Judge Goldstone recants: new evidence/data "indicate that civilians were NOT intentionally targeted" by Israel. Unlike by Hamas.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 10:32 PM GMT
    While the propaganda pouncers of the world seek to forge "facts" to suit their notions and pay lip service to reverse-engineered faux "principles", others - including one of their sources - are not so limited.

    In an op-ed on Friday, Judge Goldstone wrote:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html
    Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes
    By Richard Goldstone, Friday, April 1

    We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.

    The final report by the U.N. committee of independent experts — chaired by former New York judge Mary McGowan Davis — that followed up on the recommendations of the Goldstone Report has found that “Israel has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza” while “the de facto authorities (i.e., Hamas) have not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel.”

    Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity” by both Israel and Hamas. That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.

    The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

    ...Something that has not been recognized often enough is the fact that our report marked the first time illegal acts of terrorism from Hamas were being investigated and condemned by the United Nations. I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted.

    ...our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.

    Some have suggested that it was absurd to expect Hamas, an organization that has a policy to destroy the state of Israel, to investigate what we said were serious war crimes. It was my hope, even if unrealistic, that Hamas would do so, especially if Israel conducted its own investigations. At minimum I hoped that in the face of a clear finding that its members were committing serious war crimes, Hamas would curtail its attacks. Sadly, that has not been the case. Hundreds more rockets and mortar rounds have been directed at civilian targets in southern Israel. That comparatively few Israelis have been killed by the unlawful rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza in no way minimizes the criminality. The U.N. Human Rights Council should condemn these heinous acts in the strongest terms.

    ...I continue to believe in the cause of establishing and applying international law to protracted and deadly conflicts. Our report has led to numerous “lessons learned” and policy changes, including the adoption of new Israel Defense Forces procedures for protecting civilians in cases of urban warfare and limiting the use of white phosphorus in civilian areas. The Palestinian Authority established an independent inquiry into our allegations of human rights abuses — assassinations, torture and illegal detentions — perpetrated by Fatah in the West Bank, especially against members of Hamas. Most of those allegations were confirmed by this inquiry. Regrettably, there has been no effort by Hamas in Gaza to investigate the allegations of its war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

    Simply put, the laws of armed conflict apply no less to non-state actors such as Hamas than they do to national armies. Ensuring that non-state actors respect these principles, and are investigated when they fail to do so, is one of the most significant challenges facing the law of armed conflict. Only if all parties to armed conflicts are held to these standards will we be able to protect civilians who, through no choice of their own, are caught up in war.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 10:40 PM GMT
    It's nice to see Judge Goldstone recant, but as David Harris said:
    Judge Goldstone should apologize to the State of Israel for the accusations of intentionally targeting civilians, which he now admits were unfounded. He should present his updated conclusions to the UN Human Rights Council, as well as to the General Assembly, which endorsed the skewed report, and press for its rejection.


    See also:

    Understanding the Goldstone Report
    http://www.goldstonereport.org

    Hamas admits it lied about Casualties...
    Yet some RJers still attempt to spam & perpetuate those propaganda lies-for-the-cause?!

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1217613

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 11:02 PM GMT
    For the love of Thor.... could y'all give these Palestine/Israel threads a bit of a rest? LOL....

    I know that these topics are really near and dear to y'all.... but I'd sure love to read what you (in particular, C4/Pouncer/RealLifeDad/SexyDarkHair) guys have to say beyond debating the finer points of Palestinian/Israeli relations.

    Just sayin'.

    Peace / Shalom / Salaam. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 1:12 AM GMT
    Again, not that I want to get into this, but:

    http://ajpfp.tumblr.com/post/4325856413/goldstone-retractions-vs-facts

    The publication of Richard Goldstone’s op-ed in The Washington Post on Friday heralded a weekend of frenzied hasbara. Goldstone’s “retraction” (though ‘qualification’ is more accurate) of the report into Operation Cast Lead was welcomed by Israeli leaders, Israel advocates in the USA, and others. Ha’aretz columnist Aluf Benn described Goldstone’s op-ed has “a major public relations coup”, claiming that Goldstone had “retracted his allegations that Israel had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during Operation Cast Lead”.

    These responses ironically paralleled the fallout to the Report itself, with sound and fury (and in this case, delight) preferable to cold facts. Since the Israeli government and its propagandists have a track record in establishing certain ‘myths’ and ‘truths’ that are then repeated for years to come, here are five points about the Goldstone op-ed and the fallout.
    1. The Washington Post is not the United Nations.

