Guest Post by Jon Weinberg: The Goldstone Report

-

Richard Goldstone.jpg
Jon Weinberg is a research intern at the New America Foundation/Middle East Task Force.
The UN fact-finding mission investigating human rights and humanitarian law violations during Israel’s December 2008-January 2009 incursion into Gaza has finally published its long-awaited report.
As expected, the Israeli government – which refused to cooperate with the mission from the outset – has reflexively lashed out against the UN, the Human Rights Council, and the mission’s head, Justice Richard Goldstone. Israeli officials cite the Human Rights Council’s lack of response to Hamas’ firing rockets indiscriminately at Israeli targets since 2002, as well as the Council’s history of focusing on Israel while ignoring other countries with similar or worse human rights records.
The report has generally received a more welcoming reception among Palestinians, but Hamas has also expressed criticism, complaining that it does not adequately distinguish between the victim and the aggressor.
Goldstone has handled himself admirably amidst the intense media firestorm. This isn’t terribly surprising considering that he has served as chief prosecutor for war-crime tribunals on Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. Suffice it to say that he knows what he’s talking about. In both his interview last night with PBS’ Gwen Iffel and his op-ed in today’s New York Times, Goldstone consistently emphasized that both Israel and Hamas could have eliminated the need for the investigation if either side (or both) provided the international community with a more credible self-assessment.
Nine Israeli human rights organization agree with this observation, and published a letter on Tuesday in which they declare that they “believe that the State of Israel must conduct an independent and impartial investigation into these suspicions and to cooperate with an international monitoring mechanism that would guarantee both the independence of that investigation and the implementation of its conclusions.”
Neither Hamas nor, more importantly, Israel has taken this suggestion to heart. Gideon Levy hit the nail on the head in his incredibly well-written article from today’s Haaretz: “So far they have focused on the messengers, not their messages: the researcher for Human Rights Watch collects Nazi memorabilia, Breaking the Silence is a business and Amnesty International is anti-Semitic. All cheap propaganda.”
Nonetheless, not all of Israel’s defensive arguments are, like these accusations, cheap propaganda. Currently, Israel’s most persuasive arguments against the legitimacy of the mission’s findings rest on comparing Israel to the rest of the world: no other country would tolerate cross-border rocket attacks on civilian areas; no other country would cooperate with an investigation that could tarnish its reputation or incriminate its leaders; America would never allow such a mission on Iraq or Afghanistan; other countries have better security and could never fully appreciate the motivation behind Israel’s actions in Gaza; and the list goes on.
To some extent these arguments are convincing. They allow us non-Israelis to empathize with Israel’s truly ominous security situation – to better understand decisions that are made under conditions of constant existential threat. What these arguments do not do, however, is to render a justification for planning “collective punishment,” for prioritizing damaging infrastructure over seeking out individual militants, and for denying the unnecessary use of weapons containing tungsten and white phosphorous in urban areas.
Sure, other countries also do terrible things. Yes, Israel’s security challenges are far more serious than those of nearly every other developed country. And of course, within living memory, many countries have committed atrocities far, far worse than anything Israel did last winter in Gaza.
This is not a question of whether Israel is a democracy: It is. Nor is it a question of whether Israel must defend itself: It must. Nor is this a question of whether Hamas fights fairly: It doesn’t. Rather, this is a question of whether Israel, an economically developed democracy, fights fairly. If Israel truly wishes to prove its moral exceptionality, it should stop comparing its own mistakes to those of others and stop questioning the legitimacy of those who question Israel’s accountability.
– Jon Weinberg

Comments

53 comments on “Guest Post by Jon Weinberg: The Goldstone Report

  1. ... says:

    arthurdecco – glad to see the toronto star is covering something( the goldstone commission) that i have been hammering away on since prior to the advent of this thread… shortly after i posted this on the previous thread, we were given this post by jon weinberg.. you will note at the top of the page my thoughts on the coverage by jon…
    from the previous thread
    Posted by …, Sep 18 2009, 12:28PM – Link
    steve, i am wondering if you are going to cover the goldstone commission anytime soon? immediately when it came out, israel communicated to the usa at which point the usa had complied with israels predictable demands… what is it with the usa when it comes to standing up for any type of justice? i suppose the usa doesn’t want to have a similar dynamic unfold with its abu graib actions in iraq…
    the msm is silent on this very relevant topic… surprised anyone? how about steve saying something? looks very unlikely…

