The war that was launched this past weekend against the Goldstone report in the New York Times is aimed at the mildmannered Sec’y General of the United Nations. So Norman Finkelstein tells me, and this Haaretz piece confirms. On February 5, Ban Ki-moon will report to the General Assembly on the progress of the report (which was published last summer by the UN Human Rights Council). Before then Ban will have gotten the Israeli gov’t's response to the Goldstone report–its effort to nullify the findings–and Haaretz says the goal is to get Ban to say, I accept the Israeli response to the charges, let the Israelis investigate the Gaza slaughter.
Today the campaign for Ban is playing… the Holocaust card! "Israeli leadership is planning an all-out attack on the report to coincide with Wednesday’s anniversary of the 1945 liberation of Auschwitz."– AFP. Israeli leaders are rushing to Auschwitz this week, even as the Israeli information minister has declared the report to be "anti-Semitic."
The world will mark International Holocaust Day on Wednesday. Monday will see President Shimon Peres fly to Berlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leave for a visit to the Auschwitz death camp in Poland. They will be joined by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in Budapest and Information Minister Yuli Edelstein in New York. Before meeting with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Edelstein referred to the report accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, calling it "anti-Semitic".
The Israelis are also turning to human rights organizations in this war. Note that in his New York Times in which he published the Israeli claims re Goldstone without contradiction, Ethan Bronner put forward the Arab League report on the Gaza war, prepared by John Dugard, in an effort to make Judge Goldstone seem extreme. Bronner also deployed the Israeli human-rights orgs Breaking the Silence and B’tselem for his tendentious assertion that "virtually no one in Israel" believes that Israel targeted civilians in the war, as Goldstone alleged.
“I do not accept the Goldstone conclusion of a systematic attack on civilian infrastructure,” said Yael Stein, research director of B’Tselem. “It is not convincing."
Yes, and Gaza was reduced to rubble, and numerous police stations and the jail and the legislature and schools and hospitals were targeted and/or destroyed. I wonder what Stein would call that infrastructure? Terrorist infrastructure? "Stein’s comment is an outrageous falsehood, as anyone knowing the timing of the destruction can confirm: 90% of the destruction in the last 72 hours while Israel was withdrawing and in full control of the territory; 2,000 homes were destroyed in that period," explains Finkelstein.
The scholar reminds me that both B’tselem and Breaking the Silence are targets of an Israeli Foreign Ministry effort to end their foreign funding. Rightwing Israeli polls have called B’tselem a "trojan horse." This is mortal combat…
“and Haaretz says the goal is to get Ban to say, I accept the Israeli response to the charges, let the Israelis investigate the Gaza slaughter”
That was also the Goldstone recommendation.
I’m not sure why you are taking potshots at Stein. The Stein quote was a single line, obviously in a longer context. You could comment on that, that a single line quote was likely taken out of context.
You saw some of the consequences of actions by the IDF, not the motivations. That takes much more thorough investigation.
It doesn’t add to the significance of the report to pose it in solely black/white terms. If so, then it ends up failing as there are bases of doubt of some of his personal conclusions.
“It doesn’t add to the significance of the report to pose it in solely black/white terms.”
Yeah I know, cause death and destrustion is so ambiguous, you know?
I mean, are they dead, or just sleeping? Was the infrastrusture destroyed, or simply “remodeled”?
I mean, are they dead, or just sleeping? Was the infrastrusture destroyed, or simply “remodeled”?
You’ve indirectly touched upon my favorite hasbara tactic. Hundreds killed, but yet not a single certifiably accurate photograph of the dead has ever been published! Same with the material destruction. Every picture has been photo shopped, is published out of context, or better still, Hamas caused the destruction to make Israel look bad. Why, it’s as if none of this ever happened!
marc, do you mean “not published by Israel”? I’m not clear on what you mean.
Certainly there are other than Israeli cameras there?
Death and destruction is what Phil observed. He didn’t observe the cause or the motivation.
You prove my point.
Ever published anywhere, if you believe the hasbarists. I recall that it was a favorite past time amongst some of those commenters no longer with us to ‘debunk’ the credibility of any photograph of the dead in Gaza. If I remember correctly there was a suggestion that some of pictures of ‘dead’ children were staged with child actors and such.
The cause of the destruction was the IDF and IAF. As for the motivation, it was the collective punishment of Gaza. Israeli government representatives have said so. And you and other apologists tow that line suggesting that if Gaza would just elect some party other than Hamas, like compliant Fatah for example, then peace would shine brightly on the horizon.
Death and destruction is what Phil observed. He didn’t observe the cause or the motivation.
Cause and motivation can be inferred, deduced, concluded by anyone who’s paying attention to:
1. Soldiers coming out and saying there was wholesale targeting of civilians.
2. Cheif Rabbi of the IDF distributes handbooks in which he authorizes the targeting and killing of civilians, even babies and children.
3. Israeli generals have stated more than once that they have adopted the “Dahiya” strategy.
4. Soldiers getting T-Shirts printed out for them and their brigades/companies depicting a pregnant Palestinian woman as seen through the crosshairs of a gun sight and the text “One shot two kills” below.
So what else is missing here, that leaves you with such doubts?
Have you considered the effect Cognitive Dissonance has on you?