    Or, in other words, an opinion column in a newspaper does not have the same weight – to say the least – as a UN-commissioned report stretching over 500 pages, written by four respected international jurists. Sounds obvious I know, but you wouldn’t think it, to see some of the Israel lobby responses. Oh, and just to reiterate a point – the Report was written by four jurists, not Goldstone by himself.

    2. What the Report actually claimed about the targeting of civilians.

    In his op-ed, Goldstone wrote that Israel’s own investigations (see below) “indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”. This in particular has been seized on as an indication that a core element of the Report has been ‘retracted’.

    This is misleading. The Report never claimed that Israel set out to intentionally murder civilians, but said that Cast Lead was “deliberately disproportionate” and intended “to punish, humiliate and terrorize”. Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, has been making this point on Twitter. He commented, that the “crime of indiscriminate warfare” – not “deliberate killing” – was indeed “state policy”, and that there had been “no retraction” on that part.

    There is no shortage of evidence regarding Israel’s deliberately disproportionate use of force. Even during the attacks, Israel was preparing for the ‘day after’, under “the working assumption” that “Israel has suffered a blow to its image in the West in the wake of heavy civilian casualties” –a “negative sentiment” that would “only grow as the full picture of destruction emerges”.

    An IDF spokesperson said that: “Anything affiliated with Hamas is a legitimate target”, while on 14 January, as the military assault continued, The Jerusalem Post reported Shimon Peres’ description of Israel’s aim as “to provide a strong blow to the people of Gaza so that they would lose their appetite for shooting at Israel”.

    Then there’s the so-called ‘Dahiya Doctrine’ (after the Lebanon war in 2006) – coined when the IDF Northern Command chief in October 2008 discussed how Israel would conduct the next war: “civilian villages” would be considered as “military bases”, an “approved” plan, he affirmed. Another paper written by a reserve Colonel for the Institute of National Security Studies (INSS) at Tel Aviv University – titled ‘Disproportionate Force’- observed:

    With an outbreak of hostilities, the IDF will need to act immediately, decisively, and with force that is disproportionate to the enemy’s actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes.

    These recommendations were noted by Ha’aretz, two months before Operation Cast Lead, in an article titled, ‘IDF plans to use disproportionate force in next war’.

    One could go on – there are the booklets given to soldiers by the Israeli army’s chief rabbinate, especially produced for Cast Lead, that in one section compared “Palestinians to the Philistines”, or the disclosures by Israeli military personnel since the attack, such as one commander’s admission that the IDF “rewrote the rules of war for Gaza”

    3. The Goldstone Report’s findings were corroborated by other groups and investigations…

    …such as the Human Rights Watch report on white phosphorus, Breaking the Silence’s testimonies, and evidence from PCHR in Gaza. B’Tselem documented 252 dead children, a report by two Israeli used testimonies to allege the use of human shields, and Amnesty International concluded that “Israeli forces committed war crimes and other serious breaches of international law”, including “indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks against civilians”. There is also the report[PDF] by the US National Lawyers Guild delegation to Gaza, and the Independent Fact Finding Committee report [PDF] commissioned by the Arab League, and made up of experts from South Africa, Netherlands, Norway, Chile/Germany, Portugal, and Australia.

    An important side point here –remember how in the wake of the publication of the Goldstone Report, Israeli military officials and politicians spoke about the need “for changes in the international laws of war”. Why the imperative to ‘change’ the laws, if Israel had not broken any?

    4. When the accused conducts ‘independent’ investigations of itself.

    In his op-ed, Goldstone makes reference to Israel’s own internal investigations of allegations regarding Cast Lead, commenting that “Israel has done this [investigate ‘transparently and in good faith’] to a significant degree”. Goldstone cited the UN report into how the original Report’s recommendations are being implemented, yet there is a strange discrepancy.

    While Goldstone felt able in his op-ed to refer to what was (or wasn’t) being endorsed by Israel as “a matter of policy”, the UN Committee[PDF] repeats testimony by Israel’s Military Attorney General (MAG) that “the military investigations system he heads is not a viable mechanism to investigate and assess high-level policy decisions”. The Committee also (somewhat drily) noted that the MAG’s “dual responsibilities” as both “legal advisor” to the “military authorities”, as well as “his role as supervisor of criminal investigations…raises concerns” [my emphasis]. In other words, Israel’s internal investigations are conducted by the lawyer of the subject of the investigation.

