Turkey Identifies 174 Israeli Soldiers Implicated in Mavis Marmara Massacre

[fuji]

Sorry but UNRWA is not credible. The IMF, which is credible, simply said that the process of lifting restrictions had to continue if growth was going to continue. I believe that.

The restrictions were lifted in a series of confidence building measures, by both sides, to establish trust and security. That needs to continue, and if it does continue, so should the opening up of the West Bank.

The same thing needs to happen in Gaza, but Hamas and Islamic Jihad appear to be obstacles to prosperity there.

 

[fuji]

These are strikingly similar to the same arguments put forth by Goldstone in his report.

I have not asserted that the al Awlaki assassination was a war crime. I have demanded more information about it, and that is what Goldstone should have done in his report.

I will explain, again, the error in Goldstone's report. Goldstone himself called out this error in his retraction. In the past you have been too stupid to comprehend these points, but I will try again anyway.

Goldstone would note that he lacked information about why a target was hit. He would conclude that since HE lacked information, that IDF must not have had any either. But the only reason why he didn't have that information is that IDF refused to co-operate with him, so his conclusion was illogical.

The correct and unbiased thing for Goldstone to have done would be to do what I am doing in the case of al Awlaki: Demand more information. Demand an investigation. Demand that the reasons be made public.

You do not assume that a crime has occurred just because you lack information about what happened. You demand the missing information.

Eventually Israel DID release that information publicly. It ran its own investigations, which were competent and credible. As the information came to light, it became apparent that the cases Goldstone had thought were criminal were in fact NOT criminal. They were either honest errors in targetting, where the wrong target was hit, or else IDF actually did have information indicating that it was a valid target.

Goldstone acknowledged this in his letter retracting his report. He said he regretted that he didn't have that information at the time, and that the information that had come to light exonerated Israel of the accusations in the report.

That may well happen with al Awlaki as well. The US may well have information that he really is an active terrorist, in which case, his killing is justified. My problem is with the lack of information, I think the case against him should be public, and I suspect that perhaps when it is made public it won't live up to our standards. But I don't know that--the US may have perfectly valid reasons for going after him that they simply have not shared.

 

[blackrock13]

Here you go, Fuji, this ought to shut your trap for a few minutes.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...ws-west-bank-economy-not-flourishing-1.366647


Now, onto more interesting matters.
You just posted this, about US assassinations:



These are strikingly similar to the same arguments put forth by Goldstone in his report.
Why don't you hold Israel to the same rules as the US?
Why do you put Israel above the law?

You still insist on bringing ing this report, that the author himself said was flawed, in an attempt to support your ever weakening position. You're truly pathetic.

 

[gryfin]

You still insist on bringing ing this report, that the author himself said was flawed, in an attempt to support your ever weakening position. You're truly pathetic.

The Goldstone Report has never been modified in any way. It stands exactly as it was written. It was a 500 page report written by a team of human rights scholars according to a strict methodology with full transparency. It was only written after extensive on-site interviews and review of physical evidence. All of its proceedings were public and most were televised. It was accepted by the UN General Assembly by a vote of 114-18 and was also endorsed by the European Union.

 

[gryfin]

Once again: Arab citizens of Israel have more rights and freedoms than Arabs living in any other Middle Eastern country.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East where Arabs are free.

Again, Ernst Zundel/Fuji, the facts just cut the legs out from under you. Let's begin our lesson with this nugget from the US State Department:

U.S. State Department: Israel is not a tolerant society
Israel dismally fails the requirements of a tolerant pluralistic society, according to a new report from the U.S. State Department.

Despite boasting religious freedom and protection of all holy sites, Israel falls short in tolerance toward minorities, equal treatment of ethnic groups, openness toward various streams within society, and respect for holy and other sites.
At the end of 2008, for example, all of the 137 officially recognized holy sites were Jewish. Moreover, Israel issued regulations for the identification, preservation and guarding of Jewish sites only. Many Christian and Muslim sites are said to be neglected, inaccessible or at risk of exploitation by real estate entrepreneurs and local authorities.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...tment-israel-is-not-a-tolerant-society-1.4683

That doesn't sound equal does it, Ernst?

 

[groggy]

Sorry but UNRWA is not credible. The IMF, which is credible, simply said that the process of lifting restrictions had to continue if growth was going to continue. I believe that.

The restrictions were lifted in a series of confidence building measures, by both sides, to establish trust and security. That needs to continue, and if it does continue, so should the opening up of the West Bank.

The same thing needs to happen in Gaza, but Hamas and Islamic Jihad appear to be obstacles to prosperity there.

I'll take the UNRWA's credibility over Netanyahu and you any day.
Your bias blinds you to other points of view.

 

[groggy]

I have not asserted that the al Awlaki assassination was a war crime. I have demanded more information about it, and that is what Goldstone should have done in his report.

I will explain, again, the error in Goldstone's report. Goldstone himself called out this error in his retraction. In the past you have been too stupid to comprehend these points, but I will try again anyway.

