It's in the P-I

Today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer has a guest editorial from Peter Lippman, identified as "independent human rights researcher": Barrier violates international law

This week the International Court of Justice is meeting at The Hague to consider the legality of the "separation wall" that Israel is building in the West Bank. During the hearings, more than a dozen governments are presenting statements against the barrier. While the court's non-binding conclusions will not change the course of the wall, the structure is indeed in violation of international law, and it should be removed.

on the other hand,

Last weekend's suicide bombing on a Jerusalem bus was horrific, a crime in its own right. But this act cannot be taken as proof of the need for a wall. Together with other ongoing Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians, the wall forms a trap that only leads to more despair and thus more revenge.

So building a defensive wall is a "violation of international law", but genocide is brushed off as a "crime" that is anyway explained by Israel's self-defense?

Lippman goes on to allege that the defensive wall "violates the Fourth Geneva Convention". But he chooses not to mention that bombing a commuter bus also violates the Geneva Convention.

A two-minute google search discovers that Peter Lippman is actually an ISM activist. He's not an "independent human rights researcher". He's on the other side.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 25, 2004 08:39 AM