    The Goldstone Report itself noted that the Israeli system “to deal with allegations of serious wrongdoing by armed forces personnel does not comply” with the relevant international principles. There is no shortage of examples of the culture of impunity. Amnesty International slammed the Turkel Commission into the murderous assault on the flotilla as a “whitewash”. Last November, The Jerusalem Post reported that the IDF had investigated 400 “complaints” related to Operation Cast Lead, interviewed “more than 600 officers and soldiers”, and the total number of indictments to date was three. A report by Israeli NGO Yesh Din revealed that between 2000 and 2009, less than 6 percent of investigations by the military police “against soldiers suspected of committing offenses against Palestinians and their property” led to indictments. B’Tselem’s report last year, ‘Void of Responsibility’, featured similar statistics: out of 148 cases in which Palestinians were killed between 2006 and 2009, only 22 resulted in a military police probe.

    5. What the op-ed did not even mention.

    As others have pointed out, the Goldstone Report’s findings were not just related to the deaths of civilians; on the contrary, there were numerous other aspects of Israel’s conduct in Gaza that the Report considered unlawful, including: use of certain weapons, the use of human shields, and the destruction of property.

    Not only that, but the Report also focused on th
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 1:51 AM GMT
    Seriously, Fountains?
    I expected better from you.

    > 1. The Washington Post is not the United Nations.

    Right, the venue is more important than the facts?
    All the more reason for the UN to take the additional formal step to pull the report.


    > 2. ...The Report never claimed that Israel set out to intentionally murder civilians

    Odd, that's exactly what the ilk of pouncer and tokugawa claimed it did - and you said nothing.

    More on this point, from Goldstone directly, below.


    > was “deliberately disproportionate” and intended “to punish, humiliate and terrorize”.

    Goldstone actually does address this in his retraction. Whereas previously he didn't understand the need for certain operations (other as described above), now he understood their military justification - including in cases where this led to (unintentional!) civilian casualties.


    > 3. The Goldstone Report’s findings were corroborated by other groups and investigations

    Due to the same flawed methodology.


    > Israeli military officials and politicians spoke about the need “for changes in the international laws of war”. Why the imperative to ‘change’ the laws, if Israel had not broken any?

    Talk about a pathetic and specious argument, this was not at all Israel's point.


    > 4. When the accused conducts ‘independent’ investigations of itself.

    The Geneva Conventions call for internal investigations.

    Goldstone: an appropriate process is underway, and I am confident that if the officer is found to have been negligent, Israel will respond accordingly. The purpose of these investigations, as I have always said, is to ensure accountability for improper actions, not to second-guess, with the benefit of hindsight, commanders making difficult battlefield decisions.

    Goldstone: our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.


    > 5. What the op-ed did not even mention. ...Goldstone restates the Report’s original position: “Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and ‘possibly crimes against humanity’ by both Israel and Hamas.”

    Which, under international law, require internal investigation and correction. Which isn't the point the author Fountain's link seeks, who argues to "refer the matter to the International Criminal Court".


    In fact, I think this one paragraph from Goldstone's retraction does away with the hack job Fountains mentions:

    Goldstone: 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.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 1:55 AM GMT
    When I read this the other day I felt it was suspect that Goldstone was seen as doing a complete turn around. Had the Israeli's cooperated as requested in the first place these corrections wouldn't have had to be made. The come back from Israel was, well neither did Hamas cooperate, so what of it !! Hamas wasn't complaining about it like the Israeli's were either.

    But the Propaganda Machine in Israel pushed and pushed to get that report to fit its Propaganda, now they'll spin this correction into a full turn around of the report and this will be what is forwarded from now on. My saying this though does not mean that I think the Israeli, Government sat down and sceemed to bomb civilians.

    You realize now Fountains, that your now at crosswires with C4's Zionist Israeli's are always right and have never done wrong in their career don't you !!! Be afraid be very afraid of being labeled a jew hater now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:11 PM GMT
    Unable to address my criticisms of the article posted by fountains, pouncer simply spams it again:

    > 1. The Washington Post is not the United Nations.

    Right, the venue is more important than the facts?
    All the more reason for the UN to take the additional formal step to pull the report.


    > 2. ...The Report never claimed that Israel set out to intentionally murder civilians

    Odd, that's exactly what the ilk of pouncer and tokugawa claimed it did - and you said nothing.

    More on this point, from Goldstone directly, below.


    > was “deliberately disproportionate” and intended “to punish, humiliate and terrorize”.