Avi, Witty is a fucking hypocrite coward! he will usually blame Palestinians and justify even the baby killings committed by Zionists!
Cause and motivation? I beg your pardon?
Soldiers obey the commands from their commanders, and its clear that the commanders decided to declare war on Hamas and the Palestinians who got them to power. Israel has dropped leaflets to tell Pals that by supporting Hamas, they are giving Israel all means to punish them, Judge Gold Stone has documented this psy war on his report.
Funny how Fatah WAS (badly) governing Gaza, before Hamas got elected, and Israel still had them penned up like animals. Israelis were and are angry because their colonization efforts in Gaza failed, and Israelis will make Gazans pay for their resistance to the theft of their land. I don’t think it matters what Hamas or any other ruling entity in does, the Israeli political establishment will be satisfied with nothing less than the emigration of all Arabs from lands that it covets.
I just glanced at the Arab league report linked by Phil–it looks interesting and not that different from Goldstone. Here’s a small sample–
“There was substantial destruction of, and damage to property during the offensive.
Over 3,000 homes were destroyed and over 11,000 damaged; 215 factories and 700
private businesses were seriously damaged or destroyed; 15 hospitals and 43 primary
health care centres were destroyed or damaged; 28 government buildings and 60
police stations were destroyed or damaged; 30 mosques were destroyed and 28
damaged; 10 schools were destroyed and 168 damaged; three universities / colleges
were destroyed and 14 damaged; and 53 United Nations properties were damaged.
11. It was clear to the Committee the IDF had not distinguished between civilians and
civilian objects and military targets. Both the loss of life and the damage to property
were disproportionate to the harm suffered by Israel or any threatened harm. There
was no evidence that any military advantage was served by the killing and wounding
of civilians or the destruction of property.
12. The Committee received evidence of the bombing and shelling of hospitals and
ambulances and of obstructions placed in the way of the evacuation of the wounded.
13. The 22-day offensive with bombing and shelling from the air, sea and land
traumatized and terrorised the population. Israel dropped leaflets warning the
population to evacuate, but in most cases failed to give details of the areas to be
targeted and conversely which areas were safe. Phone calls were equally confusing.
Generally, the leaflets and phone calls simply served to confuse the population and to
cause panic.
I suspect this campaign may backfire, as Israel’s desparation to whitewash its crimes is so obvious. It’s clear that this is no attempt to discover the truth and that Israel will try to bury the truth any way it can.
Any Israeli investigation will be a whitewash.
“Any Israeli investigation will be a whitewash”
Nonsense! If the Israelis weren’t ready to admit their intransigence, why are the Israeli earthquake teams in Haiti leaving this week? Wouldn’t they stay until Goldstone was discredited? Hah!
Jerome Slater has a comment about B’Tselem at Richard Silverstein’s blog–
link
Thanks for the link.
I find the following paragraph rather ummm… I’m not sure what adjective fits.
The author writes:
“I can deal with this when it comes from an avowed Israel advocate like Dershowitz. At least you know what you’re getting. But Bronner and the Times have the imprimatur of journalistic gravitas and don’t deserve it in this case.”
I don’t know if he’s saying that in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way, or if he truly believes it. How can he be so naive as to think that the New York Times, the organization that carries the water for the US establishment (see the sloppy work and sometimes even blatant propaganda in the run up to the Iraq invasion) and exhibits strong Zionist leanings on numerous occasions retains any “journalistic gravitas”?
But then again, perhaps he’s being polite to Bronner and by extension the NYT.
“and Haaretz says the goal is to get Ban to say, I accept the Israeli response to the charges, let the Israelis investigate the Gaza slaughter” That was also the Goldstone recommendation.
Disgustingly disingenuous per usual.
The Mission recommended:
1. That Israel launch appropriate investigations in conformity with international standards within 3 months, and to inform the UNSC within a further 3 months of actions taken by Israel, to include the investigation and prosecution of the commission of crimes. As a safeguard, the Mission also recommended that the UNSC establish a panel of experts to monitor and report on any domestic legal or other proceedings undertaken by Israel, and [s]uch committee
of experts should report at the end of the six-months period to the Security Council on
its assessment of relevant domestic proceedings initiated by the Government of Israel,
including their progress, effectiveness and genuineness, so that the Security Council
may assess whether appropriate action to ensure justice for victims and accountability
for perpetrators has been or is being taken at the domestic level.
2. The Mission makes similar recommendations for an investigation by Gaza authorities, with a review of that process by an independent committee of experts appointed by the UNSC.
3. The Mission recommends that in the absence of good faith investigations by Israeli and Gaza authorities, that acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, [the UNSC] refer the situation in Gaza to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court pursuant to
Article 13 (b) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court.
4. The Mission recommends that States Parties to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 start
criminal investigations in national courts, using universal jurisdiction, where there is
sufficient evidence of the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of
1949. Where so warranted following investigation, alleged perpetrators should be
arrested and prosecuted in accordance with internationally recognised standards of justice.
5. The Mission recommends that the General Assembly request the Security Council to
report to it on measures taken with regard to ensuring accountability for serious
violations of international humanitarian law and human rights in relation to the facts in
this report and any other relevant facts in the context of the military operations in Gaza,
including the implementation of the Mission’s recommendations. The General Assembly
may remain appraised of the matter until it is satisfied that appropriate action is taken at
the domestic or international level in order to ensure justice for victims and
accountability for perpetrators. The GA may consider whether additional action within its
powers is required in the interests of justice, including under resolution 377 (V) Uniting
for Peace.
