Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

02/24 Links Pt1: Justice for Jews; The False Charges Against Pollard; Latma Ep3!

From Ian:

Latma: We'll be the Judge, episode 3

The third episode of the Israeli satire program "We'll be the Judge," from the creators of Latma's Tribal Update, Israel Channel 1, February 19, 2015.

Phyllis Chesler: Justice for Jews

Jews are commanded to pursue justice—true justice.
“The wheels of justice turn slowly but grind exceeding fine”—so said Euripides as did Sun Tzu (“The wheels of justice grind slow but grind fine”) and Longfellow (“The mills of God grind slowly but they grind exceedingly small”).
When it comes to justice for Jews, we have often received precious little or been forced to wait for thousands of years for it.
Now, a stunning moment is upon us. After a decade of litigation, and after a seven week civil trial in a Manhattan federal court, a jury has found that the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) are liable for the deaths and injuries of ten American families plus the estates of four victims. These attacks took place on an Israeli street, at a crowded Israeli bus stop, inside an Israeli bus, and in a cafeteria at Hebrew University.
This decision, which of course can be appealed, nevertheless makes it crystal clear that the PLO and the PA are not “moderate,” “peaceful” groups but are, in fact, terrorist entities, just like Hamas and Hezbollah.

The 11 families at the heart of the landmark PA terror trial

The families on Monday were awarded $218.5 million in damages, which may be tripled under the US Anti-Terrorism Act. The PA and PLO have vowed to appeal the verdict, which incriminated them in the terror attacks in and around Jerusalem between 2001-2004.
While none of the families of the victims or survivors were present in the courtroom on Monday as the decision was announced, their attorneys were hailed the “historic” verdict.
The Israel Law Center’s Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, who was involved in the case, said that while the verdict would not bring the defendants’ relatives back, it “is an important measure of justice and closure for them after their long years of tragic suffering and pain.”
Here are the stories of the 11 families behind the landmark trial:

Another "innocent teen"

Ma'an reports on the latest innocent teenage "martyr:"

Israeli forces shot and killed a Palestinian teenager during a predawn arrest raid in Bethlehem's Duheisha refugee camp, locals and medics said.

Jihad Shehada al-Jaafari, 19, was shot under his left shoulder while standing on the roof of his family home near the main road by the camp, witnesses said.

He was hit by a bullet after Israeli forces opened fire in the densely-populated refugee camp following clashes with locals during an arrest raid.

An Israeli soldier was struck by a Molotov cocktail during the clashes and sustained burns.

He was just standing on the roof, minding his own business!

Ma'an doesn't mention that Jaafari was hurling firebombs at the IDF from the roof and was the leader of the riot.

But just in case you think that he was really an innocent, peaceful bystander, here's the photo of him from the Fatah Facebook page (where they say he was 20):

They already made a "martyr poster" for him:

US consulate demanded Jewish official remove yarmulka in Ramallah

From New York City Council member David G. Greenfield:

Great chat w. US Consul General of Jerusalem in America's Ramallah office. Sadly, not highlight of visit there... pic.twitter.com/bEzlDtUbnI
— David G. Greenfield (@NYCGreenfield) February 23, 2015

After chatting w. Consul General, his security detail pulled me aside and insisted that I not wear yarmulke when leaving US Ramallah office
— David G. Greenfield (@NYCGreenfield) February 23, 2015

I asked US Consul security if I was endangering group. They said I wasnt. So I refused to remove yarmulke in Ramallah pic.twitter.com/oU274lWZI8
— David G. Greenfield (@NYCGreenfield) February 23, 2015

You see, the US officials are very, very sensitive to the feelings of Palestinian Arabs. The sight of a Jew wearing a yarmulka is offensive, and we must bend over backwards to avoid offending our friends who burn American flags and blow up American diplomats.

Offending Jews, of course, is acceptable and entirely appropriate. Because they don't burn American flags or murder American diplomats. As friends, Jews should understand how they should avoid anything that might stoke Arab antisemtism (sorry, "anti-Zionism"), like wearing a yarmulka or praying.

Or living.

(h/t Adam Levick)

The PA and Hamas might disagree on everything, and insult each other regularly, but if a Hamas agency declares that Israel is opening up dams without evidence, then by Allah the PA is going to believe them!

The Palestinian foreign ministry condemned on Monday Israel’s act of pumping large amounts of rainwater into the Gaza Strip, which flooded dozens of homes and caused injuries among Palestinians.

