I've been going out of my mind this past week seeing how the Israel Palestinian situation has been covered by the liberal media. I realize that even by posting this diary I'm fighting an uphill battle. I don't really plan on changing anyone's mind with this diary. Rather, I will attempt to diagnose where this problem has originated from.
1. Prominent democratic voices
-Professors such as Juan Cole
-Politicians such as Ralph Nader and Jimmy Carter
-Left wing Jewish Americans writing for The Nation and other liberal publications and left wing Israeli Newspapers such as Haaretz
I want to be very clear. I do not wish to delegitimize any of these people or sources, but I do believe that many of these people have unfounded biases against Israel. Jimmy Carter is quick to label Israel as the worst perpetrator of human rights violations in the world. Not only is this untrue, but I find it instructive that he ignores the very real abuses in neighboring countries such as Saudi Arabia. Also, one must ask themselves why the United Nations readily passes resolutions against Israel to the detriment of regions that are ignored such as Darfur.
Last [January] the U.N. Human Rights Council held an emergency session, organized by Arab and Muslim nations, to condemn Israel for its military actions in the Gaza strip. That the council is capable of swift and decisive action is a welcome surprise; that Israel remains the only nation to provoke such action is not. In the [first] 17 months since its inception, the body has passed 13 condemnations, 12 of them against Israel.
The council replaced what was widely viewed as a cancer on the United Nations -- an ineffectual "Commission on Human Rights" that also had a single-minded focus on Israel. According to former Secretary-General Kofi Annan, "the selectivity and politicizing of its activities [were] in danger of bringing the entire U.N. system into disrepute."
The removal of the diseased commission [three] years ago was [replaced by] the new Human Rights Council...The problems begin with the council's composition. Only 25 of its 47 members are classified as "free democracies," according to Freedom House's ranking of civil liberties. Nine are classified as "not free." Four -- China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia -- are ranked as the "worst of the worst." These nations are responsible for repeated violations of the U.N.'s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet it is they who dominate the council, leading a powerful bloc of predominantly Arab and African nations that consistently vote as a unit.
These regimes have repeatedly used the council as a powerful tool for shielding themselves from scrutiny and meting out criticism along stark political lines. According to Human Rights Watch, the council has turned a blind eye to at least 26 countries -- the sites of some of the world's worst human-rights crises...when Cuba drew fire for persecuting journalists, and Belarus for political imprisonments and rigged elections, the council responded by removing monitors from both countries.
As fresh waves of violence convulsed Darfur in December, the council responded by dismissing the team of experts tasked with monitoring atrocities in that region. Sudan's closest allies, Egypt and China, have led the council in shielding the Sudanese regime.
2. George Bush, John Hagee, Joe Lieberman are on the other side of the issue
When failed president George Bush and supporter of torture Alan Dershowitz are on one side of an issue and winner of a Nobel peace prize and Habitat For Humanity advocate Jimmy Carter is on the other side of an issue then it's understandable why liberals are more likely to listen to Jimmy Carter.