November 21, 2006

CBC News ran an article based on Associated Press files that began: "'Massive’ human rights violations are being committed in the Gaza Strip, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour said Monday as she kicked off a tour of the region." [1]

Human rights violations -- committed by whom and against whom? This passive construction conveys an image of agent-less human rights violations against anonymous victims. 

The reader is, however, later informed that 19 members of the Al Athamna family in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun were killed in an Israeli artillery attack. CBC News cited "Israeli officials" who acknowledged an error. CBC News never bothered to tabulate the numerous zionist errors/massacres over the years, such as at Qana, Nablus, Jenin, Beit Lahiya, etc. Even if the Beit Hanoun massacre were an error -- and the only error -- should that exculpate the zionist regime from condemnation and sanction?

The language used to describe Arbour’s presence in devastated regions of Palestine speaks to the lack of seriousness that CBC News and AP accord to Arbour’s role. It is not described as a fact-finding mission, an investigation, or humanitarian assignment. It’s a "trip," "tour," or "visit": the same language used to describe the family’s holiday weekend at Universal Studios or Disneyland.

What about Arbour? She told reporters, "I’m basically here to express my concern and bring some comfort, I hope, by showing these victims that the world has not abandoned them." Is Arbour of the opinion that her appearance and expression of "concern" -- and not "outrage" -- at the latest massacre of Palestinian civilians will bring Palestinian survivors some comfort? How is it that the corporate media can proffer such "concern" guised as news? Why do media consumers -- if they do -- give such news credibility?

If Arbour is so concerned about the Palestinian people, why does she not demand that all financial boycotts be lifted forthwith and that the UN send armed forces immediately to keep the zionist occupation soldiers out of -- at least -- Gaza and the West Bank to protect those Palestinian people? The Palestinians have been waiting many decades for the international community (more specifically, western regimes) to show more than concern about their horrendous plight. Words are cold comfort to a people who have suffered so long.

CBC News meekly explained away the zionist slaughter: "Israel has been operating in the area to halt Palestinian rocket strikes. Last week, an Israeli woman was killed in a rocket attack." So the Palestinians are refused the right to resist occupation?

CBC News never stated clearly that the Israeli woman was killed following the Beit Hanoun massacre. A reason was never given for the rocket "attack." Ethnic cleansing, slow motion genocide, and constant humiliation would not, supposedly, warrant a Palestinian rocket defense. Neither would the extirpation of more than 42,000 food trees and the destruction of 1,783 hectares (4,405 acres) of Beit Hanoun’s orchards, vineyards, and vegetable fields in 2004 -- some relevant history which CBC-AP failed to mention. Neither did CBC-AP mention the zionist army’s demolition of 21 houses, five factories, 19 wells and damage to 314 other homes. [2]

According to CBC News, Palestinians "swarmed" [3] Arbour seeking justice. Arbour "acknowledged their concern but also said the Palestinian leadership must offer the residents some hope." Arbour emphasized: "the necessity for the Palestinian leadership to address within its means the question of securing the safety of civilians."

The CBC News did not comment on the preposterousness of Arbour’s statement. In essence, it postulates that the leadership of the victims is culpable for zionist attacks against its people. That would be akin to blaming the parents for not "securing the safety" of their raped daughter -- or to blaming Jewish leaders for Nazi attacks on Jews rather than blaming the Nazis.

The statement also presumes that the Palestinians have a means of securing the safety of civilians in the asymmetric fighting -- short of surrendering.

Arbour abjured making "political judgments." She parlayed her role into making judgments based on the human rights record but never commented on the abysmal human rights record of the zionist state.

She said, "I will speak to the Palestinian Authority about their responsibility to enforce the law, to create an environment in which people can seek protection of the law and, of course, I will also speak to the Israeli authority."

