Criticism of the UN? Inadmissible!

[Crazed Rabbit]

A fellow from the UN Watch group unloaded on the human rights council for the foundation of hating Israel on which the council operates. The Council President told him any further such statements would be inadmissible (though he doesn't seem to mind all many of other insults and slurs)

Here's the video of the speech:
http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nl/...923&ct=3698367

And a transcript:

Mr. President,

Six decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, Eleanor Roosevelt, Réné Cassin and other eminent figures gathered here, on the banks of Lake Geneva, to reaffirm the principle of human dignity. They created the Commission on Human Rights. Today, we ask: What has become of their noble dream?

In this session we see the answer. Faced with compelling reports from around the world of torture, persecution, and violence against women, what has the Council pronounced, and what has it decided?

Nothing. Its response has been silence. Its response has been indifference. Its response has been criminal.

One might say, in Harry Truman’s words, that this has become a Do-Nothing, Good-for-Nothing Council.

But that would be inaccurate. This Council has, after all, done something.

It has enacted one resolution after another condemning one single state: Israel. In eight pronouncements—and there will be three more this session—Hamas and Hezbollah have been granted impunity. The entire rest of the world—millions upon millions of victims, in 191 countries—continue to go ignored.

So yes, this Council is doing something. And the Middle East dictators who orchestrate this campaign will tell you it is a very good thing. That they seek to protect human rights, Palestinian rights.

So too, the racist murderers and rapists of Darfur women tell us they care about the rights of Palestinian women; the occupiers of Tibet care about the occupied; and the butchers of Muslims in Chechnya care about Muslims.

But do these self-proclaimed defenders truly care about Palestinian rights?

Let us consider the past few months. More than 130 Palestinians were killed by Palestinian forces. This is three times the combined total that were the pretext for calling special sessions in July and November. Yet the champions of Palestinian rights—Ahmadinejad, Assad, Khaddafi, John Dugard—they say nothing. Little 3-year-old boy Salam Balousha and his two brothers were murdered in their car by Prime Minister Haniyeh’s troops. Why has this Council chosen silence?

Because Israel could not be blamed. Because, in truth, the dictators who run this Council couldn’t care less about Palestinians, or about any human rights.

They seek to demonize Israeli democracy, to delegitimize the Jewish state, to scapegoat the Jewish people. They also seek something else: to distort and pervert the very language and idea of human rights.

You ask: What has become of the founders’ dream? With terrible lies and moral inversion, it is being turned into a nightmare.

Thank you, Mr. President.

REPLY BY U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL PRESIDENT LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA:

For the first time in this session I will not express thanks for that statement. I shall point out to the distinguished representative of the organization that just spoke, the distinguished representative of United Nations Watch, if you'd kindly listen to me. I am sorry that I'm not in a position to thank you for your statement. I should mention that I will not tolerate any similar statements in the Council. The way in which members of this Council were referred to, and indeed the way in which the council itself was referred to, all of this is inadmissible. In the memory of the persons that you referred to, founders of the Human Rights Commission, and for the good of human rights, I would urge you in any future statements to observe some minimum proper conduct and language. Otherwise, any statement you make in similar tones to those used today will be taken out of the records.

Seems not having this council would be better than what we have now.

Crazed Rabbit

[Watchman]

I can see some demonizing being done all right.

[Marshal Murat]

I am proud that the human race can produce people like that.

[Mooks]

Good god. I have never read such a fine piece of oratory since iv read those books on roman senators. That guy is awsome.

/time to watch the movie. Must get munchies.

[Tribesman]

I am proud that the human race can produce people like that.

Yep its a strange quirk of evolution , how some people can manage to say something like........
It has enacted one resolution after another condemning one single state: Israel. In eight pronouncements—and there will be three more this session—Hamas and Hezbollah have been granted impunity. ....and not break into fits of laughter .
Or was he being serious ?

[Mooks]

Oooo comon. He couldve done a little bit of pacing back and forth and counting on his fingers. And he looked at his notes every 5 seconds, like someone just handed him the script and said "read this today".

[BDC]

It's not a UN thing, it's the problem of who makes up the UN.

If we get rid of humans, the UN would be perfect.

[Incongruous]

Yes that's right, the UN targets Isreal. Wonder why? Perhaps it's continuous and un-relenting use of state terrorism or, TERRORISM. Perhaps its because the greatest barrier to peace in the area is the millitarism an un-apolagetic nature of Isreal. Perhaps it is because Isreal is basically a rogue state, which has denied people basic human rights and commited genocide and then elected the man who had commited the act. So dn't post you're laughable comments about the Palestinian parliament being run by terrorists, as if that was an excuse for Isreal. Isreal seems to be run by a never ending stream of mass murderers and terrorists. Oh and guess what, Isreal created terrorism in the middle east.

