Goldstone: "If I had known then what I know now..."

In 2009, Richard Goldstone led a fact-finding mission created by the UN Human Rights Council to investigate international human rights and humanitarian law violations related to the Gaza War. The mission's findings that Israel and Hamas had both committed serious violations of the laws of war led to a major controversy. You can find the whole report here on the UN site.

Today, it appears that Mr Goldstone is tempering that initial report. Last Friday, April 1, the Washington Post published an op/ed with Mr Goldstone's byline:

Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes

By Richard Goldstone, Friday, April 1,

We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.

The final report by the U.N. committee of independent experts — chaired by former New York judge Mary McGowan Davis — that followed up on the recommendations of the Goldstone Report has found that “Israel has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza” while “the de facto authorities (i.e., Hamas) have not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel.”

Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity” by both Israel and Hamas. That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.

The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

[...]

The purpose of the Goldstone Report was never to prove a foregone conclusion against Israel. I insisted on changing the original mandate adopted by the Human Rights Council, which was skewed against Israel. I have always been clear that Israel, like any other sovereign nation, has the right and obligation to defend itself and its citizens against attacks from abroad and within. Something that has not been recognized often enough is the fact that our report marked the first time illegal acts of terrorism from Hamas were being investigated and condemned by the United Nations. I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted....

There is much more, and it IS worth the read here.

I have written many times about Israel. For some of those columns go here, here, or here.

I found a YouTube video put out by the IDF on the historical background of what brought Israel to Operation Cast Lead. Go here to watch that and many other videos documenting the terrorist acts that Israel contends with every.single.day.

In response to Goldstone's op/ed, Israel National News had this to say:

Goldstone Recants: No Deliberate Targeting of Civillians by IDF

by Chana Ya'ar and Gavriel Queenann

"If I had known then what I know now," Judge Richard Goldstone wrote on Friday in The Washington Post. "The Goldstone Report would have been a different document."

"While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy," Goldstone wrote.

The comment marks the recanting by Goldstone, who chaired the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, of charges that Israel deliberately targeted civilians during Operation Cast Lead. The operation, which commenced on 27 December 2008 and concluded on 18 January 2009, was aimed at stopping terrorist rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli civilians in southern Israel. Most military observers regard the operation as having had only limited, short-term success.

[...]

...our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing."...

[...]

Netanyahu Responds

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has called on the United Nations to cancel the Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead following an op-ed piece written by the author of the report, retired South African Judge Richard Goldstone.

“Everything we said was proven to be true,” said Netanyahu. “Israel did not willfully harm civilians. Israel's investigating institutions are trustworthy, while Hamas investigated nothing.

“The fact that Goldstone withdrew his conclusions must lead to the cancellation of the report once and for all. We expect this farce to be rectified immediately."

Defense Minister Ehud Barak added that in order to repair the damage done by the report, the judge should present his current conclusions to all the international bodies to whom he presented the original report – and not merely give his opinion in an op-ed piece.

The IDF is “a moral army that operated according to international law,” Barak said.

( Read the rest here at IsraelNationalNews.com)

“The fact that Goldstone withdrew his conclusions must lead to the cancellation of the report once and for all. We expect this farce to be rectified immediately."

As noted above by Barak, enormous damage was inflicted on Israel because of this report, and it is NOW (long overdue) for the UN to reverse their rubber stamping of the ongoing antisemitism that is rampant - on a daily basis - not only in Gaza, but around the world. Of course, would be only fitting for the msm to also admit what lemmings they were, and ARE, in their rush to condemn Israel at every turn. Front page story, anyone?

Waiting...waiting.

Pay Cuts for our military?

Can this be true? From Newsmax:

Outrage: Obama Administration Targets Military for Pay Reductions

Sunday, 09 May 2010 11:27 PM

By: Newsmax Wires

President Barack Obama — who came to power with the help of government employee unions across the nation and has lavished on them hundreds of billions in stimulus funds to keep them on federal, state and local payrolls with no strings attached — is moving to cut spending on salaries for military personnel.

This weekend The Washington Post headlined story, "Pentagon Asking Congress to Hold Back on Generous Increases in Troop Pay,” disclosed that the Obama administration is “pleading” with Congress to give military personnel a much smaller increase in pay than lawmakers have proposed.

The Pentagon contends that Congress simply has been too generous with troops during the past decade.

In fact, lawmakers have lavished so much money on troops, according to the Post, that service members are now better compensated than workers in the private sector with similar experience and education levels.

For example, the military brass claims that an average sergeant in the Army with four years of service and one dependent would receive $52,589 in annual compensation, according to the paper. This figure includes basic pay, housing, and subsistence allowances, as well as tax benefits.