    Goldstone actually does address this in his retraction. Whereas previously he didn't understand the need for certain operations (other as described above), now he understood their military justification - including in cases where this led to (unintentional!) civilian casualties.


    > 3. The Goldstone Report’s findings were corroborated by other groups and investigations

    Due to the same flawed methodology.


    > Israeli military officials and politicians spoke about the need “for changes in the international laws of war”. Why the imperative to ‘change’ the laws, if Israel had not broken any?

    Talk about a pathetic and specious argument, this was not at all Israel's point.


    > 4. When the accused conducts ‘independent’ investigations of itself.

    The Geneva Conventions call for internal investigations.

    Goldstone: an appropriate process is underway, and I am confident that if the officer is found to have been negligent, Israel will respond accordingly. The purpose of these investigations, as I have always said, is to ensure accountability for improper actions, not to second-guess, with the benefit of hindsight, commanders making difficult battlefield decisions.

    Goldstone: our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.


    > 5. What the op-ed did not even mention. ...Goldstone restates the Report’s original position: “Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and ‘possibly crimes against humanity’ by both Israel and Hamas.”

    Which, under international law, require internal investigation and correction. Which isn't the point the author Fountain's link seeks, who argues to "refer the matter to the International Criminal Court".


    In fact, I think this one paragraph from Goldstone's retraction does away with the hack job Fountains mentions:

    Goldstone: 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.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 3:10 PM GMT
    Pouncer, What do you bet there's an AIPAC influenced editor involved in putting out that Washington Post article in the way it forwarded what the Propagandists wanted. I

    Isn't it interesting to watch how this ZIONIST FANATIC goes into overdrive in defense of his Zionist Propaganda once he see's that there are holes riddled through it, showing that he's wrong again. The whole operation of the fanatics leading Israel into such violations, is being exposed to the world and the world authorities are not buying the propaganda lies to cover their shit. It must torture him me thinks !!!

    I'd bet that the everyday reasonable Jewish people are with the Palestinians looking forward to the day when the US calls for an end to the Fanaticsm that's blocking peace, because if the US stops backing their shit it will end immediately.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 7:46 PM GMT
    For starters, the presumption of guilt unless proven innocent.

    The only worthwhile thing (despite your usual twisting) you managed to post above is:

    p> If you actually read the article in the WP by Goldstone (in which he blames Israel for any inaccuracy in his report's findings

    First, let's expose your lie about "blame".
    Here's what Goldstone actually wrote:

    Goldstone: I would have welcomed Israel’s cooperation. The purpose of the Goldstone Report was never to prove a foregone conclusion against Israel. I insisted on changing the original mandate adopted by the Human Rights Council, which was skewed against Israel.

    This is the same HRC which was previously chaired by Libya and which read like a "who's who" of the worlds greated abusers of human rights (never, of course, focusing on themselves but on others). The same organization which previously published its "conclusions" before perpetrating a pro forma "investigation" to white wash its "conclusions".

    So in the best of all possible worlds, we wouldn't have such a shameful UN body and Israel would have cooperated with a bona fide investigation. Or even moreso, rather than rush to establish Israel's guilt within a matter of weeks, organizations would have allowed time for Israel to first properly investigate the allegations (as required by international law) and only then following up (if it did not act accordingly - as in the present case of Hamas).

    Goldstone: Some have charged that the process we followed did not live up to judicial standards. To be clear: Our mission was in no way a judicial or even quasi-judicial proceeding. We did not investigate criminal conduct on the part of any individual in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank. We made our recommendations based on the record before us, which unfortunately did not include any evidence provided by the Israeli government. Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.

    I believe you previously made an analogy to a grand jury. At best it was saying that there was an indication of wrong-doing, not evidence of it. As the evidence has become available, this is what led to Goldstone's retractment:

    Goldstone: Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity” by both Israel and Hamas. That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets. The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they [new evidence/data] also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

    Now consider just how sensationally stupid the closing line from fountain's link is, that "it’s time to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 11:27 PM GMT
    Pouncer, have you ever seen such "SHITZPAH" coming from this self important LEERON, who here claims the inside 'knowledge' for inferring, or should I say claiming, that all those acclaimed world authorities collaborated to hold the "presumption of guilt", against the always right Zionist leaders who never in their history took misadvantage of any Palestinians. YAH RIGHT !!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 12:44 AM GMT
    Evidently, incapable of saying anything intelligent, let alone addressing the issues that were being discussed, pouncer resorts to spamming further kangaroo court accusations (which only show he doesn't even understand the metrics involved or under discussion).

    p> If you actually read the article in the WP by Goldstone (in which he blames Israel for any inaccuracy in his report's findings

    P1. First, let's expose your lie about "blame".
    Here's what Goldstone actually wrote:

    Goldstone: I would have welcomed Israel’s cooperation. The purpose of the Goldstone Report was never to prove a foregone conclusion against Israel. I insisted on changing the original mandate adopted by the Human Rights Council, which was skewed against Israel.


    p> he still seems to lay the onus for any of his report's "inaccuracies" on a lack of cooperation by Israel, which he would have "appreciated".