So, no, the Mission did not recommend that Israelis investigate the Gaza slaughter. It recommended that there be a multi-pronged investigation of the Gaza slaughter.
What document is that from?
From the full text version of the ‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’. The so-called Goldstone Report.
What document is that from?
Didn’t you claim at one point that you read the report? If you read it, how come you forget the source of the above mentioned text?
No, Avi, Witty said he hadn’t read the Goldstone report and had no intention to.
What other government charged with war crimes has been allowed to investigate themselves? What bullshit.
Put money on it that Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann will continue to ignore the Goldstone Report following their owners orders. Just what the Israeli lobby wants. Silence on the Goldstone Report.
CALL YOUR REPS DEMAND THEY READ THE GOLDSTONE REPORT AND ASK JUDGE GOLDSTONE TO THE HILL TO DISCUSS HIS FINDINGS
PLEASE CALL OR WRITE YOUR REPS
It seems to me that the report is calling on Israel to investigate itself with the assumption, or rather, accepting, that “the Gaza slaughter” is a fact. Israel is called on to investigate the facts surronding that fact.
I don’t think Goldstone is calling on Israel to investigate whether or not these things happened in Gaza, not at all.
But that seems to be how they want to twist it, to assume that any mention of “investigation” puts in doubt whether there were excesses and crimes committed.
Witty will leaning hard on that. And he’ll fight it out on that line. With, of course, some “rotten apple” concessions, to show what a “kind Zionist” he is.
I think he’s taking two tracks–it might not have happened and anyway, it wasn’t Israel’s fault and if anything did happen, it was those bad apples, not the whole orchard. Expect some fruit analogies.
And not just RW–the whole “liberal Zionist” movement or at least the more dishonest members will take that line. The whole point of an Israeli “investigation” is to turn the atrocities in Gaza into some cloudy murky subject where one side says one thing and the other side says something else and nobody can tell who’s right, but hey, those Palestinian terrorists are real bastards–we can all agree on that.
And all the while trying to advance, or at least hold the line on the “equivalency hasbara“, the canard that there is an equality of means between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
Wait I’m confused. Since when did breaking the silence and Btselem come out AGAINST what the goldstone report? am I missing something? I thought the former was specifically a RESULT of the Gaza War. Anyone care, or willing to clarify things for me? I’ve been out of the loop for a little bit….apparantly too long because I would have expected Kosher pigs to fly before something like this happened.
It would, on a practical level, also see what is going on because so I can deal with hasbara propaganda..and just based on past history I know something is fishy and something going on. On top of it I can’t find where BTS actually comes out saying what Israeli Propaganda is claiming…is it a simple distortion of what they actually said, or am I stupid and need to relearn to use google?
“I do not accept the Goldstone conclusion of a systematic attack on civilian infrastructure,” said Yael Stein, research director of B’Tselem. “It is not convincing.”
Is the question that Israel is objecting to.
Yep, that’s what they’re objecting to. No sensible person doubts that they killed hundreds of civilians, destroyed thousands of homes along with factories, mosques and schools and that Israeli officials said ahead of time that they intended to punish the population. And no one doubts that the blockade is meant to punish the entire population, in part by preventing the reconstruction of all that was destroyed. But gosh, nothing offends those innocent Israelis like the demonizing implication that they did any of this deliberately. The blockade, the destruction, the unnecessary war, the killing and even the boasting about what they would do ahead of time–it was an accident.
Now lets go back to talking about the only real demons in this–those awful awful Palestinians.
They called it anti-Semitic. What the hell? That’s illogical even for the most ardent Israel defenders.
Goldstone is not going away, despite the best efforts to place it under the cloud of anti-Semitism.
And Richard, no, the Goldstone Report did not accept the Israeli response to the charges.
It does push to a “which side are you on” moment, rather than an effort of reconciliation and justice.
How can one make an effort at reconciliation with the other ‘side’ when they refuse to admit any wrongdoing? You don’t grant a prisoner clemency if he hasn’t admitted doing the crime.
Israel is trying once again to change, revise and reshape history.
The actions carried out in Jenin in 2002 were despicable, atrocious. Instead of admitting culpability or at the very least remaining silent, Israel did what Israel always does, the hasbara machine went on to change the numbers of the dead and wounded.
The same is happening with Goldstone’s Report regarding the targeting of civilians.
Of course, without an ounce of shame or sense of irony, the Israeli ambassador to some European country will probably pay its prime minister a special visit this year accusing him of Holocaust denial for objecting to taking school children to Auschwitz.
Chosen is as Chosen does.
I hope Israel does conduct a thorough and sincere investigation into its policy and practices during the war, as I hope that Hamas does similarly.
The structure of the war crimes investigations are an effort to impugn all Israeli leaders as war criminals, in a setting that is plausibly not, thereby making it impossible for them to govern.
The history of the shelling remains that Hamas initiated shelling of Israel, simultaneously “warned” that they would kill hundreds of Israeli soldiers if they conducted a ground operation, to which Israel applied a more extensive ground preparation effort given that threat, and then Hamas went underground and didn’t fight, leaving the Gazan civilians to experience the consequences of Hamas’ actions and words.
