Love of the Land: Human Rights Watch versus human rights

Human Rights Watch versus human rights

Based on recent revelations, there were systematic violations in the organization, especially regarding Israel.


Gerald Steinberg
Op-Ed/Jpost
09 May '10

New York-based Human Rights Watch – once the “gold standard” of moral watchdogs – is playing a leading role in demonizing Israel through false allegations of war crimes. HRW supported the UN report condemning Israel on Jenin (2002) and the attack on the separation barrier as a violation of international law (2004), charged Israel with “deliberate” and “indiscriminate” attacks on civilians in Lebanon (2006) and issued a flood of such allegations about Gaza (2009).

HRW also claimed credit for Judge Richard Goldstone’s one-sided UN “inquiry” on the Gaza fighting. Goldstone is a close confidant of HRW’s executive director Kenneth Roth, and was a member of HRW’s board.

But HRW has been shattered following revelations of systematic factual, moral and ethical violations, particularly with respect to Israel. Marc Garlasco, HRW’s “senior military analyst,” who wrote many of the accusations about Gaza, including the white phosphorous libel, was fired. This followed discovery of his obsessive collection of Nazi war memorabilia, but the deeper issues relate to the credibility of his military analyses. (The investigation HRW promised six months ago never happened, and instead, it imposed a gag order on Garlasco.) Garlasco is a symptom, and after NGO Monitor’s systematic revelations of HRW hypocrisy, founder Robert Bernstein denounced his own organization for helping undermine the principles of human rights. Articles by Jonathan Foreman in the Sunday Times and Benjamin Birnbaum in The New Republic have further exposed the mythology.

BASED ON interviews with HRW board members, employees and others, Birnbaum documented systematic bias and factual distortions. Sarah Leah Whitson (who led a bizarre fund-raising trip to Saudi Arabia, invoking the specter of the “pro-Israel” lobby) was brought in by Roth to head the Middle East and North Africa division. Whitson is an admirer of Norman Finkelstein, who, as Birnbaum notes, is a “Hizbullah supporter who has likened Israel to Nazi Germany” and accuses Jews of exploiting the Holocaust. In an e-mail, Whitson wrote of her “tremendous respect and admiration for him, because... making Israeli abuses the focus of one’s life work is a thankless but courageous task...”

(Read full story)

Love of the Land: Human Rights Watch versus human rights

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Hanging Judge

Hanging Judge

The front page of Yediot Achronot, our most popular newspaper, has a story about one Judge Richard Goldstone. Apparently the man was a judge in South Africa's Apartheid regime, and in that capacity he sent dozens of blacks to the gallows, and others to be lashed.

Interesting, isn't it.

Update: There's no link to the Yediot Achronot story, but Silke found a description of at at the Jerusalem Post, here.

2nd update: Asaf found a link to the story in Hebrew, here.

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Hanging Judge

Love of the Land: Israeli report contradicting Goldstone ignored

Israeli report contradicting Goldstone ignored

Just Journalism
15 April '10

On Wednesday 14 April, The Guardian’s lead opinion piece by George Monbiot focused on the issue of the application of international jurisdiction to visiting foreign dignitaries to the UK. In ‘The pope on trial would show what equality before the law means’, the journalist argued that any foreign citizen, regardless of their rank or position, should be arrested if they are alleged to have breached international law. Alongside Pope Benedict XVI, Monbiot argued that leader of Israel’s Kadima party Tzipi Livni, should be tried for war crimes if she ever visits the UK. Criticising Gordon Brown for seeking to change the law to prevent such a speculative arrest, Monbiot stated that Livni should be brought to court because ‘the evidence for the crimes against humanity to which Livni has been linked – laid out in the Goldstone report and elsewhere – is massive, detailed and hard to dispute.’

The Goldstone report is commonly cited in this manner by British journalists in both news and comment articles alleging Israeli war crimes during Operation Cast Lead. However, Israeli rebuttals of such claims are not regularly referenced in such a way – and often receive minimal coverage.

(Read full article)

Please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.

