Uncategorized

Goldstone Report: The Judge Is Still Lying


This is cross posted by Yarden Frankl, who blogs at “Crossing the Yarden“.

So now, Judge Goldstone writes an op-ed in the Washington Post where he admits that the Israeli military did NOT intentionally target civilians in Gaza.

But beyond the obvious disgust, there is one part of his “magnum oops” that you might have missed.

About the original report, he now writes “Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity.”

Oh really?

“Potential” war crimes?

“Possibly” crimes against humanity?

Excuse me. I think that I have a real “potential” to be sick and “possibly” throw up.

I went back and looked through the 500 plus page report. There are dozens of accusations of specific “war crimes” that Israel violated. Then I did a word search for the word “potential.” Guess how many times Goldstone labeled his accusations as only “potential” war crimes? None. There was no doubt expressed in the report about Israel’s actions. “Possible crimes against humanity?”  Nope.

It’s as if Goldstone is now saying “well, back then I just didn’t know if Israel committed war crimes. But you know, looking back, I don’t think they did.”

Judge Goldstone, Your Honor, excuse me, but you actually sounded certain in your report’s conclusions when you wrote:

(b) . Incidents involving the killing of civilians:
1718. The Mission found numerous instances of deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian objects (individuals, whole families, houses, mosques) in violation of the fundamental international humanitarian law principle of distinction, resulting in deaths and serious injuries.

In these cases the Mission found that the protected status of civilians was not respected and the attacks were intentional, in clear violation of customary law reflected in article 51(2) and 75 of the First AP, article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and articles 6 and 7 of ICCPR. In some cases the Mission additionally concluded that the attack was also launched with the intention of spreading terror among the civilian population.

Did some UN intern leave out the words ”potential” and “possible” when he typed that up for you? Were you so busy looking up all the specific violations of international law that you somehow forget to add that you were not 100% certain when you accused the Israeli army of: deliberately attacking Palestinian civilians in Gaza with one of the goals  to spread terror among the population.

Don’t try pitching us a softball now. Your accusations were as harsh as could be. Despite all the evidence that you chose to ignore, you barreled ahead and wrote page after page of how utterly evil Israel and our army are. In your report, our kids are not brave young men defending our country, they are baby killers acting under orders.

Now you are having a change of heart?  If you are feeling remorse, I gotta tell you — you’ve got a long way to go. The first step would be to try, just try, to be brutally honest about what you originally wrote and the damage it has done to the nation of Israel.

Then, maybe instead of submitting a timid little letter to the Washington Post, why not travel to some of the many nations who have accepted your original report as holier than the Bible and tell them how you got it wrong.

And to cap off your tour of apology, go to the U.N. and stand before the Human Rights Council — that group that represents despots and thugs who appointed you in the first place. Tell them that you wish to “revise” your report and then go give them a new document that accurately reflects what happened during the Gaza war.

I suggest that you begin by giving a call to Richard Kemp, the British military expert whose testimony you ignored in favor of the Hamas press releases.  If you have trouble recalling his remarks, I will give them to you here:

“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.”

13 replies »

  1. “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.”

    I fail to see how his statement is consistent with the number of casualties.

    See also the further views of the two other members of the panel
    http://search.wn.com/?results_type=videos&language_id=1&search_type=expression&search_string=un+goldstone+event+with+hina+hilani+desmond+travers&sort_type=-pub-datetime&template=cheetah-search-adv%2Findex.txt&action=search&corpus=current

  2. Excellent analysis, and I commend you for wading your way through the 500 page report (which I admit is more than I have done). The only way that Goldstone can undo the damage that he and his report have done to Israel is to write to the UN itself and demand that his report be cancelled and revoked, just like they did to the Zionism is Racism resolution. Otherwise his measly little op-ed is just a self-serving whine.

    “Magnum oops” – I really shouldn’t, but… LOL!

  3. @Richard Tebboth, what has the number of casualties got to do with the humanity or intentions of the army?