I think of Hamas as primarily responsible for war crimes, in its strategy (to shell Israeli civilians) and threats, and Israel likely responsible for incidents of war crimes, but NOT as Betselem indicated of planned state terror for the purpose of state terror.
Its a very great dilemma for Israel how to deal with Hamas. The Gazan civilians are the victims, caught in the middle.
A great tragedy. The way out of the continuing tragedy is to get them out of the middle.
Netanyahu played into the criticism in avoiding an internal investigation early. But, the structure of the accusations presume guilt, and structure guilt.
Ah, that’s clear. Those Hamas bastards tricked the innocent Israelis into destroying and killing and preventing any reconstruction after the war, as well as tricking them into collective punishment before the war. They also tricked them into making boastful statements before the war about what they ended up doing in the war.
You know, Witty, if you ever want to have a serious discussion about the war crimes on both sides you could have one here and you’d find at least some of us agreeing with you that Hamas is guilty of war crimes and bears some share of the blame for what has happened. But I don’t think you’re going to get that respect you ask for when you invariably finds some way to put the brunt of the blame on the Palestinians, even if that means ignoring the statements of Israeli officials and the logical implications of their actions. You don’t deserve respect.
“The history of the shelling remains that Hamas initiated shelling of Israel, simultaneously “warned” that they would kill hundreds of Israeli soldiers if they conducted a ground operation, to which Israel applied a more extensive ground preparation effort given that threat, and then Hamas went underground and didn’t fight, leaving the Gazan civilians to experience the consequences of Hamas’ actions and words.”
The history of the siege remains that Israel initiated the siege of Gaza, simultaneously refusing attempts by Hamas to make peace, to which Hamas decided to retaliate, and then Israel decided to shell Gaza and kill lots of civilians.
“I think of Hamas as primarily responsible for war crimes, in its strategy (to shell Israeli civilians) and threats, and Israel likely responsible for incidents of war crimes, but NOT as Betselem indicated of planned state terror for the purpose of state terror.”
That’s bullshit and you know it. Hamas’ strategy was no different to Israel’s strategy, the only difference being that Israel had the ability to inflict more killings and did so. Your attempt to whitewash every single Israeli crime is pathetic.
Witty, you say:
The Goldstone report has indicated, quite explicitly, that Israel also targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure.
Of course, the crimes carried out by Israel were greater in both number and frequency.
Why do you say ‘primarily’ in Hamas’s case, and ‘likely responsible’ in the case of Israel?
What is your evidence to support the former? You have been presented with lots of evidence to contradict your soft and partisan rhetoric on the latter.
If you truly wish for Two-States and for peace, do you think it is a good strategy to make such careless statements? I know you have not read the report, since you’ve said so here.
So I want to know how you can make a comparison between Hamas and Israel, and confidently characterize them in the way that you just did.
If you cannot back up your rhetoric with solid facts (you will need lots to legitimize your comparison), then what you have written is simply partisan hackery.
I should also add, that this is just like you commentary on the 48′ War and the ethnic cleansing.
You are simply being opportunistic and hypocritical (as you admitted) again.
And always remember that this is one of the famous Witty “non-judgments”. Just another example of how Richard finds it easy to judge Palestinians with or without facts, but impossible to judge Israel because he doesn’t know all the facts.
That is a very good point to make about Hamas.
Pingback: Goldstone documented nightmarish case of a Palestinian ‘human shield’
Witty, what characterization do you give to the Israeli attack on the Gazan tunnels on Nov. 4th?
Why is Hamas’s actions an ‘initiation’ when Israel had attacked Gaza beforehand?
Furthermore, during the truce, Hamas was acknowledged to having kept to the truce – virtually.
For all practical purposes.
However, there was a gross disparity in the amount of aide let in by Israel. I cannot recall the comparison details, but I’ve made this argument before on the blog so I could find them if pressed.
Your point of view is again, partisan.
In terms of impact, the Israelis killed more, and affected more, more profoundly. They continue to carry on with this behavior. During the massacre and afterwards until the very present, Israel has still been going into Gaza and has killed people there.
I don’t understand the ‘spirit’ of your commentary. This is again, why Palestinians should pursue One-State. It would be a struggle that might create a new Israel, sans the racism, double-standards, etc.
If you are indeed a Liberal Zionist, then there is very little difference between your injustice and corruption and that of the far-right and even fanatical settlers (whom you apparently support).
November 4 was likely an observed prospective violation of the cease-fire resulting in two weeks of skirmishes.
The escalation after the formal ending of the hudna was a careless act of rage, designed to bait Israel into conducting a ground offensive, which Hamas militia declared would result in hundreds of Israeli dead.
I’m curious about Norman’s citation that 90% of the destruction occurred in the last 48 hours, after Israel was in full control of the area. What sources does he describe as adding up to that conclusion?
I hope that Israel is right, that it did not objectively intentionally direct assaults at civilians. I’m not sure in fact.
I don’t see how posters here can be either.
You seem to be restraining yourself Witty. It was a break of the cease-fire. Israel killed people. 6-9 people. Has any evidence been put forth by Israel, that can potentially justify the attack on Gaza during the truce?
