babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Wife of Canadian UN observer demands answers

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Wife of Canadian UN observer demands answers
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 27 July 2006 08:33 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the Jerusalem Post

quote:
The wife of a Canadian peacekeeper killed in Lebanon demanded Thursday to know why IAF missiles struck the UN site where her husband was stationed as a military observer, despite repeated pleas by observers there to halt the firing.

Cynthia Hess-von Kruedener told reporters in Kingston, Ontario, that she believes the attack, which involved precision guided missiles, was intentional. [...]

Hess-von Kruedener said her husband told her that the UN site had been fired upon for weeks, despite the fact that their vehicles and buildings were clearly marked.



From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 27 July 2006 10:20 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The CBC has a completely different spin. The title of the CBC story is Wife of Canadian UN observer prays for a 'miracle' . Israel's role in her husband's apparent death is trivialized.

CBC spin: prayer, miracles and we believe Israel anyway...

MIA and presumed dead,
Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener.
KILLED BY ISRAEL

[ 27 July 2006: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 27 July 2006 10:44 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
After issuing what I thought to be a very gutsy statement of condemnation of the Butcher of Ottawa as well as the brutality of the Israeli invasion, it looks as if Alexa may have been brought to heel. In her statement "on the death of a Canadian UN observer", she neglects two points:

1. Who bombed the UN post.

2. Where is the Major anyway? Is he actually dead? His wife doesn't believe so. More importantly, has the Butcher kindly requested that Israel account for his whereabouts, or would that be too intrusive?

Anyway, it would be rather ironic if Alexa became Svend. Denunciation of Israel isn't good for a foreign affairs critic's longevity.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 27 July 2006 11:03 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
unionist, your point #1 is incorrect:
quote:
It was with profound sadness that we learned yesterday of the deaths of four United Nations military observers, including one Canadian,killed last evening in an Israeli bomb attack on a clearly marked UN patrol base in Lebanon...
Emphasis added by me.

From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 27 July 2006 11:10 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Contrarian:
unionist, your point #1 is incorrect:
Emphasis added by me.

My apologies - you are correct, I was mistaken. Apologies to Alexa too -- keep up the good work.

I still think Canada should be demanding the return of its soldier, or his remains.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 27 July 2006 11:33 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I thought they had not found his remains; but possibly they cannot tell, if this statement by Fisk is correct:
quote:
... Indian soldiers of the UN army in southern Lebanon, visibly moved by the horror of bringing their Canadian, Fijian, Chinese and Austrian comrades back in at least 20 pieces from the clearly marked UN post next to Khiam prison, left their remains at Marjayoun hospital yesterday...

Link here.

ETA: According to the UNIFIL website press release for July 27, they need heavy engineering equipment to keep searching for the fourth observer.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cdnviking
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9661

posted 28 July 2006 01:22 AM      Profile for cdnviking        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Maybe Israel could divert some of its heavy engineering equipment (backhoes and bulldozers) away from bulldozing Palestinian's homes WITH THEM IN THEM for a while and assist in recovering the body of the peacekeeper THEY KILLED.
From: The Centre of the Universe, Ontario... Just kidding | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Marg Bedore
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9838

posted 28 July 2006 06:09 AM      Profile for Marg Bedore     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This story must be kept alive. Harper's response was shameful. The military will shut up Kreudener's widow and the Conservatives will spin it out. China spoke out against Israel's attack on the UN but Harper will not denounce anything that Israel does. We should all be raising this issue in editorial letters etc
From: Kingston | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2006 06:14 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marg Bedore:
The military will shut up Kreudener's widow and the Conservatives will spin it out.

Yes, this must be kept alive. You are so right about the military. Look how they dishonoured the death of Anthony Boneca in Afghanistan by somehow pressuring his father (a Portugueuse immigrant labourer, barely articulate in English as I heard myself in a CBC interview) to lend his name to a phoney DND release saying how happy Anthony was to die for his country, after four other friends and family members had revealed the truth. Now the media harem has dropped the story. We mustn't let that happen here.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 28 July 2006 08:25 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
UN removes (living) unarmed observers from border.

The armed witnesses that remain will be further away. And the suffering of the Lebanese people will increase because, for starters, the delivery of supplies and relief will be made less stable and secure because promises of safety from Israel by the UN will sound hollow to drivers who risk their lives to deliver supplies. And those supplies are saving Lebanese lives. Shame on Israel and its terrible atrocities. Such events corrupt a nation and kill not only people but consciences as well.

It is noteworthy that internal Lebanese refugees (refugess in their own country) are making use of UN assistance and facilities. So if the Lebanese civilian population is the Israeli target, then bombing the UN makes sense. They're all in one place and it's easier to kill more of them.

quote:
Around 1,600 civilians had taken shelter inside UNIFIL headquarters stationed in southern Lebanon where they have been provided with food and water, UNIFIL said. Many have now been escorted to Tyre but around 430 remain in two UNIFIL compounds. Officials are attempting to transport the rest to Tyre Friday.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 July 2006 09:14 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I believe it is a mistake to remove the UN Observers from their outposts.

