{"id":84018,"date":"2016-12-12T12:00:35","date_gmt":"2016-12-12T12:00:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=84018"},"modified":"2016-12-06T13:00:30","modified_gmt":"2016-12-06T13:00:30","slug":"10-zionist-arguments-youve-encountered-but-didnt-have-answers-to","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2016\/12\/10-zionist-arguments-youve-encountered-but-didnt-have-answers-to\/","title":{"rendered":"10 Zionist Arguments You\u2019ve Encountered, but Didn\u2019t Have Answers to"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_84019\" style=\"width: 710px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school.jpg\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-84019\" class=\"wp-image-84019\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school-1024x512.jpg\" alt=\"Israel targets a UN-run school in Beit Lahiya with white phosphorous munitions during 'Operation Cast Lead', January 17, 2009 (Iyad El-Baba\/UNRWA)\" width=\"700\" height=\"350\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school-1024x512.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school-300x150.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school-768x384.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/gaza-wp-1280x640-white-phosphorous-israel-un-school.jpg 1280w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-84019\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Israel targets a UN-run school in Beit Lahiya with white phosphorous munitions during &#8216;Operation Cast Lead&#8217;, January 17, 2009 (Iyad El-Baba\/UNRWA)<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><em>Here are ten popular arguments Zionists use to defend Israel&#8217;s crimes against the Palestinians and how to answer them effectively.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>If you\u2019re active in the struggle for peace and justice in the Middle East, you\u2019ve no doubt frequently encountered Zionists who defend Israel\u2019s crimes against the Palestinians. You\u2019re familiar with many of their talking points, and maybe you know how to answer many or most of them. Here are ten you\u2019ve likely encountered, but perhaps didn\u2019t know quite how to debate effectively\u2013until now!<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong> The Palestinian refugee problem is an unfortunate result of the Arab states launching a war of aggression in 1948 to wipe Israel off the map.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>There are two principle fallacies in this argument:<\/p>\n<p>One, it was not simply that Palestinians fled war. Many did flee, but this was encouraged by the Zionist forces, which also directly expelled many civilians from their homes and destroyed their villages so they could never return. It was the <em>intent<\/em> of the Zionists to ethnically cleanse Palestine of most of its Arab population in order for the demographically \u201cJewish state\u201d of Israel to be established. Indeed, cleansing Palestine of Arabs was a prerequisite for this state to be created.\u00a0<em>This is why Israel refused to allow those refugees to return<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Two, this argument assumes that the Zionists\u2019 unilateral declaration of the existence of Israel on May 14, 1948, was legitimate.\u00a0<em>It wasn\u2019t<\/em>. The Zionists had neither any legal nor moral authority to declare sovereignty over a land in which they were a minority and of which they owned only about 7 percent. While they cited UN Resolution 181 (the \u201cpartition plan\u201d resolution) as granting such authority, in fact, this resolution neither partitioned Palestine <em>nor conferred any legal authority to the Zionists for their unilateral declaration<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Fully arm yourself with the knowledge to defeat this Zionist hasbara (i.e., propaganda) by reading:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\/2016\/11\/14\/benny-morriss-untenable-denial-of-the-ethnic-cleansing-of-palestine\/\" >\u201cBenny Morris\u2019s Untenable Denial of the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine\u201d<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" ><em>Obstacle to Peace: The US Role in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In <em>Obstacle to Peace<\/em>, see specifically:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Chapter 1, Subchapter \u201cUN General Assembly Resolution 181\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 2, Subchapter \u201cResolution 194\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 9, Subchapter \u201cThe Bias of the New York Times\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol start=\"2\">\n<li><strong> Israel has a right to exist.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><em>No\u00a0<\/em>state has a \u201cright to exist\u201d. This concept is a propaganda device invented by the US and Israel for a reason that will become clear momentarily.<\/p>\n<p>One might be tempted to answer this argument with: \u201cWell, Palestine has a right to exist, too!