Israel's 'War Crimes' in the News - again.

[Sharona]

The BBC and Times online report soldiers telling of 'Israeli troops admit Gaza abuses'.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7952603.stm

My, how some forum boards are active now that they have this to chew on!
It's astonishing how they all these 'human rights' campaigners fly out of every atom of space when Israel is alleged to have done something amiss, but never condemn any other similar or worse situation.

I have just replied to such a 'screeching-with-joy-and-smugness-badly-disguised-as-outrage' post saying that if the allegations are true then I agree with Barak; they need to be examined and perpertrators held to account. I also added that those condemning Israel must surely also praise them for their transparency?

In my reply I said that it is naive to assume that every other army in the world is error-free, or that every army is shoved under a microscope every time it retaliates. Therefore, the transparancy evident in Israel's actions are quite unique and to be applauded - not jumped on from a great height.

I asked those posting for the courtesy of their condemnation of Hamas - since they leap on demanding answers from pro-Israeli posters, but never once do they admit to Hamas' atrocities which outweigh anything Israel could do by miles. I don't expect to get anything other than an abusive and evasive response.

These posts tend to end with 'now tell me the usual spin; that the soldiers are liars and anti-semites!'. It's beyond me how they can't see the double-standards they set for themselves.

Their moral high ground is a joke. Not only because of their failure to condemn Hamas, but because they are actually appear triumphant that an Israeli soldier or two may have killed someone, thus lending weight to their 'anti' opinions.

What a bizarre display of ego.

[NewsGuy]

Sharona,

Very good post. You make some excellent points.

We're witnessing a situation where many people support the right of Muslim terrorists to fire rockets into Jewish kindergartens, but when the Jews fire back at the Muslims, then it's a "war crime."

If a handful of Israeli soldiers disobeyed orders, then they will be prosecuted. But, the overwhelming number of soldiers acted in a particularly ethical way. And let's not forget the moral imperative of fighting back against Muslim terrorism that brought about the military operation in the first place.

For decades, the same Muslims and their lunatic Leftist allies in Europe expressed support for Hamas, which blew up one bus and one restaurant after another in Israel, and machined-gunned Israeli children in their homes. All along there was never a single complaint by the lunatic Left against Palestinian terrorism. When Hamas fired 80 rockets a day into Israeli towns, again -- not a peep was heard from the Muslims and Leftists against Hamas.

We need to keep in mind that there is a certain segment of the population that feels disconnected from the rest of society, feels themselves to be failures and have a rage against the things that are good and right in the world. They feel a connection with other people who are failures in life, like the Palestinians and other radical Muslims. Most of the Leftists who voice anti-Israel, anti-American, and anti-Semitic opinions come from this segment of society.

Then you have the Muslims who apparently took a day off from bombing the London subway to write all kind of anti-Semitic, pro-terrorism comments on those forums. Yes, "keel de jooz." No big surprise here.

I would suggest keeping in mind who the anti-Israel commenters are, then understanding where their opinions come from.

[sharonbn]

First of all, I would like to say I wholeheartedly agree that many of Israel critics are tainted with bias if not outright anti-Semitism, so their opinions should be taken with this consideration.

However, the failure of these critics in objectivity and equality does not negate the harsh evidence that unfold these days. If indeed these were rotten apples then the matter should be taken with the proper perspective, but the evidence suggest that the illegal actions were sanctioned, if not ordered by commanding officers. I would like to see an official committee set up to investigate where did the order to shoot civilians came from and how much of this is local initiative vs army policy. just to ease my mind...

[Mil]

I like how the BBC reprinted Haaretz. But anyways - they just cite two examples which in themselves are dubious. All has to be collaborated. Haaretz first published the article saying that some soldiers are talking and then it published another article posing a question as "Why shouldn't the soldier be believed." I like Haaretz but that was simply STUPID - as if they don't trust into what they write.

[Sharona]

The point I was trying to make was that there is an unhealthy - almost sick - obsession with Israel.

In the UK we've seen the protest marches and the awful chants; we've had calls for Israeli produce, shops, and even academics to be boycotted. Do we get this kind of thing when any other nations under the sun fights a war?

There's the Congo, Sudan, Sri Lanka, India - even Russia's incursion into Ossetia. Where were all the marches, boycotts and chants then? The most I can recall seeing was a protest against China over Tibet - and even then that was mostly because the Olympic torch passed through London. A few days into the games and not a peep.

If Israel has some rotten apples I agree that something should be done, but in terms of perspective - why isn't this same 'World Court Martial' applied evenly and across the board?

[NewsGuy]

I have no doubt that the Leftists and Muslim terrorism supporters will make sure that at the end of the day, we'll hear about the handful of soldiers who disobeyed orders, and the overwhelming number of ethical soldiers will be ignored.

Most importantly, by the time the Israelis beat themselves up over what a handful of soldiers did while under fire by Hamas missiles, there will be only one conclusion to be learned: Terrorists are encouraged to shoot missiles at Israeli cities with impunity, while Israeli soldiers who were put in harm's way to defend their own children from the terrorists, will now be considered war criminals. And the ones most guilty here will be the Jews of the world who had nothing at all to do with the conflict.

I would say that Israel and the West in general need to take a different stance on how to ultimately deal with terrorists who operate among civilian populations, because that's what modern warfare has become these days.

There need to be new rules of engagement put in place that clearly allow a country like Israel to effectively defend its people against terrorist attacks without having its soldiers required to take out a Leftist-approved legal manual to check to see what to do ethically before firing back at the terrorists.

[Y. Shulamith]

Oh brother, sitting down to have dinner with my son, as Dad isn't home yet adn works hard and long. I had NBC news on and as I was about to take my first bite, "Israel said to have used more brutal force than first suspected", I asked my son to please turn the TV off.

Here we go again with Pro-Arab Spin. Will it never stop? I guess it WILL NEVER stop. What really irks me is the constant spin about and regarding Israel as if it were the only damn country on the planet.

Then, Obama is on NBC tonite with Jay Leno. No I will not be viewing it. I see quite enough politicking on TV of late. :tdown:

I am getting a little tired of Obama, truth to tell and am wishing he'd get off the TV for awhile.

*don't be an "I told you so", because you told me so":lol:

[Y. Shulamith]

The point I was trying to make was that there is an unhealthy - almost sick - obsession with Israel.

In the UK we've seen the protest marches and the awful chants; we've had calls for Israeli produce, shops, and even academics to be boycotted. Do we get this kind of thing when any other nations under the sun fights a war?

There's the Congo, Sudan, Sri Lanka, India - even Russia's incursion into Ossetia. Where were all the marches, boycotts and chants then? The most I can recall seeing was a protest against China over Tibet - and even then that was mostly because the Olympic torch passed through London. A few days into the games and not a peep.

If Israel has some rotten apples I agree that something should be done, but in terms of perspective - why isn't this same 'World Court Martial' applied evenly and across the board?


I, too, am getting real tired, real fast with the sick obsession about the goings on in Israel; it's getting dangerous and unseemly.

[MGB8]

We'll see how much is true. If it is true, it's a big problem. Sure, it's only a handful of bad apples, but in any event, it taints every soldier.

On the other hand, given the demographics of what the Palestinian "human rights groups" say were of the casualties - 90%ish men, 90%ish 18 or over, proves exactly the opposite of what those groups are saying - Israeli certainly didn't randomly or deliberately target civillians.

[Mason]

I believe anti-semitism more widespread than we'd like to think, but I would honestly like to think that any major anti-semitic movement will not happen in the future :|
All the hate against Israel at the moment seems to be primarily driven by politicians and Hollywood, which scares me a little.

[Mediocrates]

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=43177

IDF soldiers refute claims of immoral conduct in Gaza IDF soldiers refute claims of immoral conduct in Gaza
'It is true that in war morality can be interpreted in many different ways,
and there are always a few idiots who act inappropriately, but most of the
troops represented Israel honorably,' soldier says in response to claims of
immoral behavior during Operation Cast Lead. Reservist: Claims 'fictitious'.
'Free Gaza' movement demands international investigation
Daniel Edelson YNET Published: 03.19.09, 22:09 / Israel News
www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3689388,00.html (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3689388,00.html)
IDF soldiers who took part in January's offensive in Hamas-ruled Gaza
refuted on Thursday claims of immoral conduct on the military's part.
The claims were made by soldiers who took part in the war during a post-op
conference at the military academy at Oranim. The conference protocol was
published Thursday.
"I don't believe there were soldiers who were looking to kill (Palestinians)
for no reason," said 21-year-old Givati Brigade soldier Assaf Danziger, who
was lightly injured three days before the conclusion of Operation Cast Lead.
"What happened there was not enjoyable to anyone; we wanted it to end as
soon as possible and tried to avoid contact with innocent civilians," he
said.
According to Danziger, soldiers were given specific orders to open fire only
at armed terrorists or people who posed a threat. "There were no incidents
of vandalism at any of the buildings we occupied. We did only what was
justified and acted out of necessity. No one shot at civilians. People
walked by us freely," he recounted.
A Paratroopers Brigade soldier who also participated in the war called the
claims "nonsense". Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said "It is true
that in war morality can be interpreted in many different ways, and there
are always a few idiots who act inappropriately, but most of the soldiers
represented Israel honorably and with a high degree of morality.
"For instance, on three separate occasions my company commander checked
soldiers' bags for stolen goods. Those who stole the smallest things, like
candy, were severely punished," he said.
"We were forbidden from sleeping in Palestinians' beds even when we had no
alternate accommodations, and we didn't touch any of their food even after
we hadn't had enough to eat for two days."
According to a reservist who spent a week in Gaza during the offensive, the
claims of immoral behavior on the soldiers' part were "fictitious".
"Wherever we were we tried to cause minimum damage," said the paratrooper,
who also asked to remain nameless. "We left some of the homes cleaner than
they were before we occupied them. We even cleaned a refrigerator that
really stunk.
"During one incident, we were informed that a female suicide bomber was
heading in our direction, but even when women approached us and crossed a
certain point we made do with firing in the air, or near the women," the
soldier recalled. "Even when we came across deserted stores, we didn't even
think of taking anything. One soldier took a can of food, but he immediately
returned it after everyone yelled at him."
Major (res.) Idan Zuaretz of Givati said "in every war there is a small
percentage of problematic soldiers, but we must look at it from a broad
perspective and not focus on isolated incidents."
Zuaretz, a company commander, also questioned the integrity of the soldiers
who made the controversial claims, saying "if this was such a burning issue
for them, why have they remained silent until now? On an ethical and moral
level, they were obligated to stop what they claimed had occurred and not
wait two months to be heard at some esoteric debate."
According to the officer, the IDF went to great lengths and employed the
most advanced technology to avoid harming civilian population.
"I've seen a few things in my time, but even I was blown away by the level
of professionalism displayed by the army," Zuaretz said. "I personally gave
my soldiers an order on the day we withdrew from Gaza to leave all of our
goodies in the last house we occupied. Some reservists even left an envelope
full of money to one Palestinian family."
Meanwhile, "Free Gaza" spokeswoman Hawida Araf told Ynet that "it is hard to
say that the claims of immoral conduct are surprising," adding that an
international investigative committee must be set up to probe the incidents
in Gaza.
"Apparently some of things the soldiers had done in Gaza weighed on their
conscience to such a degree that they felt compelled to make them known,"
she said.
Araf, who has organized seven sails to Gaza in defiance of the Israeli
blockade, said a group of attorneys who visited the Strip following the
offensive is expected to issue its report next week.
"We checked whether Israel violated any international laws in Gaza," she
said, but admitted that the report was based on Palestinian eyewitness
accounts and did not include soldiers' testimonies.

[GratefulFred]

I'm personally sick of our media

There are matters that should stick strictly in the military and shouldn't be in the media. If soldiers felt that actions were wrong they need to bring it up the chain of command. The army spokesman's office should be the sole source of reporting. News and websites in Israel that publish stories that the military spokeman felt were not in the publics interest to know should be fined. A soldier that goes outside the media and damages Israel's reputation should be jailed.

The US democracy does a fine job keeping what goes on in Iraq to boring statistics. Why shouldn't we do the same instead of feeding our enemies who care less for our democractic values?

We are under the microscope and have few friends in this mad world. Civilians can't handle the truth about any military.

What comes out from our army spokeman's office should be boring statistics.

[Sharona]

It's worse now that the T-shirt affair has come out.