This move will rank amongst one of the UN greatest failures.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Marg Bedore
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9838

posted 28 July 2006 09:21 AM      Profile for Marg Bedore     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think we should send letters of support and encouragement to Mrs Hess-vonKruedener in Kingston. Not radical stuff but encouragement to persist in her efforts.

[Address edited out by moderator since I haven't heard back from Marg about whether permission has been granted.]

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: Kingston | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 July 2006 09:51 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Would she be okay with you posting her address on the internet, Marg? That's not a rhetorical question and I'm not assuming she's not - maybe she's okay with it and it's posted publicly somewhere and it's common knowledge. I just want to make sure.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 09:53 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Hess-von Kruedener said her husband told her that the UN site had been fired upon for weeks, despite the fact that their vehicles and buildings were clearly marked.


Here's an answer in Major Hess-von Kruedener's own words.

quote:
Just last week, Hess-von Kruedner wrote an e-mail about his experiences after nine months in the area, words MacKenzie said are an obvious allusion to Hezbollah tactics.

''What I can tell you is this,'' he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. ''We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.

''The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity.''

Those words, particularly the last sentence, are not-so-veiled language indicating Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets near the post, said MacKenzie.

''What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defence Forces),'' he said.


Hezbollah using the UN Posts as human shields to then attack the Israelis.

Since the UN was aware of the situation "for weeks",pehaps one of the answers required is to the question:

Why did the UN not remove these observers from the obvious danger presented by Hezbollah's provocation?


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 July 2006 09:54 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, that kind of puts a different light on things if true.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 28 July 2006 10:06 AM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
I believe it is a mistake to remove the UN Observers from their outposts.

This move will rank amongst one of the UN greatest failures.


Well, hard to blame the UN - the situation changed beyond the parameters of their mission. They were neither armed nor empowered to engage with the combatants. It does make sense to pull them out.

It makes more sense to not murder them, but apparently that's beyond Israel's capacity at the moment.

This move is the result of Israel's murderous assault on civilian populations, and their apparent desire to remove any witnesses from the scene of the crime.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Kenehan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12163

posted 28 July 2006 10:13 AM      Profile for Kenehan     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry Michelle, but why would that matter?

Is it acceptable to kill UN observers if there's a "good chance" of also killing some "bad guys"?

What about the massacre at Qana? Is it okay to kill hundreds of people and scores of children if you have a "good chance" of getting some "bad guys"?

This obscene devaluing of human life has got to stop. Israel has destroyed the lives and livelihoods of thousands in the name of stopping opponents who have not managed to inflict a tenth of the carnage they have wrought. Despite overwhelming militray superiority, despite killing hundreds in retaliation for every one of their dead, despite the backing of the most powerful nations in the world, Israelis aren't safe. It's time to ask why.

And Lewis Mackenzie should be shot. What a ratshit treacherous way to dishonour the memory of a UN soldier who died in the service of peace - making excuses for his killers.


From: Ontario | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 10:25 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
This move is the result of Israel's murderous assault on civilian populations, and their apparent desire to remove any witnesses from the scene of the crime.


Does it have nothing to do with the willingness of Hezbollah to utilise the civilian population for tactical advantage?

War is ugly and this modern variant of a guerilla
force with tactical goals supported by and acting as a proxy for other nations with strategic goals at war with a conventional military is very ugly.

The anti-Israel types use a double standard to critique the conflict-a stringent set of moral equivalencies for Israel and a free pass for Hezbollah when both sides bear responsibility.

There aren't any good guys here.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 28 July 2006 10:25 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Another opinion from the same National Pest article, from another retired military personal Maj. David Kilmartin

quote:
However, Kilmartin says he believes the fatal bombing was deliberately done by a ''cowboy'' pilot who wasn't sanctioned to do so by his commanders.

''I think the individual who did it was a pilot who was a loose cannon on the deck,'' he said, adding the damage done indicated a direct hit. ''It's either that or he's a piss-poor pilot.''



From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 10:35 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No doubt there are fanatics on both sides.

I'll venture the opinion that the Israeli military is better disciplined than that.It was more likely a lower level tactical decision made out of the chain of command and intentionally plausibly denied at the lower command level.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 28 July 2006 10:37 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
There aren't any good guys here

Then why do you insist on being an apologist for everything the IDF does?

If Hezbollah had blown up the U.N. personal it would still be a reprehensible act worthy of condemnation.

Also being anti-militaristic adventurism is not "anti-israel".

