Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, October 18, 2009

"Honor killing" in Jordan

A Jordanian man was charged on Sunday with premeditated murder after allegedly stabbing to death his 22-year-old daughter because she became pregnant outside wedlock, police said.
“The father and his brother took the girl on Saturday to a doctor because she suffered stomach pains, and everybody was surprised to learn that she was six months pregnant,” a police spokesman told AFP. “On their way home, the father stabbed the girl with a sword 25 times in her stomach, killing her immediately as well as her unborn baby boy.” The source said the suspect has confessed to the crime following the murder, which took place in the Jordan Valley.
“His brother was also charged with premeditated murder, while the victim’s boyfriend is being held in custody for his own protection,” he added.

I guess the first stabbing wasn't "honorable" enough; he had to add 24 more.

Ma'an reports on a JMCC poll that shows contradictory results from the last one I looked at from AWRAD.

According to this poll, Mahmoud Abbas' popularity has gone down a lot as a result of his Goldstone fiasco; Haniyeh's held steady:

The survey released on Sunday by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre (JMCC) indicates that if an election were held today, Abbas would receive just 16.8 percent of the vote, and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh 16 percent. A similar percentage said they would vote for Fatah leader Marwan Barghouthi, who is currently in prison in Israel.

Public confidence in Abbas dropped to 12.1% from 17.8% in another JMCC poll in June. Confidence in Haniyeh held steady at 14.2%.

JMCC also reports that while Abbas’ popularity took a hit, “it seems that the approach of Fatah Leadership to distance itself from the PNA with regards to the Goldstone report helped Fatah in keeping its popularity ahead and more than Hamas’ popularity among the Palestinian public.”

The current poll shows that a 34.6% of the public still trusts Fatah compared with a 17.9% who said they trust Hamas, followed by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) which received 3.7%, while Islamic Jihad received 2.3%.

(Google reports that the JMCC site is filled with malware, so I could not check the poll results directly; perhaps the wording of the questions is responsible for the diverse results.)

Egyptians upset over translations of poetry to Hebrew

Al Quds has a story about a new controversy in Egypt.

An Israeli publishing house is attempting to translate the works of famed Egyptian poet Iman Mersal, specifically her 2006 work Jughrafiya Badila (Alternative Geography). Egyptian intellectuals and authors are upset, because this implies some sort of normalization with Israel, which is of course a terrible thing for a country that signed a peace agreement with Israel thirty years ago.

Early reports that there was a direct agreement between her Egyptian publisher and an Israeli publisher seem to have been proven wrong.

As the article states, there seems to be a solution:

However, the National Center for Translation of the Egyptian Ministry of Culture found a solution, as stated by the President and university professor critic Gaber Asfour, who explained that he "will not be dealing with any Israeli publisher, because this is a kind of normalization, but we will seek the approval of publishers in English or French in countries other than Israel to get the right translation of it."

Interestingly, the Imad Mersal webpage on ArabWorldBooks.com mentions translations of some of her individual poems into Hebrew.

War is peace, day is night, Syria supports "human rights"

From Syria's news agency SANA:

Syria welcomes the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council's adoption of the Fact-Finding Mission's report on the war on Gaza, a Syrian Foreign Ministry official source said Sunday.

"Hailing the stances of the countries which voted in favor of the resolution, Syria expresses regret over stances of some countries which voted against it and the abstention of other countries which have long claimed that they respect and care for human rights," the source added.

The source said that the double standards of these countries regarding several issues, on top of them the human rights, denies them credibility and objectivity, which should exist when dealing with what they raise regarding the human rights issues.

Meanwhile, Syria imprisoned a blogger for his views:

Consider the case of Kareem Arabji, a 31 year old business consultant who helps manage the online youth forum www.akhawia.net. Kareem supervised Al Mabar Al Hur, a section within akhawia.net dedicated to free ideas, and wrote numerous articles under a pseudonym criticizing corruption and dictatorship in Syria. On June 7, 2007 Arabji was arrested by Syrian security forces and held incommunicado at the Palestine Branch of Military Intelligence in Damascus. He was charged with, "broadcasting false or exaggerated news which would affect the morale of the country.”