Oh... wait, does that leave you're pathetic concept of the greatness of America and its allies FREEDOM in tatters? Really? No way, Isreal cannot be bad, my media says it isnt, so does my president. Wai is this the same media which is controled by those Lefty girlie men with no real balls! Godamnit, dont they remember Pearl Harbour? Oh wait is that also the same idiotic and basically evil president which duped you're country into the Iraq war? Naaaah who cares?

Perhaps you need to actually READ up on these issues rather than watch the feakin news and search the freakin web!

[Banquo's Ghost]

Yes that's right, the UN targets Isreal. Wonder why? Perhaps it's continuous and un-relenting use of state terrorism or, TERRORISM. Perhaps its because the greatest barrier to peace in the area is the millitarism an un-apolagetic nature of Isreal. Perhaps it is because Isreal is basically a rogue state, which has denied people basic human rights and commited genocide and then elected the man who had commited the act. So dn't post you're laughable comments about the Palestinian parliament being run by terrorists, as if that was an excuse for Isreal. Isreal seems to be run by a never ending stream of mass murderers and terrorists. Oh and guess what, Isreal created terrorism in the middle east.

Oh... wait, does that leave you're pathetic concept of the greatness of America and its allies FREEDOM in tatters? Really? No way, Isreal cannot be bad, my media says it isnt, so does my president. Wai is this the same media which is controled by those Lefty girlie men with no real balls! Godamnit, dont they remember Pearl Harbour? Oh wait is that also the same idiotic and basically evil president which duped you're country into the Iraq war? Naaaah who cares?

Perhaps you need to actually READ up on these issues rather than watch the feakin news and search the freakin web!

And breathe.

Rather too close to country bashing and personal attack. If a poster has a contrary view to yours, it does not mean they are not informed.

Let's keep it polite please, and address the argument, not the poster or their nationality.

[English assassin]

The content of the speech may be a little close to the edge, possibly teetering over it at one or two points, but there IS a potential irony in the president of a Human Rights Council threatening to take statements out of the records.

Freedom of expression is, after all, a human right.

[Del Arroyo]

The whole Zionist vs. Arab issue is a hell of a lot more complex than one=good and the other=bad. What is more important is that the mere idea of creating a Jewish homeland in some part of the recently-defunct Ottoman empire was incredibly racist, and that our continued facilitation of aggressive Zionist actions is not in our national best interest.

EDIT: Well actually, it's not even quite really that simple. Effectively, it is a mess.

[Vladimir]

And breathe.

Rather too close to country bashing and personal attack. If a poster has a contrary view to yours, it does not mean they are not informed.

Let's keep it polite please, and address the argument, not the poster or their nationality.

No no, it's fine. He forgot to use the words "Zionist conspiracy" but that was quite a good rant, multiple mispellings included. Bravo .

[Adrian II]

EDIT: Well actually, it's not even quite really that simple. Effectively, it is a mess.

Quite. Though that statement should be the start of any proper analysis, not its conclusion. And any proper solution should be forward-looking, not concerned with who shoulda coulda mighta done something fifty years ago. Gentlemen such as that speaker are in deep denial doodoo. They are possibly not even aware that they are, and they certainly don't give the impression that they care. They don't need to, it's what they are paid for.

[Watchman]

Yeah. It's not like either Israel or the Palestinians are going to disappear anywhere now. Sooner or later they'll have to figure out how to coexist peacefully, and I'm quite convinced the vast majority of common Joes and Janes on both sides would not like anything better.

It's just that both have unpleasantly large, influental and noisy "all or nothing" extreme wings with enough powerful foreign backers that particularly the Israelis can get away with being intractable jerks without repercussions beyond what the Palestinian ultras can inflict on them.

[rory_20_uk]

To try to enter a region with 4,000 years of history where one lot still get emotive about being dispossessed c. 2,000 years ago and created a new country 50 years ago and say "the past is in the past - let's all move on" is believing their own rhetoric.

Yugoslavia was another area where this mentality led to people not understanding what the protagonists were fighting over, as is Ireland.

[Watchman]

What'd I say about the extreme wings ?

[rory_20_uk]

As many areas have managed to not coexist peacefully for hundreds of years I feel that this is rather optimistic, small, vocal protagonists or no.