\u201d But this is not the proper response!<\/p>\n<p>Political entities defined by lines on maps do not have rights,\u00a0<em>individuals do<\/em>. The proper framework for discussion is\u00a0<em>the right to self-determination<\/em>. And it is manifestly\u00a0<em>Israel\u00a0<\/em>that has denied that right to the\u00a0<em>Palestinians\u00a0<\/em>since its founding (and indeed, by the Zionists even before Israel\u2019s founding), and not vice versa.<\/p>\n<p>The necessity of redefining the framework for discussion thus becomes obvious. To say that Israel has a \u201cright to exist\u201d is effectively to assert that the Zionists\u2019 unilateral declaration of Israel\u2019s existence\u00a0<em>and the ethnic cleansing by which Israel actually came into being<\/em> were\u00a0<em>legitimate<\/em>. Needless to say, these were not legitimate actions on the part of the Zionists.<\/p>\n<p>For further discussion and specific examples of how this Zionist hasbara has been used to deny the equal rights of the Palestinians, see the index entry \u201cIsrael: \u2018right to exist&#8217;\u201d in\u00a0<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" ><em>Obstacle to Peace<\/em>.<\/a><\/p>\n<ol start=\"3\">\n<li><strong> In 1967, Israel acted in self-defense by launching a preemptive attack on Egypt.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Israel\u2019s attack on Egypt on the morning of June 5, 1967 \u2014 the event that started the \u201cSix Day War\u201d \u2014\u00a0<em>was not preemptive<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Zionists will argue that Nasser\u2019s threats, Egypt\u2019s closing of the Straits of Tiran and Suez Canal to Israeli shipping, its movement of troops into the Sinai Peninsula, and its expelling of the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) all essentially amounted to acts of war.<\/p>\n<p>However, none of these actions constituted aggression under international law.<\/p>\n<p>Egypt\u2019s perspective was that the straits and Suez Canal were its territorial waterways so it had a right to deny passage to an enemy state that had already attacked it once, in 1956 (when Israel conspired with Britain and France to launch a war of aggression against Egypt). While legal scholars may debate the legitimacy of that point of view, the fact is that Israel had peaceful means available to it to seek redress for this grievance against Egypt. It did not, under international law, constitute a\u00a0<em>casus belli\u00a0<\/em>(justification for war).<\/p>\n<p>Nasser wanted the UN peacekeeping force gone because he was being accused by Syria and Jordan of hiding behind it. His bellicose rhetoric was about saving face but was just that:\u00a0<em>rhetoric<\/em>. The proposal was made to restation UNEF on Israel\u2019s side of the border, but, instructively,\u00a0<em>Israel rejected this proposal<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the CIA observed that Egypt\u2019s troops took up\u00a0<em>defensive\u00a0<\/em>positions in the Sinai,\u00a0and\u00a0<em>Israel\u2019s own intelligence assessed that Israel was under no threat of attack from Egypt<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>In 1982, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin acknowledged, \u201cIn June\u00a01967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Under international law, Israel\u2019s attack on Egypt constituted aggression, defined at Nuremberg as \u201cthe supreme international crime\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>For more information about Israel\u2019s aggression in 1967, see:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\/2010\/07\/04\/israels-attack-on-egypt-in-june-67-was-not-preemptive\/\" >\u201cIsrael\u2019s attack on Egypt in June \u201967 was not \u2018preemptive\u2019\u201d<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Chapter 9, Subchapter \u201c\u2018Defensible Borders&#8217;\u201d, from\u00a0<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol start=\"4\">\n<li><strong> UN Resolution 242 did not require Israel to fully withdraw from the territories it occupied in 1967.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This is a <em>lie<\/em>. Unfortunately, it is very effective Zionist hasbara and is widely believed even by supporters of Palestinians\u2019 rights.<\/p>\n<p>There are three main components of the Zionist argument:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The absence of the article \u201cthe\u201d before the words \u201cterritories occupied\u201d in sub-paragraph (i) of the first operative paragraph of this Security Council resolution means only a partial withdrawal was required.<\/li>\n<li>Sub-paragraph (ii) requires that \u201csecure and recognized borders\u201d be established before Israel is required to withdraw.<\/li>\n<li>Officials responsible for creating and passing Resolution 242, like Lord Caradon (UK) and Arthur Goldberg (US) have said it did not require a full withdrawal.