The anti-Israel/just plain Jew haters are leaping onto forums like barracuda in a feeding frenzy.

[ygalg1]

I'm personally sick of our media

There are matters that should stick strictly in the military and shouldn't be in the media. If soldiers felt that actions were wrong they need to bring it up the chain of command. The army spokesman's office should be the sole source of reporting. News and websites in Israel that publish stories that the military spokeman felt were not in the publics interest to know should be fined. A soldier that goes outside the media and damages Israel's reputation should be jailed.

The US democracy does a fine job keeping what goes on in Iraq to boring statistics. Why shouldn't we do the same instead of feeding our enemies who care less for our democractic values?

We are under the microscope and have few friends in this mad world. Civilians can't handle the truth about any military.

What comes out from our army spokeman's office should be boring statistics.
sweeping under the carpet is also not a solution. if IDF cannot behave ethically, then it shouldn't boast about been the most moral army in the world.

IDF job was to eliminate hamas and bring to end the kassams firing. period. did it achieve that? no. what it did achieve, that it's good at killing children, women and it's own.

media accomplish it's tasks. IDF should have done that too. then would not be need to worry about the media reports.

[ygalg1]

Most importantly, by the time the Israelis beat themselves up over what a handful of soldiers did
sadly this is what happening. the notion that IDF became incompetent quite disturbing picture. and missiles indeed keep falling.

the entire world so eager to stamp the criminal war label on IDF. but leaves out the genuine war criminal Hamas.

[Mediocrates]

http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/jews-behaving-normally-reduxthe-idf-in-gaza/

[Y. Shulamith]

The US had it's Me Lai Massacre and others.

[Mediocrates]

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/An_Arab-Made_Misery.asp

An Arab-Made Misery
by Nonie Darwish It is time for the Arab world to truly help the Palestinians, not use them.
International donors pledged almost $4.5 billion in aid for Gaza earlier this month. It has been very painful for me to witness over the past few years the deteriorating humanitarian situation in that narrow strip where I lived as a child in the 1950s.
The media tend to attribute Gaza's decline solely to Israeli military and economic actions against Hamas. But such a myopic analysis ignores the problem's root cause: 60 years of Arab policy aimed at cementing the Palestinian people's status as stateless refugees in order to use their suffering as a weapon against Israel.
As a child in Gaza in the 1950s, I experienced the early results of this policy. Egypt, which then controlled the territory, conducted guerrilla-style operations against Israel from Gaza. My father commanded these operations, carried out by Palestinian fedayeen, Arabic for "self-sacrifice." Back then, Gaza was already the front line of the Arab jihad against Israel. My father was assassinated by Israeli forces in 1956.
It was in those years that the Arab League started its Palestinian refugee policy. Arab countries implemented special laws designed to make it impossible to integrate the Palestinian refugees from the 1948 Arab war against Israel. Even descendants of Palestinian refugees who are born in another Arab country and live there their entire lives can never gain that country's passport. Even if they marry a citizen of an Arab country, they cannot become citizens of their spouse's country. They must remain "Palestinian" even though they may have never set foot in the West Bank or Gaza.
This policy of forcing a Palestinian identity on these people for eternity and condemning them to a miserable life in a refugee camp was designed to perpetuate and exacerbate the Palestinian refugee crisis.
So was the Arab policy of overpopulating Gaza. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, whose main political support comes from Arab countries, encourages high birth rates by rewarding families with many children. Yasser Arafat said the Palestinian woman's womb was his best weapon.
Arab countries always push for classifying as many Palestinians as possible as "refugees." As a result, about one-third of the Palestinians in Gaza still live in refugee camps. For 60 years, Palestinians have been used and abused by Arab regimes and Palestinian terrorists in their fight against Israel.
Now it is Hamas, an Islamist terror organization supported by Iran, which is using and abusing Palestinians for this purpose. While Hamas leaders hid in the well-stocked bunkers and tunnels they prepared before they provoked Israel into attacking them, Palestinian civilians were exposed and caught in the deadly crossfire between Hamas and Israeli soldiers.
As a result of 60 years of this Arab policy, Gaza has become a prison camp for 1.5 million Palestinians. Both Israel and Egypt are fearful of terrorist infiltration from Gaza -- all the more so since Hamas took over -- and have always maintained tight controls over their borders with Gaza. The Palestinians continue to endure hardships because Gaza continues to serve as the launching pad for terror attacks against Israeli citizens. Those attacks come in the form of Hamas missiles that indiscriminately target Israeli kindergartens, homes and businesses.
And Hamas continued these attacks more than two years after Israel withdrew from Gaza in the hope that this step would begin the process of building a Palestinian state, eventually leading to a peaceful, two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There was no "cycle of violence" then, no justification for anything other than peace and prosperity. But instead, Hamas chose Islamic jihad. Gazans' and Israelis' hopes have been met with misery for Palestinians and missiles for Israelis.
Hamas, an Iran proxy, has become a danger not only to Israel, but also to Palestinians as well as to neighboring Arab states, who fear the spread of radical Islam could destabilize their countries.
Arabs claim they love the Palestinian people, but they seem more interested in sacrificing them. If they really loved their Palestinian brethren, they'd pressure Hamas to stop firing missiles at Israel. In the longer term, the Arab world must end the Palestinians' refugee status and thereby their desire to harm Israel. It's time for the 22 Arab countries to open their borders and absorb the Palestinians of Gaza who wish to start a new life. It is time for the Arab world to truly help the Palestinians, not use them.

Author Biography:
Mrs. Darwish, who grew up in Gaza City and Cairo, is the author, most recently, of "Cruel and Usual Punishment," (Thomas Nelson, 2009).

[Y. Shulamith]

Eh, just more of the disease of "Israeli Obsession".

[Sharona]

I ordered Nonie's book last week.

As a child Nonie knew Nasser who, after her father's death, expressed his hope that either Nonie or one of her siblings would die as a martyr, too.

She went on to say that apparently, when he signed the peace treaty with Israel, Sadat said to his colleagues that he had signed his own death warrant.
Nonie claims that no Arab leader can sign a peace treaty with Israel - it is just not possible due to their pride, dogma, or religiously-focused policies.

Of course, anyone from the ME, particularly one who, like Nonie, lived in Gaza is said to be 'in the pay' of the Zionists and that her testimonies and views are therefore pure propaganda:lol:

[maven]

Eh, just more of the disease of "Israeli Obsession".I just switched off Al Jazeera English after watching some of today's 'Inside Story' which was the umpteenth programme I've seen now about Israel's 'war crimes' and should they go before the International Criminal Court.

The question the media including the press should ask itself is how about just for once doing a programme about Hamas's war crimes?

But I suspect Galloway, Jeremy Corbyn, Baroness this and Lord that, and all the rest of the 'human rights lobby' and CNN's team in the region etc, would not contribute except to defend Hamas. :unsure:

[Y. Shulamith]

I just switched off Al Jazeera English after watching some of today's 'Inside Story' which was the umpteenth programme I've seen now about Israel's 'war crimes' and should they go before the International Criminal Court.

The question the media including the press should ask itself is how about just for once doing a programme about Hamas's war crimes?

But I suspect Galloway, Jeremy Corbyn, Baroness this and Lord that, and all the rest of the 'human rights lobby' and CNN's team in the region etc, would not contribute except to defend Hamas. :unsure:

For that matter, I'd love to see a piece done on the war crimes of Hamas, just once here in the USA!

You know that PBS wouldn't touch such a program, even if it were available and maybe it is available. Where are the Jewish/Israeli Journalists and why aren't they busy making a documentary about hiding behind women and children, breaking the legs and killing political adversaries, stealing UN food meant for hungry Gazans? Where is the filming and footage of this stuff.

I suppose, that one would need an army of security to even "try" to document such a film, should one even want to try to make a documentary type film of that type!

[maven]

For that matter, I'd love to see a piece done on the war crimes of Hamas, just once here in the USA!

You know that PBS wouldn't touch such a program, even if it were available and maybe it is available. Where are the Jewish/Israeli Journalists and why aren't they busy making a documentary about hiding behind women and children, breaking the legs and killing political adversaries, stealing UN food meant for hungry Gazans? Where is the filming and footage of this stuff.

I suppose, that one would need an army of security to even "try" to document such a film, should one even want to try to make a documentary type film of that type!Another thing Shule, how come we never see any programmes agonising about the apalling human rights abuses in every Arab country in the region? Gatar has the gall to act as a frontman for Hamas and Iran in holding conferences to criticise Israel. How about the way Asian servants are tortured by their employers in Gatar? How about the abuses of human rights and the exploitation of Asian construction workers across the region? Women being half-buried in the ground in iran and then stoned to death? ALL THIS CRITICISM OF ISRAEL IS PURE UNADULTERATED HATRED OF JEWS and nothing else.

I suppose, that one would need an army of security to even "try" to document such a film, should one even want to try to make a documentary type film of that type! Not if the same 'human rights workers' were investigating Hamas at the same time as they are asking them questions about Israeli actions!

And why does someone not do a programme with leading members of the 'anti-war' movement to ask them why they only protest wars by the US, the UK and Israel? :unsure:

Where are the Jewish/Israeli Journalists and why aren't they busy making a documentary about hiding behind women and children, breaking the legs and killing political adversaries, stealing UN food meant for hungry Gazans? Where is the filming and footage of this stuff.They're all lining up to work on my new Israeli International Newschannel! :D

[Y. Shulamith]

I think last year National Geographic did a cover piece on the enormous human slave trade, both adults and children, the world over with the inclusion of the USA as also being part of this problem.

This feature piece went pretty much ingloriously ignored by every human rights group as well as the public in general. It went away, as it were, and I am sure that the same problem, given the economic meltdown, probably has gotten lots worse since then.

My point is that this stuff isn't glamorous, so groups like Amnesty International, et al., don't give it the time of day that an enormous problem like this deserves. BUT let one Arab kid who had no business playing in the streets during a war, get knocked over by an Israeli soldier, and the press just eats the stuff up and it's front page news.

I have no answer for this perverse reporting or answers to this problem, but I surely hope that an Israeli/Jewish Newschannel would bring some equanimity to the news of the world.

[Y. Shulamith]

Major newspaper seems fated to cast israel in the worst possible light


http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AgrnSelpKRJXTLNqDHKd49AUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTFhMHM 3Z2hsBHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bi1tb3N0LWJsb2dnZWQEc2xrA21ha m9ybmV3c3BhcA--/SIG=144274iem/**http%3A//soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2009/03/22/major_newspaper_seems_fated_to_cast_israel_in_the_ worst_possible_light.html

[Mediocrates]

http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2009/03/haaretz-the-idf-and-the-worlds-double-standards.html


Monday, March 23 2009

Haaretz, The IDF, And The World's Double Standards


(http://backspin.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515b7869e201156f3b554c970b-pi)
Last week, Haaretz (http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072040.html) "exposed" the IDF "Killing civilians, vandalism, and lax rules of engagement" during Operation Cast Lead. After reading the article on Thursday, it wasn't hard to see reax like this (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-dupes-no-we-were-telling-the-truth-1649528.html) long in coming.
But Haaretz's report isn't all it's cracked up to be, and several have astutely noted the world's double standard against Israel coming into play once again.
Melanie Phillips (http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3464331/the-haaretz-blood-libel.thtml) points out that Haaretz's report is based on shoddy hearsay journalism: There are precisely two charges of gratuitous killing of Palestinian civilians under allegedly explicit orders to do so. One is what even Ha’aretz made clear was an accidental killing, when two women misunderstood the evacuation route the Israeli soldiers had given them and walked into a sniper’s gunsights as a result. Moreover, the soldier who said this has subsequently admitted he didn’t see this incident – he wasn’t even in Gaza at the time – and had merely reported rumour and hearsay.
The second charge is based on a supposedly real incident in which, when an elderly woman came close to an IDF unit, an officer ordered that they shoot her because she was approaching the line and might have been a suicide bomber. The soldier relating this story did not say whether or not the woman in this story actually was shot. Indeed, since he says ‘from the description of what happened’ it would appear this was merely hearsay once again.

