Did you know?

[naomiglover]

Nowhere else on the planet did a former Nazi and war criminal with links to the Holocaust end up running the show elsewhere. Most were caught and hung...or tracked down by Nazi hunters. But ODESSA had served both the Mufti and similar Nazi war criminals well when it came to escaping to the 'friendly' Middle-East. Otto Skorzeny comes to mind as one example. Ended up working for both the Mufti and Nasser. He was infamous for leading the Brandenburgers wearing US uniforms during the Battle of the Bulge...as well as rescuing Mussolini and such.

But indeed you're correct re: the CIA getting involved where they shouldn't have due to the McCarthy Era. Heck...I believe even Skorzeny was connected to them in a rather round-about way. His boss was on the CIA payroll (Reinhard Gehlen) for a brief time.

Speaking of Nazi hunters; Goldstone helped track down and bring to justice Nazis in Argentina. Now he has a report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

[M.Dancer]

According to you, who has not read the report. If you had, you would know that it's more than a testimony of 1 person that is taken into account.

This ad hominim isn't maeking you look any smarter...

The investigation was done professionally. Your attempt to discredit Goldsone and his investigation is a failure.

So you are an expert on professional investigations?

Goldstine says his fact finding mission would not stand up in court. You claimn to have read the report, explain if you can, in your own slogans why Glodstone feels this was and how that aligns with saying it was professionally down.

[M.Dancer]

Speaking of Nazi hunters; Goldstone helped track down and bring to justice Nazis in Argentina. Now he has a report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

Speaking of argentina, hezbollah bambed a cultural centre there in 1994

[bush_cheney2004]

Speaking of Nazi hunters; Goldstone helped track down and bring to justice Nazis in Argentina. Now he has a report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

Great...please have Goldstone find some more Nazi rocket scientists....free US citizenship is available!

[naomiglover]

This ad hominim isn't maeking you look any smarter...

I am stating a fact. You should read the report since you have so much to say about it.

So you are an expert on professional investigations?

No I am not. However, I do know that Richard Goldstone is a professional and cannot be seen as otherwise, by any honest person.

Goldstine says his fact finding mission would not stand up in court. You claimn to have read the report, explain if you can, in your own slogans why Glodstone feels this was and how that aligns with saying it was professionally down.

How about we see what Goldstone has to say about that:

MARK COLVIN: I believe that you have said recently that your findings wouldn't necessarily stand up in a court of law; what do you mean by that?

RICHARD GOLDSTONE: Ours was a fact finding mission, it wasn't a criminal investigation, it wasn't a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation. We came to conclusions on the facts that we were able to gather. It there are to be prosecutions either in an international court, or I would hope in an domestic court, whether in Israel or in Gaza against people who are suspected of having committed any violations of international law, these facts that we found would have be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, which clearly wasn't a standard that we used.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2009/s2721744.htm

Edited February 8, 2010 by naomiglover

[M.Dancer]

Great...please have Goldstone find some more Nazi rocket scientists....free US citizenship is available!

Speaking of rockets, the terrorists in gaza launched almost 4000 rocket attacks on Israeli civilian areas before Israel retaliated in strength.

This is of course ISraels fault.

[DogOnPorch]

Speaking of Nazi hunters; Goldstone helped track down and bring to justice Nazis in Argentina. Now he has a report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

Yeah...hypocrite or what? From hunting Nazis to defending them.

[segnosaur]

Yeah, I guess naomiglover's response is not too suprising. Almost Pavlovian.

Nothing illustrates that someone (e.g. naomiglover) fails to understand issues as when they immediately label people who disagree as 'storm troopers'.

...

Perhaps if you were able to actually state your case in a logical, rational manner, without relying on cheesy one-sided videos, and without resorting to insults you might actually be more convincing.

The stormtroopers came in and denounced the video as biased without giving any specific reason why.

More demonstration of your inability to consider the details in a rational manner.

The reasons that we have denounced the video are given by multiple posters throughout this thread. For example, go to post #5 (by me) or post #6 (by Gabriel).

