30 oct 2011
Israeli ex-soldier jailed for leaking secret papers
An Israeli court sentenced a former soldier to four and a half years in prison on Sunday for leaking classified military documents to a newspaper, which later reported allegations of a policy to assassinate Palestinian militants.
Anat Kamm, 24, was convicted in February of possessing and distributing secret information, after striking a plea bargain with Tel Aviv District Court, where judges agreed in exchange to drop more serious charges of harming state security.
Kamm was found guilty of downloading 2,085 military documents on a disc during her army service and later passing some of this information to a correspondent for Israel's Haaretz daily, a court document showed.
The newspaper subsequently reported in 2008 that top army officers had authorized the assassination of Palestinian militants, in a possible violation of Israeli law.
Human rights groups have criticized Israel's policy of assassinating militant leaders since the early days of the last Palestinian uprising in 2000, especially when civilians were also killed. Israel has justified the practice as necessary to combat and deter potential attackers, while saying it has refined its methods to kill its targets more precisely.
A three-judge panel gave Kamm a 54-month sentence and an additional 18-month suspended term, the court document said, with judges writing that they had found "the motive behind taking the documents was mainly ideological."
Avigdor Feldman, one of Kamm's lawyers, said at the time she was convicted that she had "believed she stumbled onto (evidence of) war crimes."
Kamm, who has been under house arrest since late 2009, had faced a maximum sentence of 15 years, but the judges said they had taken into account that she had no prior offenses and had cooperated with investigators.
Her case has sparked debate in Israel on the limits of press freedom in a nation where most men and women are subject to compulsory military conscription at 18, and go on to serve in the reserves, and many become privy to classified information.
Kamm was employed as a local journalist when she was arrested and disappeared from public view in late 2009, with military censors barring any publication of the case for months.
Journalists testified in her defense, some of them alleging she was being treated too harshly, noting how rarely, if ever, Israeli officials had been tried for alleged leaks of military documents to the press.
In summing up Kamm's sentence, the judges appeared to point at her case as a lesson to other soldiers. "The military establishment is built on the service of young, motivated people who fill complicated and secret roles," they wrote.
"If the army cannot trust the soldiers serving in various units and exposed to sensitive issues, then it cannot function as a regular army," they also said.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=433692
Criminal Corporate Complicity- panel probes Israeli crimes- RUSSELL TRIBUNAL
Israeli ex-soldier jailed for leaking secret papers
An Israeli court sentenced a former soldier to four and a half years in prison on Sunday for leaking classified military documents to a newspaper, which later reported allegations of a policy to assassinate Palestinian militants.
Anat Kamm, 24, was convicted in February of possessing and distributing secret information, after striking a plea bargain with Tel Aviv District Court, where judges agreed in exchange to drop more serious charges of harming state security.
Kamm was found guilty of downloading 2,085 military documents on a disc during her army service and later passing some of this information to a correspondent for Israel's Haaretz daily, a court document showed.
The newspaper subsequently reported in 2008 that top army officers had authorized the assassination of Palestinian militants, in a possible violation of Israeli law.
Human rights groups have criticized Israel's policy of assassinating militant leaders since the early days of the last Palestinian uprising in 2000, especially when civilians were also killed. Israel has justified the practice as necessary to combat and deter potential attackers, while saying it has refined its methods to kill its targets more precisely.
A three-judge panel gave Kamm a 54-month sentence and an additional 18-month suspended term, the court document said, with judges writing that they had found "the motive behind taking the documents was mainly ideological."
Avigdor Feldman, one of Kamm's lawyers, said at the time she was convicted that she had "believed she stumbled onto (evidence of) war crimes."
Kamm, who has been under house arrest since late 2009, had faced a maximum sentence of 15 years, but the judges said they had taken into account that she had no prior offenses and had cooperated with investigators.
Her case has sparked debate in Israel on the limits of press freedom in a nation where most men and women are subject to compulsory military conscription at 18, and go on to serve in the reserves, and many become privy to classified information.