(http://backspin.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515b7869e201156f3b6bb1970b-pi)
And Herb Keinon accuses Dani Zamir, who transcribed and publicized the "admissions" of having his own agenda, having appeared in the 2004 book, Refusnik, Israel's Soldiers of Conscience (http://www.amazon.com/Refusenik-Soldiers-Conscience-Peretz-Kidron/dp/1842774514), It includes a section by Zamir, who wrote: "Accordingly, collaboration with a regime or government that forces or orders me to be part of an anti-democratic apparatus that leads to self-destruction, disintegration and national decay, along with the utter denial of its own foundations, is illegitimate, unjust and immoral, and will remain so . . . ."
Keinon's acerbic response: The testimonies of the soldiers that he brought to the public's attention seem to corroborate - what a coincidence - his thesis.

(http://backspin.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515b7869e201156e4206bb970c-pi)
Noting the rising trend of the world's pots calling the Israel kettle black, bloggers raise two important points about the manifest double standard arising from this. Z-Word (http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/jews-behaving-normally-reduxthe-idf-in-gaza/) says: Perhaps because for many commentators it’s only permissible for the Jews to have a state and an army if that state and that army comply with standards of behavior far higher than that required of other states, including their own. Any failure to live up to these standards tends to be taken as evidence of the basic illegitimacy of the Zionist enterprise.
And Elder of Ziyon (http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/03/double-standard.html) articulates why it's wrong for the world to hold Israel's own high standards against it: One can observe that Israel falls short on occasion from its own self-imposed moral standards but it is quite hypocritical to judge Israel based on that. Only Israel has the right - and indeed the obligation - to judge its own people based on a higher moral code. When others do it, it is not based on morality; rather it is based on jealousy.
When one starts to judge Israel based on arbitrary "standards" beyond what is expected from others, it quickly devolves into an exercise of demonization - especially when these standards are set arbitrarily high, even beyond Israel's own self-imposed standards. Too often, Israel is judged against perfection, while others are merely judged against the status quo or their previous behaviors.

[Mediocrates]

Previous Charges of Bias
Last year, we released an in-depth report (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/One_Year_Analysis_The_BBC_in_2007.asp) analyzing one year of the BBC's coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We found that the BBC has a consistent record of portraying Israeli actions in a negative light while increasing sympathy for the Palestinian point of view. Rather than respond to the criticisms in our report, the BBC chose to accuse us of bias: HonestReporting has a particular view of the conflict and cannot be seen as an independent arbiter of our output.
That previous analysis examined the BBC's reporting, based not on subjective opinion, but on the very journalistic standards that the BBC claims to uphold. We presented hard facts but our work was summarily rejected by the BBC, which has failed to provide its own analysis as to why HonestReporting should be considered an unsuitable judge.
HonestReporting is not alone in accusing the BBC of systemic bias against Israel. Several years ago, the BBC conducted its own investigation into whether the network held an anti-Israel bias. The result -- a report by senior news editor Malcolm Balen (http://www.honestreporting.co.uk/articles/critiques/Balen_Report_Court_Rules_in_BBCs_Favour.asp) -- was a lengthy study that the corporation refuses to make public. In an ongoing legal battle to force the BBC to make the report public, the British House of Lords recently ruled against the BBC (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article5712217.ece) and sent the case back to the High Court. We hope the High Court will force the BBC to release its study into the public domain.
In light of this ongoing legal effort, we decided to examine the BBC's coverage of the recent conflict in the Gaza Strip. Images and accounts of the conflict have had a significant impact on public opinion, with many viewing Israel's actions as, at best, "disproportionate" and, at worst, "war crimes". The BBC is one of the most influential media organizations in the world. We wanted to see if its coverage encouraged such notions. What we found was an overwhelming tendency to highlight cases of both real and unproven Palestinian suffering while making Israeli actions appear trivial or illegitimate.
Comparison With Conflict in Sri Lanka
It is extremely appropriate to highlight the BBC's coverage of the Middle East considering the importance that the BBC attaches to the region. During the conflict, the BBC published, on average, 4.5 articles every day dealing with the fighting. In contrast, BBC coverage of the Sri Lankan government's campaign against the Tamil Tigers group -- a conflict that resulted in an estimated 2,000 civilian deaths in January of 2009 -- produced barely one article a day.
According to human rights organizations, the conflict in Sri Lanka includes intentional attacks by both sides on civilians, attacks on hospitals (twenty attacks from December through February alone), and the use of human shields. Yet the BBC gives this conflict, estimated to have resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, less than one quarter the average daily coverage of the Gaza conflict. If the BBC is going to focus this much on Gaza, it must expect scrutiny of that coverage.
Summary
We analyzed articles appearing on the BBC website beginning on December 22, 2008, when Hamas announced that it was ending the ceasefire, until January 19, 2009 when both sides announced a new temporary ceasefire. Over these 28 days, the BBC published 126 articles -- an average of over four each day. We found that the vast majority of these articles contained unproven accusations against Israel, graphic and out-of-context images, and highlighted quotations that reflected negatively on Israel and the Israeli Defense Forces.
Unsubstantiated Eyewitness Accounts


BBC coverage of the war included 58 accounts from "eyewitnesses" about what was happening and how the war was affecting their lives. Forty of these accounts were from Palestinians while only 18 were from Israeli civilians living under a constant barrage of rocket and mortar attacks.
Often, these accounts were unsubstantiated charges. For example, on January 14 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7828536.stm), the BBC published a lengthy article containing allegations such as: One testimony heard by the BBC and human rights group B'tselem describes Israeli forces shooting a woman in the head after she stepped out of her house carrying a piece of white cloth, in response to an Israeli loudhailer announcement.
The image on the right accompanying the story carried an implication that there was photographic proof of the woman's story. In fact, that image was unrelated to the testimony heard by the BBC. The article contained several other graphic images as well as similar allegations of Israeli soldiers acting inhumanely and intentionally targeting civilians -- all without any evidence besides the testimony of Palestinians.
"Not Possible to Verify Accounts"
The same article says that "Israel is denying access to Gaza for international journalists and human rights monitors, so it is not possible to verify the accounts." However, rather than lending legitimacy to the article, such a statement is an admission that the whole article -- with images and shocking headlines and quotations -- may very well be a complete fabrication. One of the basic rules of journalism is the responsibility to corroborate testimony. In this regard, the BBC has failed miserably.
Jeremy Bowen, the BBC's Middle East editor, kept a running diary of the conflict. In one entry, poignantly titled "Tears of a Mother (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7846136.stm)," Bowen publicizes another shocking claim: Zeinat said the Israeli troops had herded several families from the al-Samouni clan into one of the houses.
She said soldiers came in and asked for the house owner. Her husband, Atiya, put up his hand.
A soldier shot him through the head at point blank range.
Then the soldiers sprayed the room with gunfire, she says. Her four-year-son was killed.
Yet where were the follow-up investigations to these claims? What evidence besides one person's word does Bowen have to support this horrific charge?
An Internet search of the woman whom Bowen interviewed (Zeinat Abdullah al-Samouni) shows that the only other places (besides the BBC) these charges are repeated is on anti-Israel blogs. It is strange that an alleged cold blooded murder carried out in front of multiple witnesses would receive no other mainstream coverage other than an account in Bowen's diary.
The Palestinians have a well-documented record of using the media to disseminate propaganda. (See HonestReporting's "The Big Lies (http://www.honestreporting.com/a/bigLies.asp)" presentation). With this in mind, the BBC should have been even more careful to fact check such claims before publishing them.
The "Massacre" that Wasn't
One example that created a fierce anti-Israel backlash was the alleged Israeli attack on a United Nations school in which refugees had sought shelter from the fighting. On January 7, the BBC claimed that Israeli mortar shells had killed 40 civilians seeking shelter at the school. (While this report is focused on the BBC, it should be pointed out that the accusation was reported by almost all other major media).

However, investigations (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Did_Israel_Shell_a_UN_School_The_Truth_Exposed.asp ) revealed that not only had the Israeli shells fallen outside the school, but according to the IDF only 12 people -- including 9 terrorists -- were killed. HonestReporting had predicted (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Coming_Soon_Hamas_Media_Massacre.asp) that there would be tales of a massacre that would later be proven false 48 hours BEFORE the incident. If HonestReporting could predict that Hamas would attempt such a propaganda coup, why couldn't the BBC?
Even when the truth emerged, the BBC's "correction", while acknowledging that the shelling occurred outside of the school compound, failed to correct (http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2009/03/corrections-bbc-style.html) the number of dead and continues to omit that the IDF was responding to Palestinian rocket fire in proximity to the school.

[Mediocrates]

Accurate and Trustworthy Accounts?
The BBC is not ashamed of such unbalanced favoritism. In fact, Bowen has boasted about the accounts coming from the Palestinian side. In his Middle East Diary entry for January 15, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7831757.stm) he reported that: The fact that there are good Palestinian journalists in Gaza means that accurate and trustworthy accounts of what is happening are getting out.
On what is he basing his opinion that the accounts are accurate and trustworthy? With so many Palestinian claims being investigated and later dismissed, it seems he is vouching for something over which he has no knowledge. As the BBC's top Middle East reporter, he has a professional responsibility to be objective and not simply accept narratives without corroborating evidence.
Images
While shocking accounts of alleged atrocities helped spread anti-Israel sentiment around the world, it was images of casualties and destruction that really galvanized people. For this reason, it is vital that the BBC presents a balanced range of images accompanied with appropriate context. Yet, as illustrated in the chart below, the BBC image selection was overwhelmingly weighted in favor of those eliciting sympathy for the Palestinians.
We analyzed 313 images that accompanied articles about the conflict. We broke these 313 into four main groups: Israeli soldiers, Palestinian terrorists, Israeli casualties or destruction, and Palestinian casualties or scenes of destruction. The images that the BBC selected overemphasize Palestinian suffering while underemphasizing Palestinian attacks.


Images require accompanying text to clarify and contextualize what the viewer is seeing. The BBC's "in pictures" segments that highlighted certain images from that day, presented a significant problem. These images could often be found later accompanying BBC articles. These "in pictures" segments consisted solely of images and captions. We found that the captions frequently omitted critical information that would have an impact on the viewer.
Example I - Israel Destroys Government Ministries
For example, the caption accompanying the image (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7807098.stm) on the right read:
Several Hamas buildings have been destroyed, including the Justice Ministry, Legislative Assembly and Education ministry.
Anyone reading that caption with knowledge of Hamas tactics would assume that Israel was maliciously bombing Palestinian government agencies. In Gaza, however, the line between municipal government agencies and branches of the terrorist group Hamas are vague. All three of the ministries named above were run directly by Hamas and functioned as Hamas military centers during the conflict.
Example II - Israel Destroys Houses of Worship
The caption accompanying this next image (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7809755.stm) read:
As air strikes on Gaza continued, more buildings were damaged and at least 10 people were killed when a mosque was hit, local medics said.
The fact that mosques were frequently used by Hamas to store and launch rockets is relevant to the story. Yet the viewer is never give this critical piece of information. Since this picture and caption are a part of an "in pictures' segment, the viewer is given no additional information from which to draw a conclusion.
Highlighted Quotations
One way that the BBC draws attention to certain points of its articles is by selecting a quotation from the story and highlighting it in a text box to the right of the main article. Any reader skimming the article will focus on the quotations. Unfortunately, out of 38 highlighted quotations in the articles in our study, only 4 defended the Israeli position. Here is a sample of the quotations:
From the Palestinian Side:


"We have never seen a situation like this, in all the history of Palestinians."
"We're trying to hide in different corners of the apartment."
"We are unable to function normally, we have no cars, we can't even wear police uniforms because of Israeli drones."
"I have been trying to stop my children crying - I try to keep them playing."
"The glass of my windows all fell down, so we spent the night scared and cold, my children were screaming. The attacks were continuous."
"I left because I thought that the shooting was getting closer to my home and my children were scared.
"We had to squash [the injured into the ambulance]... on top of each other, including the dead man, just to get them to some sort of place of safety."

Quotations reflecting Israeli opinions were limited to the following:


"Since the majority of the Hamas militants are pretty much in hiding in those places, mainly urban places, then we operate in those areas." (repeated twice)
"Our definition is that anyone who is involved with terrorism within Hamas is a valid target. This ranges from the strictly military institutions and includes the political institutions that provide the logistical funding and human resources for the terrorist arm."
"For the children's sake we felt we had to go out. We love Sderot. But we had to go out for some time."

