| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
  Israel's Occupation:  Who Is Most Out of Touch With Reality?  By Alan Hart PIC, Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, April 9, 2012  
 Alan Hart argues that while the UN Human Rights Council may 
	well be a hypocritical body because it chooses to ignore numerous human 
	rights abuses in Africa and Asia, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin 
	Netanyahu’s attack on it for its decision to investigate the impact of 
	Israeli colonies on the Palestinians is not just hypocritical, but absurd 
	and smacks of paranoia.
 
 If more proof was needed (some of us 
	think it isn’t) that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu lives in a 
	fantasy world that exists only in his own deluded mind, his latest verbal 
	assault on the UN Human Rights Council for its decision to appoint and 
	despatch an independent international fact-finding mission “to investigate 
	the implications of the (illegal) Israeli settlements on the civil, 
	political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people 
	throughout the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem”, is 
	it.
 
		
			| 
				
					| “This claim isn’t just nuts; it’s a sort of craziness 
					triple play – a lie wrapped in an absurdity swaddled in 
					paranoia.” |  |  The council, Netanyahu said in his fury, has “an automatic majority 
	against Israel”, is “hypocritical” and “out of touch with reality”. He added 
	that it “should be ashamed of itself”. There is, in fact, some substance to the charge that the UN Human Rights 
	Council is hypocritical. There are many abuses of human rights in many 
	countries which it does not investigate because the African, Asian and Latin 
	American majority on the 47-member council say “No”. So there is most 
	certainly a case for saying that this particular UN body is hypocritical, 
	even out of touch with some realities and, in that context, appears to be 
	obsessed with Israel-Palestine.
 But does that mean the decision of 
	the UN Human Rights Council to set up an independent investigation of the 
	implications of Israel’s on-going colonization of the West Bank including 
	East Jerusalem, should be treated with contempt and not taken seriously?
 
 Netanyahu claims that it does.
 
 In my opinion that Netanyahu claim 
	deserves the judgement delivered about a different matter in a recent 
	article by economist Paul Krugman published in the New York Times. 
	He was commenting on the claim by the Republican leadership in general and 
	front-runner Mitt Romney in particular that the high and rising price of 
	gasoline in America is “thanks to an Obama administration plot”. Krugman 
	wrote:
 
 “This claim isn’t just nuts; it’s a sort of craziness triple 
	play – a lie wrapped in an absurdity swaddled in paranoia.”
 
 Netanyahu’s purpose was, of course, to encourage other powers led by America 
	to use their influence to kill the UN Human Rights Council’s initiative 
	before it takes on real life. And the early signs are in his favour. The US 
	ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Betty King, said the council’s decision 
	“harmed efforts to restart negotiations between Israel and the 
	Palestinians”.
 
 That has to be a joke given that there is no prospect 
	of restarting real and serious negotiations as long as Israel continues to 
	consolidate its occupation of the West Bank, and as long as Netanyahu’s 
	position is, in effect, that negotiations must end with the Palestinians 
	surrendering on Israel’s terms.
 
 I think it’s reasonable to imagine 
	that when ambassador King made her statement, she was aware that the Obama 
	administration would be required by the Zionist lobby and its stooges in 
	Congress to bully and intimidate the Human Rights Council into aborting its 
	investigation.
 
 While Netanyahu waits to see if the Obama 
	administration will do his dirty work on this occasion, his government has 
	cut all contact with the UN Human Rights Council and announced that it will 
	prevent the council’s team of independent investigators entering Israel or 
	the occupied West Bank from Jordan.
 
		
			| 
				
					| “Will any mainstream Western media institution have the 
					balls to offend Zionism by giving space or airtime to voices 
					expressing outrage at Israel’s continuing immunity from what 
					honest investigation would describe as crimes against 
					humanity?” |  |  Whichever way you look at it, the signs are that this particular mission 
	of the UN Human Rights Council will be more than DOA (Dead On Arrival). It 
	will most likely be DBA (Dead Before Arrival). In that event one of the questions in my mind will be this.Note
 Will 
	any mainstream Western media institution have the balls to offend Zionism by 
	giving space or airtime to voices expressing outrage at Israel’s continuing 
	immunity from what honest investigation would describe as crimes against 
	humanity?
 
 Contrary to what Netanyahu seems to think, the Palestinians 
	are human and do have rights. And they, not Jews, are the victims in the 
	true story of the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over 
	Palestine that became Israel. (As I have written previously, Israeli and 
	many other Jews need to feel they are the victims because victimhood is, it 
	seems, what gives them meaning.)
 
 As for the answer to my headline 
	question, nobody is more out of touch with reality on the ground in the 
	occupied West Bank than Netanyahu.
 Of the 47 rotating member states of the UN Human 
	Rights Commission, 36 voted in favour of the decision to investigate 
	Israel’s illegal settlement activities, and 10 including the Czech Republic 
	Romania, Hungary, Poland, Costa Rica, Italy and Spain, abstained. The United 
	States was the only country to vote against it. 
 
 |  |  |