Skip to main content

Here's the women, that a Tory pissant insulted last week

With her term expiring at the end of this month, Louise Arbour is stepping down from her position as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 

Ms. Arbour is a former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada and a former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

She was made a Companion to the Order of Canada in 2007 "for her contributions to the Canadian justice system and for her dedication to the advancement of human rights throughout the world"

She was appointed UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on July 1, 2004, replacing Sergio Vieira de Mello, who was killed in Baghdad along with other members of his staff the previous August.

In 2005 she took heat from the US over her Human Rights Day Statement: On Terrorists and Torturers
Particularly insidious are moves to water down or question the absolute ban on torture, as well as on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Governments in a number of countries are claiming that established rules do not apply anymore: that we live in a changed world and that there is a "new normal". 
They argue that this justifies a lowering of the bar as to what constitutes permissible treatment of detainees. An illegal interrogation technique, however, remains illegal whatever new description a government might wish to give it.
Pursuing security objectives at all costs may create a world in which we are neither safe nor free. This will certainly be the case if the only choice is between the terrorists and the torturers.
In 2006 she upset Israel over her official statements regarding the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. Although her statements did not single out either side, some including Israel's ambassador to Canada believed they were directed towards Israel. 

Months later, during an interview with the Jerusalem Post, she responded about the distinction between the Hezbollah missile attacks aimed at killing civilians and the Israeli military strikes where civilians were unintentionally killed.
“The two could not be equated. In one case you could have, for instance, a very objectionable intent - the intent to harm civilians, which is very bad - but effectively not a lot of harm is actually achieved,” she said. 
“But how can you compare that with a case where you may not have an intent but you have recklessness [in which] civilian casualties are foreseeable? The culpability or the intent may not sound as severe, but the actual harm is catastrophic.”
"When you kill civilians virtually each time [in a military attack], at some point you have to ask yourself, 'Wasn't that foreseeable that so many would be killed?" she said. "That is where I think you start having to engage in the possibility that it is somewhat culpable."
Although she had her distractors, others such as the director for the Irish Centre for Human Rights are disappointed that she is leaving.
"It takes political courage," he said of the job, disputing the notion that she gave a disproportionate amount of attention to the United States and Israel.

"Unless you're going to fall victim to one of the great flaws of international human rights, which is selectivity, you can't just criticize Zimbabwe all the time. You've got to criticize Russia and the United States and China. And when you do that, you get big hitters at the United Nations angry at you."
It sounds to me, like Louise Arbour is a Canadian, that we should all be proud of. A woman whose career, years of service and personal accomplishments should be honored in our country. 

Instead last Tuesday she has Vic Toews, Conservative MP and Treasury Board President taking cheap shots at her in Parliament. See National Post here.

However, this lady doesn't need me to defend her. She's been dealing at a much higher level of politics than this old Tory hack and dealing with much more dangerous assholes. By the sounds of it she could basically chew him up and spit him out, if it was worth the effort.

Welcome home Ms. Arbour. Make some noise every now and then.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

662

That is the number of Syrian refuges that the Harper government has brought into Canada.

From the Globe and Mail:
However, the government is facing criticism because 2,374 Syrian refugees have so far been settled. Of that number, only 622 - or 26 percent - were assisted by the government. The others were privately sponsored by individuals or non-government. The others were privately sponsored by individuals or non-government organizations. The NDP argues that in addition to private sponsors, the government should immediately accept 10,000 Syrian refugees. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau said the target should be 25,000 government-sponsored refugees, which he estimates would cost Ottawa $100-million.In other words the Harper government that banters around the 10,000 plus refugee number has brought in 622 refugees or about 170 families.

The other 2,352 so called refugees that Harper has allowed to emigrate to Canada consist of wealthy Syrian Christians who paid their own way in, hightailing …

Election close call, Omar, Bob and move over Warren

Wow that was a close one:
With the NDP leading in the polls at the beginning of September, I started to prepare myself, for the very first time in my life, to vote for the NDP. Mulcair looked good enough for me, with some of the best lines about Harper's Government during most of his interviews, except that he would always add the phrase, "just like the liberals" to the end of it and I thought, if I'm one of those Harper hating, Liberal voters that you probably need to vote for you, why the hell are you insulting me with this partisan bullshit.