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Briefly, here are the flaws in these arguments:<\/p>\n<p>First of all, this is nonsense even on its face: the resolution does not say Israel must withdraw from \u201c<em>the\u00a0<\/em>territories occupied\u201d so we must understand it to mean Israel must withdraw from only \u201c<em>some\u00a0<\/em>territories occupied\u201d? This self-defeating Zionist logic is prima facie nonsense.<\/p>\n<p>In truth, the absence of the article has\u00a0<em>no effect\u00a0<\/em>on the meaning of the resolution inasmuch as the\u00a0<em>extent\u00a0<\/em>of withdraw is concerned. It calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces \u201cfrom territories occupied\u201d, <em>plural<\/em>. The Syrian Golan Heights, the Egyptian Sinai, and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip and West Bank are all \u201cterritories occupied\u201d during the 1967 war and thus territories from which Israel was required to withdraw under the clear and unambiguous wording of Resolution 242.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, the preambulatory section of the resolution emphasized the principle of international law that the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible \u2014 and it is in the context of that emphasized principle that the resolution\u2019s call for Israeli withdrawal must be understood.<\/p>\n<p>As for sub-paragraph (ii), while it does call for the establishment of \u201csecure and recognized borders\u201d, it does not establish this<em> as a precondition<\/em> for the withdraw of Israeli forces. It says \u201cboth\u201d Israeli withdrawal\u00a0<em>and\u00a0<\/em>establishment of such borders are required,\u00a0<em>conditioning neither one upon the other<\/em>.\u00a0It was not the Security Council\u2019s intent that a people whose land was occupied be required to negotiate with the occupier over where to draw the border.<\/p>\n<p>Zionists claim otherwise, but to do so, they quote Caradon and Goldberg from years after the resolution\u2019s passage. But, first, UN resolutions are not open to unilateral interpretation, but must be understand according to the will of the Security Council as a whole; and, second, the relevant documentary record for understanding the will of the Council is from prior to and up until the resolution\u2019s adoption.<\/p>\n<p>And turning to that documentary record, it is absolutely clear that the Security Council was\u00a0<em>explicit<\/em> and\u00a0<em>unanimous\u00a0<\/em>that Resolution 242 required Israel to return to the lines it held prior to June 5, 1967.<\/p>\n<p>For a fuller discussion of the factual and logical errors of this Zionist hasbara, see Chapter 3, Subchapter \u201cResolution 242\u201d in\u00a0<em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<ol start=\"5\">\n<li><strong> The Palestinians have rejected every generous offer from Israel to have a state of their own.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This argument assumes that Israel accepts the two-state solution and had made generous concessions in each of those \u201coffers\u201d, such as that made at Camp David in 2000.\u00a0<em>Those assumptions are absolutely false<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, <em>every single concession<\/em> made during each of the \u201coffers\u201d in question \u2014 throughout the entire so-called \u201cpeace process\u201d \u2014 was demanded or made <em>by the Palestinians<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>This Zionist hasbara, frequently propagated by US government officials and media commentators, simply\u00a0frames\u00a0the discussion in terms of what Israel\u00a0<em>wants\u00a0<\/em>rather than what it has a\u00a0<em>right\u00a0<\/em>to under international law.<\/p>\n<p>Zionists say things like, \u201cIsrael offered the Palestinians a state in 95 percent of the West Bank at Camp David\u201d. First of all, this is false. Israel started out demanding to annex 12 percent of the West Bank, and by the end of the talks was still demanding 9 percent. Second, none of this land was Israel\u2019s to give. Under international law, every inch of it is recognized as \u201coccupied Palestinian territory\u201d. So translated into meaningful terms, we see arguments like the above equate that Israel \u201coffered\u201d to take\u00a0only 5 percent (really 9 percent) of the Palestinians\u2019 land.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, these demands to annex Palestinian territory were accompanied with other unreasonable demands, such as dividing the West Bank into Bantustan-like enclaves with Jewish-only highways connecting illegally constructed Israeli settlements and Israeli military control over Palestine\u2019s borders and airspace. In other words, Israel demanded that the Palestinians surrender more of their land, rights, and sovereignty.<\/p>\n<p>If a thief steals a $100\u00a0from you and then says he will give you back $91 if you agree to certain other demands requiring you to surrender your rights, would you describe it as a \u201cgenerous offer\u201d or a \u201cconcession\u201d?