On February 21, the Israeli army opened the floodgates of a canal leading to central Gaza, which resulted in the removal of sand mounds along the border with Israel, said Gaza's Civil Defense Directorate said in a statement.

Civil Defense said about 50 homes sank in the floods, while a number of local residents in eastern Gaza areas were reported injured. There were also reports of deaths of livestock and poultry.

The ministry considered this Israeli action as ‘arbitrary’ and a continuation of Israel’s aggression against the people of Gaza, stressing that this action is a crime against humanity and in violation of all norms and standards.

It expressed surprise at the international community’s silence over this ‘crime’, demanding a prompt move to stop the Israeli siege imposed on the strip, to provide the people of Gaza with the necessary protection, and to prosecute the perpetrators at international courts.

I have a fantasy that in some back rooms at the UN, when the PLO representative starts babbling bizarre accusations to real diplomats, they just tell him to shut the hell up.

Meanwhile, the list of people who are willing to repeat the lie about Israel opening nonexistent dams grows to include fifth-rate academic Juan Cole and Human Rights Watch's Sarah Leah Whitson.

In a sane world, the list of people and news organizations that repeated this lie would instantly lose all credibility. Too bad we live in an insane world.

(h/t Judge Dan)

02/23 Links Pt2: US court: PLO/PA guilty of funding terror attacks, jury awards victims $218m

From Ian:

NY court: PLO, PA to blame for terror attacks a decade ago

The Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority were the catalysts for a series of terrorist attacks in the early 2000s in Israel that killed or wounded several Americans, a US jury found Monday at a high-stakes civil trial.
In finding the Palestinian authorities liable in the attacks, jurors awarded the victims $218.5 million in damages for the bloodshed. The US Anti-Terrorism Act could allow for that to be tripled.
The case in Manhattan and another in Brooklyn have been viewed as the most notable attempts by American victims of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to use US courts to seek damages that could reach into the billions of dollars. (h/t Bob Knot)

Alan Dershowitz: Israel's Legal Founding

When the state of Israel was founded in 1948, it was done so with the approval of the United Nations. But today, Israel's enemies routinely challenge the legitimacy of its very existence. So, under international law, who's right? Israel? Or its enemies?

Gallup: Americans still love Israel, a lot

In the various speeches I’ve given since the summer Gaza conflict, I’ve predicted that the conflict would not move the public opinion needle much, if at all. That, despite snap surveys over the summer which suggested potential weakening of support.
I also point out that some college campuses are anti-Israel bubbles, not reflective of the nation as a whole. Left-wing anti-Israel faculty in particular are isolated from the public on Israel, as they are on so many other things.
Gallup just released its annual survey of opinions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Except for a very recent drop in Democrat support, presumably because of the dispute over Bibi Netanyahu’s appearance Congress, American support for Israel is as strong as ever.
There is only one point of weakness, and it is very recent. Democrats have moved away from Israel since the last survey, but support among Democrats traditionally has been weaker, as the chart shows.

Could the world be jealous of Israel's growth?

Only few people know what a leap Israel made in its gross national product (GNP) per capita in the past decade and that it now tops the list of European countries.
While the GNP was $15,600 in 2003, according to figures presented by the economist, it jumped to $40,620 per capita by December 2014, while the overall product jumped from $104 billion to $300 billion during that period.
The numbers per capita could have been even higher, except Israel has the highest birthrate in the West – more than three children per mother, following the Jewish demographic leap in the past decade, which has led to the blessed population explosion in Israel's kindergartens.
And where do we stand compared to the world? In Britain, for example, the GNP per capita reached almost $50,000 in 2008, while in Israel it was about half that number. Today, the Brits are only slightly ahead of us with $44,330. France and Germany (yes, the country from the pudding protest) are slightly ahead of us as well with $43,500 and $47,350, respectively. Behind us are countries like Italy, and Spain and Greece of course. In addition, for the first time this year Israel's GNP passed Japan's, which stands at $39,140.
This leap completely disconnects Israel from our region, with GNP figures standing at $3,700 in Egypt, $4,870 in Jordan and $6,070 in Iran. The only country in the Middle East with better numbers is Saudi Arabia - $26,510. But the Saudi celebration has also come to an end with the collapsing oil prices. Lebanon, meanwhile, is failing to pass the $10,000 threshold.

