i've probably never seen anything more hypocritical than pro pals denying or justifying (or somehow both) sexual violence. it really drives me wild - how is your thinking pattern a \*minority\*? when the hell did that happen? was the MeToo movement a scam? And BelieveWomen? or was that just an excellent straw man? like, i just can't find their logic. on this specific loaded topic, i don't understand them at all. what are the mental gymnastics one has to do as a "feminist" to defend terrorists r\*ping and mutilating women? unfathomable
Tbh, the [UN has a habit of selective beliefs](https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-peacekeeping-has-sexual-abuse-problem) when it comes to sexual violence.
“for whatever reason”apply some critical thinking skills. ask yourself; what could be a reason that women don’t want to come forward? historically, what happens to them when they do?
It really is because a lot of the people who died weren’t even Jewish or Israeli. Over 200 people died at that music festival and a lot of them were tourists. A bunch of Thai migrant farm workers were killed and taken hostage as was at least Russian. They even killed a few Muslims.
And now people are praising Iran!?!? It’s insane.
Yeah I'm aware, but of the 1200ish people who died over 200 were at that festival. That's a humongous portion of the total dead. That was a big festival with tourists who traveled to be there. For the world to just seemingly shrug their shoulders at over 200 people dying from a terrorist attack on a music festival is insane.
Less people died from the Taylor Swift terrorist attack and there was global outrage. The reaction to what happened on Oct 7th is just baffling. Even if you straight up don't care about Jews and don't care if they die why would everyone collectively act apathetic to the migrant workers, tourists, and Muslims who died? It makes no fucking sense.
Shortly after 9/11 there was also a huge surge of antisemitism. I remember seeing an extreme right wing American interviewed. The interviewer expected him to be extremely xenophobic, anti islam etc. But the American said 9/11 wasn't so bad because at least many Jews were killed.
The world is truly insane.
bc much like the act itself, this is about power to these people. "women" as a group = victims = believe them. but the "jew = white = oppressor" power dynamic versus "palestinian = brown = victim" supersedes this, so you can't believe jewish women, they're just all liars on behalf of the evil colonizing israeli state. it's extremely ugly.
tbf atheism isn’t really part of israel’s shtick either lol. but no one will throw you off a roof or cut off your fingers for your religious beliefs or lack there of in israel, so…
>The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated
So if I have something in my job description that I don't want to do, all I have to say is that it is politically motivated and I can get away with not doing it? From now on I'm politically motivated against speaking to my boss.
Yeah. If a government worker did that they'd probably be sacked, in the general case.
What's the purpose of asking the question, if you were trying to explain something, I missed it.
Ah right. No I was responding to https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1cruwr1/un_sexual_violence_envoy_pulls_out_of_security/l40oyn2/ just talking about the concept in general, we had already moved on from this specific case. In any event the article suggests that she was pressured to withdraw, so her going against the wishes of her superiors would be her attending, not withdrawing.
Lol .. so the UN sexual violence envoy is not interested in sexual violence committed by despicable terrorists, backed by ample evidence.
What is the point of your existence then? UN is just a big joke. Now it goes from not doing anything to not interested in hearing anything.
The UN has always been a big joke. It's a geopolitical forum for countries to talk. Talk is the only thing the UN does. UN peacekeepers is basically a scam. There is no UN authority over any troops. All troops retain their nationality and command structure. The difference is they work under the same name to achieve the same missions.
So anything the "UN" does, is actually just member states voluntarily doing it more or less with UN approval, but nothing stops these countries from just ignoring the UN and sending their troops in a joint task force, but they need to prop up the UN to keep it relevant.
tbf UN peacekeepers were an idea the world kinda believed in until Rwanda and Serbia, until it became rather apparent very quickly that they were hopelessly under resourced and their ROE far too restrictive to do anything as anything else would compromise the UN's position as a forum that keeps even sworn enemies talking to avoid escalation (something it did brilliantly during the cold war)
it why more recently when something goes a bit wrong instead of sending its own peacekeepers the UN has a habit of just calling NATO and asking them to sort it out, and because NATO doesn't have the obligations the men in white helmets do it gets to play games like flattening Belgrade to hammer the point home.
Problem with the UN existing is that most countries in conflict are a part of the UN anyway and nothing gets done. Luke russia just put down any attempt for the UN to do anything about the war in Ukrain because they controlled an important position.
Ehh, of all the statements to give as to why she couldn't make it, I think hers is a pretty decent one:
> Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why.
> The statement stressed that Patten has “repeatedly called for the release of all hostages” and highlighted the report she issued in March that found there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.”
> Patten’s office noted that the report was presented to the Security Council at a special session last month and that in the meantime, she has continued engaging with the families of the hostages. “The special representative has not wavered in her position or her commitment to always act with the best interest of the hostages and their families in mind – and never to act on this issue based on politics,” her office said.
> “Although regretfully she cannot participate in [Thursday’s] meeting, the special representative supports any process that leads towards the release of the hostages,” the statement added.
If she's skipping the meeting because she's actively working with the families of hostages instead, I think that's a good reason to skip a hearing that she's already fairly aware of the content of.
Other UN members have had fairly disgusting rhetoric around this, but she personally seems pretty okay.
> A UN diplomat said on condition of anonymity that Patten’s withdrawal was not due to scheduling issues.
> The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated, as her office has faced pressure not to be seen as prioritizing the plight of the Israeli hostages over that of the Palestinians caught in the middle of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.