And often the small vocal groups manage to irritate some moderates in the other camp to become extremists, thus ensuring that there is a steady supply of hatred for years to come.

[Suraknar]

It's not a UN thing, it's the problem of who makes up the UN.

If we get rid of humans, the UN would be perfect.

Its not the constituents of the UN that is being disputed, it is the Council of Human Rights within the UN.

The guy talking in that video is the Ex.Director of UN watch, he is making a case...I actually did some reading, and they ae bringing up some valid arguments, about the constitution of the Human Rights Cooucil should be done.

However, by the same definition as he gives to exclude some countries from it, Israel is also being excluded.

[Goofball]

Yep its a strange quirk of evolution , how some people can manage to say something like........
It has enacted one resolution after another condemning one single state: Israel. In eight pronouncements—and there will be three more this session—Hamas and Hezbollah have been granted impunity. ....and not break into fits of laughter .
Or was he being serious ?

Sorry. I'm a pretty smart guy with a pretty good sense of humor, but I still coudn't find anything that funny about the oration.

Maybe because he didn't punctuate it with enough " " like you do for the rest of us who are a little slower on the uptake.

The fact is that there are a whole bunch of Muslim nations, but only one Israel. That means that any motion condemning Israel always passes with an overwhelming majority, but motions condemning Palestinian violence against Israel don't even make it to a vote. It's a simple question of majority ruling and has nothing to do with the right or wrong of the situation.

I have no illusions about Israel being a bastion of fairness and politeness when it comes to dealing with perceived threats to its security. But I also know that if I was in Israel's position I would fight pretty dirty too.

I was happy as hell that the Canadian government was the first to cut off aid to the Palestinian authority after the terrorists were elected. At least somebody had the balls to call a spade a spade.

[Watchman]

If I was in Israel's shoes I'd stop bullying the Palestinians for their farmland and water, dump the whole Eretz Yisrael idea into the bottom of the Dead Sea, and actually get serious about peaceful coexistence instead of hiding behind my big patron while still being an ass. Might have a lot less reason to fight dirty that way, as well as rather fewer sworn enemies.

But then again I'm a spineless Euro pinko-commie who hates freedom.

As many areas have managed to not coexist peacefully for hundreds of years I feel that this is rather optimistic, small, vocal protagonists or no.

You may have noticed state-level wars aren't nearly as popular as they once were though. Something to do with the element of staggering expenses in human and financial resources for little gain they tend to involve these days, I understand.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Watchman, The Palestinians elected a bunch of terrorists who want to destroy Israel. Something makes me think fixing a few gripes about water and land, real or imagined, isn't going to make the terrorists stop trying to destroy Israel.

It is not Israel that is holding back peace talks.

Yes that's right, the UN targets Isreal.

The Human Rights council targets no one else. There are many worse things going on in the world, but they don't care about them. That is the problem. They criticize no other country in the world as they do Israel, though there are many worse ones in the world.

Wonder why? Perhaps it's continuous and un-relenting use of state terrorism or, TERRORISM.

Lol. Like pulling out the Gaza? They unilaterally pulled out- that is, they did it for nothing in exchange from Palestinians - yet they get no recognition for it. Tell me: how many weddings have been bombed purposely by Israelis, how many restaurants, birthday parties, cafes?

Perhaps its because the greatest barrier to peace in the area is the millitarism an un-apolagetic nature of Isreal.

Nothing to do with palestinians launching rockets into Israel, nothing to do with Hamas not recognizing Israel's right to exist, with them waging terrorism upon Israel?

Crazed Rabbit

[Beirut]

I was happy as hell that the Canadian government was the first to cut off aid to the Palestinian authority after the terrorists were elected. At least somebody had the balls to call a spade a spade.

I'm trying to be a good boy and stay out of all this, but I completely disagree with the stance of the Canadian government. We let in war criminals, provided them with handouts, homes, and lawyers. We sell guns and bombs and nuclear reactors to all manner of governments. We buy, sell, and trade with almost anyone anywhere if there is a profit to be made. The worst manner of foreign officials who violate human rights are treated like dignitaries and given the red carpet.

But it all comes to a screeching halt when it involves the Palestinians. That's when our chewy moral center catapults through the top of our government's heads and cries out with all sorts of indignation that "we don't deal with terrorists". It's a complete farce and it kills any chance of putting an end to the violence in Palestine. How are we supposed to have any positive impact on these people by shutting them out? The people Harper refuses to talk to are exactly the people he needs to talk to.

