'Goldstone sent 28 SA blacks to death'

[shira]

Jurist Richard Goldstone was responsible for sending at least 28 black South Africans to death when they appeared before him during the apartheid regime, Yediot Aharonot reported Wednesday.

According to the report, Goldstone, who headed the UN committee which investigated alleged war crimes perpetrated by the IDF during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, handed down the sentences while serving as a judge in the South African Court of Appeals.

Goldstone presided during the 1980s and 1990s, and wrote in one of his rulings that the gallows are the only deterrent for killers.

However, he responded to the report by saying that he was a part of the system and had to respect the laws of the state, occasionally having to enforce laws he was opposed to. The former judge was also responsible for sending four men accused of violent acts to receive lashes alongside the upholding of other racist laws, Yediot Aharonot said.

http://www.jpost.com/international/article.aspx?id=174769

[shira]

1. Richard Goldstone, we deplore your report

<snip>

Your report never misses an opportunity to mention that Israel refused to co-operate with the mission. The underlying message is clear, Israel is to blame for any harsh findings made by your mission against it. If it wished to provide the true facts that would have changed your mind, it was welcome to do so, but refused.

Your approach to Hamas, however, is entirely different. On page 6 of the report you state that during your visits to the Gaza Strip, the mission held meetings with senior members of the Gaza authorities and they extended their full co-operation and support to the mission. In a footnote on page 40 of the report you state that the term "Gaza authorities" is used to refer to the de facto Hamas-lead authorities established in Gaza since June 2007. It is therefore clear that you wish the reader of the report to believe that Hamas co-operated fully with your mission and therefore no adverse findings against it can be made as a result of their non co-operation.

Later on in your report however, an entirely different picture emerges. On page 134 you state "the mission also addressed questions regarding the tactics used by Palestinian armed groups to the Gaza authorities. They responded they had nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with the Al-Qassam brigades or other armed groups and had no knowledge of their tactics. To gather first-hand information on the matter, the mission requested a meeting with representatives of the armed groups. However, the groups were not agreeable to such a meeting". Later, on page 151, you state the following "the mission asked the Gaza Authorities to provide information on the sites from where the Palestinian armed groups had launched attacks against Israel and against the Israeli armed forces in Gaza. The mission similarly asked whether, to their knowledge, civilian buildings and mosques had been used to store weapons. In their response, the Gaza authorities stated they had no information on the activities of the Palestinian armed groups or about the storage weapons in mosques and buildings". Finally, on page 134 it is recorded that the mission notes that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups.

Whatever the reasons for their reluctance, the mission does not discount that the interviewee's reluctance may have stemmed from a fear of reprisals.

In other words, based upon the mission's own version, absolutely no one in Gaza, neither the civilian population, nor any armed group, nor the Gaza authorities were prepared to co-operate in any way in respect of the way Hamas and others conducted their armed operations during the conflict. The question to be asked is why is it stated on page 6 that the mission received full co-operation from the Gaza authorities, when it is patently clear that it did not. Secondly, why did you not make a negative inference from such refusal to co-operate, in the same manner which you did towards the Israelis. On page 151 of the report you actually state that if the Gaza authorities failed to take the necessary measures to prevent the Palestinian armed groups from endangering the civilian population by conducting hostilities in a manner incompatible with international humanitarian law, they would bear responsibility for the damage done to the civilians living in Gaza. There is an important line missing after that observation which is inserted in almost every section dealing with alleged Israeli atrocities. The missing sentence should simply have stated that the refusal of the Gaza authorities to co-operate with the mission on this issue, while fully co-operating in respect of all other requests made by the mission, forces the mission to conclude that Hamas did in fact act in a manner which would lead them to bear responsibility for the damage done to the civilians living in Gaza.

The second example of the different treatment afforded to Israel and Hamas is the manner in which you expanded your mandate to allow the report to provide a complete context for the reasons the conflict in Gaza had occurred. With regard to the Israelis, over 100 pages of your report are devoted to giving the reader a history of every actual and alleged human rights violation Israel has committed in what you term "the Occupied Palestinian Territories", since 1967. One can only presume that this endless list of Israel's "violations" is designed to provide the report's readers with an understanding as to why Hamas and the "other Palestinian armed groups" resorted to rocket fire into southern Israel and the capture of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

In respect of Israel however, no such contextualisation of its actions is provided in any meaningful manner. Nowhere in your 573 page report do you feel it is of value "for contextual purposes" to mention that Hamas' founding charter calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. Furthermore, you failed to disclose that the very reason for Israel's and Egypt's blockade of Gaza and the sanctions imposed upon Hamas by the US and the EU is a direct result of Hamas' refusal to abandon its primary aim of destroying Israel. Notwithstanding the report's claim that it supports a peaceful two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, you fail to mention that Hamas is an implacable enemy of such a solution. In fact, at the height of the Oslo Peace Accords in the mid to late 1990s, Hamas waged a merciless suicide bombing and terror campaign against Israel, resulting in 150 Israeli civilian deaths, specifically aimed at the derailing of such peace negotiations. You fail to disclose that Hamas killed over 500 Israeli civilians in suicide bombings committed during the years 2000 to 2009. You fail to disclose that the introduction by Hamas of suicide bombing into the Middle East has caused the death of tens of thousands of Muslims in the region. You fail to disclose that Hamas is armed, supported and supplied by Iran, a country whose president has on numerous public occasions stated its desire to destroy the State of Israel and is suspected of developing nuclear weapons perhaps for this very purpose.