Just what outrageous, unforgivable words did Kareem utter that so threatened the Syrian nation? "The press is a very important mechanism to struggle against the corruption, there should not be any restrictions or obstacles to it," he wrote in Akhawia. Or perhaps it was his skepticism of the Syria-Hamas alliance: "Since I was a kid in school we were always taught that the Muslim Brotherhood is a criminal gang, and I agree. And now we proudly consider Hamas, which is a Muslim Brotherhood proxy, as an ally!!!?"

On September 13, 2009, Arabji was sentenced by a Syrian court to three years in prison.

Despite a sustained public relations campaign in the West, Syria remains one of the most repressive regimes in the Middle East. Those who voice dissent are regularly intimidated, arrested, tortured and imprisoned. In September 2009 the Jordanian Business Magazine reported that Syria blocks at least "160 web sites, including Facebook, Amazon, YouTube, and the popular online-telephone service, Skype." Cyberdissidents such as Arabji face regular harassment from security forces. Ironically, article 38 of the Syrian constitution allows "the right to freely express one's opinions by spoken word, in writing or in any other medium." But this is little more than hollow rhetoric. The same article also states that expression must be in a "manner that safeguards the soundness of the domestic and nationalist structure and strengthens the socialist system." This clause effectively guts any true form of freedom of expression in Syria.

Abbas admits no one really read Goldstone, anyway

In an internal Fatah meeting where Mahmoud Abbas admits he postponed the Goldstone debate, he reveals something interesting:

President Mahmoud Abbas on Sunday defended his decision to postpone debate on South African jurist Richard Goldstone's fact-finding mission on Gaza at the UN Human Rights Council last month.

Defending the PLO's deferment of the report last month, Abbas added, "When the Goldstone report was released, we agreed on it and welcomed it. Arab countries proposed a high-level resolution be submitted to the UN Human Rights Council that protects our rights, and it was opposed by Europe, the US, China, and Russia.

"Then, the US suggested a very low-level resolution which holds us responsible for the war on Gaza. Neither resolution was passed," he said. "It was necessary to find a compromise. We found that it would be better to defer discussion of the report."

The president added that the PA is not a full member of the council, "and we can't submit, or withdraw, or delay a proposal. Everybody was silenced. Then some began accusing us of erring. Who read the report, anyway? Those who were in Geneva didn't read the report, because it needed to be translated."

Abbas added, "Let’s assume we saw the report. Where did we err? Why do we say that? Everybody says we erred. Unfortunately, the fuss about the report started here in Palestine," referring to widespread Palestinian anger at the PA and PLO for what some, including high-ranking Hamas members, termed treasonous. "They said, this is your opportunity to attack them fiercely."

Although he didn't mean to, Abbas admits that the contents of the Goldstone report aren't what matters to Palestinian Arabs. The only important thing is that it can be used as a weapon against Israel, as both the PA and Hamas seized on it...before anyone read it.

Up is down, black is white, Hezbollah supports "human rights"

From M&C:

The Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah condemned Sunday the countries that voted against the UN Human Rights Council's endorsement of the Goldstone report on the Hamas-Israel conflict in the Gaza Strip last December and January.

Hezbollah criticized countries that voted against the decision, specifically the United States, saying that their position clearly shows the 'moral degradation which some countries have reached.'

The party called for all international bodies, human rights associations and judicial institutions to take all proper measures 'to punish Zionist war criminals.'

How Orwellian can the world get?

PalArabs upset that Al Jazeera distorted their national anthem

I am not quite sure exactly what happened, but Al Jazeera ended a report about Hamas with a rendition of the Palestinian Arab "national" anthem that was somehow distorted, causing much gnashing of teeth and claims that it was "perverted."

The lyrics of the anthem are, as one would expect, filled with violence and promises of vengeance:

CHORUS
My country, my country
My country, my land, land of my ancestors
My country, my country
My country, my people, people of perpetuity

With my determination, my fire and the volcano of my revenge
With the longing in my blood for my land and my home
I have climbed the mountains and fought the wars
I have conquered the impossible, and crossed the frontiers
Chorus

With the resolve of the winds and the fire of the guns
And the determination of my nation in the land of struggle
Palestine is my home, Palestine is my fire,
Palestine is my revenge and the land of endurance
Chorus

By the oath under the shade of the flag
By my land and nation, and the fire of pain
I will live as a fida'i*, I will remain a fida'i,
I will end as a fida'i - until my country returns
Chorus

fida'i = one who risks his life voluntarily; one who sacrifices himself; hence the word fedayeen.