Kamm was employed as a local journalist when she was arrested and disappeared from public view in late 2009, with military censors barring any publication of the case for months.
Journalists testified in her defense, some of them alleging she was being treated too harshly, noting how rarely, if ever, Israeli officials had been tried for alleged leaks of military documents to the press.
In summing up Kamm's sentence, the judges appeared to point at her case as a lesson to other soldiers. "The military establishment is built on the service of young, motivated people who fill complicated and secret roles," they wrote.
"If the army cannot trust the soldiers serving in various units and exposed to sensitive issues, then it cannot function as a regular army," they also said.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=433692
Criminal Corporate Complicity- panel probes Israeli crimes- RUSSELL TRIBUNAL
|
|
|
5 apr 2011
Goldstone: An act of negligence
Downplay of Israeli aggression towards civilians during the Gaza War, causes scholars to question Richard Goldstone.
In the wake of a monumental victory in the human rights community to move the Goldstone Report out of the Human Rights Council (HRC) to the General Assembly where it can be underpinned by actionable follow up, Justice Richard Goldstone’s recent editorial makes some human rights practitioners wish it had been left to languish in the HRC.
Goldstone sought to do two things in his op-ed: to amend the record by stating that Israel’s attacks may not have been deliberate and second, to emphasise Hamas’s culpability under the laws of war. In the best case scenario, Goldstone’s intervention is a problematic attempt to cajole Israel to participate in the international process for accountability.
However, even in that case, the editorial is counterproductive, short-sighted, and casts Goldstone's attempts as no less than curious.
Just last week, I had the chance to speak to Goldstone at Stanford Law School where I participated in a debate on the report featuring him as a discussant.
Goldstone seemed struck by recent revelations made in Israel’s investigation of itself that its murder of 29 civilians in the Sammouni home, where approximately 120 civilians had taken refuge, was the result of negligence and not a deliberate attack.
He emphasised that had Israel participated in the investigatory process rather than boycott it, it would have been able to contest the mission’s findings before the report’s release thereby correcting its alleged bias.
He echoes this sentiment in his op-ed where he writes:
I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes.
Goldstone should have known better: on the one hand, he accepts Israel’s investigatory findings at face value notwithstanding the Independent Committee of Experts’ conclusions that they are structurally flawed and unlikely to yield effective measures of accountability and justice.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, Goldstone takes for granted that Israel preemptively rejected the report precisely because the mission treated Hamas evenhandedly rather than dismiss it as a terrorist organisation whose annihilation is justified by any means necessary.
That is why it should come as no surprise that rather than respond to his proclamations with a renewed faith in international legal mechanisms, Israel’s staunchest allies are opportunistically characterising Goldstone’s editorial as an attitudinal shift towards Israel in the West while its prime minister has called on the UN to retract the report all together.
The Goldstone Report documents eleven incidents where the Israeli military directly targeted civilians. Four other fact-finding missions underscore these findings: Human Rights Watch,[PDF] Amnesty International,[PDF] Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, [PDF] and the National Lawyers Guild.[PDF]
'No humanitarian consideration'
In a report [PDF] conducted by Israeli war veterans, 26 Israeli soldiers who participated in the Operation confirm that there were no clear rules of engagement.
One soldier laments:
There was a clear feeling that no humanitarian consideration played any role in the army at present. The goal was to carry out an operation with the least possible casualties for the army, without its even asking itself what the price would be for the other side.
Together, the four investigations and the soldiers’ testimonies, demonstrates an Israeli policy of targeting of civilians and/or negligent behaviour that amounts to the direct targeting of civilians according to Article 51 of the First Additional Protocol.
This comports with a policy adopted by Israel since 2006, known as the Dahiyeh Doctrine. As captured by the Goldstone Report itself, according to Major General Gadi Eiskenot: [PDF]
What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our perspective, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. Israel’s perspective however is not what matters - according to the twin linchpins of humanitarian law, namely the principles of distinction and proportionality, civilian villages are not to be targeted, are to be protected, and are to be spared excessive loss unless they directly partake in the hostilities.