    Go figure, a new pouncer lie ("onus") to defend his previous ("blame"), again putting word's into Goldstone's text which are clearly not there.


    P2. This is the same HRC which was previously chaired by Libya and which read like a "who's who" of the worlds greated abusers of human rights (never, of course, focusing on themselves but on others). The same organization which previously published its "conclusions" before perpetrating a pro forma "investigation" to white wash its "conclusions".

    So in the best of all possible worlds, we wouldn't have such a shameful UN body and Israel would have cooperated with a bona fide investigation. Or even moreso, rather than rush to establish Israel's guilt within a matter of weeks, organizations would have allowed time for Israel to first properly investigate the allegations (as required by international law) and only then following up (if it did not act accordingly - as in the present case of Hamas).


    p> Goldstone obviously has spoken out against the UN Human Rights Council, but....

    No "but..." necessary (and that "but" is just the "onus" lie quoted above).
    Characteristically, pouncer has nothing intelligent to say regarding this point.



    P3. pouncer (when not falsely pushing it as a judgement) previously made an analogy to a grand jury. At best it was saying that there was an indication of wrong-doing, not evidence of it. As the evidence has become available, it led to Goldstone's retractment:

    Goldstone: Some have charged that the process we followed did not live up to judicial standards. To be clear: Our mission was in no way a judicial or even quasi-judicial proceeding. We did not investigate criminal conduct on the part of any individual in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank. We made our recommendations based on the record before us, which unfortunately did not include any evidence provided by the Israeli government. Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.

    Goldstone: Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity” by both Israel and Hamas. That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets. The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they [new evidence/data] also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

    Now consider just how sensationally stupid the closing line from fountain's link is, that "it’s time to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court".


    p> The presumption of guilt unless proven innocent? The only way to "prove Israel innocent" would be precisely the road you don't want to go down - the International Criminal Court.

    OMG. Is he really that retarded?

    pouncer argues that when a grand jury reverses its opinion, first saying that there is a lack of evidence but potentially a crime, and then (when the evidence comes in) saying it exonerates (one of) the accused... this is when pouncer pimps the need for the exonerated accused party to be tried... while (despite his faux principles) the other accused should walk?

    pouncer shills as being Western, but his thought process betrays him.
    Does anyone else (aside from the usual suspects of foreign upbringing) not understand the presumption of innocence?
    .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 1:49 AM GMT
    Why don't you understand the legal issues involved - even when they've already been explained to you?

    Ae you just trying to pile it higher & deeper precisely because you can't address not only what I've said, but what Goldstone wrote?

    That is, when you're not characteristically twisting and lying about what he said.

    Indeed, it's funny how quickly you've dropped the "guilty until proven innocent" line.
    Quickly, perhaps, but too late. Once again you exposed yourself.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 2:15 AM GMT
    Pouncer saidOnce again - no answers.

    You never do seem to have answers, thus your constant lies and diversions.
    Come back if and when you have answers for what Goldstone and I said.
  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 05, 2011 2:19 AM GMT
    I have to say you guys sure know how to keep up the energy at this...

    Like how much adderall does it take? lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 2:20 AM GMT
    Why do you even bother with your nattering nonsensical posts when you can't address the topic?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 3:52 AM GMT
    If you don't wish to be "burdened" by inconvenient truths, just put me on ignore.

    At least my "hobby" is a labor of love, unlike your dishonest, illogical, unprincipled, hypocritical hatist-racist nonsense.

    What pouncer is really lamenting: that he can't counter what I say and would rather I go away.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 1:37 PM GMT
    Pouncer saidPutting you on ignore would simply give you the luxury of infecting others unhindered.

    Your "hobby" is lurid and based on an unapologetic "us versus them" mentality. Meaning that even if your views were often correct (and they're not), they'd still fall well below the water margin of what constitutes reasonable disagreement with your Muslim and Arab neighbours in Palestine. Ditto too for your Mulsim and Arab compatriots in Israel itself - whom you hold in barely disguised contempt.