Finally, you failed to disclose that Iran has stated that in any war which it wages with Israel, Hamas would be expected to open a second front against Israel during what will be a war for Israel's existential existence.

In summary, your mission and its report is, in the words of Canada's famous jurist and human rights lawyer Professor Irwin Cotler "tainted to the core". Without your credentials as a Jew and pre-eminent human rights jurist this report would have lacked all credibility and would have failed to gain any traction. Your involvement in this mission and report has lead to potentially devastating consequences for Israel and the Jewish people.

Based upon the circumstances surrounding the establishment of your mission and the contents of the report itself, it now appears that the world has two sets of international law, one to be applied to Israel the other to everyone else. While Israeli soldiers, generals and politicians face the prospect of war crime trials at the Hague, a fate formerly reserved for persons who were involved in such atrocities as the genocide of 300,000 Darfurians and 1 million Tutsis, the soldiers, generals and politicians of Russia, United States, Nato and Sri Lanka, who are collectively responsible for the death of over 320,000 civilians during the past 15 years of armed conflicts, will continue to be able to act with impunity and immunity. Your request that countries prosecute Israeli soldiers under Universal Jurisdiction Principles will prevent thousands of Jews from visiting their parents and grandparents in certain countries and force their absence from family celebrations.

Judge Goldstone, this situation which I have described, is not international justice. It is simply a travesty of justice, a reintroduction of discriminatory laws and practices against the Jewish people.

<snip>

In conclusion, while we are extremely unhappy with your involvement in drafting the Goldstone report, we nevertheless laud your desire to minimise casualties in any armed conflict and encourage you to develop a standard set of rules of engagement which shall apply to all nations in any conflict. We urge you to work with your fellow jurists and the United Nations to create a mechanism whereby if in any conflict a certain amount of civilian casualties are incurred, there is automatically an impartial and objective investigation into the circumstances which led to those civilians being killed. If you are able to establish such mechanisms and rules for every nation of the world, we would support you wholeheartedly in encouraging Israel to participate in such investigations, which would be no different to those applying to Russia, America, Sri Lanka, Nato and any other nation which is involved in an armed conflict.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/05/avrom-krengel-richard-goldstone

[aquart]

3. And?

[parkia00]

6. And?

And what? What are you trying to say? You consistently have this one word reply "And?" to so many posts.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. Yet there are some here who declare the lack of cooperation as an admission of guilt

Then again, they are from a civil rights limited environment

[whosinpower]

8. Desperate to portray Goldstone in a certain way

The is yet one more blah, blah blah article that states

"Even though Israel refused to participate in the mission, and made no attempt to give their side of the story - the report is biased, unfair and evil."

And - Even though there are atrocities that occur across the world, it is unfair that Israel has to put up with this so-called mission in the first place. Everyone is picking on us....it isn't fair...waaaahhhhh. It is all political.....

But what this article does not do - is refute these facts - the bombing of civilian neighborhoods, the use of flechette rounds and white phosphorus against civilian targets, the bombing of mosques and schools, the blocking of rescue parties from reaching the wounded, the killing of fleeing civilians carrying white flags, the use of human shields, and more.

We can draw our own conclusions about whether those are, in fact, war crimes or not - regardless of who the enemy is.

[shira]

11. Goldstone's "facts" have been refuted, utterly....

http://www.goldstonereport.org/

Goldstone himself was quoted as saying of his Report against Israel:

"If this were a court of law, there would have been nothing proven".
http://www.forward.com/articles/116269/

[grassfed]

52. goldstonereport.org is a propaganda site, the real site is goldstone-report.org

http://www.goldstonereport.org was created by Pro-Israel bloggers

The real site is http://www.goldstone-report.org

----------

Goldstone Smears

Nelson Mandela appointed Richard Goldstone to SA's highest court

The Goldstone Commission's revelations outraged Nelson Mandela, leading him to conclude that F.W. de Klerk's government had organized covert death squads. (For more on this topic, read the dispatches of British journalist John Carlin, the author of the book that became the movie Invictus.) Goldstone's work earned him Mandela's respect and, in 1994, South Africa's first black president appointed Goldstone to the Constitutional Court--hardly the sort of honor the great moral icon of the 20th century would have bestowed on "a man without a moral compass," as Goldberg calls him.

Shameless Israeli Propaganda V Mandela

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. Have you actually read the report and the rebuttals?

There is some interesting "dialog" between Goldstone and the Israeli government documented in Goldstone Annex II(Pages 558-574). He went ahead knowing full well that we was not going to get cooperation, not have access critical to making the conclusions he came to. He went ahead anyway saying that if the report had errors, it would not be his fault but the Israelis. That kind of petulance and hubris is one of the reasons the report has made no significant impact.

[shira]

13. Worse is that Goldstone knows the Report has errors galore, but rather than set the record straight

...he stands by his slander.

"I have yet to hear from the Obama Administration what the flaws in the report that they have identified are, I would be happy to respond to them if and when I know what they are." He continued "I have no doubt, many of the critics--the overwhelming majority of critics--have not read the report, and, you know what proves that, I think, is that the level of criticism does not go to the substance of the report."