A joke at the expense of Jews from 1859

Continuing on our month of Adar theme of jokes about Jews in the 19th century, here's one from 1859:

Not long ago, in one of the obscure streets of a city not far from our own, a son of the Emerald Isle by birth, and a son of the sea by trade, was on his bed to die. The priest had been sent for, and was ready to administer the last rites of the Church to the dying seaman so soon as he should confess his sins. But Patrick had none of that kind of thing to boast of; indeed he said that, to the best of his recollection, he had no sins to confess at all, at all. He had been a sailor, he said, and had done his duty—swearing a little, and drinking his grog as well as the next man ; but he had always come to time in a fight, and was never licked in his life, so that, for his part, he did not believe he had any thing on his mind to be sorry for; and so, please your riverence, let me off easy, and if you can’t let me off easy, let me off as easy as you can.”

“ Bethink thee again, my son,” said the priest. “ Has no man ever lost his life, and perhaps his soul, from thy hand? Be honest now, for death is at the door.”

“ Your riverence is right,” groaned the poor fellow; “ I did once convert a Jew, but I had forgotten it.”

“ Convert a Jew! and sure, Pat, there was no sin in that. But how did you manage the matter, pray! "

“ Well, your riverence must let me tell the story in my own way. I was setting him ashore in the ship’s boat—me and Pete Mullins were—and we got to disputationing like about our religion, for he thought we were no better than pagans, and I knew he was worse, for I had seen the hathun niggers and Indians at home, and they ain’t half as bad as Jews, and I told him so. He got very wrothy like, and when he laped up to give me a clip, the boat went over onto one side, and over he went into the sea. As he came up I caught him by the hair of his head, and it came to me all at once that it would be a good time to convert him; and so says I, as I drew his head out of the water,

“ ‘ Honey dear—for I thought I would spake kindly to him—‘ honey dear, do you believe in the Holy Catholic Church?’ . “‘ Not a bit of it!“ said he, as he cleared his mouth of the sea-water, and so I settled him down into it again. Once more I brought his chin to the top of the brine, and asked him tinderly,

“ ‘ Do you believe in the Holy Catholic Church now?’

“‘I don‘t think I do,‘ he said, but not so decidedly as before, and I ducked him again; and now for the third time I raised him, and said,

"' ‘ Do you believe in the Holy Catholic Church now?’

“His voice was almost gone, but I heard him distinctly but feebly answer, ‘ Yes,I do;’ and so, as these fellows, and especially the Jews, give up their religion so easy after they get it,I thought I would make him sure for the kingdom of heaven, and so I let him go. He never came up, and I hope to meet him in Paradise. That, your riverence, is the way I converted a Jew, and sometimes I feel as if I ought to have taken him into the boat, and let him take his chance of getting into the kingdom.”

The holy father admonished Pat that he did very wrong to let the Jew go to the bottom, and the poor fellow said he was very much of the priest’s opinion. So he repented him sorely of his converting the Jew, received absolution according to the rites of his Church, and in a few minutes breathed his last.

02/23 Links Pt1: Why is Obama so Afraid of Netanyahu?; al-Shabaab threatens 'Jewish owned' malls

From Ian:

Michael Lumish: Why is Obama so Afraid of Benjamin Netanyahu?

One has to wonder how it is that Barack Obama, a man who was once president of the Harvard Law Review, could be so afraid of spreading the idea that Iran should not be allowed to gain nuclear weaponry? That is pretty much all Netanyahu is likely to say, after all. Nothing that the man is likely to say to Congress will be earth-shattering or new.
If I am right – and I suspect that I am – all we are going to hear from Netanyahu are reasons why a nuclear-armed Iran is a terrible idea, not the least which reason is that it will lead to Middle Eastern arms race with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, not to mention Turkey and perhaps even Jordan, scrambling to gain their own nuclear weapons.
Obama is manufacturing hatred toward both Benjamin Netanyahu and the Jewish State of Israel, and thereby Jews more generally, merely because Netanyahu is going to plea to the American people to support Israel in preventing Iranian nuclear break-out capacity.
If Obama believes otherwise, he should allow Netanyahu to speak and then clearly tell the American public just how it is the Netanyahu is mistaken.
If the president of the United States cannot even bring himself to refute such an argument, then how can we possibly trust him to refute Iranian nuclear potential?
Finally, for Barack Obama to snub Netanyahu on the grounds that meeting so close to the Israeli election would amount to interfering with that election is the very height of hypocrisy. Everyone who follows Israel knows that the Obama administration has sent a team into Israel for the purpose of unseating the despised Netanyahu in favor of a US puppet like Herzog or Livni.
Obama likes his Jews soft and malleable.