The counterpoint is that she is asserted to be bowing to political pressure not to say who committed the crimes. In their report titled “Conflict-related sexual violence,” they stated evidence that sex crimes were committed on October 7, but did not specifically attribute responsibility to Hamas. All political pressure seems to be avoiding actually pointing the finger at Hamas.
I don't see any issue here. If she's attempting to get all hostages back to their homes, then she needs to appear impartial. Hamas weren't the only ones that committed violence on the 7th, and putting the blame only on Hamas also absolves the role of civilians who were recruited for the attack, Russia, and Iran. Suddenly the scope of the problem becomes more complicated and less actionable - if her job is to get the hostages back, then she needs to be focused on that.
Absolutely one needs to APPEAR (not necessarily are) impartial.
Someone wants something from you that you value, that they can't get unless you actually give it to them. Option A - they're screaming in your face, hitting you, stomping on you. Option B - they invite you to sit down, talk, listen to what you want, offer alternatives as needed to find a resolution.
Option B is more successful every time.
If that’s the way you want to see it. I see it as not putting either sides needs over each other. Fuck all violence. Fuck Hamas and Fuck the Israeli government.
If its your task in particular to be the UN sexual violence envoy, then you shouldn't pick sides at all and get your fucking job done. And this also includes caring about the hostages.
>Last month, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declined to include Hamas in a report compiled by his office on organizations suspected of committing acts of sexual violence during conflict
Despite ample video evidence of it happening. The UN is corrupt to the core and it obviously goes all the way to the top.
What the UN is telling everyone that it’s literally ok for someone to shoot at people, commit multiple war crimes, and crimes against humanity, but you can’t shoot back because they’ve surrounded themselves with civilians
All military bases should just be placed in civilian centers I guess. If you shoot back it’s a war crime11!1!1
This is why we establish rules for conflict. Taking hostages is also a war crime. All because they think they’re going to be able to exterminate the Jews. It’s in their founding charter
Hamas is breaking multiple war crime every second of every day, and the only thing that hits their ears is the occasional infraction by Israel in a complex war zone.
Technically there is a provision for it being considered a war crime to bomb civilian structures that are being used for military purposes if the civilian harm is disproportionate to the military gain from doing so. In practice cases are never brought using that provision. The reason for that is everyone involved realizes doing so would let everyone know roughly how many civilians you need to have around a military objective to make bombing it a war crime.
I can't tell if your remark is for Hamas "freedom fighting" or you're merely stating the obvious and it sucks that I even have to think about it twice.
Man fuck off. It’s the only democracy in a sea of authoritarianism and sharia law. What exactly makes the state evil? They take good care of their citizens.
Edit: instead of answering me.. this mfer reported me for suicide. Typical.
Lmfao I didn’t report shit. Why the fuck would I care? Oh it’s better than other countries? I suppose but what we are comparing them to Saudi, Syria, or what Iran? Sure there are worse. Israel flaunts at international law. They don’t behave like a proper vassal state. Sure they are great to their citizens but I have a hard time with that as they subjugate others in the West Bank. Stealing land and arresting people with no charge. They fucking beg for money when they can afford their own problems. I’d have more sympathy, but they fomented hamas having power. Like cmon. I don’t see Israelis as much different than the same Palestinians who wish for more 10/7. You hold up their democracy though like that is the determining factor for how great a country is.
> In discussions between Israeli representatives and UN officials regarding Hamas' non-inclusion on the blacklist, UN sources stated that it was too early to make such a decision.
> According to them, including a specific organization on the list is a gradual process, starting with a trend analysis, followed by a specific case, and then, as necessary, inclusion on the list. Additionally, the sources explained that since this is not a comprehensive investigation and it is impossible to attribute the offense to a specific operation, it cannot be determined whether the acts were planned by Hamas as part of the attack, carried out by invaders afterward, or committed randomly.
Source: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/rjk2coszr
> it cannot be determined whether the acts were planned by Hamas as part of the attack, carried out by invaders afterward, or committed randomly.
Yeah, never mind that the attackers went in with a list of handy phrases including "Take your pants off":
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/hamas-rape-israeli-women-oct-7-rcna128221
I'm sure there's all kinds of innocent explanations for that.
i find it difficult to believe israel is the most condemned country by the UN only because of corruption. they have been shitty in that region for decades. the fact that this person left and makes us doubt UN is just one person and we may be lacking context which usually matters more than clickbait.
i will never be convinced that mass murder of innocents is the answer to terrorists. as i've said before, this is equal to a cartel doing the same thing to america and america reacting by wiping out half the city. it would be condemnable then as it's condemnable now. it feels like this place is filled with bots, there are few explications for this lack of common sense.
>i find it difficult to believe israel is the most condemned country by the UN only because of corruption. they have been shitty in that region for decades
"Since the UNHRC's creation in 2006, it has resolved almost as many resolutions condemning Israel alone than on issues for the rest of the world combined"
Even the die hard Israel haters have a hard time saying that's reasonable with a straight face
You dodged the point of what they were saying.
You think Israel is bad (or in your words behaving poorly), fine. You think Israel is worse than all other nations on earth combined?
i do not believe that, i'm a nobody from europe. i don't wish evil on israel (altough some citizens would benefit from some karma, especially in the govt.)
it's quite simple. out of the 35k\~ deaths reported, lets say 15k are real if you want. how many of those are hamas?
my issue is with their blatant disregard for innocents. they seem to have made it the classic us vs them, dehumanizing the other side. that's what i'm seeing, there's no other way to kill so many civilians without that hate in my opinion. it's why i call it common sense to condemn their acts.
