UN warns of ‘blatant disregard for basic humanity’ in Gaza warfare

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

 

Did I say the UN is one man ? you were obviously doubting that Ali Bahreini had been appointed to chair the UNHRC, and I have provided a link that is not behind a paywall. Astonishing that you didn’t already know this. Obviously another one on here with no interest in the issues of the ME.

 

I don't doubt any of that nor do I consider his appointment appropriate. Stop projecting. It's the defense of those who have no argument. Astonishing that you project garbage like this. Is slurring your opponents your usual modus operandi?

Edited December 5, 2023 by ozimoron

[bradiston]

36 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Are you saying that you actually did not know that Ali Bahreini, Ambassador of Iran had been appointed to chair the 2023, UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Social forum. It is well publicised common knowledge. I can find a link if you really can't confirm it yourself. Amazed however, that you didn’t know.

It was a 2 day meeting. No other candidate was put forward. Then all the western do nothings started whingeing.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/irans-appointment-chair-un-rights-meeting-draws-condemnation-2023-11-02/

Edited December 5, 2023 by bradiston

[Eloquent pilgrim]

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I don't doubt any of that nor do I consider his appointment appropriate. Stop projecting. It's the defense of those who have no argument. Astonishing that you project garbage like this. Is slurring your opponents your usual modus operandi?

 

Why are you trolling me ? You hijacked a reply that I made to another poster telling me that he asked for a link and that DYOR was not acceptable. The information about the appointment of Ali Bahreini has been all over every news outlet about the ME. That notwithstanding, I supplied a link to confirm something that both yourself and he should have already known, and because you don’t like the confirmation, you call it projecting garbage. I was only supplying what you asked for.

 

[Morch]

28 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Link to a paywall is unacceptable. The UN is more than one man.

 

I didn't get any paywall message, but just in case you're not trolling:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/us-west-condemn-un-allowing-192928015.html

 

As for the expected cop out....expected.

[bradiston]

19 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

 

Did I say the UN is one man ? you were obviously doubting that Ali Bahreini had been appointed to chair the UNHRC, and I have provided a link that is not behind a paywall. Astonishing that you didn’t already know this. Obviously another one on here with no interest in the issues of the ME.

Yes, I found the Reuters article, and read it, which you apparently haven't. He was elected in the absence of any other candidates. And for a 2 day forum. So what's your point?

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I don't doubt any of that nor do I consider his appointment appropriate. Stop projecting. It's the defense of those who have no argument. Astonishing that you project garbage like this. Is slurring your opponents your usual modus operandi?

 

You are constantly 'projecting' a whole lot of stuff at posters not seeing things your way. Guess it's totally different when you do it, eh?

[Morch]

1 minute ago, bradiston said:

Yes, I found the Reuters article, and read it, which you apparently haven't. He was elected in the absence of any other candidates. And for a 2 day forum. So what's your point?

 

If it was an Israeli representative, I'm more than sure the usual suspects here would be up in arms.

[bignok]

2 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Fine go ahead and dismiss my comments, this is not my first time with this poster, I know what a troll is thanks.

 

Me too - you.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

5 minutes ago, bignok said:

Me too

 

 

Oh no, another victim of Harvey Weinstein

[bradiston]

4 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

 

Oh no, another victim of Harvey Weinstein

You've edited his comment to totally alter it's meaning. I can't believe you didn't know this was against forum rules etc etc etc.

[James105]

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, civilian death and destruction are part of any war. Would you include that as "acceptable" concerning what happened on 7 Oct? I wouldn't. And I don't consider the way the IDF is destroying Gasa as "acceptable" either.

What I meant by a "few" IDF soldiers, is that there has not, to my knowledge, been a complete invasion of Gaza (yet) by the IDF.

And again I have to point out that I have from the beginning said that atrocities have been committed by BOTH sides. Do you agree with that? Do you agree that the IDF has committed atrocities, or not?

 

Isreal has the equivalent of ISIS as a neighbour.   Since their ISIS like neighbours invaded their land, killed, raped, mutilated and burned alive 1400 Isreali civilians I don't think there is a country on this earth that would not respond to that kind of barbarism with the full might of their military to ensure it never, ever happens again.   I'm surprised at the restraint Isreal are showing as they have the military capability to raze Gaza to the ground if they chose to do so.   

 

Obviously it sucks to be a Palestinian just now, especially so if they are one of the small percentage that do not support Hamas or their barbaric actions, but war is a messy business.   If my country (the UK) decided that instead of using a democratic vote to leave the EU and instead decided to send thousands of soldiers to commit murderous atrocities against French civilians I would fully expect the whole of Europe to respond in the same way that Isreal is doing, and I would be cursing the governing body of my own country for causing it and not blaming those that are obliged by their own citizens to do everything in their power to prevent it happening again.  

[Eloquent pilgrim]

15 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Yes, I found the Reuters article, and read it, which you apparently haven't. He was elected in the absence of any other candidates. And for a 2 day forum. So what's your point?

 

So, you now know about the appointment of Ali Bahreini, something which you astonishingly didn’t know about an hour ago; and now you expect me to explain to you the irony of appointing the Ambassador of Iran to chair a UNHRC social forum …..