As you can see, the majority of the Palestinian quotations were personal observations on the fighting. Only the last Israeli quotation was similar. Could the BBC not find anyone else living in Sderot who could speak about living in terror? There is no doubt that when the highlighted quotations focus on only one side, the reader will come away with a certain perspective.
Conclusions
The BBC's coverage of the Gaza conflict painted a picture of an Israeli attack that intentionally targeted civilians and may have included war crimes. Specifically:


The BBC relied upon Palestinians who were given the opportunity to make dubious accusations without any supporting evidence.
The BBC published image after image of Palestinians suffering under Israeli attacks while giving readers few views of the impact that the conflict was having on Israeli civilians living under a constant and daily rocket barrage.
The most damning Palestinian statements about the Israeli operations were highlighted on the side of the articles, while Israeli statements were almost never treated in the same way.

We have said before that as one of the world's top news sources, the BBC has a tremendous responsibility to report accurately and fairly. While the BBC claims to be impartial, it has done everything possible to deflect scrutiny of its work from being made public. Right now, a pending lawsuit in the House of Lords seeks to compel the BBC to make public an internal review that allegedly found that its Middle East reporting was biased against Israel.
Please contact the BBC and demand more balanced reporting. To help navigate the BBC's complaints page, please click here (http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2008/06/idiots-guide-to.html). Afterwards, you may contact the BBC here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/).
To read our earlier reports on the BBC, click here (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/6_Month_Analysis_of_the_BBC_The_Subtle_Bias.asp) (first half of 2007) or here (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/One_Year_Analysis_The_BBC_in_2007.asp) (2007-2008). We plan to continue publishing long term analyses of specific media to determine whether reporting is fair and consistent. If you are interested in sponsoring one of these reports, please click here (action@honestreporting.com).
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/The_BBC_During_the_Gaza_War_Biased_Coverage_of_the _Conflict.asp

[bararallu]

"systemic" bias should be "systematic" bias. One deals with innards and the other with systems.

[GratefulFred]

sweeping under the carpet is also not a solution. if IDF cannot behave ethically, then it shouldn't boast about been the most moral army in the world.

IDF job was to eliminate hamas and bring to end the kassams firing. period. did it achieve that? no. what it did achieve, that it's good at killing children, women and it's own.

media accomplish it's tasks. IDF should have done that too. then would not be need to worry about the media reports.

There are things that civilians need not know about. Every democratic army in this world goes through these discussions with it's soldiers. Many soldiers need help fitting back into reality. Many soldiers may have heard but not wittnessed or maybe they are lying to lower their profile and get out of a combat unit. An army can investigate evidence but need not be an open book.

The only reason the "most moral army" comes out is a defense mechanism after the fact. None of this should've been let out and the Israeli media who published the story should be fined.

Our enemies are still pissed that we lost so few people and didn't walk into their traps. We averaged less than 1 kill per bomb we dropped by plane though anyone could see how clear a picture we have fromt he air. None of this matters though because like vultures our enemies look to pounce of our imperfections for conducting war.

Don't blame Olmert for not going all the way. We lost so few soldiers and I am sure the area was booby trapped to kill plenty of our boys. He acted as he did as Bibi will act. If we lose many soldiers as a result who will be seen as the best leader?

This current situation of picking their tunnells off is a far better way for us to operate.

You are naive to think these things never go on in every conflict. I loved my days serving in the army and reserves. I only saw brothers with love in their hearts for our country. My kids carry on my love for army and country in 2 years.

Ask yourself why no other army who's fought in a conflict is being attacked like we are? Russia in Georgia? Congo? Zimbabwee? etc...

[Mil]

dude - Israel is neither Russia, Georgia, zimbabwe, or the Congo either..... Healthy debate is always good as is scrutinize all the misdeeds by soldiers in Gaza. Israel is a Liberal Democracy.

[Golem of Prague]

The best analysis of the Haaretz expose yet, from the former Yad Vashem archives director Yaakov Lozowick:

War Crimes In Gaza? (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgxshts6_50dn5vfxfh)

In the summer of 1967, as the IDF reserve soldiers came home from the battlefields of the Six Day War, a group of kibbutz members inspired by the charismatic Holocaust survivor, partisan, and poet Aba Kovner, gathered together to talk about the war. While most of their compatriots were still reeling euphorically from the swift transformation of facing extinction in May 1967 to brilliant victory in June, these thoughtful young men reflected upon the gray zones. Their discussions were published as a book: Siach Lochamim, or Discussions of Warriors. It was important, widely read and quoted; an English version was published in 1971 as “The Seventh Day: Soldier Talk about the Six Day War”. Was it an influential book? Probably not. In post-modern jargon, it was an expression of the hegemonic elite of Israeli society, a few short years before the end of the hegemony and the onset of the present multi-cultural society. Still, it serves as a model some Israelis wistfully look back at.

Danny Zamir, head of the Oranim Academic College, is one of them. Yet there’s an ironic twist to his position. These academic colleges (“Mechinot”) are the invention of a rival group, the Zionist Orthodox,the political home of the Settlers. Twenty years ago some of them felt the need to insert a year of reflection and personal growth between high school and service in the IDF, feeling educated and mature 19-year-olds would better serve their country than less mature 18-year-olds. Zamir has copied their successful model.

This is important, because he and his student-soldiers are not a cross section of Israeli society. On the contrary. They are mostly members of a once illustrious group of Ashkenazi, secular, educated and left-leaning Israelis. One should not belittle them; while they no longer dominate Israeli society, they remain an honorable, creative and important section of it. Yet they are afflicted with a misconception shared by their political relatives in many Western societies: that they are somehow better than the others, more intelligent, more compassionate; that they are right, while everyone else is wrong, and boneheaded for not seeing their light. As in other countries so also in Israel, the rest of society returns the compliment with its own set of prejudices; the Querdenker in me loves them all, and takes none of their conceits all that seriously.

Zamir and his warrior-students have all read Siach Lochamim, and their discussion after the Gaza operation was consciously, carefully modeled on it, with Zamir usurping Kovner’s role, and the young men following their grandfathers – only the social terrain has changed. They are no longer the elite who command the nation’s attention and respect; rather, in their minds, they’re an embattled minority surrounded by a churning mass of inferiors. Read the description of their discussion carefully, and you can’t miss the arrogance.

This is really frustrating, to see that they understand that inside Gaza you are allowed to do anything you want, to break down doors of houses for no reason other than it's cool.

"You do not get the impression from the officers that there is any logic to it, but they won't say anything. To write 'death to the Arabs' on the walls, to take family pictures and spit on them, just because you can. I think this is the main thing in understanding how much the IDF has fallen in the realm of ethics, really. It's what I'll remember the most."

Here’s the code: When this young sergeant talks about trying to explain to his soldiers that civilians must be protected, he’s casting himself as their moral superior, which is what he feels. He understands, they don’t. When he’s arguing with his religious comrades, however, and especially with the rabbis, he’s facing ideological foes who are his intellectual and social equals, so his criticism becomes sharper:

"What I do remember in particular at the beginning is the feeling of almost a religious mission. My sergeant is a student at a hesder yeshiva [a program that combines religious study and military service]. Before we went in, he assembled the whole platoon and led the prayer for those going into battle. A brigade rabbi was there, who afterward came into Gaza and went around patting us on the shoulder and encouraging us, and praying with people. And also when we were inside they sent in those booklets, full of Psalms, a ton of Psalms. I think that at least in the house I was in for a week, we could have filled a room with the Psalms they sent us, and other booklets like that.

"There was a huge gap between what the Education Corps sent out and what the IDF rabbinate sent out. The Education Corps published a pamphlet for commanders - something about the history of Israel's fighting in Gaza from 1948 to the present. The rabbinate brought in a lot of booklets and articles, and ... their message was very clear: We are the Jewish people, we came to this land by a miracle, God brought us back to this land and now we need to fight to expel the gentiles who are interfering with our conquest of this holy land. This was the main message, and the whole sense many soldiers had in this operation was of a religious war. From my position as a commander and 'explainer,' I attempted to talk about the politics - the streams in Palestinian society, about how not everyone who is in Gaza is Hamas, and not every inhabitant wants to vanquish us. I wanted to explain to the soldiers that this war is not a war for the sanctification of the holy name, but rather one to stop the Qassams."

I’m not certain this comes across in the English translation; in the original Hebrew it’s crystal clear, and no Israeli will miss the lingual codes. Some may agree with them, others be affronted by them, but everyone sees them. This is crucial, because most of the report is not about the Palestinians at all, and it doesn’t describe things that happened, rather it focuses on a subjective interpretation. Read carefully, and you’ll see that actually, the soldiers didn’t generally behave with the wanton rage the descriptions would have you expect; on the contrary:

Yossie: "I am a platoon sergeant in an operations company of the Paratroops Brigade. We were in a house and discovered a family inside that wasn't supposed to be there. We assembled them all in the basement, posted two guards at all times and made sure they didn't make any trouble. Gradually, the emotional distance between us broke down - we had cigarettes with them, we drank coffee with them, we talked about the meaning of life and the fighting in Gaza. After very many conversations the owner of the house, a man of 70-plus, was saying it's good we are in Gaza and it's good that the IDF is doing what it is doing.

"The next day we sent the owner of the house and his son, a man of 40 or 50, for questioning. The day after that, we received an answer: We found out that both are political activists in Hamas. That was a little annoying - that they tell you how fine it is that you're here and good for you and blah-blah-blah, and then you find out that they were lying to your face the whole time.

Yossie, being a platoon sergeant, didn’t lay down policy. If the troops behaved reasonably, it wasn’t because he’d convinced them, it was because their own cultural baggage dictated so.

Aviv describes agonizing as, near the end of the operation, it seemed likely his unit would penetrate a part of the city of Gaza which had not been evacuated of civilians. Ultimately this didn’t happen, but his thought process is fascinating:

"At first the specified action was to go into a house. We were supposed to go in with an armored personnel carrier called an Achzarit [literally, Cruel] to burst through the lower door, to start shooting inside and then ... I call this murder ... in effect, we were supposed to go up floor by floor, and any person we identified - we were supposed to shoot. I initially asked myself: Where is the logic in this?

"From above they said it was permissible, because anyone who remained in the sector and inside Gaza City was in effect condemned, a terrorist, because they hadn't fled. I didn't really understand: On the one hand they don't really have anywhere to flee to, but on the other hand they're telling us they hadn't fled so it's their fault ... This also scared me a bit. I tried to exert some influence, insofar as is possible from within my subordinate position, to change this. In the end the specification involved going into a house, operating megaphones and telling [the tenants]: 'Come on, everyone get out, you have five minutes, leave the house, anyone who doesn't get out gets killed.'

He’s a sergeant, yet he argues up the military chain; later the orders are changed, certainly not because he argued, but then again, perhaps because he and many others all did: we can’t know; even he doesn’t know. In any case, it’s a thinking army, trying to fashion the proper way of battle, while at battle.

Continues in the next post.

[Golem of Prague]

Part 2 of Lozowick's article.

The deliberations were not only about life and death matters; they also covered more mundane topics. Back to Yossie, billeted in the home of Hamas activists:

"What annoyed me was that in the end, after we understood that the members of this family weren't exactly our good friends and they pretty much deserved to be forcibly ejected from there, my platoon commander suggested that when we left the house, we should clean up all the stuff, pick up and collect all the garbage in bags, sweep and wash the floor, fold up the blankets we used, make a pile of the mattresses and put them back on the beds."

Zamir: "What do you mean? Didn't every IDF unit that left a house do that?"

Yossi: "No. Not at all. On the contrary: In most of the houses graffiti was left behind and things like that."

Zamir: "That's simply behaving like animals."

Yossi: "There was one day when a Katyusha, a Grad, landed in Be'er Sheva and a mother and her baby were moderately to seriously injured. They were neighbors of one of my soldiers. We heard the whole story on the radio, and he didn't take it lightly - that his neighbors were seriously hurt. So the guy was a bit antsy, and you can understand him. To tell a person like that, 'Come on, let's wash the floor of the house of a political activist in Hamas, who has just fired a Katyusha at your neighbors that has amputated one of their legs' - this isn't easy to do, especially if you don't agree with it at all. When my platoon commander said, 'Okay, tell everyone to fold up blankets and pile up mattresses,' it wasn't easy for me to take. There was lot of shouting. In the end I was convinced and realized it really was the right thing to do. Today I appreciate and even admire him, the platoon commander, for what happened there. In the end I don't think that any army, the Syrian army, the Afghani army, would wash the floor of its enemy's houses, and it certainly wouldn't fold blankets and put them back in the closets."