Get the leader of the Hamas government over here, treat him like a foreign dignitary, show him the sights, involve him in our culture, talk to him, learn about what he's doing right and wrong in his government and then tell him. Show him schools and hospitals and offer grants to build these things in Palestine when the violence stops. Do something other than fold our arms, turn our backs and act like little children saying "I'm not talking to you anymore."

Harper's stance on Palestine is wrong, hypocritical, and un-Canadian. If it means helping to end suffering and killing we should be prepared to talk to anyone, anywhere, anytime. It's who we are. At least it's who we are supposed to be.

Hell, Israel has killed far more Canadians than Palestinians have and our diplomatic relations with Israel didn't stop for two seconds.

[Incongruous]

No no, it's fine. He forgot to use the words "Zionist conspiracy" but that was quite a good rant, multiple mispellings included. Bravo .

Yes, my inability to spell sometimes, means that pro-Isreal camp is in the right!
Pathetic. Maybe you should look up the thread I started up about the real fact of the Isreali occupation. hmm?
Or I could make it really easy for you, go look up a book called Freedom Next Time.

[Devastatin Dave]

Get the leader of the Hamas government over here, treat him like a foreign dignitary, show him the sights, involve him in our culture, talk to him, learn about what he's doing right and wrong in his government and then tell him. Show him schools and hospitals and offer grants to build these things in Palestine when the violence stops. Do something other than fold our arms, turn our backs and act like little children saying "I'm not talking to you anymore."

Its always soooo adorable when liberals cozy up with terrorists. How tooot!!!

[AntiochusIII]

Its always soooo adorable when liberals cozy up with terrorists. How tooot!!!

You do realize of course, that allegedly conservative people (or was Reagan just a goddam liberal sonofagun?) do that on a regular basis. As long as it's needed.

Beirut's position is admirable. It ignores the blame game and goes straight to the point -- something desperately lacking in the whole shebang.

[Watchman]

Watchman, The Palestinians elected a bunch of terrorists who want to destroy Israel. Something makes me think fixing a few gripes about water and land, real or imagined, isn't going to make the terrorists stop trying to destroy Israel.

It is not Israel that is holding back peace talks.

Israel is single-handedly responsible for mucking up the historically rather good Jewish-Muslim relationships worldwide you know. Its unapologetic land-grab policies are also the primary reason organizations like Hamas came to existence among the Palestinians in the first place - and when you look at it, it was Zionist ultras like the Stern Gang who taught their Arab neighbours a fair few of their militants' most popular tricks...

Anyway, Hamas only gets decent amounts of popular support as long as the Palestinian situation remains intolerable and embittering. It's always that way with the militant populists everywhere. Give them decent conditions and a fair deal, and I can pretty much quarantee the Palestinian general public will be far too busy trying to get rich and comfortable to have any interest in making Israel disappear.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Harper's stance on Palestine is wrong, hypocritical, and un-Canadian. If it means helping to end suffering and killing we should be prepared to talk to anyone, anywhere, anytime. It's who we are. At least it's who we are supposed to be.

So Canada should fund terrorists by giving money to the unrepentant Hamas government?

You seem to assume Hamas wants peace. Why is that? Why believe people who send their children off to murder innocents, who slander and demonize Israelis as inhuman, who tutor their kids in hate, who have for years fought to kill all Israelis, want peace? Arafat, allegedly less radical, had multiple chances and passed them up to wage terrorism.

Hamas knows that it must renounce terrorism and accept Israel's existence in order to get international support - but it hasn't done that. Does that not show their priorities?

Israel is single-handedly responsible for mucking up the historically rather good Jewish-Muslim relationships worldwide you know.

Hilarious. I think 1948 showed us Muslims didn't want to play nice from the beginning. Any 'land grab' occurred after Muslims invaded or attacked.

Anyway, Hamas only gets decent amounts of popular support as long as the Palestinian situation remains intolerable and embittering. It's always that way with the militant populists everywhere. Give them decent conditions and a fair deal, and I can pretty much quarantee the Palestinian general public will be far too busy trying to get rich and comfortable to have any interest in making Israel disappear.

Where did the 7/7 bombers in Britain come from? Once again, this is just trying to shift the blame from the terrorists.

Now, this council has condemned 'defamation of religion', specifically (in their words) Islam:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070330/...hts_islam_dc_1

GENEVA (Reuters) - The
United Nations top human rights body condemned "defamation" of religion on Friday and, in an apparent reference to the storm over the Prophet cartoons, said press freedom had its limits.