Never once has he admitted to making (deliberate) errors or tried setting the record straight despite the mountains of evidence proving how ridiculous his report is...
http://www.goldstonereport.org/

Instead, the lying POS says no such substantive and credible criticism of his report exists.

[whosinpower]

16. It is glaringly apparent

That the Israeli government did not want ANY investigation. It did not, and still does not want transparency.

The recommendation of the report was that Hamas was at fault and so was Israel. Both sides were to begin transparent investigations of war crimes - and the time period given was 6 months. After that time period, if no transparent investigations took place, then the matter was to be turned over to the Hague.

If you want to talk about petulance - look to Israel. They were the ones who refused to cooperate. If Operation Cast Lead was so righteous and so just, then there would be absolutely no reason whatsoever not to openly invite investigations into that very operation. But they did not. This would of been a perfect opportunity that they denied themselves.

Go ahead - keep blaming Goldstone for not including information that he was not privy to. Go ahead and blame his report for errors. None of that changes the recommendations. I am 110 percent sure that if Goldstone had declared everything was the fault of Hamas, he would of been declared a hero - and they would of sang songs about him in the hills of Israel - but he could not - and Israel denied him. And now there are those who are villifying him.

[shira]

19. You really don't know what you're talking about

1. Israel did credibly and seriously investigate OCL and here's how...
http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8E841A98-1755-413D-A1D2-8B30F64022BE/0/GazaOperationInvestigationsUpdate.pdf

2. Goldstone did not seriously investigate Hamas at all.

3. Israel has dealt with the UNHRC before and knew in advance that this Goldstone Report would be complete rubbish. They were surprised how OTT it went, however, sinking the UNHRC to lower depths than they were previously. There was no point cooperating with a commission proven to be as incredibly dishonest towards Israel as the UNHRC.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

26. Make your case.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shaayecanaan]

47. That was an internal military investigation...

which typically absolve the military of any and all crimes. Israel has refused to do its own judicial investigation into Operation Cast Lead, because a credible judicial inquiry would inevitably make findings that would be displeasing to the Israeli government.

The Sabra and Shatila massacres, for example, were first investigated by the military which found no fault, but then by a judicial inquiry which did find fault and contributed to the downfall of a government.

To illustrate this principle further, a military investigation found that the bulldozer driver that killed Rachel Corrie could not see her from the cockpit of the dozer, notwithstanding that she was about 15 yards directly in front of him and in plain view. My guess is when the civil court hands down its judgment into that matter there will probably be a finding that the bulldozer driver was perfectly aware that Corrie was there, but that he probably assumed she would jump out of the way at the last minute.

[rooboy]

2. i bet this post wouldn't appear if he spoke out if favor of Israel's war crimes. n/t

[aquart]

4. Israel is the only nation that ever did a wrong, I know.

Indonesia doesn't interest you, I take it? How about Sri Lanka? Kenya? Sudan? Iran? Any of the many others? Only Israel. The one nation on earth that's Jewish. Must be a coincidence.

[parkia00]

7. Because...

some people believe that if they point to the wrong doings of others, it justifies the wrong doings they do. Like two little boys caught stealing candy and the excuse they come out with is the other boy did it too.

[FarrenH]

9. Its sad isn't it?

Sadder still that they will attack the messenger with crude one-liners intended to have maximum effect and damn nuance, honesty or any other commendable value. No effort is made to analyse how many of the men he sentenced were, in fact hardened criminals, regardless of the awfulness of the government he served, or how many he was required by law to so sentence. Of the testimony of close friends within the ANC even that he tried to use his Apartheid role positively, whether he always managed to do that or not.

No recognition or understanding of the fact that there was an ongoing debate among liberals as to whether it was better to try to have a positive influence from within the system or stand outside of it and ring hands, or take up armed resistance, a fact Goldstone's colleagues, both black and white, have attested to in his defence. No acknowledgement is given that he was seen as a good judge and a fair man by the predominantly black government that succeeded the Apartheid government, and asked to head up enquiries of a sensitive political nature by said government. Nor that he participated in the tribunals in Rwanda and Yugoslavia, where his efforts won him widespread respect, at none other than Mandela's urging.

No, just a another despicable attempt to throw as much shit at the messenger as possible in the foolish belief that it will obscure the message. But, speaking for myself and I think many other South Africans and opponents of Israeli Apartheid, I can say all it does is make the racist ethnic nationalists and their supporters doing the shit-flinging appear all the more despicable.

[shira]

15. It's the duty of every principled person to expose this vulgar, morally bankrupt human being

...for what he was, still is, and will remain to be if nothing changes.

FFS, this racist advocated for sending blacks to the gallows and ruled they be whipped and flogged!

He was no liberal when he joined the SA courts and proceeded to enforce racist policies while letting white officers off the hook for their crimes. He's very simply an opportunist who is trying to use the Nuremberg defense now to cover for his despicable past. Did you know he actually indicted a fictional Serbian character at the Hague for murder based on "eyewitness testimony"?

:)

His report against Israel was so bad that he will not, and indeed, cannot defend it against those who substantively criticize it. In fact, he's gone so far as to admit that nothing in it could be proven in a court of law.

Before this aspiring opportunist becomes the next UN secretary general and does even more harm as an assumed "moral authority", it is the duty of every principled person to expose him for the very dangerous wretch that he is.