Fascinating, isn’t it. Yossie and his comrades have a common moral code. They’re stationed in a Palestinian home, and soon they’re having quasi-normal relations with them, talking, sharing cigarettes and so on. There have been Israelis in Arab captivity in some wars (not to mention Gilad Shalit right now), and I’ve never heard the parallel story. At the end, feeling a bit betrayed that the Palestinians had been lying, the soldiers don’t feel like cleaning up; Zamir, however, from the perch of his stricter moral code, or is it arrogance, makes it clear this is bestial (that’s what the original Hebrew word says). In essence, Zamir admonishes his student, you have also become bestial if you’re like all those others.

I agree with Zamir that they should have cleaned up. Yet in the annals of war this is hardly obvious, nor the norm. Leaving a mess is impolite; it’s not bestial. This is exactly where the internal Israeli conversation, happening in Hebrew, turns into something radically different in the malicious hands of unknowing outsiders.

The killing of civilians is of course a different subject altogether. Yet in spite of the world-wide excitement about these testimonies, which if you believe the reports contain Israeli confirmations of wanton brutality and destructiveness, they contain descriptions of only four civilian deaths; here’s the case of three:

Ram: "I serve in an operations company in the Givati Brigade. After we'd gone into the first houses, there was a house with a family inside. Entry was relatively calm. We didn't open fire, we just yelled at everyone to come down. We put them in a room and then left the house and entered it from a different lot. A few days after we went in, there was an order to release the family. They had set up positions upstairs. There was a sharpshooters' position on the roof. The platoon commander let the family go and told them to go to the right. One mother and her two children didn't understand and went to the left, but they forgot to tell the sharpshooter on the roof they had let them go, and it was was okay and he should hold his fire and he ... he did what he was supposed to, like he was following his orders."

Question from the audience: "At what range was this?"

Ram: "Between 100 and 200 meters, something like that. They had also came out of the house that he was on the roof of, they had advanced a bit and suddenly he saw then, people moving around in an area where they were forbidden to move around. I don't think he felt too bad about it, because after all, as far as he was concerned, he did his job according to the orders he was given. And the atmosphere in general, from what I understood from most of my men who I talked to ... I don't know how to describe it .... The lives of Palestinians, let's say, is something very, very less important than the lives of our soldiers. So as far as they are concerned they can justify it that way."

According to a radio broadcast two days ago, Ram has since admitted he wasn’t an eyewitness to any of this, it’s only hearsay. Or to be accurate: the tragic death of that woman and her two children happened; the talk about “the atmosphere in general” and so on, that’s hearsay. Ram assumes the shooter would have said he was merely following orders – a loaded statement if there ever was one – but he doesn’t know this. He implies that had he been stationed on the roof, he would have known better – and perhaps he might have. Then again, perhaps not. The devil – not figuratively – is in the details: was it daylight or nighttime? Were the children toddlers, or teenagers? Did their killer recognize them for who they were, or could he have easily been convinced they were something else? These specific questions make all the difference between the confusion of war and a malicious killing. They need to be clarified by professional investigators, not by a kangaroo court.

War is one of the worst occupations men can engage in – though genocide and some large scale injustices are worse, and their prevention justifies war. There is no such thing as a pretty war. The decision to be in war entails, always, the decision to do things that would be totally unacceptable in any other context. For this reason, the decision must be made with care, including detailed planning, meticulous training, permanent self reflection even under fire, and calm examination of everything afterwords so that mistakes not be repeated. Israel is currently examining itself, in a public, communal discussion. I cannot think of any other society which does this in such a frank and open manner; certainly never any of our enemies, but not any of our friends, either. The decision of our critics to cast this in a very different light tells mostly who they are, not who we are.

[Y. Shulamith]

Healthy debate about Israel's military missions often turn into gala events for the enemies of Israel and anti-semites everywhere.

[Mil]

by Shulamith:

Healthy debate about Israel's military missions often turn into gala events for the enemies of Israel and anti-semites everywhere.

That's true of any Democracy. Here in the States we are often critical and are very open about behavior of our soldiers and law enforcement. In fact we TOO OPEN compared to all other societies. "Apocalypse Now" is only possible to be made by Americans in America. Many of American enemies use our own criticism against us and what????? We are only stronger because of that because we KNOW who we are!!!!

The only way Israel can beat all this cr***p is through Openness and healthy debate; all that describes Israel internal politics anyways. If this gets misinterpreted by some Arab and dictator lovers, who cares.... lets them boil in their own envy knowing how to criticize and handle state institutions and especially the army. Israel can and they can't!!!!!

[Yala]

They didn't accomplish much in Gaza except a few billion that is going to be donated to Hamas from the west. I think from all perspectives this mission was a failure. I think responding to each rocket with a smart bomb is a better plan. At least this way things will have to be reported in context and Israeli reprisals won't be viewed as so out of the blue, wanton wreckage.

[ygalg1]

'Israel should preempt war crime charges'
Mar. 23, 2009 Herb Keinon , THE JERUSALEM POST

Even though allegations of war crimes in the Gaza Strip are being used by some to delegitimize Israel, it is incumbent on Israel to investigate the allegations to show the world it is taking the matter seriously, Alan Baker, formerly the Foreign Ministry's legal adviser, said Monday.

Baker said Israel should investigate the most recent allegations by Physicians for Human Rights, including that Israel "impeded emergency medical evacuation of the sick and wounded" during the Gaza operation.

He noted that in the course of the investigation it would likely emerge that ambulances were used to transport terrorists, and as such lost - according to international law - their privileged status.

But the investigation itself is important because it shows that Israel is checking itself and taking the charges seriously, Baker said.

"Israel is going to face considerable legal challenges, and all this is being used as part of a campaign to delegitimize Israel," said Baker, who returned late last year after serving as Israel's ambassador to Canada for four years.

He retired last month from the Foreign Ministry following 30 years of service, after waiting in vain for some five months for a suitable position inside the ministry.

"There is no doubt that Israel did not systematically go in and commit war crimes," Baker said.

He said that in isolated incidents, things may have happened that caused innocent people to be killed, and that it was in Israel's interest to investigate itself, and prosecute where necessary.

Baker said that Israel's legal system was widely respected abroad, and that its say on the matter would be respected overseas.

He said, for instance, that the International Criminal Court in The Hague only gets involved in war-crimes cases if the feeling is that the country allegedly responsible was not looking into the matter on its own.

If it appears that Israel is not investigating, other countries and international bodies may feel the need to get involved, he said.jpost (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1237727519023&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)

[GratefulFred]

sweeping under the carpet is also not a solution. if IDF cannot behave ethically, then it shouldn't boast about been the most moral army in the world.

IDF job was to eliminate hamas and bring to end the kassams firing. period. did it achieve that? no. what it did achieve, that it's good at killing children, women and it's own.

media accomplish it's tasks. IDF should have done that too. then would not be need to worry about the media reports.

I didn't say that the IDF should sweep things under the table. I do say they should investigate and in many cases NOT report their findings to the news media. The army can discipline it's soldiers without this fanfare media attention.

Disciplining a few soldiers who stepped out of line is an internal issue all armies around the world address. I can't stand our media.

Why do you question our armies actions when other armies rape and murder countless numbers? Set up a standard if you are bored and decide the army that has the highest moral standard is the one that rapes the fewest number of women and kills the fewest civilians given factors such as did the enemy hide behide children, etc... Maybe we end up in the top end but not the highest. I don't care about names. I had to live with running to the safe room. So big F*****G deal about tags.

Olmert/Barak are credited without having our boys killed and the missiles being launched have been greatly diminished. Maybe they saw no way to enter further without the causalties being high.

Perhaps they lacked the resolve as indicated by the election. Right now, is the best situation as we can pick off our enemy without the world news media saying Day 1 Part 2 of Gaza.

Just as I voted for Bibi and many others did, time will tell if we will be able to achieve better results.

Your comments about killing women and children show how childish you are. Just because you can't see the millions dead in Darfur or the Congo by video means your brain cannot compute logic and that one or a few Israeli soldier who may face military jail time because they acted inappropriate but you saw on youtube is far more earth shattering than a graveyard of a thousand raped children in Africa you only know from a weak news blurb. Just call yourself a Hamas Puppet on the way out.

Show me your posts on Africa which should number in the tens of thousands to keep things proportional or get a brain operation. Your choice.

dude - Israel is neither Russia, Georgia, zimbabwe, or the Congo either..... Healthy debate is always good as is scrutinize all the misdeeds by soldiers in Gaza. Israel is a Liberal Democracy.

I would keep military matters in the military. We don't need to debate such issues that we never learn about or need to know. Don't we have others issues needing our attention that we can debate? We have gone overboard with information and it serves our enemies and does not help moral of our people one bit. What happened to military censorship anyways? Justice can be served within the military without cameras.

[Brody15]

The point I was trying to make was that there is an unhealthy - almost sick - obsession with Israel.


Radhika Coomaraswamy, Under-Secretary General for Children in Armed Conflict is making a stink about supposed abuses by the Israeli army. Coomaraswamy is a beauracrat who has been under fire for not going after her home country's Tamil Tiger and their use of children as soldiers. My guess is that she needs to look good for her bosses and the public, so she goes after the world's best scapegoat, the Jews.

All this garbage coming out about Israel war crimes is nothing new, and its always a home run. Sad.

[Mediocrates]

You can thank Ha'aretz for drumming this one. Bradley Burston and Amira Hass

[Mil]

Posted by Grateful:

I would keep military matters in the military. We don't need to debate such issues that we never learn about or need to know. Don't we have others issues needing our attention that we can debate? We have gone overboard with information and it serves our enemies and does not help moral of our people one bit. What happened to military censorship anyways? Justice can be served within the military without cameras.

Israel is still an open Democracy? Right?

[Y. Shulamith]

Posted by Grateful:

I would keep military matters in the military. We don't need to debate such issues that we never learn about or need to know. Don't we have others issues needing our attention that we can debate? We have gone overboard with information and it serves our enemies and does not help moral of our people one bit. What happened to military censorship anyways? Justice can be served within the military without cameras.

Israel is still an open Democracy? Right?

Just because you are an open democracy doesn't mean that you need to air every piece of dirty laundry for the international communities consumption and digestion. Some things are best let be investigated by internal military inquiries. Where did the USA get with it's open Democracy, yet letting on about every possible infraction by/to/from inmates and goings on in Gitmo? Nada.

[GratefulFred]

Israel is still an open Democracy? Right?

20+ years ago when I served in the IDF in regular service half the guys in my combat unit spent some time in military jail as a result of cracking under the intense pressure of basic training. What was true than was true before and what's true today.

Should we report Private Benny's cracking under pressure as an 18 year old kid? A website devoted to that cause, even for insignificant events 20+ years ago, would have a large following in today's world of anti-Jewish settiment. Squirting around the boycott needs fuel for the fire. Chipping away at an aid package is within grasp of our enemies providing they keep the fire against us burning.

Benny went on to officer's school and matured into a fine productive citizen.
He probably learned alot sitting in boring jail for a week for throwing his temper tandrum.

Being an open democracy has to do with civilian life. Civilians need not be burdened with details of military life.

Ha'aretz and all our media act irresponsibly and would publish pictures of every square inch of Dimona if they could. They seek to out scoop each other and everyone is fair game. They've stepped over the line and no one is standing up to them.

No army is perfect 100%. It's a high pressure situation and just as people die under friendly fire abuses happen sometimes. The military alone should investigate, discipline and seek to improve itself.

We will still be a democracy but we'll be a people with balls and act with conviction and stop being the mascocists the world demands of only us.

[Mil]

Posted by Grateful:

We will still be a democracy but we'll be a people with balls and act with conviction and stop being the mascocists the world demands of only us.

What is that supposed to mean exactly? Look, The Moment Israel will loose its Democracy, its freedoms and its openness Israel will LOOSE!!!! Israel's subjectivity is why Israel kicked buttes of all of its enemies both on the battlefield and on the political arena. If Israel looses its Democracy it will not loose to the outside but to its own self. Start hiding something one - you'll hide something else.

You should stop warring of what the rest of the world thinks of you and wary what you think of yourself. I personally like Haaretz as I like Jpost and whatever else is written in English, which I can read, and which has some good journalism. Unfortunately many in the outside world take information from Israeli media and use it against Israel .... especially those who want to do Israel harm. But that's part of the game. They do this to America, Denmark, France, Canada and every other normal nation. Hey, recently some good number of Canadians got pissed at FOX because some commentator said something very derogatory about Canada..... and it goes both ways.