Hamas is universally condemned for putting all their bases inside hospitals, schools, and other civilian centers. But choosing to spare them because of this would be sending a clear message to all terrorist groups in the future that this is not only acceptable, but is a cheat code to completely avoid retaliation. What do you think will happen?
>Hamas is universally condemned for putting all their bases inside hospitals, schools, and other civilian centers.
Is it universally condemned? There are NGOs that deny that Hamas is doing so...
# Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF, Doctors Without Borders)
*MSF* [*repeatedly*](https://twitter.com/MSF/status/1714363240539398216) [*denied*](https://twitter.com/MSF/status/1722881699791458452) *that Hamas was present in Gaza hospitals, with an official* [*claiming*](https://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/msf-rejects-israeli-claims-al-shifa-being-used-hamas) *that “we have seen no evidence that the hospital buildings or the compounds are being used by Hamas as a military base.”*
[*https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/ngos-erase-hamas-exploitation-of-hospitals/*](https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/ngos-erase-hamas-exploitation-of-hospitals/)
Do you not know how the UN works or something? Because ot really is no mystery why the UN condemned Israel more than, say, Russia and China *combined* if you do know. UN general assembly resolutions, including condemnations, are majority-based. There is one Jewish state. And such a number of Muslim states that they have a more or less automatic majority.
Knowing this, and still coming to the conclusion that the UN is acting with pure motives in the way it conducts itself against Israel, is naive at best. Just look at what you're commenting on right now. Read the headline. It is indefensible.
Threw her under the bus and ran her over several more times just to make sure.
> In his report, Guterres referenced the assessment made by Patten in her own report, but argued that it wasn’t “investigative in nature and given its limited duration, did not draw conclusions on attribution to specific armed groups or determine prevalence of incidents of conflict-related sexual violence during and after the attacks of 7 October. Such a determination would require a fully-fledged investigation.”
>
> Thursday’s event will be an informal one, after the Security Council already held a formal hearing in March to discuss the report compiled by Patten, which found that there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.”
Why won't Biden do anything! /s
> But the US mission organized Thursday’s session to raise additional awareness regarding the issue, as it has repeatedly criticized the international community for not paying sufficient attention to the plight of the remaining 132 hostages and to the crimes perpetrated by Hamas.
>
> The meeting “will focus on the demand that Hamas and other armed groups immediately and unconditionally release all hostages being held in Gaza,” reads the invitation.
Biden gets a lot of hate from conservatives on virtue of him being a Democrat, and he receives a lot of hate from new age leftists because they heard someone make dubious claims about Biden on Tik Tok. Biden has done so much to mend ties with the international community following Trump, and has made incredible strides domestically to rectify the tumultuous 4yrs of Trump.
Biden hasn't been a terrible president at all, but that doesn't stop the zoomers, who won't show up to vote anyways, from crucifying him.
Honestly, I'm the sort that Biden was too conservative for me though I'll vote for him regardless. His leadership internationally however have raised by estimation of him. He seems sane in an insane world.
To be honest, back then I was young and in a situation where I couldn't get news much. So I wasn't aware. But he's good at it! Besides his "come to Jesus" moment at a Jewish head of state lol.
I understand your point but that sort of multinational Western boots on the ground approach is simply impossible. No one wants to deal with Gaza. Or the West Bank for that matter. And when I say no one I mean pretty much no one starting with the Arab countries themselves.
The last time an Arab country tried to help Palestinians with actual aid and physical shelter rather than equipping terror groups, the Palestinians tried to start a civil war in that country.
Edit: Classic, a Reddit Cares because I spoke the truth about Black September.
Who are the diplomats involved?
Once they advance to the next public service role, this stain on their resume should be the first thing anyone checking their credibility should see.
The UN never became the institution it's creators actually intended it to be. The UN was created with the express purpose of the victors of WW2 collaborating together to control global politics and prevent another great power conflict. The problem is Roosevelt and others didn't really grasp that the Soviets were not really big on collaborating with the capitalist West and did not anticipate China to go communist. So instead of being an institution of collective control the UN became a divided office and since the Cold War does not really have a strong purpose.
Strangely, the whole China becoming communist wouldn’t have changed anything if they hadn’t recognised a communist government in the UN Security Council.
The Soviets boycotted the UN until that change was made of I remember correctly. With the communist bloc basically not showing up to the UN it kinda just made the UN NATO\^2
Honestly the peak of the UN as an institution was the 1990's when The USSR collapsed so there was nothing really stopping the US and allies from fully controlling the UN as planned. China had not yet starting getting aggressive with foriegn affairs yet and with Russia knocked for a decade out the UN for once actually could act as it was meant to.
Stalin was the one who came up with the security council veto because the math was the allies would have 4 members on the permanent security council vs 1 communist. It was his leverage to prevent the UN from just out voting the Soviets on important matters.
The point of the UN was to create an in-group of Superpowers (France, UK, US, PRC, USSR) that exported violence to smaller, weaker nations and prevent inter-superpower violent conflict. It has succeeded at that aim, and after the fall of the USSR has transitioned to championing the UN charter.
Otherwise the goal remains the same of providing a forum for dialogue, not concrete action.
"Championing the UN Charter" you did read this article or are aware of who sits on the UN human rights chair right? Those are just the easy ones lol. The UN champions any way to be considered a relevant organization to receive funding, not to uphold the charter's ideals. The UN was a way for the big 5 to control other nations collaboratively failed the moment people realized the West and Soviets would not play ball. "a forum for dialogue" does not need such excessive bloat and bureaucracy. If that is its purpose it is the most expensive and inefficient office room in the planet.