Do you really wish to continue arguing that his immoral past has no relevance when he is judging the behaviour of others?

Seriously?

Tell me - would you have a problem with Goldstone being exposed now if his Report largely exonnerated Israel?

[whosinpower]

17. Vicious, desperate, pathetic

None of which take into account what EXACTLY the recommendations of the report stated, and certainly does not account for exactly what the mission was, what the mandate was.

Hamas would be so very proud of your efforts. Well done. You show em girl. You show em how Mandela was wrong, how Apartheid really is a sound system and how evil this Goldstone charactor is for seeing its destruction in South Africa.

[FarrenH]

18. Its the fervent hope of every propagandist, you mean

Shira I have a problem with the fact that every single substantive critic of Israel is subjected to character assasination, and you dump that trash on this board. While you lay claim to being open to criticism that isn't "demonisation" (a laughable fiction) you have, on this board, engaged in attacking (not the message, but the messenger) the SA HSRC, HRW, the UN, and half a dozen other human rights bodies in the time I've been posting here. It reaches a point where it simply becomes a joke, or a very said reflection on yourself and other propagandists. Reasonable people are, in Shira's world, expected to believe that just about every human rights body in existence is populated by anti-semites, self-hating jews, racists, gullible fools and so on, a proposition that might be entertained if it was a selective criticism of a single body. But when it is an absolutely predictable response to any and all harsh critics of Israel a far more compelling impression develops that, in fact, the source of the smearing is themselves a dishonest partisan suffering from extreme cognitive dissonance. I reached a point a long time ago where I stopped taking anything you say seriously. I regard your opinion as a joke. Its telling that your preferred modus operandi (and that of your sources) is that of the right-wing in America, namely character assassination. You claim to be a liberal but "swift-boat" all of Israel's critics. You link to opinion pieces with no actual proof of anything in them and say "here's proof". You appear to have a poor grasp of basic logic (something which really rubs me the wrong way because formal logic is a central component of my job). I only respond to your constant stream of propaganda (how much DO the Israeli government pay you, btw?) to influence other people who might read the drek you post here.

[shira]

20. I just can't get past the first line of your post

"Shira I have a problem with the fact that every single substantive critic of Israel is subjected to character assasination"

========

That you believe Goldstone is a substantive critic of Israel is preposterous.

You need to read at least SOME of the substantive criticism of his report - and there's an awful lot of it in the link below - which proves what a wretch he really is...
http://www.goldstonereport.org/

To this date Goldstone cannot and will not answer his critics.

In fact, he pretends substantive criticism of his report is virtually non-existant and all that remains is character attacks.

An outright lie and you know this too.

========

The UNHRC, who picked Goldstone to carry out their will, is controlled mostly by undemocratic countries with very poor human rights records - in fact, by a majority of countries who have no internal use for human rights.

You don't think this plays a factor at all WRT Israel, do you?

[whosinpower]

21. That you attack him so viciously leads one AWAY from your links

Goldstone is a Woodrow Wilson Visiting Scholar in Political Science at Washington & Jefferson College.

According to Shira - they must be stupid.

Goldstone was named the 2007 Weissberg Distinguished Professor of International Studies at Beloit College, in Beloit, Wisconsin.

According to Shira they were dumb.

Justice Goldstone taught at Harvard University in the Spring 2007 semester. In Fall 2007 he was the William Hughes Mulligan Professor of International Law at Fordham University School of Law, and holds that position again in Fall 2009. Fordham Law presented him with a Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, in 2007, the highest honor the school can bestow.

According to Shira they must've had no other people on the PLANET to teach, so they chose this morally bankrupt bad guy instead.

Justice Goldstone has received many prominent awards, including the MacArthur Award for International Justice, announced by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation in October 2008, and bestowed in the The Hague in May, 2009.

I was not aware that racists would be awarded such a thing. Must be shaking your head Shira.

In 1994, Goldstone received the International Human Rights Award of the American Bar Association and in 2005 he received the Thomas J. Dodd Prize in International Justice and Human Rights.

Oh - well there you have it - Human rights - yeah that IS bad, right Shira?

He holds honorary degrees from Hebrew University, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Maryland, and the Universities of Cape Town, British Columbia, Glasgow, and Calgary among others.

These degrees - they hand them out for a REASON Shira....is the whole world wrong, and only you know how bad he is?

He was the first person to be granted the title, The Hague Peace Philosopher in 2009, as part of the new Spinoza Fellowship, a program run by the city of The Hague, the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS), Radio Netherlands, and the Hague Campus of the University of Leiden.

A morally bankrupt racist peace philosopher....makes no sense to me Shira, how foolish they are eh?

He is an honorary fellow of St Johns College, Cambridge, an honorary member of the Association of the Bar of New York, a foreign member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a fellow of the Center for International Affairs of Harvard University.

The list continues, much to the protestations of Shira. And all these people, from all over the world, in modern western democratic nations have all honoured him. Makes your claims and protests even more pathetic, petty, small and pointless. But that is what propegandists DO, after all. And they set up websites too - such as goldstone.org.

[shira]

22. Some of the criticisms Goldstone has ignored has been from long time friends and associates

Believe it or not.

=======

But back to the OP, you don't have a problem with Goldstone implementing racist policies, advocating for blacks to go the gallows, ruling that blacks get beaten and flogged, letting white officers off the hook for their crimes against blacks, etc.?