Is the Era of Euphemism in Washington beginning to end?

Euphemism: The act or example of substituting a mild, indirect, or vague term for one considered harsh, blunt or offensive. (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1992.)
In years to come we may look back on the past week as the beginning of the end of an era of euphemism in American political history. It may be ending because the gap between the language of the government of the United States and the reality of Islamist inspired terror and barbarism has become an abyss. For two decades, various academics and political figures have warned us against committing the sins of Orientalism and then Islamophobia. Yet now millions of people see with their own eyes on television and computer screens that the sins of our error are being committed in the name of a fanaticism born of Islamist ideology. This fact is now so obvious that denying it leads officials into embarrassing linguistic acrobatics that finally make them objects of ridicule. Simply put, the past strategies of avoidance and deflection have ceased to convince because they are being contradicted by facts available to millions.
Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, two American Presidents, but especially our current one, have spoken a language of euphemism concerning the ideology inspiring the major terrorist organizations and states of our era. They have substituted mild, indirect or vague terms to refer to the causes of global terrorism in place of others considered harsh, blunt or offensive. Those terms held to be offensive and thus taboo in government statements include “radical Islam,” “Islamism,” and “Islamic fundamentalism,” or other such terms that connect interpretation of the religion of Islam to the practice of terrorism. Those who used such terms were held to be either “Islamophobic” or simply politically harmful because doing so was bound to offend over a billion Muslims and thus undermine Western counterterrorism efforts. As a result two famous euphemisms continue to shape the public stance of the United States government.
In the Bush years, the term of art was “the war on terror,” which suggested we were, absurdly, at war with a tactic. In the Obama era, the acceptable term has been a fight against unspecified sources of “violent extremism.”

'Do not hesitate': Terror group calls for 'Westgate-style' attacks on Westfield shopping centres in chilling new threat from militants behind bloody Kenya siege

An al-Qaeda linked terror group has issued a chilling propaganda video threatening Western shopping centres and singling out 'Jewish owned' Westfield malls as targets.
In a 76-minute long message issued overnight, a masked militant purportedly from the al-Shabaab organisation encouraged Islamic fundamentalists to strike at shopping centres around the world.
Dressed in military fatigues, the spokesman named complexes owned by Frank Lowy's Australian group as among potential targets, dwelling on two Westfield malls in East and West London.
'If just a handful of mujahideen fighters could bring Kenya to a complete stand-still for nearly a week, just imagine what the dedicated mujahideen could do in the West to American or Jewish shopping centres across the world,' he said.
‘What if such an attack on the Mall of America in Minnesota or the West Edmonton mall in Canada or in London’s Oxford Street. Or any of the hundred or so of the Jewish owned Westfield shopping centres.
‘Take the Westfield shopping centre in (London's) Stratford or White City for example, what would be the implications of such an attack, one can only imagine.
‘All it takes is a man with firm determination, of which our Muslim ummah (community) has plenty of.
‘So hurry up and hasten to Heaven and do not hesitate.'

Last year I noted a couple of times that newspapers in the Arab world would have occasional articles describing the negative qualities of the Jews described in the Quran. (Often the articles are illustrated with this picture.)

One of those articles has been published this past weekend in newspapers in Egypt and Morocco.

This is a recurring theme. In Arabic media, antisemitism is not only mainstream, but widely accepted to be mandated by the Quran. And the West refuses to pay any attention to this (except for rare occasions.)

Here is an English synopsis of a Gaza university research paper on this topic

Jewish recipes as portrayed by the Koran - an objective study of graphic
Abstract: Quran highlighted the many characteristics of the Jews in order to warn the world of them and especially the Arab world and Muslim peoples and leaders, and the research will be remembered most important of these qualities that have had a negative impact on the formation of ideology and mentality, the thought of the Jews perverted, it is these qualities disbelief in Allah and His signs, deception, and hardening of the heart, cunning, and cunning, treachery, betrayal and bloodshed love of this world and hatred of death and eating people's wealth unlawfully, those qualities that are reflected on the behavior of individuals and groups, making them commit the crime of crimes, what on earth who has not committed, because these people do not know the meaning of humanity, so this research to reveal those qualities and those evil intentions and reveal their risk the entire world and especially the Islamic world and the Arab world and to take heed of these and reconsider.

Nah, not newsworthy.

Flood libel, part 2

Yesterday, I pointed out a false Ma'an story claiming that Israel deliberately opened up "dams" to flood Gaza with excess rainwater. As I pointed out, there are no dams near Gaza; there are some reservoirs but no evidence that they released any water.