[Mil]

Posted by Shulamith:

Where did the USA get with it's open Democracy, yet letting on about every possible infraction by/to/from inmates and goings on in Gitmo? Nada.

You never lived in a place where the word freedom actually stood for nothing. I did, as did my family.

The same freedom which reminds the world of Gitmo also remembers the Holocaust. Where I came from is where the Holocaust took place.... and where the Holocaust took place nobody cares about Jewish suffering. But America does.

[Reffo]

"The battle with the Jew haters will continue, because it has been prophesised and decreed, and none of his words go unfulfilled….. as the oral tradition states 'The Day of Resurrection will not come until the Good people on earth make war against the Jew Haters and kill them, and until the Jew Hater hides behind a rock and tree, and the rock and tree says: 'Oh righteous, servant of G-D, a Jew Hater is behind me, come and kill him!'…"

[ranchcer]

If you choose to report publicly and investigate a few rotten apples, surely the time factor is important here. as it takes dacades to buil a reputation that can be ruined overnight.

In the present situation, one may feel that Israel is not doing enough to counter her enemies'
propaganda efforts and clear up the confusion for her supporters and the rest of the world.

I found particularly insiduous and disgusting the picture i saw in a national Spanish newspaper about this T-shirt business that turned the allegations of war crimes into allegations of premeditated crimes. It said New fashion trends among soldiers and their relatives. It may be an insult to the reader's intelligence but nonetheless the editor feels free to get away with it.

[Mediocrates]

COGAT: 22.3.09 - HUMANITARIAN AID TO THE GAZA STRIP, WEEKLY AND CUMULATIVE FIGURES COGAT: 22.3.09 - HUMANITARIAN AID TO THE GAZA STRIP, WEEKLY AND CUMULATIVE FIGURES (Communicated by the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Spokesman)

22nd March, 2009
Humanitarian Effort - Humanitarian Aid to the Gaza Strip Weekly and Accumulative figures 15-21 March 2009

Throughout the week, 16,436 tons of humanitarian aid, food commodities, medical supplies and medication, supplies for the private and public sectors were transferred to the Gaza Strip via Kerem Shalom cargo terminal and the Karni conveyor belt. Kerem Shalom operated on 6 scheduled days, Karni conveyor belt operated 3 scheduled days and Nahal Oz operated 5 scheduled days. Erez crossing operated 6 scheduled days and facilitated medical movements beyond regular operating hours. 2,178,410 liters of heavy duty diesel, for the Gaza power station were delivered via Nahal Oz fuel depot. Also, 1017 tons of gas for domestic uses was transferred to the Gaza Strip. This week a noticeable increase in domestic gas was ordered by the Palestinian side (compared to 582 tons last week). The ongoing supply of gas for domestic use is reliant on Palestinian demand and is not subject to any limitation by Israel.

This week 80 Medical evacuations from Gaza to Israel took place (including escorts), via Erez crossing. The Palestinian Authority continues to reduce the number of referrals to Israel from the Gaza Strip of the chronically ill. 174,217 tons of humanitarian aid has been delivered to Gaza since the unilateral cease fire. Also, 15,817,900 liters of heavy duty diesel were transferred to Gaza for the power station. 111 truckloads of humanitarian aid were delivered this week by the international community. This week sees a further decline in international aid being sent to Gaza. 85,000 carnations were exported this week from Gaza to the European market at the request of the Dutch government.

International Aid & Donations
A total of 111 trucks with international aid and donations were shipped this week to Gaza. Donations included basic food commodities, school kits, paper and other essential items. Also, Italy donated an ambulance destined for the Gaza Strip. This week there was a further noticeable decline in the volume of international aid sent to the Gaza Strip by the International community.

Kerem Shalom & Karni accumulative summary
Throughout the week a total of 16,436 tons of aid were transferred to the Gaza Strip, including International aid, donations, food supplies, medical supplies, medication, pipes for the water network rehabilitation, hypochloride, dairy and meat products, various types of grain, vaccines and fodder for livestock. Karni conveyor belt facilitated shipping of 5020 tons of grain. This week, 84.5% of the goods transferred were at the request of the private sector and 15.5% were at the request of the international community. Since Monday (2.3.2009), COGAT has implemented, at the request of the Dutch Government, a mechanism to enable the export of carnations from Gaza to the European market via Kerem Shalom. This week 85000 carnations were shipped through this mechanism (amount of flowers exported is determined by the Palestinian farmers).

Nahal Oz
Nahal Oz Fuel Depot operated from Sunday - Thursday shipping 2,178,410 liters of heavy duty diesel and 1017 tons of domestic gas.

[Mediocrates]

Monday, March 23, 2009 The Ha'aretz blood libel www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3464331/the-haaretz-blood-libel.thtml (http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3464331/the-haaretz-blood-libel.thtml)
On his eponymous BBC TV show this morning, I listened open-mouthed as Andrew Marr invited Tory foreign affairs spokesman William Hague to express his views about the pretty appalling looking reports coming out of Israel where members of the Israeli Defence Force who were involved in the Gaza operation have talked about effectively being told to shoot at civilians.

Hague replied:
Well those are absolutely appalling stories. There is no question about that. We don't yet know the truth of them. I think it's very important to say that. This is evidence that now has to be looked at, of course, by Israel's military investigations unit; and it is a good thing that Israel does have provision for that, for investigating these things and for bringing to book any who were responsible for behaving in such a way. But we will expect. I think across the world, we will expect Israel to deal decisively with anybody who committed such crimes. It will be very important for Israel to do that if it is to keep any moral authority in these situations in the future. So we're all appalled by that and we hope that it will be dealt with.

Of course Hague was careful to say the truth of this evidence was not yet known. But there is no evidence. So far, there is simply nothing to prove or disprove from these reports of the soldiers' discussion carried in Ha'aretz last week, here and here -- just innuendo, rumour and hearsay, demonstrably (read the second account) wrenched out of context and refracted through the patent prejudice of the soldiers' instructor Danny Zamir, an ultra-leftist who had previously been jailed for refusing to guard settlers at a religious ceremony and who said of the soldiers who spoke at the meeting in question that they reflected an atmosphere inside the army of 'contempt for, and forcefulness against, the Palestinians.'

So what are these pretty appalling looking reports and absolutely appalling stories?

There are precisely two charges of gratuitous killing of Palestinian civilians under allegedly explicit orders to do so. One is what even Ha'aretz made clear was an accidental killing, when two women misunderstood the evacuation route the Israeli soldiers had given them and walked into a sniper's gunsights as a result. Moreover, the soldier who said this has subsequently admitted he didn't see this incident - he wasn't even in Gaza at the time - and had merely reported rumour and hearsay.

The second charge is based on a supposedly real incident in which, when an elderly woman came close to an IDF unit, an officer ordered that they shoot her because she was approaching the line and might have been a suicide bomber. The soldier relating this story did not say whether or not the woman in this story actually was shot. Indeed, since he says 'from the description of what happened' it would appear this was merely hearsay once again. And his interpretation was disputed by another soldier who said: She wasn't supposed to be there, because there were announcements and there were bombings. Logic says she shouldn't be there. The way you describe it, as murder in cold blood, that isn't right.

So two non-atrocity atrocities, then. What else? Soldiers mouthing off -- in conversations of near-impenetrable incoherence - that instructions to kill everyone who remained in buildings designated as terrorist targets after the IDF had warned everyone inside to get out amounted to instructions to murder in cold blood. There cannot be an army in the world which would not issue precisely such instructions in such circumstances, where Hamas had boasted it had booby-trapped the entire area. Gloating graffiti left in the houses of presumed terrorists. Tasteless T-shirts emblazoned with motifs crowing about killing, condemned immediately by the IDF. Rabbis distributing to soldiers psalms and religious opinions about the conflict.

That's it. Not one single verifiable actual incident of intentional killing of civilians. No evidence whatever of any such rogue incidents -- let alone any order by the IDF to tear up its actual rules of engagement which forbade the deliberate targeting of civilians. Talk by one soldier about the IAF having killed a lot of people before the soldiers went in contradicted by another who said:

They dropped leaflets over Gaza and would sometimes fire a missile from a helicopter into the corner of some house, just to shake up the house a bit so everyone inside would flee. These things worked. The families came out, and really people [i.e., soldiers] did enter houses that were pretty empty, at least of innocent civilians. [my emphasis] Funny sort of unethical military behaviour, that goes to some lengths to empty houses of civilians before storming them. Indeed, the soldiers' discussion contains more such material totally contradicting the impression of gross violations of ethics. Such as this:

'I am a platoon sergeant in an operations company of the Paratroops Brigade. We were in a house and discovered a family inside that wasn't supposed to be there. We assembled them all in the basement, posted two guards at all times and made sure they didn't make any trouble. Gradually, the emotional distance between us broke down - we had cigarettes with them, we drank coffee with them, we talked about the meaning of life and the fighting in Gaza. After very many conversations the owner of the house, a man of 70-plus, was saying it's good we are in Gaza and it's good that the IDF is doing what it is doing.

The next day we sent the owner of the house and his son, a man of 40 or 50, for questioning. The day after that, we received an answer: We found out that both are political activists in Hamas. That was a little annoying - that they tell you how fine it is that you're here and good for you and blah-blah-blah, and then you find out that they were lying to your face the whole time. What annoyed me was that in the end, after we understood that the members of this family weren't exactly our good friends and they pretty much deserved to be forcibly ejected from there, my platoon commander suggested that when we left the house, we should clean up all the stuff, pick up and collect all the garbage in bags, sweep and wash the floor, fold up the blankets we used, make a pile of the mattresses and put them back on the beds.

... 'There was one day when a Katyusha, a Grad, landed in Be'er Sheva and a mother and her baby were moderately to seriously injured. They were neighbors of one of my soldiers. We heard the whole story on the radio, and he didn't take it lightly - that his neighbors were seriously hurt. So the guy was a bit antsy, and you can understand him. To tell a person like that, 'Come on, let's wash the floor of the house of a political activist in Hamas, who has just fired a Katyusha at your neighbors that has amputated one of their legs' - this isn't easy to do, especially if you don't agree with it at all. When my platoon commander said, 'Okay, tell everyone to fold up blankets and pile up mattresses,' it wasn't easy for me to take. There was lot of shouting. In the end I was convinced and realized it really was the right thing to do. Today I appreciate and even admire him, the platoon commander, for what happened there. In the end I don't think that any army, the Syrian army, the Afghani army, would wash the floor of its enemy's houses, and it certainly wouldn't fold blankets and put them back in the closets.' This is what instructor Danny Zamir described as 'contempt for, and forcefulness against, the Palestinians.' No mention of any of that in the world's media, is there? Do you think Andrew Marr or William Hague read those bits? Do me the proverbial. All they've picked up and run with is the lazy and malicious boilerplate carefully spun by Ha'aretz: rumour and hearsay about two incidents related by two soldiers (one of whom wasn't even in Gaza) -- one an accidental killing, the other maybe not a killing at all -- plus some wild mouthing-off by soldiers, some unpleasant graffiti, ditto T-shirts, plus some leaflets by unidentified rabbis making statements that carry no weight with the IDF or reflect Israeli policy whatsoever.

On that basis, however, it's proof positive for the likes of Andrew Marr, William Hague, the New York Times, Guardian, Independent, BBC and Uncle Tom Israelbasher and all, that yes!! Israel is now shown (unless specifically disproved -- and how do you disprove something for which no evidence is offered whatever?) to have been committing atrocities after all in Gaza; and so has now forfeit what remains of its moral authority, which was already hanging by a thread as a result of all the previous blood libels, and almost certainly its right to exist at all. This is not just bigotry. It is medieval witch-hunt territory. And it's global.

[Y. Shulamith]

Posted by Shulamith:

Where did the USA get with it's open Democracy, yet letting on about every possible infraction by/to/from inmates and goings on in Gitmo? Nada.

You never lived in a place where the word freedom actually stood for nothing. I did, as did my family.

The same freedom which reminds the world of Gitmo also remembers the Holocaust. Where I came from is where the Holocaust took place.... and where the Holocaust took place nobody cares about Jewish suffering. But America does.