Arguably therefore, no mission could have written a report to Israel’s liking unless it accepted this perversion of humanitarian law casting villages as bases.
In fact, after the report’s dissemination, Prime Minister Netanyahu requested "the facilitating of an international initiative to change the laws of war in keeping with the spread of terrorism throughout the world".
Accordingly, Goldstone’s painstaking efforts to highlight Hamas’s culpability, which he already makes plain in paragraph 108 of the report, are futile because the controversy has not been over the report’s inequitable application of the law but rather over Israel's insistence that it should be freed from the laws’ restraints in order to have its way with its "terrorist" adversaries.
Goldstone also miscalculates the value of Israel’s domestic investigations.
To date, the Independent Committee of Experts, chaired by New York Judge Mary McGowan Davis, has reviewed the domestic investigations process twice, and both times it found Israel’s investigations to be inadequate.
Whereas Goldstone applauds Israel for "dedicating significant resources to investigating 400 incidents of operational misconduct", he does not mention the rest of the committee’s findings.
'No' Israeli investigatory initiative
In particular, it took issue with the fact that "there is no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead".
The committee goes onto note that "more than one-third of the 36 incidents in Gaza are still unresolved or unclear. [And] Finally, the Committee is concerned about the fact that the duration of the ongoing investigations into the allegations contained in the FFM report - over two years since the end of the Gaza operation - could seriously impair their effectiveness and, therefore, the prospects of ultimately achieving accountability and justice".
In light of these conclusions, it is perplexing that Goldstone would accept Israel’s assertion that its attack on the Sammouni home was a regrettable act of negligence by those commanders "making difficult battlefield decisions". Consider also that this is the home where emaciated children were rescued four days after the attack because Israel prevented access to the Red Cross.
What kind of remorseful military commander negligently orders an air strike on a home full of civilians and then prevents humanitarian relief to its victims for four days? At most, Israel’s conflicting investigatory findings should have buttressed the report’s recommendation for an international judicial enquiry.
Perhaps Goldstone sincerely believes that Israel’s boycott of the mission was a function of remedial short-sightedness. Arguably then, his willingness to overlook a compelling record is an effort to lure Israel to the table of multilateral reconciliation.
In fact, his endorsement of “applying international law to protracted and deadly conflicts” for the sake of making warfare more humane indicates his enduring faith in the mission’s mandate as well as the need for accountability, rather than a disavowal of the report and the exoneration of Israel for its alleged crimes.
If this is indeed the case, the Justice exercised excessive good faith and poor judgement to believe that Israel would accept his gesture as an opportunity to reconcile with the UN-investigatory process, rather than cast the final blow against the report and the HRC.
Regardless of what may have been his best intentions, Goldstone has negligently, one hopes not deliberately, undermined the laws of armed conflict and emboldened those states, like Israel, who believe that it is a surmountable nuisance.
Noura Erekat is a Palestinian human rights attorney and activist. She is currently an adjunct professor at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies in Georgetown University. She is also a co-editor of Jadaliyya.com.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
http://fwd4.me/z0L
Gaza families shocked after Goldstone retraction
Families of some of the casualties laid to rest during the 2008-9 Israeli war on Gaza expressed shock over recent statements by Judge Richard Goldstone that he retracted his opinion that Israel had committed crimes during aggression.
Goldstone headed a UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission which submitted a report to the UN condemning Israel for targeting civilians and other human rights violations during the war. But he has recently rescinded the conclusion made in the report in an article in the Washington Post saying that if he knew then what he knows now, the report would have varied.
Meanwhile, casualty families in Gaza said they were disappointed after the so-called Goldstone report had for the last two years been tantamount to boost of morale for the possibility that Israeli occupation leaders would be tried and taken to justice.
Some of those families gave brief statements in interviews conducted by Hamas's media bureau in northern Gaza Strip on Monday. They said Goldstone's retraction has been tantamount to a shock to international human rights organizations which tried to show some equity to the Palestinians through the report.