    Reply

  2. Paul Norheim says:

    Somewhere on this thread Nadine alluded to the fact that Israel was in “good” company: USA, Sri Lanka,
    Pakistan. You may add a democratic ally of The United States as well as Israel – India.
    Here is an excerpt from a brilliant essay by the Indian writer Arundhati Roy, neither directly on nor
    off topic, but somehow extending the topic, from an Indian perspective:
    “I have lived all my life in India – a country that markets itself as the world’s biggest,
    democracy (other adjectives like ‘greatest’ and ‘oldest’ have already been taken). So, if you
    will forgive me, it is from this vantage point that I will critique democracy today.
    A few weeks ago the Indian government announced its plans to raise 26,000 paramilitary
    troops to mount a military operation against Maoist ‘terrorists’ in the dense, mineral rich
    forests of Central India. For decades now the Indian Army has been deployed in States like
    Nagaland, Manipur, Assam and Kashmir where people have been fighting for independence.
    But for the government to openly announce the militarization of India’s heartland is an
    official acknowledgement of civil war.
    The Operation —which incidentally, is what wars are called these days—is scheduled to
    begin in October, when the monsoon rains come to an end and the rivers are less angry and
    the terrain more accessible. The people who live in these forests, including the Maoists who
    see themselves as waging war against the Indian state, are tribal people, the poorest people in
    the country. They have lived on these lands for centuries with no schools, no hospitals, no
    roads, no running water. Their crime is an old one —they live on the land that is rich with
    iron-ore, bauxite, uranium and tin, all of it desperately desired by major mining corporations,
    among them Tata, Vedanta, Essar and Sterlite. The Prime Minister has declared that his
    government is duty bound to exploit India’s mineral wealth to fuel India’s economic boom.
    He has called the Maoists the ‘single largest internal security threat to India.’ In the corporate
    press words like ‘stamp-out’ and ‘exterminate’ are commonly used in discussions about what
    ought to be done to them. When the security forces enter the forests, nobody knows how they
    are going to distinguish between Maoists, Maoist symapthizers and ordinary people.
    It is significant that India is one of the countries that blocked a European move in the UN
    asking for an international probe into war crimes that may have been committed by the
    government of Sri Lanka in its recent offensive against the Tamil Tigers.16 Governments in
    this part of the world have taken note of Israel’s Gaza blueprint as a good way of dealing with
    ‘terrorism’: keep the media out and close in for the kill. That way they don’t have to worry too
    much about who’s a ‘terrorist’ and who isn’t. There may be a little flurry of international
    outrage, but it goes away pretty quickly.
    An unacknowledged, low-grade civil war has been under way for a few years now.
    Hundreds of thousands of people have had their villages destroyed, their food stocks burned.
    Many have migrated to cities where they work as manual laborers on starvation wages. The
    rest are hiding in the forests, surviving on grass and wild fruit, many are slowly starving.
    But now preparation for the formal war in which ground forces will be assisted by
    helicopter gunships and satellite mapping, has begun. Brigade headquarters are being set up
    in Raipur, the capital of Chhattisgarh. The forest is being barricaded and cordoned off.
    Restrictions on journalists have been put in place. A slew of laws that criminalize every kind
    of dissent including peaceful dissent have been passed. Scores are being arrested and
    imprisoned without bail.
    The October war, if it takes place, if we don’t manage to stop it, will mark the converging,
    the marriage, if you like, of two separate kinds of wars that have been raging in India for
    decades now – the war on “terror’ that the Indian army has waged against people of Kashmir,
    Nagaland, Manipur and the war to corner and control natural resources, a process that is
    otherwise known as ‘Progress’.
    In January 2008, on the first anniversary of the assassination, of the Armenian journalist
    Hrant Dink, I was invited to give a lecture in Istanbul. Dink was shot down on the street
    outside his office for daring to raise a subject that is forbidden in Turkey—the 1915 genocide
    of Armenians in which more than one million people were killed. My lecture was about the
    history of genocide and genocide denial, and the old, almost organic relationship between
    ‘progress’ and genocide.
    I have always been struck by the fact that the political party in Turkey that carried out the
    Armenian genocide was called the Committee for Union and Progress. Union and Progress,
    or, in today’s idiom, Nationalism and Development—those unimpeachable twin towers of
    modern, Free Market Democracy – have had a long, common history. When European
    countries were ‘progressing’, being ‘enlightened’, industrializing and developing limited but
    new forms of democracy and citizens’ rights at home, they were simultaneously
    exterminating people in their millions in their colonies. In the early years of colonialism,
    openly slaughtering natives in the name of civilizing them was quite acceptable. But as the
    discourse on civil rights and democracy grew stronger and more sophisticated, a new form of
    dual morality took shape. It gave rise to a new phenomenon. Genocide Denial.
    Now, when genocide politics meets the Free Market, official recognition—or denial, or
    more recently, the manufacture of imaginary holocausts and genocides is a multinational
    business enterprise. It rarely has anything to do to with historical fact or forensic evidence.
    Morality certainly does not enter the picture. It is an aggressive process of high-end
    bargaining that belongs more to the World Trade Organization than to the United Nations.
    The currency is geopolitics, the fluctuating market for natural resources, that curious thing
    called futures trading, and plain old economic and military might.
    In other words, genocides are often denied for the same set of reasons genocides are
    prosecuted. Economic determinism marinated in racial/ethnic/religious/national
    discrimination. Crudely, the lowering or raising of the price of a barrel of oil (or a ton of
    uranium), permission granted for a military base, or the opening up of a country’s economy
    could be the decisive factor when governments adjudicate on whether a genocide did or did
    not occur. Or indeed whether genocide will or will not occur. And if it does, whether it will or
    will not be reported, and if it is, then what slant that reportage will take. For example, the
    death of two million in the Congo goes virtually unreported. Why? And was the death of a
    million Iraqis under the sanctions regime, prior to the U.S. invasion in 2003, genocide
    (which is what UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq Denis Halliday called it) or was it
    “worth it,” as Madeleine Albright, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, claimed? It depends on
    who makes the rules. The US President? Or an Iraqi mother who has lost her child?
    The history of genocide tells us that it’s not an aberration, an anomaly, a glitch in the
    human system. It’s a habit as old, as persistent, as much part of the human condition as love
    and art and agriculture.”
    http://www.literaturfestival.com/upload//roy%20english%281%29.pdf
    Highly recommended reading!

    Reply

  3. Paul Norheim says:

    “In the end, the Goldstone Report is unlikely to break the inter-governmental
    refusal to challenge the Israeli blockade of Gaza or to induce the United Nations to
    challenge Israeli impunity in any meaningful way. Depending on backroom diplomacy,
    the United States may or may not be able to avoid playing a public role of shielding
    Israel from accountability for its behavior during the Gaza War or its continuing
    refusal to abide by international humanitarian law by lifting the blockade that
    continues to impinge daily upon the health of the entire population of Gaza.
    Despite these limitations, the report is an historic contribution to the Palestinian
    struggle for justice, an impeccable documentation of a crucial chapter in their
    victimization under occupation. Its impact will be felt most impressively on the
    growing civil society movement throughout the world to impose cultural, sporting,
    and academic boycotts, as well as to discourage investment, trade, and tourism with
    Israel. It may yet be the case that as in the anti-apartheid struggle the shift in
    the relation of forces in the Palestinian favor will occur not through diplomacy or
    as a result of armed resistance, but on the symbolic battlefield of legitimacy that
    has become global in scope, what might be described as the new political relevance
    of moral and legal globalization.”
    http://mondoweiss.net/2009/09/falk-goldstone-bombshell-will-fray-jewish-support-for-
    israel.html#more-9287
    ————————————————–
    I don`t have high expectations to the attempt to restart the Peace Process, but I
    regard Obama`s insistence of a settlement freeze as a contribution on the same
    global “symbolic battlefield of legitimacy”.

    Reply

  4. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Its not like the Goldstone report was created in a vaccuum. Amnesty International, the Red Cross, the Red Crescent…..who else?? Damned near every human rights organization on earth has condemned the abuses and crimes committed by Israel. Did we really need Goldstone to tell us dumping white phosphorous on civilians is illegal and inhumane? The photographc evidence cannot be denied.
    Israel pretty much got a free pass for the carnage they inflicted on the Lebanese civilians. And, likely, they’ll get a free pass on Gaza too. Of course, it will be in no small part because of the USA’s efforts to discredit Goldstone’s report. The whores in Congress are getting on the record in typical fashion, and so too is the mouthpiece Rice, speaking for our nation.

