@ bud/naomi/dub

[Bonam]

Yeah so the gospel you've been using to condemn Israel in almost every thread for the past year and a half... the conclusions of the Goldstone report, have now been retracted by the report's own author:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/04/02/israel.goldstone.report/index.html

Excerpts:

"If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document," wrote Richard Goldstone, a former South African jurist, in a Washington Post op-ed column Friday.

"Everything we said has proven to be true," said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. "Israel did not intentionally harm civilians, its institutions and investigative bodies are worthy, while the Hamas intentionally fired upon innocent civilians and did not examine anything. The fact that Goldstone backtracked must lead to the shelving of this report once and for all."

Israeli investigations found cases involving individual soldiers, but the intentional targeting of civilians by Israel was not a "matter of policy," Goldstone now writes.

In his column, Goldstone cites a subsequent report by a U.N. committee of independent experts, which found Israel investigated more than 400 allegations of misconduct while Hamas has "not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel."

The judge wrote of military commanders "making difficult battlefield decisions" and that he is confident Israel is appropriately investigating the deaths of 29 members of one family. "The shelling of the home was apparently the consequence of an Israeli commander's erroneous interpretation of a drone image, and an Israeli officer is under investigation for having ordered the attack.

Goldstone is now saying pretty much exactly what we told you on these forums in all those threads.

[Jack Weber]

Don't expect a mia culpa...

That He/She/It has pretty much proven themself (selves) to barely have a toe holds grip on reality...

They are same person(s) who tried to tell me that Hamas,Islamic Jihad,and,Hezbollah were not being assisted by both Iran and Syria...

Edited April 3, 2011 by Jack Weber

[Guest American Woman]

Yeah so the gospel you've been using to condemn Israel in almost every thread for the past year and a half... the conclusions of the Goldstone report, have now been retracted by the report's own author:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/04/02/israel.goldstone.report/index.html

[...]

Goldstone is now saying pretty much exactly what we told you on these forums in all those threads.

Wow. This is big. I wonder if the UN will now retract it? Moshe Ya'alon urges UN to retract Goldstone report

Also to bud/namoi/dub et al, ie: those who have thrown the U.S. not endorsing it at me, guess this vindicates the U.S., and the rest of the nations that didn't endorse it, too.

[Oleg Bach]

Yah they had better apologize for infering that Israel does not give a shit if it kills a few innocent civilians on occassion...as far as the Jerusalem Post...wasn't that one of Conrad Black's concerns at one time? Imagine - Conrad having editorial authority in Israel? I am sure that all that is said is true - Conrad never lied - nor have his henchmen.

[bud]

even though i haven't had a chance to read the article he's written i applaud goldstone for showing that he is about honesty and justice. i respected goldstone for what he's done in the past and i have even more respect for him now for his response to the new information that has come out. it's too bad that israel refused to cooperate with the original mission that goldstone set out to do.

ps - naomi is a different person but i don't mind if you want to continue thinking we're the same people.

edit: here it is.

i'll read it later.

Edited April 4, 2011 by bud

[Guest American Woman]

even though i haven't had a chance to read the article he's written i applaud goldstone for showing that he is about honesty and justice. i respected goldstone for what he's done in the past and i have even more respect for him now for his response to the new information that has come out. it's too bad that israel refused to cooperate with the original mission that goldstone set out to do.

His original report wasn't wrong based on what Israel would or wouldn't say, but of course you'd find a way to blame Israel, even as Goldstone is admitting he was wrong about them.

[Jack Weber]

even though i haven't had a chance to read the article he's written i applaud goldstone for showing that he is about honesty and justice. i respected goldstone for what he's done in the past and i have even more respect for him now for his response to the new information that has come out. it's too bad that israel refused to cooperate with the original mission that goldstone set out to do.

ps - naomi is a different person but i don't mind if you want to continue thinking we're the same people.

edit: here it is.

i'll read it later.

We're beyond crow...

How does that buzzard meat taste??

[Bob]

Israel was right not to cooperate with the UNHRC "fact-finding mission", knowing full well exactly what the UNHRC is all about (anti-Zionism). Moreover, the individuals charged with managing the report have well-established records of anti-Israel perspectives. Hila Jilani, as self-proclaimed "human rights defener" and Desmond Travers, the token alleged military expert. Hila Jilani makes no secret of her anti-Israel perspective, and has made statements and delivered lectures that reveal her massive ignorance of Israeli history and the security challenges Israel deals with. Beyond that, she is completely oblivious to the history of Israel's conflict with the Arabs that has brought us to where we are today. The same is true for Desmond Travers, who has a history of misrepresenting Israel security issues prior to his involvement with the Goldstone report. Goldstone himself should've known better. How a Jewish man of prominence who considers himself a man of justice could willingly become a part of the anti-Israel apparatus that is the UNHRC is beyond me. Goldstone is beyond redemption and will always be outcast from the Jewish community for the damage he did through his irresponsibility.