Mohammed Abu Askar, who lost two children and a brother during the aggression and who himself was one of the witnesses in the report, said that ever since the report was issued he felt a sense of justice, even though he commented that the report had actually equated between the victim and the executioner.
We believe the retraction came after pressure or extortion. But this is not an excuse to retract the report, he said.
He emphasized that those who sustained damages in the war will continue to demand that Israel is brought to justice in the International Criminal Court and that the Goldstone report remains a tool for human rights groups, as it is based on verified testimonies and accounts of victimized families.
Muteea al-Selawi, who lost seven members of his family in the war, said that he has lost hope that international rights organizations would side with justice, as they have had a long track record of siding with Israel.
Subhi Semmouni said Goldstone's retraction was a setback for victims' families, as the report had given hope that those who massacred children and women would be tried before courts of law. Semmouni had lost 20 family members in the war.
The move gives Israel justification to repeat its massacres against the Palestinians, said one Palestinian man Faraj Abdo Rabbo.
We have lost trust in the world and all human rights centers, who did nothing to bring justice to the Palestinians or bring even one Israeli to the Israeli courts.
http://fwd4.me/yzg
Palestinian figures slams European countries for supporting Israel's war crimes
Human rights activists, academics and intellectuals in Gaza strongly denounced all European union countries for not voting in favor of Goldstone report in the UN human rights council 10 days ago, saying that this European position provided a political cover and immunity for Israel against international law and accountability.
This came in a censure letter sent to the envoy of the European union in the occupied Palestinian territories.
"We were expecting a position supportive of the council's decision to move Goldstone report and its recommendations forward in order to achieve justice, but we were surprised at this western position," the letter read.
"There is a big difference between what the European governments claim about their keenness on ensuring the respect for human rights and international humanitarian law, and their actual positions that prevent the achievement of justice in this part of the world, to say the least," they underlined.
"This development clearly reflects double standards, where the United Kingdom voted against the resolution, while all European countries, members of the human rights council, abstained from voting in favor of the decision."
The signatories to the letter wondered about the use of the support provided by the European countries for promoting democracy and human rights projects in the Arab region if they contribute to creating an atmosphere that encourages further abuses and crimes.
http://fwd4.me/yzf
Samouni Family Responds to Goldstone Backtrack on Israeli War Crimes - Ken O'Keefe
Goldstone: An act of negligence
Downplay of Israeli aggression towards civilians during the Gaza War, causes scholars to question Richard Goldstone.
In the wake of a monumental victory in the human rights community to move the Goldstone Report out of the Human Rights Council (HRC) to the General Assembly where it can be underpinned by actionable follow up, Justice Richard Goldstone’s recent editorial makes some human rights practitioners wish it had been left to languish in the HRC.
Goldstone sought to do two things in his op-ed: to amend the record by stating that Israel’s attacks may not have been deliberate and second, to emphasise Hamas’s culpability under the laws of war. In the best case scenario, Goldstone’s intervention is a problematic attempt to cajole Israel to participate in the international process for accountability.
However, even in that case, the editorial is counterproductive, short-sighted, and casts Goldstone's attempts as no less than curious.
Just last week, I had the chance to speak to Goldstone at Stanford Law School where I participated in a debate on the report featuring him as a discussant.
Goldstone seemed struck by recent revelations made in Israel’s investigation of itself that its murder of 29 civilians in the Sammouni home, where approximately 120 civilians had taken refuge, was the result of negligence and not a deliberate attack.
He emphasised that had Israel participated in the investigatory process rather than boycott it, it would have been able to contest the mission’s findings before the report’s release thereby correcting its alleged bias.
He echoes this sentiment in his op-ed where he writes:
I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes.
Goldstone should have known better: on the one hand, he accepts Israel’s investigatory findings at face value notwithstanding the Independent Committee of Experts’ conclusions that they are structurally flawed and unlikely to yield effective measures of accountability and justice.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, Goldstone takes for granted that Israel preemptively rejected the report precisely because the mission treated Hamas evenhandedly rather than dismiss it as a terrorist organisation whose annihilation is justified by any means necessary.