    Reply

  5. Kathleen Grassi Andersen says:

    arthurrrr…thanks for that article…I think I will go to the UN website and read the actual report..UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict..best to go right to the source for the straight skinny….

    Reply

  6. arthurdecco says:

    From today’s Toronto Star: Shining a light on Israeli aggression in Gaza
    http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/697997
    Sep 20, 2009 04:30 AM
    Haroon Siddiqui
    So, (Prime Minister) Stephen Harper and his ministers were defending possible war crimes and crimes against humanity, while Michael Ignatieff and senior Liberals were staying mostly mum. And much of our mainstream media were averting their gaze from, or excusing, the possible crimes.
    Now, no less an authority than Richard Goldstone, former chief prosecutor with the war crimes tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, says that the three-week Israeli onslaught on Gaza eight months ago amounted to “war crimes and possibly, in some respects, crimes against humanity.”
    Releasing his report Tuesday, he said: “As a Jew with a long-standing affiliation with Israel, it’s obviously a great disappointment to me, to put it mildly, that Israel behaved as described in the report.”
    His four-member United Nations panel found that both Israeli and Palestinian groups committed war crimes, the latter by rocketing Israeli civilian areas. But the panel reserved its harshest judgments for Israel: Its Dec. 27-Jan. 18 attack was “directed at the people of Gaza as a whole,” not just at Hamas militants (as Israel claimed).
    In fact, Israeli operations were “carefully planned in all their phases as a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic capacity to work and to provide for itself, and to force upon it an ever increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability.”
    Israel was following its Dahiya Doctrine – “the application of disproportionate force and the causing of great damage and destruction to civilian property and infrastructure, and suffering to civilian populations.”
    Goldstone has pronounced Israel guilty of:
    * Attacking residential areas, water wells, rooftop water tanks, agricultural land, citrus groves, chicken farms, greenhouses, business factories and police stations.
    * Using phosphorous incendiary shells on a UN compound sheltering more than 600 civilians.
    * Using phosphorous and high explosive artillery shells on Al-Quds hospital. (He rejected the contention that Hamas or other militants were using the hospital.)
    * Attacking a crowded mosque during evening prayers. (He rejected the contention that arms and militants were inside.)
    * Using flechettes, 4-cm metal darts fired from missiles, planes or tanks “that penetrate straight through human bone and can cause serious, often fatal, injuries.”
    * Using Palestinians as human shields in house searches.
    Goldstone urged the UN Security Council to ask both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities to hold transparent investigations and report back in six months.
    Failing that, the council should turn the matter over to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
    Israel had boycotted the panel and refused it entry into Israel. Panellists entered Gaza via Egypt for inspections and interviews. They went to Jordan to meet Palestinian Authority officials from the West Bank. They heard testimony from Israelis, including some victims of Hamas attacks, by flying them to Geneva.
    The 575-page report (Adobe Reader required) – based on 188 interviews, 10,000 pages of documentation, 1,200 photographs and satellite imagery – is not easily dismissed. But Israel and its defenders are trying, with a smear campaign:
    What else would you expect from a report done for the anti-Israeli UN Human Rights Council? Where was the need for a UN inquiry when Israel has conducted more than 100 of its own?
    The former South African Supreme Court and Constitutional Court judge is not easily cowed into silence. “It is grossly wrong to label a mission or to label a report critical of Israel as being anti-Israel.” He urges “fair-minded people” to read the report for themselves. (Go to the UN website, UN.org, and search for the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict.)
    Goldstone’s report is a condemnation not only of Israel but also its apologists in Canada, including the media. The latter are now busy burying the report under an orchestrated avalanche of negative reaction without ever properly reporting its contents.
    hsiddiq@thestar.ca

    Reply

  7. Paul Norheim says:

    Sorry, my last post was misplaced… I`ll post it
    where it belongs…

    Reply

  8. Paul Norheim says:

    I know, I know… it`s annoying when commenters seem to make it a habit to quote
    themselves. But I can`t resist this one – also two years old:
    “Posted by Paul Norheim, Oct 29 2007, 9:21PM – Link
    WHO IS THIS GUY WHO DOES NOT WANT TO SHOOT THAT PARTICULAR ELEPHANT TODAY AT 5.30
    PM?
    I`ve been reading TWN for a while, and watched the increasing tensions between
    Steve Clemons and some of the commentators on his blog. The issue is complex, but
    this is roughly how I see it:
    Steve Clemons is a ZOON POLITIKON, a political animal, who is fascinated by other
    animals, especially the big ones. He spends a lot of his time informing people
    where these animals are, what they`re doing, as well as speculating on why they`re
    doing it. Sometimes he tries to predict what they`ll do the next day. Occasionally
    he enjoys hunting too.
    Then some people start telling him which animal he should pursue. And they don`t
    stop there. They also tell him which weapon he should use, even when to pull the
    trigger.
    Does he submit to their demands? Nope. “I am free to go hunting when I want to”, he
    says to himself. This make some of these people suspicious: “Who is this guy who
    does not want to shoot that particular elephant today at 5.30 PM? And by the way:
    who is paying for his rifle? Perhaps an organization working for the protection of
    elephants?”
    This makes him angry. Suddenly Steve Clemons becomes a pissed off American. Big
    surprise to some of his critics. Steve Clemons pissed off? He must be overreacting!
    I think I would`ve been angry too. As a hunter. But also as a zoon politikon.”
    http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2007/10/leading_dems_an/
    —————————————————————————–
    That was in 2007. And we`re still there. It`s his blog, folks.

    Reply

  9. Paul Norheim says:

    “Paul, if you have managed to delude yourself into thinking that the Arab world actually
    cares about the Palestinians, you have really lost the clue.”
    Nadine, I hesitate to communicate with you, due to some absurd experiences in the past.
    So please don`t regard this comment as an open invitation to a new meaningless marathon
    discussion. However, I`m a bit curious: Where in this thread did I mention or allude to
    the “Arab world” – or raise the issue of their solidarity for the Palestinians?
    Aren`t you inventing this, Nadine? Isn`t it a bit like your resent outcry that Iran is
    invading someone “right now”?

    Reply

  10. kathleen says:

    Nadine clearly support breaking and ignoring International laws. No need to waste your breath. Like arguing with a teabagger. Were better, god told us so…Laws do not apply to us
    “do as we say not as we do” sounds like Nadine’s motto too

    Reply

  11. arthurdecco says:

    shorter Nadine: SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECH!!!!!