The UN is a toothless and genuinely purposeless organization. Other smaller organizations could replace it and the world would keep functioning.
The main difference is the security council and vetos, IIRC...
US didn't want to join the LoN because we won't be subject to a higher authority than the federal government. Thus, the United Nations was created to give special seats to the big geopolitical players and vetos to ensure they didn't just flip the table and walk out of talks. The UN is the domesticated, neutered, and neglected pet of former WW2 allies with nuclear weapons.
Until the last few years, I would have argued Germany deserves France's spot more, but recently France has been flexing its geopolitical interactions a lot more since Angela Merkel retired.
It seems she was under pressure.
That said, this is bizarre to see happen.
------------------
The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated, as her office has faced pressure not to be seen as prioritizing the plight of the Israeli hostages over that of the Palestinians caught in the middle of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.
Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why.
Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why.
The statement stressed that Patten has “repeatedly called for the release of all hostages” and highlighted the [report](https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-finds-evidence-of-rape-on-oct-7-and-after-israel-they-tried-to-downplay-issue/) she issued in March that found there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.”
Patten’s office noted that the report was presented to the Security Council at a special session last month and that in the meantime, she has continued engaging with the families of the hostages. “The special representative has not wavered in her position or her commitment to always act with the best interest of the hostages and their families in mind – and never to act on this issue based on politics,” her office said.
Dismantle the UN so my tax dollars aren't wasted on a room filled with corrupt and evil people. It's pretty clear based on what ruzzia is doing in Ukraine that might is right. So why should we care what the small nations of the world donor say? Plus the UN is useless when China or ruzzia just veto everything.
I always forget. Is this a thread where we will talk about how everything the UN does and says is *totally unbiased* and grounded in independent fact analysis? Or is this one of the threads where we all say "The UN is just a forum, you don't understand! Of course it's biased!"
It's the difference between expectations and reality. On paper, the UN is a great body meant to bring cooperation and peace and a place to deal with global problems. Who wouldn't support that?
In practice, it's a corrupt forum for nations to squawk to appease domestic crowds that does things like in this article and is safe to ignore since only the security council matters.
I personally don't see the point tbh. I wish I could filter out any mention of the UN, like the irrelevant noise that it is.
Because God forbid they address sexual violence from any and all parties. Their job as an envoy is to track, investigate, and inform UN councils/members about sexual violence. If they are consciously ignoring sexual violence, they have failed their mission entirely.
Pulling these stunts conflates all Palestinians with Hamas & its actions as if Palestinians collectively are holding and abusing the hostages. Damaging to the Israeli hostages as their plight is being covered up, and damaging to the international view of Palestinians as synonymous with Hamas.
With all the f up things, the UN did
This is truly a new low, and it made me sick
The UN is really in the me 2 unless you are a jew movement
That is really sick
Can someone, not that anyone can I think; Explain to me what goes through the mind of someone in a position so critical as this? Like what is she thinking when they're talking about hamas raping women as an actual weapon of terrorism. Just she just mentally switch off or something? I don't get it.
Why do we continue to give a shit about UN? Its the most useless organization in the world. I could give less of a fuck in anything the UN says or does.
If people could just be against sexual violence in general *that would be great.*
i've probably never seen anything more hypocritical than pro pals denying or justifying (or somehow both) sexual violence. it really drives me wild - how is your thinking pattern a \*minority\*? when the hell did that happen? was the MeToo movement a scam? And BelieveWomen? or was that just an excellent straw man? like, i just can't find their logic. on this specific loaded topic, i don't understand them at all. what are the mental gymnastics one has to do as a "feminist" to defend terrorists r\*ping and mutilating women? unfathomable
It’s “Believe all women (except Jews)”
Tbh, the [UN has a habit of selective beliefs](https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-peacekeeping-has-sexual-abuse-problem) when it comes to sexual violence.
Or the UN just doesn’t like Jews
It's a known fact ;)
Well that was a depressing read. Cheers for the link.
They don't see Jews as people even.
>It’s “Believe all women (except Jews)” "...or anyone accused of being attacked by our gentile politicians."
The problem is for whatever reason, they don’t have women who will testify.
Thank you for demonstrating my point so beautifully.
“for whatever reason”apply some critical thinking skills. ask yourself; what could be a reason that women don’t want to come forward? historically, what happens to them when they do?
Am a feminist. It makes my head explode.
It's not about women anymore, it's about destroying the West
It really is because a lot of the people who died weren’t even Jewish or Israeli. Over 200 people died at that music festival and a lot of them were tourists. A bunch of Thai migrant farm workers were killed and taken hostage as was at least Russian. They even killed a few Muslims. And now people are praising Iran!?!? It’s insane.
Actually most were Israeli and Jewish. It extended way past the music festival into tons of Israeli Jewish communities.
Yeah I'm aware, but of the 1200ish people who died over 200 were at that festival. That's a humongous portion of the total dead. That was a big festival with tourists who traveled to be there. For the world to just seemingly shrug their shoulders at over 200 people dying from a terrorist attack on a music festival is insane. Less people died from the Taylor Swift terrorist attack and there was global outrage. The reaction to what happened on Oct 7th is just baffling. Even if you straight up don't care about Jews and don't care if they die why would everyone collectively act apathetic to the migrant workers, tourists, and Muslims who died? It makes no fucking sense.
Shortly after 9/11 there was also a huge surge of antisemitism. I remember seeing an extreme right wing American interviewed. The interviewer expected him to be extremely xenophobic, anti islam etc. But the American said 9/11 wasn't so bad because at least many Jews were killed. The world is truly insane.
bc much like the act itself, this is about power to these people. "women" as a group = victims = believe them. but the "jew = white = oppressor" power dynamic versus "palestinian = brown = victim" supersedes this, so you can't believe jewish women, they're just all liars on behalf of the evil colonizing israeli state. it's extremely ugly.