And you realize he really did indict a fictional character based on "eyewitness testimony"?

[whosinpower]

23. Israel ignores criticism too - nt.

[shira]

24. Goes to show that Goldstone's friends and associates have major issues with his report

Now put it all together and it's no wonder his character is called into question.

Do you really wish to defend his past?

[FarrenH]

27. I know, right?

I mean we have lots of examples of apparatchniks of formerly racist states being not only appointed to positions of even more power, but lauded by the very people that fought against the racist dispensation, don't we? I heard the French were just scrambling to elevate Vichy officials to the highest and most esteemed positions after WWII. All snark of course, but meant to illustrate just how bizarre it is that the dishonest fuckwits that come up with this garbage think its going to convince anyone who isn't already convinced, in light of the kind of career you've described above. It beggars belief. But hey, its all par for the course from people who won't even listen to black members of the liberation movement in SA who have actually gone to the West Bank, observed how things operate, and almost unanimously declared it "worse than Apartheid". People who will attack a man of Desmond Tutu's stature when he supports calls for boycotts and so on.

A faction that routinely smears the likes of Goldstone, Carter and Tutu (the last two Nobel peace prize winners) along with the entire UN, HRW, SAHSRC and every other human-rights body that issues a negative report on the object of their affections, then expects reasonable people to take them seriously, they are seriously living in an alternate reality - ESPECIALLY when they label themselves "left" or "liberal". And to a South African like myself who grew up under Apartheid, opposed it bitterly from the age of about 13 (when I first started to understand it - I'm white, so I didn't really suffer its depredations) and has a far greater understanding of the history and context of these character smears, its especially galling. Shira et al seem to think that their smears carry more weight than Nelson Mandela's praise, as character references go. Ha!

[shira]

29. All you have is an appeal to authority, as though evidence against Goldstone showing

...him to be extremely dishonest doesn't matter.

1. How does a liberal who adjucates for an apartheid government in order to change it from within ADVOCATE for blacks to go to the gallows? How does this liberal from within rule that blacks be beaten and flogged?

2. And how does such a reputable judge indict a Serbian fictional character based on imaginary "eyewitness" testimony?

Do you still think that ANC 300 page study on Israeli Apartheid is good, based solely on the reputations of the authors behind it?

Hello?

[shira]

28. You probably still believe, after being corrected, that the ANC study on Israeli apartheid

....is honest and credible "substantive criticism" of Israel and not slanderous demonization.

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=284199&mesg_id=284199

Remember their allegations of "Jew only roads"?

:eyes:

A 300 page hate screed masquerading as legitimate scholarship in your opinion.

[FarrenH]

30. I rest my case. LOL

The only thing that interests me is when you'll get round to trashing Amnesty International. I'm trying to think of other respected human rights organisations you haven't gone after yet.

(by the way, I have the full study in PDF form on my computer and not once does it make the claim that there are "Jew only roads" in the West Bank. lulz)

[shira]

31. When you can't argue facts, you appeal to authority and that's the extent of your argument

[FarrenH]

32. Hell, Shira, if I had the slightest interest in treating you

like you have a serious case, I'd try to engage you more substantively. But, to be honest, I've read a vast amount (including actual discriminatory laws as they are written in Israels statute books), seen a vast amount of footage, heard a wide range of arguments and concluded, after a ten-year journey from "fence-sitter" to avowedly "anti", that Israel is, in fact an Apartheid state with a brutal record of oppression. As a South African who drew up under a similarly despicable arrangement I have no more interest in seriously engaging relentless propagandists for Apartheid than I would have in arguing with a Nazi about the finer points of contentious Nazi policy in wartime Germany. I have too much contempt for your project.

Then of course there's the little issue of the fact that there are no actual references to "Jew only roads" in the report you just complained about again. lol

[shira]

33. Well if they're not "Jew-only" roads, then what's racist about them?

Palestinian-Israeli Arabs (many label themselves that way) can use them, and in fact, they actually live in settlements and are in the process of buying more homes in settlements.

Here's an article about P/I Arabs living in settlements…
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2009/12/28/Jerusalem-approves-Arab-housing-units/UPI-81171262005573/

Hundreds of P/I Israelis buying settlement homes and living there
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZyEmn4wjnY

What kind of apartheid is that?

:)

Your 300 page "scholarly" screed devotes a LOT of space to these "apartheid" roads due to Jewish settlements.

P/I Arabs who buy and live in homes within these settlements sort of render your 300 page Magnum Opus as worthless drool, don'tcha think?

:eyes:

[FarrenH]

35. The report itself quite effectively

addresses your question. I won't rehash it here except to say having a minority Arab population that are less disriminated against than their brethren in the West Bank (but still substantively discriminated against) coupled with a host of apparatus that favour Jews both in and outside of the West Bank, and absolutely ensure preferential treatment for Jews, is still a dispensation that resembles the most contemptible aspects of Apartheid in both form and function, justifying the term. The authors, respected legal scholars all, lay out a compelling case why Israel's laws and occupation fit the UN definition of "the crime of apartheid", not some fantasy of your imagination - I mention this because I recall you haring off after the entirely irrelevant point (to international law) that Israelis don't have the same labour relationship to Palestinians as whites and blacks did under Apartheid - and do a very good job of it. But since you didn't actually read that "hate-filled screed", instead skimming through it in a frantic effort to find "gotchas" without any intention of considering its arguments at all, I don't expect you to have anything interesting to say on the topic.