    Reply

  12. nadine says:

    “Does that make you proud, Yids threatening Yids?”
    I don’t know why it should bother you since you like political violence. Che rules, right? That’s what you say.
    Che was a stone killer. But you love him.
    Oh, you only love polical violence that comes from the side you are cheering for. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter and all that. Well that is where the law of reaction comes into it. When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, they got rewarded with 10,000 rockets on the heads of their civilians. This provoked after many years, one of those reactions you love to talk about. And look, no more rockets. Reactions work both ways. Now the Pals are just working on lawfare attacks, where it becomes “interantional law” that they get to suicide bomb and shoot rockets onto civilians with impunity.
    That is what YOU want, isn’t it?

    Reply

  13. ... says:

    altered nadine quote “”nadine (was paul), if you have managed to delude yourself into thinking that israel actually cares about the anyone other then jews, you have really lost the clue. The cause of zionism is about destroying any opposition to it’s fanatical cause.. If it destroys the rest of the world too, nobody but the rest of the world outside zionism will care…””
    couldn’t have said it better myself nadine…

    Reply

  14. nadine says:

    Paul, if you have managed to delude yourself into thinking that the Arab world actually cares about the Palestinians, you have really lost the clue. The cause of Palestine is about destroying Israel. If it destroys the Palestinians too, nobody but the Palesitnians will care.
    Elevating settlements into not only a main issue but THE main issue is just cracked. Try to think about it rationally. Israel has towns of 30,000 or 40,000 people built on the East Side of the Green Line that have been there for over thirty years now. And you are trying to tell me that THE MAIN ISSUE standing in the way of Mideast Peace is whether Israel builds a new kindergarten in the middle of the existing town? We are not talking about even an inch of expansion beyond the current town borders, just building inside them. That is what “natural growth” means.
    It defies logic. However, both Bibi and Abu Mazen have reason to thank President Obama for his idiocy in elevating the issue, since it gives Abu Mazen the perfect excuse to refuse to negotiate, which he does not want to do. He has attended hundreds of previous negotiations while this natural growth construction was going on (the Oslo Accords, by which the PA exists, allow it) but now that Obama has put his foot in it Abu Mazen will naturally insist that he won’t talk a word until it stops.
    And Bibi will refuse to talk, with the full backing of the Israeli public. Since they don’t have anything to talk about, except maybe how Fatah is breaking the last of the Oslo terms by select Mohamed Ghaneim as Abu Mazen’s successor, that suits both of the them just fine. Only Obama ever wanted these talks anyway.

    Reply

  15. nadine says:

    “By abandoning the rocket shield in Eastern Europe, he hopes that Russia will be
    much more willing to cooperate with USA/EU on Iran. ”
    Paul, I think we can stop at step 1, which by your own description involves Obama giving away the rocket shield in return for nothing more than his “hopes” that it will make Russia more cooperative.
    What odds do you rate his “hopes”? Unless he got a deal, he just gave something away for nothing. There are names for this in foreign policy. They are “weak” and “loser”. Vlad Putin must be ecstatic. Do you see any sign whatever that he got a deal? Unless we see Russia change course on Iran sanctions, and I’m not holding out much hope for that, since Russians like their present policy just fine, Obama just scored a huge own goal in foreign policy. As icing on the cake, he announced abandonment of the missile defense in Poland on the 70th anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Poland in WWII. Smart diplomacy at work.

    Reply

  16. Kathleen Grasso Andersen says:

    Steve…don’t you know someone in an NGO in Geneva who can “Live-Blog” Ambassador Goldstone’s presentation on Sept 29, of his Report/Israel/Hamas Responses and the comments of other govt’s and NGO’s? Better yet, hop on a plane pick up a press pass and “Live Blog” it yourself…you’ll love the scene….

    Reply

  17. Paul Norheim says:

    “Then all armies would march straight in jail.”
    Hmm… perhaps not such a bad idea?

    Reply

  18. Ivan says:

    Would you prosecute American soldiers by the same standards?
    Then all armies would march straight in jail. Consider a rebuttal at
    http://samsonblinded.org/blog/goldstone-report-the-
    rebuttal.htm

    Reply

  19. Kathleen Grasso Andersen says:

    Sorry guys…I just can’t get past giggling to myself about the flap that keeps on flapping…having been there to witness what happens when a “REPORT” is submitted to the UN Commission on Human Rights, now Council…
    I also witnessed the US Mission at the UN in Geneva boycott Yassir Arrafat’s addrees to that body…as if to thumb our nose at even the appearance of being fair and balanced in our diplomatic relations on the Palestine question.
    ICH is running a piece from Haaretz by Goldstone’s daughter, saying that her father softened his report on Israel….
    I posted links to articles at ICH on another thread re IAEA having knowledge that certain documents alleging Iranian nuclear weapons development were forgeries, but suppressed the info…from yellowcake to green salt..,
    The other link is about US knowledge that Iran suspened it’s nuclear weapons development in 2003…
    Back to basics and UN procedures..I would like to know why the Goldstone Report is being referred to the Security Council…the normal procedure for Reports submitted to the Commission/Council on Human Rights is to be included in their Report to the General Assembly…I’m wondering what the exception is in this case…perhaps the unfolding story will tell us…
    Oh to be a fly on the wall of the NGO coffee clatch….multilingual grapevine..almost sounds x-rated.
    OT..I noticed Progressive Dave Sirota wrote a piece called “Selective Deficit Disorder” Is it synchronicity or does he read TWN? I read his piece and loved the “Obummer” moniker(gotta borrow it) and President Rahm Emmanuel…
    I’m sorry..I think I went off a deep end a while back…but I just can’t take any of this “ssseeeerioussssly” because I have my limits on how much farce I can handle .. it’s like being in a game of political chartades..they’ve made up their mind, they know the end game and we’re just going through some two party Kabuki moves…
    The good newes is the Un IAEA want to send inspectors to Isreal to take a peak at their nukes…

    Reply

  20. arthurdecco says:

    The post above @ Sep 19 2009, 1:18AM did not originate with me. So who is it playing games?