Now, who could possibly be the objects of this "revenge"?

I guess that Jews are major characters in more than one "national" anthem!

Open thread - special weekend edition!

Now twice as open!

Enjoy while I try to catch up on my sleep....Shabbat Shalom!

Daily Goldstone 10/16

Testifying on behalf of UN Watch in Geneva at the special session called to condemn Israel, Col. Richard Kemp says

I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan. I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland, Bosnia and Macedonia; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK Government’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes.

More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians.

Mr. President, Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

And I say this again: the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

UN votes to bar Jews from their holiest spot

UPDATE: The resolution passed.

The current UNHRC Special Session is not only about the Goldstone report, but also a wide-ranging condemnation of Israel (alone) that intends to, ironically, bar Jews from the Temple Mount.

Here is part of the draft resolution being considered in this session (A/HRC/S-12/L.1):

The Human Rights Council,

Recalling the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

Affirming the responsibility of the international community to promote human rights and ensure respect for international law,

Emphasizing the particularity of The Occupied East Jerusalem in its rich religious and cultural heritage,

Recalling all relevant United Nations resolutions including Security Council resolutions on Occupied East Jerusalem,

Deeply concerned at the Israeli actions undermining the sanctity and inviolability of religious sites in the Occupied Palestinian Territory including East Jerusalem,

Deeply concerned also at the Israeli policy of closure and severe restrictions, including the permit regime, that continue to be imposed on the movement of Palestinians hindering their free access to their Christian and Muslim holy sites, including Al Aqsa Mosque,

1. Strongly condemns all policies and measures taken by Israel, the occupying power, including those limiting access of Palestinians to their properties and holy sites particularly in Occupied East Jerusalem, on the basis of national origin, religion, sex, age or any other discriminatory ground, which are in grave violation of the Palestinian People's civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights;

2. Condemns further the recent Israeli violations of human rights in Occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the confiscation of lands and properties, the demolishing of houses and private properties, the construction and expansion of settlements, the continuous construction of the separation Wall, changing the demographic and geographic character of East Jerusalem, the restrictions on the freedom of movement of the Palestinian citizens of East Jerusalem, as well as the continuous digging and excavation works in and around Al-Aqsa mosque and its vicinity;

3. Demands Israel, the occupying power, to respect the religious and cultural rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the core International Human Rights instruments, the Hague Conventions, and the Geneva Conventions, and to allow Palestinian citizens and worshippers unhindered access to their properties and religious sites therein;

4. Demands also Israel, the occupying power to immediately cease all digging and excavation works and activities beneath and around Al Aqsa Mosque and its vicinity, and refrain from any acts or operations that may endanger the structure or foundations or change the nature of holy sites both Christian and Islamic in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem;

5. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights, pursuant to resolution S-9/L.1 and in the context of her periodic reports, to monitor, document and report on the state of implementation by Israel, the occupying power, of its Human Rights obligations in and around East Jerusalem.

Unlike the sponsors of this resolution, Israel is the only party that is trying to allow equal access to religious places. The rights of Jews to visit their holy spots would be eliminated should this resolution pass (the goal of paragraph 4.)

Not only that, the resolution itself includes outright lies:

Israel does not dig "in" or "beneath" the Temple Mount (although the Islamic Waqf does, destroying priceless archaeological treasures.)

There has never been a place called "East Jerusalem" as distinct from Jerusalem itself. The only people who ever divided Jerusalem were Arabs in 1948.

The implication that Jews have no right to any part of the Old City and no historical ties to Jerusalem.

The implication that archaeological digging and normal construction anywhere in the Old City is endangering the Al Aqsa mosque. (The Arab press always refers to the incredibly important City of David excavations as being "tens of meters" from Al Aqsa for this reason. Also, this is a veiled way to stop Jews from ever building new synagogues in the Old City.)

Urge world leaders to vote "no" to this sickening and, frankly, anti-semitic resolution by clicking here and personalizing the text to emphasize these lies.

