Observations:
The UN Sides with Terrorists - Editorial (Washington Times)
Suppose a UN investigation team found that the U.S. had committed war crimes in its response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The report finds that while al-Qaeda may have been culpable for the attacks, America was equally to blame - if not more so - for the civilian deaths caused during Operation Enduring Freedom. The UN instructs the U.S. to conduct an internal investigation and punish the perpetrators, or face action from the International Criminal Court. This is the framework established by the Goldstone Commission Report.
Much of the report was cut and pasted from unsubstantiated and suspect reports from nongovernmental organizations with openly anti-Israel sentiments. Some of the "witnesses" interviewed by the mission were disguised Hamas officials.
Even more troublingly is the report's ignoring of the differences between Israel, a sovereign state with a professional armed forces governed by strict policies to limit civilian deaths during the conduct of war, and Hamas, a terrorist organization. After the conflict, Israel conducted some 100 investigations into reports of misconduct by its troops.
There is no moral equality between Hamas and Israel any more than there is between al-Qaeda and the U.S.
See also Was Churchill a War Criminal? - Ophir Falk (Ynet News)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, October 19, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Obma supports J Street which is anti-Israel
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1121716.html
J Street embraced by Obama administration, but not in Jerusalem
By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya
The Obama administration appears to be welcoming the efforts of the left-leaning Jewish lobby in Washington, J Street.
While Israel's ambassador to the U.S. will probably not be attending the group's October 25 conference, senior U.S. administration officials who have confirmed their participation include James Jones, national security adviser in the Obama administration.
Advertisement
J Street was set up more than two years ago to offer an antidote to the large and powerful America Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC enjoys substantial support in both the Democratic and Republican parties and is identified with a more "rightist" line on the peace process. J Street defines itself as being "for Israel and for the peace process."
Senior members of J Street have had close ties to senior figures in the Obama campaign, and since he was elected, they have been consulted by the administration. When President Obama met with the heads of Jewish organizations in the U.S., representatives of J Street were also invited.
Participation in the J Street conference is a very sensitive political issue in Washington - and also at the Foreign Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem.
Ambassador Michael Oren has still not acknowledged an invitation to address the conference. Senior Israeli officials say Oren has not been given any instruction and was told the decision to participate or not was his to make. Oren apparently is inclined not to participate and to send a lower-ranking diplomat in his stead.
Arguments against the ambassador's participation were put forward, primarily the belief J Street is not a pro-Israel lobby, despite its claims.
In Israel, there is concern that AIPAC will interpret participation as an act against it. "You don't turn your back on someone who has acted in your favor for decades," said a senior Israeli official. "Certainly not in favor of an organization that has done nothing for Israel." The official added: "We have no reason to build up or bolster J Street."
Israeli domestic politics are also a likely factor in the decision on whether to participate or not. The vast majority of the politicians from Israel who have confirmed their participation in the J Street conference are from the left, mostly Meretz and Labor.
Meanwhile, J Street's executive director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, sent a letter to ambassador Oren Friday, inviting him to the conference, reiterating the support of the group for Israel and for an immediate resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through peaceful means. Ben-Ami said that at the conference "we will come together as pro-Israel activists to discuss the best path forward for Israel and the United States in troubling circumstances, balancing a desire for security and for peace and a commitment to the values we bring to the table as Jews and as Americans."
He also reminded Oren that in the past "you've spoken publicly of the need for Israeli officials to engage with progressive elements in the American Jewish community that have not traditionally been attracted to pro-Israel lobbying
J Street embraced by Obama administration, but not in Jerusalem
By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya
The Obama administration appears to be welcoming the efforts of the left-leaning Jewish lobby in Washington, J Street.
While Israel's ambassador to the U.S. will probably not be attending the group's October 25 conference, senior U.S. administration officials who have confirmed their participation include James Jones, national security adviser in the Obama administration.
Advertisement
J Street was set up more than two years ago to offer an antidote to the large and powerful America Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC enjoys substantial support in both the Democratic and Republican parties and is identified with a more "rightist" line on the peace process. J Street defines itself as being "for Israel and for the peace process."
Senior members of J Street have had close ties to senior figures in the Obama campaign, and since he was elected, they have been consulted by the administration. When President Obama met with the heads of Jewish organizations in the U.S., representatives of J Street were also invited.
Participation in the J Street conference is a very sensitive political issue in Washington - and also at the Foreign Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem.
Ambassador Michael Oren has still not acknowledged an invitation to address the conference. Senior Israeli officials say Oren has not been given any instruction and was told the decision to participate or not was his to make. Oren apparently is inclined not to participate and to send a lower-ranking diplomat in his stead.