    Reply

  21. Carroll says:

    >
    If you want to send Susan Rice your opinion on her Goldstone-UN- Israel remark.
    US-UN contacts:
    Opinion & Comment line: 212-415-4062
    Fax: 212-415-4053
    If you want to send an email you have to do it thru their contact form here:
    http://www.archive.usun.state.gov/Issues/contactus.html

    Reply

  22. Paul Norheim says:

    Most people at TWN seem to agree that President Obama is a) intelligent and b) weak.
    However: Is his intelligence a strength, or a part of his weakness?
    There are good reasons to assume that Obama regards issues like Israel/Palestine,
    Iran, and Russia as intertwined on certain levels. Roughly, I think the strategy
    behind certain US actions and statements is the following:
    1) By abandoning the rocket shield in Eastern Europe, he hopes that Russia will be
    much more willing to cooperate with USA/EU on Iran. (And if Russia cooperates, China
    will hesitate to be the only power vetoing a resolution against Iran in the Security
    Council – that`s something they`ve avoided in the past).
    2) If Obama, with a little help from Russia, succeeds in bending Iran more according
    to the will of the United States/EU, his hope is that this will satisfy Israel.
    3) This will on the other hand put pressure on Israel to give more in peace
    negotiations with the Palestinians (Netanyahu has expressed that certain outcomes on
    “the Iran issue” is a precondition for negotiations with the Palestinians).
    Now, there are a lot of x-factors in such a strategy. What if Russia is unwilling to
    change course in its Iran policy? Secondly, what if the unpredictable, but
    predictably stubborn Achmedinejad is uncooperative? And thirdly: What if Benjamin
    Netanyahu, predictable both in his stubbornness and his hawkishness, just continues
    to demand more from USA, Iran, and the Palestinians, regardless of what Obama may
    achieve?
    And if Israel and USA just continue to demand that Iran shall prove that they don`t
    have a nuclear weapons program, something nobody yet has proved that they actually
    have, we may be steering towards an attack on Iran.
    It would be interesting to hear what Steve thinks about US strategies in relation to
    the above mentioned factors. Maybe my guesses are completely off the mark. But I
    think this is part of the complex chain of actions and reactions that Obama hoped
    for. Along the road, the elections in Iran created a domestic crisis there that is
    not yet resolved. Recent events in Tehran show that the situation remains fragile.
    Secondly, Netanyahu was more stubborn than Obama probably anticipated. Thirdly more
    and more people realize that Israel may be a bigger obstacle for peace than the
    Palestinians, due to the settlement issue – and this is something that Obama may have
    calculated. I wouldn`t be surprised if Israel`s international reputation will be
    severely damaged in the coming months, both because of Israeli stubbornness on the
    settlement issue and related to the UN report and possible legal actions. Even the
    Israeli nuclear arsenal may become more official in this process.
    The big irony here – if I am partly correct – is that when Washington allows itself
    to be pressured by hawks in Tel Aviv and rightwingers in the US Congress into a more
    confrontational position against Tehran, Washington itself may interpret such
    pressure against the mullahs in Tehran also as a pressure on the hawks in Tel Aviv in
    the next round. And this may be a huge miscalculation.

    Reply

  23. Outraged American says:

    Nadine, you’re looking for “terrorists” under every bush
    including your girlfriend’s. One woman’s terrorist is another’s
    freedom fighter.
    There is a cause and effect relationship (basic physics, which is
    all I remember after all that whisky / meth) in any nation’s policy
    toward its neighbors. One woman’s terrorist is another’s
    freedom fighter. Or pin-up. Che ruled.
    The people in the Gaza Strip have nothing, not even clean
    drinking water, due to Israel, so they have nothing to lose.
    BTW: Israel has made a propaganda / hasbara effort to call it
    “Gaza” instead of “the Gaza Strip” because calling it correctly a
    “strip” indicates how tiny it is.
    But it’s too stupid to argue with you: just send me back what my
    tax dollars sent you in whatever settlement you live in instead of
    using it for chlorine for your pool or bullets for your kids’
    assault weapons or axes to whack down ancient olive trees and
    Palestinian kids.
    In terms of “leftist” Jews: I have a friend, a college professor,
    who was put on the list by those Kahane maniacs of “self-hating
    Jews” (far from self-hating, I just think she’s sane) She requested
    protection from the campus police because she got threats.
    Does that make you proud, Yids threatening Yids?
    I don’t know what you do beyond sit on your roof with an Uzi
    and a bottle of Mogen David, or decide which wig you’re wearing
    for Shabbat, but I guarantee that my friend’s work will help all
    Jews achieve peace and security much more than yours.

    Reply

  24. ... says:

    spin-cycle town would be a better synonym…

    Reply

  25. ... says:

    but paul, according to nadine those countries are dumbocracies!!! that means they don’t have to be held accountable for their murderous actions!!!! welcome to world turned upside down by posters like nadine and helped along by the comings and goings of all these ””important”” people working in washing – town to make things LOOK right… oh, to be above cynicism…

    Reply

  26. Paul Norheim says:

    “Nobody else in the whole world is told such
    nonsense. Not the US, not the Pakistanis, not the
    Sri Lankans.”(Nadine)
    Nice company: Israel, USA, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.
    There are several top ranking officials in at least
    three of these countries who now should have been
    behind bars due to war crimes committed during the
    last decade.

    Reply

  27. Paul Norheim says:

    And as I said above, warning Iran is the main response of the Obama adm. to
    the UN report about war crimes committed in Gaza.
    Carroll recently pasted something from an AP (or Haaretz?) article, from
    which I quote:
    “Robbie Sabel, a former legal advisor at the Israeli Foreign Ministry and
    now on the staff of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, told IPS, “There is
    a real possibility that this could give legitimacy to private legal
    initiatives in Western European countries, like in Britain and Scandinavia,
    for the issuing to Israeli officials and army officers of warrants for war
    crimes.””
    This is probably part of the context of the debate over the organ story in
    Sweden and the Hamsun jubilee in Norway. By attempting to label Scandinavia
    as anti-semitic, Israel tries to make possible legal actions from Norway or
    Sweden suspect in advance.

    Reply

  28. Paul Norheim says:

    “Remember when we were asking Saddam to prove the
    impossible to prove?”
    Exactly. This reminds me of February 2003.