[shira]

37. The ANC report mentions that there are Israeli Arabs living in settlements and using its roads?

Are you serious?

Facts like these are completely absent in their joke of a report because it's things like these that prove the report is complete crap!

Neither you nor that report is capable of pointing to even ONE thing that proves without any question that Israel implements deliberately racist policies.

[FarrenH]

38. Its not an ANC report

Its a study from a team of international scholars brought together by the South African Human Sciences Research Council, a venerable and respected NGO. And I'm not going to argue the study with you, since you're just tilting at the same windmills as you did last time. Maybe when you've read the report and understand the detailed argument and the international law referred to I might. But you simply don't. And I don't feel like arguing about the perfidities of inanimate objects with some crank from La Mancha

[shira]

39. Gee, when you can't defend the study's so-called findings on those apartheid roads...

...the honest thing to do would be to admit there's nothing racist and apartheid about roads in the West Bank that are equally available to Palestinian-Arab Israelis whose representation within the settlements is only increasing.

It's not much to ask for, really.

ps,
Here's a little more for you to chew on WRT Israel being so racist and apartheid-like...

"Yet since 1996, Dr. Shikaki has been polling Palestinians about what governments they admire, and every year Israel has been the top performer, at times receiving more than 80 percent approval. The American system has been the next best, followed by the French and then, distantly trailing, the Jordanian and Egyptian."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/international/middleeast/02LETT.html?pagewanted=1

If Israel is racist and apartheid and their government ranks ahead of the USA according to the vast majority of Palestinians, then what does that make the USA, and of course the rest of the world? How do all other countries rate in comparison to Israel?

Is every other government in the world worse than apartheid since they all rank behind Israel in the eyes of Palestinians?

Did over 80% of SA's blacks admire the Apartheid government over every other government in the world?

:)

83% of Umm Al Fahm Arabs oppose transfer to Palestinian Authority
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/358.htm

Funny how they prefer "apartheid".

Did 83% of SA's blacks prefer apartheid too?

The 2 situations are so very similar.

:eyes:

[whosinpower]

40. Then you will have no problem whatsoever

Absorbing them into the general Israeli population and give them equal rights.

Right?

What is that - can't do that because they aren't jewish? Yeah - see, here is the THING, Shira. The one key issue that makes Apartheid a necessity to the preservation of a jewish state. In order for this to be so, you must disenfranchise those who are not jewish.

There are many examples of Israeli law that disenfranchise those of palistinian descent within the state. Refusal of family reunification comes to mind.

There are ample examples of grand apartheid in the occupied territories.

And your polling that you frequently and proudly show - does not ask the question - do you feel Israel is an Apartheid state. What it DOES show is that the two state solution is fading from the minds of palistinians - and the single state possibility grows stronger.

[shira]

41. And watch as Jews become a minority and back to the situation they were in prior to 1948?

Once that happens, Palestinians will have self-determination and the Jews won't. Not to mention there will be a LOT of bloodshed as a result.

But that's your idea of peace and justice, right?

The only way one-state works democratically is if Hamas and the PLO become very strong and active advocates of liberal civil and human rights for all. The whole liberal, democratic enchilada. Real progressivism. And the Arab/Muslim world would have to be 100% behind that. Think it will happen? ;)

Israel doesn't enforce apartheid at all. The issue is competing nationalities, not race.

[whosinpower]

42. The issue always has and always will be - Apartheid

In order for a jewish state to exist, to come into being, people of Arab descent were disenfranchised - they were foricbly removed in 1948, and to this very day, they continue to be subject to unequal rights, to the point where many in the world suggest it is Apartheid.

I agree with them.

[shira]

43. Come on, it's apartheid because "they" say so. You can't justify that position.

Conservatives argue liberals are just communists or socialists. Your argument that Israel is apartheid in nature is just as convincing.

In fact, I challenge you to find just one example in which there's no question Israel implemented racist or bigoted policy for no other reason than to advance some type of apartheid system.

Just one. Your best argument. Bring it. Take your time.

As for Arabs being "forcibly removed", that's bullshit. The fact is that war was declared on Israel by all its neighboring Arab states which played a major role in making Palestinians into refugees, and keeping them that way.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=311586&mesg_id=311712
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=311586&mesg_id=311631

Not one person would have been displaced had war not been declared on the Jews in 1948 due to Arab governments rejecting the 1947 Partition plan. Palestinian refugees were no more ethnically cleansed for racist reasons than millions of Germans after WW2.

[whosinpower]

48. The Koenig memorandum

The document put forward a number of strategic goals and tactical steps aimed at reducing the number and influence of Arab citizens of Israel in the Galilee region. Outlining what he viewed as "objective thought that ensures the long-term Jewish national interests", Koenig stressed the need to "examine the possibility of diluting existing Arab population concentrations".

[shira]

49. And it was denounced by the PM at the time and cabinet ministers - never implemented

And that's the best you could dig up?

[whosinpower]

50. Never implemented?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....hohoho...hehe

Please provide links showing Rabin rejecting the memorandum - and please also provide links showing how marginalized Koenig became after the memorandum. It is my understanding that he enjoyed a long and fruitful career AFTER he wrote the memorandum.

