Roger Cohen, Filastin and Goldstone: Draw Your Own Conclusions

From Roger Cohen's New York Times op-ed entitled "The Goldstone Chronicles" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/opinion/08iht-edcohen08.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss):

"We have a new verb, 'to Goldstone.' Its meaning: To make a finding, and then partially retract it for uncertain motive. Etymology: the strange actions of a respected South African Jewish jurist under intense pressure from Israel, the U.S. Congress and world Jewish groups."

From Filastin, the Hamas newspaper in Gaza, the following "cartoon":

















Draw your own conclusions.

Roger Cohen's "The Goldstone Chronicles": A New Assault on Common Sense

The following blog entry, which was submitted as an online comment in response to Roger Cohen's op-ed, "The Goldstone Chronicles", was censored by The New York Times:

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Goldstone Chronicles" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/opinion/08iht-edcohen08.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), Roger Cohen begins by writing:

"We have a new verb, 'to Goldstone.' Its meaning: To make a finding, and then partially retract it for uncertain motive. Etymology: the strange actions of a respected South African Jewish jurist under intense pressure from Israel, the U.S. Congress and world Jewish groups."

By the same token, I could begin this blog entry by stating:

"We have a new verb, 'to Roger Cohen.'"

I would have no problem providing a definition by observing Cohen's determination that "Iran is not totalitarian"; by noting Cohen's willingness to publish an op-ed called "What Iran's Jews Say", but failing to inform his readership that his interviews were conducted via an Iranian government appointed translator; or by alluding to Cohen's recent declaration concerning "the moral bankruptcy of the West with respect to the Arab world" soon followed by his own volte-face pursuant to which he justified U.S. intervention in Libya in accordance with "American exceptionalism".

The etymology of Cohen's peculiar style of journalism? I couldn't care less, and instead of wasting time on Cohen's motivation and wiring, let's jump to the conclusion of this gem of an op-ed. Cohen writes:

"Israel is celebrating what it calls a vindication. It is preparing to welcome Goldstone. It is demanding nullification of the report, even though Goldstone is only one of its four authors. Meanwhile the facts remain: the 1,400 plus Palestinian dead, the 13 Israelis killed, the devastation, the Hamas rockets — and the need for credible investigation of what all evidence suggests were large-scale, indiscriminate, unlawful Israeli attacks in Gaza, as well as Hamas’ crimes against civilians."

"Meanwhile the facts remain"? Let's talk about the facts. Let's begin by observing that Cohen was not in Gaza during Israel's Operation Cast Lead and has no personal knowledge of what occurred there.

In April 2008, before the war, I suggested that Cohen come to Israel in order to acquaint himself with the facts, i.e. the thousands of mortar shells, rockets and missiles that had been fired from Gaza at civilian targets in southern Israel. Included in the itinerary I proposed to him:

"Visit Sderot, opposite the Gaza strip. I would like you to meet some of the underprivileged families that live there - they cannot afford to move - and their children, who have been living with the rockets for the past five years and the 15 second routine to reach a bomb shelter. Some wet their beds rather than risk a trip to the bathroom."

Cohen's response:

"Thanks, Jeffrey. And will do."

But Cohen never came to Sderot to write about the horrifying rocket attacks upon Israeli civilians. A pity. Instead he ultimately found his way to Tehran, where, over the course of some six months, he sought to promote the image of the barbarous Iranian regime.

Cohen tells us in today's op-ed that the war in Gaza, which he did not witness, left "1,400 plus Palestinian dead", but he does not inform us where he obtained this number or how many of the Palestinian dead were combatants. Cohen also does not acknowledge what Goldstone states in theWashington Post : Hamas now admits that the Israel Defense Forces numbers concerning Palestinian combatants (709) and civilians (295) killed in the operation were accurate.