That is why it should come as no surprise that rather than respond to his proclamations with a renewed faith in international legal mechanisms, Israel’s staunchest allies are opportunistically characterising Goldstone’s editorial as an attitudinal shift towards Israel in the West while its prime minister has called on the UN to retract the report all together.
The Goldstone Report documents eleven incidents where the Israeli military directly targeted civilians. Four other fact-finding missions underscore these findings: Human Rights Watch,[PDF] Amnesty International,[PDF] Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, [PDF] and the National Lawyers Guild.[PDF]
'No humanitarian consideration'
In a report [PDF] conducted by Israeli war veterans, 26 Israeli soldiers who participated in the Operation confirm that there were no clear rules of engagement.
One soldier laments:
There was a clear feeling that no humanitarian consideration played any role in the army at present. The goal was to carry out an operation with the least possible casualties for the army, without its even asking itself what the price would be for the other side.
Together, the four investigations and the soldiers’ testimonies, demonstrates an Israeli policy of targeting of civilians and/or negligent behaviour that amounts to the direct targeting of civilians according to Article 51 of the First Additional Protocol.
This comports with a policy adopted by Israel since 2006, known as the Dahiyeh Doctrine. As captured by the Goldstone Report itself, according to Major General Gadi Eiskenot: [PDF]
What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our perspective, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. Israel’s perspective however is not what matters - according to the twin linchpins of humanitarian law, namely the principles of distinction and proportionality, civilian villages are not to be targeted, are to be protected, and are to be spared excessive loss unless they directly partake in the hostilities.
Arguably therefore, no mission could have written a report to Israel’s liking unless it accepted this perversion of humanitarian law casting villages as bases.
In fact, after the report’s dissemination, Prime Minister Netanyahu requested "the facilitating of an international initiative to change the laws of war in keeping with the spread of terrorism throughout the world".
Accordingly, Goldstone’s painstaking efforts to highlight Hamas’s culpability, which he already makes plain in paragraph 108 of the report, are futile because the controversy has not been over the report’s inequitable application of the law but rather over Israel's insistence that it should be freed from the laws’ restraints in order to have its way with its "terrorist" adversaries.
Goldstone also miscalculates the value of Israel’s domestic investigations.
To date, the Independent Committee of Experts, chaired by New York Judge Mary McGowan Davis, has reviewed the domestic investigations process twice, and both times it found Israel’s investigations to be inadequate.
Whereas Goldstone applauds Israel for "dedicating significant resources to investigating 400 incidents of operational misconduct", he does not mention the rest of the committee’s findings.
'No' Israeli investigatory initiative
In particular, it took issue with the fact that "there is no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead".
The committee goes onto note that "more than one-third of the 36 incidents in Gaza are still unresolved or unclear. [And] Finally, the Committee is concerned about the fact that the duration of the ongoing investigations into the allegations contained in the FFM report - over two years since the end of the Gaza operation - could seriously impair their effectiveness and, therefore, the prospects of ultimately achieving accountability and justice".
In light of these conclusions, it is perplexing that Goldstone would accept Israel’s assertion that its attack on the Sammouni home was a regrettable act of negligence by those commanders "making difficult battlefield decisions". Consider also that this is the home where emaciated children were rescued four days after the attack because Israel prevented access to the Red Cross.
What kind of remorseful military commander negligently orders an air strike on a home full of civilians and then prevents humanitarian relief to its victims for four days? At most, Israel’s conflicting investigatory findings should have buttressed the report’s recommendation for an international judicial enquiry.
Perhaps Goldstone sincerely believes that Israel’s boycott of the mission was a function of remedial short-sightedness. Arguably then, his willingness to overlook a compelling record is an effort to lure Israel to the table of multilateral reconciliation.
In fact, his endorsement of “applying international law to protracted and deadly conflicts” for the sake of making warfare more humane indicates his enduring faith in the mission’s mandate as well as the need for accountability, rather than a disavowal of the report and the exoneration of Israel for its alleged crimes.