Your SO funny. Shira.....if it was never implemented, then why pray tell did the Supreme Court of Israel have to make a decision regarding Kaaden? And if it wasn't state policy - then why pray tell did the state feel the need to write a bill explicitly to countermand the supreme courts ruling?

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/09/world/plan-to-keep-israeli-arabs-off-some-land-is-backed

snip - The bill was designed to counter a March 2000 Israeli Supreme Court decision that there could be no discrimination between Jews and Arabs in allocating state lands.

The court decision was handed down in a case involving an Israeli Arab, Adel Kaadan, who was turned down when he applied to buy land to build a home in the Jewish village of Katzir in Galilee. Like many rural communities in Israel, Katzir was built by the quasigovernmental Jewish Agency, and Mr. Kaadan was rejected because he was an Arab.

The bill seeks to invalidate the ruling by legislating that communities be built exclusively for Jews. An explanatory note attached to the bill asserts that the court decision undermines the Jewish Agency's mission to settle Jews in Israel -- that the court ''preferred the principle of equality of a state of all its citizens to its value as a Jewish state.''

The attachment also says giving preference to settling Jews is in keeping with a government policy ''that recognizes the need to Judaize various areas across the country.''


And another article - By Uri Ash, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service

The Jewish Agency for Israel, the Ministry of
Housing and Construction and the Authority for the
Development of the Galilee have launched a
campaign aimed at promoting Jewish settlement in
the areas adjacent to the northern border with
Lebanon.

The state is offering free land
for construction, financial
assistance for development of
infrastructure and services, a
construction grant and improved
mortgage benefits. Some of the
terms and conditions will be on
offer until the middle of
December.

The campaign will target the regional councils
of Mateh Asher, Ma'ale Yosef, Marom Hagalil and
Hagalil Ha'elion, and will span 23 settlements
in the northern region.

Israel's northern border region is among the few
areas where kibbutzim have continued to prepare
agricultural ground for construction purposes
despite a supreme court ruling banning the
practice, in accordance with temporary Israel
Lands Administration regulations.

[shira]

51. You're pointing to things decades after Koenig to show how Koenig's unofficial report

....was later secretly implemented.

:eyes:

This begs the question - if Koenig's report was written in 1975 then this discrimination was non-existant from 1948 until at least the time Koenig wrote the memorandum, right?

:)

I never heard of Koenig until you brought it up and this is about all I can find on it...

The Koenig Report or “memorandum” as it is sometimes referred to, was a private document of recommendations written in 1975 by civil servant Israel Koenig, the Interior Ministry’s official in charge of the Galilee, to alter the demographic balance of the region in favor of the Jews. The recommendations were rejected by then Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin, denounced by senior Cabinet ministers and rued by then foreign minister Yigal Alon who expressed great regret that the recommendations were ever written. It provoked controversy within Israel after being leaked to Al Hamishmar, the publication of Israel’s Marxist party, Mapam. Koenig’s recommendations included expanding and strengthening Israel’s Jewish presence in the Galilee, applying legal consequences to Arabs expressing hostility toward the state and Zionism, enforcing tax collection from the Arab sector, cutting family subsidies to Arabs with large families, eliminating preferential acceptance of Arabs into Israeli universities, channeling Arab students into studying the physical and natural sciences rather than humanities, and encouraging young Arabs to study abroad and emigrate.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=775

And this time article...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,946659,00.html

Even though Koenig's recommendations were considered unacceptable in Jerusalem, Haim Kubersky, Director-General of the Interior Ministry, supported Koenig's right to make them.

It was unacceptable in Rabin's government.

You have zero proof this was ever officially or unofficially implemented. Simply associating any form of discrimination or the construction of Jewish homes in the Galilee with this memorandum isn't evidence.

[whosinpower]

55. You asked the wrong question

It is most enjoyable how you love to obscure things - but here goes....if the Koenig memorandum was rejected - then it is only obvious that there IS no Arab demographic issue and NO NEED TO JUDAIZE CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE STATE OF ISRAEL. No discrimination riiiiight???

And yet, time and time again, Arabs are forbidden to live in certain areas, own land, homes are demolished.

Laws are written to undermine the so called equality of the state - see below.

The bill was designed to counter a March 2000 Israeli Supreme Court decision that there could be no discrimination between Jews and Arabs in allocating state lands.

The court decision was handed down in a case involving an Israeli Arab, Adel Kaadan, who was turned down when he applied to buy land to build a home in the Jewish village of Katzir in Galilee. Like many rural communities in Israel, Katzir was built by the quasigovernmental Jewish Agency, and Mr. Kaadan was rejected because he was an Arab.

The bill seeks to invalidate the ruling by legislating that communities be built exclusively for Jews. An explanatory note attached to the bill asserts that the court decision undermines the Jewish Agency's mission to settle Jews in Israel -- that the court ''preferred the principle of equality of a state of all its citizens to its value as a Jewish state.''

The attachment also says giving preference to settling Jews is in keeping with a government policy ''that recognizes the need to Judaize various areas across the country.''

The correct question should of been - why would this Kaadan case have to be brought forth to the supreme court in the first place - and specifically - why would policy makers work so hard to undermine equality, and write that into LAW. That is Apartheid. This is not part of the occupied territories - this is within Israel proper.