Love of the Land: Israeli report contradicting Goldstone ignored

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Even the Greatest of Them

Even the Greatest of Them

There's been a flurry of condemnation of some South African Jews who disapprove of Richard Goldstone to the extent that he won't be joining the synagogue services of his grandson's bar mitzva. JTA says he has been barred; the Jerusalem Post offers a fudged version of the story, in which some of the protagonists seem to be backing away from the appearance of their decision without changing it. J.J. Goldberg at The Forward notes the story, and many of his readers think it's disgraceful.

The story emphasizes an aspect of the story of the Goldstone report not often directly mentioned: that Jews are a community, and always have been; that the community has its own internal dynamics; and that Richard Goldstone dealt his community a grievous blow by adding his stature to a nasty defamation of it. (I'm not going into the issue of the report here, because I've already done so here, but having read the entire 575 pages of it I have no problem in calling it a nasty defamation).

The tool of nidui (roughly similar to the Greek practice of ostracism) has been one of the most powerful methods of sanction and censure in Jewish communal life. During the millennia in which the Jews had no state power to wield, it was perhaps the most powerful tool in their arsenal, but it predates even those times.

Perhaps the most famous nidui ever was the casting out of rabbi Eliezer in the 2nd century CE. Rabbi Eliezer was one of the greatest of the tanaim, the scholars who created the Mishna; indeed, he is one of fountainheads of the Mishna; he appears thousands of times in the Talmud and his impact was enormous. He also seems to have been a stubborn pedant, unwavering in his puristic interpretations, a fact that eventually led to his clash with the other scholars of his generation. In one of the most fascinating discussions in the history of religion (any religion), R. Eliezer took the side of God against the scholars but lost, and when he refused to accept this he was cast out.

As he lay on his deathbed a group of his disciples came to visit him, among them rabbis Akiva and Yehoshua. First they loitered outside his chamber, as R. Eliezer rebuked his son for putting care of him above preparations for the approaching Shabbat. The disciples then entered, while sitting across the room because of the nidui order.
- R. Eliezer: Why did you come?
- We came to learn.
- Where were you up till now?
- We were busy [they didn't want to pain him by saying they had been respecting the order]
- We'll see how you die
- R. Akiva: What will my death be like?
- Yours will be the worst of them all [R. Akiva was later tortured to death by the Romans, in an emblematic act of martyrdom]

R. Eliezer then crossed his arms across his chest: Oh, what will be lost when I go. I studied much Torah from my teachers, but what I took from them was like a dog lapping at the sea [so great was what I didn't have time to learn]; I taught much Torah to my students, but they didn't take more than a drop from a vessel. I have studied 300 rules about the affliction of leprosy that no-one ever asked me; I've studied 300 rules of the farming of squash that no-one ever asked me except R. Akiva once [These are arcane matters; his passing would mean the loss of such details that are not common knowledge].

The disciples and R. Eliezer got into a detailed discussion of holiness and impurity; to one of the questions he added that a leather item if treated in a particular manner is pure - and on the word Pure he died.
Rabbi Yehoshua stood up and said The nidui is over, the nidui is over [otherwise it could also have affected the burial arrangements].

Richard Goldstone is not an important Jew, not in any Jewish context; ostracizing him may make him feel sorry for himself, but it's no great matter in a Jewish context.

Sanhedrin 68a; the Daf Yomi thread is presented and explained here.

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Even the Greatest of Them

Love of the Land: President Obama’s Priorities: Human Rights Be Damned

President Obama’s Priorities: Human Rights Be Damned

Anne Bayefsky
Commentarymagazine.com
26 March '10

On Friday, March 26, 2010, the UN Human Rights Council’s month-long session ended, along with any justification for believing that President Obama is a champion of human rights. The president insisted that America join the UN’s lead human-rights body for the first time very early in his presidency, and the consequences are now painfully clear. The enemies of democracy and freedom are having a field day at the expense of American interests and values.

The Council, which meets in Geneva, is the personal playground of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. They hold the balance of power by controlling the Asian and African regional groups, which together form a majority at the Council. The Council’s agenda is accordingly fixated on issues of priority to the Islamic bloc -- number one, delegitimizing Israel; number two, trumping free speech in the name of Islam; and number three, avoiding any criticism of human-rights violations in their own backyards. None of which has anything to do with protecting human rights.

More troubling than the Council’s growing infamy, however, is the Obama administration’s relationship to it. The America on display in Geneva is an embarrassment, and the only people oblivious to how the U.S. is perceived by those assembled are the American representatives themselves.