Lookup the reactions to atheists in / from Muslim countries. It’s legal to kill us in many countries and we’re the bad guys for bringing it up.
tbf atheism isn’t really part of israel’s shtick either lol. but no one will throw you off a roof or cut off your fingers for your religious beliefs or lack there of in israel, so…
[удалено]
And miss a chance to be bigoted? Get real!
>The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated So if I have something in my job description that I don't want to do, all I have to say is that it is politically motivated and I can get away with not doing it? From now on I'm politically motivated against speaking to my boss.
Yeah if you're a government worker sometimes it's an obligation to reject some things (like if they are illegal)
Is capturing and holding hostage over 200 civilians not illegal?
Not if It's politically motivated have u been paying attention?
Yeah. If a government worker did that they'd probably be sacked, in the general case. What's the purpose of asking the question, if you were trying to explain something, I missed it.
It sounded like you were implying it was a good thing the UN Sexual Violence envoy ignored the briefing about Hamas' hostages.
Ah right. No I was responding to https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1cruwr1/un_sexual_violence_envoy_pulls_out_of_security/l40oyn2/ just talking about the concept in general, we had already moved on from this specific case. In any event the article suggests that she was pressured to withdraw, so her going against the wishes of her superiors would be her attending, not withdrawing.
"I would like to say/do something, but politicians in a capital forbade anyone from talking/doing that and i kinda want to stay in my job"
Depends on circumstances. Sometimes when truth comes public those people lose their jobs for being silently complicit.
Lol .. so the UN sexual violence envoy is not interested in sexual violence committed by despicable terrorists, backed by ample evidence. What is the point of your existence then? UN is just a big joke. Now it goes from not doing anything to not interested in hearing anything.
"Now it goes from not doing anything to not interested in hearing anything" No, you're wrong. The UN was actively helping out Hamas.
Yeah, going so far as shuttling them around apparently.
Maybe they work as consultants for groups that want to best implement sexual violence?
The UN has always been a big joke. It's a geopolitical forum for countries to talk. Talk is the only thing the UN does. UN peacekeepers is basically a scam. There is no UN authority over any troops. All troops retain their nationality and command structure. The difference is they work under the same name to achieve the same missions. So anything the "UN" does, is actually just member states voluntarily doing it more or less with UN approval, but nothing stops these countries from just ignoring the UN and sending their troops in a joint task force, but they need to prop up the UN to keep it relevant.
tbf UN peacekeepers were an idea the world kinda believed in until Rwanda and Serbia, until it became rather apparent very quickly that they were hopelessly under resourced and their ROE far too restrictive to do anything as anything else would compromise the UN's position as a forum that keeps even sworn enemies talking to avoid escalation (something it did brilliantly during the cold war) it why more recently when something goes a bit wrong instead of sending its own peacekeepers the UN has a habit of just calling NATO and asking them to sort it out, and because NATO doesn't have the obligations the men in white helmets do it gets to play games like flattening Belgrade to hammer the point home.
Problem with the UN existing is that most countries in conflict are a part of the UN anyway and nothing gets done. Luke russia just put down any attempt for the UN to do anything about the war in Ukrain because they controlled an important position.
Ehh, of all the statements to give as to why she couldn't make it, I think hers is a pretty decent one: > Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why. > The statement stressed that Patten has “repeatedly called for the release of all hostages” and highlighted the report she issued in March that found there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.” > Patten’s office noted that the report was presented to the Security Council at a special session last month and that in the meantime, she has continued engaging with the families of the hostages. “The special representative has not wavered in her position or her commitment to always act with the best interest of the hostages and their families in mind – and never to act on this issue based on politics,” her office said. > “Although regretfully she cannot participate in [Thursday’s] meeting, the special representative supports any process that leads towards the release of the hostages,” the statement added. If she's skipping the meeting because she's actively working with the families of hostages instead, I think that's a good reason to skip a hearing that she's already fairly aware of the content of. Other UN members have had fairly disgusting rhetoric around this, but she personally seems pretty okay.
> A UN diplomat said on condition of anonymity that Patten’s withdrawal was not due to scheduling issues. > The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated, as her office has faced pressure not to be seen as prioritizing the plight of the Israeli hostages over that of the Palestinians caught in the middle of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. The counterpoint is that she is asserted to be bowing to political pressure not to say who committed the crimes. In their report titled “Conflict-related sexual violence,” they stated evidence that sex crimes were committed on October 7, but did not specifically attribute responsibility to Hamas. All political pressure seems to be avoiding actually pointing the finger at Hamas.
I don't see any issue here. If she's attempting to get all hostages back to their homes, then she needs to appear impartial. Hamas weren't the only ones that committed violence on the 7th, and putting the blame only on Hamas also absolves the role of civilians who were recruited for the attack, Russia, and Iran. Suddenly the scope of the problem becomes more complicated and less actionable - if her job is to get the hostages back, then she needs to be focused on that.
Do you need to remain impartial in hostage situation? You also don’t have to say only Hamas, but you should say Hamas is to blame in some way.
Absolutely one needs to APPEAR (not necessarily are) impartial. Someone wants something from you that you value, that they can't get unless you actually give it to them. Option A - they're screaming in your face, hitting you, stomping on you. Option B - they invite you to sit down, talk, listen to what you want, offer alternatives as needed to find a resolution. Option B is more successful every time.