I also genuinely doubt the utmost strategic significance of targeting this area while ignoring the risk posted to the U.N. Blaming the tactics of Hezbollah for indiscrimate endangerment of others loses credibility with the frequency it is used.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 28 July 2006 10:44 AM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:

Does it have nothing to do with the willingness of Hezbollah to utilise the civilian population for tactical advantage?


Hezbollah has little to do with the bombings in Beirut, to my knowledge.


quote:
The anti-Israel types use a double standard to critique the conflict-a stringent set of moral equivalencies for Israel and a free pass for Hezbollah when both sides bear responsibility.

There aren't any good guys here.


I never said they were. But I'm not going to preface every criticism of an Israeli action - the topic of this thread, incidentally - with a list of all the other bad people involved. Hezbollah sucks too.

And the civilians are paying the price for both sides. Hezbollah for continuing to fire missiles, and Israel for going way over the top and slaughtering civilians across the country.

May the Israeli and Hezbollah leadership collectively choke on their next bite.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
eau
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10058

posted 28 July 2006 10:48 AM      Profile for eau        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ridding the area of UN observers may well have been the intent. With overwhelming firepower, F16s, tanks etc, it pretty well gives ISrael the opportunity to now do in Lebanon what they have been doing in Gaza.

All Israel will succeed in doing is pushing ever more moderate Lebanese into Hezbullahs camp. Sad, sad and sadder.


From: BC | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 July 2006 11:06 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kenehan:
Sorry Michelle, but why would that matter?

Is it acceptable to kill UN observers if there's a "good chance" of also killing some "bad guys"?


No, no. Definitely not. I'm just saying that if Hezbollah actually was using the UN observers as human shields by stationing right next to their building and engaging, as is claimed in that quote, then they come in for a share of the blame for turning the UN location into the middle of the war zone. And it also puts into question the speculation that Israel might have been deliberately targeting the UN building.

That doesn't mean that Israel's not to blame for falling for the tactic and bombing the UN office in order to get the fighers near it, and I don't believe people should bomb civilian areas in the hopes of getting a few "bad guys" among them.

But I would also question why it is, if the UN knew that their observers were being used as human shields, that they didn't evacuate them from that building. If that report is true. That's a big "if" in itself.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2006 11:07 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Well, that kind of puts a different light on things if true.

What different light does it put on it?

The criticism of the U.N. in this case is criticism by butchers and their apologists seeking to deflect attention from murder.

It is similar to the U.S. ultra-right wave of "criticism" of the Christian Peacemakers, which was discussed on babble at the time.

It is also similar to the argument that women who dress in a certain way deserve to get raped.

I'm afraid I don't buy any arguments designed to blame the victim for the crime of the monster.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2006 11:09 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

I'm just saying that if Hezbollah actually was using the UN observers as human shields by stationing right next to their building and engaging, as is claimed in that quote, then they come in for a share of the blame for turning the UN location into the middle of the war zone.

What "quote" are you talking about? Who quoted whom?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2006 11:12 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
No doubt there are fanatics on both sides.

Of what -- your mirror?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 July 2006 11:13 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think this is the nature of guerilla warfare that the Israeli and western propaganda machine is attempting to make illegitimate. Expecting Hezbollah to come out in the open to fight an army that is armed to the eye teeth isn't realistic. Guerilla warfare was effective against the most well-equipped fascist armies of the last century. The right-wing propagandists will continue referring to them as terrorists and "cowards" when, in fact, it's those who drop bombs from above the clouds and from behind computerized missile launch stations who are the more calculating, un-feeling cowards murdering innocent women and children in the middle of the night.

I think Gwyn Dyer is right about this conflict. The Israelis, U.S. and Brits will fend-off international calls ceasefire for a week or so until the Israelis can inflict as much destruction as they can on Lebanese population. But they won;t be able to do significant damage to Hezbollah who are dug into bunkers on the other side. But the Israelis realize they face a fair number of casualties themselves if they send in ground troops of their own in a Tet-like offensive. It's dirty, and I don't doubt that it's poorer Lebanese and Israeli's taking the brunt of it as usual.

ETA: I know it's not supposed to matter to us which class of Israeli's are bearing the brunt of Hezbollah attacks, but I am curious just the same.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 28 July 2006 11:57 AM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
That doesn't mean that Israel's not to blame for falling for the tactic and bombing the UN office in order to get the fighers near it, and I don't believe people should bomb civilian areas in the hopes of getting a few "bad guys" among them.

According to Israel, everyone in Southern Lebanon is a terrorist..

quote:
"Mr Ramon said at a security cabinet meeting headed by Ehud Olmert, the prime minister. "Everyone in southern Lebanon is a terrorist and is connected to Hizbollah."

The sheer violence in that kind of statement boggles the mind. That's the justice minister, incidentally.

These places are not villages

quote:
"Asked whether entire villages should be flattened, he said: ``These places are not villages. They are military bases in which Hezbollah people are hiding and from which they are operating.''