UPDATE 2 : Goldstone says he is "saddened" that Hamas violations of human rights law wasn't mentioned by the UNHRC. Extraordinary naivete or trying to save face? 90% of his report slams Israel, what did he expect?

Urge world leaders to vote "no" on Goldstone report

Here.

Muslim Student Union's interesting defense

From AP:

A University of California campus has asked the U.S. Justice Department to look into allegations that money raised at a Muslim student group event went to a terrorist organization.
UC Irvine spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon said Wednesday that the university forwarded to federal investigators a complaint that funds collected at a May 21 speech by controversial British politician George Galloway went to his group, Viva Palistina.
The Zionist Organization of America, which filed the complaint, said in a statement that the Muslim Student Union, which hosted the event, "illegally used the campus as a base for fundraising for the terrorist group Hamas," and the money raised "may have been for the purpose of providing material support and resources to Hamas."

And what does the MSU respond?

Muslim student leaders say the allegations are false. They acknowledged in a statement that they might have mistakenly breached university policy, which bans such fundraisers. But they argued that the Zionist group filed the complaint as part of a smear campaign to intimidate Muslims and create a hostile environment on campus.

They also said:

ZOA and affiliates’ targeted attacks against the MSU indicate nothing more than a bad faith intent at denying MSU their constitutional First Amendment rights of speech, religion, and association.

Here is the webpage for the fundraiser. On another page, MSU says "everyone has the opportunity to contribute to the cause."

Does Viva Palestina support Hamas? Very much so:

In March, Viva Palestina's leader, British MP George Galloway, defiantly handed a bag of cash directly to a Hamas minister (click here to see the video from the Middle East Media Research Institute):

"I, personally, am about to break the sanctions on the elected government of Palestine. By Allah, we carried a lot of cash here. You thought we were all fat. We are not fat. This is money that we have around our waists ... We are giving you now 100 vehicles and all of the contents. And we make no apology for what I am about to say: We are giving them to the elected government of Palestine; to the Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh."

So the MSU cannot deny that it raised money for Hamas through Viva Palestina, breaking not only university policy but also US law. Yet somehow it still denies the allegations. And its whiny defense is that since the Zionists are bothering them by pointing out their crimes, they should be let off scot free.

The secret Jooish plan to move Al Aqsa

Iran's PressTV has all the gory details:

Extremist Jewish organizations in Israel have demanded that the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock from East Jerusalem Al-Quds be transferred to Mecca.

Gershon Salomon is seeking the removal of the mosques from East Jerusalem Al-Quds, which Israel occupied during the 1967 aggression and illegally annexed it later despite international opposition, Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Wednesday.

The founder and leader of the ultra-Orthodox Temple Mount and Eretz Yisrael Faithful Movement plans to have Israeli engineers transfer the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock to the Muslims' holy city of Mecca, the daily added.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find the original alleged YNet article, in Hebrew or in English. The best I could find was an article in a Turkish website that claimed the same thing.

My section of the Elders was lobbying to have the mosques transferred to Ramallah, but we were voted down by the secret Gulf section who showed that our Saudi allies were amenable to such a move, in order to gain more tourist dollars.

The flatbed trucks and helicopters are being procured now.
(h/t Meryl Yourish via email)

Goldstone and the Abu Askars

I just looked at the testimony of one of the Goldstone witnesses, Mohammed Abu Askar. While the report did mention that he was a Hamas member it stressed that he was not a member of the Qassam Brigades. He testified concerning the Fakhoura school incident.

Here is a prime example of how credulous the commission was of his testimony, concerning his oldest son Khalid who was killed in the attack:

Khalid is a newlywed groom. He got married 15 days before the war, and such grooms, as you know, are, are, happily spend their days as newlyweds, and they do not really have time to go to war or other, or to be wanted. He's also quite young. He was only 18 years old. Again I say that what was being targeted was a child.

The final report mentioned Khalid's newlywed status, in an effort to show that the IDF could not have possibly been targeting him legitimately:

686. It would appear that shortly after the attack the Israeli armed forces received some information that two Abu Askar brothers had been killed. That much is indeed true. However, the use made of that information appears to the Mission to have been knowingly distorted. The brothers were Imad and Khalid, not Imad and Hassan as asserted. One was a 13-year-old boy, the other was a recently married 19-year-old. The certainty and specificity with which the Israeli authorities spoke at the time make it very difficult for them to suggest now that they had simply mixed up the names.

