http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

 

The UN intends to investigate Gaza despite not receiving permission from Israel. They say they will enter through Egypt. Both Hamas and Israel will be investigated as both perpetrated alleged war crimes throughout the conflict.

 

It's really sad to see Israel giving the UN the finger. The UN group responsible, the Human Rights Council, has been accused of bias against Israel in the past, but that doesn't mean they should be barred from investigating.

 

The article points out that the inquiry is being headed by Richard Goldstone, a "respected South African war crimes prosecutor who is also Jewish" which has given it some clout despite accusations of bias.

Good for them -- it's not Israel's place to decide who gets to investigate happenings in Gaza. I agree with your point about the HRC as well.

 

If I were President Obama I would ask them to make Baghdad their very next stop.

I completely agree the U.N should conduct this investigation regardless of Israel's willingness to cooperate.. it's like asking a suspected thief if he agrees for a search in his apartment. Obviously, the "agreement" is irrelevant.

 

However, the U.N in general - and the Human Rights Council specifically - were accused multiple times of being biased against Israel. I think it would only be fair to have yet another group, unbiased and separate from the U.N, Israel and Gaza, to conduct its own investigation as well.

 

Having a third party that isn't accused of being biased will also validate whatever conclusions are drawn from the investigations.

Both Hamas and Israel will be investigated as both perpetrated alledged war crimes [/i']throughout the conflict.

Not to be picky, but that should read "allegedly perpetrated war crimes". Your phrasing assumes that crimes were actually perpetrated, whereas they are only alledged.

 

Or is it to be "Judgement first, then Trial"?