VIDEO: State Dept. Denies Rigging UN Process on Palestine

The US government sabotaged the International Court of Justice orders at the UN Security Council. Its denials are hollow. Other countries must act.

While the US government is sabotaging meaningful action at the UN and other countries pontificate, Palestinians are being slaughtered.

See video by Decensored News —

I’ve written about how the US government with Israel rigged the process at the UN to sabotage the International Court of Justice orders stemming from South Africa’s Genocide Convention case. This explains the so-called “ceasefire” proposal put forward by Biden claiming that it was from Israel.

When I asked about this — particularly the timing of it all — at the State Department briefing on Tuesday, Matt Miller predictably denied that’s what they were doing, claiming that the US government was concerned about the wellbeing of the Palestinians in Gaza.

It’s important to keep in mind that on May 28 it was reported that Algeria was proposing UN action to “stop killing in Rafah” — to implement the May 24 ICJ orders, which ordered Israel to “immediately halt its military offensive” in Rafah. The US government stalled that and then Biden’s May 31 statement tried to derail it completely. The UNSC adopted the phony US resolution on June 10. I objected to all this in real time, see my June 4 piece: “The US Government is Using ‘Ceasefire’ Rhetoric to Try to Obstruct International Law in Gaza.”

Interestingly, just around the time I was asking my question at the State Department on Tuesday, the UNSC was meeting and members were reportedly expressing their frustration at the US process they had mostly allowed (it was 14 votes for with Russia abstaining), see reports by Rami Ayari on statements from:

Slovenia: “We were told safe zones will protect civilians. …”

China: “At the time, the US claimed that Israel already accepted the ceasefire proposal. Regrettably, until now, we haven't seen tangible signs from Israel of its agreement to a lasting ceasefire.” This was obvious at the time. Indeed, if it was an actual Israeli proposal — why did Biden announce it?

Russia: “What the #US authors alleged or proposed is not working.” I think it is working perfectly.

The Palestinian statement bizarrely said: “The aim [of Netanyahu] is to sabotage the #US initiative without taking the blame for it, to sabotage the efforts of #Egypt and #Qatar and of the international community as a whole.” As if Netanyahu wasn’t colluding with Biden.

If these countries are serious, they will move on a Uniting for Peace resolution with teeth in the General Assembly immediately.

Transcript of my questioning via State Dept.:

Husseini: Thank you. A couple questions, if I could. It’s been a while. The U.S. vetoed multiple UN Security Council resolutions for a ceasefire over the last several months, of course, but finally drafted one itself, which claimed that Israel had accepted the ceasefire. You say that they did; other people don’t see it that way. My question is about the timing. The – it came just after the latest orders from the International Court of Justice. On May 24th, they ordered Israel to not invade Rafah, and they stipulated that the invasion had, in fact, started on May 7th. Was that the actual purpose of the U.S. backing that resolution at that time, in order to forestall the UN Security Council doing its normal job of instituting the Security Council —

MR MILLER: No, it was not.

QUESTION: — of the ICJ order.

MR MILLER: Sorry. No, it was not. Our purpose in backing that resolution is we saw Israel put forward a proposal that we thought offered a real chance for not only a ceasefire but an enduring end to the conflict that would return the hostages home to be reunited with their families, that would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, that would set the conditions potentially for lasting peace. And we thought it was important that the entire world rally around that proposal, and that’s why we put that resolution forward.

I then followed up with my question about the Hannibal Directive, which Miller also claims not to know about.