israel doesn't commit war crimes.

[Phil G]

Helpful:

Note the sources for their data are from the UN (which has no interest in being biased)

Well now that's a debatable point. According to Ban Ki Moon, the UN is biased.

"On August 16, 2013, Ban Ki-moon admitted that the UN was biased against Israel, stating in a meeting with Israeli students that there was a biased attitude towards the Israeli people and Israeli government at the UN. He described this as "an unfortunate situation."

Ban Ki-moon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Antigone]

Well now that's a debatable point. According to Ban Ki Moon, the UN is biased.

"On August 16, 2013, Ban Ki-moon admitted that the UN was biased against Israel, stating in a meeting with Israeli students that there was a biased attitude towards the Israeli people and Israeli government at the UN. He described this as "an unfortunate situation."

Ban Ki-moon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Biased to the point of falsifying data? I don't think so.

 

[Phil G]

Biased to the point of falsifying data? I don't think so.

Think or know?

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Biased to the point of falsifying data? I don't think so.

Well, you are mistaken.

The UN is full of anti semites and socialists. They have an agenda that doesn't concern the truth.

 

[Antigone]

Well, you are mistaken.

The UN is full of anti semites and socialists. They have an agenda that doesn't concern the truth.

[source missing]

Facts, please.

Think or know?

I have no reason to believe they do, let's put it that way. I doubt anyone who doesn't work as a fairly high-ranking member of the UN and has access to all available data will be able to determine that.

FWIW, Ban Ki-Moon's statements do not, an sich, prove a definite bias one way or another, and he retracted his statement the week after.

 

[Phil G]

[source missing]

Facts, please.



I have no reason to believe they do, let's put it that way. I doubt anyone who doesn't work as a fairly high-ranking member of the UN and has access to all available data will be able to determine that.

FWIW, Ban Ki-Moon's statements do not, an sich, prove a definite bias one way or another, and he retracted his statement the week after.

The UN Human Rights Council has as current members Algeria, Congo, Ethiopia, India, Sierra Leone, China, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Cuba, Indonesia to name a few. These countries are given the privilege to passing resolutions against human rights abuses in other countries, usually Israel.

How far will the UN go against Israel? I suggest it may be further than you think or want to believe.

As for Ban Ki moon, he says one thing and then another the total opposite. Why is that? He has brought himself and, as Secretary-General of the UN, the UN itself into a position of being untrustworthy.

Also an interesting piece by UN Watch.

UN, Israel & Anti-Semitism - UN Watch

 

[Antigone]

The UN Human Rights Council has as current members Algeria, Congo, Ethiopia, India, Sierra Leone, China, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Cuba, Indonesia to name a few. These countries are given the privilege to passing resolutions against human rights abuses in other countries, usually Israel.

If even those countries think Israel is doing badly, what does that say about Israel?

And the UNHRC isn't the only UN organ that concerns itself with Israel.

Oh, and 'to name a few' suggests you selectively chose to list a few countries.

How far will the UN go against Israel? I suggest it may be further than you think or want to believe.

As for Ban Ki moon, he says one thing and then another the total opposite. Why is that? He has brought himself and, as Secretary-General of the UN, the UN itself into a position of being untrustworthy.

He is, after all, a politician. UN Watch didn't feel they had this problem with Kofi Anan, by the way.

Additonally, the fact that an admittedly disproportionate number of UNHRC resolutions seems to be aimed at Israel - the bias of which Ban Ki Moon was speaking - does not in and of itself indicate that there has been mass fraud with statistics.

The UN is an unyielding, contrary beast that is only as good as the people who make it, but there are plenty of researchers in service of the UN without an agenda.

 

[Armoured]

Well, you are mistaken.

The UN is full of anti semites and socialists. They have an agenda that doesn't concern the truth.

Oh noes! Not teh SOCIALISTS!!1!one!

 

[Phil G]

If even those countries think Israel is doing badly, what does that say about Israel?

And the UNHRC isn't the only UN organ that concerns itself with Israel.

Oh, and 'to name a few' suggests you selectively chose to list a few countries.



He is, after all, a politician. UN Watch didn't feel they had this problem with Kofi Anan, by the way.

Additonally, the fact that an admittedly disproportionate number of UNHRC resolutions seems to be aimed at Israel - the bias of which Ban Ki Moon was speaking - does not in and of itself indicate that there has been mass fraud with statistics.

The UN is an unyielding, contrary beast that is only as good as the people who make it, but there are plenty of researchers in service of the UN without an agenda.

My point about UNHRC isn't just that it has a bias against Israel, but that a lot of countries who are allowed to vote on resolutions against Israel or even sit on the UNHC have an extremely bad human rights record themselves, some even worse than any accusations against Israel, yet my understanding is that Israel has never been allowed on the UNHRC. That is why I highlighted the countries I did.

While it is true that Kofi Anan did a lot to move the UN in the right direction, the UN remains a biased organisation against Israel.

The figures for the civilian death toll in Gaza must take into account the fact that not all numbers attributed to civilians are civilian. And if the UN doesn't intentionally falsify figures, it doesn't attempt to qualify them either. They are currently happy to accept the figures given to them by the Gaza Health Ministry which is run by Hamas.

I'm sure it's true that there are researchers in the UN without an agenda, but I am also sure there are those who have. Which is why ultimately the UN and its statistics cannot be trusted when it comes to Israel.

 

[Historicus]

Mod Hat On
This thread has been moved to the OBOB Politics forum from the main OBOB forums.
Please keep all CF rules and OBOB specific guidelines in mind while posting.
Mod Hat Off
​

 

[Zeek]

Even if your figures were the right figures, your previous logic would be nonsensical.

Sorry ebia, you will have enlighten me about what is nonsensical...I don't catch your drift.