This is one of those obvious lies that start getting believed by being repeated year after year, and even AFP ended up reporting that Israel opened up dams without doing a modicum of fact checking. ("Journalist" Max Blumenthal repeated the lie as well, as did Radio France International.)

Today, the claims were proven to be lies, as CAMERA reports:

Regarding the claim that Israel opened dams, thereby flooding Gaza, a spokesman for the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) told CAMERA:

The claim is entirely false, and southern Israel does not have any dams. Due to the recent rain, streams were flooded throughout the region with no connection to actions taken by the State of Israel.

Prior to the storm, the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories allowed the transfer of four water pumps belonging to the Palestinian Water Authority from Israel into Gaza to supplement the 13 pumps already in the Gaza Strip in dealing with any potential flooding throughout the area.
In addition, Nechemia Shahaf, the head of the Drainage Authority for the Shakma-Besor Region, confirmed to CAMERA that there are no dams which can be opened and closed in southern Israel. Shahaf said, "There is a diverting dam one meter high which directs water to reservoirs. This is a low dam which cannot be opened or closed." He also noted that the singular dam, which cannot be opened, is next to Kibbutz Gvulot, and approximately 20 kilometers away from Gaza.

But that was only one of the false stories claiming that Israel floods Palestinians.

IMEMC and Palestine News Network claimed that somehow Israel managed to flood a "refugee" camp by opening "barrages":

Aida refugee camp north Bethlehem city has drowned after Gilo Israeli settlement opened its barrages, throwing all excess rain and melted snow water onto the camp.

Aida camp is adjacent to the Israeli apartheid wall, which is backed by the Gilo settlement northwest, that opened the barrages to flood the homes of refugees.

The head of water pumps in the camp, Sami Hmedan, said that Israeli occupation authorities opens the barrage water with disregard to the Palestinians and without any official concerns.

Gilo as seen from Aida. Where are the "barrages"?

The only "barrage" between Gilo and Aida is the security barrier. If anything, that protected Aida from excessive flooding.

Or are they saying that those devious Israelis removed the "apartheid wall" to flood Arabs and then quickly put it back?

Who knows what crazy slander they will come up with next. But we do know that a percentage of those lies will end up in AFP and other mainstream media, because if there is something that Palestinian Arabs have learned over the years, it is that repeating their lies gets results.

(h/t Gidon Shaviv, Judge Dan, Bob Knot, Nurit Baytch, Rudi Roth)

From Colonel Richard Kemp's blog:

This submission to the UN Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza conflict is based on observations on the ground during the conflict, 29 years’ military experience of conflicts of this type, intelligence work relating to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, knowledge of the IDF and Israeli intelligence services, study of the Israel-Palestine conflict and observations on the ground during the 2012 Gaza conflict. I should add that I have no formal, paid or unpaid, connection with the IDF or with any other organ of the Israeli government.

In my opinion the actions taken by the IDF were necessary to defend the people of Israel from the ongoing, intensive and lethal attacks by Hamas and other groups in Gaza. It is the inalienable duty of every government to use its armed forces to protect its citizens and its terrain from external attack.

...If, as I am asserting, it was necessary for Israel to conduct military action to defend its people against attack from Gaza; and if, as I am also asserting, the IDF conducted, in general terms, the most appropriate form of operations, namely precision air and artillery strikes against the command and control infrastructure and the missile launching infrastructure, and a limited ground incursion to locate and destroy the tunnels; the question then arises as to how these operations were conducted in relation to the Laws of Armed Conflict.

Much of the Hamas military infrastructure was located amongst the civilian population in Gaza. In these circumstances, neutralizing the threat from Hamas made civilian casualties unavoidable. Under the Laws of Armed Conflict this fact does not render such operations illegal assuming they were necessary. However the IDF had a duty to distinguish between legitimate military targets and civilians and to ensure that operations were conducted in accordance with the principle of proportionality as well as necessity.

It is worth emphasizing that proportionality is not, as often believed by critics of Israel, a relationship between the numbers of casualties on either side in a conflict, but a calculation that considers whether the incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated in an attack.

From my own research as well as briefings from and discussions with Israeli legal, military and political leaders, I understand and know well the ethos and operating principles of the IDF and I know that their commanders place great emphasis on adherence to the laws of armed conflict. This includes the principle of proportionality, which is set out in Israel’s manual of military law and is recognized by the International Committee of the Red Cross.