Furthermore, Israel has been revealed to have planned Cast Lead many many months in advance. They even hired legal advisers to see what targets could be killed without fear of prosecution.
The operation was carefully planned. The rockets could not have been the reason for the attack since they were of that same rate for quite some time.
Furthermore, during this same time, Israel shelled Gaza as well, Witty. In fact, if I were to pursue the same superficial rhetoric, I could refer to the sheer number of ammunition fired. Would that be compelling? If I only referred to ‘the shelling’?
Of course, this shelling had an effect on the Gazans. Comparably, it did more dmg and killed more people. I believe Israel fired more or close to the same amount of ammunition – however in a shorter time-frame.
This is in addition to the on-going blockade.
Comparatively, I cannot identify any moral core to your criticism. Cast Lead was premeditated and designed to induce capitulation. Hence, the continued blockade.
I’ve always held that Israel’s blind defenders seem to have selective memory. For them, history of mankind could very well begin two years ago, if it serves their interests.
Notwithstanding all the great points mentioned by Cliff, there was also that oh so pesky 2006 election after which Israel INITIATED (I’ll type it again) INITIATED assassinations of members of the legislative council in Gaza. These were not, by any stretch of the definition, activists in Hamas’ military wing. These were legislators and Israel assassinated many (not to mention the children and civilian casualties that usually accompanied such assassinations) and kidnapped others.
Noam Chomsky has cited on various occasions how Israel abducted two brothers from the Gaza strip (with no affiliation whatsoever with any organization) after which Hamas launched rockets into Israel and Israel stood as usual in the international arena and whined about those evil Palestinians. But, I digress.
Following all this, Israel imposed a siege claiming that the reason for the siege was the rocket attacks. But, the rocket attacks were not a problem until Israel started assassinating Palestinians willy nilly.
Back in 1967, Israel cited the closure of the Tiran Straits by Egypt’s Nasser as a “declaration of war”, even though the Tiran Straits were Egyptian territory.
So, if that closure or embargo was viewed a declaration of war by Israel, why is Israel suddenly immune when it imposes similar measures on a population that is already under occupation?
And what kind of crazy world do we live in, where Israel can terrorize entire populations for decades on end and call it self defense, but the minute that population stands up for itself, it’s suddenly terrorism and therefore should Israel go a turkey shoot, it will somehow be justified in doing so?
Your dove, Israel, is irredeemable. If you’re looking for something to cling to, try humanity for a change, instead of a criminal state. Or, better yet, get a hobby.
Cast Lead was one of many scenarios. EVERY mature army plans, and then alters plans based on actual events.
If Hamas was digging an abduction tunnel that would also have been plausibly a breach in the cease-fire.
December 17th was not the result of a break in the cease-fire, but a break in the discipline of Hamas and factions to maintain and restore it. Escalated incrementally over 10 days.
Don’t be naive to excuse Hamas of wrongdoing. It was a dance between militancies, in which civilians got caught in the middle.
The best option when a breach occurs is to return to quiet, not to resort to escalation, both sides.
Its a which side are you on argument now, rather than a peace movement argument.
No changing is occurring, just added volume.
If Hamas was digging an abduction tunnel that would also have been plausibly a breach in the cease-fire.
One would think, given Israeli PR and hasbara, that such a tunnel would be seized on by the Israeli army for sheer publicity. Let’s face it, showing members of Hamas emerging from a tunnel on the Israeli side of the fence despite a ceasefire would be great PR for Israel.
But, somehow, the powers that be, decided it wasn’t worth it. Somehow, ambushing Hamas at the exit point of the tunnel was too much effort. I mean, the Israelis could have hid behind a concrete wall with cameras, 50 caliber machine guns, grenade launchers, a tank, and a troop carrier and ambushed Hamas.
But, instead, we get this ludicrous claim that Hamas was digging a tunnel and somehow Israel saw it fit to raid Gaza and kill a few Palestinians on the 4th of November, the very same day the world’s eyes were directed at the US elections. Where was this tunnel? In what stage of completion was it?
December 17th was not the result of a break in the cease-fire, but a break in the discipline of Hamas and factions to maintain and restore it. Escalated incrementally over 10 days.
Where did you get “December 17th”?
Don’t be naive to excuse Hamas of wrongdoing. It was a dance between militancies, in which civilians got caught in the middle.
Yeah. More eqivalency on your part. Those poor civilians, on both sides, got caught in the middle, nevermind the goddamn siege and the DAHIYA strategy.
The burden of proof is on Israel to prove that a tunnel was indeed being dug. On a grander scale and under international law, the safety of the civilian population under occupation is the responsibility of the occupying army.
Either way, you keep lecturing everyone here on the symptoms while ignoring the problem. So why don’t you show some courage and conviction and admit that Israel has the power and ability to turn this situation around tomorrow morning if it wanted?
Are you going to keep using Hamas as a crutch? If this is how you run your own personal life, then no self improvement or betterment can ever be expected of you.
Perhaps you’re just like that officer, standing at a distance, sending others to do the dirty work while you sit comfortably behind, knowing that you stand to lose nothing. Actually, that is exactly the behavior you exhibit. You’re a coward like that officer in the “Human Shields” article from the Goldstone Report. So, pray tell, what part of North America are you comfortably sitting in while the conflict rages on thousands of miles away?