There are plenty of places where Jewish suffering is a nothing issue. I'd rather not give them more reasons to delight in Jewish suffering, where ever it is and whom ever they are.

I'll be there is plenty of madness in the USA's military but it doesn't get dished out everyday and we don't have it banged on our heads constantly, until we would be completely demoralized. Once inawhile a soldier is murdered in cold blood by another soldier and that makes the regular news, but that's about it, as it should be. We don't hear about the infractions in an on-going and never-ending basis. Separation of military and not is a good thing, as well as separation of church and state. The military has it's own standards, laws, court system.

[wat0n]

Did anyone read Falk's report on Gaza? I did, and well, honestly I can't avoid thinking that he may have a point...

Here it is: http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/f0a9f3e9fad114d38525757e00628b1e!OpenDocument

[CLL1709]

You can thank Ha'aretz for drumming this one. Bradley Burston and Amira Hass


And Harel.

[CLL1709]

Today in the Tampa Tribune, compliments of the Associated Press, is a photo of a supposed IDF soldier, a graduate of the IDF sniper school, wearing a tee shirt with a pregnant Arab woman in the cross hairs of a scope, in English it reads "Two for One".

Where do you suppose that came from? I don't believe anything that comes from the international press.

I'am writing the Trib asking why there is no story of more importance regarding the 100 rockets and morter shells that have been fired at Israeli towns since the end of Operation Cast Iron, or whatever it was called.

[GratefulFred]

Posted by Grateful:

We will still be a democracy but we'll be a people with balls and act with conviction and stop being the mascocists the world demands of only us.

What is that supposed to mean exactly? Look, The Moment Israel will loose its Democracy, its freedoms and its openness Israel will LOOSE!!!! Israel's subjectivity is why Israel kicked buttes of all of its enemies both on the battlefield and on the political arena. If Israel looses its Democracy it will not loose to the outside but to its own self. Start hiding something one - you'll hide something else.

You should stop warring of what the rest of the world thinks of you and wary what you think of yourself. I personally like Haaretz as I like Jpost and whatever else is written in English, which I can read, and which has some good journalism. Unfortunately many in the outside world take information from Israeli media and use it against Israel .... especially those who want to do Israel harm. But that's part of the game. They do this to America, Denmark, France, Canada and every other normal nation. Hey, recently some good number of Canadians got pissed at FOX because some commentator said something very derogatory about Canada..... and it goes both ways.


Military censorship goes on at a much higher level in every other country. The IDF can and should investigate impropriaties and arrive at some conclusion. If it's in the public's best interest to disclose, than so be it. If it's a moral issue, they can work to improve it with no help fromthe outside world.

If we don't get F-35s; If we don't get refueling options; If our aid package gets diminished on of account of some houses we build in Jerusalem, because public opinion polls in the US find less support for our cause with each passing PR flop, is it more important that our news media give the world a camera's eye of Dimona's nuclear plant?

Today, page 11 of Yidiot Achronot 5 mentally retarded individuals became members of the IDF for full service because they wanted the opportunity and got their wish. Of course the UN would like to charge them for war crimes.

Our democracy isn't in danger of exploding because we have a military censor that starts doing it's job for a change.

[Mediocrates]

Today in the Tampa Tribune, compliments of the Associated Press, is a photo of a supposed IDF soldier, a graduate of the IDF sniper school, wearing a tee shirt with a pregnant Arab woman in the cross hairs of a scope, in English it reads "Two for One".

Where do you suppose that came from? I don't believe anything that comes from the international press.

I'am writing the Trib asking why there is no story of more importance regarding the 100 rockets and morter shells that have been fired at Israeli towns since the end of Operation Cast Iron, or whatever it was called.

Oh no that's real. Some troopers got them on their own.

[maven]

I'm thinking of a special concert in Pakistan entitled "In League With The Liberals" headlined by the Dixie Chicks and Bruce Springstein with Aki Nawaz of the UK punk group 'Fun-Da-Mental'.

All the Taliban would be invited and everyone would get a free 'George Bush Is The World's Leading Terrorist' poster on a stick and a free suicide vest. At the end of the concert they could all blow themselves up at the same time, cheaper than fireworks in that part of the world :D, and a good way to make a protest about "The US, UK and Israel's Illegal Wars".

They did'nt make it to the Eurovision song concert this year but this is the UK's top Muslim 'anti-war' rock group:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCFf3jDpRlI&feature=related

[Reffo]

At the end of the concert they could all blow themselves up at the same timeOoooops, the trees and the rocks might get upset :D

[Golem of Prague]

Did anyone read Falk's report on Gaza? I did, and well, honestly I can't avoid thinking that he may have a point...

Here it is: http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/f0a9f3e9fad114d38525757e00628b1e!OpenDocument
Falk's point is that because legally mandatory distinction between civilian and military targets can extremely difficult to impossible during large scale military operations in densely populated urban areas, it is unlawful to conduct such operations regardless of the reasons. The immediate corollary is that urban-based terrorism becomes a risk-free venture. Any terrorist group that chooses densely populated urban areas as its base of operations and a launching pad of its attacks is legally shielded from any retaliation, and can operate with total impunity. Military action against them is illegal, blockade is illega, economic sanctions are illegal- basically, you can't touch them.

[Yala]

Oh no that's real. Some troopers got them on their own.

How do you know? Have you seen it? Who knows who really printed these up or the real circumstances?

They are having a field day over @ HuffingtonPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/20/israeli-army-tshirts-mock_n_177574.html

[Reffo]

watOn

This is the rule that applies to what happened in Gaza:

To protect combatants or military objectives with human shields is unlawful. The crucial question is whether the brazen act of shielding a military target with civilians (albeit a war crime) can effectively tie the hands of the enemy by barring an attack. Article 51(8) of Protocol I states that a violation of the prohibition of shielding military objectives with civilians does not release the belligerent from it's legal obligation vis-a-vis the civilians. What this means that the principle of proportionality remains prevalent. However, even if that's the case, the actual test of excessive injury to civilians must be relaxed. That is to say, the appraisal whether civilian casualties are excessive in relation to the military advantages anticipated must make allowance for the fact that – if an attempt is made to shield military objectives with civilians – civilian casualties will be higher than usual.

The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=a88YJ7MuaMoC&pg=PA130&lpg=PA130&dq=%22The+presence+of+a+protected+person+may+not+b e+used+to+render+certain+points+or+areas+immune+fr om+military+operations.%22&source=web&ots=_jxNOLBCdX&sig=5NoryXbrKGFCwUV5JP-_7Csp0qI&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA131,M1)

[Mediocrates]

How do you know? Have you seen it? Who knows who really printed these up or the real circumstances?

They are having a field day over @ HuffingtonPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/20/israeli-army-tshirts-mock_n_177574.html


How do I know? As opposed to what? The army hands them out in their kit bags? Seriously?

[Djinn]

COGAT: 22.3.09 - HUMANITARIAN AID TO THE GAZA STRIP, WEEKLY AND CUMULATIVE FIGURES ....
Excellent info that I'd like to use on another forum. Can you provide a link for this data?

[Kenneth]

They did'nt make it to the Eurovision song concert this year but this is the UK's top Muslim 'anti-war' rock group:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCFf3jDpRlI&feature=related

That would be a slightly disturbing song if not for the use of the xylophone. They won me over no end.

[Mediocrates]

Excellent info that I'd like to use on another forum. Can you provide a link for this data?


http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=43210

[Djinn]

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=43210
Many thanks... but is there a site that's regularly updated with the previous week's aid report?

[Mediocrates]

Not that I know of, you might look at Israel's MFA.

[wat0n]

Falk's point is that because legally mandatory distinction between civilian and military targets can extremely difficult to impossible during large scale military operations in densely populated urban areas, it is unlawful to conduct such operations regardless of the reasons. The immediate corollary is that urban-based terrorism becomes a risk-free venture. Any terrorist group that chooses densely populated urban areas as its base of operations and a launching pad of its attacks is legally shielded from any retaliation, and can operate with total impunity. Military action against them is illegal, blockade is illega, economic sanctions are illegal- basically, you can't touch them.

watOn

This is the rule that applies to what happened in Gaza:



The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=a88YJ7MuaMoC&pg=PA130&lpg=PA130&dq=%22The+presence+of+a+protected+person+may+not+b e+used+to+render+certain+points+or+areas+immune+fr om+military+operations.%22&source=web&ots=_jxNOLBCdX&sig=5NoryXbrKGFCwUV5JP-_7Csp0qI&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA131,M1)

Yes I agree with both of you guys, I think that it's a matter of common sense that civilians will die during urban warfare. Yet, I think that he has a point on wether Israel (and Egypt too, he forgets that) did enouh to let civilians get the hell out of there or not. Of course one could argue that it's extremely difficult for Israel and Egypt to do that well because Gaza is so small that for doing that the blockade should be lifted and thousands of persons should be let into their territory - with the risks this entails. But, it is a valid concern...

I also think that he may have a point on how this was started, even though I'd like to read the study he quotes (I haven't been able to find it)... I mean, why did Israel attack Hamas on November 4 of 2008? Did Hamas or any other terorrist group launch rockets on Israel that day or on November the 3rd? Also, what about the study says on who started most clashes in the 2000-2008 period? Was it Israel 79% of times like the study says? Is there any other study contradicting these claims?

I consider myself a supporter of Israel (especially since the Gaza withdrawal), but this study that Falk quotes... Well it makes me reconsider things, you know. I still support Israel's right to exist, though, don't misunderstand me ;)

[Reffo]

I consider myself a supporter of Israel (especially since the Gaza withdrawal), but this study that Falk quotes... Well it makes me reconsider things, you know. I still support Israel's right to exist, though, don't misunderstand me ;) You have every right to question, no hard feelings about that .... but be careful about giving too much credence to some sources ...... in fact you should question them too and their motivations. You'd do well to do some background research about Richard Falk (I know I will) ..... as for the UN, here is an example about how some of them operate:
The United Nations' chief representative in Gaza, John Ging, has admitted that not only were no shells dropped on the UNRWA school for girls last month, but no one inside the school compound was killed. Three shells fell in the street outside; several people were hurt. But the UN forbade a teacher on the site from telling media representatives no one was killed, the Australian reports, and the worldwide press took up an anti-Israel cry of "War Crimes" in the immediate aftermath. Quoting The Globe and Mail,

Israel's War Crime -- Gaza School Shelling -- Wasn't (http://www.correntewire.com/israels_war_crime_gaza_school_shelling_wasnt)

Yes I agree with both of you guys, I think that it's a matter of common sense that civilians will die during urban warfare. Yet, I think that he has a point on wether Israel (and Egypt too, he forgets that) did enouh to let civilians get the hell out of there or not. Of course one could argue that it's extremely difficult for Israel and Egypt to do that well because Gaza is so small that for doing that the blockade should be lifted and thousands of persons should be let into their territory - with the risks this entails. But, it is a valid concern...Had Israel let Palestinian Arab civilians into it's own territory, it would have had to set up detention camps. And what do you think would have happened then? It would have been criticized for that. Moreover, what would that have accomplished? How would Israel prevent Hamas fighters from intermingling with civilians?

I also think that he may have a point on how this was started, even though I'd like to read the study he quotes (I haven't been able to find it)... I mean, why did Israel attack Hamas on November 4 of 2008?I don't know where he gets his news from but I recall that it was Hamas who refused to renew the cease fire and subsequently resumed it's rocket attacks. Israel then responded to that. If I were you, I'd google for some newspaper headlines, I'll try and get you some references..

As I said, don't believe every claim that some UN personnel make, many of them ceased to be impartial and they don't shy away from revising history, even very recent history...

Did Hamas or any other terorrist group launch rockets on Israel that day or on November the 3rd? Also, what about the study says on who started most clashes in the 2000-2008 period? Was it Israel 79% of times like the study says? Is there any other study contradicting these claims?They [Hamas] most certainly did .... even leftist newspapers reported it before operation Cast Led. I find this amazing. Israel's enemies are becoming more and more brazen in their revision of history, even as it happens...

I don't even understand why Israel would be motivated to discontinue the cease fire. What would Israel have to gain by that?

[Reffo]

watOn

You might be interested in this:
Hamas' political leader Khaled Meshal on Saturday said the Palestinian militant group would accept an Egyptian-mediated cease-fire with Israel but it would only be a "tactic" in the group's conflict with Israel.

