UK raises concerns over Israel's treatment of Palestinian children

[Jefferson23]

70. I already addressed Ki-moon's statements..you don't like what I said, too bad.

You seem to think if you repeat over and over to the person you disagree with
to admit what you want them to, they will at some point submit to you...you're
mistaken.

lol@ whining and crying about Goldstone's recant..you're amusing in a desperate
vein shira.

I think it is important for anyone who supports Israeli policy regarding the Palestinians
especially about OCL, is to understand they decided not to cooperate with the human rights
groups and made the decision about controlling a free press. Mr Bernstein expresses no concerns
for this behavior that I am aware of.

Israel ranks low for freedom of press, after Gaza war media ban
Israel falls to No. 93 of 175 countries indexed in 2009; Iran places No. 172, in wake of post-election violence.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-ranks-low-for-freedom-of-press-after-gaza-war-media-ban-1.5765

Mr. Bernstein is a trusted source for you, but his words don't match up his
claims..which he pretty much admits, but does so in an unprofessional manner.


David Bernstein Misrepresents Human Rights Watch (Yet Again)

by Kevin Jon Heller

This time concerning the Goldstone Report and whether Israel intentionally targeted civilians during Operation Cast Lead as a matter of policy. You know a post is in trouble when it’s entitled “Human Rights Watch Lies re: Goldstone Retraction,” but then states, three paragraphs later, “Well, maybe lying isn’t quite right. Roth chose his words carefully, and I suppose it’s technically true that HRW never explicitly endorsed a Goldstone Report finding that Israel had a policy of targeting civilians.” So HRW is lying, except that it’s not.

The misleading title, however, is far from the biggest problem with the post. Even worse is Bernstein’s inability to understand what Goldstone retracted and what HRW has said about Israel’s ostensible policy of intentionally targeting civilians. Here is the relevant paragraph from Goldstone’s editorial (emphasis added):
http://opiniojuris.org/2011/04/06/david-bernstein-misrepresents-human-rights-watch-yet-again/


Mr. Roth in his own words, Gaza: the stain remains on Israel's war record 2011

Richard Goldstone's partial retraction of his own report doesn't excuse the conduct of Israel's war in Gaza
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/gaza-stain-remains-israel-war-record


If you actually read the Goldstone report it never stated or implied that the main
objective of Israel's attack was to murder Palestinians. If the report came to that
conclusion they would have labeled it genocide..it did no such thing.

The report did say that the invasion of Gaza was a "deliberately
disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a
civilian population.
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/factfindingmission.htm

Yoram Dinstein on international law: there is no genuine difference between a
premeditated attack against civilians ( or civilian objects) and a reckless disregard
of the principle of distinction between civilians or civilian objects and combatants
or military objects...they're equally forbidden.( Law of International Armed Conflict.)

Among other players and reports, Ms.Livni for one, provided statements reflecting
her thoughts on OCL.

Speaking at an Institute for National Security Studies conference, Livni said that "the operation in Gaza was necessary. Operation Cast Lead achieved its goal, which was to restore Israel's deterrence ability, and managed to restore Israel's deterrence ability.
She also said that she was proud of the achievements of Operation Cast Lead.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3820134,00.html

Ms Livni declared yesterday that the military offensive had "restored Israel's deterrence ... Hamas now understands that when you fire on its citizens it responds by going wild – and this is a good thing."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israeli-cabinet-divided-over-fresh-gaza-surge-1332024.html

Her regard for the law:

snip* This is a main principle. Part of the TOR. This is what will make the Arab states come.



[Recap the points.]



AA:

International law?



TL:

NO. I was the Minister of Justice. I am a lawyer…But I am against law -- international law in particular. Law in general.
If we want to make the agreement smaller, can we just drop some of these issues? Like international law, this will make the agreements easier.



[TL made the point that Palestinians don’t really need international law. Palestinians protest this assertion. AA raises examples of where it is important, such as water, and that it is key for the parties to agree what the permanent status agreements will be based on. Abr says that the agreement will be whatever is agreed at the table. At one point during this discussion, SE raises a problem with the “as adopted” language with respect to the Roadmap and previous agreements, noting that this would encompass the Israeli reservations which is not acceptable to the Palestinian side.]
http://transparency.aljazeera.net/document/2003


Have a good day and good luck.


on edit for clarity.