The most important thing for many people to realize is just how offensive it is to Israel and the Jewish people to suggest that there is some sort of policy where Israel specifically targets civilians. Israel has suffered thousands of injuries and casualties since 1948 in its efforts to reduce civilian casualties. Don't forget that there is a draft in Israel, and it's pretty much been there since day one. That doesn't mean that everyone goes to the army, as there are many avenues through which someone can have an exception made or not be eligible to serve. It does mean, however, that a much higher proportion of Israelis know much more about Israel's military conduct that most people in most other countries know about their own militaries. And we know that Israel goes to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. Israeli know this because they've served, because they've been there, or, simply because we talk to each other. It is particularly egregious that all the Israel soldiers who have served, are serving, and will serve take great risk upon themselves (I would argue too much risk) to reduce civilian casualties, doing door-to-door searches and exposing themselves to a waiting and treacherous enemy rather than simply destroying buildings. The irony of course being that our enemies operate out of a completely different playbook. Goldstone became complicit with our enemies by attempting to draw moral equivalence between the moral conduct of the IDF and the treachery of Hamas and the other terrorist Palestinian terrorist organizations. Unfortunately the damage has been done, as many ignorant people blindly trust the UN and its affiliates without being aware of just how politicized these organizations are in an anti-Israel manner, where countries like Libya and Iran are given equality to the USA and Canada. What needs to be done is a delegitimization of the UN given its current systemic problems. Average persons need to be made aware of how absurd the UN and its affiliates are, and how empty its "resolutions" are.

[Bob]

even though i haven't had a chance to read the article he's written i applaud goldstone for showing that he is about honesty and justice. i respected goldstone for what he's done in the past and i have even more respect for him now for his response to the new information that has come out. it's too bad that israel refused to cooperate with the original mission that goldstone set out to do.

ps - naomi is a different person but i don't mind if you want to continue thinking we're the same people.

edit: here it is.

i'll read it later.

Why are you pretending to even care about the Goldstone Report? You were probably screaming "war crimes!" accusations against Israel long before you ever heard his name, and you will continue to do so. The reality of Israel never intentionally targeting civilians as a matter of policy has always been there, regardless of what reports and "fact-finding missions" have to say about it. The Goldstone Report simply gave you a talking point that you believe reinforced your dishonest and ignorant anti-Israel positions. Don't worry, there are plenty of "reports" out there you can use as false support for your lies.

For the fiscal conservatives in here, bear in mind that many people participated in the production of this report, and were all paid out of the UN's purse "international public servants", as it were... As if there wasn't any real work to be done with that money.

[bud]

your smug reaction is unwarranted. i don't even think you know what you guys are celebrating.

i had a chance to read goldstone's article. i wonder how many of you have actually read it.

first of all, i do blame israel and hamas for not cooperating with the mission when it first started. i am glad that israel made an effort to follow up over 400 of the allegations. this goes to show that israel's core system is still admirable and should be commended. hamas, however, failed to do any follow ups which has driven its credibility even lower.

unlike what many are trying to insinuate, goldstone's article does not suggest that everything in his report was false. from what i've read in his articlein the washington post, goldstone has altered only one of his original findings. he now says that he has concluded that the idf did not intentionally target civilians during attacks in which 1400 palestinians died, of whom half were civilians and 400 were children. rather they were collateral damage, not the intended targets but people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

so really, israel and its unconditional supporters are patting themselves on the back, because the 1400 palestinians killed were not killed intentionally and as a matter of policy, which somehow makes the attack okay in their books. if that's what this has been about, then, yay, go and celebrate.

now imagine if canada or even u.s. had attacked an inferior militant group in a densely populated area and had killed 1000 civilians, including 400 children (intentionally or not). that would certainly not fly in the moral compass of canadians. somehow, the die-hard israeli fans, have made this okay in the hearts and instead of questioning the policies and methods, they try to justify it.