If this is indeed the case, the Justice exercised excessive good faith and poor judgement to believe that Israel would accept his gesture as an opportunity to reconcile with the UN-investigatory process, rather than cast the final blow against the report and the HRC.
Regardless of what may have been his best intentions, Goldstone has negligently, one hopes not deliberately, undermined the laws of armed conflict and emboldened those states, like Israel, who believe that it is a surmountable nuisance.
Noura Erekat is a Palestinian human rights attorney and activist. She is currently an adjunct professor at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies in Georgetown University. She is also a co-editor of Jadaliyya.com.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
http://fwd4.me/z0L
Gaza families shocked after Goldstone retraction
Families of some of the casualties laid to rest during the 2008-9 Israeli war on Gaza expressed shock over recent statements by Judge Richard Goldstone that he retracted his opinion that Israel had committed crimes during aggression.
Goldstone headed a UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission which submitted a report to the UN condemning Israel for targeting civilians and other human rights violations during the war. But he has recently rescinded the conclusion made in the report in an article in the Washington Post saying that if he knew then what he knows now, the report would have varied.
Meanwhile, casualty families in Gaza said they were disappointed after the so-called Goldstone report had for the last two years been tantamount to boost of morale for the possibility that Israeli occupation leaders would be tried and taken to justice.
Some of those families gave brief statements in interviews conducted by Hamas's media bureau in northern Gaza Strip on Monday. They said Goldstone's retraction has been tantamount to a shock to international human rights organizations which tried to show some equity to the Palestinians through the report.
Mohammed Abu Askar, who lost two children and a brother during the aggression and who himself was one of the witnesses in the report, said that ever since the report was issued he felt a sense of justice, even though he commented that the report had actually equated between the victim and the executioner.
We believe the retraction came after pressure or extortion. But this is not an excuse to retract the report, he said.
He emphasized that those who sustained damages in the war will continue to demand that Israel is brought to justice in the International Criminal Court and that the Goldstone report remains a tool for human rights groups, as it is based on verified testimonies and accounts of victimized families.
Muteea al-Selawi, who lost seven members of his family in the war, said that he has lost hope that international rights organizations would side with justice, as they have had a long track record of siding with Israel.
Subhi Semmouni said Goldstone's retraction was a setback for victims' families, as the report had given hope that those who massacred children and women would be tried before courts of law. Semmouni had lost 20 family members in the war.
The move gives Israel justification to repeat its massacres against the Palestinians, said one Palestinian man Faraj Abdo Rabbo.
We have lost trust in the world and all human rights centers, who did nothing to bring justice to the Palestinians or bring even one Israeli to the Israeli courts.
http://fwd4.me/yzg
Palestinian figures slams European countries for supporting Israel's war crimes
Human rights activists, academics and intellectuals in Gaza strongly denounced all European union countries for not voting in favor of Goldstone report in the UN human rights council 10 days ago, saying that this European position provided a political cover and immunity for Israel against international law and accountability.
This came in a censure letter sent to the envoy of the European union in the occupied Palestinian territories.
"We were expecting a position supportive of the council's decision to move Goldstone report and its recommendations forward in order to achieve justice, but we were surprised at this western position," the letter read.
"There is a big difference between what the European governments claim about their keenness on ensuring the respect for human rights and international humanitarian law, and their actual positions that prevent the achievement of justice in this part of the world, to say the least," they underlined.
"This development clearly reflects double standards, where the United Kingdom voted against the resolution, while all European countries, members of the human rights council, abstained from voting in favor of the decision."
The signatories to the letter wondered about the use of the support provided by the European countries for promoting democracy and human rights projects in the Arab region if they contribute to creating an atmosphere that encourages further abuses and crimes.
http://fwd4.me/yzf
Samouni Family Responds to Goldstone Backtrack on Israeli War Crimes - Ken O'Keefe
|
|
During Operation Cast Lead Israel committed massive war crimes for all the world to see. Among these crimes the use of White Phosphorus in densely populated areas, use of Depleted Uranium, bombing civilian targets of all sorts without military necessity, destroying civilian infrastructure with no military justification and the infamous massacre of the Samouni family... among many other crimes.