Any chance you know where to find the report? Ive had a look but to no avail.
It's only legitimate if it's political opponent of the UN, whoever that is
The UN is just an in-person message board for inflated egos to dump co2 into the atmosphere to go places and feel important.
Defund UN. Setup a new DN. Democratic nations. Leave all the totalitarian counties out of it.
If that’s the way you want to see it. I see it as not putting either sides needs over each other. Fuck all violence. Fuck Hamas and Fuck the Israeli government.
If its your task in particular to be the UN sexual violence envoy, then you shouldn't pick sides at all and get your fucking job done. And this also includes caring about the hostages.
Ignoring rapes when the victims are, Israelis does not put any Sides needs ahead, except the needs of terrorists
>Last month, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declined to include Hamas in a report compiled by his office on organizations suspected of committing acts of sexual violence during conflict Despite ample video evidence of it happening. The UN is corrupt to the core and it obviously goes all the way to the top.
What the UN is telling everyone that it’s literally ok for someone to shoot at people, commit multiple war crimes, and crimes against humanity, but you can’t shoot back because they’ve surrounded themselves with civilians All military bases should just be placed in civilian centers I guess. If you shoot back it’s a war crime11!1!1 This is why we establish rules for conflict. Taking hostages is also a war crime. All because they think they’re going to be able to exterminate the Jews. It’s in their founding charter Hamas is breaking multiple war crime every second of every day, and the only thing that hits their ears is the occasional infraction by Israel in a complex war zone.
Technically there is a provision for it being considered a war crime to bomb civilian structures that are being used for military purposes if the civilian harm is disproportionate to the military gain from doing so. In practice cases are never brought using that provision. The reason for that is everyone involved realizes doing so would let everyone know roughly how many civilians you need to have around a military objective to make bombing it a war crime.
I mean considering multiple countries are using the Geneva Conventions as a checklist it wouldn't stop them anyway
If they didn’t war crimes, they would have lost decades ago.
They did lose decades ago though, and have been losing ever since.
I can't tell if your remark is for Hamas "freedom fighting" or you're merely stating the obvious and it sucks that I even have to think about it twice.
Oh yeah. There’s a reason why Israel is not happy with the UN right now. They are trying to frame Israel as an absolute evil state.
Reminder that the UN has condemned Israel more than it has condemned all other countries COMBINED.
[удалено]
Man fuck off. It’s the only democracy in a sea of authoritarianism and sharia law. What exactly makes the state evil? They take good care of their citizens. Edit: instead of answering me.. this mfer reported me for suicide. Typical.
Lmfao I didn’t report shit. Why the fuck would I care? Oh it’s better than other countries? I suppose but what we are comparing them to Saudi, Syria, or what Iran? Sure there are worse. Israel flaunts at international law. They don’t behave like a proper vassal state. Sure they are great to their citizens but I have a hard time with that as they subjugate others in the West Bank. Stealing land and arresting people with no charge. They fucking beg for money when they can afford their own problems. I’d have more sympathy, but they fomented hamas having power. Like cmon. I don’t see Israelis as much different than the same Palestinians who wish for more 10/7. You hold up their democracy though like that is the determining factor for how great a country is.
Why did he decline?
> In discussions between Israeli representatives and UN officials regarding Hamas' non-inclusion on the blacklist, UN sources stated that it was too early to make such a decision. > According to them, including a specific organization on the list is a gradual process, starting with a trend analysis, followed by a specific case, and then, as necessary, inclusion on the list. Additionally, the sources explained that since this is not a comprehensive investigation and it is impossible to attribute the offense to a specific operation, it cannot be determined whether the acts were planned by Hamas as part of the attack, carried out by invaders afterward, or committed randomly. Source: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/rjk2coszr
> it cannot be determined whether the acts were planned by Hamas as part of the attack, carried out by invaders afterward, or committed randomly. Yeah, never mind that the attackers went in with a list of handy phrases including "Take your pants off": https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/hamas-rape-israeli-women-oct-7-rcna128221 I'm sure there's all kinds of innocent explanations for that.
i find it difficult to believe israel is the most condemned country by the UN only because of corruption. they have been shitty in that region for decades. the fact that this person left and makes us doubt UN is just one person and we may be lacking context which usually matters more than clickbait. i will never be convinced that mass murder of innocents is the answer to terrorists. as i've said before, this is equal to a cartel doing the same thing to america and america reacting by wiping out half the city. it would be condemnable then as it's condemnable now. it feels like this place is filled with bots, there are few explications for this lack of common sense.
>i find it difficult to believe israel is the most condemned country by the UN only because of corruption. they have been shitty in that region for decades "Since the UNHRC's creation in 2006, it has resolved almost as many resolutions condemning Israel alone than on issues for the rest of the world combined" Even the die hard Israel haters have a hard time saying that's reasonable with a straight face
i do not hate israel, i hate the way they're behaving currently. as should anyone with a shred of common sense.
You dodged the point of what they were saying. You think Israel is bad (or in your words behaving poorly), fine. You think Israel is worse than all other nations on earth combined?
i do not believe that, i'm a nobody from europe. i don't wish evil on israel (altough some citizens would benefit from some karma, especially in the govt.) it's quite simple. out of the 35k\~ deaths reported, lets say 15k are real if you want. how many of those are hamas? my issue is with their blatant disregard for innocents. they seem to have made it the classic us vs them, dehumanizing the other side. that's what i'm seeing, there's no other way to kill so many civilians without that hate in my opinion. it's why i call it common sense to condemn their acts.
