Thursday, January 15, 2009

Israel may face UN court ruling on Gaza conflict

Communitarian Network founder Amitai Etzioni is a leading voice in the growing consensus over the ineffectiveness of the UN's soft power. To centrist PeaceHawks like Etzioni, the need to combine the authority of the UN with the military and financial power of the USA is the most pressing global security issue in the world.

What if the Zionist state and their entire history of inhumane attacks on Arab civilians was just one of many British theosophical tools used to manipulate human social evolution into a British-Dutch synthesized world government system? There is enough evidence pointing in that direction to justify further inquiry.

Are there other possible solutions to the Hegelian conflict in Gaza besides taking the case before the UN court?

Yes, there are. We don't need to grant the UN Court Supreme Communitarian powers over Israel. The United States funds Zionism. The only reason communist Israel ever survived was the same reason the communist USSR survived: American tax dollars. Israel has the military power to destroy Gaza because the US people give it to them (and it has the nuclear power because Zionist spies steal American military secrets). Wouldn't cutting off their automatic, yearly US tax money supply (and paying closer attention to Israeli dual nationals working in US Top Security areas) be a lot more cost and life efficient than using more US tax dollars and more US-NATO soldiers to enforce a UN ruling that has no hard authority without our military and tax backing?

Are we all so gullible that we will finance senseless wars of destruction and then finance the interventions to stop the senseless wars, interventions that will in turn usurp our supreme national law and place us all under the control of a global communitarian justice system? Why would free, educated people appoint the same PeaceHawks who start and manage wars of aggression to write the global peace process?

The Case Against Pinochet was the first big test of UN Communitarian Supremacy of law. The UN's Case Against Israel is not pilot test. It's the real deal.

From Peter Meyer's elist:
(3) Israel may face UN court ruling on Gaza conflict

From: Kenneth Rasmusson Date: 14.01.2009 03:13 PM

14 January 2009

Israel may face UN court ruling on legality of Gaza conflict

by Afua Hirsch, legal affairs correspondent

Israel faces the prospect of intervention by international courts amid growing calls that its actions in Gaza are a violation of world humanitarian and criminal law.

The UN general assembly, which is meeting this week to discuss the issue, will consider requesting an advisory opinion from the international court of justice, the Guardian has learned.

"There is a well-grounded view that both the initial attacks on Gaza and the tactics being used by Israel are serious violations of the UN charter, the Geneva conventions, international law and international humanitarian law," said Richard Falk, the UN's special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories and professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University.

{The surname Falk also just happens to be Etzioni's German birth name ~ Niki}

"There is a consensus among independent legal experts that Israel is an occupying power and is therefore bound by the duties set out in the fourth Geneva convention," Falk added. "The arguments that Israel's blockade is a form of prohibited collective punishment, and that it is in breach of its duty to ensure the population has sufficient food and healthcare as the occupying power, are very strong."

A Foreign Office source confirmed the UK would consider backing calls for a reference to the ICJ. "It's definitely on the table," the source said. "We have already called for an investigation and are looking at all evidence and allegations."

An open letter to the prime minister signed by prominent international lawyers and published in today's Guardian states: "The United Kingdom government ... has a duty under international law to exert its influence to stop violations of international humanitarian law in the current conflict between Israel and Hamas."

The letter argues that Israel has violated principles of humanitarian law, including launching attacks directly aimed at civilians and failing to discriminate between civilians and combatants.

The letter follows condemnation earlier this week from leading QCs of Israel's action as a violation of international law, and a vote by the UN's human rights council on Monday on a resolution condemning the ongoing Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip.

"The blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel are prima facie war crimes," a group of leading QCs and academics, including Michael Mansfield QC and Sir Geoffrey Bindman, wrote in a letter to the Sunday Times.

Israel has already been found to have violated its obligations in international law by a previous advisory opinion of the ICJ, and is likely to vigorously contest arguments that it is an occupying power. It previously stated that occupation ceased after disengagement from Gaza in 2005.

Its stance raises questions as to the utility of an advisory opinion by the ICJ after Israel rejected its finding in a previous case, which found the wall being constructed in the Palestinian territories to be a violation of Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.

Questions are also being raised as to whether the international criminal court, which deals with war crimes and crimes against humanity, would have any jurisdiction to hear cases against perpetrators of the alleged crimes on both sides of the conflict. Neither Israel nor the Palestinian territories are signatories to the Rome statute, which brings states within the jurisdiction of the ICC.

