From the start, the United Nations-sponsored inquiry into the 2005 murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has looked more like an agit-prop campaign, first aimed at Syria and now Hezbollah, than an impartial investigation into the crime. Gareth Porter notes the inquiry’s curious blind eye toward an al-Qaeda confession.
The evidentiary standards used by international tribunals to charge people with crimes seem to depend on whether the West favors you or not. A new example is the Hariri case in which four Hezbollah members were indicted based on a bizarrely speculative cell-phone analysis, writes Gareth Porter for Inter Press Service.
Exclusive: The U.S. news media regularly rallies the American public to outrage when a U.S. adversary or some unpopular group is linked to a heinous crime. But a different standard applies to U.S. allies even when there is strong evidence of a similar offense, observes Robert Parry.