Thousands of civilians are believed trapped in southern Lebanon, according to humanitarian officials. "


Zero respect for human life.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 01:30 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

Of what -- your mirror?



A spurious unsupported ad hominem attack from one of the loonier members of the activist community.

I must have said something right

Must have been the double standard thingy


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
otter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12062

posted 28 July 2006 01:38 PM      Profile for otter        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think Gwyn Dyer is right about this conflict. The Israelis, U.S. and Brits will fend-off international calls ceasefire for a week or so until the Israelis can inflict as much destruction as they can on Lebanese population.

As has been the want of militaristic aggressors since time immemorial.


From: agent provocateur inc. | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 28 July 2006 01:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I am confused. What is not as hominem about calling someone a "looney."
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 01:45 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Then why do you insist on being an apologist for everything the IDF does?


My dear NRK, There is a difference between presenting facts in a debate and supporting or defending those facts.

I have posted previously that Israel is wrong to attack Gaza or Lebanon.The Israelis bear responsibility for escalating the violence and there is no military solution-only a just negotiated settlement.

That said,it does not give Hamas and Hezbollah a free pass to stir up shit.Hamas and Hezbollah have the same responsibility to commit to a negotiated settlement.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 July 2006 01:48 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

No, no. Definitely not. I'm just saying that if Hezbollah actually was using the UN observers as human shields by stationing right next to their building and engaging, as is claimed in that quote, then they come in for a share of the blame for turning the UN location into the middle of the war zone. And it also puts into question the speculation that Israel might have been deliberately targeting the UN building.

That doesn't mean that Israel's not to blame for falling for the tactic and bombing the UN office in order to get the fighers near it, and I don't believe people should bomb civilian areas in the hopes of getting a few "bad guys" among them.

But I would also question why it is, if the UN knew that their observers were being used as human shields, that they didn't evacuate them from that building. If that report is true. That's a big "if" in itself.


I found an UN report the other night saying that
Hezbollah has used the UN observers as human shields before however I lost the report and I can no longer find the website on the UN homepage.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 01:49 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
I am confused. What is not as hominem about calling someone a "looney."

Timing. Got anything of interest to say?


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Kenehan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12163

posted 28 July 2006 01:50 PM      Profile for Kenehan     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
Does it have nothing to do with the willingness of Hezbollah to utilise the civilian population for tactical advantage?
One might want to ask why the civilian population is so willing to collaborate?

During the Vietnam War the Viet Cong were able to use "civilian shields" because civilians supported them. Today during the Iraq War Iraqi insurgents are able to hide and conduct guerilla strikes and the vanish for the same reason. Guerillas who don't have popular support don't last very long (as Che Guevara learned in Bolivia).

The fact is when faced with a choice between people who are killing your kids and blowing up your home and the people fighting those people - you're going to pick the latter. If you have any sense.

If Israelis want an end to the attacks maybe they should stop fuelling the hatred.


From: Ontario | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 01:55 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by arborman:

I never said they were. But I'm not going to preface every criticism of an Israeli action - the topic of this thread, incidentally - with a list of all the other bad people involved. Hezbollah sucks too.

And the civilians are paying the price for both sides. Hezbollah for continuing to fire missiles, and Israel for going way over the top and slaughtering civilians across the country.

May the Israeli and Hezbollah leadership collectively choke on their next bite.


I agree


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 28 July 2006 02:06 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I have no doubt that Hezbollah tried to take advantage of the modicum of "protection" that the UN observer post provided. Reports from all sources indicate that such behaviour was encountered in Srebrnicia when Bosniak militia used Durch peackeepers as a means of preventing Serb attacks. However this is more or less irrelevant.

I mean wasn't part of the point of having UN people at Srebrencia to create a shield in order to prevent Serb attacks against the enclave?

Anyway...

Kruedener in his earlier report, and also the evidence of the actual incident where Kruedener was killed indicate quite clearly that Israeli artillery and ariel bombardment was sustained on and off over the last few weeks and as such, whatever so called protection afforded by existance of the outpost was pretty close to nil, so this issue is moot.

It is quite clear based on Kruedener's communications that there was nothing really significant near the compound such as a Katyusha battery, or an artillery post, or even light mortar positions, so we have to assume that however much Hezbolah might have used the compound as protection, it was little more than for light infantry armed with small arms.

And specifically Kruedener does not say that Hezbollah people were "engaging," nor does he say that there were heavy weapons positioned nearby, nor does he mention a direct small arms engagement in close proximity to the post. One would think, that these details would surface in his report if they were.

He seems perfectly open to discussion of such things as this entry from his e-mail states:

quote:
On the night of 16 July, at 2125 hrs, a large firefight broke out between the Hezbollah and the IDF near a village called Majidyye and lasted for one hour and 40 minutes.

The absence of observations in that vein about engagements in the immediate proximity of the post speak volumes.