<\/p>\n<p>The truth is that while the Palestinian leadership has accepted the two-state solution since the late 1980s, Israel has always rejected it. In fact, the US-led so-called \u201cpeace process\u201d is in reality\u00a0<em>the process by which Israel and its superpower benefactor have long <strong>blocked<\/strong> implementation of the two-state solution.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>To arm yourself with the knowledge to defeat this Zionist hasbara, see especially Chapter 2, \u201cThe \u2018Peace Process&#8217;\u201d, from <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" ><em>Obstacle to Peace<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"6\">\n<li><strong> Israel\u2019s blockade of the Gaza Strip is legal \u2014 the UN has said so.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Actually, the UN has repeatedly affirmed the\u00a0<em>illegality\u00a0<\/em>of Israel\u2019s blockade, which amounts to a policy of collective punishment in violation of international law. This criminal policy has been condemned by numerous UN bodies; the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC); and numerous international human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Israeli rights groups B\u2019Tselem and Gisha. This blockade continues in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1860, which called on Israel to end it.<\/p>\n<p>So what are Zionists talking about when they claim the UN has said Israel\u2019s blockade is legal?<\/p>\n<p>They are talking about a report commissioned by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon known as the \u201cPalmer Report\u201d. It\u2019s true\u00a0that this report expressed the opinion of its two chairmembers that Israel\u2019s naval\u00a0blockade was legal. But what Zionists don\u2019t tell you is that they also noted in their report itself <em>that this conclusion of theirs went beyond their mandate and that they had no authority to offer their legal opinion<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the arguments they employed to arrive at their conclusion were riddled with factual and logical errors. Essentially, they employed circular reasoning by adopting the conclusion as their premise: in short, they argued that the naval blockade was legal because it was not a policy of collective punishment. In fact, they went to great lengths to\u00a0<em>avoid\u00a0<\/em>inquiring whether the blockade constituted collective punishment under international law, and they resorted to <em>demonstrable<\/em> misrepresentations of what international law actually has to say in an effort to sustain their expressed opinion.<\/p>\n<p>So why would they do that? Well, they stated the reason in their report: their mandate was\u00a0<em>not\u00a0<\/em>to inquire into the legality of the blockade, but the\u00a0<em>political<\/em> objective of allowing Israel and Turkey to put\u00a0the <em>Mavi Marmara<\/em> incident behind them.<\/p>\n<p>That was the incident in May 2010 in which Israeli forces attacked the humanitarian \u201cFreedom Flotilla\u201d \u2014 which was seeking to break Israel\u2019s illegal blockade and draw the world\u2019s attention to it \u2014 in international waters and murdered nine Turkish activists on board.<\/p>\n<p>Ban Ki-moon charged them with helping these two states to reconcile. Had they affirmed the international consensus that Israel\u2019s blockade was illegal, it would have undermined their political objective. So they expressed the opinion it was not as a predetermined conclusion and then proceeded to manipulate the facts and employ fallacious reasoning to support it.<\/p>\n<p>For more on Ban Ki-moon\u2019s duplicitous role as UN Secretary-General, see \u201c<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jeremyrhammond.com\/2015\/11\/14\/ban-ki-moons-complicity-in-israels-occupation-and-war-crimes\/\" >Ban Ki-moon\u2019s Complicity in Israel\u2019s Occupation and War Crimes<\/a>\u201c.<\/p>\n<p>For a thorough debunking of the Palmer Report, see Chapter 9, Subchapter \u201cThe Palmer Report\u201d in\u00a0<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" ><em>Obstacle to Peace<\/em><\/a>. For more about Israel\u2019s criminal assault on the <em>Mavi Marmara\u00a0<\/em>and how to answer the arguments of those who try to defend it, see Chapter 7, \u201cMurder on the High Seas\u201d.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"7\">\n<li><strong> Israel launched \u201cOperation Cast Lead\u201d only after thousands of rockets had been fired at Israeli towns from Gaza.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This Zionist hasbara \u2014 frequently parroted by the US government and mainstream media \u2014 is deceit by omission.