    Reply

  29. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Clinton: ‘Time Running Out for Iran’
    Warns of ‘Profound Consequences’ if Iran Can’t Prove Intentions Are Peaceful
    by Jason Ditz, September 18, 2009
    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today warned of ‘profound consequences’ if Iran is unable to convince the United States that their civilian nuclear program “is intended exclusively for peaceful purposes.”
    Iran has agreed to enter into talks with the six parties (the US, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany) which are planned for early next month. The US has said it doesn’t expect anything positive to come of the talks, and has been pressing the other five negotiating nations to support “crippling” sanctions against Iran.
    Though Secretary Clinton insisted that Iran isn’t living up to its obligations, the IAEA yesterday reiterated that there was no proof that Iran was doing anything untoward in its civilian program, and Russia has said it firmly opposes any new sanctions.
    The IAEA has continued to confirm that Iran isn’t diverting any of its low-enriched uranium to any military purpose, and the US intelligence community says it has confidence Iran doesn’t have an active nuclear weapons program. It remains unclear how Iran can possibly “prove” what the administration doesn’t want to believe, particularly when it is something international inspectors and US spies already know.
    http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/18/clinton-time-running-out-for-iran/
    Right on cue, this hawkbitch Hillary jumps in with the same old shit. Remember when we were asking Saddam to prove the impossible to prove?
    Who here can possibly doubt that Israel is framing the narrative, and has absolute and total control over what our policy will be in regards to Iran? If you want to see what these bought and paid for cowards in Washington are going to be saying tomorrow, just look at what AIPAC is saying today.

    Reply

  30. Dirk says:

    Lets see here…google: “UN Human Rights Council” … go to:
    http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/membership.htm
    Check membership…hmm…no Somalia
    As far as Hamas fighting fairly; the Israelis are holding some 10000 Palestinian hostages and to attempt to balance that Hamas managed to grab one Israeli soldier.

    Reply

  31. nadine says:

    “Nor is this a question of whether Hamas fights fairly: It doesn’t. Rather, this is a question of whether Israel, an economically developed democracy, fights fairly.”
    “fight fairly”? What the hell does that mean? Lose? Never kill a civilian, even a human shield or a fighter in civilian clothing? And what does “economically developed democracy” have to do with it? Is he ordering Israel to match its arsenal to Hamas’ to be “fair”? Nobody else in the whole world is told such nonsense. Not the US, not the Pakistanis, not the Sri Lankans.
    This is a recipe for saying that Israel – and only Israel – should sit and accept rockets and suicide bombers without fighting back at all. The whole thing was a farce, as Israel knew going in, which is why it didn’t cooperate.
    A human rights council that has genocidal Somalia as a proud member in good standing that spends 95% of its effort bashing Israel is a great emblem for the UN as a whole. Think we’ll get the UN to investigate Darfur? Not hardly.
    BTW, the problem with HRW Marc Garlasco is not that he collects Nazi memorabilia. It is that when he worked as a Pentagon analyst in 2003, he was in charge of selecting high value targets in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Then, he explained that a selecting a target to try to kill one important Iraqi was okay as long as you didn’t kill more than 30 Iraqi civilians (in the end they only killed the civilians, they didn’t get ANY important Iraqis). But now he condemns Israel for killing any civilians, even those who were human shields, even those who weren’t civilians at all but Hamas fighters in civilian clothes. They take Hamas’ word for who is a civilian. The level of hypocrisy is mind-blowing.

    Reply

  32. arthurdecco says:

    The only fact in this fantasy constructed by the sociopathics like Nadine and et al, is this: http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/09/guest_post_by_j_13/#comments
    Record this to their obvious directions…
    It’s already been a bad night – let us go…
    The

    Reply

  33. nadine says:

    I see someone leaked the IAEA ‘secret annex’ to the AP, which tells what every sane person in the world already knows: Iran is building nuclear weapons, and is almost ready to construct them. The only question is, do they build one as soon as they can, or do they wait to collect the material for several and perfect their ability to make warheads for their ICBMs first?
    The US knows this. France knows this, and Sarkozy says so. Israel and the Arab states know this. Even the frickin’ IAEA knows this, though as usual they try to cover for Iran by not publishing their findings. It has just gotten so obvious that they couldn’t cover completely for Iran anymore.
    The only bright spot on the horizon is how shaky the Ahmedinejad regime is (who said AGAIN that the Holocaust is a lie and Israel won’t last long). Did you catch any of the video of today’s Qods day rallies? They have imprisoned, beated and raped thousands of these protesters, and they are still protesting! By now the regime has to bus in the Basiji regime supporters from the countryside.
    But I’m sure you lot will continue to demonstrate what human rights supporters you are by being for Ahmedinejad all the way.

    Reply

  34. arthurdecco says:

    My gawd, easy e, we’re mind-melded! LOL!

    Reply

  35. arthurdecco says:

    The silence is deafening, POA…

    Reply

  36. easy e says:

    Posted by …, Sep 18 2009, 6:56PM – Link
    > i note steves involvement in all of this : a platform for propaganda with jons article here at twn…
    * * * * *
    Posted by arthurdecco, Sep 18 2009, 9:19PM – Link
    > I see AIPAC has finally co-opted TWN.
    * * * * *
    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Sep 18 2009, 10:34PM – Link
    “IAEA: Iran Can Make Nukes”
    Straight off the AIPAC presses.
    > Nadine???
    > Questions???
    > Wig-wag????
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    WELL???????????????
    THE S I L E N C E IS D E A F E N I N G .

    Reply

  37. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “IAEA: Iran Can Make Nukes”
    Straight off the AIPAC presses.
    Nadine???
    Questions???
    Wig-wag????
    Is the AIPAC article’s headline honest? Or do any of the three of you three have the integrity to admit it is blatant bullshit, pure propaganda aimed at that American public?
    How about this bunch of SHIT about Gibbs mentioning a “ballistic nuclear weapons program”? How do you feel about this propaganda slinging foreign agency misquoting the White House in order to misrepresent and exagerate a threat?

    Reply

  38. Carroll says:

    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Sep 18 2009, 9:36PM
    >>>>>>>
    I saw that. They and all the zionistas do it all the time. If you can find one article or statement made by that crowd that is even 50% accurate I would be shocked…I’ve never seen one that wasn’t completely squewed or an outright lie.
    They are pathological liars and they have lied so long they believe their own lies.

    Reply

  39. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Iran experts at the U.N.’s nuclear monitoring agency believe that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb”
    You gotta love it, doncha?
    How long before Reid and Hillary are preaching this shit as gospel????