Given that fighting was going on at a fair distance from the position one really has to ask what was the military necsessity of attacking the area around the post, since there was no long range heavy weaponry in evidence?

The argument that the tactical situation neccesitated sustained fire against the post seems specious in this light, and actually reinforces the impression that the Israeli tactical and operational approach is often gratuitous and pell mell.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 28 July 2006 02:45 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Posted by Jester:
quote:
Since the UN was aware of the situation "for weeks",pehaps one of the answers required is to the question:

Why did the UN not remove these observers from the obvious danger presented by Hezbollah's provocation?


It would have been much more helpful had Jester posted Hess-von Kreudener's actual email rather than Lewis Mackenzie's spin on his words.

The actual email is available here and is a fascinating read:
http://tinyurl.com/fybl5

Moreover, if one reads the daily UNIFIL press releases since July 17, every reasonable precaution was taken to safeguard UN personnel in the observation posts.

Maybe Jester (and Harper) are smarter or more prescient than the rest of us, but it sure wouldn't have occurred to me that a clearly marked UN post would suffer a direct hit from an Israeli precision guided missile or missiles.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 08:28 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
It would have been much more helpful had Jester posted Hess-von Kreudener's actual email rather than Lewis Mackenzie's spin on his words.


From John K's link:

quote:
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.

I thank you for the opportunity to provide you with some information from the front lines here in south Lebanon.

Maj Hess-von Kruedener


From the link in my post of the NP article:

quote:
''What I can tell you is this,'' he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. ''We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.

''The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity.''


Gee John,thanks for clearing up the confusion.It would be much more helpful to read the post before complaining about it.

quote:
Maybe Jester (and Harper) are smarter or more prescient than the rest of us, but it sure wouldn't have occurred to me that a clearly marked UN post would suffer a direct hit from an Israeli precision guided missile or missiles.


John,John,John.I may or not be more prescient than you or Steve but I am definitely not as gullible.

It may not have occurred to you but let me assure you that it occurred to me that shit happens.Whether or not it was a direct hit.Indirect hits can snuff your wick just as easily.

I do not consider that the observations made by the UN members were worth their lives.This post has reported infracions since 1972 and the UN has done nothing.So,why are a couple more incident reports worth these men dying?

The UN as usual has made a cockup of it and good men died.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 July 2006 08:37 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
261 troops have died in this UN mission alone during the last 30 years.
From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2006 08:44 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:

I do not consider that the observations made by the UN members were worth their lives.This post has reported infracions since 1972 and the UN has done nothing.So,why are a couple more incident reports worth these men dying?

The UN as usual has made a cockup of it and good men died.


I don't blame the UN. I blame the observers themselves. They are obviously fanatics who are prepared to give their lives in vain -- kind of like suicide bombers.

No, on second thought, I blame their spouses, children, and families. A truly concerned and loving family would never allow their loved one to spend ages away from home in a useless occupation with nothing to expect but a senseless death. These are callous wives, cynical children, and uncaring parents. The blood of the observers is on their heads.

So you see, it's a complex situation, a convergence of coincidences which led to tragedy. Many are to blame. Numerous are those who, but for a slightly different act, could have averted the catastrophe.

The only ones who really acted properly throughout and had nothing to do with the butchery of these misguided UN peaceniks were the Israelis themselves. In fact, they clearly warned that UN as long ago as 1967 that they had no intention of respecting UN resolutions or international boundaries. The UN, the observers, their families, yes God himself, ought to have known since then that placing observers anywhere within a, say, 5000 km radius of Israel was bound to lead to disaster.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 28 July 2006 08:53 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The absence of observations in that vein about engagements in the immediate proximity of the post speak volumes.



quote:
This is all the information of a non-tactical nature that I can provide you. I cannot give you any info on Hezbollah position, proximity or the amount of or types of sorties the IAF is currently flying. Suffice to say that the activity levels and operational tempo of both parties is currently very high and continuous, with short breaks or pauses


Given the level of activity in the area,I would not rule out a deliberate attack on the UN post.

There is a willingness on the part of some leaders to allow Israel time to deal Hezbollah a fatal blow before pressing for a ceasefire.

It can't be done and will escalate the conflict.Israel calling up reserves,foreign fighters and Al Qaeda joining Hezbollah,escalating until there is nothing left to negotiate for.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 28 July 2006 09:05 PM      Profile for siren     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
There is a willingness on the part of some leaders to allow Israel time to deal Hezbollah a fatal blow before pressing for a ceasefire.

Why not name these leaders? At the G8 meeting; the UK, the US and Canada. At the Rome summit -- ditto. Fools who think the 3 recent incursion into Lebanon will wipe out the "terrorist" organization Hezbollah when that organization was founded on the failure of the last Israeli incursion to wipe out the Palestinian Liberation "terrorists".

The world is not dealing with quick learners here. Or for that matter, anyone who understands mass psychology. Morons, in a word.