[Eloquent pilgrim]

7 minutes ago, bradiston said:

You've edited his comment to totally alter it's meaning. I can't believe you didn't know this was against forum rules etc etc etc.

 

I have not edited his comment, merely replied to a quoted section, which is commonplace on this forum; so stop getting angry on behalf of someone else   ……. I bet you could take all the fun out of a bouncy castle.

[bradiston]

17 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

So, you now know about the appointment of Ali Bahreini, something which you astonishingly didn’t know about an hour ago; and now you expect me to explain to you the irony of appointing the Ambassador of Iran to chair a UNHRC social forum …..

Now you're being a pita. You failed to mention he was elected in the absence of any other candidate, and that it was for a 2 day forum. I know Iran's record on women's rights. You're not talking to 3 year olds. But I don't see the relevance of your waving this flag about it. Yes, the irony is stark. So is this part of your critique of the UN , or what?

 

My point was the UN is unable to bring any pressure to bear on Israel to halt it's indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Naturally, you can argue about whether it's indiscriminate or just unfortunate. Either way, 1000s of innocent people are being herded into a ghetto and slaughtered. Warsaw Mk II. The Israelis should recall that. But Israel is in the hands of fanatics, just like Iran.

 

Cue the confused and sad emojis. Are people hiring these obnoxious lurkers?

Edited December 5, 2023 by bradiston

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, bradiston said:

Now you're being a pita. You failed to mention he was elected in the absence of any other candidate, and that it was for a 2 day forum. I know Iran's record on women's rights. You're not talking to 3 year olds. But I don't see the relevance of your waving this flag about it. Yes, the irony is stark. So is this part of your critique of the UN , or what?

 

My point was the UN is unable to bring any pressure to bear on Israel to halt it's indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Naturally, you can argue about whether it's indiscriminate or just unfortunate. Either way, 1000s of innocent people are being herded into a ghetto and slaughtered. Warsaw Mk II. The Israelis should recall that. But Israel is in the hands of fanatics, just like Iran.

 

Getting one's knickers in a knot over a 2 day social forum? That was sure scraping the barrel since that aspect wasn't mentioned. One could have been forgiven for thinking he had some influence over policy decisions.

[bradiston]

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Getting one's knickers in a knot over a 2 day social forum? That was sure scraping the barrel since that aspect wasn't mentioned. One could have been forgiven for thinking he had some influence over policy decisions.

I don't think he bothered to read that far. Just give him the "I can't believe you didn't know" gaslighting treatment he's so fond of. People use it repeatedly as a means of calling into question other people's intelligence. A stock tactic on any forum.

Edited December 5, 2023 by bradiston

[Eloquent pilgrim]

37 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Now you're being a pita. You failed to mention he was elected in the absence of any other candidate, and that it was for a 2 day forum. I know Iran's record on women's rights. You're not talking to 3 year olds. But I don't see the relevance of your waving this flag about it. Yes, the irony is stark. So is this part of your critique of the UN , or what?

 

My point was the UN is unable to bring any pressure to bear on Israel to halt it's indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Naturally, you can argue about whether it's indiscriminate or just unfortunate. Either way, 1000s of innocent people are being herded into a ghetto and slaughtered. Warsaw Mk II. The Israelis should recall that. But Israel is in the hands of fanatics, just like Iran.

 

Cue the confused and sad emojis. Are people hiring these obnoxious lurkers?

 

 

We might possibly have some agreement regarding the UN, insomuch as I was only using the Ali Bahreini appointment to highlight the impotency and meaninglessness of that corrupt organisation.

 

The UN was originally conceived as a well intended organisation, but it has morphed into a pointless relic. The UN Security Council comprises of 15 countries,10 of which are rotating members, with 5 permanent members. Any of the five permanent members, the USA, Russia, France, China, and the UK, can veto any resolution put forward even if the other 14 members support it.

 

In the last couple of years, Russia has vetoed 4 resolutions regarding Ukraine, and China vetos any resolution regarding their illegal expansionism in the South China sea.

 

As you say, the UN are unable to bring any real pressure to bear on Israel (or on Hamas, although they aren’t even attempting that)  … they remain a corrupt, biased, paradox of their founding charter.

 

[bradiston]

41 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

 

We might possibly have some agreement regarding the UN, insomuch as I was only using the Ali Bahreini appointment to highlight the impotency and meaninglessness of that corrupt organisation.

 

The UN was originally conceived as a well intended organisation, but it has morphed into a pointless relic. The UN Security Council comprises of 15 countries,10 of which are rotating members, with 5 permanent members. Any of the five permanent members, the USA, Russia, France, China, and the UK, can veto any resolution put forward even if the other 14 members support it.

 

In the last couple of years, Russia has vetoed 4 resolutions regarding Ukraine, and China vetos any resolution regarding their illegal expansionism in the South China sea.

 

As you say, the UN are unable to bring any real pressure to bear on Israel (or on Hamas, although they aren’t even attempting that)  … they remain a corrupt, biased, paradox of their founding charter.

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power#:~:text=As of May 2022%2C Russia,cast in the Security Council.

