Prejudice At The UN? So, What Else Is New?
Print This Post
Email This Post
Would any respectable court allow a judge to sit on a case after the judge made public statements prejudging the case and berating the defendent?
Of course not. Not in the normal world.
But in the twilight zone world of the United Nations, where mass-murdering dictatorships sit on the “human rights council”, a prejudiced judge is hardly anything out of the ordinary. Especially when it comes to prejudging Israel, of course.
London School of Economics law professor Christine Chinkin, pictured here (who shows us that ugliness—unlike beauty—is not just skin deep, but sometimes permeating to the core), is on a United Nations panel conducting [yet another] investigation into Israel’s possible “human rights” violations. The only problem is that she has already made plenty of statements asserting Israel’s guilt in her eyes, having accused Israel of “aggression” and “prima facie war crimes.” And that was before her involvement in the “investigation”. (Who needs facts when you have already reached your conclusions, right?)
The Jerusalem Post has reported that Geneva-based UN Watch, a European non-government organization, has submitted a 28-page legal brief to the United Nations last week to remove this lunatic from that panel.
It would not surprise me in the least if the United Nations ignores this because, after all, they probably don’t even have anyone in their phone directories who doesn’t already hate Israel. That would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

I previously posted about the latest rash of scandalous photos coming out of Afghanistan showing U.S. military atrocities under Obama’s command, and wondering if the media would pick up on it the way they did when it was Bush’s army… Well, here’s a twist I wasn’t expecting: yes, one of the U.S. media, Rolling Stone, [...]
Jeffrey Goldberg, a correspondent for the Atlantic, cast a spotlight on yet another disgustingly overt example of pure bias in the mainstream media, particularly at the anti-Semitic Reuters newswire. He points to a Reuters news item which contains the following despicable sentences: Police said it was a “terrorist attack” — Israel’s term for a Palestinian [...]
In the [sparse] reporting of the Palestinians’ massacre of the Fogel family, several newspapers stand out with their distorted sense of “balance”, i.e., where they feel overwhelmingly uncomfortable describing the barbarity of the Palestinians without at least taking a swipe or two at the Israelis, no matter how patently irrelevant or disgustingly disrespectful it comes [...]