No MidEast Accomplishments? No surpise!

As all good bloggers are accustomed to doing, I have multiple methods of keeping track of the number of “hits” my postings receive. First, there is the stat-tracking on the blog’s host site. Second, there are the automatic notifications from the discussion boards on which I post links. Third, there is my friend Frank. Frank often tells me how bad (the term he often uses is “POS!”) such a particular piece was.

Recently, it seemed that a lot of older postings were receiving increased hits, and I wondered why. Perhaps the holiday season had caused them to reflect on the state of humanity? Could it be that people had suddenly taken an interest in world affairs? Or was it more likely that a string of terrorist attacks – I refuse to use the Obama administration’s epithet “extremists” – had jarred people of their “historical moment” infatuation with Barack Hussein Obama?

Had they suddenly realized what a terrible mistake they just might have made that fateful first Tuesday in November 2008? Yes, I think they are beginning to realize that.

BHO came to office with no real plan to govern. He had no idea how to fix the economy, no I idea how to fix America’s healthcare crisis, no idea how to stop global warming, and certainly not even a gram’s worth of sense as far as foreign policy is concerned.

Let’s be fair. No one really has an idea how to fix the economy; it has never been broken like this before. America’s healthcare system is a mess, but one that could easily be solved by eating at McDonald’s ten fewer times each week and exercising. The demise of the world’s economies has at least delayed the melting of the polar icecaps. However, the Middle East is more than the Arab-Israeli conflict.

President Obama’s simplistic reduction of the matter to one of Palestinian statehood obscures numerous problems. Oil wealth is not evenly distributed and the have’s are not sharing with the have-not’s. There is a burgeoning demographic crises, with the number of 18-24 year olds increasing. This demographic is the cannon-fodder for extremist movements. There is the conflict between Shi’ite and Sunni Islam, 14 centuries in the making. Arab, Persians and Turks have been fighting for dominance over the region for almost the same period of time.

I have tried numerous times to parse President Obama’s foreign policy vis-à-vis this region. Is he truly simplistic and naïve? Does he hold the view that the US cannot continue to act as the world’s policeman? Is he just trying to keep the lid on the pot? All of these explanations may be true; none of them may be. One certainty is, that after a year in office he has accomplished little, excepting reducing America’s standing with allies and bolstering the prestige of its enemies.

No to Palestine!

Chief Negotiator Saeb Erekat says the Palestinian Authority is making an effort to elicit international support for declaring statehood, Al-Ayyam newspaper reported Saturday, November 14th. According to Erekat, the PA intends to promote this issue in order to bring it for a vote at the UN Security Council. The Palestinians’ frustrations are understandable to a certain extent. The Oslo Peace process, begun in 1993, has not delivered to them the independent state that they want. This brings several questions to mind.

First, the Palestinians’ frustrations are largely of their own making. They have never negotiated in good faith, they have never recognized Israel as the legitimate expression of the Jewish People’s right to their own independent state, they have constantly resorted to violence at every opportunity, and their leadership continues to make statements regarding Palestinian plans to erase Israel from the map completely.

Second, the Oslo peace process specifically forbids the declaration of a Palestinian state without negotiations with Israel and a peace agreement with Israel. This latest ploy is just more evidence of the Palestinian leadership’s inability and unwillingness to abide by signed agreements. If a situation displeases them, they tear up past agreements and resort to terrorism and murder.

Third, Oslo does not guarantee a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. The 1967 borders are actually based on the armistice lines of 1949 between Jordan and Israel. Those lines were internationally recognized as a temporary accommodation based on the military situation on the time. The international community, Israel and Jordan accepted that the “Green Line” would eventually be replaced by a negotiated border acceptable to both sides.

“A Palestinian state cannot be established without a peace agreement,” Israeli President, Shimon Peres,  told reporters. He continued, “It’s impossible and it will not work. It’s unacceptable that they change their minds every day. Bitterness is not a policy.” Peres is right. The international community should take note of this, not just in regard to Palestinian issues, but also toward a host of other issues, such as: Iran’s nuclear proliferation; Saudi Arabia’s treatment of migrant workers and women; Pakistan’s sponsorship of terrorism against India; Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism in Gaza and Lebanon; and Sudan’s persecution of Christian and Animist tribes in southern Sudan.

The fact of the matter is that Islam as a whole is an aggressive, militaristic, racist religion incapable of interacting honestly or peacefully with other faiths. To give Islam one more platform (a Palestinian state) to wage global jihad is not just a mistake, it is a criminal act against western Judeo-Christian culture and society.

Just six more months?

Just six more months until US President Barack Obama’s misguided peace initiatives stop.  Why six months?  Mid-term elections in the US, that’s why.  Memorial Day weekend at the end of May 2010 will signal the start of the referendum on Obama’s presidency.

The Republican’s will pull out all the stops in order to maintain the balance in the Senate and trim the Democrats’ majority in the House of Representatives.  The GOP will certainly beknocking on a lot of Jewish doors in states like California, Florida, Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.  Large Jewish populations that have been less than thrilled with his feeble attempts to twist Israel’s arm while sucking up to demagogues, dictators and tyrants in the Arab world.

Democrats will need Obama on the campaign trail with them. They need to “rousing message of hope” to buy them one more precious term grazing at the public trough.  So, the Obaminator will have less time to spend bowing and scraping to Saudi Arabia, less time to hold Hosni Mubarak’s shaky hand, less time to play checkers with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  The consolation being that he’ll still be in the lime-light that he so dearly loves!

Call Abbas’s Bluff

Jerusalem Post reporter Khaled Abu Toameh wrote a piece that appeared in the paper’s on-line edition on November 8th entitled “Abbas’s big bluff” in which he analyzes Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to hold new presidential and parliamentary elections January 24th as one of his strangest moves since succeeding Yasser Arafat five years ago. It might seem strange, but actually, it is quite consistent with the character and quality of Palestinian leadership.

Simply stated, the Palestinian leadership is devoid of quality and utterly lacking in character. It is a cancer on the Palestinian people (who really don’t seem to care that they have a cancer), and on the Middle East.

This should come as no surprise to anyone. Fatah and Hamas, vying for leadership of this stillborn entity, are stocked from bottom to top with murderers, thugs, thieves and liars. Even the communist parties that ruled the USSR and its satellites during the Cold War could boast of competent technocrats. Perhaps with the exception of Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, the dictator who has driven one of the more prosperous countries of Africa into abject poverty and despair, there is not a less-skilled group of “leaders” in the world.

As Toameh points out, Hamas has already made it clear that it won’t participate in the elections. It has declared that it won’t allow the vote to take place in the Gaza Strip and would punish any Palestinian there who is involved. This shouldn’t surprise anyone, let alone Mahmoud Abbas. As far as Hamas is concerned, there was an election, they won, why bother having another?

If the elections take place as planned, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank will become even more politically estranged than they already are. As Hamas legislator, Salah Bardaweel explained: “Abbas will then become the mayor or governor of the West Bank.”

Abbas’s decision to call the new elections came after the Egyptians failed to broker an agreement between Hamas and Fatah. The two rival parties were supposed to sign a “reconciliation” accord in Cairo last month. Hamas backed out at the last minute: better to rule in Gaza than serve in Ramallah. Toameh states that Abbas would be best served by maintaining the status quo, which allows him at least to argue that he’s a democratically-elected president.

However, most educated people in the world have come to realize that “Arab democracy” is an oxymoron. Israeli politicians should stop their hand wringing and just tell Abbas: resign, go into retirement, and write your memoirs. We’ll handle things.

Never Mssing a Chance to Miss a Chance

There is an old saying, “Every people gets the leaders it deserves.” If this is true, one has to wonder what dark stain the Palestinians have on their political souls that have cursed them live with the so-called leadership of the PLO and Hamas. A quick examination reveals that they have followed murderers – plain and simple – murderers, and allowed themselves to be plundered by these so-called leaders.

The PLO – re-styled since the Oslo Accord of 1993 as the “Palestinian Authority” has had sixteen years to build a functioning government and state, but cannot even collect the garbage on time. The PLO’s princes of terror, ensconced in official positions and granting themselves titles as if they had already achieved their long-sought after state, have systematically looted foreign aid and ruined the economy of the West Bank. Hamas, on the other hand, has erased every sign of development, prosperity, hope and democracy from the area it controls, the Gaza Strip.

One certainly cannot say that the Palestinians are uninformed. Ironically, they enjoy a degree of freedom of the press unavailable to the rest of their Arab brethren. Hamas and the PLO operate rival cable television and radio networks that the average Palestinian has no trouble receiving. This, by the way, is thanks to the electricity that Israel supplies. The Palestinian Authority has failed to build a single power plant capable of supplying even the smallest village.

Likewise, Palestinians have access to dozens of newspapers. Each supports the position of one of the alphabet soup of political parties: DFLP, Hamas, PFLP, Fatah, etc. They even have access to Israeli and Jordanian newspapers on a daily basis, not to mention broadcasts from Israel and Jordan. It might be time-consuming to tease the facts out of the opinions, but this is a responsibility that a citizen – any citizen – must take upon himself: critical thinking. It cannot be delegated, subcontracted or outsourced.

Unfortunately, it would seem that critical thinking is not the Palestinian people’s strong suit. If it were, after sixteen years, one would think that they would reject the incompetence and plundering of the PLO. One would think that they would reject the murder and Islamizing (the two often go hand-in-hand), not to mention the international isolation, that Hamas has visited upon them.

People in East Germany, Romania, the Philippines and many other nations have risen up and forced out cruel despotic leaders. The Free World congratulated them, supported them and welcomed all these countries into the ranks of democratic nation-states. The Arab people, and the Palestinians in particular, seem to lack the moral courage to take it upon themselves and make the difficult decisions that come with liberty and self-governance.

Out of the Moral Swamp

Recently, I saw an article about an ad-hoc memorial that had sprung up near the site where a small child had been murdered. It was touching: flowers, teddy bears, candles, ribbons. I read the story about how the child had been abused for several years by her mother and a series of “boyfriends.”

People had been aware of the woman, who “kept to herself” or “changed jobs a lot” or “kept strange hours.” They were aware of different cars parked in front of the run-down house at the end of the block, of people coming and going at all hours. But they did nothing.

Now, they placed flowers, and teddy bears, and candles and ribbons.

What does it say about a society that stresses superficial mourning over positive moral action?  Could a phone call have saved this child’s life? What about a knock on the door? What if someone had tried to take this young woman and her child under their arm?

Gifts have great symbolic power. They show we care, that we understand, that we wish to give and share in all the occassions of life.  They also are a sad comment on the moral swamp we live in when left on a murder site.  Take a stand!  If someone is acting immorally or unethically, do not be afraid to tell that is the case.  To many people shrug and say, “It’s her/his life. What do you care?”  I care – there are too many teddy bears being sold for the wrong reason.

The Persian Abyss

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director, Mohamed ElBaradei, said on Wednesday, October 21, that he had given Iran, France, Russia and the United States a draft text of a deal for approval by this Friday to help allay concerns over Tehran’s nuclear program. Various diplomatic sources have been quoted off-the-record as saying that ElBaradei’s draft required Iran to send some 75% of its enriched uranium reserve abroad before the end of this year for conversion into fuel for a Tehran reactor producing medical isotopes. Iran’s representatives to the negotiations did not indicate if their government would sign-off on the proposal.

However, the day before Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran’s Foreign Minister, stated that his country would never abandon its “legal and obvious” right to nuclear technology and would not halt uranium enrichment. “The meetings with world powers and their behavior shows that Iran’s right to have peaceful nuclear technology has been accepted by them … Iran will never abandon its legal and obvious right,” Manouchehr Mottaki said. Whether Mottaki’s statement is part of Iran’s bargaining strategy – a kind of Good Cop / Bad Cop strategy – or reveals a deepening rift within the regime is a matter of spirited debate among Western analysts.

Iran’s stance vis-à-vis Western demands has moved incrementally over the last several months. Earlier this year the Iranian position was that there was nothing to negotiate. However, with increasing Western pressure – and the ongoing saber rattling in Israel – the Teheran regime’s position has softened somewhat. In early August, it became willing to “negotiate,” with the precondition that it would not accept any limitations on it nuclear programs.

There was the revelation in late-September that Iran had built a second clandestine uranium enrichment facility near the city of Qom. Catching the Iranians red-handed for the third time really didn’t surprise anyone in Washington, London, Paris, Moscow or Peking. One suspects that the Iranians were simply thrilled to have gotten away with as much subterfuge as they had for so long. It was just another episode in the game of nuclear cat-and-mouse.

Iran won a reprieve from harsher UN sanctions by agreeing on October 1 to inspections of a hidden nuclear site and to send low-enriched uranium abroad for further processing. That inspection is supposed to take place towards the end of this month. One school of thought is that the Iranians know they must allow this inspection to take place or another round of sanctions will be enacted, a much harsher round than the previous three.

This line of thinking theorizes that the Iranians know what the IAEA inspectors will find. The inspectors’ report will report that the Qom site violates past agreements, and the report will serve as a trigger for more sanctions. By agreeing to a deal now, Iran hopes to muffle the West’s response to the report, and then use stalling tactics to modify the terms of any deal that is reached.

Another school of thought states that the Iranian leadership is divided. The demonstrations and riots that followed the presidential elections in June shook the regime. Sanctions would be significant and further weaken the regime. Some also point to recent terrorist acts within Iran as proof that the regime is faltering. However, these analysts are for the most part the same ones that eschew military action in favor of diplomatic actions.

The truth of the matter is that the regime in Teheran has a tight grip on all the levers of power in the country.

• While the demonstrations and riots were indeed an embarrassment, they were crushed in short order.
• The economy has been in poor shape for many years; it is unlikely that any additional erosion is likely to cause a mass uprising, especially with the lessons of June-July fresh in the public memory.
• Finally, the Teheran regime has lived with a small level of violent resistance for its entire 30 years in power.

It fears an Israeli/Western military strike far more than it does a few hundred guerrilla fighters in far-off Baluchistan province. By Friday morning, the Iranians were already backing away from the proposal.

Another Word on the Goldstone Report

Churchill – Hero or War Criminal?
There is an old canard that goes, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” The Goldstone report took this to absurd levels. Now, it appears that “Terrorist attacks are legitimate, but defending your country makes you a war criminal!”

After London was relentlessly bombed during the days and nights of WWII, Winston Churchill instructed the Royal Air Force to practically wipe out a number of European cities that were considered German strongholds. The US Air Force also participated in these raids. One of these air raids, on Dresden in early 1945, killed 90,000 people in three days. Military historians are divided on whether these raids actually had a strategic impact on Germany’s ability to wage war.

Was Churchill a war criminal? Richard Goldstone might think so, but to the Americans, British and other Allies, he was a hero.

Public norms and laws changed, and with the end of WWII, the international community rewrote the laws of war. In an attempt to protect civilians, the Geneva Conventions and subsequent protocols categorized people in conflict as combatants or non-combatants, with the latter designated as immune to attack. That categorization may have been fitting for WWII but it does not adequately address the realities of modern day asymmetric warfare, where terror groups such as Hamas and al-Qaeda intentionally target civilians and take cover behind other civilians.

International Law – for who?
Based on what the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) calls International Humanitarian Law, the assumption of Goldstone’s Report is that a clear differentiation was not made between civilian and military targets; even when the civilian population is sympathetic to and involved with the enemy and is used, willingly or not, as shields, the IDF has no right to attack. Based on this interpretation, US & allied troops in Afghanistan and Iraq have no right to attack Al Qaeda, Taliban and other Muslim fundamentalist terrorist groups. In other words, the recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, US President Barack Obama, is a war criminal.

According to the ICRC, Article 51 of the UN Charter does not allow Israel to act in self-defense against terrorists because “they are not a state but organized individuals among the population it occupies.” Terrorists, according to this interpretation, may be “criminals – (but) not military targets,” unless they are directly engaged in carrying out a terrorist act at the time; if not, they should be arrested and are entitled to due process in courts of law.

The US suggests an additional category, ‘Unlawful Combatants’, be added to the Geneva Convention. America has been using this rubric to cover hundreds, at times thousands, of Al Qaeda and Taliban forces it has captured – primarily in Afghanistan, but also in other countries – during its eight-year battle against Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. Unfortunately, those who drafted the recent report concerning the battle in Gaza have yet to adopt that categorization.

Goldstone: Guilty of Moral Turpitude & Cowardice
Another terminological and moral reason for the distorted findings of the UN report is the misperceived premise held by Goldstone and his team that the lives of IDF combatants and Israeli citizens are of less value than the lives of Hamas terrorists and collaborators. In a not-so-speculative scenario where a residential building located in enemy controlled territory (i.e. Gaza) is occupied by scores of terrorists (i.e. Hamas) that target civilians (i.e. Sderot), the correct course of action in Goldstone’s book would be to either let Hamas continue its terrorist attacks or to put IDF combatants under unreasonable risk.

Goldstone would send his military force of blue-helmeted UN peacekeepers into the Hamas-controlled compound with forms, rubber stamps and fingerprint kits, in an effort to differentiate between heavily armed terrorists, their collaborators and their reluctant neighbors.

Anyone who lives in Israel or a country with a socialist history can easily imagine the scene: a large waiting room, fold-up chairs, a pensioner standing at the door handling out numbers, dozens of bored clerks absent mindedly reviewing forms with non-sense categories such as “Full-time Terrorist,” “Part-time Terrorist,” “Terrorist Trainee,” “Terrorist Sympathizer,” “Collaborator,” “Spectator” (reserved for the global media community) and “Interested Bystander.”

Reality Check
As for the battle itself, never before were civilians alerted to danger by the attacking force more often than in the Gaza campaign. The IDF warned the civilian population of imminent attacks and instructed them time and again via flyers dispersed over homes, as well as thousands of text messages insisting that they get out of harm’s way. Israel took all the reasonable and at times unreasonable precautions to spare civilian life.

Gaza is one of the most densely populated places on earth with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics estimating 1.5 million inhabitants on Gaza’s 139 sq. mile area. Hamas makes use of that civilian population as human shields. That is no secret. If the IDF would have “intentionally killed” civilians like Goldstone’s report would like us to believe, there would have been tens of thousands killed.

Both Hamas and Israel have prepared separate reports detailing the casualties. Hamas claims that 80% were civilian; Israel claims that 80% were combatants. The reader is free to believe whomever or neither. However, bear in mind the 12,000 rockets and mortars fired at Israel over eight years and film footage of Hamas terrorists using children as human shields, and storing weapons and ammunition in schools and hospitals.

Goldstone has recently backpedaled on the report’s findings. Although it states that Israel “violated the prohibition under customary international law”, in a recent interview to The Jewish Daily Forward, Goldstone acknowledged that the report is limited and if it were presented in “a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.” Goldstone belatedly added that he himself “wouldn’t consider it in any way embarrassing if many of the allegations turn out to be disproved.” In other words, he knows or at least suspects that he was lied to, but wrote down the lies anyway. In addition to being a moral coward, that makes him a stooge.

Final note
This posting borrows heavily from the following writers:
Ophir Falk, “Was Churchill a War Criminal,” Ynetnews.com, October 17, 2009.
Moshe Dann, “Guilty without Trial,” Ynetnews.com, October 17, 2009.

And recent press releases from the Prime Minister’s cabinet meetings and speeches by Deputy FM Ayalon.

1st Prize for Good Intentions

It would seem that the Nobel Peace Prize is now awarded for lofty intentions, not real achievements. Personally, I am deeply disappointed at not having won the prize for literature, but I still have high hopes of landing a Pulitzer later this year. Since nominations closed only 12 days after Obama took office, it is doubtful that this year’s recipient knew his way from the Oval Office to the bathroom in the West Wing residence, let alone where Chechnya, Darfur, East Jerusalem, Tibet or a dozen other places embroiled by conflict and war actually are located.

Writing for the Washington Post, Dan Balz said there was amazement that the award had gone to “a president still in his first year in office with no major accomplishments internationally”. Or domestically, he could have easily added.

The New York Times called it a “mixed blessing” for Obama that highlighted “the gap between the ambitious promise of his words and his accomplishments”. The Times went on to say that the award further demonstrated that Obama was still celebrated as the “anti-Bush” while in fact he had not shifted as much as he once implied he would from the previous administration’s national security policies. In other words, torture = bad, but occasionally useful.

In China the unofficial Beijing News called it “an award of encouragement”. The paper said the Nobel jury’s decision was more “symbolic” than anything else, and that it was “very clear that Obama’s ‘feats’ are still purely verbal and it will be very difficult to implement them”. In a related development, the Mao Tse-tung Elementary school is Xiandong Province awarded him the prestigious “Red Star of the Revolution” for his essay, “How I spent my Summer Vacation Alienating my Capitalist Allies.”

In Japan, the mass-circulation Yomiuri Shimbun saying it was “an important task for him to achieve fruitful results from now on”. The Asahi Shimbun stated: “Tough issues are mounting. It is still unknown if (he) can show achievement.” The paper speculated that soon Obama would arrive in Japan to deal with the North Korean nuclear threat, stop the on-going struggle between Godzilla and Mothra, then deal with the rising cost of baby dolphin fillets.

The Jakarta Globe in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, called the US leader an “extraordinary person”. “He leads by projecting values and attitudes that are shared by decent people in every corner of the world,” with the exception of Indonesia it said. “We hope the Nobel Peace Prize will encourage him to continue to work for peace, no matter how difficult the road ahead.” Below the fold, the paper reported that an international lumber company had cleared 100,000 acres of tropical forest, thus further reducing the planet’s eco-diversity.

Next week there are plans for Obama and Reverend Jeremiah Wright to announce the long-anticipated beginning of the Rapture.

Indict Godstone Now!

Richard Goldstone is guilty of a moral crime. Not against the State of Israel or the Jewish People – although there is enough evidence to support a charge like that – but against human rights! Goldstone willingly took up a loathsome role that others had the good sense to reject.  Goldstone sold his soul and his integrity, and for what?  He has foisted an endless series of lies on a world already burdened with too much falsehood.  Goldstone – like Winston Smith in George Orwell’s Ninety Eighty-Four – rewrites history and spews forth lies in service of hatred: about Hamas ideology, its history of terrorist acts, and its persecution of the Palestinian people themselves.

As in other cases where radical Islam grows, most of Hamas’s victims since Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza have been Muslims. Hamas’s rockets, suicide terrorists, abductions and military operations do not stem from the occupation or the blockade, as the Goldstone Mission either claims.  Even during Operation Cast Lead, Hamas killed more Palestinians than it did Israelis.  Of course, Goldstone, this great humanist, does not mention of Hamas’s internal terrorism against innocent Palestinians.  Why is he silent on this matter?  Because he’s been bought and paid for, like a cheap suit.

In a perfect world there would be no war.  However, as we all know, we live in a less than perfect world. There are conflicts.  When faced with the necessity to take up arms and defend one’s home, family and way of life, does one toss his or her moral code aside and do “whatever necessary” to win?  No, this would diminish to a degree the value of those things for which one is fighting.  However, Israel certainly raised the moral bar in how such a conflict should be conducted.

Goldstone condemns Israel for imposing a blockade, but fails to explain why the blockade was imposed in the first place. Did Israelis wake up one morning and collectively say, “Just for kicks, let’s blockade Gaza and see what happens!  It’ll be a hoot!”  Of course not.  The blockade was imposed out of necessity.

It was imposed because Islamic terrorists had violently seized control of the Gaza Strip. They Islamicized all the institutions of civil society; curtailed freedom of the press; imprisoned their opponents – when they weren’t actually brutally executing them, that is.  Day after day, they impose more and more restrictions on every human being in Gaza.  Even the most right-wing Israelis never dreamed of doing the things that Hamas does to its own people on a daily basis.  Goldstone is silent on Hamas’ crimes!

Goldstone insists on blaming Israel. In Article 28 of his “report,” he simplistically determines that Israel is the occupying power.  Of course this ignores the fact that Israel completely withdrew from the Gaza Strip several years ago!  The facts – the truth – are not something to be considered in his single-minded goal of harming Israel.  For this self-serving collaborator, facts and truth are only so many gnats to be shooed away with a wave of the hand.

Amnesty International (hardly a friend of Israel) reported a series of incidents in which Hamas eliminated, i.e., murdered, dozens of Fatah members in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead.  Not surprisingly, not a single word of this report is cited by Goldstone.  Of course not – the goal was not to objectively analyze the conflict, but to demonize Israel.

Space is too short to detail the parade of lies known as “the Goldstone Report.” Goldstone, has chosen to collaborate with evil.  The deeper one digs into the report, the more it becomes clear that Goldstone is the criminal hiding under the umbrella of human rights.  On behalf of human rights, he and his lies must be exposed.  Israel’s Ministry of Justice should indict him for giving material support to a terrorist organization and demand his extradition to face trial!