Arguments against the ambassador's participation were put forward, primarily the belief J Street is not a pro-Israel lobby, despite its claims.
In Israel, there is concern that AIPAC will interpret participation as an act against it. "You don't turn your back on someone who has acted in your favor for decades," said a senior Israeli official. "Certainly not in favor of an organization that has done nothing for Israel." The official added: "We have no reason to build up or bolster J Street."
Israeli domestic politics are also a likely factor in the decision on whether to participate or not. The vast majority of the politicians from Israel who have confirmed their participation in the J Street conference are from the left, mostly Meretz and Labor.
Meanwhile, J Street's executive director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, sent a letter to ambassador Oren Friday, inviting him to the conference, reiterating the support of the group for Israel and for an immediate resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through peaceful means. Ben-Ami said that at the conference "we will come together as pro-Israel activists to discuss the best path forward for Israel and the United States in troubling circumstances, balancing a desire for security and for peace and a commitment to the values we bring to the table as Jews and as Americans."
He also reminded Oren that in the past "you've spoken publicly of the need for Israeli officials to engage with progressive elements in the American Jewish community that have not traditionally been attracted to pro-Israel lobbying
Friday, October 16, 2009
disgusting UN anti Human rights
N rights council endorses Gaza war crimes report
AP
By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press Writer Frank Jordans, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 45 mins ago
GENEVA – The U.N. Human Rights Council voted Friday to endorse a Gaza war crimes report that calls on Israel and Hamas to carry out credible investigations into alleged abuses — or face possible referral to international war crimes prosecutors.
The move — which was opposed by six nations, including the United States — means Israel could find itself facing a request at the U.N. Security Council to refer the case to prosecutors at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, a move likely to be blocked by Washington.
Still, Friday's decision could have far-reaching implications for the way the global body deals with war crimes claims, experts said.
It also keeps attention on the report, compiled by an expert panel chaired by respected South African jurist Richard Goldstone, just as President Barack Obama tries to restart the Middle East peace process. Almost 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the Dec. 27-Jan. 18 conflict.
The 575-page document concluded that Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its incursion into the Gaza Strip to root out Palestinian rocket squads.
AP
By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press Writer Frank Jordans, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 45 mins ago
GENEVA – The U.N. Human Rights Council voted Friday to endorse a Gaza war crimes report that calls on Israel and Hamas to carry out credible investigations into alleged abuses — or face possible referral to international war crimes prosecutors.
The move — which was opposed by six nations, including the United States — means Israel could find itself facing a request at the U.N. Security Council to refer the case to prosecutors at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, a move likely to be blocked by Washington.
Still, Friday's decision could have far-reaching implications for the way the global body deals with war crimes claims, experts said.
It also keeps attention on the report, compiled by an expert panel chaired by respected South African jurist Richard Goldstone, just as President Barack Obama tries to restart the Middle East peace process. Almost 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the Dec. 27-Jan. 18 conflict.
The 575-page document concluded that Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its incursion into the Gaza Strip to root out Palestinian rocket squads.
Israel most moral ever
UN Watch Briefing: "Speech of the Year"
News and Analysis from UN Watch in Geneva Vol. 208 | October 16, 2009
British Hero Tells U.N. Council: 'IDF Most Moral Army in History of Warfare'
Today's emergency UN Human Rights Council debate on the Goldstone Report predictably saw a line-up of the world's worst abusers condemn democratic Israel for human rights violations. In a heated lynch mob atmosphere, Kuwait slammed Israel for “intentional killing, intentional destruction of civilian objects, intentional scorched-earth policy,” saying Israel “embodied the Agatha Christie novel, 'Escaped with Murder'.” Pakistan said the “horrors of Israeli occupation continue to haunt the international community’s conscience.” The Arab League said, “We must condemn Israel and force Israel to accept international legitimacy." Ahmadinejad’s Iran said “the atrocities committed against Palestinians during the aggressions on Gaza should be taken seriously” and followed up by the international community “to put an end to absolute impunity and defiance of the law.”
What the world's assembled representatives did not expect, however, was the speech that followed (see video and text below), organized by UN Watch. We invited as our speaker a man who repeatedly put his life on the line to defend the democratic world from the murderous Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, and the Taleban. The moment he began his first sentence, the room simply fell silent. Judge Goldstone, author of the biased report that prompted today's one-sided condemnation, had refused to hear Col. Kemp's testimony during his "fact-finding" hearings. But UN Watch made sure today that this hero's voice would be heard -- at the U.N., and around the world.
