Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Hezbollah can't tolerate a difference in "opinion" | Main | Iranian people don't support Hezballah »

Saturday, July 22, 2006

Coyne Shames Arbour

In today's National Post (behind the usual subscriber barrier, so I won't bother linking), Andrew Coyne takes UN Human Rights High Commissioner, Canadian Louise Arbour, to task for her remarks about Israel being guilty of war crimes as dictated by the Geneva Conventions.

He writes:

The First Protocol to the Geneva Conventions reads in part: "The presence or movements of the civilian population... shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations... The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population... in order to attempt to shield military objectives."

If you attempt to use civilians as human shields, you are yourself guilty of war crimes. What is more, the culpability for any civilian deaths that occur as a result falls upon you, not the attacking party. Ms. Arbour would do well to read the conventions she cites.

Geneva Conventions resource can be found here.

Posted by RightGirl on July 22, 2006 in International Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Coyne Shames Arbour:



exactyly why usa is right NOT to join world crimes tribunal

the scum of the earth the left and the muslim are the ONLY ONES WHO BELEIVE IN


not bush the first as the left called him for wanting free trade

Posted by: woodbridge | 2006-07-22 3:02:29 PM

Ann Louise Arbour is a product of the 1960s "Quiet Revolution" in Quebec, which came about mostly as a rebellion against the prosperous but straitjacketed premier Maurice Duplessis. She freely admits to dabbling in separatism, candidly dismissing it as part and parcel of the 1960s intellectual scene (without saying it was wrong), and is a fine example of the mindless emotionalism, misandristic feminism, and underdog-at-any-cost attitudes of that era.

As they say, you become the thing you hate. It would shock Arbour and her contemporaries unspeakably to realize that they have become just as ideologically strictured as the people they grew up rebelling against. The worst of it is that, unlike those they pledged to destroy, they have no idea how to make things run, nor do they care.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2006-07-22 5:00:00 PM

crime of humanity NOT?

suicide/HOMICIDE bombings?


Two Canadian soldiers murdered by MUSLIMS
Eight injured in suicide bomb attack

Cpl. Jason Patrick Warren.
Photograph by : CP/HO

Saturday, July 22, 2006
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Celebration turned to grief for Canadian troops after a pair of suicide bombers killed two soldiers and wounded eight on Saturday, as their armoured convoy neared its home base at the end of a major phase of combat operations.
The first blast, from a vehicle laden with explosives, killed Cpl. Francisco Gomez, 44, an anti-armour specialist from the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry in Edmonton, who was driving the Bison armoured vehicle targeted by the bomber's vehicle. Cpl. Jason Patrick Warren, 29, of the Black Watch in Montreal was also killed.

One injured soldier, assessed to be in good condition with non-life-threatening injuries, was flown to a military hospital in Germany, for treatment not available in Afghanistan. Two wounded soldiers were kept in hospital for observation, and five were released from hospital Saturday night and are expected to return to duties shortly. The soldiers were part of a returning convoy of Canadian soldiers who were destined to return to Canada within weeks, their tour of duty in Afghanistan complete.

All told, 19 Canadian soldiers and one Canadian diplomat have been killed while on duty in Afghanistan since the Canadian forces were deployed there in 2002 to fight Taliban forces.

Posted by: woodbridge | 2006-07-22 5:41:19 PM

Let us not forget that Hizb'allah terrorist don't wear uniforms, and Charles Taylor conquered Liberia, Paul Martin's ship flag of choice, for Islam with kidnapped child soldiers.

Hmmm, child soldiers and non-uniformed terrorists. If they were killed in battle they could easily be passed off as civilians.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-07-22 8:30:43 PM

The terrorists don't give a damn about the Geneva Convention, except as another tool to persecute their enemies (ie: us), the lib-left weenies need to be slapped upside the head until they understand that. Then we can get down to business and use whatever means necessary to eliminate these scumbags. Until then the west might as well be fighting with one hand tied behind our collective back and our feet shackled.

Posted by: JohnnyR | 2006-07-22 11:11:34 PM

In war,one must fight fire with fire
To do anything less is to court disaster.
To fight by the Leftist World Handbook
Is to court certain defeat
War may have been a sport in distant ages past
But this one is very real
And we had better damn well win because I don't believe that this enemy intends to take any prisoners.

Posted by: in ques t | 2006-07-23 11:45:37 AM

Arbour is a prime example of the stupidity of the Lib/Left.
This trough pig needs to be sent back to the barnyard she came from.

Posted by: OMMAG | 2006-07-23 12:30:37 PM

OMMAG is right about Arbour. Anyone with a brain who actually reads the Geneva Convention can see it does NOT and can NOT apply to Islamists. It deals with combattants in uniform.

The Arbour appointment by the Liberals was a disgrace to Canada, and the Americans are right not to agree to this kangarou court.

Posted by: Alain | 2006-07-23 1:36:56 PM

Arbour would probably not think the same thing, if her children were being fired at, by those terrorist missiles.

Or perhaps she actually is dumb enough to believe that the terrorists have every right to fire thousands of missiles into a neighboring state. I wonder what she would say if they actually got their hands onto one that landed in canada? I suppose her position on that would be different. Then again, she is no war specialist, which reminds me of the fact that war is a different beast than is in and of the civil world.

Once upon a time, I have to admit, I would have been proud of the fact that a woman had made it to her position. Now, I am ashamed of the fact that a person, regardless of her gender, has made it to that position, and is so incredably ignorant. If she represents the best of her profession, we may just be sitting ducks!?

Posted by: Lady | 2006-07-24 2:00:00 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.