"It is a tactic in conducting the struggle - It is normal for any resistance that operates in its people's interest... to sometimes escalate, other times retreat a bit," Meshal said in an interview with pan-Arab Al-Jazeera television.

Meshal: Hamas ready for truce, but only as 'tactic' (Haaretz 27/04/2008) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/977839.html)

And this:
Palestinian civilians have accused Hamas of forcing them to stay in homes from which gunmen shot at Israeli soldiers during the recent hostilities in Gaza, the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported Thursday.

Italian paper: Gazans say Hamas kept them in homes used by gunmen (Haaretz 22/1/2009) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057874.html)

[wat0n]

You have every right to question, no hard feelings about that .... but be careful about giving too much credence to some sources ...... in fact you should question them too and their motivations. You'd do well to do some background research about Richard Falk (I know I will) ..... as for the UN, here is an example about how some of them operate:


Israel's War Crime -- Gaza School Shelling -- Wasn't (http://www.correntewire.com/israels_war_crime_gaza_school_shelling_wasnt)

Yes, I know that Falk supported the Iranian Revolution (Wonder if he has changed his mind on that now that we know how that turned?)

I also remember the article regarding UNRWA backtracking its claim on the school incident.

I'm lookin at the argument rather than the source, and if the argument isn't valid, if this report Falk wrote isn't accurate (and it may be the case as he calls for an investigation on the war), I'd like to know what's the reality. What worries me the most is the study he quotes, it's quite recent (24 Jan 2009), and it presents a different version on who's to blame for the war (as far as I was concerned, it was Hamas because they didn't renew the truce on 19 Dec 2008 and also since the Second Intifada started Israeli attacks on the Palestinian Territories were an answer on terrorism and not the other way around, but the study (or Falk himself) say that Israel broke the truce when it attacked Hamas on November 4 and the study points out another story on who started most clashes since 2000... And now I don't know what to believe, honestly).

Had Israel let Palestinian Arab civilians into it's own territory, it would have had to set up detention camps. And what do you think would have happened then? It would have been criticized for that. Moreover, what would that have accomplished? How would Israel prevent Hamas fighters from intermingling with civilians?

Yeah that's true, that's why doing that is risky... Oh well I guess Israel and Egypt didn't have a choice.

I don't know where he gets his news from but I recall that it was Hamas who refused to renew the cease fire and subsequently resumed it's rocket attacks. Israel then responded to that. If I were you, I'd google for some newspaper headlines, I'll try and get you some references..

Yes, that's what I remember as well. But I don't remember how did things turn out on November 4, do you know if terrorists launched rockets from Gaza that day or the day before?

As I said, don't believe every claim that some UN personnel make, many of them ceased to be impartial and they don't shy away from revising history, even very recent history...

They [Hamas] most certainly did .... even leftist newspapers reported it before operation Cast Led. I find this amazing. Israel's enemies are becoming more and more brazen in their revision of history, even as it happens...

I don't even understand why Israel would be motivated to discontinue the cease fire. What would Israel have to gain by that?

Ummm I do remember that Hamas started to launch 30+ rockets from Gaza a day after Dec 19, and this of course prompted an Israeli reaction. But like I said, I don't remember if they launched rockets in early November, before Israel hit Hamas... They are claiming that Israel broke the truce because of this attack (even though I do remember that a little after the truce was signed terrorists were still launching rockets to Israel).

watOn

You might be interested in this:


Meshal: Hamas ready for truce, but only as 'tactic' (Haaretz 27/04/2008) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/977839.html)

And this:


Italian paper: Gazans say Hamas kept them in homes used by gunmen (Haaretz 22/1/2009) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057874.html)

Indeed, these guys from Hamas aren't to be trusted just like that. But, I think that we should still listen to their reasons/excuses (and if they are lying, show this to everyone). I also agree that there should be a probe on Hamas war crimes.

[Reffo]

Here is another Haaretz reference that outlines the situation in Gaza just before the cease fire was due to end. And remember: Haaretz is a leftist newspaper which has never been shy in slamming Israel whenever the opportunity presents itself ....

Meshal: Cease-fire ends this week (Haaretz December 16 2008) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1046509.html)

Gilad noted that Israel rejects Hamas' view that the truce is set to expire this Friday. The agreement reached last June included no expiration date, he insisted. The Egyptians previously supported Israel's interpretation.

Nevertheless, Gilad continued, Israel will support extending the truce only if Hamas once again enforces a complete cease-fire. In recent weeks, though it has largely refrained from firing at Israel itself, Hamas has allowed other Palestinian groups to do so almost daily. Yesterday, for instance, Palestinians fired one Qassam rocket and three mortar shells at the Negev, though none caused any casualties or damage.

If Hamas does not restore complete calm, Gilad warned, Israel will respond forcefully.

"There will be no unilateral fire from Gaza at Israel," Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office declared in a press statement. "If Hamas is interested in continuing the lull, it will be only on the terms of the original agreement" - meaning that Hamas must enforce the truce on other factions.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni echoed these sentiments at a meeting with her Austrian counterpart, saying: "All fire from Gaza will obligate us to respond so as to defend our citizens. We will not leave Gaza in Hamas' hands."

"If Hamas continues to foment terror from Gaza, Israel will act via the means at its disposal," she added, without elaborating.

[Reffo]

Here is an earlier Haaretz Article about truce violations:

IDF kills Hamas man in Gaza clash (Haaretz November 5 2008) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=1034307)

Israel Defense Forces troops yesterday killed a Hamas gunman and wounded two others in the first armed clash in the Gaza Strip since a cease-fire was declared there in June. One IDF soldier was lightly wounded in the exchange of fire.

An Israeli army spokeswoman said troops had entered the territory to destroy a tunnel that Gaza militants had dug under the border in order to try to abduct soldiers.........

At around the same time as the gunfight, six mortar shells were reportedly fired at Israel from Gaza, in yet another violation of the cease-fire.

"Qassam fighters are engaging in violent armed clashes with a Zionist (Israeli) force that raided east of central Gaza Strip," a Hamas statement said.
All I can say that I for one support whatever action that would prevent additional abductions of Israelis even if such action is deemed as a violation of cease fires which in any case is arguable .... Why? Because I don't want to see more Israeli families grieving for captive sons, fathers or brothers, one Shalit is enough and I don't care what ever Israel's enemies say about it ...

[wat0n]

Here is an earlier Haaretz Article about truce violations:

IDF kills Hamas man in Gaza clash (Haaretz November 5 2008) (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=1034307)


All I can say that I for one support whatever action that would prevent additional abductions of Israelis even if such action is deemed as a violation of cease fires which in any case is arguable .... Why? Because I don't want to see more Israeli families grieving for captive sons, fathers or brothers, one Shalit is enough and I don't care what ever Israel's enemies say about it ...

Thank you! This is what I wanted to know, if they were digging a tunnel in the Gaza border to get into Israel, then it's justified for Israel to stop it by force.

[Mediocrates]

MSM's Urban Myths

If you're not sure what to make of NY Times bureau chief Ethan Bronner (http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2009/03/29/now_he_tells_us.html) or The Guardian's media columnist Peter Wilby (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/mar/30/newspapers-pressandpublishing), see Dry Bones (http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2009/03/israeli-war-crimes.html) on big media's handling of so-called Israeli war crimes (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/War_Crimes_and_Shoddy_Journalism.asp) in Gaza.

[idfBEEP]

BBC News | Gaza soldier accounts 'hearsay' - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7972490.stm

[Golem of Prague]

The "war crimes" claims have now been definitively demolished by none other than Danny Zamir himself- the man who brought the soldiers' accounts to Haaretz- in his Jerusalem Post editorial: (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1238562926523&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

A number of articles published recently in The New York Times quoted or were based on words spoken by myself and by graduates of the pre-army leadership development program which I head (the "Rabin Mechina") - graduates who participated as combat soldiers in Operation Cast Lead and who met recently to process personal experiences from the battlefield.

Both explicitly and by insinuation, the articles claim a decline in the IDF's commitment to its moral code of conduct in combat, and moreover, that this decline stems from a specific increase in the prominence of religious soldiers and commanders in the IDF in general, and from the strengthening of the position of IDF Chief Rabbi Avichai Ronsky in particular.

It was as if the media were altogether so eager to find reason to criticize the IDF that they pounced on one discussion by nine soldiers who met after returning from the battlefield to share their experiences and subjective feelings with each other, using that one episode to draw conclusions that felt more like an indictment. Dogma replaced balance and led to a dangerous misunderstanding of the depth and complexity of Israeli reality. The individual accounts were never intended to serve as a basis for broad generalizations and summary conclusions by the media; they were published internally, intended for program graduates and their parents as a tool to be used in the process of educating and guiding the next generation.

I chose as well to submit the soldiers' accounts to the highest levels of the IDF, directly to the chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, out of my deep faith in the solid moral foundations of IDF policy and in complete confidence that the accounts would receive serious and thorough attention, including both investigation and corrective measures, if and when necessary. This faith was and is based on my personal experience of more than two decades - as a combat solider, a major in the IDF and as mentor for hundreds of the Rabin Mechina's graduates who are soldiers serving in combat units (active and reserve).

There are, to be sure, important political differences between myself as a social-democratic Zionist and Zionists of other political opinions. But there exists among us a very broad consensus regarding the moral character of combat - a moral character to which the IDF is committed and educates its soldiers, a character positively influenced by religious mechinot and by the special personal qualities of my colleague Rabbi Ronsky.

THE GUIDING principle that directs IDF combat soldiers, both in their planning and conduct in combat, encompasses a balance between two needs: to defend soldiers' lives and to minimize harm to the civilians behind whom terrorists try to hide. This is expressed in the tension between the necessity of opening fire when the soldiers' security and battle conditions require, even when there's a danger to civilians (providing advance warning to the extent possible), and the absolute obligation to hold fire and to act with due compassion toward civilians when it appears that they have no evil intent. In addition, basic respect toward civilians' belongings and their religious and spiritual property is part of this moral code.

These guidelines and the obligation to uphold them are an inseparable part of the Jewish-Zionist world of IDF soldiers, and deeply anchored in generations of Jewish heritage, particularly in the doctrine of military conduct renewed by the early socialist-Zionists a century ago. They called this principle by a name that's unlikely to have been given by any other nationalist movement fighting for its independence: "Purity of Arms" - that is, preventing harm to those not involved in or supporting the combat.

This moral commandment remains a central motto of the IDF; it is the complete opposite of the code of conduct of Islamist terror organizations such as Hamas, whose judgment on every Israeli and Jew is death. "Purity of arms" is not part of their world, not even in theory.

The outsider may not understand this, but we - the Jews of the State of Israel - live this every day, every hour.

In order to appreciate this moral code, one must note the context in which it operates. The State of Israel is under a prolonged attack by the Hamas movement - a fundamentalist Islamic terror movement, based on a racist and ultra-nationalist ideology that seeks the killing of Jews for being Jews and the actual elimination of the State of Israel as its declared aspiration, and formally part of its foundation platform. And bear in mind that Hamas is not a marginal extremist underground, but a movement freely chosen by the Palestinians to head their elected government.

Our war against an unrestrained terror organization that uses civilian populations as human shields in various ways, such as hospitals and masquerading as women and children, presents the IDF - an army obligated to an ethical code of combat based on humanism and international law - with almost impossible complexities. The nature of combat in complex conditions (such as in Gaza) brings with it difficulties and failures. The greatness of an army fighting under such conditions lies in its aspiring to "zero errors" and in its openness to examining its failures - finding them and fixing them.

IF IT'S possible to learn something from the real Israel - and not that which the media (including Israeli media) makes such efforts to portray - it would be from the uproar of emotions and the frank discussions that have taken place within Israeli society in the wake of the soldiers' accounts. It is out of their commitment to the moral code that the soldiers spoke and their accounts were submitted; purity of arms requires continuous examination of our actions and intentions.

"May our camp be pure." This is the watchword borne by my soldiers in the IDF, not only because this is how they've been educated by their commanders and their officers, but because this is the essence of their belief and their national heritage, a belief and heritage shared by and uniting us all: secular and religious, right and left, in the IDF and outside it. It is a source of pride and of confidence in our way, even in times of venomous attacks from every quarter - such as transforming a sensitive, personal discussion among combat soldiers back from the battlefield to mendacious claims of policies that involve so-called war crimes.

And so may it be.