So, Israel has been telling the truth all along about the number of Palestinian casualties. Apparently this is hard for Cohen to accept, inasmuch as this means that Israel did a remarkable job in controlling civilian casualties, given that Hamas was fighting, i.e. firing rockets and missiles at Israeli civilian targets, from within and alongside civilian buildings and infrastructure.

As stated by British military expert Colonel Richard Kemp in an interview with the BBC (http://zionism-israel.com/issues/Israel_human_rights_kemp_gaza.htm):

"I don’t think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza."

Does Cohen know better than Colonel Kemp? He obviously thinks he does.

Cohen also objects to the fact that Palestinian casualties were high, while Israeli casualties were low. This is the same Roger Cohen who in recent days has been urging Obama to be "ruthless" in Libya:

"My condition for going in was ruthlessness. The one unforgivable thing would have been to involve America in looking virtuous from the sky."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/01/opinion/01iht-edcohen01.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Cohen concludes his latest op-ed with the barb:

"To 'Goldstone': (Colloq.) To sew confusion, hide a secret, create havoc."

And now I ask you, what is it to "Roger Cohen"?

[On Thursday afternoon, an anti-tank missile was fired by Hamas terrorists from the Saja'iya neighborhood in eastern Gaza at an Israeli school bus, critically injuring a 16-year-old. Hamas knew that it was firing on civilians. What does Cohen have to say? Does this outrage also demand "ruthlessness" in return?]

Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch: More Egg on His Face After Goldstone Retraction

First, in 2009, Robert Bernstein, the founder and chairman of Human Rights Watch for 20 years, ripped into this organization, stating that "Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of Human Rights Watch’s criticism" and that "[o]nly by returning to its founding mission and the spirit of humility that animated it can Human Rights Watch resurrect itself as a moral force in the Middle East and throughout the world" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20bernstein.html).

Next, in 2010, Marc Garlasco, HRW's "military expert", left the organization after it was discovered that this investigator of "war crimes" was an avid collector of Nazi memorabilia (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/31/expert-quits-rights-group-over-nazi-memorabilia/).

Now, in 2010, HRW's credibility has reached a new nadir with Goldstone's retraction of his Gaza report. Goldstone had been a member of HRW's board, and HRW became one of the chief proponents of the report on the Gaza war prepared for the United Nations Human Rights Council by Goldstone, which was exceptionally critical of Israel (see: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/human_rights_watch_selling_goldstone_s_indictment0).

Kenneth Roth, the executive director of HRW, cannot accept Goldstone's retraction sitting down, and has returned fire with an opinion piece in The Guardian entitled "Gaza: the stain remains on Israel's war record" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/gaza-stain-remains-israel-war-record). Roth writes:

"Goldstone backed away from a particularly controversial charge in the report – the allegation that Israel had an apparent high-level policy to target civilians. He now says that information from Israeli investigations indicates "that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy".

Goldstone was right to make that amendment.

. . . .

But Goldstone has not retreated from the report's allegation that Israel engaged in large-scale attacks in violation of the laws of war. These attacks included Israel's indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and white phosphorus in densely populated areas, and its massive and deliberate destruction of civilian buildings and infrastructure without a lawful military reason. This misconduct was so widespread and systematic that it clearly reflected Israeli policy."

Regrettably, Roth's remarks amount to little more than a smoke screen. Ignored by Roth are Goldstone's other admissions in his Washington Post retraction (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html):

• Hamas now confesses that the Israel Defense Forces numbers concerning hostile combatants and civilians killed in the operation were accurate.

• Subsequent to Operation Cast Lead, hundreds more rockets and mortar rounds have been directed at civilian targets in southern Israel.

What is the significance of Hamas's concurrence that its losses were in line with the numbers reported by the IDF? In a nutshell, this means that the IDF did a remarkable job in controlling civilian casualties, given that Hamas was fighting, i.e. firing rockets and missiles at Israeli civilian targets, from within and alongside "civilian buildings and infrastructure".