Could Khalid and Imad have been shooting mortars at the time from the street? It is difficult to think that Imad was involved, but it is certainly a possibility.

First of all, Mohammed Abu Askar understated the ages of both his sons: Khalid was 19 (born December 12, 1989), and PCHR indicates that Imad was 14, not 13.

Secondly, the al-Qassam Brigades has an unusually detailed obituary for Khalid, indicating that he was quite well known. It says that he was an avid attendee at mosques from a young age, that were festooned with "jihad slogans." He joined the Muslim Brotherhood in 2004, meaning he was (almost certainly) 14 at the time. More importantly, he wanted to join the Al Qassam Brigades at the same time, but was rejected because he was too young, causing him to throw a temper tantrun and lock himself in his room. He demanded again to join the Qassam Brigades when he entered high school and this time he was accepted.

Khalid was already involved in terror attacks when he was 16, participating in "dozens of ambushes." He attempted "martyrdom operations" against Israelis at least three times, in March, April and June 2008 (one at Kerem Shalom) but they were not successful.

He fought with the Qassam Brigades even after his marriage in December, fighting with Ayman Ahmed ‘Amer al-Kurd who was killed (#758 on PCHR English list.)

Given that history, is it so far-fetched that young Imad would have the same burning desire for martyrdom at an early age that Khalid had, and that he would tag along with his older brother that he idolized as he sought revenge for the destruction of their family house earlier that day? One could argue otherwise, but any fact-finding mission should at least have considered this.

More to the point: The Goldstone Commission accepted their father's testimony without any skepticism, even after Mohammed claimed that he saw over 6 mortars fired (the final report says they were only aware of four.) It mentioned the utterly irrelevant fact that Khalid was a newlywed but ignored the quite relevant fact that he was a well-known al-Qassam Brigades member. It didn't think anything strange about the discrepancy of ages, even as it noted his correct age after hearing Mohammed's testimony that he was 18 (using his young age as to score a propaganda point.) Finally, it believed the father when he claimed that his son wasn't fighting after his wedding.

Goldstone seized on the inconsistent Israeli position between the immediate aftermath of the incident and the later clarifications that the IDF made as proof that the IDF claims were not credible, but the inconsistencies of an admitted Hamas member who raises his sons to be martyrs is not considered at all.

Daily Goldstone 10/15

Some good stuff out there, as the UNHRC convenes to yet again condemn Israel (and ignore Hamas, directly ignoring the parts of the Goldstone report that are inconvenient.)

Warren Goldstein in the Jerusalem Post attacks Goldstone on legal and procedural grounds:

The Mission's findings were based on accepting the allegations of only one party to the conflict. The Mission did not try to cross-examine or challenge the witnesses in any real way. There is a lengthy, fascinating article by Jonathan HaLevi of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs in which he analyses in detail the methodology employed by the Mission in respect of witnesses. He demonstrates that there was a lack of adequate cross-examination of the testimony of the witnesses. Unproven allegations of Hamas officials were accepted as established facts. Even the most basic questions were not asked; when, for example, allegations were made of Israel's bombing civilian installations, witnesses were not asked whether there were Hamas fighters or weaponry in the vicinity, or whether any attacks had been launched from the area.
[Another] procedural injustice which undermines the integrity and credibility of Judge Goldstone and the three other members of the Mission: There simply was not enough time to do the job properly.
Any lawyer with even limited experience knows that there was just not sufficient time for the Mission to have properly considered and prepared its report. One murder trial often takes many months of evidence and argument to enable a judge to make a decision with integrity. To assess even one day of battle in Gaza with the factual complexities involved would have required a substantial period of intensive examination. According to the Mission's Report, the Mission convened for a total of 12 days.

The Forward notes the contradictions that Richard Goldstone states in his interview published last week:

“We had to do the best we could with the material we had,” he said during the interview. “If this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.”

And: “I wouldn’t consider it in any way embarrassing if many of the allegations turn out to be disproved.”