Having jumped on the Council bandwagon last year without insisting on any reform-minded preconditions, U.S. diplomats now sit there taking it on the chin and lending predictable and immutable Council routines undeserved legitimacy. This past session, the Council adopted five resolutions condemning Israel and fewer resolutions on the rest of the world combined: one each on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, North Korea, Burma/Myanmar, and Guinea.

The other 187 states on the planet got a free pass from the Council, notwithstanding the pressing reality of Nigeria’s butchered Christians, Saudi Arabia’s gender apartheid, Egypt’s systematic torture, China’s iron fist, Sudan’s genocide, and Russia’s slain human-rights defenders. In fact, over the entire four-year history of the Council, more than half of all resolutions and decisions condemning any state have been directed at Israel alone.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: President Obama’s Priorities: Human Rights Be Damned

Love of the Land: All the News Unfit to Print

All the News Unfit to Print

Andrea Levin
CAMERA Media Analysis
18 March '10

What the New York Times chooses to cover in the Arab-Israeli conflict – and what it excludes – is a story in itself. The paper's silence, as of this writing, about an event that has rocked the Israeli media and public and triggered calls for government action once more raises serious questions about the paper's news judgment. After all, the Times reports on no other foreign nation as minutely as it does Israel, whether about negotiations, housing permits in Jerusalem, Israeli gravel-use in the West Bank or a Tel Aviv polygamist.

The story being ignored is the Im Tirtzu campaign to expose the New Israel Fund's connection to the defamatory Goldstone Report via its funding of groups that spurred the creation of and then contributed harsh commentary about Israel to the UN document. Originally founded as a student organization to counter anti-Zionist activity on campus, Im Tirtzu publicized revelations about the NIF-Goldstone ties in provocative ads across the country. The campaign began in January and has already prompted moves in the Knesset to intensify oversight of foreign political entities financing groups in Israel.

According to polls, the Israeli public by a significant margin opposes politically-based foreign funding of activity in Israel.

So why the silent treatment by the Times?

For starters, many of the very same NIF-supported NGO's under fire for allegedly helping fuel the Goldstone calumnies against Israel are also preferred news sources of the Times, quoted regularly as reliable critics of Israeli society. B'Tselem and Yesh Din, for instance, are favorites, together cited at least 25 times in the last two years, typically charging the Israel Defense Forces or other official bodies with misconduct, and sometimes prompting entire stories focused on the NGO charges.

(Read full critique)

Love of the Land: All the News Unfit to Print

Remember the Goldstone Report?

Remember the Goldstone Report?

Professor Richard Landes,who blogs at The Augean Stables, has carefully read the Goldstone Report. The first part of his findings is here, the second here. I've only had the time to skim over it, and recognize that rational discussion of the report hardly has any value in any case, but if you're interested in an intelligent reading of this famous anti-Israeli screed, you'll find Landes' comments valuable.

Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Love of the Land: The March of the Red-Green Brigades

The March of the Red-Green Brigades

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
12 March '10

The Red-Green alliance is on the march. On Wednesday, the leftist-controlled European Parliament in Strasbourg passed a resolution endorsing the Goldstone Report. That report, it will be recalled, denies Israel's right to self-defense by alleging that Israel's actions to defend itself from illegal Palestinian aggression during the course of Operation Cast Lead were war crimes.

The resolution did more than accept the Goldstone Report's baseless claims. It sought to silence those who are trying to make the Red portion of the Red-Green alliance pay a price for its abetment of jihad.

The resolution "expresses its concern about pressure placed on NGOs involved in the preparation of the Goldstone Report and in follow-up investigations, and calls on authorities on all sides to refrain from any measures restricting the activities of these organizations."

This statement was inserted to defend the EU-supported Israeli organizations - overwhelmingly associated with the far-Left New Israel Fund - that took a lead role in providing Richard Goldstone and his associates with false allegations of illegal actions by IDF soldiers. Those organizations - and the New Israel Fund - have rightly been the subject of scrutiny in Israel after their role in compiling the Goldstone Report was revealed in January by the Israeli student organization Im Tirzu.

