Richard Goldstone and Dore Gold discuss the U.N. Gaza Report at Brandeis

[letstalkaboutstuff]

Check out my video:

The United Nations -- RUN FROM THEM! RUN FAST!



[steute2011]

The faces of the older Jewish audience members when Justice Goldstone is speaking are filled with contempt. I believe that even if there was actual video of the IDF committing war crimes, they would still deny it and or justify it. Just sad that Israel will not just take responsibility for it's actions. BTW, The US will protect you in the UN, so stop it Mr.Gold.

[steute2011]

Dori Gold tries his normal spin, but falls flat when he tells the story about Israel calling off an air strike on a house where they knew there were a group of terrorists, because they were afraid of civilian casualties, and did the same thing in 2009 in Gaza. The facts know that to be a flat out lie. Israel bombed 12 hospitals and countless schools. How can you claim that you took great care to prevent civilian deaths, when there were 400 children and 350 women killed?

[nevskixx]

Goldstone has certainly had to eat his words, but at what a cost. His 500 pages are seriously now being viewed as a calumny. In short he now concludes that Israeli policy was not one of deliberate targeting of civilians, something that will be news to no one who follows the truth, but I worry about the others . To defend their beliefs, they must assume even crazier arguments or withdraw and concede that their libellous game is over. I fear that reason will not prevail.

[pladdaable]

my question to judge Goldstone: you talked about deliberate damage done to civilians and civilian structures, can you show me a war fought in urban areas in which such events did not occur? iI doubt it.

that brings me to wonder if a similar investigation was performed on any other conflict over the last, say, 70 years, would it not have found all the parties involved accused of war crimes? and this would include countries such as the UK, Germany, France and... the USA.

[theresmoretoit1]

@pladdaable Have you heard Goldstone has had to eats his words? Google Goldstone Washington Post.

UN bias against Israel is overt in bodies such as the General Assembly, which each year passes some nineteen resolutions against Israel and none against most other member states, including the world's most repressive regimes. UN WATCH

[ThunderAppeal]

Goldstone, is Jewish only in his own imagination.

[CyberneticOrganism01]

Dore Gold's appearance is Jewish and he would also be subject to discrimination in some places like Europe and America. This seems to be a case where a victim of discrimination thinks that discrimination towards others is justified. The very existence of the state of Israel is an act of discrimination. The world would be a better place if we abolish institutionalized racism.

[MoonshadowRogue]

A fascinating video. Thank you very much for sharing it with the public

[QAAproducts]

I have to study it more, but at this moment I wonder: Why does the Goldstone report suspiciously whiff of being a Straw-man?

[josephbel]

Yes the israeli army teaches the story of the sheperd, now they dont release anyone, they kill the sheperd.

[tarrasque420]

A/HRC/RES/13/6 Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination Adopted by a recorded vote of 45 to 1. The voting was as follows: Against:

United States of America. What is everybody in the entire world anti-Semitic except for the United States and Israel? After watching this video I am glad to hear that the dreaded holocaust excuse was not mentiond.

[rnmisrahi]

Listen to his answer:

"We got completely unsatisfactory answers from Hamas

We asked where the rockets were fired from: 'We don't know, that's the military wing'

They shrewdly adopt this divorce where the one hand doesn't know what the other hand

You have this amorphous situation governing with the one hand and using terrorist tactics with the other

How you deal with that would do a good semester"

Goldstone, you didn't have the support of Israel and the deception of Hamas. Your report shows it!

[MrRyanEmanuel]

One question assumes that Brandeis University is biased against Goldstone. I wonder why any person who objectively looks at the report can not be against it. This report only criticizes Israel. Criticism of human right violation should be done and it should be focused on most severe violations of human rights: Saudia Arabia, Libya, Syria...

[meshzzizk]

@MrRyanEmanuel You obviously haven't read the report. So shut the fuck up.

[RandyatWayne]

This program, and others like the one a few years ago inviting President Carter to discuss his controversial book, are important and courageous actions from the Brandeis University community are are to be applauded.

[MagicKirin]

@RandyatWayne

not when Carter cowardly refuses to debate Alan Dershowitz and vetts the question.

Carter suports international terrorism, because he is a racist against Jews

[MsZeitgeist85]

@MagicKirin Alan Dersowitz is a discredited lying qwack that plagerizes, and that remark about Carter being racist is one ot the stupidest comments I have seen in a long time.

[MagicKirin]

@MsZeitgeist85

Cater is a racist and so is Demond Tutu

[MsZeitgeist85]

@MagicKirin Where is your proof of that? Carter created peace between Egypt and Israel after Israel started 3 wars with them.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Is that a joke, Egypt started every war. Read some history, cmon.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox 1. Go look up Plan Dalet, Israel started the war in 48. 2. France and the UK wanted to get rid of Nassar in 56 and Israel fired the first shot. 3. In 67 Israel Pear Harbored Egypt after lying about the blocade and after the CIA predicted that there was no chance Nassar wouldattack.

Fact: Israel started every war except 73. You need to read history.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 No, Plan Dalet has nothing to do with Egypt's entry into the war. Egypt entered the war on May 15th 1948 when two spitfires bombed Tel Aviv. Yes, Israel may have started the 56 war in response to Egyptian nationalization of the Suez Canal and due to Allied pressure. In 67 Israel carried out the first strike because they had to. Nasser as well as Jordan and Syria rallied troups along their borders, Nassar did block straits of tiran and was continuously threatening Israel.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Plan Dalet was planned at the end of 47 to "Secure" the borders by ethnically clensing Palestinian towns within the Israeli borders. hundreds of towns were destroyed and thousands killed before 1 Arab soldier set foot on Israels borders. They started this conflict.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 We were talking about Egypt not Palestinians. We cant talk about all issues at once. Plan Dalet did not have anything to do with Egyptian acts of war. Egypt did start the war on May 15th, the day after Israel declared its independence.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Even Egypt admitted that they blocked the straits of tiran. A pre-emptive strike was the only chance that Israel had to survive.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Another Bullshit Myth. The so called blocade lasted only 1 week. After this happened Egypt was  allowing ships to pass. Also even if for the sake of argument you wanted to say that there was a blocade this would not effect Israel because only 5% of thier shipping went through that area.