_________
UN Human Rights Council, 12th Special Session
Debate on Goldstone Report
Geneva, 16 October 2009
IDF Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Army in History of Warfare
Delivered by Col. Richard Kemp
Thank you, Mr. President.
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 Defense 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.
Thank you, Mr. President.
News and Analysis from UN Watch in Geneva Vol. 208 | October 16, 2009
British Hero Tells U.N. Council: 'IDF Most Moral Army in History of Warfare'
Today's emergency UN Human Rights Council debate on the Goldstone Report predictably saw a line-up of the world's worst abusers condemn democratic Israel for human rights violations. In a heated lynch mob atmosphere, Kuwait slammed Israel for “intentional killing, intentional destruction of civilian objects, intentional scorched-earth policy,” saying Israel “embodied the Agatha Christie novel, 'Escaped with Murder'.” Pakistan said the “horrors of Israeli occupation continue to haunt the international community’s conscience.” The Arab League said, “We must condemn Israel and force Israel to accept international legitimacy." Ahmadinejad’s Iran said “the atrocities committed against Palestinians during the aggressions on Gaza should be taken seriously” and followed up by the international community “to put an end to absolute impunity and defiance of the law.”
What the world's assembled representatives did not expect, however, was the speech that followed (see video and text below), organized by UN Watch. We invited as our speaker a man who repeatedly put his life on the line to defend the democratic world from the murderous Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, and the Taleban. The moment he began his first sentence, the room simply fell silent. Judge Goldstone, author of the biased report that prompted today's one-sided condemnation, had refused to hear Col. Kemp's testimony during his "fact-finding" hearings. But UN Watch made sure today that this hero's voice would be heard -- at the U.N., and around the world.
_________
UN Human Rights Council, 12th Special Session
Debate on Goldstone Report
Geneva, 16 October 2009
IDF Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Army in History of Warfare
Delivered by Col. Richard Kemp
Thank you, Mr. President.
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 Defense 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.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Hagee and Farrakham
He wrote:
"Would you be as willing to turn a deaf ear to Louis Farrakhan if he gave a lot of money to Israel? I don't see there being any real difference between Hagee and himk.="
The obvious logical fallacy here is that Hagee works night and day to SUPPORT Israel and Jews and Farrakhan is an anti-Semite and anti-Israel.He represents 100 million Americans who love Israel. See http://dailymuslimatrocities.blogspot.com/ for story after story of how the world is working feverishly to declare Israel a pariah state,and to kill Jews and Israel. Israel is not sure it will be able to depend on the US forever as a friend
WHO WILL SUPPORT ISRAEL? The left and moderate Churches? No they are pressing boycotts. The Universities?-Israel apartheid weeks are growing. The Left in the US? Come on. The US Jews? Many don't care and do nothing. J Street? Israel warned them yesterday they are undermining Israel. Should Israel be friendless? Be clear about who are our friends and who not.
"Would you be as willing to turn a deaf ear to Louis Farrakhan if he gave a lot of money to Israel? I don't see there being any real difference between Hagee and himk.="
The obvious logical fallacy here is that Hagee works night and day to SUPPORT Israel and Jews and Farrakhan is an anti-Semite and anti-Israel.He represents 100 million Americans who love Israel. See http://dailymuslimatrocities.blogspot.com/ for story after story of how the world is working feverishly to declare Israel a pariah state,and to kill Jews and Israel. Israel is not sure it will be able to depend on the US forever as a friend
WHO WILL SUPPORT ISRAEL? The left and moderate Churches? No they are pressing boycotts. The Universities?-Israel apartheid weeks are growing. The Left in the US? Come on. The US Jews? Many don't care and do nothing. J Street? Israel warned them yesterday they are undermining Israel. Should Israel be friendless? Be clear about who are our friends and who not.
Green Inventions
Israeli Inventions that Could Shape the Next Green Century - Ehud Zion Waldoks (Jerusalem Post)
A biomass that could replace coal, a new type of engine that runs on a fifth of the gas of the internal combustion engine, a smart faucet that saves water and energy.
These are some of the practical, clean technologies nearing production that will be presented at the Israeli Presidential Conference: Facing Tomorrow 2009 at the Jerusalem International Convention Center next week.
A biomass that could replace coal, a new type of engine that runs on a fifth of the gas of the internal combustion engine, a smart faucet that saves water and energy.
These are some of the practical, clean technologies nearing production that will be presented at the Israeli Presidential Conference: Facing Tomorrow 2009 at the Jerusalem International Convention Center next week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