Israel is not the only target of the Red-Green alliance. Its operations span the globe. Sometimes, as in the case of the Goldstone Report, the Left leads the charge. Sometimes, as with the Hamas-led missile offensive against Israel that preceded Cast Lead, the jihadists move first.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: The March of the Red-Green Brigades

Love of the Land: Seriously! Isn't There Anyone Associated With The Goldstone Report Who Didn't Condemn Israel In Advance

Seriously! Isn't There Anyone Associated With The Goldstone Report Who Didn't Condemn Israel In Advance

Daled Amos
08 March '10

It's not a difficult question--but as you read the following article, it's hard to avoid the obvious answer, and wonder why it had to be this way.

There is a common thread that ties together

Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on "The situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967"

Judge Richard Goldstone, head of Goldstone Commission

Desmond Travers, member of Goldstone Commission

Christine Chinkin, member of Goldstone Commission

Hina Jilani, member of Goldstone Commission

Francesca Marotta, a senior member of the UN staff that helped compile the Goldstone Report

UN Inquiry Accused of Anti Israel Bias

A controversial United Nations report called the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict and more commonly known as "The Goldstone Report," is under fire for being biased against Israel. Among its conclusions was an accusation that Israel had committed "war crimes" during its twenty-two day war with Palestinian terrorists that ended in January, 2009. Critics discredit this finding - saying key members of the report were clearly biased in favor of the Palestinians.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Seriously! Isn't There Anyone Associated With The Goldstone Report Who Didn't Condemn Israel In Advance

Love of the Land: What a hutzpa

What a hutzpa

Ben-Dror Yemini
Op-Ed/JPost
03 March '10

THE REUT report has already generated a significant buzz and a wide range of incredible responses.

One of the most important documents about the delegitimization process against Israel was recently published by the Reut Institute. It reported that over the past year, Israel has been the subject of a campaign of unprecendented force – which reached its peak with the Goldstone Report – against it in North America and Europe, “where Israel is slowly becoming a ‘state beyond the pale’ as its right to exist is challenged.”

It describes two types of networks – the “resistance network” comprised of nations, NGOs and individulals who reject Israel’s right to exist on the basis of ideology, and the “delegitimization network” comprised of those who reject its right to exist based on a combination of political objections, including branding Israel as the ultimate “human rights violator.”

The report states that these networks have devised seemingly effective strategies to advance their claims and that their success “stems from their ability to engage and mobilize others.”

The report goes on to mention that Israel has presented an “inadequate systemic response” and offers counter-strategies and proposes policy changes for fighting back against the posed “existential threat.”

THE REUT report has yet to be translated into English (but an executive summary is available in English on the Reut Web site) but has already generated a significant buzz and a wide range of incredible responses.

One of these responses is that of Bouthaina Shaaban, a former minister in the Syrian government, who currently serves as a senior adviser to President Bashar Assad.

The text, titled “The Decade of the Victory for Freedom and Justice,” published in CounterPunch magazine, is incredible because it confirms the report’s claim: The struggle against Israel has shifted to the arena of “human rights,” in whose name the campaign to delegitimize Israel is waged.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: What a hutzpa

Love of the Land: Goldstone: Human Rights Gone Wrong

Goldstone: Human Rights Gone Wrong

Ben Cohen
Z-Word Blog
01 March '10

Here’s the latest video from AJC Reality Check, focusing on how the prejudices of one of Richard Goldstone’s lieutenants, Desmond Travers, played a key role in the distortions which followed in the Goldstone report.



Related: Goldstoned also New Revelations About the UN Goldstone Report that Seriously Undermine its Credibility

Love of the Land: Goldstone: Human Rights Gone Wrong

Love of the Land: Resistance and Rockets: Hamas Targeting of Israeli Civilians

Resistance and Rockets: Hamas Targeting of Israeli Civilians

Jeffrey White
The Washington Institute for
Near East Policy
25 February '10

Recently, Hamas has gone to extraordinary lengths to prove that it did not attack civilian targets in Israel during the December 2008 to January 2009 Gaza conflict. But a review of the organization's own media -- including the website of its military arm, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades (www.qassam.ps), and the Hamas-associated monthly journal Filastin al-Muslima (www.fm-m.com) -- shows that Hamas knowingly and repeatedly fired on Israeli population centers in southern Israel. To accept Hamas's latest claim that it did not launch rockets at civilians is to deny its numerous past claims to the contrary.

