…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…
Shortlink http://wp.me/pDB7k-gw
Almost every statement in Harold Evans’ CiF article is either a lie or an unsubstantiated statement of opinion. How can such blatant lies be allowed space where “Facts are Sacred”? Different points of view, certainly should be allowed. However, absolute bullshite in this article, is quite beyond the pale. Talknic posts pointing to substantiated facts, from verifiable, irrefutable sources have been completely purged (ironically, at the appearance of PetraMB & Sydk)
The headline is enough to tell us that this is going to be a propaganda pack of bullshite straight from the Israeli handbook.
Harold Evans – A moral atrocity – Judge Goldstone has been suckered into letting war criminals use his name to pillory Israel
Who are these war criminals Harold Evans speaks of, he fails to mention any.
“It was to be expected that the usual suspects of the risible UN human rights council would be eager to condemn Israel for war crimes in defending itself against Hamas.”
Defend itself? It’s defending the notion that Israeli citizens can live in non-Sovereign territory. The areas in reach of Hamas’ weapons are not Israeli. They reach only into non-annexed areas, illegally acquired by war. Areas cleansed of many of their rightful inhabitants by war, by 1949.
“If you treat people as the Chinese do the Tibetans or Uighurs (“Off with their heads!”); or as the Russians eliminate Chechen dissidents; or as the Nigerians tolerate extrajudicial killings, the evictions of 800,000, rape and cruel treatment of prisoners; or as the Egyptians get prisoners to talk (torture) and the Saudis suppress half their population … well, go through the practices of all 25 states voting to refer Israel to the security council for the Gaza war, and you have to acknowledge they know a lot about the abuse of humans. Anything to divert attention from their own atrocities.”
I’d’ve thought a journalist would at least familiarize themselves with the mandate under which the UN and it’s instruments are enabled. The UN cannot interfere in internal matters of Sovereign countries. At best all the UN can do through the UNHRC is support the victims. So, as ghastly as they might be, his examples are quite pointless.
“..the Chinese do the Tibetans or Uighurs” – Internal & does China even allow UNHRC in? NO!
“..the Russians eliminate Chechen dissidents” – Internal & does Russia even allow UNHRC in? NO!
“..the Nigerians tolerate extrajudicial killings, the evictions of 800,000, rape and cruel treatment of prisoners”– Internal
“..the Egyptians get prisoners to talk” – Internal
“..the Saudis suppress half their population” – Internal
Have any of the countries railed against prevented ALL the civilians of their neighbour from fleeing a war zone by having ALL means of escape closed, including the closure of border crossings that are NOT it’s own (Gaza / Egypt under the 2005 agreement), including flight into the sea. Then proceeded to attack the territory with some of the world’s most advanced weaponry? Geneva Convention 1V…Section II..Occupied territories…….Art49…The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
“Poor Judge Goldstone now regrets how his good name has been used to single out Israel. The Swiss paper Le Temps reports him complaining that “This draft [UN human rights council] resolution saddens me … there is not a single phrase condemning Hamas as we have done in the report. I hope the council can modify the text.” Fat hope.”
Harold Evans’ link leads to Haaretz reporting, Israeli Army radio reporting, Le Temps.
A) Mr Goldstone did NOT say he ” regrets how his good name has been used to single out Israel” It simply does not appear anywhere other than in unsubstantiated accusations. Why does Harold Evans lie?
B) The original Le Temps goes on to say: The judge, however, defends its conclusions: “The Americans talk about errors in our report, but they do not advance a single fact to demonstrate tangible.” Despite the politicization of his report – including Hamas – it can only regret, he remains confident that it will make its way and will support peace in the region. As for the virulence of Israeli attacks, he expected, “but not to such venom. It is a sad experience. “
Meanwhile the UNHRC has altered the text to include Hamas. The report was adopted in Geneva on Friday. The resolution proposed by Palestine on crimes committed by Israel and Hamas in Gaza has been approved by 25 votes to six against and 11 abstentions. Why does Harold Evans lie?
“The truth is he was suckered into lending his good name to a half-baked report – read its 575 pages and see. He said that, as a Jew himself, he was surprised to be invited. He shouldn’t have been, and should never have accepted leadership of a commission whose terms of reference were designed to excuse the aggressor, Hamas, and punish the defender, Israel.”