As stated by British military expert Colonel Richard Kemp in an interview with the BBC (http://zionism-israel.com/issues/Israel_human_rights_kemp_gaza.htm):

"I don’t think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza."

Of course, Colonel Kemp is never mentioned by Roth in his opinion piece in The Guardian.

And what about Goldstone's observation that Hamas and friends continue to fire mortar shells and rockets at Israeli civilian targets in southern Israel? Needless to say, also no mention of this "phenomenon" in Roth's opinion piece in The Guardian. Any such mention might interfere with HRW fundraising in, for example, Saudi Arabia (see: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2009/07/fundraising-corruption-at-human-rights-watch/21345/).

Bottom line: Roth's attempt to equate the conduct of Hamas with that of Israel is sickening, and it is HRW's prejudicial record that remains stained.

Goldstone Retracts U.N. Human Rights Council Mission's Findings on Gaza War

In an opinion article in The Washington Post entitled "Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html) published on Friday, Richard Goldstone has belatedly retracted the principle findings of his UNHRC mission's September 2009 report on Israel's Cast Lead operation in Gaza and claims, "If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document."

Goldstone further writes:

"That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.

. . . .

While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

. . . .

Israel’s lack of cooperation with our investigation meant that we were not able to corroborate how many Gazans killed were civilians and how many were combatants. The Israeli military’s numbers have turned out to be similar to those recently furnished by Hamas.

. . . .

I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted.

. . . .

Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. [Former New York judge Mary] McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.

. . . .

At minimum I hoped that in the face of a clear finding that its members were committing serious war crimes, Hamas would curtail its attacks. Sadly, that has not been the case. Hundreds more rockets and mortar rounds have been directed at civilian targets in southern Israel."

It took Goldstone a year and a half to retract the manifest falsehoods of his report, and he could not recant without blaming Israel for his mistakes.

Needless to say, Goldstone's Washington Post article is barely making a media ripple, compared with the publication of his original report, i.e. the damage to Israel cannot be undone.

Goldstone, Who Hanged 28 Blacks, to Receive Tikkun Award for Service of Human Rights and Social Justice

Tikkun magazine tells us that it is "dedicated to healing and transforming the world," and apparently, as part of its efforts to "heal and transform the world", Tikkun continues to seek new ways to venerate and celebrate Judge Richard Goldstone, who headed the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 2009 Gaza Conflict, which quite expectedly denounced Israel for war crimes:

"Last week Judge Richard Goldstone (the South African jurist who authored the UN report showing prima facie evidence that during its invasion of Gaza in Dec 2008 and Jan 2009 which had resulated [sic] in the death of 1600 Palestinians, Israel--and Hamas--had committed violations of human rights and that they should do their own credible public investigation of the hundreds of pages of documentation he was submitting to the UN) was told that right-wing Zionists in South Africa would picket his grandson's bar mitzvah, and that the synagogue would not be able to vouch for his safety, so he should not attend.

Tikkun Magazine and the Network of Spiritual Progressives publicly invited Goldstone to the Bay Area where we would perfom a Bar Mitzvah for his grandson while honoring Goldstone.

When he told us that the Bar Mitzvah was taking place in a few weeks and so it would be impossible to shift the location for his grandson, we announced his agreement to receive the annual TIKKUN AWARD in 2011 for his work in service of human rights and social justice at the conference celebraton of Tikkun's 25th anniversary."

http://www.tikkun.org/article.php/20100423161156636

Meanwhile, however, the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth has revealed:

"that Goldstone sentenced at least 28 black defendants to death. Most of them were found guilty of murder and sought to appeal the verdict. In those days, he actually made sure he showed his support for the execution policy, writing in one verdict that it reflects society's demands that a price be paid for crimes it rightfully views as frightening.

In another verdict, in which he upheld the execution of a young black man convicted of murdering a white restaurant owner after he fired him, Goldstone wrote that the death penalty is the only punishment likely to deter such acts.

. . . .