Here again you are evasive. Of course there are plans for various scenarios.
However, there is a difference between addressing various situations and planning an operation in advance, w/ intent to carry said operation out.
My response was to your partisan comment:
I can’t imagine why Israel would take these threats seriously. Hamas cannot kill more than 10 people in years of rocketing. What would they do differently, to result in ‘hundreds’ of Israeli deaths?
A threat is only worth paying attention to if it is backed up by substance. If it’s not – then it’s just tough talk.
There is also a big difference between Hamas threatening and Israel threatening. I do recall an Israeli politician threating a ‘shoah’ on the Palestinians, if they did not oust Hamas or something along those lines.
I also, recall the head of the Shin Bet threatening the PA over the Goldstone Report.
Furthermore, you keep referring to ‘Hamas’ issuing these threats. Who specifically made the threat? Who in the Hamas government?
I wonder, why you would bring up this comment by a Hamas official when Hamas did not kill ‘hundreds’ of Israelis as promised and have not demonstrated the capacity to do so in the only relevant time-frame (implied, within a short time-frame and not across, for example, decades).
Whereas, while Israel did not inflict a ‘shoah’ – they certainly wreaked havoc and misery upon the Palestinians of Gaza.
Again, you demonstrate a partisan and moral corruptness that will not translate into a mutually humanizing dialogue that which could facilitate two States.
What is the evidence provided for the bombing of the tunnels? You can tell me what Israel has said – but that is not evidence.
I do not excuse Hamas.
It is not an equal conflict, Witty. Your argument is not supported by facts or sincere application of critical thinking. I’ve already dealt with the profundity (or lack thereof) of Hamas threats, w/ respect to ‘Israel’s threats’.
You seem to want to construct a narrative, rather than focus on truth.
More reason for One-State. Palestinians are struggling now, simply to get truth heard. I see no sincerity in the Zionist Left (as represented by you, Witty). And the Zionist Right is as bad.
Why should the Palestinians not transition their struggle into One-State? They only need to read your perspective on their tragedy. This dehumanization should empower them to endure further.
December 17th was the first day after the hudna lapsed, at which point Hamas began shelling first desert, then Sderot, then Ashkelon, then Ashdod, before Israel responded militarily. (It later shelled multi-cultural Beersheba).
Hamas is not a crutch, but a quandry. The reason for any component of dahiya philosophy is because of Hamas’ continued aggression towards Israeli civilians. Dahiya is a desparate approach. Maybe that is successful resistance, when your opponent concludes (or is driven) to desparate and cruel measures to achieve legitimate ends of a sovereign civilian state.
10 killed from terror on civilians is too many, especially when the attempt is conducted year in, and year out.
Truth is being heard. In the New York Times, in Haaretz, here (of a flavor).
The reason that Gazan experience is not heard of more, is the way it is framed and the association with Hamas. (I know you think that is insignficant, but their history is known among adults, thinking adults., and it is way beyond unpleasant.)
The single-state is impossible, and your comments don’t make it more possible. I get that solidarity has to face the quandry of whether to pursue its goal for a single state with all its attention, or to instead orient towards Palestinian solidarity. It is the same question that Zionists that bargained for limited objectives experienced relative to oppressions of their own. Here, blamed for choosing one over another.
Ali Abunimeh’s dual emphasis (dual loyalty if you like, and an American citizen as well), confuses. He reaches only the angry that are content to pick sides, but not the humanistic which value each community and actively seek broader goals of peace.
You are asked to support Hamas by the situation in Gaza. You cannot stay neutral. They’ve positioned their political approach so that to support Gazan civilians, requires some support of Hamas (even if qualified verbally).
I prefer reformed Israel (that requires work to achieve).
December 17th was the first day after the hudna lapsed I knew you were going to write that, Witty, and completely ignore the fact that Israel broke the six or four month truce on Nov 4, 2009.
you guys need new arguments.
November 4th happened because Hamas was digging a tunnel into Israel. After bombing the tunnel Hamas fired at Israel soldiers, then the 6-9 militants were killed, not before.
And of course they were planning for war w/ Hamas. This is what armies do, why is that so hard for everyone on here to understand? Israel is planning Caste Lead II right now along with a similar war w/ Hezbollah, because armies plan contingencies. Do they hope to use them, or want to, of course not, but any army in the world would be silly not to plan for future conflict.
link to guardian.co.uk
Israel said, as your article quotes :”The Israeli military said the target of the raid was a tunnel that they said Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers positioned on the border fence 250m away.” Israel claimed it. And it was never confirmed.
If Israel was so prescient about threatened soldiers 250 meters away, why didn’t they just move the soldiers, or pour cement into their end of the tunnel?
And, oh, BTW, that article contains the quote that Richard Witty mangled and misquoted:
“Hamas is not a crutch, but a quandry. The reason for any component of dahiya philosophy is because of Hamas’ continued aggression towards Israeli civilians. Dahiya is a desparate approach. Maybe that is successful resistance, when your opponent concludes (or is driven) to desparate and cruel measures to achieve legitimate ends of a sovereign civilian state.”
This is the reasoning of a morally depraved five year old. The other guy started it (true or false, every five year old uses this argument), we just react, and our terrorism (the dahiya philosophy) is a desperate approach. Hamas leaders who employed suicide bombing as a tactic undoubtedly thought the same way.
