing prisoners of war without any legal niceties), but the U.S. government actually KNEW that Israel had deliberately slaughtered 34 U.S. sailors and injured scores more, and covered it up in order to protect Israel.

      The Guardian ran a fascinating excerpt from “Body of Secrets” by James Bamford . From that excerpt:

      Early in the morning of Thursday June 8 1967 and the first rays of sun spilled softly over the Sinai’s blond waves of sand. A little more than a dozen miles north, in the choppy eastern Mediterranean, the USS Liberty headed eastward. But the calmness was like quicksand – deceptive, inviting and friendly – until it was too late.

      As the Liberty passed the desert town of El Arish, it was being closely watched. About 4,000ft above was an Israeli reconnaissance aircraft. At 6.05am, the observer on the plane reported back to Israeli naval headquarters: “What we could see were the letters written on that ship and we gave these letters to ground control,” he said. The letters were “GTR-5” – the Liberty’s identification. “GTR” stood for “General Technical Research” – a cover designation for the National Security Agency (NSA)’s fleet of spy ships.

      The Liberty was in dangerous waters at a dangerous time. The six-day war, in which Israeli air and ground forces launched a massive attack on Egypt, Syria and Jordan, was raging.

      Three days after Israel had launched the six- day war, Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai had become a nuisance. There was no place to house them, not enough Israelis to watch them, and few vehicles to transport them to prison camps. But there was another way to deal with them.

      As the Liberty sat within eyeshot of El Arish, eavesdropping on surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned the town into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners. An eyewitness recounted how in the shadow of the El Arish mosque, they lined up about 60 unarmed Egyptian prisoners, hands tied behind their backs, and then opened fire with machine guns until the pale desert sand turned red.

      This and other war crimes were just some of the secrets Israel had sought to conceal since the start of the conflict. An essential element in the Israeli battle plan seemed to have been to hide much of the war behind a carefully constructed curtain of lies: lies about the Egyptian threat, lies about who started the war, lies to the US president, lies to the UN Security Council, lies to the press, lies to the public. Thus, as the American naval historian Dr Richard K Smith noted, “any instrument which sought to penetrate this smoke screen so carefully thrown around the normal ‘fog of war’ would have to be frustrated”.

      By then the Israeli navy and air force had conducted more than six hours of close surveillance of the Liberty off the Sinai and must have positively identified it as an American electronic spy ship. They knew she was the only military ship in the area. Nevertheless, the order was given to kill her and at 12.05pm, three motor torpedo boats from the port of Ashdod, about 50 miles away, departed. Israeli air force fighters, loaded with 50mm cannon ammunition, rockets and napalm, followed.

      Without warning, the Israeli jets – swept-wing Dassault Mirage IIICs – struck.

      In the communications spaces, radiomen James Halman and Joseph Ward had patched together enough equipment and broken antennae to get a distress call off to the Sixth Fleet, despite intense jamming by the Israelis. “Any station, this is Rockstar,” Halman shouted, using the Liberty’s voice call sign. “We are under attack by unidentified jet aircraft and require immediate assistance.”

      “Great, wonderful, she’s burning, she’s burning,” said an Israeli pilot.

      At 2.09pm, the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, operating near Crete, acknowledged Liberty’s cry for help. “I am standing by for further traffic,” it signalled.

      After taking out the gun mounts, the Israeli fighter pilots turned their attention to the antennae so the ship could not call for help or pick up any more revealing interceptions. Then the planes attacked the bridge, killing instantly the ship’s executive officer. With the Liberty now deaf, blind, and silenced, unable to call for help or move, the Israeli pilots proceeded to kill her. Designed to punch holes in the toughest tanks, their shells tore through the Liberty’s steel plating like hot nails through butter, exploding into jagged bits of shrapnel and butchering men deep in their living quarters.

      As the slaughter continued, neither the Israelis nor the Liberty crew had any idea that witnesses were present high above. Until now, that is. According to information, interviews and documents obtained, for nearly 35 years the NSA has hidden the fact that one of its planes – a Navy EC-121 ferret – was overhead at the time of the incident, eavesdropping on what was going on below. The interceptions from that plane, which answer some of the key questions about the attack, are among the NSA’s deepest secrets.

      The NSA’s worst fears had come true. “After considerations of personnel safety,” said deputy director Tordella, “one of my immediate concerns, considering the depth of the water and the distance of the ship off shore, had to do with the classified materials on board.” Tordella got on the phone to the Joint Reconnaissance Centre (JCS) and spoke to the deputy director, a Navy captain named Vineyard. “I expressed my concern that the written material be burned if at all possible, and that the electronic equipment be salvaged if that were possible,” he said.

      But Tordella was not prepared for what he heard. According to NSA documents – classified top secret- he was told that some senior officials in Washington wanted above all to protect Israel from embarrassment. “Captain Vineyard had mentioned during this conversation,” wrote Tordella, “that consideration was then being given by some unnamed Washington authorities to sink[ing] the Liberty in order that newspaper men would be unable to photograph her and thus inflame public opinion against the Israelis. I made an impolite comment about the idea.” Almost immediately, Tordella wrote a memorandum for the record, describing the conversation, and then locked it away.