Even when it came to far less serious offenses, Goldstone sided through and through with the racist policies of the Apartheid regime. Among other things, he approved the whipping of four blacks found guilty of violence, while he acquitted four police officers who had broken into a white woman's house on suspicions that she was conducting sexual relations with a black man – something considered then in South Africa as a serious crime.

In another incident, Goldstone sentenced two young black men merely for being in possession of a video tape showing a speech given by one of the senior officials in Nelson Mandela's party."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3885999,00.html

Goldstone's response was that he opposed the death penalty, but was forced to act in accordance with requirements of the South African legal system. This is what is known as the "Nuremberg Defense", i.e. he was only following orders, or in German, "Befehl ist Befehl."

Alan Dershowitz's rejoinder to Goldstone's attempt to justify this behavior:

"Richard Goldstone, author of the notorious Goldstone report, did not become a South African judge in the post-Apartheid Mandela Era, as The New York Times and other media have erroneously reported. He accepted a judgeship during the worst days of Apartheid and helped legitimate one of the most racist regimes in the world by granting the imprimatur of the rule of law to some of the most undemocratic and discriminatory decrees.

Goldstone was--quite literally--a hanging judge. He imposed and affirmed death sentences for more than two dozen blacks under circumstances where whites would almost certainly have escaped the noose. And he affirmed sentences of physical torture--euphemistically called "flogging"-- for other blacks. He also enforced miscegenation and other racist laws with nary a word of criticism or dissent. He was an important part of the machinery of death, torture and racial subjugation that characterized Apartheid South Africa. His robe and gavel lent an air of legitimacy to an entirely illegitimate and barbaric regime."

http://www.hudsonny.org/2010/05/legitimating-bigotry-the-legacy-of-richard-goldstone.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+kramerlinks+(Linkage+by+Martin+Kramer)

So, will the Editor in Chief of Tikkun, Michael Lerner, proceed with the bestowal of the annual TIKKUN AWARD to Goldstone "for his work in service of human rights and social justice"? Meanwhile, there is no mention of Goldstone's work in service of the South African Apartheid regime on Tikkun's online home page, but only a reference to an "attack" (posters attached to the door and around the property) on the home of Rabbi Lerner "by Right-Wing Zionists".

Goldstone? Dante's spirit visited late last night while I was walking with my friend, Pancake, and informed me that a special place in hell has been reserved for this "jurist".

J Street, Goldstone: Congressman George Miller Responds

Congressman George Miller of California responded to my e-mail message. Below is his answer, followed by my reply:

Thank you for writing me to share your concerns about H. Res. 867, the resolution condemning the "Goldstone Report." I was one of 36 members of the House of Representatives to vote against H. Res. 867. The organization J Street is just one of many organizations and prominent individuals who also opposed the resolution. My position on the resolution was based on my own views of the issue.

There are two goals that I strive to meet when Congress makes statements or sets policy concerning the Middle East. I support efforts to provide clarity, honesty and accuracy to the debate about issues that arise in any of the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. More importantly, I look to aid the important effort of achieving a two-state solution to help end the ever-present violence and strife in the region, allowing both Israelis and Palestinians to have greater peace and security in their lives once and for all.

Unfortunately, H. Res. 867 did not achieve either of those goals. One problem is that H. Res. 867 implicitly criticizes the Goldstone Report because of the initial U.N. Human Rights Council resolution authorizing the report. This U.N. resolution wrongly singled out alleged Israeli abuses and ignored the harm caused by Hamas' rocket and mortar attacks on the Israeli people.

However, Justice Richard Goldstone, who oversaw the Goldstone Report, to his credit extended the original mandate for the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict to include an evaluation of Hamas' rocket attacks on civilians in southern Israel, among other issues. This was pointed out in H. Res. 867. Judge Goldstone is a distinguished jurist with a long record of support for human rights. Most notably, Justice Goldstone was a prominent critic of the abhorrent apartheid regime in South Africa.