Try again this won't work.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 So you first claim that the blockade never occurred. Now you say that it occurred for only a week. The act was intended to provoke war. Israel said previously that closing the straits would be considered an act of war. In addition the blockade violated UN agreements. Nassar made pacts with the armies of other local warring nations. And here are some quotes of Nassar prior to the war:

"Our basic objection will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Oh yeah, the straits were blocked from May 23rd until the war started. Which is only a little over a week anyways.. lol. And I dont know where you got the figure of 5 percent but Israel's primary energy supply came through the gulf which is of vital importance for any country.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox You are lying there was no blockade when Israel attacked. There was only a blocade for a breif period. You need to go read Meir Amit who was the head of Mossad at that time that agreed with the CIAs prediction that there is no proof Nassar would attack and if he did they would win in 7 to 10 days. Even if all of the Arab States attacked at the same time they would win very quickley.

Not 1 single UN nation, not even the US agreed Israel was acting in self defence in 67.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Provide some evidence of your claim that there was no blockade when Israel attacked. And it doesn't matter than they had no definitive proof that they would attack or that some analysis suggested that Israel might win. The fact is that the war only occurred due to the behavior of the Egyptian government. Constant provocation, constant threats of destroying Israel and of impending war and amassing huge armies along Israel's borders. They caused the war, end of story.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Meir Amit the head of Mossad said he agreed with LBJ that there is no proof that Nassar would attack. They had no reason to, Egypt's economy was in terrible shape thanks to Israel's sabatoging and drug smuggling.

You have nothing to stand on. Israel started the war to grab more land. Period. END OF STORY.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Then why would they give it back for peace? Israeli drug smuggling?

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox They didn't give it back. Egypt went to war with them in 73 because Golda Meir said they will not leave even after Saddat accepted Israels terms and in 70 Israel started building permanant settlements in the Sinai and they said they were going to keep 1/3 the land. Even the Israeli stooge Henery Kissanger said " I don't condem Egypts agression in 73 because they had the right to get their land back." Only when they lost in 73 and had the agreement in 77 did they return the land.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Explain these quotes from Nasser just before the war: "we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." “We will not accept any…coexistence with Israel.…Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel….The war with Israel is in effect since 1948" He also expelled the UN from the Sinai, why would he do this?

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Mosche Dyane said that if Israel would have placed the UN forces on their side in 67 the war could have been avoided.

Nassar in the 50s and 60s was like Ahmadenajad in Iran. Alot of talk and bluster but no action.

There are quotes from Ehud Barack that tell more than Nassar. Like "If I was born a Palestinian I would have joined a terrorist group" Or from Sharone where he said " If I was Arrafat I would never make peace with Israel."

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 I don't understand what anything you said in this post has to do with whether or not Egypt started the war. Nassar was more than just talk. Like I said before, amassing the troops, kicking out the UN, blocking the strait with full knowledge that it would be considered an act of war and making pacts with other aggressive nations who were making the same threats that Nassar was. It's pretty clear.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Yes drug smuggling, look it up. In the early 60s Israel was smuggling drugs into Egypt and they admitted that they were printing millions of dollars of counterfid Egyptian money to cause hyperinflation in Egypt's economy in the early 60s. This did alot of damage to Egypt's economy.

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 The only thing I could find was an article by somebody with zero citations that quoted an unnamed former colonel who said that Israel pushed drugs on Egyptian soldiers. Assuming this is true I don't understand why this would have any effect on Egypt's economy. It would only make the soldiers lazier than they already were. And again why would Israel give back the Sinai in the late 70s for peace? They could have easily kept it.

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox Why would they give back the land? Because it is illegal to aqurie land by war in the modern era. There was only 1 time when this happened. Do you know what time it was?

[jonahfox]

@MsZeitgeist85 Explain those quotes first please. And why did Nasser expel the UN from Sinai while signing pacts with neighboring Arab nations while amassing large amount of troops on the border with Israel?

More:

"The Arab people is firmly resolved to wipe Israel off the map" - Cario state radio

"Our goal is clear – to wipe Israel off the map. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa." - pres of iraq

[MsZeitgeist85]

@jonahfox You can't even make the case for 67 being a preventive war because there was no proof Nassar would attack. There were 6 intelligence agencys in the US that all reached the same conclusion, and Mossad agreed with them.

Even if you could make the case for this it is not legit because preventive wars are illegal.

[phooey108]

"If Hezbollah fires Katyushas, we have to deliver a severe blow to Lebanon's infrastructure, black out Beirut, cut off electricity, turn off the water, destroy bridges, halt industry and flatten entire villages. If there is horrible damage in Lebanon, they will say, 'The Jews are crazy'" ...

(haaretz interview, google it)

Forget about Goldstone. The reports on Israeli conduct in the 33 day war are far more damning than anything from the Gaza "War" Israel targets civilians.

[ADR10723]

@phooey108 This is legal under the Geneva Convention.

[brabon1]

@phooey108 when did targeting infrastructure constitute targeting civilians?

why dont you look at how america conducted the first gulf war...they went after the infrastructure of bagdad

you kill command and control

you idiot

[phooey108]

So what of Israel's "Dahiyeh strategy" then? If Hezbollah, as reported by Human Rights watch, Amnesty international, and the IDF (not IDF spokepeople obviously,haha) was not among the civilian population, why then did Israel kill a 1,000 Lebanese civilians? Eli Yishai explains:

[phooey108]

"In 2006, the great majority of Hezbollahs fighters wore uniforms. In fact, their equipment and clothing were remarkably similar to many state militaries—On occasion, IDF

units hesitated to fire on Hezbollah parties in the open because their kit, from a distance, looked so much like IDF infantrys: at Addaisseh, seven Hezbollah fighters

were mistaken for Israelis until an IDF soldier noticed that one of them was wearing track shoes."

[phooey108]

....", and IDF participants consistentl report little or no meaningful intermingling of Hezbollah fighters and noncombatants. The fighting in southern Lebanon was chiefly urban, in the built-up areas of

the small to medium-size villages and towns typical of the region. But it was not significantly intermingled with a civilian population that had fled by the time the ground fighting began."

[phooey108]

""Hezbollah is often described as having used

civilians as shields in 2006, and, in fact, they made extensive use of civilian homes as direct fire combat positions and to conceal launchers for rocket fire into Israel. Yet the villages Hezbollah used to anchor its

defensive system in southern Lebanon were largely evacuated by the time Israeli ground forces crossed the border on July 18. As a result key battlefields in the

land campaign south of the Litani River were mostly devoid of civilians

[phooey108]

(cont.)

The U.S Army War College produced a report on the 33 day war.and examined Hezbollah's tactics during the 33 day war and drew overwhelmingly from interviews and account that came from the IDF. ( (enter "U.S. war college, hezbollah, 2006" in google, and consult page 43 of the report)

It states the following:

(cont)

[phooey108]

And let's stop pretending that Israel wasnt supporting Hamas went it wanted to undermine PLO. Let's stop pretending that Hamas, which has only been in power since 2006, is the cause of all the problems

As for border security. Israel could have near impregnable borders if it wanted to;it could simply build a concrete security wall all around the 67 borders with a buffer zone, covered by land mines and snipers.

[nevskixx]

Again some truth Phooey regarding some israelis trying to nurture an alternative leadership for the Palestinians, but Arafat changed his tune for a while at least and a greater mistake of bringing him back was made. Hamas is in power in Gaza and has the power to make the peace. Because of its attachment to Muslim Brotherhood ideals and its nihilistic outlook , it just won't. and therefore is a problem backed by Iran.

[phooey108]

"no right to self defense"

This is a phony pretext used to create more facts on the ground. Israel used the same excuse when tried to steal the Sinai from Egypt.

Only a crazy state thinks that keeping a hostile population under brutal occupation contributes to the long term safety and well being of its citizens. Israel only gave up the Sinai after a near catastrophic war. It left Lebanon when the Hezbollah forced them out.

It seems clear that Israel only understands the language of force.

[nevskixx]

I thought Israel gave up Sinai for peace with its neighbour which it got phooey? You obviously see history in polmical terms, not for what really happens.

[phooey108]

Israel was building settlements in the Sinai and had plans to build cities.

Israel wasnt occupying the Sinai to protect itself, it planned to create facts on the ground and expand its borders. It was compelled to give up its territorial ambitions AFTER a war that endangered its existence. Before the war, Sadat offered peace in exchange for a full withdrawal to the 67 borders and just settlement of the Palestinian refugee crisis.... Israel refused.

[nevskixx]

"Before the war, Sadat offered peace in exchange for a full withdrawal to the 67 borders and just settlement of the Palestinian refugee crisis.... Israel refused". There is some truth Phooey in what you say on this point and indeed it was not believed by Israel but this was more of an admitted mistake rather than a plan to construct settlements regardless. Once Sadat clarified further his intentions regarding peace and recognition there was no going back and settlements were removed.

[phooey108]

I hold Ahmedinejad in low regard. On the matter of Holocaust denial, it's morally irresponsible and thuggish, but I refuse to be party to the hysteria that surrounds it, because it's overwhelmingly calculated and political.

[nevskixx]

As you rightly point out, phooey108 it is morally irresponsible and thuggish . However it is quite clear to most decent people that the reason that it is , is because underlying Holocaust denial is a regret and desire to will it to happen again. Isn't such an action not overwhelmingly calculated and political? Would it not be simpler to retract the statements and apologise in order to defuse the "hysteria" ?

[nevskixx]

There is a tendency to play down the Arab and Iranian threat as if to suggest that the hateful content against Jews or Israel is not really something to take seriously or literally. That somehow it is the cry of a wounded victim, whilst any peaceful overture from Israel is to be perceived as a devious trick and never to be trusted. No. Hate is hate and it does not derive from a wound though it is camouflaged to appear so much of the time. The proof is the uhistory of unprovoked hatred over time.

[phooey108]

The Arabs have made several peace overtures to Israel. Israel could have avoided many of its wars, starting with the 73 War, if it had accepted the Arab peace overtures and settled on its own borders. The Israeli excuse of "land for security" is a cynical fraud; if it doesnt want attacks being launched from the territory it illegally occupies, then it could do what it did in southern Lebanon in 2006, pull out on the condition that A UN peacekeeping force replace its own troops.

[nevskixx]

" The Israeli excuse of "land for security" is a cynical fraud": That's the opinion Phooey of those who are willing to see Israel go down the tubes. No right to self-defence in short. And what about iran who have no territorial claims but are happy to indulge Hamas and Hizbullah with supplying them weapons and not much else! Cynical? Moi. And the UN ? ThTrue they did stop the Hutus in Rwanda didn't they?. Perhaps you are right Phooey, Israel should give them a try.

[nevskixx]

And according to the majority of Arabs, isn't all of israel supposed to be illegal phooey?

[phooey108]

Israel doesnt need the UN. Its godfather, the United States, is the most awesome military force on the planet. Suppose as an alien from Andromeda paid attention to this hysterical self defense plea coming from an illegal occupier with the best air force on the planet and the political, financial, and military backing of the strongest superpower in human history. Our alien friend would collapse in laughter.

[nevskixx]

You place heavy reliance on weapons and force. If that were the case why worry about aircraft security in the US. If Al-Qaeda attacks, the US can use a nuclear weapon to destroy Afghanistan or wherever! Hamas is lethal if it attacks shopping centres, buses etc Your argument is fatuous. If Hamas was to have stronger weopons it would use them and they will kill wherever they can says Hezbollah.Illegality is always used as an argument, but murdering civilians is illegal, isn't it?

[nevskixx]

Phooey, read "Under a mushrrom cloud" by Ottolenghi for a more worrying scenario that now is forseeable for anyone with concerns about the future. What he says is something to reflect on.

[phooey108]

Explain how Israel's illegal, brutal, occupation makes its shopping centres, buses and public places safe? Explain why building "jewish only" highways in occupied Palestine makes Israel a safer place.

Murdering civilians is illegal, yes. As it stands, Israel has killed far more civilians than Hamas or the PLO, and violated or broken more resolutions and agreements than any of its Arab neighbours, so it stands to reason that Arabs have a much more legitimate case of self defense than Israel.

[nevskixx]

So according to you phooey, it is legal to kill Israelis and everything else is illegal. At least you have established your credentials which are noted.

[phooey108]

I said no such thing. You tried to justify Israel's occupation and aggression by claiming that it needs to colonize the West Bank in order to keep its civilians from being murdered.

I pointed out that the Israel's record of aggression, broken agreements, and targeting of civilian populations and civilian nfrastructure gives the Arabs a stronger basis for the "self defense" argument, if you want play that game. But rationale people think the best option is the international concensus.

[nevskixx]

Some of this stuff is quoted out of Goldstone and is proving problematic. I don't believe Israel deliberately teargets civilians. All the Arabs have to do is recognise Israel's right to exist and to make peace and many problems in that region can start to be resolved. I agree that an arbiter respected by all sides should play a part in future discussion. Finally I have nothing further to add to this thread.. I wish you well.

[nevskixx]

I strongly recommend you read the book I suggested and anther: The Closed Circle by David Pryce-Jones published in the 1980s but whose description of Arab Society gives ssome detailed reasoning as to why it has been so hard to bridge the gap.

[phooey108]

Forget about Goldstone and the Gaza Massacre, take a look at Israel's conduct in the 33 day war with the Hezbollah. That's a case where there is just an overwhelming amount of evidence that Israel deliberately targeted civilians.

Amnesty and Human rights watch reported that they found no evidence that the Hezbollah systematically used civilians as human shields...but suppose you feel those organizations have an agenda...well there's an especially damning report on 33 day war....

[nevskixx]

Overtures? Well look what happened in 2000! Nothing. Who's to blame? depends which account you believe? But most blame Arafat

[phooey108]

Your own foreign minister of the time, Shlomo Ben Ami, said if he were Palestinian, he wouldnt have accepted the deal at Camp David. I'm talking about the peace initiatives proposed by King Fahd, and then later, the Arab League.

Israel is the fourth strongest military power on the planet. It is more than capable of defending itself from the might of Hamas from inside of its own borders. Dont try to tell me there will be a second Holocaust or a Yom Kippur War if Israel goes back to its borders.

[nevskixx]

Firstly Shlomo ben Ami is not MY foreign minister. You also misrepresent what he said. He did say about camp david that it would not have been acceptable but he also said that what Arafat was offered at Taba WAS, and the response he gave was to withdraw without making a counter proposal. There are a conflicting number of reasons that others have given but it had much to do with personal vanity . As for no second holocausts, your words do not reassure everyone.

[nevskixx]

Don't get me wrong Phooey, I believe that conditions in Gaza are far from acceptable for ordinary folk. I do not hate Palestinians and hope that they too will have a viable state, but not one that calls for Israel's end. I detest racism and worry where the hatred will lead. It's not as simple as you make out.

[phooey108]

I believe policies responsible for the likes of Operation Cast Lead fuel hatred. I was surprised and shocked when Olmert renouncd his previous positions on the borders of Palestine and publically admitted that some of Israel's security issues are self generated problems. Olmert is a war criminal, but at least he admits that Israel is charging down a path that will spell punishing consequences it. The recent threats from Syria and the Hezbollah are sobering and reflect a dangerous new reality.

[nevskixx]

" some of Israel's security issues are self generated problems."

At least there is always some nuanced discussion. Note of course he said "some" and not "all". As for hatred, this has remained for a very very long time. Antisemitism is disgustingly rife in the Arab World and is largely overlooked by the West and the political left who often engage in antisemitic discourse : the extreme right in plain antisemitism. That said, racism has proliferated generally and not because of Cast Lead.

[phooey108]

"Antisemitism is disgustingly rife in the Arab World"

There is also a staggering amount of anti-Arab racism coming from Israel, especially in the West Bank. Is any Arab country treating its Jewish population the way Israel treats Palestinians in occupied territories? House demolitions, beatings, torture, lethal force used on peaceful activists, and all manner of vicious, violent behaviour from the terrorist settlers.

[nevskixx]

Phooey: "Is any Arab country treating its Jewish population the way Israel treats Palestinians in occupied territories?"

Not really, since most have left Arab countries largely through persecution. Whilst 20% of Israel's population are Arab. I agree there is an unacceptable level of anti-Arab feeling, but it cannot be compared. You do not find it in the daily press, the news items like you do daily in the Arab world about Jews. This equivalence argument fails Phooey.

[nevskixx]

"The recent threats from Syria and the Hezbollah are sobering and reflect a dangerous new reality." Agreed! And also their backers the Holocaust denying Iranian regime.

[phooey108]

The Holocaust denial of the thugs running Iran is juvenile and stupid, but the hysteria over it is very political and calculated. Israel and the corporate Western media attack Ahmadinejad for his Holocaust revisionism again and again, yet curiously, Israel's Holocaust denying house Negroe in the West Bank, Dr. Mahmoud Abbas, is spared much of this outrage. Secondly...those in glass houses shouldnt throw stones...does the Knesset recognize the Armenian genocide?

[nevskixx]

You praise Ahmedinejad with faint damns. "it's juvenile" "it's childish", "they don't mean it" "It's political" "It's an over reaction"... Pull the other one Phooey. When an anti semite says he wants to kill Jews, this is one lesson we accept. It is totally unacceptable from him, from Hamas , from Abbas and whoever. Period.

[nevskixx]

I'd like to say one thing more. The people of Gaza benefitted considerably during periods of calm when they often came to Israel to work and to sell produce on a regular daily basis, In the 1990s, when there was great hope ON BOTH SIDES, that peace might finally actually materialise, that relations between Arab and Jew were warm and open across the Middle East. The breakdown in peace talks and the failure to revive them has caused untold misery and has allowed for extremism to dictate.

[phooey108]

Furthermore, Egypt isnt controlling gaza's airspace and blockading Gaza by sea.

[phooey108]

The Gaza Massacre wasnt about stopping rocket attacks, in the lead up to Cast Lead Israel deliberately provoked them.

The larger focus of the operation was undermining support for Hamas (by attacking civilians and civilian infrastructure) and the secondary purpose was finding Gilat Shalit.

[bobpulga]

At the same time of operation Cast Lead , Sri Lanka Army massacred more than 70,000 tamils !

UNHRC voted in favor a resolution which highlights Sri Lankas continued commitment towards the resettlement of IDPs , and its commitment to an inclusive political solution to ensure sustainable peace.

DO YOU REALLY EXPECT THE JEWISH STATE TO TAKE UNHRC/UN AS A NO BIAS/SERIOUS ORGANISM ?

Final words of Israel Ambassador give expression to a sad reality !

ISRAEL CAN ONLY COUNT WITH ITSELF

[unionation]

Exactly

Not to mention the slaughter of 200,000-300,000 Sudanese civilians by Arab militias over the last 5 years in Darfur.

The Arabs are furious about the death of 1,400 Arabs in Gaza, but seem quite comfortable with perpetrating a wholescale genocide. The Arab governments even refuse to recognize the UN's International Criminal Warrant to arrest Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for sponsoring the killings.

What hypocracy.

[xerocada1]

@unionation Jewish Voice for Peace, Jews for a Just Peace, JStreet would say that the genocide, the ethnic cleansing is being carried out by Israel, a militaristic-fascist state against the Palestinians who have no military, no sophisticated weapons, no powerful friends to defend them. Palestinians control 14% of the remaining 22% of the original Palestine left to them after '67.Ethnic cleansing is what is happening at this moment by Israel against indigenous people of Palestine.

[ThunderAppeal]

@xerocada1 Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. JERUSALEM as in JEWISH. ISRAEL is the home land of the Jewish people. Everyone else is either a guest, squatter or trespasser.

[xerocada1]

@ThunderAppeal As Jewish intellectuals like the late Tony Judt or the very much alive Noam Chomsky would say: a nation likeIsrael which privileges one religion over another is an ANACHRONISM, a product of a 19th c. philosophy that thought that land was for the taking by Europeans. Just as Iran should not be an Islamic state or the US a Christian state, Israel shouldn't be Jewish. It won't be as demographics takes its toll on the Jewish majority and that majority becomes a minority.

[ThunderAppeal]

@xerocada1 The fact that you follow a blabbering idiot like chomsky says plenty about what kind of half-assed quasi intellectual you make yourself out to be. Why should America not be a christian state again? Why should Israel not be a Jewish state? As for iran? Its very easy why it should not be an izlamic state, it never started out as being an izlamic state. The thing with morons like you who follow still greater morons like chomsky is that you people try to completely whitewash history.

[ForgotMyName3]

@unionation Lumping "Arabs" together based on nothing but ethnicity to hold Palestinian responsible for the genocide in Darfur, makes as much sense as holding Ethiopians responsible for the Genocide in Rwanda, or blaming white people for Nazis. Get your head out of your ass, and realize that Arabs aren't a category of people you lump together whenever it suits your bigotry. And what exactly did the West do for Darfur? I'm sure you didn't invade them to bring democracy. Hypocrisy indeed.

[drainey32798]

Do you dispute any of the allegations in the Goldstone Report? All you should care about is what's true, whether you are responsible for harming someone, and if you are, you should try to stop it. The crime of others are irrelevant in this basic moral analysis. Would you have accepted Saddman Hussein's argument that his attack against Kuwait should be overlooked because of the crimes of the Serbs in Bosnia?

[bobpulga]

In response to drainey32798 Yes indeed !!!But before analyzing the report the main question remains , would you submit yourself to a trial where the sentence had been fixed before the judgment procedure ? No one would !!

[drainey32798]

It was not a trial. It was a fact finding mission, in which Goldstone gave his opinion as to whether international law had been violated. Of course it is not conclusive that crimes have been committed (but use common sense, it is likely they did on both sides). That is why Goldstone's main goal was to induce Hamas and Israel to conduct open and fair inquiries into the matter before any intl criminal trial is even recommended.

[bobpulga]

Christine Chinkin, The British member had already decided the case before hearing one bit of evidence. Here is what she said in a letter that bore her signature written before she was even appointed to the : The rocket attacks on by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling to rely on self-defense .

[drainey32798]

Regarding Chinkin, it is unfortunate they didn't remove her, but I would be interested to know what effect she had on the gathering of evidence. If one person is biased in a large group of unbiased, then it may not have mattered. If Isreal had worked with Goldstone, maybe they could have removed or marginalized her role. Isreal chose not to do so. Also, I believe that her remarks deal with the right to use force, which the goldstone report did not address

[bobpulga]

Goldstone in a very curious way responded that This is not a judicial inquiry. Here I state: SURE NOT OTHERWISE that letter shed signed would have been a ground for trial disqualification

[bobpulga]

Regarding the report allegations I would need far more time and space to reply them all but hereby a crucial fact for you to think about. Goldstone s categorically denied the allegations that Hamas officials accompanied Members of the Fact Finding Mission at all, let alone at every stage of their visit to witnesses .

[bobpulga]

Which would had also constituted a base for mistrial, taking into account Hamas past actions against Palestinians political enemies.

Hereby I quote Associated Press article published on June 9, 2009, Hamas security often accompanied his [Goldstones] team during their five-day trip to last week, raising questions about the ability of witnesses to freely describe the militant groups actions.

[bobpulga]

Furthermore !!! How could Goldstone possibly know who among those escorting him were affiliated with Hamas? The reality is that nothing significant takes place in without the approval of Hamas.

Sorry can not accept the report as a unbiased and fair piece of evidence !!!!!

[drainey32798]

If you don't accept the report, that's fine. The proper way to respond though is for Israel to do it's own investigation, with non military independent officials doing their work out in the open (like Goldstone did, for all to see). So if you don't accept Goldstone's findings, fine, just dispute them with your own evidence (or put pressure on Israel to do so, if you live there or live in the US.

[nevskixx]

The problem with your argument drainey is that there is no equivalence with any of the examples you have given, to what happened in gaza.. Firstly Sadaam was the aggressor whilst Kuwait did not attack in any way. Israel was fired upon for many years by Hamas and effectively every missile it fired was a war crime. Enough is enough and so when israel defends itself it is adjudged of war crimes by clowns, most of whom are despots. That's the problem with the UN and Goldstone.

[drainey32798]

@nevskixx You are missing my point. I would never suggest that the Gaza and Iraqi invasions were "equivalent." I was trying to make a simple ethical point. Israelis and Americans are responsible for the predictable consequences of their own actions, not for the predictable consequences of other countries' actions. Bobpulga was trying to evade the issue of Israel's disproportionate use of force by pointing to Sri Lanka's actions. Making that move is morally bankrupt.

[nevskixx]

Israel has been accused of using "disproprtionate force" and therefore by inference unjustifiable force .Since no one has questioned proprtionality of force in any other example except in the case of Israel, it is this that offends. But indeed the evidence points in an opposite direction:Colonel Richard Kemp and Colonel Tim Collins, both experts on warfare, seem to think that Israel minimised civilian casualties which inevitably occurs, in war, and that they acted ethically as a whole.

[nevskixx]

Notwithstanding Goldstone, Israel has started to make its own investigations and has censured soldiers where wrongs have been done. It does not need a Goldstone to promote discussion in israel. Israel is a vibrant democracy and conducts itself in a way that puts most of the world to shame. Now Hamas: that's a very different story. we wait with baited breath as to how it will deal with its own crimes.

[bobpulga]

. according to Goldstone own words: should fight the bombing of it civilian population with COMANDOS . in order to avoid Palestinian causalities. IT IS PREJUDICE !!!

Let me also remind you that no country had judged it own army chief commander and defense minister after winning a war for criminal acts against it enemies !

[bobpulga]

No country except Israel. In the sad episode of Sabra/Shatila those two were removed, unfortunately nothing happened to Christian militias , who by the way sit side by side in Lebanon Government.

My moral is not bankrupt, but maybe you are to much naïve not to question and recognize the facts.

[bobpulga]

drainey32798! I will try to make myself more direct and clear . Anti-Semitism is still a constant in the world but of course in new types and forms. One of it cruel and evil forms is delegitimization of the Israel state. By bringing Siri Lanka episode I am simply highlighting that routine procedure at UNHRC/UN l is to judge Israel in a totally different moral ground than the entire world.

[drainey32798]

Hello. Sorry it took me so long to respond. Life got in the way... I have no doubt you are a sincere person, but i remain unpersuaded by your posts. I think we just approach moral issues differently. To decide whether an action is right or wrong, I apply a simple analysis. I first look at what i'm responsible for (the actions of my state [US], and its allies [Israel]), I then see whether their actions conflict with a moral principle that I think is worth following.

[drainey32798]

contd. In this case, the moral principle that i think is worth following is the principle of distinction between noncomabtants and combatants in war, and the principle or proportionality. Another one is transparent inquiries into whether the aforementioned principles are being followed. I then inquire as to whether my state and its allies are living up to these principles. If they are not, I criticize them. Now do you see why I think the crimes of other states are irrelevant?

[nevskixx]

@drainey " transparent inquiries" : be more specific.

[drainey32798]

My post was for bobpulga, but I would be glad to flesh out the point a bit. The moral principle that must be followed in order to enforce the principles of distinction/proportionality is a commitment to transparent government processes (or else how is the citizenry to know when disproportionate force is used?). As Goldstone pointed out, 10 months had past while the military was investigating itself in secret. I object to that b/c I share some responsibility for what happened as a US taxpayer.

[bobpulga]

In another words, an alien observing the United Nations' debates, reading its resolutions, and walking its halls would conclude that a principal purpose of the world body is to censure a tiny country called Israel. There is no other explanation why Russia can simply eliminate Chechens, Nato be able to make use of disproportionate use of force to bomb Serbian civilians, Saudi Arabia is allowed to smash Yemen Shias without being worried to be censored and Israel

[bobpulga]

. according to Goldstone own words: should fight the bombing of it civilian population with COMANDOS . in order to avoid Palestinian causalities. IT IS PREJUDICE !!!

[bobpulga]

Let me also remind you that no country had judged it own army chief commander and defense minister after winning a war for criminal acts against it enemies ! No country except Israel. In the sad episode of Sabra/Shatila those two were removed, unfortunately nothing happened to Christian militias , who by the way sit side by side in Lebanon Government.

My moral is intact , but maybe you are to much naïve not to question and recognize the facts.

[phooey108]

The whole concept of "disproportionate force" rides on the assumption that Israel had a right to stop the rocket attacks with a military operation.

Israel could have stopped the rocket attacks by agreeing to the ceasefire offered by Hamas AFTER Israel broke the original, six month 'calm." During the original six month ceasefire, Israel was obliged to lift its blockade on Gaza; it refused, but Hamas was careful to observe the ceasefire in spite of this.

[phooey108]

cont.

On November 4, 2008, using the cover of the American elections, Israel broke the six month calm by killing six Hamas militants in Gaza. Hamas immediately retaliated with rocket attacks.

Some time after, Hamas agreed to an extended ceasefire on the condition that Israel lift its blockade. Remember, from late June to Nov. 4, Hamas lived up to its obligations under the original ceasefire, in spite of Israel's refusal to lift the Gaza blockade.

[phooey108]

cont.

returning to November 4, Israel, which is already in partial violation of the terms of the ceasefire, breaks the ceasefire completely. But shortly after, Hamas expresses a willingness to renew the ceasefire on the condition that israel live up to terms of the original ceasefire, which called Israel to lift the blockade. Israel refused, Hamas continued its rocket attacks, and soon after Israel launched Cast Lead, on the grounds that it was acting in "self defense"

[phooey108]

cont.

But careful examination of the facts reveals the opposite. Hamas demonstrated a willingness to stop its rocket attacks but Israel deliberately provoked them. Israel has a claim to self defense, but not through force.

So why did Israel provoke the Hamas rocket attacks? Because it needed a pretext for Cast Lead.

[phooey108]

What was the purposes of Cast Lead?

Crushing the Hamas government and infrastructure, punishing and terrorizing the civilian population (to undermine support for Hamas) and finding Gilat Shalit.

[nevskixx]

Neither israel or Hamas believed that the ceasefire would last. Both sides saw the lull as a time of opportunity. Israel used the time to investigate Hamas that was found to have had well developed permanent bases, weapon silos, training camps. On November 19, Hamas launched dozens of missiles and mortars which was a portent for future conflict. Israel's decision to act was timed to coincide with the change of the US administration. Hamas has no intention of recognizing Israel.

[phooey108]

Hamas has repeatedly said it recognizes the 67 borders. This babble and prattle about Hamas recognizing "Israel's right to existence" is political stonewalling.

Hamas recognizes Israel as a fact that it has to tolerate. What Hamas wont recognize is Israel's moral legitimacy, with good reason; Israel has no right to demand that Palestinians accept the moral legitimacy of the evictions and forced resettlements that took place when Israel was established.

[phooey108]

Hamas is obliged to accept Israel's sovereignty over the internationally recognized borders and Hamas has a legal and moral obligation to renounce TERRORISM and attacks against Israeli civilians...but certainly no legal or moral obligation to renounce violent measures it takes against the military targets of a foreign attacker. Hamas has a right to resist a foreign power that blockades and starves them. Israel's casus belli for its 67 war was Nasser's "blockade"

[nevskixx]

Hamas has not repeatedly recognized Israel phooey. It often speaks in ambiguous terms. "we are fighting for our land" , "we are fighting against occupation", "we are fighting zionism", but when one gets down to what it all REALLY means, it means murder of jews "wherever they are" , an Islamification of the region(not much room for Christians either). It certainly isn't stonewalling. And by the way what about Egypt? why no missiles being sent there for the blockade Mmm?

[phooey108]

No, it has stated over a half dozen occassions that it would recgnize the 67 borders. If Hamas words terrorize you so much, then surely you can agree that Israel ACTIONS against the state of Palestine, namely, occupying East Jerusalem and the West Bank, are far more serious than "ambiguous terms" that come from Hamas.

As for your point about Egypt, the Egyptian army isnt occupying Palestine, nor is it butchering Palestinian civilians by the hundreds.

[nevskixx]

So why is Egypt blockading Gaza? I'll tell you why. The Muslim Brotherhood of which hamas derives, undermines Egyptian society. Hamas serves to spread extremism (with others) to all corners of the middle East. I agree with what you say about UN Res 242 etc and the Int Ct ruling, but without cessation of violence don't expect anything but the continuation of it. hamas terrorizes its own people Phooey. It's far from democratic and IS a force to be reckoned with. That;s why borders are controlled.

[phooey108]

I dont agree with your characterization of hamas as extremis. Hamas has demonstrated a willingness to negotiate within the framework of the international concensus. Politically, that's not extremist, that's a moderate position. Plus, Hamas is a democratically elected governing authority, unlike say, the love of the West, the ruling tyrants and Islamic extremists in Saudi Arabia. Is Hamas a nasty government that violates human rights? Sure, but let's apply standards across the board.

[phooey108]

According to Human Rights Watch, Egyptian government, America's ally, terrorizes its own citizens; Egypt's record on human rights record is terrible. Same with Saudi Arabia, except that that country has the distinction of being a ruthless absolute monarchy. Furthermore, Israel's human rights record in the occupied territories is generally abysmal. So when we talk about ruthless, oppressive regimes, let's show a little humility. Let's be a little consistent.

[nevskixx]

The Arab world's human rights record and Iran's record is deplorable phooey-that's very true. Name me a single country that has regard for the welfare of its citizens in that region and you will understand that when Hamas says it is not extremist as you say so few of us really can believe it.

[nevskixx]

It might be useful for you to take a look at Ross Kemp's quite revealing 2 part documentary on Gaza and Israel. It's done with some empathy for the 2 sides. Perhaps we can discuss this another time. Also Tim Collins short 9 minute film is revealing too about Gaza. What I appreciated about the 2 films was that they did not emote as much film footage does. As regards to democracy, the kind of election that it was was something out of a nightmare: the sort where 51% vote to destroy the other 49%!

[nevskixx]

..and israel is not "butchering" Palestinians either!!

[phooey108]

Your argument presupposes that israel did nothing to provoke the missiles fired by Hamas. Israel imposes a land, sea and air blockade on Gaza and illegally occupies the West Bank. Israel has a right to defend itself AFTER its exhausted peaceful means.

But that's beside the point; Israel provoked the Hamas rocket attacks when it violated the 6 month ceasefire under the cover the American election, then refused to agree to Hamas' offer to extend the ceasefire.

[phooey108]

If the UN is inherently biased against Israel, why does it recognize Israeli territory conquered in the course of the 1948 war?

[nevskixx]

I think you will find that if put to a UN vote today there would be a sizeable number of states who would vote Israel off the map phooey. Israel declared itself a state along partition lines offered in 1947, which the Arabs rejected. In 1948, Jordan in fact acquired territory including East Jerusalem. No one at the time supported Israel on that one.

[phooey108]

Patently untrue. The UN general assembly has voted in favour of the two state settlement every year in General Assembly for 30 years. The whole world (including Iran) votes in support of Israel's right to exist on its OWN legal borders. Literally every country on the planet, with the exception of the United States, Israel, and a few south Pacifc island states, votes in support of Israel's existence on 67 borders.

[nevskixx]

The question of " legal" borders is always invoked as an argument , whatever period in Israel's existence, as Israel never being within its proper borders as a means to deny it any borders at all. Clearly some borders have defined within the framework of agreements Israel has had with Egypt and with Jordan for example, but the rest is open to discussion and to be decided once the parties to the conflict agree to resolve it phooey.

[phooey108]

No, when resolution 242 was laid out, it was stated explicitly that the border adjustments within the framework of the 67 borders would be "minor and mutual." 242 emphasized the inadmissability of territory conquered by war, but it acknowledged that both parties should agree to MINOR AND MUTUAL border adjustments. In 2004, the world court, in a non-binding decision, voted 14-1 that the West Bank, including East Jerusalem was occupied Palestinian territory.

[Megamediaplex]

dot com

[Mankindfails]

The truth is that ppls like Goldstone are trying to help the world but especially Israel against its own National radicalism by pointing out that Israel policies must change before its too late.Ppls like him should be respected instead of being called Jews self haters(lol)

[Mankindfails]

And he dare saying that UN are against Israel...even tho they are the one who made a jewish state possible...Maybe UN think that they helped create the m-east conflict and now they try to contain the jews.But every sanctions made against Israel didnt passed cause of Usa veto.But for Israel the only time UN was fair is when they gave half of palestine to the jews lol

[Mankindfails]

And i would not trust any country especially not mine to be impartial in a public self investigation and alot less if its being closed doors.And to think or say that Jews amongs all ppls have the integrity to fairly investigate themselves is so arrogant and

pretentious...thats a shame

[Mankindfails]

And Gold said he fully trust Israeli's military and civil justice systems to investigate themselves...well if they are all as one sided as he is it means that there's no justice for Palestinians in Israel

[Mankindfails]

And Gold said he fully trust Israel's military and civils justice system to investigate themselves...well if they are all as one sided as he is, there's no justice in Israel for Palestinians

[Mankindfails]

Funny thing about Israel is that they always say that Palestinians dont recognize the jewish state and that they 'want' to destroy it

But Israelis dont recognize palestine either and they have destroyed and are still destroying Palestine everyday

Jews can deny it and blame it on Palis cause they are blinded by nationalism or religous convictions but everyone else see the facts

[Mankindfails]

Of course for him building illegal settlements in occupied territories especially in east Jer and clearly making as much settlements as possible to make a palestine state impossible was not a motive for Hamas rockets on Israel

[Mankindfails]

Damn Gold is so one sided its just crazy...according to him every problems in Palestine/Israel conflict must be blamed only on palestinians.Like if jews were only victims in this conflict...lol and yet he dares saying that Goldstone is one sided

[swim3330]

Richard Goldstone = huge tool

[proudisraeli1]

Thank you Ambassador Gold for your great presentation to debunk the new 'protocols'! G-d bless you!

[LamaJoMaMa]

With Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Amy Goodman, Goldstone is among the great

Jewish voices for human rights and sanity in the world today.

Tremendous courage is required to stand for humanity in the face of US-Israeli state terrorism.

The Israeli Defense Forces have always targeted civilians, as evidenced by the LEHI ribbon awarded to Jewish terrorists who did their work prior to the founding of the state, successive bombings of Lebanese civilians and the recent Gaza slaughter.

[proudisraeli1]

I think the IDF displayed much more courage in going into Gaza to face scum Islamists to defend their fellow citizens than shmuk Goldstone. What courage on his part are you talking about? Is he being imprisoned or something? Thanks to his protocols he is doing great...just see he will be appointed to the Hague write a book making a few million...

[LamaJoMaMa]

Hi Proud,

There is no courage in bombing defenseless civilians. The Israelis killed about 1400 people,

while Hamas retaliation killed four people. This

is a firepower ratio of more than one hundred to

one.

Especially craven were the bombings (accidental, of course) of twenty-two hospitals.

The bombings constituted major violations of international law, as Israel is required to provide for the safety of persons under occupation, not to terrorize them.

Goldstone's honesty is his courage.

[ronmichaeli]

Fuck Goldstone

God bless Israel

[J11ACO]

the interruptions are terrible impossible to follow