In the aftermath of Cast Lead, Justice Richard Goldstone, a Zionist Jew, was commissioned by the United Nations to write a report on the alleged war crimes. Although the report did not go nearly far enough in exposing the brutality of all the crimes committed, crimes committed by the fourth largest military in the world against a essentially defenceless and captive population, it did allege that Israel (and Hamas) was almost undoubtedly guilty of war crimes and possibly, crimes against humanity. |
But on April 1st, 2011 Justice Goldstone had an apparent change of heart and effectively said that he was wrong. With regard to the Samouni family he said, Israel simply made a mistake. It seems that the world in which we live in, a world of impunity for the favoured Israeli state, is set to continue. Unless of course we the people decide enough is enough. -- Ken O'Keefe
Minister: Goldstone to visit Israel
Israel's interior minister says that international jurist Richard Goldstone has accepted an invitation to visit Israel, reports the Associated Press.
The move comes after Goldstone wrote an opinion piece revisiting the conclusions drawn by a United Nations war crimes report bearing his name that explored Israel's 22-day operation in the Gaza Strip in 2008-2009.
Eli Yishai told Israel Army radio Tuesday he invited Goldstone to tour southern Israeli communities that sustained Hamas rocket fire.
Yishai says he told Goldstone it was courageous to reconsider the report and asked the retired South African judge to officially retract it. Yishai didn't say if Goldstone agreed to do so.
Israel two years ago refused to cooperate with the UN investigation.
http://www.jmcc.org/news.aspx?id=2564
US welcomes Goldstone retraction
State Department clarifies administration never saw evidence Israel intentionally targeted civilians during Gaza war. Clinton to Peres: We must work together.
The American State Department responded Tuesday, for the first time, to Judge Richard Goldstone's retraction of his Operation Cast Lead findings, saying: "We've made clear from when the Goldstone Report was initially presented, and maintained ever since, that we didn't see any evidence that the Israeli government had intentionally targeted civilians or otherwise engaged in any war crimes," State Department Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said.
Toner clarified the United States government read Goldstone's op-ed article published in the Washington Post Friday, and emphasized that the administration's stance on the matter remains the same as it was since the United Nations' Human Rights Council appointed Goldstone as chairman of the inquiry committee into the Gaza War.
Toner said Washington believes Israel has undertaken a credible internal processes to examine its own actions, adding that Goldstone acknowledged this. He added the US remains concerned by what they call "anti-Israeli bias" in the US Human Rights Council.
The State Department spokesman refused to address the Goldstone committee's proceedings.
A spokesman for the UN Human Rights Council said for the report to be withdrawn Goldstone would have to submit a formal request to the Geneva-based body, which he has not done.
Stormy weather in Mideast
Meanwhile President Shimon Peres met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington. The two discussed the recent Mideast changes and attempted to find new ways to renew the peace process and strengthen ties between Jerusalem and Washington.
Clinton said this is a time of great challenges and many opportunities. She mentioned she looks forward to important conversations with Peres in which the two will discuss the strong friendship between the two countries. Clinton complimented Peres, saying that at age 88 he is one of the younger people she knows.
Peres is expected to meet with US President Barack Obama Tuesday. Clinton told Peres they are honored to have him visit Washington and added Obama is looking forward to meeting with him.
The Secretary of State declared Israel and the US must work together to bring change and hope to the future.
Peres told Clinton her name in Israeli is synonymous to that of a true friend operating under harsh conditions in a wise and creative way while creating a sense of security without giving up even when things get rough.
He added the Middle East is weathering a strong storm as the young generation calls for change, democracy and peace. Israel hopes the Arab world finds a way to promote peace and democratization, said Peres, then Israel would be glad to cooperate for peace and stability.