 

Mostly the US vetoing any condemnation of Israel. And here's the result.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

 

There are any amount of analyses of the USA's insane love affair with Israel. See Hitchens and Chomsky. They're very revealing. And you see it all the time here, on this forum, in the press. Israel, can do no wrong. Everybody else, can do no right. It's utterly childish, bigoted, stupid, ignorant. The whole Arab world is just a collection of terrorists trying to destroy the world... Etc etc etc

Edited December 5, 2023 by bradiston

[bradiston]

2 hours ago, bradiston said:

As providing cause for retaliation. Don't dodge the issue. You know what I'm talking about. Israeli settlers taking over Palestinian held land. Why do you think Hamas attacked Israel? Certainly one of the reasons. Alongside many others. People no longer seem able to tell right from wrong. Shelling hospitals? Cutting off water and power supplies? 6000 children killed. Is this justifiable?

So the tally is, in answer to "Is the killing of 15,000 civilians and 6,000 children justifiable?" 1 confused, 1 thanks, 2 highly amusing. A very bizarre forum indeed!

[Morch]

39 minutes ago, bradiston said:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power#:~:text=As of May 2022%2C Russia,cast in the Security Council.

 

Mostly the US vetoing any condemnation of Israel. And here's the result.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

 

There are any amount of analyses of the USA's insane love affair with Israel. See Hitchens and Chomsky. They're very revealing. And you see it all the time here, on this forum, in the press. Israel, can do no wrong. Everybody else, can do no right. It's utterly childish, bigoted, stupid, ignorant. The whole Arab world is just a collection of terrorists trying to destroy the world... Etc etc etc

 

Or it might tell you that the UN is disproportionately invested in things Israel.

[Morch]

29 minutes ago, bradiston said:

So the tally is, in answer to "Is the killing of 15,000 civilians and 6,000 children justifiable?" 1 confused, 1 thanks, 2 highly amusing. A very bizarre forum indeed!

 

As I understand it the 15,000 figure (regardless if one accepts it or not) includes the 6000 children (same comment). Not 'and'.

Getting triggered by emoticons....that's bizarre.

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

As I understand it the 15,000 figure (regardless if one accepts it or not) includes the 6000 children (same comment). Not 'and'.

Getting triggered by emoticons....that's bizarre.

 

Laughing at 15,000 civilians deaths is much more bizarre. I guess those people wish the number was much higher.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Laughing at 15,000 civilians deaths is much more bizarre. I guess those people wish the number was much higher.

 

You do realize that the post contained a bit more than that, right?

So trying for the spin as if people were laughing (or rather, placing an emoticon) about it specifically would be kinda lame.

[ozimoron]

Just now, Morch said:

 

You do realize that the post contained a bit more than that, right?

So trying for the spin as if people were laughing (or rather, placing an emoticon) about it specifically would be kinda lame.

 

If the post contained a reference to 15,000 deaths, nobody should laugh, regardless of the rest of the content. One has to wonder about the mental stability of those who do so.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

If the post contained a reference to 15,000 deaths, nobody should laugh, regardless of the rest of the content. One has to wonder about the mental stability of those who do so.

 

Of course, of course. The minute that someone mentions death it adds a certain gravitas. And it automatically makes the post worthy of serious consideration.

 

Then again, don't recall you having issues with such things when Israeli deaths were referenced.

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Of course, of course. The minute that someone mentions death it adds a certain gravitas. And it automatically makes the post worthy of serious consideration.

 

Then again, don't recall you having issues with such things when Israeli deaths were referenced.

 

That's because you didn't read the posts where I condemned Hamas. More projection.

Edited December 5, 2023 by ozimoron

[radiochaser]

5 hours ago, WDSmart said:

The atrocities that "are being committed" by the IDF are the killing of civilians and the destruction of entire blocks of buildings in Gaza. This has been done by rockets and artillery. There have been few IDF soldiers who have invaded Gaza (to my knowledge). The atrocities which "have been committed" by the IDF (Zionists) over the 100+ year period these two peoples have been at war include all the atrocities cited in my original post, which include murder, torture, and rape. 

What do you say about hamas and their violation of, supposedly international law, Rule 97?

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule97#:~:text=of human shields-,Rule 97.,of human shields is prohibited.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, radiochaser said:

What do you say about hamas and their violation of, supposedly international law, Rule 97?

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule97#:~:text=of human shields-,Rule 97.,of human shields is prohibited.

 

Leaders of both sides need a free ticket to The Hague.

[Purdey]

6 hours ago, WDSmart said:

The atrocities Hamas committed on 07 Oct cannot be used to justify the retaliatory atrocities

Most Palestinians don't want a two state solution, they want to kill all Jews "from the river to the sea". 

When someone wants your utter annihilation, there aren't many choices. 

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Most Palestinians don't want a two state solution, they want to kill all Jews "from the river to the sea". 

When someone wants your utter annihilation, there aren't many choices. 

 

True, except that it isn't true of all Palestinians. Likewise, when somebody wants to thin your population there aren't many choices. In one case its a minority of terrorists and in the other case it's the actual leader of the country.