Goldstone would note that he lacked information about why a target was hit. He would conclude that since HE lacked information, that IDF must not have had any either. But the only reason why he didn't have that information is that IDF refused to co-operate with him, so his conclusion was illogical.

Wrong interpretation, buddy.
Goldstone said that since Israel refused to co-operate with the investigation he had to assess the possibilities of war crimes based on the evidence, and found there was enough evidence to support charges, and enough evidence to dismiss claims like yours.. His job wasn't to assess guilt, but to assess whether there was enough evidence to press charges.

 

[blackrock13]

The Goldstone Report has never been modified in any way. It stands exactly as it was written. It was a 500 page report written by a team of human rights scholars according to a strict methodology with full transparency. It was only written after extensive on-site interviews and review of physical evidence. All of its proceedings were public and most were televised. It was accepted by the UN General Assembly by a vote of 114-18 and was also endorsed by the European Union.

Apparently it wasn't extensive enough, as pointed out by Goldstone and therefore flawed. The fact that the UN Assembly voted to support this report doesn't make it correct in its assumption. It just fits your opinion and you are hanging on to it out of desperation. A few years back a number of world leaders thought the sun revolved around the earth and the world was flat, even though really smart people knew differently.

 

[basketcase]

I really wonder why grog tries this hard to defend the indefeasible, even after all of his arguments have been completely destroyed. I know that fuji tends to do the same thing but trying to emulate him is not going to convince anyone of anything.


Oh, and in this case, fuji is correct.

 

[gryfin]

Apparently it was extensive enough as pointed out by Goldstone and therefore flawed. The fact that the UN Assembly voted to support this report doesn't make it correct in its assumption. It just fits your opinion and you are hanging on to it out of desperation. A few years back a number of world leaders thought the sun revolved around the earth and the world was flat, even though really smart people knew differently.

You will feel much better then knowing that the Goldstone Report was written by a panel of human rights and international law experts rather than a couple of world leaders (like the Palmer/Uribe report). It was also public and transparent and involved on site interviews and the on site review of physical evidence.

Scholarly reports of this depth are so important because they do not reflect opinions but are the product of objective analysis based on verifiable evidence. All of this evidence was listed in the Goldstone Report.

 

[fuji]

Wrong interpretation, buddy.
Goldstone said that since Israel refused to co-operate with the investigation he had to assess the possibilities of war crimes based on the evidence, and found there was enough evidence to support charges, and enough evidence to dismiss claims like yours.. His job wasn't to assess guilt, but to assess whether there was enough evidence to press charges.

You and others claimed at the time that Goldstone had accused Israel of war crimes. Now you are back-pedalling, and saying that Goldstone contains no such allegation? OK.

Yes, what you say is what he did, and why we said he was biased: Israel refused to co-operate him, so he lacked information, and instead of demanding that information, he jumped to unfounded and unsupportable conclusions.

In any case back to the topic: Goldstone SHOULD have done what I am doing in the case of Anwar al Awlaki. Namely, not jumping to conclusions based on the lack of evidence, but rather demanding that the information be made public. Instead of doing something sensible like that Goldstone jumped to conclusions that were, in his own estimation in retrospect, unwarranted.

 

[groggy]

You and others claimed at the time that Goldstone had accused Israel of war crimes. Now you are back-pedalling, and saying that Goldstone contains no such allegation? OK.

Yes, what you say is what he did, and why we said he was biased: Israel refused to co-operate him, so he lacked information, and instead of demanding that information, he jumped to unfounded and unsupportable conclusions.

In any case back to the topic: Goldstone SHOULD have done what I am doing in the case of Anwar al Awlaki. Namely, not jumping to conclusions based on the lack of evidence, but rather demanding that the information be made public. Instead of doing something sensible like that Goldstone jumped to conclusions that were, in his own estimation in retrospect, unwarranted.

No, because Goldstone is both smarter and more educated then you.
He did not jump to conclusions, he weighed the evidence present with possible Israeli information and concluded that even had they information that would have left the civilian classification in doubt, it did not justify the mass killings and thus were worthy of investigations and/or charges.

But back to the question you refuse to answer.
Why do you use different standards for either side?
Why do you ignore charges by the UN or HRW on Israel and harp only about Palestinian infractions?

 

[fuji]

Groggy you are simply flat out wrong. Goldstone not only jumped to conclusions, he jumped to wrong conclusions. He has admitted that now in his published letter.

I apply the same principles everywhere.

You just accused me of having different principles in the case of Anwar al Awlaki, but I have shown you that I am applying the same principles. I have demanded the missing information be made public, I have said the US needs to make public its case against al Awlaki, and explain why he was targetted. That is what I have always said Goldstone should have done. Had the Goldstone Report been fair and unbiased Goldstone never would have had to publish that retraction. He should simply have said in his report that there was not enough information to determine if a crime had been committed, that there were serious unanswered questions, and that Israel should carry out full and public investigations to unearth the truth. That would have been what an unbiased report would have said. In fact, Israel did carry out those investigations, in a very public fashion, and Goldstone as a result eventually retracted his claim of any Israeli wrongdoing.