White House Advisor Dennis Ross addressed the issue of US-Israeli relations Monday saying they have become more important at a time of uncertainty in the Middle East. Ross told the Anti-Defamation League's annual leadership conference that Israel must see her security issues are being addressed by the US.
Ross stressed he cannot recall a time between the two countries when the security relationship was so close and cooperation was so strong and focalized. He added that Israelis must handle their security issues in a way that would not leave them vulnerable. Ross hinted at US intentions regarding the peace process and said Israel should allow Palestinians to have more authorities.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052261,00.html
Minister: Goldstone to visit Israel
Israel's interior minister says that international jurist Richard Goldstone has accepted an invitation to visit Israel, reports the Associated Press.
The move comes after Goldstone wrote an opinion piece revisiting the conclusions drawn by a United Nations war crimes report bearing his name that explored Israel's 22-day operation in the Gaza Strip in 2008-2009.
Eli Yishai told Israel Army radio Tuesday he invited Goldstone to tour southern Israeli communities that sustained Hamas rocket fire.
Yishai says he told Goldstone it was courageous to reconsider the report and asked the retired South African judge to officially retract it. Yishai didn't say if Goldstone agreed to do so.
Israel two years ago refused to cooperate with the UN investigation.
http://www.jmcc.org/news.aspx?id=2564
US welcomes Goldstone retraction
State Department clarifies administration never saw evidence Israel intentionally targeted civilians during Gaza war. Clinton to Peres: We must work together.
The American State Department responded Tuesday, for the first time, to Judge Richard Goldstone's retraction of his Operation Cast Lead findings, saying: "We've made clear from when the Goldstone Report was initially presented, and maintained ever since, that we didn't see any evidence that the Israeli government had intentionally targeted civilians or otherwise engaged in any war crimes," State Department Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said.
Toner clarified the United States government read Goldstone's op-ed article published in the Washington Post Friday, and emphasized that the administration's stance on the matter remains the same as it was since the United Nations' Human Rights Council appointed Goldstone as chairman of the inquiry committee into the Gaza War.
Toner said Washington believes Israel has undertaken a credible internal processes to examine its own actions, adding that Goldstone acknowledged this. He added the US remains concerned by what they call "anti-Israeli bias" in the US Human Rights Council.
The State Department spokesman refused to address the Goldstone committee's proceedings.
A spokesman for the UN Human Rights Council said for the report to be withdrawn Goldstone would have to submit a formal request to the Geneva-based body, which he has not done.
Stormy weather in Mideast
Meanwhile President Shimon Peres met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington. The two discussed the recent Mideast changes and attempted to find new ways to renew the peace process and strengthen ties between Jerusalem and Washington.
Clinton said this is a time of great challenges and many opportunities. She mentioned she looks forward to important conversations with Peres in which the two will discuss the strong friendship between the two countries. Clinton complimented Peres, saying that at age 88 he is one of the younger people she knows.
Peres is expected to meet with US President Barack Obama Tuesday. Clinton told Peres they are honored to have him visit Washington and added Obama is looking forward to meeting with him.
The Secretary of State declared Israel and the US must work together to bring change and hope to the future.
Peres told Clinton her name in Israeli is synonymous to that of a true friend operating under harsh conditions in a wise and creative way while creating a sense of security without giving up even when things get rough.
He added the Middle East is weathering a strong storm as the young generation calls for change, democracy and peace. Israel hopes the Arab world finds a way to promote peace and democratization, said Peres, then Israel would be glad to cooperate for peace and stability.
White House Advisor Dennis Ross addressed the issue of US-Israeli relations Monday saying they have become more important at a time of uncertainty in the Middle East. Ross told the Anti-Defamation League's annual leadership conference that Israel must see her security issues are being addressed by the US.
Ross stressed he cannot recall a time between the two countries when the security relationship was so close and cooperation was so strong and focalized. He added that Israelis must handle their security issues in a way that would not leave them vulnerable. Ross hinted at US intentions regarding the peace process and said Israel should allow Palestinians to have more authorities.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052261,00.html