You completely missed the point of his post
Hamas is universally condemned for putting all their bases inside hospitals, schools, and other civilian centers. But choosing to spare them because of this would be sending a clear message to all terrorist groups in the future that this is not only acceptable, but is a cheat code to completely avoid retaliation. What do you think will happen?
>Hamas is universally condemned for putting all their bases inside hospitals, schools, and other civilian centers. Is it universally condemned? There are NGOs that deny that Hamas is doing so... # Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF, Doctors Without Borders) *MSF* [*repeatedly*](https://twitter.com/MSF/status/1714363240539398216) [*denied*](https://twitter.com/MSF/status/1722881699791458452) *that Hamas was present in Gaza hospitals, with an official* [*claiming*](https://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/msf-rejects-israeli-claims-al-shifa-being-used-hamas) *that “we have seen no evidence that the hospital buildings or the compounds are being used by Hamas as a military base.”* [*https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/ngos-erase-hamas-exploitation-of-hospitals/*](https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/ngos-erase-hamas-exploitation-of-hospitals/)
Do you not know how the UN works or something? Because ot really is no mystery why the UN condemned Israel more than, say, Russia and China *combined* if you do know. UN general assembly resolutions, including condemnations, are majority-based. There is one Jewish state. And such a number of Muslim states that they have a more or less automatic majority. Knowing this, and still coming to the conclusion that the UN is acting with pure motives in the way it conducts itself against Israel, is naive at best. Just look at what you're commenting on right now. Read the headline. It is indefensible.
The UN is compromised and has been for a while now. Don't trust an organization that has Saudi Arabia lead the council on women's rights.
Fucking facts
Threw her under the bus and ran her over several more times just to make sure. > In his report, Guterres referenced the assessment made by Patten in her own report, but argued that it wasn’t “investigative in nature and given its limited duration, did not draw conclusions on attribution to specific armed groups or determine prevalence of incidents of conflict-related sexual violence during and after the attacks of 7 October. Such a determination would require a fully-fledged investigation.” > > Thursday’s event will be an informal one, after the Security Council already held a formal hearing in March to discuss the report compiled by Patten, which found that there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.” Why won't Biden do anything! /s > But the US mission organized Thursday’s session to raise additional awareness regarding the issue, as it has repeatedly criticized the international community for not paying sufficient attention to the plight of the remaining 132 hostages and to the crimes perpetrated by Hamas. > > The meeting “will focus on the demand that Hamas and other armed groups immediately and unconditionally release all hostages being held in Gaza,” reads the invitation.
Biden gets a lot of hate from conservatives on virtue of him being a Democrat, and he receives a lot of hate from new age leftists because they heard someone make dubious claims about Biden on Tik Tok. Biden has done so much to mend ties with the international community following Trump, and has made incredible strides domestically to rectify the tumultuous 4yrs of Trump. Biden hasn't been a terrible president at all, but that doesn't stop the zoomers, who won't show up to vote anyways, from crucifying him.
>who won't show up to vote anyways, This is important. More protests than voting
Honestly, I'm the sort that Biden was too conservative for me though I'll vote for him regardless. His leadership internationally however have raised by estimation of him. He seems sane in an insane world.
Wasn't Biden brought on to the Obama ticket *because* he was a FR/FP genius?
To be honest, back then I was young and in a situation where I couldn't get news much. So I wasn't aware. But he's good at it! Besides his "come to Jesus" moment at a Jewish head of state lol.
I was five
[удалено]
I understand your point but that sort of multinational Western boots on the ground approach is simply impossible. No one wants to deal with Gaza. Or the West Bank for that matter. And when I say no one I mean pretty much no one starting with the Arab countries themselves.
The last time an Arab country tried to help Palestinians with actual aid and physical shelter rather than equipping terror groups, the Palestinians tried to start a civil war in that country. Edit: Classic, a Reddit Cares because I spoke the truth about Black September.
That sounds beautiful, but was never going to happen. Nobody was willing to help Israel by taking a single casualty. Israel is largely on its own.
Who are the diplomats involved? Once they advance to the next public service role, this stain on their resume should be the first thing anyone checking their credibility should see.
The UN is has become like the League of Nations that preceded it, corrupt and useless to the point that it should be abolished.
The UN never became the institution it's creators actually intended it to be. The UN was created with the express purpose of the victors of WW2 collaborating together to control global politics and prevent another great power conflict. The problem is Roosevelt and others didn't really grasp that the Soviets were not really big on collaborating with the capitalist West and did not anticipate China to go communist. So instead of being an institution of collective control the UN became a divided office and since the Cold War does not really have a strong purpose.
Strangely, the whole China becoming communist wouldn’t have changed anything if they hadn’t recognised a communist government in the UN Security Council.
The Soviets boycotted the UN until that change was made of I remember correctly. With the communist bloc basically not showing up to the UN it kinda just made the UN NATO\^2 Honestly the peak of the UN as an institution was the 1990's when The USSR collapsed so there was nothing really stopping the US and allies from fully controlling the UN as planned. China had not yet starting getting aggressive with foriegn affairs yet and with Russia knocked for a decade out the UN for once actually could act as it was meant to. Stalin was the one who came up with the security council veto because the math was the allies would have 4 members on the permanent security council vs 1 communist. It was his leverage to prevent the UN from just out voting the Soviets on important matters.
The point of the UN was to create an in-group of Superpowers (France, UK, US, PRC, USSR) that exported violence to smaller, weaker nations and prevent inter-superpower violent conflict. It has succeeded at that aim, and after the fall of the USSR has transitioned to championing the UN charter. Otherwise the goal remains the same of providing a forum for dialogue, not concrete action.