    Reply

  40. PissedOffAmerican says:

    As some of you may remember, a couple of days ago I linked to an obvious LIE on the AIPAC website, where they misquote one of Gibb’s lies. Gibbs’ bullshit was obviously not bullshitty enough for them, so they morphed the phrase “illicit nuclear weaponas progran” into “ballistic nuclear weapons program”. Never mind that Gibbs was already feeding us a line of shit, as there is no proof of an “illicit” nuclear weapons program, much less evidence of a “ballistic nuclear weapons program”. I guess the AIPAC website managers were just jealous, and resented seeing a lie that they did not compose.
    Heres an opportunity to do a little comparison shopping……….
    http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/17/iaea-no-concrete-proof-iran-has-nuclear-weapons-program/
    IAEA: No Proof Iran Has Nuclear Weapons Program
    Leaked “Annex” Claims Iran Probably Has Technology to Create a Bomb
    by Jason Ditz, September 17, 2009
    The Associated Press earlier today leaked the details of what it believes is the “secret annex” to the IAEA report on Iran, which claims that the IAEA “assesses that Iran has sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device based on HEU as the fission fuel.”
    The IAEA would not confirm the authenticity of the document, but reiterated that it has “no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapon programme in Iran.”
    The annex also accuses Iran of having tested explosives which could be used in such a device and that some of the warheads it is working on might be able to be used to carry a nuclear payload.
    Though much has been made of the report, Iran’s hypothetical capability to make a weapon from highly enriched uranium would require them to enrich uranium to much higher levels than they are currently doing for energy production, and the IAEA has continued to verify that none of its uranium has been diverted to any such purpose.
    And while the United States has repeatedly accused Iran of seeking such a weapon publicly, privately its intelligence community still stands behind its 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) which expresses confidence that Iran is not actually working on weapons.
    http://www.aipac.org/130.asp#29261
    IAEA: Iran Can Make Nukes, Developing Warheads
    Iran is said to have studied nuclear warhead designs.
    Iran experts at the U.N.’s nuclear monitoring agency believe that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and has worked on developing a missile system that can carry an atomic warhead, the Associated Press reported. According to a confidential report drafted by senior officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), titled “Possible Military Dimension of Iran’s Nuclear Program,” Iran engaged in “probable testing” of explosives commonly used to detonate a nuclear warhead and “has sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device (an atomic bomb) based on HEU (highly enriched uranium) as the fission fuel.” Senior diplomats had previously accused Mohamed ElBaradei, the IAEA chief, of hiding information about Iran’s nuclear program. Still, recent IAEA reports have noted alarming advances in Iran’s uranium enrichment activity-the key element of a nuclear weapons program.

    Reply

  41. arthurdecco says:

    I see AIPAC has finally co-opted TWN.
    I suppose i shouldn’t be surprised. When it’s a choice between integrity and lucre we know who always wins in Americka, don’t we?

    Reply

  42. Carroll says:

    >>>>>>Posted by Outraged American, Sep 18 2009, 1:47PM
    Israel is not on the defensive, she is perpetually on the offensive.
    She wants the water from the Litani in Lebanon, and from the
    West Bank. She wants the oil discovered off of Gaza. She wants
    the water from the Blue Nile. She has dreams of being “Eretz
    Israel” controlling all the land between the Niles and the
    Euphrates.
    And Israel uses the US military as mercenaries, and US tax
    dollars as her ATM.>>>>>>>>>>
    Exactly.
    >>>>>Posted by DonS, Sep 18 2009, 3:30PM
    Lipstick on a pig>>>>>>>>>
    Exactly.
    And for the record.
    Israel is not a democracy. A kangroo court and a vote does not democracy make..as we in the US very well know.
    It’s a midget nazi Jewish state that has played the holocaust card for 60 years for trillions of dollars. It’s a state of money grubbing scam artist, shake down thugs, and con men.
    Tell us Weinberg, if Israel is so economically developed why do we have to give them 3 billion + + + + a year? They are a freaking eternal welfare state of whinning, psycohpathic cultist, just like the US Israelis who have inflitrated our government.
    Burn Washington to the Ground and Start Over

    Reply

  43. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Let us watch the Administration’s response very carefully”
    John, you should know by now, our “Administration’s response” is drafted in Tel Aviv, and faxed to the White House. And if The White House doesn’t get the fax, you can bet your ass that Reid will, and HIS office will make sure every sniveling piece of shit coward in Congress gets a copy.
    http://www.aipac.org/130.asp#29262
    U.S. Rejects Calls for Israel War Crimes Probe
    Ambassador Rice called the investigation’s mandate ‘basically unacceptable.’
    The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations rejected a U.N. Human Rights Council proposal to compel Israel to conduct an investigation into alleged war crimes during last winter’s defensive operation in Gaza, The Washington Post reported. Ambassador Susan Rice said the United States has long had “very serious concerns” about the mandate the Human Rights Council gave to its investigators, calling the mandate “unbalanced, one-sided and basically unacceptable.” Rice also dismissed that the report’s recommendation that the U.N. Security Council investigate violations of human rights. Several members of Congress from both parties also criticized the so-called “Goldstone Report” as deeply flawed and biased against the Jewish state.

    Reply

  44. PissedOffAmerican says:

    It is interesting that Weinberg could type this tepidly critical essay without mentioning the FACT, widely accepted, that it is ISRAEL that broke the cease fire on November fourth of ’08. It can be said that that the Palestinians “have a right to defend themselves”, yet it seems no one is willing to say it, even those that offer mild criticism of Israel’s actions, such as we see Weinberg doing.
    As many of you know, with a simple click of the mouse, we can find pictures of Israeli white phosphorous weapons raining down on Gazan urban areas. Tristan Anderson, an American citizen, lies as a vegetable in a Tel Aviv hospital, shot down while engaged in peaceful protest, by the IDF jackboots. Palestinian crops and orchards are regulatrly razed by the IDF. Palestinian fisherman are fired upon, their boats confinscated, and denied access to fishing grounds.
    Also, I note Weinberg fails to mention that initially, Goldstone’s investigation was to only look at Israeli abuses. Goldstone dissented, and only took the task after it was agreed that both Israel AND the Palestinian’s actions should be looked at.
    But absolutely NOTHING will come of Goldstone’s report. The whores in Congress, kneeling before AIPAC and their Israeli patrons, are already demonstrating their obscene fealty, as can be seen on the AIPAC website….
    http://www.aipac.org/The_Issues/29184.asp
    These tepid criticisms such as Weinberg’s are embarrassing in their toothless futility. There is not a week that goes by where Israeli does not commit especially egregious abuses against the Palestinian people. Whether it be blocking medical supplies, holding pregnant women in labor at checkpoints, razing an orchard, or shooting a peaceful protester in the head, we do not need the occassional “harrumph” from someone that speaks as though calling frying Palestinian women and children in white phosphorous a “crime” is some sort of step forward. Of course its a crime, now, what the fuck are we going to do about it? Send them a few more billion dollars and block international criminal indictments? Thats my bet.
    Meanwhile, who can doubt that Reid and Hoyer, as I am typing this, are working overtime to make sure NO ONE in the Democratic party does anything but criticize the Goldstone report.
    Its those nasty raghead Palestinian terrist radical jihadists causing all the problems, and if they’d just stop lobbing those rockets at Israeli day care centers and lollipop stands, Israel would stop frying them in white phosphorous, shitting in their living rooms, and stealing their land.