Edited April 4, 2011 by bud

[Bob]

Nobody's happy that civilians were killed. They were killed, though, because of Hamas. The blood of all the victims of Cast Lead is on the hands of Hamas and its subsidiary terrorist-affiliates. All the Palestinians need to do is lay down their arms, renounce violence, recognize Israel as the eternal Jewish homeland, and join in negotiations to find out what sort of progress they can make towards their autonomy and perhaps eventual statehood. Their commitment to "resistance", however, comes with consequences. Israel cannot sit idly while its civilians are being attacked simply because Palestinians civilians may be killed in actions of self-defense.

Lastly, I an highly skeptical of Palestinian declarations of civilian statistics. Moreover, being a child doesn't mean one wasn't a legitimate military target, given that we know children are utilized in the terrorist infrastructure. It's sick, but it's reality. At the end of the day, Cast Lead still didn't achieve its objectives, as Hamas is still fully operational and conducting terrorism. Israel, unfortunately, never hits its enemies hard enough because of deference to anti-Israel political pressures.

[Bob]

It's funny that you're suggesting we didn't read the article, when you just said you didn't have time to read it. It takes about five minutes to read that brief op-ed. The op-ed was also painfully thin and devoid of details. He could have, and should have, written a far more detailed expose of why he changed his mind and gone over the false allegations in the report that bears his name. I guess Goldstone is too busy to actually spend more than an hour on such a matter.

[Black Dog]

Nobody's happy that civilians were killed. They were killed, though, because of Hamas. The blood of all the victims of Cast Lead is on the hands of Hamas and its subsidiary terrorist-affiliates. All the Palestinians need to do is lay down their arms, renounce violence, recognize Israel as the eternal Jewish homeland, and join in negotiations to find out what sort of progress they can make towards their autonomy and perhaps eventual statehood. Their commitment to "resistance", however, comes with consequences. Israel cannot sit idly while its civilians are being attacked simply because Palestinians civilians may be killed in actions of self-defense.

IOW: Submit to their masters and all will be well.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Black Dog

[bush_cheney2004]

....now imagine if canada or even u.s. had attacked an inferior militant group in a densely populated area and had killed 1000 civilians, including 400 children (intentionally or not). that would certainly not fly in the moral compass of canadians. somehow, the die-hard israeli fans, have made this okay in the hearts and instead of questioning the policies and methods, they try to justify it.

Not at all, as both the Americans and Canadians had killed civilians long before this action by Israel (e.g. Iran Air Flight 655, Kosovo War)....including children. Perhaps that "moral compass" needs to go to the shop for a checkup.

[Guest American Woman]

your smug reaction is unwarranted. i don't even think you know what you guys are celebrating.

What we're "celebrating" is Israel being vindicated of the worst allegations: that civilians are intentionally targeted as a matter of policy and that Israel was guilty of war crimes.

i had a chance to read goldstone's article. i wonder how many of you have actually read it.

I would wager we all have.

first of all, i do blame israel and hamas for not cooperating with the mission when it first started. i am glad that israel made an effort to follow up over 400 of the allegations. this goes to show that israel's core system is still admirable and should be commended. hamas, however, failed to do any follow ups which has driven its credibility even lower.

Of course you blame Israel. So did Goldstone. But lack of Israeli cooperation, lack of information, didn't stop him from erroneously drawing conclusions. Now he's blaming Israel for what he did, which amounts to condemning Israel without having had access to all of the facts.

unlike what many are trying to insinuate, goldstone's article does not suggest that everything in his report was false. from what i've read in his articlein the washington post, goldstone has altered only one of his original findings. he now says that he has concluded that the idf did not intentionally target civilians during attacks in which 1400 palestinians died, of whom half were civilians and 400 were children. rather they were collateral damage, not the intended targets but people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

He retracted the most serious allegations: intentional targeting of civilians and allegations of war crimes. You know. The stuff you went on and on about based on the Goldstone Report. Goldstone himself said "the Goldstone Report would have been a different document" if he had known then what he knows now. Perhaps he should have waited until he had all the information before drawing his damning conclusions.

so really, israel and its unconditional supporters are patting themselves on the back, because the 1400 palestinians killed were not killed intentionally and as a matter of policy, which somehow makes the attack okay in their books. if that's what this has been about, then, yay, go and celebrate.

There's a lot that goes whisssh right over your head, eh? What we're "celebrating" is the fact that the allegations were wrong. Simple as that. Allegations that you threw at us over and over. Way to dismiss the importance of them now that they were found false.

now imagine if canada or even u.s. had attacked an inferior militant group in a densely populated area and had killed 1000 civilians, including 400 children (intentionally or not). that would certainly not fly in the moral compass of canadians. somehow, the die-hard israeli fans, have made this okay in the hearts and instead of questioning the policies and methods, they try to justify it.