      On the Liberty, black smoke was still escaping through more than 800 holes in the hull, and the effort to hush up the incident had already begun. Within hours of the attack, which left 34 men dead and two-thirds of the rest of the crew wounded, Israel asked President Johnson to quietly bury the incident. “Embassy Tel Aviv,” said a highly secret, very limited distribution message to the state department, “urged de-emphasis on publicity since proximity of vessel to scene of conflict was fuel for Arab suspicions that the US was aiding Israel.” Shortly thereafter, a total news ban was ordered by the Pentagon. No one in the field was allowed to say anything about the attack. All information was to come only from a few senior Washington officials.

      Later that morning, Johnson took the unusual step of ordering the JCS to recall its fighters while the Liberty still lay smouldering, sinking, fearful of another attack and with its decks covered with the dead, dying and wounded. On board the flagship of the Sixth Fleet, Rear Admiral Lawrence R Geis, who commanded the carrier force in the Mediterranean, was angry and puzzled at the recall and protested to the secretary of defence, Robert S McNamara.

      Geis was shocked by what he heard next. “President Lyndon Johnson came on with a comment that he didn’t care if the ship sunk, he would not embarrass his allies.”

      Despite the overwhelming evidence that Israel had attacked the ship and killed the American servicemen deliberately, the Johnson administration and Congress covered up the entire incident. Johnson was planning to run for president the following year and needed the support of pro-Israel voters.

      • just on June 24, 2015, 8:55 am

        Thanks, Kris.

        Re- reading that Bamford excerpt still makes me so furious and so incredibly sad.

        “President Lyndon Johnson came on with a comment that he didn’t care if the ship sunk, he would not embarrass his allies.”

        It makes me sick. “His allies”, over his men’s lives and his country. Some commander- in- chief.

      • CigarGod on June 24, 2015, 9:15 am

        It makes me sick, too. But, without more info, it just doesnt ring true. Its too outrageous. There has to be more context.

      • CigarGod on June 24, 2015, 9:12 am

        The one thing that always rings unlikely in this story, is that coverup was because Johnson didn’t want to embarrass or lose support. I’ve never been persuaded. Just never seen enough info on this specific bit, to be able to swallow it.

  11. Sibiriak on June 23, 2015, 11:49 pm

    Ilan Pappe: … when in 1967 Israel’s territorial appetite was satisfied with the occupation of the whole of historic Palestine, as well as large territories from Egypt and Syria, it was achieved with the help of similar inhumane ethnic cleansing operations of expulsions and massacres.

    RoHa: “in 1967 Israel’s territorial appetite was satisfied”

    What make you think that?

    @RoHa — Israel would not be satisfied with the whole of historic Palestine + Syrian territories etc?

    • RoHa on June 24, 2015, 7:25 pm

      Israel might be satisfied with the Nile to the Euphrates, along with the same sort of control over the rest of the world that they currently have over the US, Canada, and Australia.

  12. ckg on June 24, 2015, 9:52 am

    Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have supported the UNHRC report, publicized its conclusions, and urge all parties to co-operate with the ICC. In contrast the US State Department shamefully keeps its head buried in the sand.

    • just on June 24, 2015, 10:06 am

      Thanks, ckg. I wonder what’s cooking with the Obama Administration… could it be something other than ssdd?

      Beaumont has an article up at The Guardian that is quite detailed:

      “Palestine prepares to submit file that could see Israeli officials indicted
      Submission to international criminal court follows UN Human Rights Council’s report on war in Gaza, accusing Israel and Hamas of potential war crimes

      Between 10 and 11 o’clock on Thursday morning – if all goes according to schedule – the Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, will arrive with a delegation at the office of the prosecutor of the international criminal court in The Hague.

      …Broken down into three main categories of complaint, the whole file is introduced by a short narrative running to about 30 pages.

      One section of the complaint will focus on issues relating to illegal Israeli settlement activity; another the treatment of Palestinian prisoners. A final section deals with last summer’s war in Gaza. …

      Mustafa Barghouti, one of the members of the committee that drew up the submission told the Guardian he believed the handing over of the file had been supplied added significance following Monday’s UN Human Rights Council inquiry accusing Israel of potential war crimes in last summer’s war, not least as the events the UN documented would be included with the file.

      “We are dealing with everything. So many different types of crimes. When you look at the Rome statutes there are a very wide range of possibilities for a criminal investigation. What was important for us in the first place was to show that it is systematic.

      “One of the questions that people ask is why – since it could take a long time to come to a conclusion. My answer is that it will have a long term and an immediate effect. In the long term it is necessary because those who commit war crimes should be brought to justice. In the short term it is about ending Israeli impunity.””

      • CigarGod on June 24, 2015, 10:13 am

        And….Dear, Just: Have I told you lately that I love you?
        You are amazing!

      • just on June 24, 2015, 11:06 am

        aww thanks, CigarGod~ I think you’re amazing, too.


  13. bintbiba on June 24, 2015, 11:06 am

    +1, CigarGod :-)

    From one who has been known to unabashedly declare her love on MW ,too !!

    • just on June 24, 2015, 11:12 am

      mwah*, bintbiba. Right back at ya!

      (I’m blushing now)

      I learn so much from so many here at MW. Thanks to all.

    • CigarGod on June 24, 2015, 11:13 am


Leave a Reply