With the support of China, Russia and Cuba, Moslem and Arab states comfortably won a vote on the 47-state Human Rights Council to express concern at "negative stereotyping" of religions and "attempts to identify Islam with terrorism."

Iran portraying Jews as pigs? No problem. But you can't criticize Islam!

Crazed Rabbit

[Incongruous]

Don't Kid yourself CR. all this ranting against countries dealing with terrorists is ridiculous. You know damn well that the USA's recent history is more seedy, backstabbinf and violent than most others.

[Suraknar]

@Beirut - Ouin, Block encore alors pour une deuxieme partie de minorité - ca marche mieux le gouvernement en minorité de toute maniere.

Now, as far as the topic is concerned, it has to start somewhere, I kinda touk an interest about this, thanks to the OP for posting this. I have been reading some and watching more videos.

9 May 2006 – The United Nations General Assembly today elected 47 members of the recently established UN Human Rights Council – a move immediately welcomed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as an opportunity for a fresh start as the new body replaces the much criticized and now defunct Human Rights Commission.
Noting that the Council will be required to conduct a regular review of the human rights record of all countries beginning with those serving on it, Mr. Annan said through a spokesman: “This will give its members the chance to show the depth of their commitment to promote human rights both at home and abroad.”

With all countries taking part in the voting, Mr. Annan said that the high rate of participation reflected “a widely shared commitment to replace the previous Commission on Human Rights with a body that can work more effectively, and can embody human rights ideals with more credibility; and that the Council elected today offers the United Nations a unique opportunity to make a fresh start in its vital work of upholding the highest standards of human rights.”

All regions – Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Western Europe and Other states – obtained or exceeded the required 96-vote majority needed to fill their allocated number of members, except the Eastern European States, where only the Russian Federation, Poland and the Czech Republic won seats on the first ballot, while Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Romania were elected in a second round. [...]

In short, UN-Watch is not very happy with the way events unfolded and how the original proposal for a HR Council was modified by the Great Assembly and subsequent voting.

Seems like UN-Watch wants the HR Council to be made up of only countries that actually have a HR Charter within their Law Systems and in application.

While, the UN as a body prefers to invite countries in that council that do not necessarilly have HR charters in application, in order to promote the rights to many countries from within by engaging them in the process.

Because now, here is where we seem to have a problem (from the little reading i have been doing on this):

UN Charter Preamble

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and

to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and

to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS

Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.

And

Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and

4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

So mentions of Human rights (that I have been able to find) in the Charter itself, do not obligate members to adhere to them, however do invite promotion of Human Rights.

On the other hand, in article 2.

Article 2
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.

3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.

6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.

7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

Therefore, no country can be really forced to addopt a HR Charter, and it is up to that country and it's people to do so and attain that level of Human Justice.

In conclusion, I think that in this basis the criticism of UN-watch was deemed inadmissible. not because it was critisism, but because of its sgestive tone versus some of the member countries.

Criticism is good, but it needs to be made Diplomatically I think under such an Organisation.

Its certaintly a complicated Issue...

[Beirut]

Its always soooo adorable when liberals cozy up with terrorists. How tooot!!!

Oh Dave, you Devastate me as always.

So Canada should fund terrorists by giving money to the unrepentant Hamas government?

Both our governments have dealt with and given money to lots of unrepentant people. To draw a line in the sand that has only Palestine on the other side is ridiculous.

You seem to assume Hamas wants peace. Why is that? Why believe people who send their children off to murder innocents, who slander and demonize Israelis as inhuman, who tutor their kids in hate, who have for years fought to kill all Israelis, want peace? Arafat, allegedly less radical, had multiple chances and passed them up to wage terrorism.

The issue is not whether Hamas wants peace, the issue for Canada is to tell Hamas that we want peace and show them the benefits of ending the violence. As for "sending their children off to murder innocents", have no doubt, Israelis murder far, far more Palestinians than Palestinians murder Israelis, so we should be careful about which moral horse we ride highly upon.

Hamas knows that it must renounce terrorism and accept Israel's existence in order to get international support - but it hasn't done that. Does that not show their priorities?

The Palestinian's priority is survival. The Israelis are killing them like it's free, just as they have been doing for decades. The blame cannot be placed solely with the Palestinians. Israel is not the victim here, Israel is the country with the massive army and air force, with endless billions in handouts from the US, with the highest of high tech assets, with nuclear weapons, yet we're supposed to vilify the poor and the subjugated who live in squalor and apartheid and have no friends? Not a chance. Canada should not be so blindly biased.

Making peace requires intellectual honesty and guts. I'm sorry our PM Harper has neither.