UN Secretary General Kofi Annan accused Israel of "deliberately targeting" the UNIFIL peacekeepers. Being in such a responsible position he should have at least "tried" to ascertain the truth. Which he wouldn't do, of course, since it doesn't suit his agenda, especially since he and his son were caught with their pants down in the Oil for Food Scam.
The leftist-liberal media went to town over this with the usual breast beating and planted stories of how "evil" Israel was doing horrible things to the "innocent" Lebanese. Notice how they conveniently transition from innocent Lebanese comprised of old, disabled, women and children to brave jihadis, depending on the mood of the media or the need of the propaganda.
The party pooper came from a very unlikely source. The UN's own press statement dated 24th July, which says:
Notice that Kofi Annan never acknowledged this incident. He never asked Hezbollah to stop using the UN positions as cover nor did he thank Israel for saving the life of one of his peacekeepers.One unarmed UN military observer, a member of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL), was seriously wounded by small arms fire in the patrol base in the Marun Al Ras area yesterday afternoon. According to preliminary reports, the fire originated from the Hezbollah side during an exchange with the IDF. He was evacuated by the UN to the Israeli side, from where he was taken by an IDF ambulance helicopter to a hospital in Haifa. He was operated on, and his condition is now reported as stable.
Also, one of the Canadian peacekeepers among the four killed in the bombing sent an email nine days earlier to a Canadian Media network and said that there was no "deliberate targeting". His email ends by saying:
Tactical necessity? Why? Because Hezbollah was using the UN positions as a shield against Israeli fire. What can you expect from this bunch when they use their own civilian population as human shields?What I can tell you is this: we have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both artillery and aerial bombing. The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Bliffle
Hezbolah is notorious for using UN sites as shields. They inch up closer and closer with truck mounted racks of rockets. Several UN observers have commented on this.
2 - sal m
nevermind using UN sites as shields...they use civilians as shields and as targets!
3 - Apollo
their strategy seems to be to blame Israel for any civilian casualties and raise a big ruckus. The Media ofcourse is complicit in this. There was a report on CNN where the reporters were walking around a bombed area with a Hezbollah "Media co-ordinator"????? He of course was using every trick in the Goebbells manual to push his point across and sadly so are the useless media.
4 - Christopher Rose
What's actually wrong with the media reporting what is happening, Apollo?
You sound very angry, as though you have already decided where all the responsibility lies. I can't see the situation in such starkly black and white terms myself.
And before you might be tempted to attack me, rather than my question, I'm already on record on Blogcritics as believing Israel has every right to defend itself but that is a long way from justifying all of their current tactics.
I don't care if they carpet bomb everywhere within Lebanon up to 30 miles over the border if that will stop the missiles. However, some of what is happening, both in Lebanon and in the now nearly forgotten Gaza Strip, is clearly designed to punish the whole community.
That is so dumb because Lebanon is actually one of the more moderate states in the region and the net result is going to be at least another generation of enmity through a wider swathe of the community.
The other result is that Hezbollah is now strengthened, as it is clearly providing far fiercer resistance than Israel imagined. This doesn't seem like good warfare or good politics to me.
5 - Apollo
Christopher, The boot is actually on the other foot. It looks like the Media has decided to act as the Propoganda arm of Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is not allowing the civilians to leave. they are firing rockets from homes and residential buildings. So what will u do when faced with such an immoral enemy?
How come ur heart doesn't bleed for innocent israeli civilians who have to endure rocket attacks clearly aimed at them. plus those rockets have been loaded with ball bearings and shrapnel to kill as many as possible even if they are out of range of the primary blast area.
And do u really believe that this latest incident has generated "hatred" for israel and maybe america. Then i'am sorry to say that ur woefully out of touch with reality.
Tell me what did those who died on Madrid trains or in Bali or phillipnes or kenya do?
let us count out all the usual USA, israel, russia, india, Britain, france etc....
tell me about let's start from thailand?
6 - Christopher Rose
I think you are misunderstanding the media, Apollo. They are reporting more from the Lebanese side because there is more to report from there, that's all.