The Palestinian Authority’s "responsibility" for law enforcement? Considering that Israeli state operatives have abducted many of the elected members of the Palestinian Authority and that the US and other western countries have hijacked the electoral will -- i.e., the law-making apparatus -- of the Palestinian people, this statement is incredible. Furthermore, it suggests that the Palestinian people have their own recognized state and their own rights and laws within that state, when nothing is further from the truth.

Arbour’s statements are vague. Whose law is the Palestinian Authority supposed to enforce? What will she speak to the Israeli authority about? Enforcing laws? As a UN high commissioner for Human Rights, Arbour must be well aware of the scofflaw zionist state’s disregard for international law and UN officials. [4]

Meanwhile, an ongoing major tank offensive by Zionist forces into Gaza reveals the zionists’ disregard for Arbour and her "tour."

But Israeli defense [sic] minister Amir Peretz is offering peace: "I emphasize that our hand is outstretched in peace, but anybody who rejects it ... should know that ... we will do all we can to sever the hand which uses terror." That presumably excludes self-mutilation.

One wonders on what terms the outstretched hand of peace is offered. Peretz said: "We have no intention of making concessions to anybody..." In other words, peace on Zionist terms only. Who would want to shake that hand?

Arbour said, "I think we can’t continue to see civilians who are not the authors of their own misfortune continue to suffer to the extent of which I see."

The "authors" must be identified and they must be stopped. To come about, this will take much more than platitudes from another international official.

Kim Petersen, Co-Editor of Dissident Voice, lives on the outskirts of Seoul in southern Korea. He can be reached at: kim@dissidentvoice.org. 

ENDNOTES

[1] CBC with AP files, "Arbour decries 'massive’ rights violations in Gaza," CBC News, 20 November 2006. The Associated Press, "As Israeli-Palestinian violence flares up, U.N. human rights chief begins Mideast visit," International Herald Tribune, 20 November 2006.

[2] When the US has not used its veto, from 1955 to 1992, "Israel is the target of at least 65 UN Resolutions and the Palestinians are the target of none." For a listing see: "UN Resolutions Targeting Israel and the Palestinians," if Americans knew. 

[3] The latent racist, belittling language is disturbing. The wording likens Palestinians to insects swarming rather than humans gathering.

[4] Eric Silver and Sa’id Ghazali, "Uprooted trees, razed houses... Israel leaves its calling card in Gaza," The Independent (UK), 6 August 2004.

Other Recent Articles by Kim Petersen

* Principles Over Realism: The Zero-State Solution
* Let’s Not Support Lesser Evilism: Much Ado About Nothing Election Results
* The Reciprocity Principle: Questions That Need to be Asked
* Genocide in Iraq
* Going Nuclear: Northern Korea’s Ace
* An Unacceptable Nuclear Gamble
* Canada: The Honest Broker?
* Progressive Duty is to Speak Out Against Oppressors Not Excoriate Their Resisting Victims
* Subtle Loyalties to Zionism
* Inside the Madhouse
* A Higher Standard
* Whither Elementary Morality?
* Optimistic Progressivism
* The Analytical Skewer
* Inequality Matters
* There is No "Israel Lobby"
* South American Paradigms: Revolutionary Change Through Mass Social Movements
* "Insurgents": Hermeneutics Are Not a Substitute for Clarity!
* The Inalienable Right to Self Defense: Balancing the Power

* This Is Not Progressivism
* Europe's Free Speech Paradox
* Remembering with Shame and Horror
* Before Columbus: Revisionism and Enlightenment
* Desperately Seeking Victory in a War Already Lost
* Progressivism, Skepticism, and Historical Revisionism
* Resisting Capitalist-Imperialist Assimilation: Interview with Stewart Steinhauer
* The Morbid Symbolism of the Yasukuni Shrine
* Elementary Morality and Torture
* Darkness Over Empire
* Anti-Israel?
* Syria in the Imperialist Crosshairs 

* The Struggle to Restore the Dignity of Labor
* Gizen: Perverted Principle in Japan
* The Need to Speak Out: Canada’s Governor Generalship
* Antithetical Heroism
* Progressives and the Imperialist Line