What the Koenig memorandum shows in clearly written language, is that Israeli policy makers identified a potential issue along racial/ethnic/religious demographic lines. You can say it was never officially implemented, but the proof lies in the actions of the government - not what it says. And we are not talking about what happened in the 1970's...the Kaaden finding happened in the 2000's.

[shira]

56. Idiotic argument

Reducing this to the absurd...

If an IDF soldier kills a Palestinian, that proves the super top secret memorandum calling for a final solution (genocide) against Palestinians must still be in effect.

And if any Jews decide EVER to move into Arab neighborhoods of the Galilee, that MUST mean the Koenig Memorandum is still on.

:eyes:

The Supreme Court of Israel makes certain that any "secret" documents which intentionally discriminate, call for genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc... cannot be enforced.

Compare and contrast to S.Africa.

======

You see, unlike in S.Africa where Apartheid Judges like Goldstone ruled to whip and hang blacks, Israel's Supreme Court is thankfully dominated by real liberals who will not stand for apartheid policies and claim they are just "following orders".

[whosinpower]

57. That is what you do....

Reduce to the absurd...

The Goldstone character assasinations - reduced to the absurd.

The Apartheid analogy - reduced to the absurd.

If that does not work - change the subject.
If that does not work - blame Hamas.

I will make one thing crystal clear - the word genocide and final solution scenario are yours. You own them. I did not say those things - nor does the Koenig memorandum, in any way, suggest genocide. You created that. I am not sure you even read it, so quick to jump on the victim wagon. Even the word apartheid - you quickly jump on the victim wagon without understanding what it is - you just ASSUME it is exactly like South African apartheid.

Hamas does not write Israeli policy. That the Israeli Supreme Court had to deal with land discrimination within Galilee and found in favour of equal rights over special privilages to jews is applaudable - it really is. HOWEVER - it was only a matter of a few months when another policy/law was presented to deliberately UNDERMINE that very finding.

Apartheid is defined as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."

Since you provided no logical arguments against my position that the Israeli leadership is following the path of Apartheid - I went out on my own and searched more reasoned arguments.

[LeftishBrit]

45. Yes, it would. Just from different posters, that's all.

Some hate Goldstone, some hate Dershowitz, some hate Finkelstein, some even hate Wiesel; but in all cases, your opponent can never just be wrong, he has to be portrayed as evil in every possible way.

(I admit that when it's people trying to push our countries to the right, I treat them as evil too. But I prefer usually to use use their own words, not other people';s opinion pieces against them.)

[Tripmann]

10. Well worth a read, its always nice to have another perspective

http://writingrights.org/2010/05/06/goldstone-sent-28-sa-blacks-to-death-cries-apartheid-israel-as-its-membership-application-to-the-oecd-is-questioned-by-the-imf-and-world-bank/

[Eg-ptiangirl]

14. very funny!

Any judge would have easily said what Goldstone said and more! Goldstone is an international judge and he headed a UN committee which included other international investigators. Goldstone and them are chosen very carefully and they are high level judges. But since he is Jewish he can't be personally attacked as antisemite. Imagine Goldstone report was on Israel favor and this article was posted on another newspaper, jpost article would have been: Unfair AntiSemite Attack on the International Judge Goldstone.

Any way jpost is a pathetic newspaper and reading its readers comment is painful cause it is sad to know such stupid people exist.. bomb the Arabs Finish them Expel all Palestinians from eretz Israel etcccccccccccc are the kind of comments you read there, very funny and sad.

[Tripmann]

36. Exactly

I especially love the hypocracy of the same people who cheerleaded the death sentences handed to INNOCENT women and children during OCL get on their transparent little soapbboxes about goldstone handing GUILTY men theirs.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[miscsoc]

46. anyone care to remind us of israel's enlightened policies towards apartheid south africa?

nt

[grassfed]

53. lots here

great transparent hasbara and some good links (scroll down)....

[azurnoir]

54. Desperately smearing Goldstone

Inside the Israeli echo chamber, it’s now “case closed” on the war in Gaza. The country’s biggest newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, has “exposed” Judge Richard Goldstone as an apartheid-era hanging judge. This proves he’s a huge hypocrite whose word means nothing, which proves his report on the war in Gaza means nothing, which proves Operation Cast Lead was every bit the shining example of restraint and purity of arms Israel says it was.

That’s the verdict in here. Outside the echo chamber, though, in the saner parts of the world, this episode can only make us look even guiltier. To any but a brainwashed Israeli or “Israel advocate,” this Goldstone ploy is so transparent, so pathetic. All it proves is how desperate this country has become, how blind we are to ourselves and to how others see us.

<snip>

I’m sure Goldstone made at least some bad, even immoral decisions from the bench during the years of apartheid. He set for himself the task of stretching a viciously unjust legal system in the direction of justice, and I’m sure there were times he could have stretched it more.

But in all, he was one of the good guys of that terrible time.

NELSON MANDELA knows it. After Mandela was elected president in 1994, he appointed Goldstone to South Africa’s highest court. Earlier, during the transition to democracy, Mandela concurred in Goldstone’s appointment to head an extremely explosive inquiry into regime-sponsored murder (in which it was found that Goldstone himself had been on the hit list).

In the saner parts of the world, they can trust Mandela’s conclusions about the judge, or they can trust Yediot Aharonot’s.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=175401