    Israel makes sure that its citizens all have shelters, safe rooms and warning sirens when the terrorist enemy attacks, and certainly the IDF does not operate from within civilian territory.

    The terrorist enemy, on the other hand, makes sure its own citizens are shielding their brave “soldiers”, hide their weapons, missiles and ammunition amongst the civilian population, including schools and mosques, and launch attacks against Israel, deliberately targeting Israeli civilians, from amongst their own civilian population. This is a win-win situation for them, for they reckon that when the IDF hits back at the rocket launchers they will end up harming some of the Palestinian civilians, thereby bringing opprobrium onto the heads of the IDF and Israel, and the terrorists don’t particularly care about their own civilians anyway.

    That is why there was such a difference in the number of casualties on each side. Stop whining about the numbers and go and complain to Hamas.

  4. Richard, I don’t think there is a contradiction between the statement and the number of casualties. You can warn people, but if they choose, or are made, to put themselves in harm’s way, what can you do? As I understand it, the Israelis have bomb shelters to protect themselves from the missiles from Gaza, but Hamas is not interested in protecting its own people, but rather making propaganda hay out of their deaths.

    “Magnum oops” LOL indeed!

  5. Tebboth, the number of casualties was because the Hamastards embedded themselves among civilians. They are still doing that. They are spinning these people the yarn that they will go straight to paradise if they stand on roofs or next to qassam launchers and get killed by retaliatory, very accurate fire. (The launchers of the qassams and those who fill civilian houses with explosives hide, of course, under hospitals, leaving their people to bear the brunt).

    And Fathi Hamad, Hamastard, summed it up by being proud that the elderly, women and children make the best human shields. (I’ll bet they’re not consulted as to whether they love death more than life).

    (What sort of animals actually HOPE FOR women, old people and children to be killed?)

  6. How can one find evidence of a “potential” occurence?

    Is Goldstone a practitionar of law or METAPHYSICS?!

  7. “I fail to see how his statement is consistent with the number of casualties.”

    And you aren’t 25 year military general with first-hand experience against terrorist groups and the tactics they use.

    Rule 1) being body counts are irrelevant and casualties stats themselves mean jack squat.

    Rule 2) Since that’s your only argument, both israel and hamas have released casualty figures that agree with each other – the vast majority of palestinian deaths were hamas militants (or freedom) fighters. only civilians killed were those in danger zones, and those that weren’t their deaths were the result of the tragedies of war and chaos.

    but it is true – israel’s performance in gaza, compared to its critics – was impressive. if we were to substitute the IDF with the British or Russians or French or Americans it would have been a Gadaffi-style conflict. But no Goldstone Report would be written.

    Do you fail to see this?

  8. Pygmy, shrivelled morality of Goldstone. “Apologising” only because he has been found out to be a fraud.

  9. To Richard Tebboth: this conflict lasted 14 days and about 1400 Palestinians were killed, i.e. about 100 a day. Since we were told that the “strongest army in the Middle East” was “indiscriminately shelling” one of the “most densely populated areas of the planet”, I find 100 casualties a day to be quite low. One man with a machine gun could probably do more.

  10. Richard Tebboth,

    Until the international laws of warfare are amended to take the immoral Islamic way of warfare (putting civilians in the line of fire as human shields, for propaganda benefits in case the other side hurts them) into account, they must be considered null and void. Goldstone’s vice lies in his very decision to charge Israel with war crimes in the first place. Nation-states that are up against the Islamic way of warfare should be indemnified from all war crimes charges; to charge them with war crimes is to give aid and comfort to Islamic imperialism and should itself be regarded a war crime.

  11. ziontruth, very good point! We assume wrongly that all leaders want to protect their civilians. For Hamas civilians are both cannon fodder and propaganda material.

  12. Tebboth, Since more Germans than British died in WW2, does that make the British the aggressors in WW2 too?

    Perhaps you’d be happier if it were the other way around in both cases?