 

[groggy]

You have never once suggested that Israel should be investigated, other then suggesting that their army was capable of investigating themselves.
A policy that you would never apply anywhere else, nor any reasonable person would even suggest here.
Just look at the uproar over the G20.
Two standards.

 

[cye]

You have never once suggested that Israel should be investigated, other then suggesting that their army was capable of investigating themselves.
A policy that you would never apply anywhere else, nor any reasonable person would even suggest here.
Just look at the uproar over the G20.
Two standards.

Will you support an investigation of Egypt?

 

[fuji]

You have never once suggested that Israel should be investigated, other then suggesting that their army was capable of investigating themselves.

Israel is perfectly capable of investigating itself, and has done so on many occasions. You keep forgetting that it is a democracy with strong courts and an independent judiciary.

A policy that you would never apply anywhere else, nor any reasonable person would even suggest here.
Just look at the uproar over the G20.

Utter nonsense. Where have I suggested that Canadian courts aren't competent??? When the Canadian government launches internal probes, Royal Commissions, and whatnot, those are competent also.

 

[groggy]

Will you support an investigation of Egypt?

Investigating who for what?

 

[groggy]

Israel is perfectly capable of investigating itself, and has done so on many occasions. You keep forgetting that it is a democracy with strong courts and an independent judiciary.

No its not. It would be as credible as you investigating for them. Even the UN knows that.
Would you accept the police investigating themselves for G20 irregularities?

 

[cye]

Ethnic cleansing of coptic christians by the state

When Andro Naguib Gobrail arrived at Cairo's main thoroughfare, the Corniche, on Sunday, he was on a mission: to pick up his father, Coptic human-rights activist Naguib Gobrail. The elder Gobrail had been shot in the leg when Egyptian soldiers attacked peaceful Christian protesters near the iconic Maspero building, which houses radio and television facilities. "They put a gun over my head, and they asked me to go away," the younger man tells TIME. "I carried my dad to my car. When I got there, I found a lot of people saying, 'We will kill you.' "
The Gobrails quickly left the area — but not before witnessing part of the rampage that by late Monday had left at least 24 dead and 270 injured, according to the Egyptian Health Ministry. Many were mowed down by vehicles driven by soldiers under the command of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), the interim body ruling Egypt. According to Andro Naguib Gobrail, the cars deliberately plowed through crowds of protesters. "The army was driving over the bodies," Gobrail says. "It was disturbing." He says he later went to the nearby Coptic hospital on Ramses Street — which became a gathering place for survivors and members of the Christian community — and saw one corpse with 10 bullet wounds to the chest.
(See pictures of the clashes involving Egypt's Coptic Christians.)
The Coptic community, which accounts for about 10% of Egypt's 80 million population, has long been one of its most embattled and vulnerable minority groups. On Sunday, the estimated 10,000 Christians who marched to Maspero — a landmark of the ousted Hosni Mubarak regime — were protesting the recent burning of a church in Aswan province by an ultraconservative Muslim group and what they perceive as the ruling military junta's soft response to anti-Christian attacks since Mubarak's ouster in February.
"Children, grandparents — nobody had weapons on them," says Lobna Darwish, an activist who marched on Sunday. Reaching Maspero that afternoon, the protesters encountered security forces who were "running toward us, firing at us, first into the air and then at people." Later, she says, able-bodied protesters returned to the Corniche to try and help the wounded. Darwish says they found gun-wielding soldiers "walking around in a zigzag, looking for people to hit. One man was in a burning car — he was pulled out. We saw people being run over on the Corniche. The soldiers were pointing at us, looking for people to hit. At one point, some people were hiding behind a car, and they came and looked for them too."
On Monday morning, bodies lined the floor of the morgue at the hospital, covered in blood. "People were bringing ice blocks and putting them over the bodies to prevent decay," says Lillian Wagdy, 30, who joined the protesters on Sunday. "It was an awful sight." Staffers, she says, soon ran out of ice.


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2096639,00.html#ixzz1aVZeYxE2

 

[fuji]

No its not. It would be as credible as you investigating for them. Even the UN knows that.

Bullshit.

Would you accept the police investigating themselves for G20 irregularities?

I accept that the Canadian courts are perfectly suited to this task. I also accept that Canadian inquiries such as Royal Commissions are perfectly capable of it.

Some of the G20 irregularities were indeed properly investigated by the police themselves. In other cases it makes more sense to have one police force look into another. So for example the SIU looked into the more serious allegations, and in some cases we have RCMP investigate OPP, and vice versa. As a whole the Canadian system is pretty good at sorting out what is the proper way to investigate these things, and so is the Israeli system. In fact, so is the system in place in pretty much every viable democracy.