Israel

[Shahab3]

Goldstone's Gaza
Richard Goldstone's second thoughts only matter to those who have consistently defended an indefensible war.
MJ Rosenberg Last Modified: 04 Apr 2011 18:38

Goldstone revised only one of his original findings, saying that Israel did not intentionally kill hundreds of civilians [EPA]
Defenders of Israel's Gaza onslaught of 2008-9 can barely contain their joy. In a Washington Post op-ed on Friday, Judge Richard Goldstone offered some second thoughts about it that softened his earlier criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza as "war crimes".

In fact, Goldstone altered only one of his original findings. He now says that he has concluded that the Israeli Defense Forces did not intentionally target civilians during attacks in which 1,400 Palestinians died, of whom half were civilians and 400 were children. Rather they were collateral damage, not the intended targets but people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And this "exoneration" of Israel's behaviour has Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and their defenders in Israel and the United States crazily dancing in the end zone. You see, they shout, Goldstone lied all along. We didn't kill all these people on purpose. Hooray for us.

These celebrations tell us infinitely more about the Israeli government and its cutouts here than Goldstone's column does about what happened in Gaza.

Imagine if the United States government was forced to admit that it killed hundreds of innocent people in a few days and that hundreds of that number were kids. Does anyone imagine that our government would pat itself on the back because the killings were deemed unintentional?

No doubt, many many innocent people have been killed at American hands just as at Israel's in Gaza. But it is hard to recall American officials saying that the discovery that the deaths were unintentional exonerated us. As for victory laps such as those being taken by Netanyahu and Barak, they wouldn't happen here.
...

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/04/20114417579339638.html">http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 39638.html</a><!-- m -->