From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 28 July 2006 09:08 PM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The National just had an interview with Lebanon's President. Amazingly they let him speak and for the first time we heard an unfiltered view of what they believe was behind the attack on the UN post:

quote:
The president said the Israeli air strike on Tuesday that killed four UN observers, including Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, was a case of "history repeating itself," pointing to the 1996 Israeli destruction of a UN base in Kana that killed dozens.

Lahoud said he believed the UN strike was a deliberate attack, a response to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's plea two days earlier for Israel to exercise restraint.


Lebanese president fully behind Hezbollah

Bravo to the CBC for airing this interview and for the first time letting an intelligent differing voice have a say. I can only imagine the flack they will take for airing this interview. Try to watch it on the news tonight.


From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 28 July 2006 09:16 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: Webgear ]


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 July 2006 12:27 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:

Given the level of activity in the area,I would not rule out a deliberate attack on the UN post.

There is a willingness on the part of some leaders to allow Israel time to deal Hezbollah a fatal blow before pressing for a ceasefire.


I think you are missing my point. My point is that as he seemed very able to say:

quote:
On the night of 16 July, at 2125 hrs, a large firefight broke out between the Hezbollah and the IDF near a village called Majidyye and lasted for one hour and 40 minutes.

And then in he describe the kinds of munitions dropped near his position. In my view if he felt able to disclose "after action summaries" of Israeli Hezbolah firefights, and then be specfic about a 1000 kg bomb being dropped near his position there is no reason why he would not be able to say what (if anything) it was dropped on, like, say, an artillery position if there was one there.

[ 29 July 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 29 July 2006 09:28 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes,I appreciate your point.It may be due to impartiality in immediate conflict.When the operational information is no longer sensitive,it is included in after-action reports on infractions.

Regardless of whether the targetting was deliberate and the political implications thereof,open hostilities negated the UN observer's mandate to patrol the Blue Line and they should have been removed.

I will be incautious enough to suggest Kofi Annan hung them out to dry to furthur his political agenda.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 29 July 2006 10:57 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

I don't blame the UN. I blame the observers themselves. They are obviously fanatics who are prepared to give their lives in vain -- kind of like suicide bombers.

No, on second thought, I blame their spouses, children, and families. A truly concerned and loving family would never allow their loved one to spend ages away from home in a useless occupation with nothing to expect but a senseless death. These are callous wives, cynical children, and uncaring parents. The blood of the observers is on their heads.

So you see, it's a complex situation, a convergence of coincidences which led to tragedy. Many are to blame. Numerous are those who, but for a slightly different act, could have averted the catastrophe.

The only ones who really acted properly throughout and had nothing to do with the butchery of these misguided UN peaceniks were the Israelis themselves. In fact, they clearly warned that UN as long ago as 1967 that they had no intention of respecting UN resolutions or international boundaries. The UN, the observers, their families, yes God himself, ought to have known since then that placing observers anywhere within a, say, 5000 km radius of Israel was bound to lead to disaster.

[ 28 July 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]


Even as as a poor attempt at satire,there are readers who may take exception to your words.Especially on this thread.

Is there a line somewhere you are unwilling to cross in support of your spin?


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michael Nenonen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6680

posted 29 July 2006 11:58 AM      Profile for Michael Nenonen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:

Does it have nothing to do with the willingness of Hezbollah to utilise the civilian population for tactical advantage?

War is ugly and this modern variant of a guerilla
force with tactical goals supported by and acting as a proxy for other nations with strategic goals at war with a conventional military is very ugly.

The anti-Israel types use a double standard to critique the conflict-a stringent set of moral equivalencies for Israel and a free pass for Hezbollah when both sides bear responsibility.

There aren't any good guys here.



This article challenges the idea that Hezbollah regularly uses civilians as human shields:

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/salon025.html

“Throughout this now 16-day-old war, Israeli planes high above civilian areas make decisions on what to bomb. They send huge bombs capable of killing things for hundreds of meters around their targets, and then blame the inevitable civilian deaths -- the Lebanese government says 600 civilians have been killed so far -- on "terrorists" who callously use the civilian infrastructure for protection. But this claim is almost always false. My own reporting and that of other journalists reveals that in fact Hezbollah fighters -- as opposed to the much more numerous Hezbollah political members, and the vastly more numerous Hezbollah sympathizers -- avoid civilians. Much smarter and better trained than the PLO and Hamas fighters, they know that if they mingle with civilians, they will sooner or later be betrayed by collaborators -- as so many Palestinian militants have been.”


From: Vancouver | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 29 July 2006 12:01 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
'They just don't care' about UN force
Israeli military's recklessness, not malice, to blame for strike, ex-mission staffer says

G+M

Former UNIFIL officers shed light on the destruction of the UN post.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 29 July 2006 12:11 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
This article challenges the idea that Hezbollah regularly uses civilians as human shields:

Yes. There is more information available that appears to support Hezbollah's claim that they do not intentionally use civilians as shields.