Regardless of one's ultimate evaluation of the report, it is important to recognize the changes that Justice Goldstone was able to make to it and evaluate his report on its own merits. Regrettably, the resolution condemning the Goldstone Report was never considered by the appropriate committee in the House and Judge Goldstone was never asked to testify before Congress about it. In the end, with no hearing and public testimony, I believe members of Congress lacked a sufficient basis on which to condemn the report.

I believe that, when Congress turns its attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we should do so in a way that helps broker peace in the region. Unfortunately, this resolution did not do that, and in fact may have contributed to increasing tensions in the region.

For these reasons, I was unable to support H. Res. 867 when it was voted on in the House. I will continue, though, to work with my colleagues to try and secure a better way forward that leads to lasting peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Sincerely,

GEORGE MILLER
Member Of Congress, 7th District

My reply:

Dear Congressman Miller,

Let us begin by acknowledging that you never read the Goldstone Report in its entirety. I did.

Let's also begin by noting that your "distinguished" Goldstone stated in The New York Times that "I accepted [the mandate] because my fellow commissioners are professionals committed to an objective, fact-based investigation." In fact, there was not one person on his committee sympathetic to Israel, and Christine Chinkin had pronounced Israel guilty before seeing any evidence.

Your "distinguished" Goldstone himself was on the board of Human Rights Watch, which had already condemned Israel before he began the Commission.

Your "distinguished" Goldstone has consistently refused to answer questions or provide clarification about the substance of his mission's findings or his methodology.

You claim in your e-mail to me that "Congress lacked a sufficient basis on which to condemn the report", yet the Goldstone Committee was in all respects a "kangaroo court".

Should you wish to read more, I suggest you read Prof. Richard Landes' comprehensive articles concerning Goldstone and his Report in "The Augean Stables": http://www.theaugeanstables.com/category/goldstone-report/

I doubt that you will.

Query: Is it your intention to accept funds from J Street?

Thank you for your prompt reply.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey Grossman

Israel Continues to Brace for a Two or Three-Front War

Israel continues to brace for war with Iranian surrogates Hamas in the south (Gaza) and Hezbollah in the north (Lebanon). Should a conflict involving Iranian nuclear ambitions arise, Hamas and Hezbollah have instructions to let their missiles fly.

In the south, this report from an article by Yaakov Katz of the Jerusalem Post, entitled "Hamas preparing advanced rockets and 'offensive' tunnels" , concerning additions to Hamas arsenals since Operation Cast Lead less than a year ago:

"Hamas is believed to have a significant number of shoulder-launched anti-tank missiles and 9M113 Konkurs, which have a range of four kilometers and are capable of penetrating heavy armor.

In addition, Hamas is believed to have today a few thousand rockets, including several hundred with a range of 40 kilometers and several dozen with a range of between 60 and 80 km. . . .

Iran already supplies Hamas with 122mm Katyusha rockets that are smuggled into Gaza in several pieces and then assembled by Hamas engineers.

. . . .

Hamas has also increased its use of civilian infrastructure, particularly mosques, which the terror group already used quite extensively for storage and launching rockets during the operation. Hamas is believed to have taken control of almost 80 percent of the mosques in Gaza, using them to store weapons and set up command-and-control centers.

Hamas, is 'padding' itself as well by setting up its command centers in large apartment buildings. This way, it believes, the IDF will not attack them by air, and will need to send ground forces deep into the population centers, where it will lose its technological advantage."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1260181035814&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

All of this is in addition to the 40,000 missiles shipped by Iran to Hezbollah and capable of hitting all of Israel.

Meanwhile, where is Richard Goldstone? Or is it his job to reproach Israel only after the bellicosities?

Open Letter to Congresswoman Betty McCollum, Who Prides Herself on Her "Common Sense"

Betty McCollum from Minnesota's Fourth District was one of 36 members of Congress, all but three Democrats, who recently voted against the House resolution condemning the Goldstone report. According to her website, "Congresswoman McCollum brings a common sense, Minnesota perspective to her work".