"The moral compass of Canadians??" Yeah, if we could only all live up to the moral compass of Canadians, eh? In case it's escaped you, some of the "die hard Israel fans" ARE Canadians.

What's happening here is that you're turning this into something it's not. Yet again.

What the "die-hard Israeli fans" are doing is exactly what's the correct thing to do: "celebrating" that Goldstone admitted that he was wrong. Simple as that. But of course in your effort to downplay and mostly ignore that, you have to try to turn it around into "die-hard Israeli fans" being the bad guy. And once again you've failed miserably.

But do keep trying! You get an A for effort.

Edited April 4, 2011 by American Woman

[M.Dancer]

now imagine if canada or even u.s. had attacked an inferior militant group in a densely populated area and had killed 1000 civilians, including 400 children (intentionally or not). that would certainly not fly in the moral compass of canadians. somehow, the die-hard israeli fans, have made this okay in the hearts and instead of questioning the policies and methods, they try to justify it.

If the group was firing rockets at me...I would whole heartedly endorse military action and the ensuing carnage....now do I have to imagine this hypothetical group are as idiotic as Hamas and would continue with their terrorism? If so I would endorse a second, third and fourth attack....fifth, six and seventh too...

[Bob]

IOW: Submit to their masters and all will be well.

You think we're the'yre masters? They have a large degree of autonomy, as it is. We don't want to be their master. Every inch of involvement we have with managing the Palestinians is an inch we don't have managing ourselves. And it costs money. And it costs lives. And it costs energy. Unfortunately, it's necessary given the threats we face from these people. They need to so "submit" to our basic national rights.

Since you did me the courtesy of paraphrasing my comments, albeit dishonestly and inaccurately and stupidly, allow me to return the favour. Although I will rephrase your statements properly:

IOW: Palestinians should continue their "struggle" and "resistance" against the Zionists. Since their ridiculous demands are oh-so-realistic.

[Bonam]

unlike what many are trying to insinuate, goldstone's article does not suggest that everything in his report was false. from what i've read in his articlein the washington post, goldstone has altered only one of his original findings. he now says that he has concluded that the idf did not intentionally target civilians during attacks in which 1400 palestinians died, of whom half were civilians and 400 were children. rather they were collateral damage, not the intended targets but people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Well duh. That was always the most damning accusation in the report. Everything else is par for the course in a military operation. Unintentional collateral damage, however unfortunate it may be, was what I and others always claimed was the case in these civilian deaths during the operation. You insisted, often with reference to Goldstone's report, that the killing of civilians was intentional and targeted, as a means of terror, collective punishment, or other such nonsense. Now, it is plain that that was not the case.

[Bob]

The sad truth is that Goldstone's recent op-ed doesn't really matter. Even a formal redaction of the fraudulent report from the UNHRC wouldn't mean much. It took the UN fifteen years to overturn the "Zionism is racism" resolution infamously passed in 1975. And so what? The same people who advanced that hatred still believe it, as do many others. The sad truth is that the UN and its subsidiaries, in the words of the wise Irwin Cotler, is a vehicle through which anti-Zionist propaganda and rhetoric is "laundered". Hatred against Israel and Jewish national rights is given a level of legitimacy through the UN and its subsidiaries. It's sad, and it's sick, but it's true. And Obama's a big fan of the UN.

[Black Dog]

You think we're the'yre masters? They have a large degree of autonomy, as it is. We don't want to be their master. Every inch of involvement we have with managing the Palestinians is an inch we don't have managing ourselves. And it costs money. And it costs lives. And it costs energy. Unfortunately, it's necessary given the threats we face from these people. They need to so "submit" to our basic national rights.

Since you did me the courtesy of paraphrasing my comments, albeit dishonestly and inaccurately and stupidly, allow me to return the favour. Although I will rephrase your statements properly:

IOW: Palestinians should continue their "struggle" and "resistance" against the Zionists. Since their ridiculous demands are oh-so-realistic.

The choice as you put it makes continued resistance an inevitability since it demands complete surrender and total concession as a precondition to negotiation. It doesn't sound like you're that interested in any real accord.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Black Dog

[Oleg Bach]

The choice as you put it makes continued resistance an inevitability since it demands complete surrender and total concession as a precondition to negotiation. It doesn't sound like you're that interested in any real accord.

Confining a certain group that is as large as the greater GTA...is an expensive containment...keeping the Palistinians under control gets as expensive as keeping the un-ruley and non-compliant wefare receipents oppressed. There seems to be som sort of satisfaction in keeping persons you might consider unsavory under your control and dominace. The greatest insult that you can put on a person is control...harsh oppresive control! We in the west use a certain grace and finese in the art of dominance - the Israel dominace over the Palistinians lacks sophistication. They are just not as clever as the gentiles - dispite what myth dictates.