I’ll respond to your comment below here as well.
“10 killed from terror on civilians is too many, especially when the attempt is conducted year in, and year out.”
True. Funny the same reasoning doesn’t apply to Palestinian suffering. I suppose it’s because in that case we’re not talking about real “thinking” people.
“The reason that Gazan experience is not heard of more, is the way it is framed and the association with Hamas. (I know you think that is insignficant, but their history is known among adults, thinking adults., and it is way beyond unpleasant.)”
Hamas is a very unpleasant group. But then, so is the Israeli government. They’re both pretty nauseating. How odd to think that one shouldn’t hear about suffering because a ruling party is unpleasant. I suppose this means we shouldn’t hear much about terrorism against Israel then.
“You are asked to support Hamas by the situation in Gaza. You cannot stay neutral. They’ve positioned their political approach so that to support Gazan civilians, requires some support of Hamas (even if qualified verbally).”
Usual Witty gibberish. It appears to be an excuse for collective punishment of all Gazans. Support for Gazan civilians means treating them like human beings with rights and for Richard, this is a dilemma if Hamas would also benefit. Better that they all suffer than have some of Israel’s enemies helped. Of course BDS would be an atrocity, because in that case real people would suffer, not mere Arabs.
Dahiya is only desparate in the sense that Israel was not able to force capitulation from the Palestinians or Lebanese.
Considering, that you have gone on record as saying the ends justify the means vis a vis the ethnic cleansing of Palestine to create a Jewish majority and thus a Jewish State – you again, are just being partisan.
This is why Two-States is a lost cause. What you want is to privilege Israeli Jews over Palestinian Arabs. That is what Israel is, since the formation of the State was through force and the destruction of the pre-existing society.
The truce was broke when Israel bombed Gaza and killed Palestinian militants. There has been no evidence provided to argue compellingly that these tunnels were intended to ‘kidnap’ an Israeli soldier.
Furthermore, again if we are not totally racist or ideological, observe that Israel holds 1000s of Palestinians hostage in their jails. Israel kidnaps non-violent activists as well.
Do you apply the same principle toward Israel, w/ respect to these blatant injustices?
One-State is not impossible. It’s just going to take struggle. Why should Palestinians reason with partisan ‘Liberal’ Zionists like yourself, Witty? Or yonira?
Both of you are incapable of applying one standard to non-Zionists.
So, considering that Palestinians already are brutalized and struggling – what more could people like you do to them?
I say ‘people like you’ because while you won’t take part in the terrorism (to induce another Palestinian flight) you would not be against it.
The ends justify the means for you Witty, so long as you are reaping the benefits.
I have never implied that One-State should be a Utopian struggle. I imagine it to be very bloody. However, Palestinians are already dehumanized by both polite Zionists like yourself as well as the most thuggish fanatic settlers.
The physical brutality go hand in hand w/ the intellectual dishonesty, lies and hypocrisy.
That is Zionism for the Palestinians. For you, it is privilege.
Hence, the Palestinian struggle can easily transition to One-State. What will you do, Witty? Do you think more Cast Leads will be accepted by ‘the world’ (hubs of delegitimization, etc.)?
I think you oppose One-State because it can work. Non-violent activism w/ the pursuit of One-State. Israel can carry out it’s wars and it will help the Palestinians, because the brutality will undo all that PR.
Palestinians are not immigrants, Witty. It is there land, as much as it is the land of the Israelis living there presently.
Witty, respond to this. Cite the quotation from the Hamas official, or explain the above quote. Why did you give us the impression of comic-book-villainy?
Israel in its current form has long passed any chance of serious reformation. The Israeli state, which is practically worshiped by Zionists (golden calf, anyone?), started with the purpose of providing a safe haven from persecution for Jews. Now it has become an institution ruthlessly focused on occupation, ethnic cleansing, and colonization.
Israeli and American Zionist societies are both saturated with rank racism and mindbogglingly arrogant self-entitlement. They aren’t going to change until reform is brought to the social, educational, religious, economic, and political institutions that strive to ensure, whether deliberately or not, generational perpetuation of their racism. A mass reform of Israeli and Zionist institutions isn’t going to happen without a top-level change in governance, i.e. the Israeli state as an expansionist colonizing legally-racial quasi-theocracy has to end. This isn’t a call for an end to Israel, but for an end to its current government.
Some Zionists strive for Israel to be seen as ‘normal’. Normal peoples try to reform their states when they malfunction as badly as Israel is. The psychological burden of the Holocaust laid into each new generation has seriously frakked with Zionist heads, and they aren’t capable of doing it by themselves. Honest and well-meaning people like Goldstone are demonized as Hitlerian antisemites for making modest efforts to reign in self-destructive Israeli criminal conduct. External pressure, i.e., rigorous and intrusive BDS and aggressive non-violent Palestinian civil resistance, are the only peaceful methods which may force Zionist introspection into their xenophobia.
People who belittle BDS and complain that we just need to ‘understand’ Israelis and their special problems and all will be roses, aren’t seriously interested in a peaceful solution to this conflict. I think they define a safe haven for Jews as a Holy Land free of Muslims and Christians. This isn’t going to happen, and there will be no safe haven there until they realize it.