...I have frequently questioned senior and junior IDF personnel on these issues and I have found that communication of these directions is effective. In my experience the most junior soldiers in the IDF understand them and the imperative of adhering to them in conflict.

I questioned Israeli commanders and soldiers on the ground on their actions in combat on the Gaza border immediately before and immediately after they were fighting in Gaza and during ceasefire periods. I spoke to soldiers from infantry, tank, artillery and engineer forces.

Many of them expressed frustration at the restrictions imposed upon them by the rules of engagement, in the same way as British, US and other Western soldiers express such frustration. This was generally explained to me as frustration due to the additional risks imposed on their own lives and the lives of their fellow soldiers and also on the reduction in effectiveness against an enemy brought about by adherence to the highly restrictive IDF rules of engagement. The latter relates to restrictions that I was told frequently allowed enemy fighters to escape rather than take the risk that innocent civilians might be killed.

Nevertheless all of the soldiers that I questioned – including those who claimed they were frustrated by these restrictions – accepted and understood the need to adhere to the rules and told me that they and their comrades did adhere to the rules during combat in Gaza. I found this level of acceptance to be higher than would generally be found among soldiers from other Western armies that I have commanded or served alongside. The expressions of frustration also, in my view, tend to confirm adherence to the rules of engagement – even though they didn’t necessarily like the rules they still apparently complied with them.

Many soldiers that I questioned told me about encounters with Palestinian fighters among the civilian population and the steps they had taken to avoid civilian casualties. Soldiers told me that not only were they not permitted to kill, wound or mistreat innocent civilians but also that their own morality would not allow it. For example, one engineer soldier who had recently emerged from a Hamas attack tunnel told me that even while advancing along the tunnel, faced by a wide range of potential threats to his life, uppermost in his mind was the need to avoid killing innocent civilians. He explained that he knew Hamas sometimes used innocent civilians as human shields in the tunnels.

...I previously commented in relation to the 2008-09 Gaza conflict that no army in the history of warfare had taken greater steps than the IDF to minimise harm to civilians in a combat zone. My observations during the 2014 conflict confirmed this. No other army that I have served in or alongside or that I have studied and researched has yet taken such extensive precautions. This includes British and US forces. It is in part due to the specific circumstances of the Gaza conflict, which allow the IDF to go to such lengths whereas other armed forces in other situations may not be able to do so.

However, during some operations in Afghanistan, British and US forces adopted some methods developed by the IDF in Gaza. And in November 2014, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the IDF ‘went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties’ during the 2014 conflict in Gaza. He revealed that he had sent a delegation of US military officers to Israel to learn about the measures that the IDF took to prevent civilian casualties.

...In conclusion, in my opinion the IDF took exceptional measures to adhere to the Laws of Armed Conflict and to minimise civilian casualties in Gaza. During the conflict many politicians, UN leaders, human rights groups and NGOs called on the Israelis to take greater action to minimise civilian casualties in Gaza. Yet none of them suggested any additional ways of doing this. I conclude that this was because Israel was taking all feasible steps. I believe Israel to be world leaders in actions to minimise civilian casualties; and this is borne out by the efforts made by the US Army, the most sophisticated and powerful in the world, to learn from the IDF on this issue.

In my opinion Israel is also making strenuous efforts to investigate incidents where civilians were apparently unlawfully killed, wounded or ill-treated, and where civilian property was unlawfully damaged or stolen. I am not aware of any nation that has conducted more comprehensive or resolute investigations into its own military activities than Israel during and following the 2014 Gaza conflict.

On the other hand, Hamas and other groups in Gaza took the opposite approach to that of the IDF. Their entire strategy was based on flouting the Laws of Armed Conflict, deliberately targeting the Israeli civilian population, using their own civilian population as human shields and seeking to entice the IDF to take military action that would kill large numbers of Gaza civilians for their own propaganda purposes. There was and is of course no accountability or investigation of any allegations against Hamas and other extremist groups in Gaza.

..Many people believe that your findings are a foregone conclusion, as the findings of the 2008-09 Commission regrettably proved to be. They believe that you will roundly and without foundation condemn Israel for war crimes while at best making only token criticism of Hamas and other Gaza extremist groups. If you genuinely want to contribute to peace and to improve human rights for the people of Gaza and of Israel then you must have the courage to reject the UN Human Rights Council’s persistent and discriminatory anti-Israel programme and produce a balanced and fair report into these tragic events.