More likely, experts say, is the establishment of ad-hoc tribunals of the kind created to deal with the war in the former Yugoslavia and the genocide in Rwanda.

"If there were the political will there could be an ad-hoc tribunal established to hear allegations of war crimes," Falk said. "This could be done by the general assembly acting under article 22 of the UN charter which gives them the authority to establish subsidiary bodies."


Bobby Garner said...

The Zionists in control of Israel are political whores who will jump ship the very moment the U.S., in spite of its rhetoric, cuts off its aid and begins real support for the United Nations. There is a growing body of evidence indicating that this will be an early act of the Obama administration. Whatever he said on the campaign trail had no more validity than any other campaign promise ever made.

Obama is an asset of the British aligned Pilgrim Society, and this so called financial collapse is easily traceable to their decades of manipulations. Furthermore, the result is true to their agenda of acquiring possession or control of all the world's wealth. People are loosing their wealth even on a larger scale than they did in 1929. Our loss is their gain as is readily apparent in the bailouts from the bottomless pits of the people's debt (they already had all the real wealth).

Our "money" is a debt instrument, not wealth, and it will be the next bubble to burst at no cost to those who have the real wealth (land and its resources). It will prove to be even more devastating to those who believed it was money, than the housing collapse was to those who believed that a mortgaged home equated to ownership. The credit based economy along with its corrupted form of Capitalism (both Pilgrim creations) is history, never to return, because it has completed its mission. We are on the brink of another plunge in market values to at least the 4 thousand range on the DOW, followed by hyper-inflation putting 1923 Weimar Germany to shame.

"Market value" will be a meaningless concept after that. They are busily outlawing barter, and our rights trade among ourselves beginning with used toys and used children's clothing. Soup kitchens and labor/detention camps will soon define American life as it never did during the Great Depression.

the tent lady said...

I agree Bobby. When I was younger I read a lot about the conditions in Germany prior to WWI and WWII and the Soviet states after the war. The thing that always bothered me the most was how they get people to stand in lines to get bread or shoes or whatever. It always seems to coincide with stories about people standing in line to be shot.

One of the pieces I found in Seattle in 1999 was called The Transient Tracking Program. It was introduced by Seattle Councilman Peter Steinbrueck. I asked him about it after I saw that the local Homeless advocate groups were against it. He denied Transient Tracking had anything to do with the LA21 Seattle neighborhood plans calling all the rental tenants in Seattle "transients." The plan was to make everyone standing in line for a government or private handout officially sign up for the "help, as in: enter their names and SS number into the COMPASS database.

In some places the tracking programs enlisted volunteers to have a small chip of data inserted under their skin, called VeriChip. Andy Rooney went on 60 minutes and said everyone should be chipped.

Chip chip cheree.

Bobby Garner said...

People's behavior in times of crisis is a most interesting study. The normal fight or flight reaction can be tilted toward flight if efforts to fight are stymied. That seems to be the purpose of regulations on the sale and transport of goods, to criminalize everything which is not licensed or permitted. Farmers are not allowed to develop niche markets for their organic produce without submitting to inspections and compliance to regulations. There are hundreds of examples of Big Mother's interference in private enterprise to the point where free enterprise is non-existent. The terms "private enterprise" and "government regulation" are diametrical opposites, and cannot coexist.

One of the greatest achievements of credit based capitalism is that it fraudulently proved to the 'democratic majority' the absolute necessity for government regulation, so expect that to move ahead with a vengeance against anything smacking of private initiative or self sufficiency.

Private food stores in excess of specified amounts have been illegal for some time in most places. Cash is contraband under any circumstances which some authority figure determines to be "suspicious".

Independence demands ownership and control over the means of production of necessary things, including the essential raw materials, and transportation. Why else would communists demand it? It also requires a demand for our products. When the potential customer base is convinced that there is something criminal in private marketing strategies between consenting, mature adults, and maintain a well worn path to the doors of megalith outlets like Wal-Mart, free enterprise doesn't have a prayer.

So, when the bread lines form in those parking lots, and the only medium of exchange is a veri-chip (under the skin or in a plastic card), all of the consumers will line up, and the working producers will have no market for their products. Anyone who imagines he will live off the land, will find it extremely impossible to eat or wear all that he produces, and with no market for the excess, efficiency drops to near zero. There are other problems. Anyone who produces, is permanently tied to the land, and even if he is able to defend his title, he is a sitting duck for raids and confiscations.