I haven't seen any credible reports that Hezbollah isn't letting civilians leave the area so I'd like a good source for that.
How do you know, as you so presumptously put it, that my heart isn't bleeding for all the innocents that are suffering in the area? Once again, there is simply more to talk about on the Lebanese side, as there are more people dieing there.
If you don't believe that the attacks on civilians will generate more hostility towards Israel and the USA, then it can only be you that is out of touch with the laws of cause and effect, never mind reality.
I don't understand what you mean by your last three sentences so you'll have to expand on that if you want to continue the discussion. You'll also have to mind your manners a bit too, please...
7 - Apollo
christpher, first i don't need moral science lessons from u. so chill.
If u want a good discussion then i'am all for it. I have not attacked u personally. but don't think i won't if u start.
and why are u getting so offended by my legitimate criticism of the media?
are u one of them? if so, why is the media so sensitive to criticism when it feels it can criticise anyone else as it likes.
The last three sentences asks u to talk abt madrid, bali and thailand. are they full of jews or USA interests?
And talking about laws of cause and effect. Who started the latest round? Did not Hizbollah by kidnapping 2 israeli soldiers.
Looks like Hizbollah knows ur law of cause and effect very well. That is why they are using civilians and UN peacekeepers as human shields. They know that the agenda driven media will do the rest of the propoganda circus for them. And looks like they are right. The Media is right behind Hezbollah on this.
8 - Christopher Rose
I've never even heard of moral science before, Apollo, so I'm pretty sure I'm not lecturing you on it.
I'm not at all offended by your "legitimate criticism" of the media, I was simply putting another perspective on it as yours seems so, er, pre-loaded.
If being the Blogcritics' Comments Editor or running a microscopically small citizen journalism site means I'm I'm "one of them", then hands up, guilty as charged. If so, I'd sure like to see some wages mind you!
Whilst it's certainly true that Hezbollah's kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers was the immediate trigger for the current situation, that's not strictly speaking cause and effect, as I hope you appreciate. Nor does it have anything to do with my observation that Israel is clearly not doing so well either on the ground or in terms of public opinion, regional or global.
I still maintain that the media is reporting what is happening and see no support for your contention that they are in some way "right behind Hezbollah on this", although clearly you see it differently.
9 - Apollo
yes christopher my contention is that the media is not being fair. It is not holding Hezbollah to account. As simple as that. I got nothing personal against the media. No reporter accidentally dropped his camera on my head for for example :)
10 - Dean
It is notable that so many whine when the facts are not on their side...
11 - Dave Nalle
I'm watching McLaughlin group right now, and the argument there is bringing out exactly the facts which Apollo has raised. Kofi is taking advantage of what was essentially an accident caused by Hezbollah's methods to promote his anti-Israeli agenda.
On the media argument Apollo is on shakier ground. I haven't seen anything in the media supporting Hezbollah except from some ultra-left and pro-jihad talking heads brought on as counterpoint.
Under UN Order 1599 the UN should have removed Hezbollah from southern Lebanon years ago. If they had done their job they wouldn't be in a warzone anymore.
Dave
12 - Dean
The text of UN Resolution 1559 includes:
Reaffirming the importance of the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory,
Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;
Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;
Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory;
Calls upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully and urgently with the Security Council for the full implementation of this and all relevant resolutions concerning the restoration of the territorial integrity, full sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon…
________
Based on the above, “all parties“ and “foreign forces “ would include Israel.
After Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers:
1. Israel could have negotiated their release by a prisoner exchange, something it had done before.
2. Israel could have gone in and limited itself to fighting a ground war against the guerillas, thereby minimizing civilian casualties.
3. Israel could have decided to bomb Lebanon and invade as it did in 1982, hoping for better results this time,
4. Israel could have decided to bomb Lebanon and not invade as it did in 1982, hoping to minimize Israeli military casualties.
Based on the results so far, what Israel decided is not working.
13 - Dave Nalle
If one was not a raving anti-zionist, one could suggest that Israel, having already complied with 1559 by withdrawing, is merely trying to force Hezbollah's compliance which is well past due.