Given that Hezbollah enjoys widespread support from the Lebanese population,including the Lebanese president and some of the Christian population,it does not make sense that they are similar to the PLO in the 80s in brutalising the population.

In the modern era of conflict,war is more or less a vehicle to utilise in gaining public support rather than an end in itself.If this is the case,the Israelis are definitely on the losing end.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 29 July 2006 08:39 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
...Regardless of whether the targetting was deliberate and the political implications thereof,open hostilities negated the UN observer's mandate to patrol the Blue Line and they should have been removed.

I will be incautious enough to suggest Kofi Annan hung them out to dry to furthur his political agenda.


Are you seriously suggesting that Annan left the UN observers there in the hope that the IDF would murder them and thus improve the UN's public image? Or maybe he blew them up himself, just so he could blame Israel?


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 29 July 2006 08:49 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Please. The UN positions were observation posts. Now that the UN has withdrawn following the deliberate targetting of an unarmed mission, who will provide independent witness to allegations of the war crimes to come? Does anyone not think Israel intends to "cleanse" southern Lebanon as has been stated?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 29 July 2006 09:53 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, that's more believable than saying Annan left them there for his own political agenda.

ETA: according to the UNIFIL press release for July 28 there are still UNIFIL bases, to which the unarmed observers have been moved. So does that mean there are still potential witnesses?

[ 29 July 2006: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 29 July 2006 11:15 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Contrarian:
Are you seriously suggesting that Annan left the UN observers there in the hope that the IDF would murder them and thus improve the UN's public image? Or maybe he blew them up himself, just so he could blame Israel?


No. You made that up yourself.If you spend the time to comprehend the thread,it may spare you the need for ill-informed commentary

[ 29 July 2006: Message edited by: jester ]


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 31 July 2006 11:45 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
UN observer confirmed dead in last week's strike

"The body of missing Canadian UN observer Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener has been found -- almost a week after his observation base in southern Lebanon was hit during an Israeli air strike."


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 30 September 2006 10:47 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This is probably as close to an answer as she'll ever get.

UN: Israel used precision bomb to hit UN officers

quote:
Israel used a precision-guided bomb to launch a direct hit on four U.N. peacekeepers killed in southern Lebanon last July, the United Nations said on Friday of its probe into the incident.

But a report by a special U.N.-appointed board of inquiry could not affix blame because Israel did not allow the access to operational or tactical level commanders involved in the July 25 disaster at Khiam. Four military observers died, officers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland.

Therefore, the board was "unable to determine why the attacks on the U.N. position were not halted, despite repeated demarches (communications) to the Israeli authorities from U.N. personnel, both in the field and in U.N. headquarters," Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement.
...
Despite not drawing any conclusions, a senior U.N. official briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said precision-guided munitions were "precision-guided and meant to hit the targets they hit, which was the United Nations."

"War is hell, peacekeeping is not supposed to be," the official said.
...
U.N. officials agreed Hizbollah guerrillas were at a base in the area as well as in a nearby prison. But they said there was no activity from the militia on July 25 and the U.N. bunker was clearly marked.
...
An Irish army officer in south Lebanon warned Israeli forces six times that its strikes threatened the lives of the four observers, Ireland's Foreign Ministry said.



From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 02 February 2008 09:40 AM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Lieutenant-General Michel Gauthier, Commander Canadian Expeditionary Force Command (CEFCOM), released today the findings from the Major Paeta Hess-Von Kruedener Board of Inquiry (BOI) that investigated the bombing of the UN Patrol Base Khiam in Southern Lebanon, July 25, 2006.

Major Paeta Hess-Von Kruedener Board of Inquiry Released


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 02 February 2008 10:29 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks very much for this update, Webgear.

From the DND summary:

quote:
On 25 July 2006, Major Hess-Von Kruedener was on duty at Patrol Base Khiam where he was subjected to three waves of bombardment throughout the course of the day. Reports of these attacks were passed to the Israeli Defence Forces by the UN, on the established liaison network, however the attacks did not cease.

The media are also reporting that Israel refused to cooperate with the DND inquiry.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 02 February 2008 01:31 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Your welcome Unionist. I will never try and deny information.

I always enjoy reading Board of Inquiry reports, it always increases my knowledge of mistakes I can prevent.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
adam stratton
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14803

posted 02 February 2008 10:36 PM      Profile for adam stratton        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The report notes that the IDF did not fully co-operate with the Canadian inquiry and denied access to documents and people involved in the event. It suggests that if the board had the access it requested, it might have been able to assign blame to an individual within the IDF.

(..) The board also couldn't resolve the unanswered question of why Israeli air force jets continued their attacks despite warnings that UN personnel were in the area.