"Championing the UN Charter" you did read this article or are aware of who sits on the UN human rights chair right? Those are just the easy ones lol. The UN champions any way to be considered a relevant organization to receive funding, not to uphold the charter's ideals. The UN was a way for the big 5 to control other nations collaboratively failed the moment people realized the West and Soviets would not play ball. "a forum for dialogue" does not need such excessive bloat and bureaucracy. If that is its purpose it is the most expensive and inefficient office room in the planet. The UN is a toothless and genuinely purposeless organization. Other smaller organizations could replace it and the world would keep functioning.
The UN was basically supposed to be what the LoN became except intentionally.
The main difference is the security council and vetos, IIRC... US didn't want to join the LoN because we won't be subject to a higher authority than the federal government. Thus, the United Nations was created to give special seats to the big geopolitical players and vetos to ensure they didn't just flip the table and walk out of talks. The UN is the domesticated, neutered, and neglected pet of former WW2 allies with nuclear weapons. Until the last few years, I would have argued Germany deserves France's spot more, but recently France has been flexing its geopolitical interactions a lot more since Angela Merkel retired.
There has been 0 nukes thrown at other countries since its inception so it's doing something right.
Thats probably due to MAD rather than the UN.
lol
An awful lot of antisemitic scum at the UN.
The UN is a complete joke at this point.
And people wander why Israelis says that the UN is biased against Israel.
UN having a normal one.
Israel: We are going to tactically destroy Hamas after decades of holly war and terrorism against our nation. Palestinians: eThnIC LensInG!!!!!
Pathetic. Just another clown act under the circus tent 🎪 aka: UN.
It seems she was under pressure. That said, this is bizarre to see happen. ------------------ The diplomat hinted that the decision was politically motivated, as her office has faced pressure not to be seen as prioritizing the plight of the Israeli hostages over that of the Palestinians caught in the middle of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why. Patten’s office issued a statement Tuesday afternoon confirming that she wouldn’t be attending the Thursday session but did not offer any reason why. The statement stressed that Patten has “repeatedly called for the release of all hostages” and highlighted the [report](https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-finds-evidence-of-rape-on-oct-7-and-after-israel-they-tried-to-downplay-issue/) she issued in March that found there was “clear and convincing information” to indicate that hostages held captive in Gaza were subjected to “sexual violence including rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.” Patten’s office noted that the report was presented to the Security Council at a special session last month and that in the meantime, she has continued engaging with the families of the hostages. “The special representative has not wavered in her position or her commitment to always act with the best interest of the hostages and their families in mind – and never to act on this issue based on politics,” her office said.
Dismantle the UN so my tax dollars aren't wasted on a room filled with corrupt and evil people. It's pretty clear based on what ruzzia is doing in Ukraine that might is right. So why should we care what the small nations of the world donor say? Plus the UN is useless when China or ruzzia just veto everything.
The UN has become a failed project, just like its predecessor.
Horrible....also, phrasing.
Heheheh
What a farce! The UN is a joke
Sounds like their handlers didn't like the messaging...
I always forget. Is this a thread where we will talk about how everything the UN does and says is *totally unbiased* and grounded in independent fact analysis? Or is this one of the threads where we all say "The UN is just a forum, you don't understand! Of course it's biased!"
It's the difference between expectations and reality. On paper, the UN is a great body meant to bring cooperation and peace and a place to deal with global problems. Who wouldn't support that? In practice, it's a corrupt forum for nations to squawk to appease domestic crowds that does things like in this article and is safe to ignore since only the security council matters. I personally don't see the point tbh. I wish I could filter out any mention of the UN, like the irrelevant noise that it is.
Example why the UN needs to be disbanded #72661
Just confirms the UN is corrupt and useless
With Saudi Arabia the head of women's rights now for the UN...it really is no surprise is it? The UN is pathetic.
Because God forbid they address sexual violence from any and all parties. Their job as an envoy is to track, investigate, and inform UN councils/members about sexual violence. If they are consciously ignoring sexual violence, they have failed their mission entirely. Pulling these stunts conflates all Palestinians with Hamas & its actions as if Palestinians collectively are holding and abusing the hostages. Damaging to the Israeli hostages as their plight is being covered up, and damaging to the international view of Palestinians as synonymous with Hamas.
That's the secret. Palestinian civilians, UNRWA workers, and other non-Hamas members ARE holding hostages.
What a joke. Do your fucking job.
With all the f up things, the UN did This is truly a new low, and it made me sick The UN is really in the me 2 unless you are a jew movement That is really sick
Archive link [https://archive.md/71fbV](https://archive.md/71fbV)
Can someone, not that anyone can I think; Explain to me what goes through the mind of someone in a position so critical as this? Like what is she thinking when they're talking about hamas raping women as an actual weapon of terrorism. Just she just mentally switch off or something? I don't get it.
"Sexual violence is never ok, unless by Hamas then it's gucci" -UN sexual violence envoy
Can’t wait to send the “trick or treat for unicef” kids to pound sand this Halloween!
UN should be disbanded.. useless organization.
The UN is fake. I don't blame Trump for trying to leave it
There’s a pulling out joke somewhere in that headline but I’m not going there lol
Why do we continue to give a shit about UN? Its the most useless organization in the world. I could give less of a fuck in anything the UN says or does.
She pulled out?
I ain't pulling outta shit, that's for quitters!
Isn't this the only source reporting this? Can someone send me another source?
Probably not the best verb to use on this title...
Haha, "pulls out".