Dave
14 - Dean
If one was not a rabid Zionist, one could suggest that Israel should have forced compliance with Res 1559 through the UN, and negotiated the release of the two Israeli soldiers for Lebanese prisoners held in Israeli jails.
Hezbollah and Hamas were both born of war during the past 25 years.
Most agree that the 50-year old Arab-Israeli conflict cannot be resolved by military means so why keep pursuing it?
15 - gazelle
I like kofi. he's from ghana. hes too soft though. buts thats how he survives the US. good job.
best
16 - Dave Nalle
But Dean, the UN wasn't actually DOING its job, as usual. I don't agree with the Israeli actions - I think they're playing into Hezbollah's hands by helping to radicalize the normally sane Lebanese population. But the UN certainly bears a large amount of guilt for its usual feckless and febrile behavior.
Dave
17 - SFC SKI
Not to mention that Israeli soldiers in Arab captivity have a bad habit of being killed by mobs beforethey can be released. It amazes me that people see the UN as a reliable 3rd party when its track record shows it to be hopelessly ineffectual in lethal situations. Look at the inability to counter the buildup of Hizbollah forces right around its own oibeservation posts. I really feel a pang of grief for those UN soldiers who knew they were left flapping. FOr Kofi Annan, I have nothing but disdain. gazelle has pointed out it's Annan's softness that has kept him in his positon, of course, when Annan offends no one, nor calls Hezbollah to account, why wouldn't he be popular?
18 - Dave Nalle
Well, he's not popular with many in the US, but our opinions are generally discounted by most of the rest of the world and the elites in our own country.
I imagine those UN peacekeepers would love to have a chance to hammer Hezbollah when they start launching missiles from the school parking lot next door to an observation post, but that order never comes, does it...
Dave
19 - Dean
Dave says --"the UN wasn't actually DOING its job, as usual."
How can the UN be DOING it's job?
The UN can't be DOING it's job when the US vetoes UN Resolutions that could DO the job.
A partial list of UN Resolutions that the US ignores:
Resolution 106: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people". * Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem". * Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria". * Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees". * Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan". * Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital". Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation". * Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon". * Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem". * Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon". * Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon". * Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
Resolution 425: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon". 0
Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon. * Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
Resolution 446: " . . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon". * Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians".
Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'". * Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors".
Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility". * Resolution 497: " . . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon". *
Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in".
Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon". * Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters.
Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.
Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention. 0
Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians. * Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians. * Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations. * Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians. * Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians. * Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return
Hezbollah and Hamas didn't always exist. They are the result of the lack of US determination to resolve this 50-year old conflict.
Want to see more reasons for the conflict? jewishvirtuallibrary.org
20 - Clavos
Christopher #6 sez:
How do you know, as you so presumptously put it...
And this:
...then it can only be you that is out of touch with the laws of cause and effect, never mind reality.
And finally has the chutzpah to say this to Apollo:
You'll also have to mind your manners a bit too, please...
Christopher, you being the Comments Editor literally begs the question:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
21 - Dean
Clavos... Such a pithy post!
22 - Christopher Rose
Clavos, aah, the old philosophical questions never die. Who indeed?
23 - Dave Nalle
Dean, are you sure you're not Richard Brodie under a different name?
Yes, the US has defended Israel from endless spurious sanctions in the UN. It has also let through a reasonable number of justified sanctions and condemnations of Israel.
The fact that there are slavering anti-semites in the UN who propose a zillion sanctions doesn't mean that the US shouldn't be vetoing a portion of them to keep things reasonable.
Dave
24 - Dean
Dave, are you sure you're not Ruvy under a different name?
If you took the time to study the UN Resolutions vetoed by the US over tle last half century, you would see that on many vetoes the US cast the lone negative vote.
But either your mind is closed or you can't read.
25 - pleasexcusetheinteruption12
The UN is only as powerful as its participant nations make it. Everyone complains that the UN is weak and never does anything, but how is it supposed to do anything when its participant nations dont actually participate or follow its resolutions. How ironic that Bush should simultaneously disregard the UN as weak and appoint an ambassador to the UN who is against the UN.