Claim vs. Conduct

On February 3, 2010, Hamas released a fifty-two-page response to the UN's Goldstone report regarding its conduct during the Gaza war (called the "Battle of al-Furqan" in the organization's commentary). According to this document, the killing and wounding of Israeli civilians was unintentional -- Hamas forces had targeted only military installations during the fighting. This claim was based on a supposed internal investigation conducted by Hamas and led by its justice minister, Faraj al-Ghoul.

(Read full report)

Love of the Land: Resistance and Rockets: Hamas Targeting of Israeli Civilians

Love of the Land: The bottom line on the Dubai hit, Israel, the Mossad etc

The bottom line on the Dubai hit, Israel, the Mossad etc.

Stephanie Gutmann
Telegraph.uk.com
20 February '10

Tom Gross has excellent stuff on reasons other nations may have been involved in the hit and also photographs of children killed by rockets that Israel believes Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, the object of the hit, helped smuggle into Gaza.

Then over to Martin Solomon of Solomonia for the bottom line:

Let’s leave that aside for the moment and assume Israel’s responsibility. Apparently some people believe this is a bad thing, in spite of the fact that Mahbhouh was an active operative for a declared enemy. This is a guy who certainly deserved death. Dubai should be embarrassed that this guy was in their country [allegedly] doing arms deals far more than Israel should be embarrassed for bumping him off.

Isn’t this exactly the type of activity people like Goldstone and others are always calling for?

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: The bottom line on the Dubai hit, Israel, the Mossad etc.

Love of the Land: ‘Goldstone Report was our smoking gun’

‘Goldstone Report was our smoking gun’

How did Im Tirtzu go from organizing campus demonstrations to compiling a major report that has reverberated into a major scandal?


Abe Selig
JPost
18 February '10

How did Im Tirtzu-The Second Zionist Revolution, which was created less than four years ago as a small student organization to voice support for IDF reservists, go from organizing campus demonstrations during the Second Lebanon War to compiling a major report that has reverberated into a major scandal?

One of the reasons, The Jerusalem Post learned this week, was that the document the group released last month, now known as the “Im Tirtzu Report,” which listed the New Israel Fund as a main financier of more than a dozen Israeli NGOs – including: The Association for Civil Rights in Israel; Adalah, The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel; Bimkom-Planners for Planning Rights; Gisha-Legal Center for Freedom of Movement; HaMoked-Center for the Defense of the Individual; Physicians for Human Rights-Israel; the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel; and Yesh Din-Volunteers for Human Rights – that provided testimony used in the UN’s Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead, was the result of efforts modeled after military intelligence operations that trace and pinpoint money trails leading to terrorist organizations.

Im Tirtzu head Ronen Shoval, told the Post this week that the detailed report, which has continued to make waves both in civil society and government circles, was “modeled after the way intelligence agencies look into the financing of terror groups.”

“We invested great efforts to understand the funding strategy and ideology behind the NIF, and what we found out is just the tip of the iceberg,” Shoval said, although he declined to elaborate.

(Read full article)

Related: (Video) Im Tirtzu: Bringing about the 2nd Zionist revolution

Love of the Land: ‘Goldstone Report was our smoking gun’

Love of the Land: I guess our New Israel Fund check got lost in the mail

I guess our New Israel Fund check got lost in the mail

Jacob Shrybman
Sederot Media Center
16 February '10

When the news of the New Israel Fund (NIF) paying around $8 million to organizations that provided the Goldstone Report with all its condemnations of Israel, it was clear that the “New Israel” desired by the New Israel Fund is one with more than 9 years of consistent rocket fire.

Our organization, Sderot Media Center (SMC), with a yearly budget of close to $200,000, worked tirelessly on a formal report that was requested by the Goldstone Commission itself, which encompassed the impact of the rocket fire on the residents of the Sderot region. We sent this formal report accompanied by photographs and videos to depict to this UN committee, which did not visit Sderot, what it is like to live under either daily rocket fire or the threat of daily rocket fire over the course of then eight years. The Goldstone Committee then flew our director, Noam Bedein, to the UN Headquarters in Geneva to give a 30-minute presentation/testimony in front of the committee on this daily reality lived in Sderot.

The New Israel Fund paid around $8 million to organizations that provided information to the Goldstone Report. As a cited provider of information for the Goldstone Report, I guess our New Israel Fund check got lost in the mail?

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: I guess our New Israel Fund check got lost in the mail

Love of the Land: As persistent as they wanna be

As persistent as they wanna be

SoccerDad
15 February '10

If the UN has been persistent in pursuing the Goldstone Report, it hasn't been as scrupulous in a different matter. Michael Young complains about the U.N.'s betrayal in Beirut. Five years ago former Lebanese President Rafiq Hariri was killed.

Half a decade later, however, the Hariri case has made little progress toward justice. Lately, Syria has reasserted its power in Beirut after years of trying to destabilize a government dominated by its political foes. In December, Saad Hariri, Lebanon's prime minister and Rafik's son, met with Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, acceding to the reconciliation between his own political sponsor, Saudi Arabia, and Damascus -- making Lebanon less likely to point the finger at Syria for the killing.
But the more significant problem actually lies within the United Nations investigation itself. While it has been upgraded to a special tribunal, sitting near The Hague, it has suffered from questionable leadership, lost key members and last year had to release suspects for lack of formal indictments.

Young concludes:

Any murder case takes time, but there's reason to believe that investigative incompetence or international political pressure, or a combination of both, has played a role in slowing down, and even rolling back, the search for Mr. Hariri's killers. Whichever it is, the United Nations has done little to ensure success. In our interview, Mr. Mehlis recalled that the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, had warned him that "he did not want another trouble spot."
The impetus to identify Mr. Hariri's assassins is gone; not only has Lebanon sought rapprochement with Syria, but the Lebanese public's expectations, after years of an inconclusive inquiry, have hit rock bottom. Foreign governments fear the instability that might ensue if Mr. Bellemare issues indictments, so few will regret it if he doesn't. But the United Nations pushed for the Hariri investigation; its integrity is tied up with a plausible outcome. If that's impossible, there is no point insulting the victims by letting the charade continue. Better to send Mr. Bellemare home.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: As persistent as they wanna be

Love of the Land: Can it all be just a mistake?

Can it all be just a mistake?

Itzik Yarkoni
Sderot Media Center
09 February '10

Hamas officials said that a 52-page document has been compiled to testify that the offensive missiles fired during Operation Cast lead were “an accident” due to their weapon’s lack of aiming capabilities toward military installations.

However, section 1687 of the “Goldstone Report” presents that, “indeed, Palestinian armed groups, among them Hamas, have publicly expressed their intention to target Israel civilians.... claimed responsibility for the deaths of each of the Israeli civilians killed by rocket fired during the operations in Gaza”.

This begs the question: If Hamas weapon’s suffer from inaccuracy, maybe the information that was given to Goldstone is also off target?

I remember the first time that I heard about Sapir college was when I was traveling in the United States after the army. When I asked about the whereabouts of the college, a friend replied, “It is a nice place next to Sderot. However, the situation is a little strange. Rockets are launched towards the city daily”. I did not know what lay ahead for me at Sapir College, but I decided that I would take the risk. After all, I figured something would be done, eventually, to stop the rockets.

Eight years have passed since the first rocket was launched towards Sderot. The situation has not changed, I was wrong. More than ten thousand kassam missiles, grad, and mortar shells have been fired from Gaza, of which eighty-four fell in Sderot during Operation Cast Lead. Moreover, the “military installations” Hamas speaks of are nowhere to be found in the city. Where exactly were the rockets intended to fall?

(Read full story)

Love of the Land: Can it all be just a mistake?

Love of the Land: Re: Goldstoned

Re: Goldstoned

Evelyn Gordon
Contentions/Commentary
14 February '10

Readers of David’s post on Goldstone Commission member Desmond Travers’ ridiculous assertion — that “the number of rockets that had been fired into Israel in the month preceding” last year’s war in Gaza “was something like two” — could erroneously conclude that Travers was correct about that month; his mistake was in “blithely ignoring the thousands of rockets Israelis endured in the years leading up to the operation.” That was certainly not David’s intention, but to eliminate all doubt, here are the actual figures, as compiled by Israel’s Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center:

The war began on December 27, 2008. During 2008 as a whole, the number of rockets and mortar shells launched at Israel from Gaza was 3,278, more than double the number that landed in 2007.

More importantly, however, there was a significant escalation in November and December, 2008, after Hamas withdrew from the truce that had been in place during the previous months. Thus the number of rockets launched from Gaza into Israel totaled 125 in November and 361 in December, compared with only 11 in the four preceding months (July through October) put together. The number of mortars totaled 68 in November and 241 in December, compared with only 15 in the four preceding months put together. The number of rockets and mortars combined totaled 193 in November and 602 in December, compared with only 26 in the four preceding months put together.

Needless to say, these figures are a good deal higher than “something like two.” But the more important fact to be derived from this data is that Hamas could have avoided the war simply by continuing the truce. Instead, it opted for a major escalation in the volume of fire. And it was that escalation that finally provoked Israel into responding, after three and a half years of trying and failing to end the bombardment by methods short of war.

Love of the Land: Re: Goldstoned

Love of the Land: Goldstoned

Goldstoned

David Hazony
Contentions/Commentary
14 February '10

One of the big questions surrounding the Goldstone report is whether the Israeli government made a mistake by refusing to cooperate with the mission. It was, admittedly, a serious gamble: If Goldstone’s “fact-finding” commission were in any way sincere in its efforts to present a balanced view, Israel would be giving up on a real opportunity to make its case to the world; on the other hand, if the commission had already decided from the outset to blast Israel and accuse it of atrocities, then to cooperate with the commission would have been to grant it a legitimacy it might not otherwise have had.

Part of an answer came in recent weeks from the mouth of none other than Desmond Travers, a retired Irish army colonel who was one of the commission’s members (h/t, JCPA and Haaretz). In an interview with the Middle East Monitor, Travers unleashes a pile of telling quotes. First, he points out that “the number of rockets that had been fired into Israel in the month preceding their operations was something like two.” For this reason, he “reject[s]… entirely” Israel’s excuse for the whole operation, since Hamas had anyway stopped terrorizing. This statement, blithely ignoring the thousands of rockets Israelis endured in the years leading up to the operation, or the fact that Hamas continued shooting rockets at Israeli civilians despite many warnings and more limited retaliations, is infuriating to anyone who watched as Israelis in Sederot and other communities suffered repeated barrages, and should alone be enough to call Travers’s objectivity, or at least his judgment, into question.

Second, he dismisses Israel’s claims that Hamas hid its missile stockpiles in Gaza mosques as “spurious.” What about the photographs? “Unless they can give me absolute forensic proof, I do not believe the photographs.” Well, we do have to wonder: If incriminating photos of missile stockpiles do not meet the threshold of “facts” that the commission was meant to find, why the head-spinning gullibility in repeating all those accusations of Israeli war crimes, which were almost entirely based on unverified hearsay?

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Goldstoned

Love of the Land: Guardian Invents Evidence Against Israel

Guardian Invents Evidence Against Israel

Proud Zionist
09 February '10

Last week, the IDF released it’s report to counter Goldstone. The Guardian, in it’s desperation to find a negative angle, resorted to their own “evidence” to delegitimize Israel’s version of an incident in which a flour mill in Gaza was damaged.

The Guardian repeats the Goldstone report’s claim that the flour mill was hit by an air strike, implicating that it was deliberately targeted and therefore a possible war crime.

The IDF meanwhile, described the incidents in detail, explaining how

“Hamas had fortified this area [of the flour mill] with tunnels and booby-trapped houses, and deployed its forces to attack IDF troops operating there... IDF troops came under intense fire from different Hamas positions in the vicinity of the flour mill. The IDF forces fired back towards the sources of fire and threatening locations. As the IDF returned fire, the upper floor of the flour mill was hit by tank shells.”

They even arranged for fire engines to reach the area and extinguish the fire.
The Guardian quotes Israel’s defence as merely that “there were Hamas fighters ‘in the vicinity of the flour mill’”. But they claim that when they visited the mill just after the war last year, they “saw what appeared to be the remains of an aircraft-dropped bomb” on the first floor, stating that:

“The UN mine action team, which handles ordnance disposal in Gaza, has told the Guardian that the remains of a 500-pound Mk82 aircraft-dropped bomb were found in the ruins of the mill last January.”

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Guardian Invents Evidence Against Israel