    _____________________________________________________________


    And a strange labor of love this must be for this OBNOXIOUS ZIONIST FANATIC who dayly has to stretch the truth/reality to fit his propaganda that he's always right. It appears to me that he has to have a hell of a lot of hate for the palestinians and those muslim country's around Israel to keep up his Labor of Love, kind of a Love to Hate them mentality,

    It must be a torturous effort on Leerons part, to have to work and strain so hard to be right while his propaganda falls apart all around him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:02 PM GMT
    It is fairly clear that Goldstone is a man of considerable integrity.

    I wish that you guys would follow his example.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2011 7:46 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidIt is fairly clear that Goldstone is a man of considerable integrity.

    I wish that you guys would follow his example.



    ____________________________________________________________


    Go apply for some of Leerons integrity in the form of his extra credit he offered for considering who is benefiting from the settlement issue, the Palestinians or the Israeli's, and help him figure out what rate of hunger is required for the Gazans to be considered needy enough for an aid flotilla. Maybe you can get him to answer as to why the Israeli thugs initiated violence and killed 9 on that aid flotilla in international waters.

    His integrity in making such statements or refusal to answer those questions and many many more in defense of ZIONIST FANATIC PROPAGANDA is in dire need of your help and support. Go for it and let us know how that goes for ya !!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2011 7:48 PM GMT
    Pouncer saidWhere Now for the Goldstone Report?
    In short, there are no new facts that could possibly have led Richard Goldstone to change his mind about the UN-backed investigation into Israel and the conflict in Gaza.
    By John Dugard
    http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/04/goldstone-report-israel-rights







    Shame on you Pouncer !! your blowing holes int the ZIONIST Propaganda theory that ZIONIST FANATIC ACTIONS ARE ALWAYS RIGHT.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2011 9:21 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidIt is fairly clear that Goldstone is a man of considerable integrity.

    It should be embarrassing that some have advocated that Goldstone changed his mind because the "lobby" somehow got to him, etc.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/what-made-goldstone-change-his-mind-about-the-gaza-war-report-1.353905

    What made Goldstone change his mind about the Gaza war report?
    academic suggests Goldstone decided to reconsider his report partly due to debate he attended at Stanford University, just days before he released his Washington Post column.


    ..."He tried to claim that he did not make a mistake, but after that night – it seems to me – he understood that he could not claim such a thing and be taken seriously," said [Prof.] Bell.

    "If [Goldstone] hadn't have sat there and people hadn't have confronted him at other events, he would not have done it," said Bell, referring to the column Goldstone wrote in the April 1 edition of the Washington Post, entitled 'Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2011 8:47 AM GMT
    I was there when Gaza-Israel war started. I saw people dying there... Now we have idiot like Caesarea4 trying to cover up his Zionist propaganda and blaming on innocent Palestinians? Seriously... REALJOCK admin when are you going to ban that stupid sorry ass ZioNazi in here?
  • Avron88

    Posts: 136

    Apr 11, 2011 1:01 PM GMT
    God- these Israel/Palestine threads need to end... they're so annoying.

    Looking at all you fools arguing about this on REAL JOCK is pathetically ridiculous.

    Sorry for interrupting btw --- you can all carry on with your whining and bickering now. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2011 2:29 PM GMT
    Avron88 saidGod- these Israel/Palestine threads need to end... they're so annoying.

    Looking at all you fools arguing about this on REAL JOCK is pathetically ridiculous.

    Sorry for interrupting btw --- you can all carry on with your whining and bickering now. icon_lol.gif


    ____________________________________________________


    Maybe if you would consider how much negative affect the Fanaticism of Zionist Propagandists like RJ's Ceaserea4 (C4) has on our US Foreign Policy, you would do some research and get involved against it. The "USEFULL IDIOTS" as C4 calls the US religious far right Christian Fundamentalists, promote this shit to our Politicians who fall in line out of fear of their or AIPAC, labeling them Anti Semitic, We have many an unecessarry enemy because of it and it has led to wars, so give this subject your 'heads up' it does affect you and your tax dollar.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2011 8:08 PM GMT
    I don't understand what is so ambiguous. Goldstone's report was based on incomplete information because Israel refused to cooperate --- and they were idiots for not doing so.

    Having actually had access to the relevant information, he appears to have decided his original conclusions were not justified.