[Bob]

The choice as you put it makes continued resistance an inevitability since it demands complete surrender and total concession as a precondition to negotiation. It doesn't sound like you're that interested in any real accord.

"Complete surrender"? What are you talking about? They need to get into negotiations and stop the violence. The problem is, they cling to demands that cannot be delivered, make excuses not to negotiate, and continue terrorism. Therefore, the status quo resumes. And you obviously think that's a good idea. It's easy for people like you, completely disconnected from the circumstances (and largely ignorant about relevant history and context), to cheer the Arabs on in forums like this. It's also pathetic.

As far as my interest in an accord, of course I want a resolution to this conflict. Unlike you, I actually care about this situation. What I am not interested in, however, is an accord that is unacceptable. People like yourself spin this situation into the following story - "Israel won't accept Arab demands, therefore Israel doesn't want peace." Or, as you just recently put it, "Renouncing violence and sitting down to have negotiations (the Palestinian Authority refuses to negotiate unless "settlements are frozen") is the same as 'surrender', therefore Palestinians should continue doing what they are doing."

Nice perspective you have there!

[Jonsa]

"Complete surrender"? What are you talking about? They need to get into negotiations and stop the violence. The problem is, they cling to demands that cannot be delivered, make excuses not to negotiate, and continue terrorism. Therefore, the status quo resumes. And you obviously think that's a good idea. It's easy for people like you, completely disconnected from the circumstances (and largely ignorant about relevant history and context), to cheer the Arabs on in forums like this. It's also pathetic.

As far as my interest in an accord, of course I want a resolution to this conflict. Unlike you, I actually care about this situation. What I am not interested in, however, is an accord that is unacceptable. People like yourself spin this situation into the following story - "Israel won't accept Arab demands, therefore Israel doesn't want peace." Or, as you just recently put it, "Renouncing violence and sitting down to have negotiations (the Palestinian Authority refuses to negotiate unless "settlements are frozen") is the same as 'surrender', therefore Palestinians should continue doing what they are doing."

Nice perspective you have there!

So if you were in charge what kind a settlement would you negotiate?

would you withdraw from the minor settlements and the jordan valley?

would you pay compensation in lieu of right of return to Israel proper?

would you "share" jerusalem?

would you allow free passage between WB to Gaza?

would you allow sovereign rights to the nation of Palestine?

In your world, what would a peaceful, meaningful, and sustainable agreement look like?

[Black Dog]

"Complete surrender"? What are you talking about? They need to get into negotiations and stop the violence. The problem is, they cling to demands that cannot be delivered, make excuses not to negotiate, and continue terrorism. Therefore, the status quo resumes. And you obviously think that's a good idea. It's easy for people like you, completely disconnected from the circumstances (and largely ignorant about relevant history and context), to cheer the Arabs on in forums like this. It's also pathetic.

I'm quite aware of the history, including past negotiations and Israel's intransigence. But to you, with your lack of distance and objectivity, it's all a one-way street.

As far as my interest in an accord, of course I want a resolution to this conflict. Unlike you, I actually care about this situation. What I am not interested in, however, is an accord that is unacceptable. People like yourself spin this situation into the following story - "Israel won't accept Arab demands, therefore Israel doesn't want peace." Or, as you just recently put it, "Renouncing violence and sitting down to have negotiations (the Palestinian Authority refuses to negotiate unless "settlements are frozen") is the same as 'surrender', therefore Palestinians should continue doing what they are doing."

Nice perspective you have there!

Link for that quote, please.

As for your ideal accord, I think we know what that looks like: Israel keeps everything it has and more. The Arabs (since there's no such thing as a Palestinian to you) can go somewhere else.

[bud]

Well duh. That was always the most damning accusation in the report.

what about the demolition and destruction of civilian buildings? what about the white phosphorus used by the idf? what about the use of heavy artillery in a densely populated area? what will become of the individuals who went against israel's policy against killing civilians (ex: white flag waving civilians)? what about the school that was hit? what about the UN compound that was hit which israel was fully aware of? what about all the high tech weapons with amazing accuracy that israel boasts about, which failed to be anything but accurate?

this is typical israeli and their useful idiots' propaganda. you can't void a whole report because goldstone has retracted one issue after new evidence. evidence that could not be used due to the lack of israeli cooperation in the investigation.