Anyone who can tell more about the pressure on B’Tselem and others? Funding and stuff.
aha! link to ngo-monitor.org
has the hitlist.
If punishment of war crimes is an aspect of justice then rejecting allegations because the person complained of rejects them – wholeheartedly and very vigorously rejects them, be in no doubt!! – and giving that person the formal role of saying what really happened is a sort of ludicrous, Orwellian and more than Orwellian, denial of the principle, known to Caesar and Herod, that no one should be judge in own cause.
As to whether civilian infrastructure and the civil population was systematically targeted, much will turn out to depend on what ‘systematically’ means. No doubt there was an intention to leave some of it in place.
As to whether anyone in Israel thinks so, I suspect that many non-Jewish Israeli citizens think exactly that. And they are not no one, though they are ever so quiet and effaced.
To the non-Israeli, non-IDF, American born and bred Richard Witty, who pontificates from an American armchair about experiences he hasn’t had, and about events he can’t grasp either while they happen or historically…here is an article by an Israeli and former IDF soldier who can and does.
Read the rest here: link to guardian.co.uk
I wish I had an armchair.
Again, Shlaim both educates and distorts. The WAR of 1947 and 1948 was not solely an attempted ethnic cleansing of Palestinians (which it was and distinctly wasn’t as evidenced by their 20% minority population in Israel, not 0 as was the case of Jews in then Jordan.)
Those wars were also attempts to ethnically cleanse the land of Jews. You’ve never heard the term “drive them to the sea”. It was spoken, written.
So, which “genocidal” intent do you consider more wrong, the intent that partially occurred and is partially contested by facts, or the intent that was sought and fully achieved in Jordan/West Bank?
Neither the pro-Palestinian nor the expansionistic Zionist demonstrate a confident live and let live mode. Individuals do. I appreciate the approach of Fatah and Fayyad, even as Israel feels threatened by Fayyad’s successes, if/when they turn the corner to assertions of statehood.
Keep trying Witty. Eventually you’ll be able to admit that at certain times and places, the Israelis committed the greater crimes against more people, and you won’t feel obliged to downplay Israeli atrocities. You’re about one tenth of the way to becoming honest on this subject. If you can do it, then there’s real hope for reconciliation, because I don’t think there’s a tougher nut to crack anywhere than you when it comes to making forthright admissions of Israeli crimes. You just can’t seem to do it without bring in Arab atrocities and trying to argue that they are the real barbarians. It’s like a reflex with you.
And of course the Arab side committed atrocities. It’s a sordid conflict with the usual hypocrisy and bullshit and people on each side convinced of their innocence. Look at you and you’re not even directly involved.
New York Times fails to disclose Jerusalem bureau chief’s conflict of interest
Report, The Electronic Intifada, 25 January 2010
The New York Times has all but confirmed to The Electronic Intifada (EI) that the son of its Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner was recently inducted into the Israeli army.
Over the weekend, EI received a tip suggesting this had been the case and wrote to Bronner to ask him to confirm or deny the information and to seek his opinion on whether, if true, he thought it would be a conflict of interest. [...]
link to electronicintifada.net
I guess EI is more reliable?
Oh no, of course not. EI is run by members of that ethnic group which really does commit atrocities–Arabs, you know. And they are so prone to demonize real people, people who don’t commit atrocities, you know–Israelis.
If you would read the article, you would know that EI contacted the NYT and got a response from it. Instead you mount an ad hominem.
Actually, more reliable than you. It follows up. In this instance, it contacted the NYT for verification.
I see Phil has picked this up in his next thread and agrees with me about EI’s journalistic cred.
Pingback: Goldstone documented nightmarish case of a Palestinian ‘human shield’ « ROFTO RADIO – PALESTINE
Yael Stein seems somewhat two-faced as B’Tselem’s research director. In September 2009, she published a report very critical of B’Tselem’s civilian mortality figures in Cast Lead
link to spme.net
In which she complains that B’Tselem used a restricted definition of ‘combatant’ and therefore excludes 248 policemen who were ‘known terrorists’ (ie they were members of the military wings of Hamas). She also infers that a high proportion of the male casualties aged 17-18 (30 in total) may have been combatants, simply because of their high male/female ratio.
However, back in 2003, discussing Israel’s assassination policy against Palestinians, she was quite definite: ‘The Israeli policy is both illegal and immoral…Armed Palestinians are not combatants according to any known legal definition. They are civilians––which is the only legal alternative––and can only be attacked for as long as they actively participate in hostilities.
link to cceia.org
We will get more of this kind of statistics twisting in the IDF’s defencive report. The major problem is that most casualties were caused by airborne forces, who could not possibly have known who were militants and who were not.
In the case of the 89 policemen bombed in the very first moments of the attack, it was determined retrospectively that Of these, 60 (67 percent) belonged to Hamas and almost all were members of its military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades. The total number of terror activists and fighters among those killed at police headquarters was 81 (91 percent).
link to jcpa.org
In other words the IDF killed any male they suspected of being a potential combatant, and then added up their true identities later.
Pingback: B’Tselem questions whether Gaza destruction was ’systematic’ without military justification
Pingback: Ethan Bronner – Fair and Biased « بنسبة لنا
Pingback: Tuesday | Headlines