1. "supposed"? you kidding?
2. if you would care about protecting human rights then you wouldn't care who is in this council. you would only care if their claim has merit or not.
2. if you would care about protecting human rights then you wouldn't care who is in this council. you would only care if their claim has merit or not.
2. When the EFF is parroting the claims of "UN experts", the credibility of said experts is relevant.
In other words, if you say: "listen to what they say, because they are experts", questioning their expert status is entirely justified. It's different if you were to say: "listen to what they say, because it makes sense".
In this case, I think what they say is correct, but if it's true that Israel is the only item on their agenda, their credibility as experts is still suspect.
And I do agree that Israel has a terrible human rights record, but they are indeed hardly the worst offender. (Was Qatar member of this? They have enslave migrant workers, working them to death for the 2022 world championship!)
Therefore personally I'm glad that Israel is the subject of UN meetings, because they should be.