On January 9 of this year, when Operation Cast Lead was underway, McCollum, in a speech before the House of Representatives, stated:

"Despite the fact too many Israeli citizens are under great stress from Hamas rockets, these weapons do not represent an existential threat to Israel. Rather than a serious military challenge, these rockets are like a drug gang that uses drive by shootings as a tactic to terrify a neighborhood. When is the solution to this type of terror for authorities to lay waste to the neighborhood?"

http://minnesotaindependent.com/22670/mccollum-votes-present-on-house-israel-resolution

McCollum claimed in her speech that "after 13 days of warfare it is reported by officials in Gaza that more than 750 people are dead, of which 40 percent are women and children." The Israeli Defense Forces at the end of the operation stated that of 1,166 Gazans who died in the operation, 709 were Palestinian combatants, 295 were male non-combatants, 49 were women and 89 were children.

My open letter to McCollum, who is shown in her website snuggling with Obama after Obama was awarded his "richly deserved" Nobel Peace Prize, appears below:

Betty,

When voting against the House resolution condemning the Goldstone report, you declared: "American-made white phosphorus shells were used by Israel in civilian areas causing horrible burns to Palestinian children, yet this resolution refuses to seek the truth?"

You want the truth? I also want the truth? Where were you when more than 10,000 mortar shells, rockets and missiles were fired from "civilian areas" in Gaza at civilians in southern Israel from 2001-2009? Did you ever visit the Israeli children who lost limbs from these attacks? Would you and your family be willing to live almost a decade under such fire? Think about it: Israeli children wet their beds rather than venture out of their safe rooms, because they had only 30 seconds from the sound of an alarm to return to safety.

Did you bother to read the entirety of the Goldstone Report? You obviously did not. Apparently it doesn't bother you that the members of this commission had already declared their enmity to Israel before the "investigation" had begun.

Does it bother you that the allegations of Hamas were accepted by the Goldstone commission without validation or verification? It was also alleged by Hamas that Israel is distributing aphrodisiac chewing gum in Gaza to subvert the morality of Gaza's youth. Shall we also seek the truth of this allegation?

Does it bother you that the charter of Hamas calls for the indiscriminate murder of all Jews?

Does it bother you that members of the rival movement of Hamas, Fatah, were murdered by Hamas before and during Operation Cast Lead? Some were thrown to their deaths from the tops of buildings.

Did you ever examine the casualty reports validated by Israel, or perhaps you don't believe the figures provided by American allies? Yes, civilians died - war is a terrible thing - but they were a fraction of the number of civilians who died in Iraq, Afghanistan and Serbia, owing to the measures taken by Israel to safeguard human lives.

Have you ever witnessed the aftermath of an "honor killing" in Gaza? Recently a Gaza man bludgeoned his daughter with an iron chain, because his daughter - a 27-year-old divorced mother of five - owned a cell phone and spoke to a man outside the family. Such murders go vitually unpunished by the authorities in Gaza, i.e. Hamas. These are the same authorities in whom Goldstone placed his trust.

You pride yourself on your "common sense"? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Yemen: Where are Goldstone and Human Rights Watch?

According to the Tehran Times:

"Since the beginning of November, Saudi forces have attacked residential areas and border villages in Yemen, killing and injuring many people.

The Saudi Army has deployed one of its main brigades, which consists of at least 13,000 troops, to northern Yemen.

. . . .

Terrorism and extremism are the most serious problems in Yemen, and certain people are trying to turn Yemen into a center for terrorist activities, [Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki] added."

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=207645

However, the Saudi Gazette provides us with a different account concerning the battle with Shiite rebels on the Saudi border with Yemen:

"The Saudi forces will continue their airstrikes against the infiltrators until they move back from the Saudi frontier, Assistant Minister of Defense for Security Affairs Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz said Tuesday. 'We are not going to stop the bombing until the infiltrators retreat tens of kilometers inside their border,' Prince Khaled said on a visit to Saudi troops in southwestern Jizan province."

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2009111154154

There's a Middle East conflict that doesn't involve Israel? Why aren't the NGOs protesting this slaughter, or might this somehow affect their fund raising activities in Saudi Arabia?

Many civilians have died? Where are Goldstone and the Human Rights Council, or doesn't brewing enmity between Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia matter? Could it be that if Israel can't somehow be blamed, the world yawns and goes about its business?

Israel Braces for Two-Front War

Hamas is smuggling Iranian missiles into Gaza, which are capable of hitting Tel Aviv. Appearing before the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset (Israeli parliament), Major General Amos Yadlin, Head of Israeli Military Intelligence, stated that there had been at least one recent test firing by Hamas of a rocket with a 60-kilometer range into the Mediterranean Sea, placing Tel Aviv within range of Hamas.

It is not clear whether Hamas has acquired Iranian Fajr 3 rockets, which have a maximum range of some 50 kilometers, or Fajr 5 rockets, which can hit targets 70 kilometers away.

Meanwhile in the north, Hezbollah has accumulated 40,000 missiles from Syria and Iran, many hidden in southern Lebanese villages, all aimed at Israel.

When does Iran instruct its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, to ignite the next war? It's coming, and many civilians on both sides will inevitably die.

Where are Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the UN and Goldstone? All bitterly complaining about the Israeli blockade of Gaza, as the missiles pass under the sands from Egypt into Gaza and across the Turkish and Syrian borders into Lebanon.

J Street Version of Doublespeak

The US House of Representatives, by a vote of 334 to 36, passed a non-binding resolution on Tuesday condemning the Goldstone Report and calling for the Obama administration to to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the report. In a peculiarly phrased opinion, J Street expressed its opposition to the House resolution:

"J Street is unable to support House Resolution 867 regarding the Goldstone Commission report on Operation Cast Lead.

J Street would be able to support a resolution that:

Recognizes the history of bias against Israel at the United Nations, the flaws in the original mandate to the Goldstone Commission, and the dangers in pursuing resolutions in multilateral fora with a track record of anti-Israel bias;

Condemns the series of one-sided resolutions adopted by the UN Human Rights Council;

Expresses support for the people of southern Israel who were traumatized by years of constant rocket and mortar fire as well as for the people of Gaza who are suffering greatly from the effects of both the military operation and the ongoing blockade of Gaza;

Correctly acknowledges that the Commission’s original mandate was adjusted by Judge Goldstone himself and accepted by the Human Rights Council to include a focus on the conduct of both sides, and that the report included the first-ever exposure by a UN body of war crimes and human rights violations by Hamas;

Calls on both the Palestinians and Israelis to launch independent investigations into their conduct during Operation Cast Lead;

Calls on the US government to attempt to defeat in the General Assembly any resolution which unfairly focuses only on Israel and

Calls on the US government to state unequivocally that it will veto in the Security Council any resolution which refers charges against Israel and Israelis to the International Criminal Court.

We urge members of the House to consider changes in the Resolution in line with the positions above".

http://www.jstreet.org/blog/?p=697

Now have a look at the House resolution:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr111-867

Excuse me, but doesn't the House resolution say almost exactly all of these things? Is J Street splitting philosophical hairs or traversing a slippery slope, hoping to please unnamed donors while pretending it is "pro-Israel"?

General James Jones, Obama's national security advisor, who was the keynote speaker at J Street's first conference, pledged, “You can be sure this administration will be represented at all future conferences.”

My question for General Jones: Which passes into oblivion first, J Street or the Obama administration?

Richard Goldstone Sets the Gold Standard of Hypocrisy

Sure, everyone read Goldstone's smug, self-congratulatory September 17 op-ed in The New York Times, "Justice in Gaza", which begins:

"I ACCEPTED with hesitation my United Nations mandate to investigate alleged violations of the laws of war and international human rights during Israel’s three-week war in Gaza last winter. The issue is deeply charged and politically loaded. I accepted because the mandate of the mission was to look at all parties: Israel; Hamas, which controls Gaza; and other armed Palestinian groups. I accepted because my fellow commissioners are professionals committed to an objective, fact-based investigation."

But as known to most, the mandate was not "to look at all parties" (there was a reason that even Mary Robinson wouldn't touch this investigation), and his fellow commissioners were far from committed to an "objective" investigation (Christine Chinkin declared Israel guilty prior to seeing any evidence).

But more to the point, how many people commenting on Goldstone actually read the Goldstone "Fact Finding" Mission report? I couldn't help but notice the following language:

paragraph 9: "The Mission has enjoyed the support and cooperation of the Palestinian Authority and of the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations. . . ."

paragraph 150: "Finally, the Mission wishes to thank the people of Gaza for their warm welcome, their humanity and their hospitality in spite of such difficult and painful circumstances."

paragraph 438: "In its efforts to gain more direct information on the subject, during its investigations in Gaza and in interviews with victims and witnesses of incidents and other informed individuals, the Mission raised questions regarding the conduct of armed Palestinian groups during the hostilities in Gaza. The Mission notes that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of or conduct of hostilities by the armed Palestinian groups. Whatever the reasons for their reluctance, the Mission does not discount that the interviewees' reluctance may have stemmed from a fear of reprisals."

paragraph 439: "The Mission also addressed questions regarding the tactics used by Palestinian armed groups to the Gaza authorities. They responded that they had nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with al-Qassam brigades or other armed groups and had no knowledge of their tactics. To gather first-hand information on the matter, the Mission requested a meeting with representatives of armed groups. However, the armed groups were not agreeable to such a meeting. The Mission, consequently, had little option but to rely upon indirect sources to a greater extent than for other parts of its investigation."

paragraph 496: "The Mission asked the Gaza authorities to provide information on the sites from where the Palestinian armed groups had launched attacks against Israel and against the Israeli armed forces in Gaza. The Mission similarly asked whether, to their knowledge, civilian buildings and mosques had been used to store weapons. In their response, the Gaza authorities stated that they had no information on the activities of the Palestinian armed groups or about the storage of weapons in mosques and civilian buildings. The Mission does not find this response to be entirely plausible."

In short, after observing the warmth and cooperation received from the Palestinians as opposed to the Israelis (Goldstone reportedly fell asleep while being screened a film showing Sderot children fleeing from rocket fire), Goldstone observes that in fact cooperation was not received from the Gaza authorities concerning what is most critical in his report, i.e. the locations, amid the Gazan civilian population, where and from which the Palestinians stored and fired rockets and Grad missiles. Given the lies of the Gaza authorities, Goldstone happily relied upon "indirect sources", i.e. conjecture, to pillory Israel, as mandated by the UNHRC.

Although unwilling to identify the civilian structures where Hamas stored its missiles, from which it fired its missiles, and which it booby-trapped, Goldstone nevertheless blithely condemns Israel for harming civilian targets.


Acknowledging that Gaza authorities were not "entirely plausible" in their explanations and dubious of Hamas claims concerning the casualties they inflicted upon the Israeli army (paragraph 362, note 233), Goldstone nevertheless prefers their civilian casualty figures to those of the Israeli Defense Forces when it serves his purposes. Above, Abdullah Talal Ibrahim Aal-Sane, an example of a "civilian" casualty.

Like Qaddafi, Goldstone was provided a pulpit by The New York Times to feed his narcissism and spew outright falsehoods. I complained to a senior editor of The Times, with whom I occasionally correspond, that he had not provided adequate or appropriate space for opinion contrary to that of Goldstone, and that the Goldstone report did nothing to advance the cause of peace, but was met with stony silence.