Meanwhile, a U.S. postal letter carrier, with no supervisory or hazardous duty, makes approximately $80,000 a year when all benefits are factored in...

To read more on this article, go here.

I have no idea what any of our troops earn, but whatever it is, it is not enough - in my humble opinion.

H/T Mike

"This just in"!!

Found this on Military.com:

Military Pay Raise of 1.9% Likely in 2011

May 12, 2010

Stars and Stripes|by Leo Shane III

WASHINGTON -- Lawmakers are poised to give servicemembers an extra boost in pay next year despite objections from the Defense Department over the long-term cost of the raise.

On Wednesday, the House Armed Services personnel subcommittee announced plans for a 1.9 percent pay raise next January, 0.5 percent above the target set by Pentagon planners in January. Defense officials had asked for a 1.4 percent raise based on anticipated private sector raises for 2011.

Check out Military.com's Pay Calculator

But Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif., said the extra money is needed to help close the ongoing gap between civilian paychecks and military wages. Congress has approved higher-than-civilian pay increases each of the last 12 years.

Lawmakers have said repeatedly that the additional pay raise is also needed to reward servicemembers and their families for the sacrifices during nine years of war and because of the strain placed on the force.

“I would challenge anyone to find a civilian job that has the same set of requirements and risks as those experienced by our military personnel,” said Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C. “For me, the assertion that personnel costs are crowding out the ability to fund other defense priorities should not be solved by asking military personnel to take less.”

Even with the extra boost, a 1.9 percent pay raise in 2011 would be the lowest since the start of the all-volunteer military in 1973. In 1988, Congress approved a 2.0 percent raise for servicemembers. This year, troops received a 3.4 percent bump in their pay....

More here.

A Disaster for the Women of Afghanistan

I have often shared stories about how our troops being in either Iraq or Afghanistan has changed the lives of women and girls for the better. Anybody who reads anything at all written by our boots on the ground MUST know of the new schools for girls; girls who attend those schools despite repeated attacks and intimidation by the thugs. I have also written about the women in Afghanistan who - albeit on a very small scale - are participating in the political process. At Blackfive, Grim has a piece up focusing on a letter from an Afghan woman that appeared in The Washington Post yesterday.

We all know that BO is waffling and wringing his hands, despite advice from his Generals who see the difference our troops are making on the ground. Villages emerging from under the oppressive boots of the Taliban; communities with running water, hospitals, roads. The list of accomplishments which better their lives is long. I have NO idea what it will take for BO to keep the promise the US, and the international community, made to the men, women and children of Afghanistan. I would love to see him go to Afghanistan and talk to the Afghanis who are impacted by his dithering. I would like him to see, firsthand, what is at stake as he now slithers from inaction to outright abandoning the decent families of Afghanistan. It seems that the military has been unable to impress the urgency of this mission on their C-in-C. The mealy-mouthed politicians (who also apparently know less than zero about the reality of Afghanistan as they preach "no more troops") ignore the global implications of their dangerously uninformed rhetoric.

We all know that in DC, partisanship is the name of the game they play. Meanwhile the realities of day to day living, with the tenuous buffer of coalition troops - for now, at least - are no mere rhetorical, academic game for the Afghan women. These incredibly brave women now must face the real possibly that future dreams of a life free of the historical brutality of the Taliban, will be ripped from their grasp.

From Blackfive:

A Disaster for the Women of Afghanistan

Posted By Grim

An added perspective on our debate, from an Afghan woman named Wazhma Frogh.

As an Afghan woman who for many years lived a life deprived of the most basic human rights, I find unbearable the thought of what will happen to the women of my country if it once again falls under the control of the insurgents and militants who now threaten it.

In 2001, when the war in Afghanistan began, the liberation of Afghan women was one of the most important justifications for military intervention. Has the world now changed its mind about Afghan women? Is it ready to let them once again be killed and tortured by militants? Does the world no longer believe in the principles it supported in 2001?...[emphasis mine]

What Wazhma Frogh cries from her heart, SHOULD rip out the heart of every decent westerner. It should. We all know that those hypocritical, lying politicians (of all stripes) really don't give a damn about all the Wazhma's of Afghanistan. These weasals choose to ignore the terrible implications - both within Afghanistan and globally - of walking away from the families of Aghanistan. IF the politicians in DC did give even a scintilla of a damn, there would not be any need for debate, the moral choice is so blatantly obvious.

Go now and read the excerpt of Wazhma's letter here, at Blackfive. Be sure to read the ongoing debate in the comments, too. Then, when you are done weeping for her, and for us, get angry. Get really angry and demand accountability, and action, NOW, from the politicians.

As I read somewhere long ago: Tears, without action are wasted. We know the politicians have shed no tears for the plight of the Afghan people. Let's at least demand they act before it is too late for all of us.