Nothing proven? Allegations? The air of tentativeness that hung over Goldstone’s remarks that day was surely missing from the stark and disturbing legal conclusions in the report, in which Israel was told flat out that it had violated international law by targeting civilians — “the people of Gaza as a whole.”

Nor is there anything tentative about Goldstone’s words in a New York Times opinion article published after the report was released, in which he wrote, “Repeatedly, the Israel Defense Forces failed to adequately distinguish between combatants and civilians, as the laws of war strictly require.”
It is difficult to know what to make of these contradictory statements, except that it’s obvious Goldstone is trying to climb down from the dangerous perch he had built.

Finally, Yaacov Lozowick publishes an email exchange he had with an Amnesty International press officer, and in the thread Yaacov explains in a personal way why the Goldstone report is so fundamentally offensive to Israelis as well as why it is fundamentally flawed:

The findings as they were announced by the members of the mission, before anyone had had a chance to read them, were ridiculous. I apologize for being so blunt, but I see no softer way to say it. Their methodology was, a-priori, never tenable. The moment they allowed themselves to make statements about Israel's intentions, as against Israel's actions, they demonstrated their biases and intellectual shoddiness. The only way to know about Israel's intentions is by researching those intentions: the decision-making process, the plans drawn up, the orders given and so on. These things can't be inferred from the results, they can't be learnt from talking to Palestinians, and they certainly can't be deduced from ruins of homes which could have been knocked down by all sorts of things including Hamas weapons.

If the Israelis won't give you access, you can't say what they were thinking, not unless you have access. Sad, perhaps, unfair, perhaps, but true. Someday, 50 years from now, historians will be able to pore over the documents whether the authorities like it or not, because we're a democracy. At the moment, however, if the Israelis refuse to talk and to cooperate, there's no way to say what they were thinking.

Since Goldstone and his colleagues made clear from the moment of publication that they had found Israel had intentionally targeted the Palestinian population, at that moment their intellectual credibility was destroyed. The Israelis then followed up by reading the report and demolishing its findings, but the rejection didn't have to wait.

I suggest, Neil, that you stop and think about this before simply writing me off. I'm being very serious here, and I'm telling you something very fundamental, and that is that Israel did not have the intention of hurting the civilian population of Gaza, You don't know me, you certainly don't know my sources of information, but I assure you the reading of the Goldstone commission (which I'm slowly reading - it's ghastly) is factually wrong. It's not true. You can wave the report from now till doomsday; you can take comfort in the large numbers of people around you who agree with you; you can talk about international law and human rights to your heart's content - none of this can change the reality, which is that the basic finding of the Goldstone fact finding mission is a blatant lie. Since it was clearly stated up front, it's no wonder that the official Israeli responders, who do know the facts, sharply rejected it.

Remember: Israeli intentions are about Israelis. The Israelis had them, the Israelis decided upon them, the Israelis know what they were. Take a deep breath and count to ten before you tell us what we were thinking - as the Goldstone team so foolishly did.

[W]hen our government takes steps most of us thought it should take, that's us who is responsible. And it's we, too. Not to mention that when you talk of the IDF, that's us and we in the most simple meaning: it was I when I was young, it's my son right now (and in Gaza last January), and I guess it will be my grandsons in the wars we'll still be waging 30 years from now.

Finally, here's a thought for you. Over the years prior to the Gaza campaign, as the Palestinians shot more than 10,000 projectiles at Israeli citizens in the Sderot region,we did our best to look away. It was far from the large cities; doing something about it would have inevitably have included hurting Palestinian civilians because Hamas uses them as shields; doing something would have brought the rage of Amnesty and HRW and the UN and the BBC on our heads... so we dithered. Year in and year out we refrained from action. Eventually, we began to admit to ourselves, this callousness of ours was eating away at who we are, at those Kol Yisrael statements I told you about. It became harder and harder to look ourselves in the eyes, knowing that we were preferring the suffering of the few to the trouble to all.

Eventually, our patience broke, and we acted. WE acted. In OUR name. So far as WE can tell, most of the actions WE took were moral, legal, and justified; if there were minor exceptions, WE'll deal with them. At the moment, close to a year later, it even seems to have worked, and no-one, not Israelis nor Palestinians, are getting killed. And we're whole again.