    Reply

  45. ... says:

    john waring, the us admin has already given the response… israel says ‘jump’ and the usa says ‘how high?’ that has essentially been the response to the goldstone report so far from rice us ambassador to the un..
    “”We have very serious concerns about many of the recommendations in the [Goldstone] report… We have long expressed our very serious concern with the mandate that was given by the Human Rights Council prior to our joining the council, which we viewed as unbalanced, one-sidee and basically unacceptable… The appropriate venue for this report to be considered is the Human Rights Council [and not the more serious Security Council as the report suggests]… Our view is that we need to be focused on the future.”
    — Susan E. Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 9/17/2009″
    we stands for israel lobby…..
    follow the above recipe if you want to make the usa the laughing stock of the planet….
    i note steves involvement in all of this : a platform for propaganda with jons article here at twn…

    Reply

  46. Kathleen Grasso Andersen says:

    I love the UN..I really do..and think they do tremendous amounts of good around the world…especially when the US is current with their dues and not being an obstructionis member..
    I can’t help but smile at the ripples spreading throughtout the US an Isreali missions at the UN on this report..brings back fond memories of when the UN Report on Hopi/Navajo Forced Relocation was submitted to the Commission for Himan Rights in 1989…such sa kerfuffle..so much fun to witness…
    LKooks like UN is dealing Israel a one-two punch…
    IAEA urges Isreal to allow nulear inspections… pinch me…
    I must be dreaming…’bout time..
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3778884,00.html

    Reply

  47. Paul Norheim says:

    Hillary Clinton has already responded today – by
    warning Iran!

    Reply

  48. John Waring says:

    Let us watch the Administration’s response very carefully.
    There must be a response.
    Hold the mirror up, gentlemen, hold the mirror up.

    Reply

  49. samuelburke says:

    can you imagine the uproar in the u.s if muslims from any country would sing the national anthem of a muslim nation in their mosques this friday.
    the inclusivity community in the u.s would scream…traitors and america haters and terrorits and extremist and fundamentalist.
    http://jewschool.com/2009/09/17/18004/conservative-movement-hatikvah-instead-of-shofar/
    The Rabbinical Assembly distributed this letter today to its members, asking its rabbis to read the piece below in lieu of the Shofar service on Rosh Hashanah. (The shofar is traditionally not sounded when RH falls on Shabbat, as it does this year.)
    Friends,
    On this Rosh Hashanah our brothers and sisters in Israel face the threat of a nuclear Iran – a threat to Israel’s very existence.
    Today, we Jews around the world also confront the anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment of the Goldstone report which blames Israel disproportionately for the tragic loss of human life incurred in Operation Cast Lead, which took place last winter in Gaza. This unbalanced United Nations sponsored report portends serious consequences for Israel and the Jewish people.
    On this holy day, which is not only Rosh Hashanah, but also Shabbat, the Shofar is silent in the face of this spurious report, the world is far too silent.
    Today the state of Israel needs us to be the kol shofar, the voice of the shofar!
    We ask you to write to our governmental leaders and call upon them to condemn the Goldstone report and to confront the threat of a nuclear Iran.
    While the shofar is silent today, all Conservative rabbis, cantors and congregations have been asked to sing Hatikvah at this moment in the service.
    We rise in solidarity with our brothers and sisters in Israel.

    Reply

  50. GPC says:

    Hamas (and all Palestinians for that matter) fighting FAIRLY?
    How can that be done?
    Doesn’t that require some kind of symmetry?

    Reply

  51. DonS says:

    “If Israel truly wishes to prove its moral exceptionality, it should stop comparing its own mistakes to those of others and stop questioning the legitimacy of those who question Israel’s accountability.”
    What say we give Israel another 60 years to clean up it’s act.
    I don’t think so. Even the suggestion that Israel may have a legitimate claim to “exceptionality” is tendentious. If Mr. Weinberg is trying to set up some cute little trap for Israel to be embarrassed into fulfilling, I say good luck; a fool’s errand. Based on the record, the actual record, there is no way that Israel can prove the opposite of what it’s actions, including it’s most recent actions, have belied.
    It’s only in the good old US of A that such silly ‘argument’ can even get a hearing. The time is long passed for making excuses for Israel’s miserable behavior — for a supposed democracy and a supposed advanced, civilized people.
    But still the Weinberg’s keep making the argument, and the Obama’s and US politicos keep buying the AIPAC-approved dog and pony show.
    Lipstick on a pig.

    Reply

  52. Outraged American says:

    Those countries, except for mine, didn’t commit atrocities using
    my tax $$. That’s the difference. And the Palestinian “rockets”
    are bottle rockets that a pre-schooler could make using manure
    and spit.
    This commentary is yet another example of a Noam Chomsky
    limited hang-out: admit something while slyly defending the
    greater atrocity, which is the existence of Israel as a “Jewish
    State” itself.
    Israel is not on the defensive, she is perpetually on the offensive.
    She wants the water from the Litani in Lebanon, and from the
    West Bank. She wants the oil discovered off of Gaza. She wants
    the water from the Blue Nile. She has dreams of being “Eretz
    Israel” controlling all the land between the Niles and the
    Euphrates.
    And Israel uses the US military as mercenaries, and US tax
    dollars as her ATM.
    The existence of Zionism itself is a religion-perpetuated myth -
    - that Jews will be hated just for being Jews. That’s not true
    anymore. Now Israel is hated for what she does on her own, and
    granted, other countries, like the USA, have done as bad or
    worse, but they, except for the USA, didn’t fucking use my tax
    dollars.
    If one believes the official narrative of 9/11/01, which I don’t –
    the Tooth Fairy is more credible — my friend died, probably a
    painless death because he was basically pulverized, because of
    Israel.
    Sell your schtick to others. BTW: Gwen Ifell and the New York
    Aluminun Tubes Times are fucking jokes. They have so much
    blood on their hands I bet they have an iron, what’s the opposite
    of deficiency?

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *