Lieberman and Livni Join Forces to Change Government System

Israel Beitainu and the Kadima Party are collaborating to promote a governmental revolution. Both parties have agreed to formulate an initiative that will strengthen the position of Prime Minister and increase government stability.

Mia Bengal & Mairav David | 6/10/2009

Earlier this week, Foreign Minister and Chairman of Israel Beitainu Party, Avigdor Lieberman, met with the Chairman of Kadima Council, Haim Ramon, who was sent on behalf of Party Chairman Tzipi Livni.

Both agreed that Israel Beitainu and Kadima Parties will work together towards electoral reform with the beginning of the new Knesset’s winter session after the holidays. They will try to engage the help of Ministers and Knesset members from other factions, including Labor and Likud.

The goal is to create an electoral reform bill in the current term of the Knesset and recruit a majority of 61 MK to vote in favor of it.

This “goal” has a better chance than ever before. Kadima is the largest faction in the Knesset (28 seats) and together with Israel Beitainu (15 seats), they have a total of 43 Knesset members to support the proposal.

Lieberman, Livni, and Ramon intend to work with the members of the Labor Party (13 seats) and the Likud to enlist their support of this initiative. If they succeed, the target of 61 Knesset members is possible.

During the last election campaign, both Kadima and Israel Beitainu emphasized “changing the system of government” as their platform. Though they have collaborated in the past when both were partners in the coalition, now their cooperation is even more meaningful because Israel Beitainu is in the Coalition, but Kadima is the largest opposition party.

“We agreed that the current system is bankrupt and causes instability,” said Ramon. “We will formulate a joint bill and will recruit members from the Labor and Likud Party.

Above,  was a press article from Maariv Newspaper illuminating the ”fruits” of CECI’s efforts.  We are happy and proud to share this important news.

To review the complete article, please click here:

http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART1/950/399.html

Statement by Richard Goldstone on behalf of the Members of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict before the Human Rights Council

Human Rights Council 12^th Session – 29 September 2009

Check against delivery

Mr. President,

(Madame High Commissioner)

members of the Council,

ladies and gentlemen

My colleagues and I are here today to present to the Council the final report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.

Since the release of the advance version of the report two weeks ago, we have witnessed many attestations of support, but also a barrage of criticism towards our findings as well as public attacks against the Members of the Mission.

We will not address these attacks as we believe that the answers to those who have criticised us are in the findings of the report.

I have, however, to strongly reject one major accusation levelled against the Mission; the one that portrays our efforts as being politically motivated.

Let me repeat before this Council what I have already stated on many occasions:

We accepted this Mission because we believe deeply in the rule of law, humanitarian law, human rights, and the principle that in armed conflict civilians should to the greatest extent possible be protected from harm.

We accepted with the conviction that pursuing justice is essential and that no state or armed group should be above the law. Failing to pursue justice for serious violations during any conflict will have a deeply corrosive effect on international justice.

We accepted out of a deep concern for the hundreds of civilians who needlessly died and those who suffered injury and dislocation of their lives.

We accepted because we believe that the perpetrators of serious violations must be held to account.

We do not claim to be immune from error. After the release of the report we have received a number of comments from people who are sincerely interested in the truth.

We have considered them and where relevant redressed inaccuracies in the final version of the report which is today before you.

We regret that the response to date of the Government of Israel avoids dealing with the substance of the report.

Mr. President

As you all know, the Mission was established in April of this year with the mandate to investigate “all violations of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza from 27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009, whether before during or after”.

Ambassador Uhomoibhi and I announced the establishment of the team at a press conference in April and he brought the mandate of the Mission before this Council in June.

The mandate of the mission was to look at all parties: Israel; the Palestinian Authority; Hamas, which governs Gaza; and armed Palestinian groups.

Soon after its establishment the Mission was faced with one of its major challenges: the decision of the Government of Israel not to cooperate with it and its implicit refusal to give us access to Gaza, the West Bank and to southern Israel.

We decided not to allow this lack of cooperation to prevent the Mission from discharging its mandate.

The Mission is grateful to the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt for having facilitated its entry into Gaza through the Rafah crossing.

The Mission also wishes to express its gratitude to many, without whose assistance its task would have been impossible to fulfil.

It would be difficult to name all of them here. We attempt to do so in the acknowledgement section of the report.

We wish, however, to pay our respect to the many civil society organisations, in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Israel and elsewhere, which – often under difficult and challenging circumstances – continue to play a crucial role in upholding the universal principles of human rights.

We would respectfully suggest that this Council should recognize and support these organizations.

The first field visit by the Mission Members was conducted in the Gaza Strip from 1-5 June 2009, during which we held meetings, conducted interviews with victims and witnesses and visited the sites of incidents.

The Members of the Mission were in Gaza again from 26 June to 1 July, during which time we continued our investigations and held the Mission’s first round of public hearings. Mission staff maintained a presence in Gaza until early July.

Members of the Mission also travelled to Amman, Jordan, from 1 to 4 July to interview witnesses and meet with people and organizations from Israel and the West Bank.

As part of its investigation process, the Mission held a second set of public hearings. In the two rounds of public hearings, 38 witnesses, victims and experts gave testimony.

The aim of holding the hearings publicly was to give a voice to those who had direct experiences and expertise that related to the mandate of the Mission.

The Mission reviewed reports produced by various organizations and institutions as well as submissions on matters of fact and law relevant to its inquiry.

The Mission consulted with a wide range of interlocutors. They included victims and witnesses, Palestinian, Israeli and international NGOs, United Nations and other international organizations, community organizations, human rights defenders, medical and other professionals, legal and military experts, authorities and other sources of reliable information relevant to the Mission’s mandate. These interlocutors were both within and outside Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory.

The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews, reviewed over 10 000 pages of documentation and viewed some 1200 photographs, including satellite imagery and video-tapes.

The Mission was supported by an outstanding Secretariat provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).   We are grateful to the High Commissioner for providing this support, without which the Mission could not have carried out its mandate.

In making findings of fact, we relied primarily on our own evaluation of the people who spoke to us and from what we saw with our own eyes.

We relied on reports from others where they corroborated the views we had formed.

The exception to that approach was in respect of some facts relating to the West Bank and to Israel in light of the refusal by the Israeli Government to allow us into Israel or to visit the West Bank.

On 15 September the Mission released an advance version of its report.

Mr. President

Members of the Council

Our report is before this Council for its consideration.  Allow us, however, to focus the Council’s attention on a number of points.

Let me immediately say that the report reflects the unanimous views of all four of its members.

For practical reasons, the Mission decided for the most part to restrict its fact finding to the period from 16 June 2008 to 31 July 2009. The 16th June 2008 was the date on which a cease fire between Israel and Hamas came into effect.

The Report contains an analysis of 36 specific incidents in Gaza as well as a number on the West Bank and in Israel.

In Chapter XI of the Report, for example we detail a number of specific incidents in which Israeli forces launched direct attacks against civilians with lethal consequences. These were, with only one exception, where the facts establish that there was no military objective or advantage that could justify the attacks.

You will find details of the other 35 incidents in the Report. Some of them relate to the use by the Israel Defense Forces of human shields in violation of an earlier ruling by the Israel Supreme Court outlawing such conduct.

The Mission investigated in some detail the effects on the civilian population in Southern Israel of the sustained rocket and mortar attacks from Palestinian armed groups in Gaza. We detail the suffering of victims and the highly prejudicial effects of these acts on the towns and cities that fall within the range of the rockets and mortars.

The Mission decided that in order to understand the effect of the Israeli military operations on the infrastructure and economy of Gaza, and especially its food supplies, it was necessary to have regard to the effects of the blockade that Israel has imposed on the Gaza Strip for some years and has been tightened since Hamas became the controlling authority of Gaza.

The Mission found that the attack on the only remaining flour producing factory, the destruction of a large part of the Gaza egg production, the bulldozing of huge tracts of agricultural land, and the bombing of some two hundred industrial facilities, could not on any basis be justified on military grounds. Those attacks had nothing whatever to do with the firing of rockets and mortars at Israel.

The Mission looked closely and sets out in the Report statements made by Israeli political and military leaders in which they stated in clear terms that they would hit at the “Hamas infrastructure”.

If “infrastructure” were to be understood in that way and become a justifiable military objective, it would completely subvert the whole purpose of IHL built up over the last 100 years and more. It would make civilians and civilian buildings justifiable targets.

These attacks amounted to reprisals and collective punishment and constitute war crimes.

The Government of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens. That in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli Government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future.

Finally, the teaching of hate and dehumanization by each side against the other contributes to the destabilization of the whole region.

Mr. President

Members of the Council

Let me come to some of the recommendations.

The Mission debated long and hard on whether this was a case, like Darfur, where the Security Council should consider referring the situation both in Israel and Gaza to the International Criminal Court.

The Mission is highly critical of the pusillanimous efforts by Israel to investigate alleged violations of international law and the complete failure by the Gaza authorities to do so in respect of the armed groups. That notwithstanding the Mission came to the conclusion that both Israel and the Gaza Authorities have the ability to conduct open and transparent investigations and launch appropriate prosecutions if they decide to do so.

We therefore recommended that the Security Council should require Israel to report to it within six months, on the investigations and prosecutions it is carrying out with regard to the violations referred to in this Report and any others that may come to its attention.

The Mission recommends further that the Security Council should set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of the Israeli investigations and prosecutions. The committee of experts should similarly report on investigations and prosecutions undertaken by the relevant authorities in Gaza with regard to crimes committed by the Palestinian armed groups.

In both cases, if within the six month period there are no good faith investigations conforming to international standards, the Security Council should refer the situation or situations to the ICC Prosecutor.

The Mission was concerned at the use made by the Israeli army of certain munitions and especially white phosphorous, flechettes and certain heavy metals such as tungsten. Their use is not presently banned by international law.

The Mission has recommended that the General Assembly should promote an urgent discussion on the future legality of the use of these munitions.

As appears from the Report the manner in which those munitions were used in Gaza caused unacceptable and unnecessary human suffering as well as environmental damage – not only in Gaza but probably also in southern Israel. The situations arising from the latter should be monitored by the United Nations.

Since the issue of the advance copy of the Report it has been rejected in vehement terms by the Government of Israel. The call for transparent investigations has been rejected. The Government of Israel wishes to restrict its investigations to secret inquiries by the Military investigating itself. That would clearly not satisfy the legitimate expectations of the many victims of the Israeli military operations.

A word about accountability. It has been my experience in many regions of the world, including my own country, South Africa, that peace and reconciliation depend, to a great extent, upon public acknowledgement of what victims suffer. That applies no less in the Middle East. It is a pre-requisite to the beginning of the healing and meaningful peace process.

The truth and accountability are also essential to prevent ascribing collective guilt to a people. Many people in Gaza deplore the firing of thousands of rockets at civilians in Southern Israel and the terror that it has caused to innocent children, women and men. And many in Israel, Jews and Palestinians, deplore the actions by the Israel Defense Force that caused unjustifiable civilian deaths and injuries on a very large scale. They do not approve of the damage to the food and commercial infrastructure of Gaza that will take many years to repair.

Support for many of the recommendations contained in the Report has come from Gaza, the West Bank and Israel.

People of the region should not be demonized. Rather their common humanity should be emphasized.

It is for this reason that the Mission came to the conclusion that it is accountability above all that is called for in the aftermath of the regrettable violence that has caused so much misery for so many.

The Mission calls upon the HRC to accept the Report and adopt its recommendations.

Mr. President

Now is the time for action.

A culture of impunity in the region has existed for too long.

The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point; the ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence. Time and again, experience has taught us that overlooking justice only leads to increased conflict and violence.

In conclusion, may I say that the Mission hopes that the substance of this report will be used to strengthen initiatives for peace in the region. The mission is convinced that the international community must confront the realities highlighted in this report and that by doing so find a meaningful basis for the pursuit of peace and security for all the people of the region. Only in that way will the human dignity and security of these people be realised.

By appointing this Fact Finding Mission, the Human Rights Council raised expectations for action and for justice: we call on the Council and on the international community as a whole to take up our recommendations so those expectations will not have been raised in vain.

Thank you.

Geneva, 29 September 2009

Part 2 of an open response to Judge Goldstone and members of the Mission
re the Report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict

From Maurice Ostroff September 22, 2009

Dear Judge Goldstone,

Human Shields, Dehumanization and the methodology

Having read more of the Mission’s report since sending part 1, I respectfully suggest that it is incomplete and requires substantial editing and even revision before it can be accepted by the HRC.

May I hope that as a conscientious human being and eminent jurist you will seriously consider the factors I enumerate below and accept that mistakes can be made by even the most well-intended persons? Because of the immense serious consequences of your report and the likelihood that existential decisions will be made based on its conclusions may I urge you to recall the report for further critical examination for the following reasons?

In part 1 I dealt extensively with available evidence that has been ignored and I reiterate that even if your mission disagrees with the credible evidence presented by authorities like Colonel Kemp and the fifteen eminent Australian lawyers, their views nevertheless deserve to be seriously considered and dealt with in detail. So too, the facts contained in the video memoranda sent to you deserve to be investigated and reported on. These matters are much more worthy of consideration than some of the insignificant items that have received undue attention and taken up pages in the report.

At the very least, in the interests of transparency, the HRC and the public should not be deprived of the opportunity to evaluate the above information.

As it stands at present, the report perhaps fulfils the narrow mandate prescribed in OP14 of resolution S/9-1, which you criticized for its lack of balance, but it blatantly contradicts the worthy amendments to the resolution that you told us had been accepted. Below are a few examples of the many deficiencies that need to be corrected before the report can be considered as constructive and worthy of consideration.

Human Shields. Paragraph 475 of the report states briefly that the Mission is aware of the public statement by Mr. Fathi Hammad, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, “which is adduced as evidence of Hamas� use of human shields”.

It is not clear what the word “adduced” means in this context. One must wonder at the reluctance to state unambiguously that Mr. Hammad declared proudly that the Palestinians use human shields as he did.

Although Mr. Hammad’s exact words can be heard and read in translation in the video sent to you, your report states, “Mr. Hammad reportedly (the emphasis is mine) stated that the Palestinian people has developed its [methods] of death seeking. For the Palestinian people, death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the mujahideen excel and the children excel. Accordingly, .. and here the UN report stops short.

The next sentence in the video clip which is evidently intentionally omitted in your report is the operative one. Mr Hammad went on to say. “This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly and the mujahideen.. ”

The inference that this sentence was deliberately omitted to hide the evidence of the use of human shields by Palestinians is strengthened by Paragraph 481 which states “..While reports reviewed by the Mission credibly indicate that members of Palestinian armed groups were not always dressed in a way that distinguished them from civilians, the Mission found no evidence that Palestinian combatants mingled with the civilian population with the intention of shielding themselves from attack”.

Surely the HRC must insist that the authors explain the contradiction between paragraphs 475 and 481 as well as the actual content of the video clip.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx-CW3UKoIg&feature=related and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLFAJK5LtwY .

Dehumanization. During an interview on Al Jazeera TV, you emphasized that dehumanization of the other is the essential factor leading to horrific acts like genocide. It is therefore astonishing that this report ignores the daily incitement against Infidels, Jews and Israel that continues unabated in PA mosques and schools, contrary to the Oslo agreements and the 2003 Roadmap and strangely refers only to supposed dehumanization of Palestinians by Israelis. It states for example “graffiti left on the walls in Gaza, the obscenities and often racist slogans all constituted an overall image of humiliation and dehumanization of the Palestinian population.”

The Mission failed in its fact-finding obligation by depriving itself of important credible information in ignoring my recommendation to invite evidence from Palestinian Media Watch and Memri, two organizations that document Palestinian incitement. It ignored evidence of dehumanization of Jews that had been drawn to the attention of the Mission e.g, In the At Al Omari mosque, the imam refers to Jews as “the brothers of apes and pigs” and the video presentation in which a three year old is taught that Jews are the sons of pigs and apes as well as a school class taught to strive for martyrdom by killing as many Jews as possible. If the members of your mission were not inclined to express horror, surely they were duty bound to at least mention in the report, the likely effect of this indoctrination of children? Or do they consider the indoctrination justified?

The Mission also completely ignored a recent PA TV broadcast of an event in which the savage murder and mutilation of two Israelis by a frenzied mob of Palestinians was celebrated and lauded as an example of national pride and duty. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEqeKdjJto0

It is surprising that your report fails to recommend appropriate action against Hamas and the PA in terms of article 3 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which provides that incitement to commit genocide is a punishable act.

The report ignores the thesis presented to it, that the cycle of violence of which pundits speak glibly is inaccurate. The cycle is not Palestinians attack and Israel responds or vice versa. The missing element is the Palestinian INCITEMENT, which unavoidably leads to the initial violence and which must be eliminated if any peaceful solution is to be contemplated.

The methodology
Irresponsible speculation presented as factual. An alarming aspect of the report is the irresponsible, manner in which uninformed speculation with no foundation at all in fact, has been used as a basis for making critical recommendations that will affect the lives of millions.

Paragraph 1680 rejects the Israeli Government’s assertion that the Cast Lead operation was essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defense and the Mission speculates without any effort at substantiation that the plan was directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole.

This statement is reckless slander in the extreme, in view of the more than 10,000 rockets that rained almost daily on Sderot and the western Negev, fired from heavily populated civilian centers and deliberately aimed at civilian areas (a double war crime) over the past eight years

Your Mission was shown video clips of schoolchildren rushing to take shelter whenever the red alert sounded giving only 15 seconds warning. Mr. Bedein of the Sderot Media Center gave evidence in Geneva about the tragic sufferings of the population and yet you do not accept that this was the reason for Cast Lead.

The rockets were often deliberately fired at times of day when schoolkids were gathering so as to achieve maximum casualties and it is only by good luck or divine providence that they claimed only 28 lives, over 600 injured and thousands psychologically traumatized.

In these circumstances, denying that the Cast Lead operation was aimed at ending the rocket fire is equivalent to claiming that the earth is flat. The irresponsible weighty recommendations that will have long-term, even existential effects based on preconceived opinions supported by pure speculation with no attempt at substantiation, reflects egregiously on the entire methodology adopted in preparing the report. The flaw is so serious that on this count alone, the report must be either rejected or returned for serious revision.

September 21, 2009

MK Livni Stresses the Importance of
Establishing a Stable Government in Israel

Monday night, September 14th, 2009, the Young Professionals of The American Friends of the Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel (CECI) hosted a Beverly Hills event in honor of MK Tzipi Livini, Head of the Opposition Party in Israel’s Parliament – Knesset.

More than 200 professionals from various fields, including members from the entertainment industry attended, eager to meet MK Livni and hear her personal accounts and opinions about Israel and the future of its government.

“I don’t believe in a new Middle East. It’s not going to happen tomorrow. But I think, step by step, day by day, we can come up with the reconciliation (with the Arabs) that is needed,” MK Livni said.

MK Livni, who received a standing ovation, stressed the importance of establishing a stable government in Israel and working arduously on negotiations with the other side.

Sunday night, September 13th, 2009, CECI held another exclusive dinner at the Beverly Hills residence of Pouran and Parviz Nazarian. In attendance were leaders of the Jewish community, government officials, prominent rabbis, members of the entertainment community, and the press.

MK Livni, Head of the Kadima Political Party – the largest party in the Knesset, spoke on the necessity of reform for the structure of Israeli government and its electoral system. A long-time nationalist, she addressed the crowd about her vision on the future of Israel and its relationship with its neighbors in the Middle East, what she called a “tough neighborhood.”

MK Livni, 51, was born and raised in Tel Aviv by parents of Polish decent. MK Livni comes from a family of Nationalists. Both her parents served in Israel’s Irgun, shortened for Ha’Irgun HaTzva’i HaLe’umi BeEretz Yisra’el, or National Military Organization in the Land of Israel,” a Zionist group that operated between 1931 and 1948 to establish the State of Israel. MK Tzipi Livni served as a lieutenant in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and later left the IDF to continue her studies in law. MK Tzipi Livni is an attorney by profession; she has been married for 26 years and has 2 sons.

An open response to Judge Goldstone
re the Report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
From Maurice Ostroff                                                                 September 18, Dear Judge Goldstone,
Part 1 – The evidence;
I feel it important to address some glaring shortcomings in your 500 plus page report, but as it took several months to prepare the report, it is impossible to respond effectively in a period of days. I shall therefore do so in several parts, each dealing with a different aspect.  I trust you will find this more convenient than receiving one very lengthy all-embracing document.

In this Part 1, I address the question of the nature of evidence presented and the manner in which it was dealt with as well as available evidence that was ignored.

At a press conference last April you said that submissions from all relevant persons would be sought and taken into account. This statement was encouraging in that it recognized the duty of a FACT-FINDING mission, to actively seek out and examine all possible evidence even when not readily available and even when contradicting preconceived opinions.

Sadly, the report falls short in meeting these ideals. For example, the matters raised in the professionally prepared document submitted by a group of fifteen eminent Australian lawyers deserved to be addressed seriously in your report and your readers deserve the courtesy of being provided with an internet address where the contents of this serious document can be viewed. “http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com
Similarly the two serious memoranda from Take-a-pen with their links to concrete evidence   deserve more than a mere mention in a footnote.   ”http://www.takeapen.org/index.asp”>http://www.takeapen.org
Indeed, your report states simply that the Mission mostly reviewed the allegations made in reports by the Government of Israel, by private individuals and organizations and by NGOs that are listed only in a footnote. (Note the use of the word “allegations’)

Your Mission has patently arrived at its conclusions and made far-reaching recommendations in the full knowledge that it has not pursued all the available evidence despite the danger that conclusions based on incomplete information have, in many cases, led to disastrous consequences such as sentenced prisoners who have been pardoned on production of evidence unavailable earlier. These unfortunate episodes are excusable where there were no indications of withheld evidence at the time sentence was passed, but in this case, you are fully aware of available evidence that you have not examined.

It is difficult to understand why, despite your acknowledgment at the press conference that the Mission would be heavily dependent on advice on military aspects, you ignored recommendations to invite Colonel Richard Kemp the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and an adviser to the UK cabinet, who has expert knowledge of warfare in conditions similar to that in Gaza. He does not even earn a mention in your report.

Even if you disagree with Colonel Kemp’s authoritative views, your responsibility to provide an educated balanced report imposes a duty to at least advise your readers of their existence, so that they can judge for themselves. Failure to even mention the existence of opinions on the Cast Lead operation of an expert of Colonel Kemp’s stature suggests suppression of evidence. If your esteemed panel has judged Colonel Kemp’s views as irrelevant or unimportant, the least your readers and the HRC to whom you are reporting are entitled to receive is an explanation of your reasons.

Intellectual honesty requires that, in evaluating evidence about situations they have never personally experienced, non-military investigators should not ignore key practical military aspects like those enumerated by experts like Colonel Kemp.  The credibility of your report would certainly have been enhanced had you referred to his undeniable remarks that the battlefield – in any kind of war – is a place of confusion, chaos and fast-moving action.

Your report has sadly ignored the context explained by Colonel Kemp that in the type of conflict that the IDF fought in Gaza and in Lebanon, and that Britain and America are still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, these age-old confusions and complexities are made one hundred times worse by the fighting policies and techniques of the enemy.

Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy’s main weaknesses.

Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law.

Civilians and their property are routinely exploited by these groups, in deliberate and flagrant violation of international laws or reasonable norms of civilized behavior.

Protected buildings, mosques, schools, and hospitals are used as strongholds. Legal and proportional responses by a Western army will be deliberately exploited and manipulated in order to produce international outcry and condemnation.

Hamas’ military capability was deliberately positioned behind the human shield of the civilian population. They also ordered, forced when necessary, men, women and children from their own population to stay put in places they knew were about to be attacked by the IDF. Israel was fighting an enemy that is deliberately trying to sacrifice their own people, deliberately trying to lure you into killing their own innocent civilians.

And Hamas, like Hizbullah, is also highly expert at driving the media agenda. They will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

When possible the IDF gave at least four hours’ notice to civilians to leave areas targeted for attack. The IDF dropped over 900,000 leaflets warning the population of impending attacks to allow them to leave designated areas. The IDF phoned over 30,000 Palestinian households in Gaza, urging them in Arabic to leave homes where Hamas might have stashed weapons or be preparing to fight.

Many attack helicopter missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were cancelled if there was too great a risk of civilian casualties in the area. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza, even though delivering aid virtually into your enemy’s hands is to the military tactician normally quite unthinkable.

Surely Colonel Kemp’s summation that by taking these actions the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare, deserved a mention and a link. e.g.  http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com/id199.html

The relative importance placed by the panel on different aspects of the evidence may be gauged by the close attention it paid to a lengthy presentation by Israeli witness Shir Hever, as seen on your webcast, who said almost nothing about the Gaza operation and instead of being asked to keep to relevant matter, was encouraged to go into great detail about irrelevancies like conscription laws in Israel.  Professor Chinkin found this subject so important that she asked him to elaborate on how the legal system in Israel responds to these conscription laws that have no relevance whatsoever to the Cast Lead operation. Evidently, the Mission considered time spent listening to these irrelevancies, more important than addressing the views of Colonel Kemp.

Your mission also knows that some witnesses have withdrawn because of fears of retribution and the very reason for their withdrawal raises a red flag, indicating that their evidence could be critical.  It is incongruous that your report refers to unjustified fears that Israel may penalize witnesses despite the well known freedom of activists and the media to severely and even viciously criticize the Israel government, in marked contrast to the widely known strict control of the media and the vicious punishment of dissenters in Gaza.

In these circumstances I believe that your fact-finding mission was remiss in failing to exert every effort to obtain their evidence by all possible means including offering anonymity and protection.  Such witnesses could be readily traced from the abundance of textual and visual evidence available on the Internet demonstrating how Hamas behavior left the IDF with no alternative but to react as it did.

The video presentations I sent to the Mission contain details of Palestinians who fled from Hamas describing the abuse of hospitals and ambulances, a named member of the Hamas legislative council boasting on TV about the use of civilian shields and examples of the continuing blatant incitement in mosques and schools. One cannot but be disappointed that none of this highly relevant information was followed up by the Mission.

See  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx-CW3UKoIg&feature=related and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLFAJK5LtwY

I believe you will agree that it is desirable to avoid the impression that your mission has imposed its subjective opinion of the evidence it received, This can be easily avoided by placing all memoranda that you received in an archive on a web site accessible by the public, as is done for example by the UK Parliamentary  Committees (See http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com/id18.html )

Your considered response will be appreciated

Sincerely

Maurice Ostroff

UNFFMGC_Report

Attitude
By Bob Proctor

Victor Frankl once wrote, “Everything can be taken from a person but one thing:
the last of human freedoms – to choose one’s attitudes in any given set of circumstances,
to choose one’s own way.” Frankl was right. Attitude is a choice. You could be faced
with a thousand problems, many or most over which you have absolutely no control.
However, there is always one thing you are in complete and absolute control of and that
is your own attitude.
When you surrender control of your attitude to what appears to be a negative
situation, you will react to that situation. More often than not, reacting is inappropriate.
On the other hand, if you were to remain objective, you would respond to the situation
appropriately, thereby creating a winning situation.
If attitude is such an important word, why do so few people understand it? To be
honest, it wasn’t until I was in my late 20s when I finally understood its full impact. All
through my teens and into my early adult life, I can’t tell you the number of times that I
heard, “Bob, if you’d just change your attitude, you would do a lot better.” In retrospect I
can easily see the cause of my problem. I didn’t know what attitude was, let alone know
how to change it!
Attitude is the composite of your thoughts, feelings and actions. Your conscious
mind controls feeling and ultimately dictates whether your feelings will be positive or
negative by your choice of thoughts, then your body displays those choices through
action and behavior.
Attitude is actually a creative cycle that begins with your choice of thoughts. You
do choose your thoughts and that choice is where your attitude originates. As you
internalize ideas or become emotionally involved with your thoughts, you create the
second stage in forming an attitude; you move your entire being – mind and body – into a
new “vibration.” Your conscious awareness of this vibration is referred to as “feeling”.
Your feelings are then expressed in actions or behaviors that produce the various results
in your life.
Positive results are always the effect of a positive attitude. Attitude and results
are inseparable. They follow one another like night follows day. What I mean by that is:
one is the cause, the other, the result. There is a term we use to distinguish this “cause
and effect” relationship, it is called The Law of Cause and Effect. Simply stated, if you
think in negative terms, you will get negative results; if you think in positive terms you
will achieve positive results. Ralph Waldo Emerson reiterated that same point when he
said, “A person is what they think about all day long.” The results you achieve in life are
nothing more than an expression of your thoughts, feelings, and actions. Take a close
look at your life and evaluate the results you are achieving in various areas. See if you
are able to relate your attitude to your results.
Winning and losing are opposite sides of the same coin – and that coin is attitude.
There are many things wrong in this world; unfortunately that is all some people are able
to see. Those who view the world in this light are often unhappy and somewhat cynical.
Usually, their life is one of lack and limitation and it almost appears as if they move from
one bad experience to another. I know people who are like this and I’m certain you do as
well. It would appear as if they were born with a streak of bad luck and it has followed
them around their whole life. These individuals are quick to blame circumstances or
other people for their problems, rather than accepting responsibility for their life and their
attitude.
Conversely, there are others who are forever winning and living the good life.
They are the real movers and shakers who make things happen. They seem to go from
one major accomplishment to another. They’re in control of their life; they know where
they are going and know they will get there. They are the real winners in life and their
wins are a matter of choice.
You can experience that kind of life as well, you only need to decide. Making that
simple decision is the first step to a new life. Dorothea Brand once said, “Act as if it were
impossible to fail,” and I challenge you to do so. By simply becoming aware that you can
choose your thoughts each and every day, you will change your entire outlook. You have
the power to choose an abundant life no matter your circumstances. That active choice
will allow other positive people and opportunities to be attracted into your life. Don’t
wait to experience all the wonderful things the universe has in store for you. Start today
by working on you attitude and welcome the abundant life that you were meant to lead.
Bob Proctor is widely regarded as one of the living masters and teachers of The Law of
Attraction. Featured in the blockbuster hit, The Secret, Proctor has worked in the area of
mind potential for over 40 years, is the best-selling author of You Were Born Rich, and
has transformed the lives of millions through his books, seminars, courses and personal
coaching.
© LifeSuccess Productions www.bobproctor.com
800-871-9715

The American Friends of The Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel (CECI) hosted an exclusive reception at the residence of Pouran and Parviz Nazarian in honor of MK Tzipi Livni, Head of the Opposition Party in the Knesset.  MK Livni gave a briefing on the reform of the government and electoral system in Israel.  She also spoke of her vision for Israel’s future, internal matters, and Israel’s relationships in the world arena, as well as explaining her ideas on a two State solution.

Over 150 people attended the evening’s special event.  Guests included:  Israel’s Consul General Jacob Dayan,  Jewish Journal Columnist David Suissa who also served as the Master of Ceremonies, Event Chair Daphna Ziman and CECI Executive Director Dora Kadisha, Diane and Gil Glazer, and Rabbi David Wolpe.  Also present were many community leaders, individuals from entertainment industry, and members of the press.

The evening proved to be an enormous success.  The sponsors of CECI’s educational programs in Israel were recognized for their support:   Mr. Sam Delug, Dr. Igal Elyassi, Mr. & Mrs. Yahya Gabbayzadeh, Mr. Michael Gallop, Mrs. Katherine Merage, Mr. & Mrs. Bijan Nahai, Mr. & Mrs. Mike Nazarian, and Mr. & Mrs. Ebi Simhaee.

The words of the wise old man,

We should live for today, not always looking & waiting for other times & conditions before we feel satisfied with our lives!

One should read well & try to remember these saying & use it in our daily life for better living!

The Military Advocate ordered the opening of more than twenty criminal investigations Since the conclusion of Operation Cast Lead, the IDF has received petitions from various sources – private attorneys, human rights organizations (both Israeli and foreign), and news outlets (both Israeli and foreign) – that have raised various claims regarding the conduct of IDF forces during the course of Operation Cast Lead. The IDF is studying the petitions on their respective merits, in accordance with the IDF’s policy on investigations, which has also been stated before the High Court of Justice. Within the framework of these petitions, the Military Advocate General has ordered the opening of more than twenty criminal investigations into claims of violence against detainees, looting, and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. In addition, criminal investigations have been opened following petitions in which particularly severe claims of IDF fire directed towards civilians, including individuals waving white flags. In accordance with standard practice, the investigations are overseen by the Military Advocate General’s Corps, which will study the findings and issue recommendations regarding further action on each of the cases. The IDF will continue to investigate every credible claim of illegal conduct on the part of our forces during the course of Operation Cast Lead, in accordance with out commitment to international law in general and to the laws of war in particular.