In the Ottawa Citizen, Feb 1st, 2008

http://tinyurl.com/24av2q


From: Eastern Ontario | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 06 February 2008 07:11 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This story keeps getting worse:

UN officer reported Israeli war crimes before deadly bombing: widow

quote:
A United Nations military observer sent e-mails home to Canada reporting that Israel was bombing schools and waging "a campaign of terror against the Lebanese people" shortly before he was killed by an Israeli bomb in Lebanon, said his widow. [...]

"Obviously they were unhappy with what they were observing. Maybe that post was in the way as well," she said. "I know my husband was reporting war crimes. And I guess they don't want to deal with that." [...]

Hess-von Kruedener said she is not satisfied with the response of the Canadian government, which she alleges did not protest Israel's refusal to co-operate in the probe. [...]

In a statement issued Wednesday, Hess-von Kruedener called on the House of Commons to debate the findings of the board of inquiry report through the foreign minister, and take the issue to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly.

She also asked the public to get involved by writing their MPs.



From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 06 February 2008 10:01 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't like Ignatieff much, but as I recall he was the only Liberal contender at the time of its leadership race to state that Israel was committing a war crime by relentlessly bombing Lebanese villages and part of Beirut. I especially recall that our enlightened media promptly declared his political prospects over for having said this.
We are systematically complicit with two of the most corrupt and murderous nations on this planet. Indeed, I see no reason why we shouldn't be seen as one of them. The war in Afghanistan, a huge issue for Canadians?
Sure. We're waging it, and, by a wide margin, applauding it.
The decline and fall of public outrage (Heather Mallick)

From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 10 February 2008 01:42 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Canada's official report on the deaths of four United Nations peacekeepers - including a Canadian officer - at Israeli hands during the summer 2006 war in Lebanon is a slap in the face to those who died and their families, to those who wear the same uniforms, and to those who selflessly serve the UN around the world....

According to the report, neither the Israeli military nor the UN was "fully" cooperative with the investigation. Especially in the case of the former (seeing as how it was Israeli fire that killed the victims), one expects to find at least a degree of resentment in the relating of this refusal to be forthcoming. Instead there is only the bland prose of the cautious bureaucrat. And in other parts of the document, every effort is made to excuse questionable Israeli actions, to ignore them altogether, and even to shift the blame elsewhere.

One example has the board bending over backward to rationalize Israeli firing habits of the sort that killed the four OGL officers - and more than 1,000 Lebanese civilians - by concluding that Israeli ground attacks supported by air and artillery strikes were "typically focused on specific operations against a specific target," that these were "directed toward Hezbollah positions, lines of communication and infrastructure;" and that the resistance placed non-combatants at risk by being "well integrated with the civilian population and infrastructure." In other words, in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary, the report insinuates that the Israelis did not mean to destroy Patrol Base Khiam or even to blast away indiscriminately, only to root out enemies hiding among civilians....

Where the really important findings of the lengthy investigation should be, there is only blank paper. The recommendations only make matters worse: Nowhere do they meaningfully address the real issues at stake, or even some of the - pointedly Israeli - failings acknowledged earlier in the document.

For these and other reasons, the report is not just an insult to all those who read it. It is also raises more questions than it answers. If the board was not even willing to mention the possibility that the Israeli military acted with, at best, wanton disregard for the welfare of UN personnel (not to mention civilians), or to reveal what is sees as the "cause" of the incident, what options are we left with? Were Major Hess-Von Kruedener and his colleagues deliberately assassinated because they reported or witnessed atrocities, were they the unfortunate victims of an unintended (although obviously not unpredictable) mistake, were their deaths due to the latent hostility that marks much of Israel's interactions with the UN, or is the truth a mix of these and/or other possibilities?


Marc J. Sirois, managing editor of The Daily Star of Lebanon.

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 21 February 2008 07:36 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Still no answers... by Thomas Walkom

quote:
Certainly what the UN monitors were observing in the summer of 2006 was not pretty. Yesterday, Hess-von Kruedener's wife, Cynthia, read out to me an email from her husband that described Israel's bombing of a nearby hospital.

"What this has to do with Hezbollah, I have no idea," he wrote. "I agree that the Israelis have the right to protect themselves, but they have indiscriminately bombed and targeted a civilian population's infrastructure, which is a war crime under the Geneva Convention."

In fact, an earlier UN inquiry had concluded that on the day of the fatal bombing Hezbollah guerrillas were not in the vicinity of the post. Maybe the Israeli forces didn't know this. But the Canadian inquiry couldn't find out since both Israel and the UN refused to let it interview the relevant people.

When the Canadian report came out earlier this month, it was accorded a few paragraphs in the press. Nobody in authority said much, because anything that could be said might be construed as a criticism of the Israeli government – which in Canadian political circles (although, tellingly, not in Israeli ones) is considered unwise.



From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca