Footnote: Blair was a major player in getting Hamas’ political wing banned in the EU and also scuuppered plans for Gaza’s gas to be brought ashore in Egypt.

When the Presdident of Sudan was cited for crimes against humanity, he was named specifically and the court clearly identified who they were after and why. They didn’t name Sudan. Here, the report is general and a bit defensive on Israel and I think they threw Hamas in there as a measure to apphease critics, the results as we see, western countries are falling over each other trying to protect Israel. Would there have been the same reaction if Barak was named as principal?

I would have liked to see more direct charges and accusations against people like Ehud Barak and Livni for prosecuting the war with little concern for civilian casualties. Several of the field commanders should have been named specifically and specific crimes charged against them. Then maybe you’re not really attacking a whole country but the individuals who were responsible for the crimes.

Blair himself, along with George Bush, Romsfeld, Rice, and a whole slew of neocons in the Bush white house along with Perle, Wolfowitz and Bill Clinton all deserve to be named for war crimes for their role in the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq. But who is going to pursue that action.

The best you can hope from the Goldstone report will be the same fate as the Kahan Commission on Ariel Sharon and his role in the massacres in Sabra and Shatila, a wrap on the knuckles and later elect him as Prime Minister, reward for his war crimes ?

If you want to prosecute people for their war crimes, win the war, then charge the losing side with everything you can think of, case in point, Nuremberg. Notice no one was charged in the US for the crimes committed in Vietnam.

Hypocrisy still rules our world and justice leans towards those who win and can write history with their own words. This is exactly what Blair is saying.

The point is that Blair is full of it. He claims that there is a “second” view to consider. But, it’s starkly clear that the US and the UK (to name a few) including Blair constantly put Israel’s needs ahead of those of the Palestinians.

If there IS bias, it exists on the part of the pro-Israel camp. But you already know that so there’s no point in explaining this to you.

What did Barney Frank say to one angry protester at a town hall meeting recently?

Anyway, if the sky is a shady haze of brown in your world, then you might find Blair to have answered the question appropriately.

But, we on planet earth, disagree.