The video focused on the numbers, which, as far as I've seen all happen to be true.

Which, of course, as we already explained, does not tell the entire truth.

That there were Palestinian deaths (in fact more Palestinians than Israelis) is not in dispute. That there were civilian deaths is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the reason for those deaths.

Israel had been subject to on-going rocket attacks for years. Those rocket attacks were not aimed at military targets. Strangely enough, your video did not mention that. The party controlling the Gaza strip has, as their policy, the destruction of Israel. Your video did not mention that. Hamas fighters regularly used human shields, thus putting civilians at risk. Your video did not mention that. Multiple posters have already pointed out the fallacy of laying the blame at a country engaging in self defense.

The conflict was investigated by Richard Goldstone. A respected and experienced judge, who is a former chief prosecutor of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda.

His findings indicate that both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity. Hamas, for firing rockets into Israel, even if they killed 3 civilians. Israel for numerous acts that they committed.

Ah, where exactly shall I begin? So much stupidity, so little time...

First of all: Goldstone (as well as others in his little 'fact finding' mission have regularly been accused of exhibiting bias. (Heck, there is even evidence that he lied about his mandate... See: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5322971/the-goldstone-showtrial.thtml)

Secondly... even if there is truth to this inquiry, strangely enough, your video did not indicate the Palestinians war crimes, only the Israelis. Why do you think that is?

Thirdly, keep in mind that the group wasn't even initially mandated to investigate Palestinian aggression.

Lastly, the 'information' used is rather suspect. For example:

- The report does not include claims of the user of human shields, but any civilians that were approached had Hamas soldiers watching them (can you say "indimidation"?)

- Many groups testifying in front of the group had long histories of making anti-Israeli statements (many of which had since proven to be false.)

So, would you rather see one of the few modern, democratic states in the Middle east (i.e. Israel) eliminated, and replaced by a nation run by Hamas or Fatah, groups that have been, ahem, far from democratic (Hamas is known to kill political rivals within the Palestinian population and Fatah was widely seen to be corrupt, often run as a dictatorship)?

If Israel follows international law, it does not mean that they would be eliminated.

Well, lets see:

- When Israel was first formed, they were attacked, multiple times... The U.N. did not defend them. They had to defend themselves

- When Israel went into Lebannon last time, the U.N. repeatedly allowed themselves to be attacked and used as human shields by Hezbollah (see: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jul/30/20060730-093558-9976r/)

So, why exactly should any Israeli assume that the "rest of the world" will come to its defense if they are subject to attack?

And what precisely has international law ever done for Israel?

It allowed Israel to be created.

On the other hand, despite repeated aggressive actions by its neighbors, the U.N. has not taken any steps to actually defend Israel.

Where is the outrage at Hezbollah and its masters in Tehran and Damascus?

Iran support for Hezbollah is not much different than U.S.' support for Israel.

Ummm... this shows a rather idiotic sense of moral equivalence.

Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. It is behind suicide bombings against civilian targets, kidnappings (and summary executions), and is a religious organization. (If you lived in a society controlled by Hezbollah you would not have the same freedoms you have now.) While Israel is not perfect, they are far and above more moralistic than Hezbolla.

How certain? As certain as Tel Aviv pointing their weapons at Tehran and everyone else around them? If Israel can get away with having nuclear weapons, who are we to say that Iran cannot?

Well, mainly the Nuclear Non-poliferation treaty. Any party signing on to the treaty agrees not to pursue nuclear arms, and in exchange they get assistance in the peaceful use of nuclear power.

Thing is, Iran signed the treaty, therefore they should be subject to its terms. Israel, on the other hand, never signed, so they are not subject to its terms.

I could also point out that Israel is a democratic country, controlled by the rule of law. (This country has, in the passed, offered humanitarian aid to Iran!). Iran is a brutal dictatorship, run by Islamic extremists, who's leaders have made comments regarding a desire to "wipe Israel of the map". Now, given those 2, ahem, political situations, which country do you think is more likely to actually use nuclear weapons?