Why does Harold Evans lie? The truth is, Mr Goldstone demanded that Hamas be included BEFORE he took the position and there are nine pages in the report condemning Hamas.
“The council’s decision was to “dispatch an urgent, independent, international fact-finding mission … to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression, and [it] calls upon Israel not to obstruct the process of investigation and to fully co-operate with the mission”.”
Why does Harold Evans lie? The council’s decision was changed at the demand of Goldstone to include Hamas.
“Israel is not an “occupying power” in Gaza in either fact or international law. Four years ago it voluntarily pulled out all its soldiers and uprooted all its settlers.”
The UNSC tells us that Gaza is a part of the Occupied Territories.
The Security Council – “Recalling all of its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008), “Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state,
“Here was a wonderful chance for Gaza to be the building block of a Palestinian state, and for Hamas to do what the Israelis did – take a piece of land and build a model state. They didn’t. Instead of helping the desperate Palestinians, they conducted a religious war.”
A) A part of a proposed state cannot declare Sovereignty. In order to declare, the entity must have control over ALL it’s territories. Same rules applied to Israel.
B) A religious war? No Mr Evans, it’s a war against a neighbour who has continued to steal Palestinian territory for 61 years.
“The terms of reference he accepted validate the torment of Israeli civilians.”
Why does Harold Evans lie? Goldstone demanded the terms of reference be change BEFORE he accepted the position
“The rockets were war crimes and ought to have been universally condemned as such. While new rockets hit Israel ….”
A) They have been condemned by HRW as War Crimes. They were condemned by the Goldstone report as War Crimes.
B) Israel’s Sovereign territories are those recommended by UNGA resolution 181. Israel has never legally annexed any territory outside of it’s Sovereign territory.
“…over many months there was no rush by the world’s moralisers – including Britain – to censure Hamas”
Miliband criticized Hamas’ rocket attacks on Israel and implicitly urged Syria to exert its influence on the group to stop such attacks.
“I argue that Hamas’ violence hurts Syria, which says it believes in a comprehensive peace,” Miliband said. “The rockets are a threat to the successful process.
“…no urgency as there was in “world opinion” when Israel finally responded. Then Israel was immediately accused of a “disproportionate” response without anyone thinking: “What is a ‘proportionate’ attack against an enemy dedicated to exterminating your people?” A dedication to exterminating all of his?”
Perhaps a better question is, what is the justification for illegally acquiring your enemies territory over 62 years and thus prompting them to want rid of you?
Israel risked its own forces by imposing unprecedented restraint. In testimony volunteered to the human rights council (and ignored), Colonel Richard Kemp, a British commander in Bosnia and Afghanistan, stated: “The Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.”
By preventing civilians from fleeing a war zone, then attacking the territory with some of the most modern war technology in the world.
“No doubt there were blunders. A defensive war is still a war with all its suffering and destruction. But Hamas compounded its original war crime with another. It held its own people hostage. It used them as human shields.”
Mr Evans’ rhetoric is straight out of the Israel propaganda handbook.
Had Israel allowed civilians from fleeing the war zone, they’d not have been in this alleged predicament. I say alleged, because it is a well known, transparent and age olde propaganda ploy, to demonize one’s enemy. It is a fact however, that Israel prevented them from fleeing the war zone, by having all means of escape closed, even the borders between Gaza and Egypt, under the 2005 agreement. On the other hand, it is only alleged, by Israel, that Hamas held it’s own people hostage. Furthermore, Hamas did not just drop out of the sky they are all volunteers, Palestinians, their own people, fighting for the cause of their own people. They can exist only with the support of their own people. So it does not make one iota of sense to have their own turn against them.
“The Goldstone report won the gold standard of moral equivalence between the killer and the victim. Now Britain wins the silver. Who’s cheering?”
Harold Evan$ perhaps? I can think of no other reason why one would stoop so low. Statistics show us who the killers are, by a ratio of about 100 :1
The “moral atrocity” is the absolute shite dished up by one Harold Evans.
First, find out what isn't true... 