Edited February 8, 2010 by segnosaur

[M.Dancer]

RICHARD GOLDSTONE: Ours was a fact finding mission, it wasn't a criminal investigation, it wasn't a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation.

, We can both agree that thios anthology of hearsay testimony which does not rise up top the stardard of a professional investigation. I asked if you could explain in your own slogans why thiS anthology of hearsay testimony doesn't rise to higher standards.

[DogOnPorch]

Good post segnosaur...

As mentioned in other threads, Israel's apparent nuclear stockpile isn't a very good first strike force...more a Doomsday--Bye-bye Islam force. Since their design is independent and untested, one can never be sure if any given single weapon will work. Best launch 'em all to be sure...and since we're launching them all...might as well make it worthwhile. Mecca...Tehran...Damascus...etc.

[naomiglover]

More demonstration of your inability to consider the details in a rational manner.

The reasons that we have denounced the video are given by multiple posters throughout this thread. For example, go to post #5 (by me) or post #6 (by Gabriel).

Which, of course, as we already explained, does not tell the entire truth.

No it doesn't. I don't think anyone here claimed that the video told the entire truth. It's a short video which cannot detail everything.

You want to discuss the matter, this thread is your opportunity.

That there were Palestinian deaths (in fact more Palestinians than Israelis) is not in dispute. That there were civilian deaths is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the reason for those deaths.

Israel had been subject to on-going rocket attacks for years. Those rocket attacks were not aimed at military targets. Strangely enough, your video did not mention that.

I don't think there is any dispute here that launching rockets are illegal and wrong. I'm sure most people in this thread, including muyself agree that Hamas committed war crimes by launching the missiles.

The party controlling the Gaza strip has, as their policy, the destruction of Israel. Your video did not mention that. Hamas fighters regularly used human shields, thus putting civilians at risk. Your video did not mention that. Multiple posters have already pointed out the fallacy of laying the blame at a country engaging in self defense.

The investigation in regards to Hamas using civilians as shields came to the conclusion that there was no evidence that it took place. In fact, the report came to the conclusion that Israel used civilians as shields regularly. Why aren't you waving your fingers at Israel for doing this?

Ah, where exactly shall I begin? So much stupidity, so little time...

First of all: Goldstone (as well as others in his little 'fact finding' mission have regularly been accused of exhibiting bias. (Heck, there is even evidence that he lied about his mandate... See: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5322971/the-goldstone-showtrial.thtml)

I thought you were actually going to come up with some rebuttles. Instead, you sent me to an opinion page by some Melanie Phillips. That's all it was. An opinion piece with no evidence or facts behind the opinions. You need to do better than that. So keep trying.

Secondly... even if there is truth to this inquiry, strangely enough, your video did not indicate the Palestinians war crimes, only the Israelis. Why do you think that is?

No one said the video has documented everything. What it did was give numbers about the attack on Gaza. You want to go into depth of the attack on Gaza, then read the report, which covers Hamas' war crimes, yet that's not good enough for you either. Can you point to specifics in the Goldstone report that you do not agree with?

Thirdly, keep in mind that the group wasn't even initially mandated to investigate Palestinian aggression.

Percisely why Goldstone would not do the investigation unless Hamas was also investigated.

Lastly, the 'information' used is rather suspect. For example:

- The report does not include claims of the user of human shields, but any civilians that were approached had Hamas soldiers watching them (can you say "indimidation"?)

That's not true. You either haven't read the report and its methodology and are retyping a nerrative that isn't true or you're making things up.

- Many groups testifying in front of the group had long histories of making anti-Israeli statements (many of which had since proven to be false.)

What? Where do you come up with these things?

Well, lets see:

- When Israel was first formed, they were attacked, multiple times... The U.N. did not defend them. They had to defend themselves

UN was established 3 years before Israel came to be. Besides the resolutions like Resolution 54, what else could they have done?

- When Israel went into Lebannon last time, the U.N. repeatedly allowed themselves to be attacked and used as human shields by Hezbollah (see: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jul/30/20060730-093558-9976r/)

Silly. No one allows themselves to be attacked. If you want to be taken seriously, stop making comments like that.

So, why exactly should any Israeli assume that the "rest of the world" will come to its defense if they are subject to attack?

Israel is no longer the victim. This is all about real estate. If you look at what the Palestinian land size was in 1948, then in 1967 and what it is now, and you were an honest person, you would know who the aggressor is and who the victim is.

Ummm... this shows a rather idiotic sense of moral equivalence.

Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. It is behind suicide bombings against civilian targets, kidnappings (and summary executions)

Israel also behind targeting civilians, kidnappings and assassinations. The difference here is that I'm not defending Hezbollah, but you are defending Israel.

Well, mainly the Nuclear Non-poliferation treaty. Any party signing on to the treaty agrees not to pursue nuclear arms, and in exchange they get assistance in the peaceful use of nuclear power.

Thing is, Iran signed the treaty, therefore they should be subject to its terms. Israel, on the other hand, never signed, so they are not subject to its terms.

So we've gone from moral equivalence to a 'signed' treaty. So if Iran pulls out of the NPT, you would be okay with Iran having nuclear weapons?

I could also point out that Israel is a democratic country, controlled by the rule of law.

When it comes to domestic law and as long as the judgement is about Jews in Israel, Israel is decent democratic nation, however, when it comes to international law, they continue to violate numerous laws.

Iran is a brutal dictatorship, run by Islamic extremists, who's leaders have made comments regarding a desire to "wipe Israel of the map".

No one here is defending Iran's government.

Now, given those 2, ahem, political situations, which country do you think is more likely to actually use nuclear weapons?

Looking at Israel's repeated violations of international law and their aggressive military approach both now and in the past, and taking into consideration Iran's history of wars, without hesitation, I would bet on Israel to use nuclear weapons.

[Oleg Bach]

When you have an ancient culture that prides in it's own history that consists of murder - deception and invasion...and a supposed religious tradtion that all those not of the tribe or extended tribe are sub-human - THEN at the same time this group cry with a loud and relentless voice that they are persecuted ...well - it's not something the world should take seriously - Palistians live in a prison camp ...just as our natives who are intergenerational prisoners of war...have survival issues...some take well and thrive in captivity and others die in what is a zoo for human beings - Frankly unless the old guard dies out ..there is no hope - but hopefully....there will be rebels who will say _ "I don't have to destroy others to survive" - It is consumerism or better yet a sublime cannibalism - welcome to the brave new world of barbarity _ It is heart breaking once you realize we have de-evolved.

[DogOnPorch]

Israel is no longer the victim. This is all about real estate. If you look at what the Palestinian land size was in 1948, then in 1967 and what it is now, and you were an honest person, you would know who the aggressor is and who the victim is.

They fought alongside the Syrian/Jordanian/Egyptian armies...they lost. Too bad...so sad. Danzig used to be a German city. Oh...and the Arab armies were the aggressors in 1948, 1967 and 1973.

[Topaz]

By taking financial and military help for the US, Israel has set itself up as a target in the Middle-East from other countries there. As far as Harper, well its hard to be against a nation when the Jewish society has given many awards to you!! I think at times Israel is as guilty about the attacks on other countries as the countries are, that attack them. In other words , I don't think Israel should have special treatment and should be held accountable when they do wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

By taking financial and military help for the US, Israel has set itself up as a target in the Middle-East from other countries there.

But not Egypt or Jordan, right?

As far as Harper, well its hard to be against a nation when the Jewish society has given many awards to you!!

Or be for a "nation" that gives suicide bombers and Katyusha rockets instead.

I think at times Israel is as guilty about the attacks on other countries as the countries are, that attack them. In other words , I don't think Israel should have special treatment and should be held accountable when they do wrong.

Israel bombs its hostile neighhbors.....Canada bombs somebody else's neighbors.

[DogOnPorch]

But not Egypt or Jordan, right?

Of course not. Plus the free weapons doled out by the former Soviet Union to the Arabs doesn't hit the radar screens either. T'was the 'Weapons Fairy' we've heard so much about...

Now the Russians actually want MONEY for their weapons...the nerve!

[naomiglover]

Or be for a "nation" that gives suicide bombers and Katyusha rockets instead.

There doesn't have to be an "Or".

Why not condemn any act that is wrong? There is nothing wrong with condemning both Hamas' and Israel's violations of international law.

[bush_cheney2004]

There doesn't have to be an "Or".

You set up the silly choice...not me.

Why not condemn any act that is wrong? There is nothing wrong with condemning both Hamas' and Israel's violations of international law.

Because it rings hollow when "we" are doing the same thing. Have you hugged a PalestIndian today?

Edited February 9, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[ToadBrother]

A suicide attack is not "an act of war."

If it were directed by the government of the Palestinian Authority, then yes it would be (in particular if Israel recognized the PA as the government of a sovereign state).

Edited February 9, 2010 by ToadBrother

[segnosaur]

According to you, who has not read the report. If you had, you would know that it's more than a testimony of 1 person that is taken into account.

And I've already pointed out that while there was the testimony from multiple groups, many of those groups have repeatedly illustrated an anti-Israeli bias, and have often made allegations that were later found to be incorrect. Multiple testimonies from individuals who all have similar flaws is not really that convincing.

Richard Goldstone's methodology of investigation has been good enough for him to be selected as the chief prosecutor for international criminal court for the former yugoslavia and rwanda.

You know, its kind of ironic that you would praise him for being involved in Yugoslavia and Rwanda issues, considering in those situations the UN failed to act. Similarly, when UN personnel were being used as human shields by Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon and failed to act.

The fact is, the U.N. has repeatedly shown itself to be inept, often siding with despots and dictatorships around the world. The U.N. and its support of the Palestinians in this case is just another example of that.

Judge Goldsone was also a member of the International Panel of the Commission of Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina

All I can say to that is... Who cares?

Really... please show me where its written that an individual, once they do something 'right', will always continue to act in a correct manner.

Frankly, the world is filled with people who have made great contributions at one point in their life, only to later go on and make incredibly huge blunders.

The investigation was done professionally. Your attempt to discredit Goldsone and his investigation is a failure.

No, the attempts have been successful. Its just that you're so incredibly biased in the issue that you would automatically grasp at anything which supports your view of the world.

[segnosaur]

By taking financial and military help for the US, Israel has set itself up as a target in the Middle-East from other countries there.

Ummm... really? Do you honestly think that, if Israel stopped taking U.S. aid, that the rest of the middle east would jump right in and make peace?

(I could point out that Israel was attacked pretty much from the start, long before people started believing Israel was some 'puppet' of the U.S.)

Frankly, I think most middle east governments don't really care about Israel or Palestine, but Israel serves as a convenient 'whipping boy' that governments in the region can use to distract people from their own brutal oppression. And that would go on regardless of whether the U.S. supported Israel or not.

As far as Harper, well its hard to be against a nation when the Jewish society has given many awards to you!!

Frankly, I think it should also be hard to be against a country that actually is a functioning democracy, when they are surrounded by oppressive theocracies and other dictatorial regeimes.

I think at times Israel is as guilty about the attacks on other countries as the countries are, that attack them.

Please point out which of the Arab-Israeli wars that Israel was guilty of starting. (The only one which Israel 'started' was the 6 day war, but given the fact that Egypt, Jordan and Syria were all massing their forces, had partially blockaded Israel, and given the fact that leaders from at least some countries had expressed a desire to "destroy" Israel, Israeli actions are usually viewed as pre-emptive.)

In other words , I don't think Israel should have special treatment and should be held accountable when they do wrong.

Kind of ironic that you would suggest that Israel shouldn't have "special treatment". The fact is, there are brutal dictatorships and human rights abuses all over the world. The Palestinians themselves are subject to more abuse from their own leaders (lets face it, Hamas is just as willing to kill Palestinians as it is to kill Israelis) than they are from Israel. Your average Palestinian living within Israel itself probably has more rights than your average Iranian or Saudi Arabian citizen.

With all the tragedy in the world, the U.N. still has the time to single out Israel, with repeated attempts to pass anti-Israeli resolutions, and running conferences that were widely seen as excuses for anti-semitism.

Your right, Israel shouldn't receive "special treatment"... That should also mean that it shouldn't be singled out for special condemnation.

[DogOnPorch]

Please point out which of the Arab-Israeli wars that Israel was guilty of starting. (The only one which Israel 'started' was the 6 day war, but given the fact that Egypt, Jordan and Syria were all massing their forces, had partially blockaded Israel, and given the fact that leaders from at least some countries had expressed a desire to "destroy" Israel, Israeli actions are usually viewed as pre-emptive.)

"There is no longer a way out of our present situation except by forging a road toward our objective, violently and by force, over a sea of blood and under a horizon blazing with fire."

---Gamal Abdel Nasser: June 1967

"People do not want words - they want the sound of battle - the battle of destiny."

---Gamal Abdel Nasser: June 1967

[naomiglover]

And I've already pointed out that while there was the testimony from multiple groups, many of those groups have repeatedly illustrated an anti-Israeli bias, and have often made allegations that were later found to be incorrect. Multiple testimonies from individuals who all have similar flaws is not really that convincing.

Where do you get this information? Anything to back up your claims?

You know, its kind of ironic that you would praise him for being involved in Yugoslavia and Rwanda issues, considering in those situations the UN failed to act. Similarly, when UN personnel were being used as human shields by Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon and failed to act.

It's not ironic that he was involved in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The reason that he was is because he has the experience and the credentials.

The fact is, the U.N. has repeatedly shown itself to be inept, often siding with despots and dictatorships around the world. The U.N. and its support of the Palestinians in this case is just another example of that.

The U.N. is far from perfect and it has faults, however, you have yet to share any problems with the Goldstone report. All you've managed to do is to say that the 'groups who gave testimony are biased' without anything to back-up your comments.

All I can say to that is... Who cares?

Who cares? I do and many other Jews do. So do people who care about justice. What is wrong with you?

Really... please show me where its written that an individual, once they do something 'right', will always continue to act in a correct manner.

Frankly, the world is filled with people who have made great contributions at one point in their life, only to later go on and make incredibly huge blunders.

No, the attempts have been successful. Its just that you're so incredibly biased in the issue that you would automatically grasp at anything which supports your view of the world.

You're just babbling now. Trying to mask your failure to back-up your claims and your inability to have an honest discussion with a bunch of rubbish.

Tell me when you're ready to have a real discussion, instead of wasting time.

[Guest American Woman]

Ummm... really? Do you honestly think that, if Israel stopped taking U.S. aid, that the rest of the middle east would jump right in and make peace?

(I could point out that Israel was attacked pretty much from the start, long before people started believing Israel was some 'puppet' of the U.S.)

This is true. And in reality, there have been threats made against the U.S. because of the support given Israel. So it's really the opposite of Israel being threatened because of our support; jihads have been issued against us because we support Israel.

[DogOnPorch]

naiomiglover: The U.N. is far from perfect and it has faults, however, you have yet to share any problems with the Goldstone report. All you've managed to do is to say that the 'groups who gave testimony are biased' without anything to back-up your comments.

When we do such a thing, Greg and Charles take the post down as it is too violent for Mapleleaf.

For those with the stomach, there's Truthtube...a very, very biased web-site which has only one value as far as I can see. They allow all those videos that Youtube (et al) doesn't allow. Mainly, videos filmed by the terrorists themselves.

But beware, the violence some of these groups do is downright sickening. A simple search in Google should do...