\u00a0It\u2019s true that in the years prior to Israel\u2019s 2008-09 \u201cOperation Cast Lead\u201d thousands of rockets were fired at Israel from Gaza \u2014 and indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli population centers are certainly war crimes. However, what the Zionists\u00a0<em>don\u2019t\u00a0<\/em>tell you is that on June 19, Israel and Hamas entered into a ceasefire agreement\u00a0<em>that was repeatedly violated not by Hamas, but <strong>Israel<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0<em>New York Times\u00a0<\/em>actually reported on the most serious of those Israeli violations on the day it occurred (November 4, 2008), but thereafter tossed this fact down the memory hole. Subsequently, when it referred to the ceasefire, it merely said that it \u201cbroke down\u201d without stating the reason why:\u00a0<em>because it was violated by Israel<\/em>. More frequently, that there had even\u00a0<em>been\u00a0<\/em>a ceasefire \u2014 much less that it was not Hamas but Israel who violated it \u2014 was completely omitted, replaced by a false narrative in which Israel was acting in self defense against Hamas rocket attacks.<\/p>\n<p>As illustrated by Operation Cast Lead, it is a modus operandi of Israel\u2019s to take actions to attempt to provoke a violent response from Palestinian militants in order to create pretexts for its own resorts to its own violence, which occurs on an incomparably greater scale.<\/p>\n<p>For more on Israel\u2019s violation of the ceasefire and the mainstream media\u2019s disgraceful reporting on \u201cOperation Cast Lead\u201d, see: <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\/2016\/09\/20\/the-role-of-the-us-media-in-the-palestine-conflict\/\" >\u201cThe Role of the US Media in the Palestine Conflict\u201d<\/a>, which draws upon material from\u00a0<em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<ol start=\"8\">\n<li><strong> Palestinian civilians were only killed during operations like \u201cCast Lead\u201d because they were being used by Hamas as human shields.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This is a lie. The truth is that Israel engaged in deliberately disproportionate use of force during its 2008-09 (Operation Cast Lead), 2012 (Operation Pillar of Defense), and 2014 (Operation Protective Edge) assaults on Gaza. In fact, it openly declared its intention to commit what amount to war crimes with its so-called \u201cDahiya Doctrine\u201d \u2014 a reference to the flattening of the Dahiya district of Beirut in 2006 to punish the civilian population.<\/p>\n<p>To take the example of Operation Cast Lead, Israel\u2019s war crimes are well documented and incontrovertible. It deliberately targeted the civilian infrastructure for destruction as part of a policy of punishing the people of Gaza, and the IDF routinely used indiscriminate force, such as attacks on UN schools being used as shelters, hospitals, and residential homes.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, <em>there is not a single documented case<\/em> of a Palestinian civilian killed during Operation Cast Lead who was being used by Hamas at the time as a human shield.<\/p>\n<p>This might seem like a shocking truth, given the US mainstream media\u2019s mindless repetition of the IDF\u2019s own propaganda about civilians dying only because Hamas was using them as human shields, but this operation has been extensively investigated by human rights organizations and the UN, all of which investigations have concluded that there is no evidence to support Israel\u2019s claimed justifications for killing civilians.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, these investigations\u00a0<em>did\u00a0<\/em>conclude that\u00a0<em>Israeli forces\u00a0<\/em>used Palestinian civilians as human shields during Operation Cast Lead, such as forcing children to walk in front of them as they cleared\u00a0homes.<\/p>\n<p>For the full details of what really happened before and during Operation Cast Lead, see <em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a><\/em>, especially:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Chapter 1, Subchapter \u201cThe Collapse of the Ceasefire\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 2, \u201c\u2018Operation Cast Lead&#8217;\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 4, Subchapter \u201c\u2018The Most Moral Army in the World&#8217;\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 5, \u201cThe Goldstone Report\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 6, Subchapter \u201cIsrael\u2019s \u2018Cast Lead\u2019 Self-Exoneration: Update\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Chapter 7, Subchapter \u201cIsrael\u2019s \u2018Cast Lead\u2019 Self-Exoneration: Second Update\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol start=\"9\">\n<li><strong> The finding of the UN \u201cGoldstone Report\u201d that Israel committed war crimes during Operation Cast Lead has been debunked.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This is a lie. What Zionist apologists for Israeli war crimes are referring to, specifically, when they make this claim is an op-ed by one of the four chairs of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, Justice Richard Goldstone.<\/p>\n<p>The so-called Goldstone Report did indeed conclude that both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes \u2014 and these conclusions still stand.<\/p>\n<p>For his part in that report, Goldstone came under intense pressure and heavy criticism from Zionists, including\u00a0threats to protest outside of and bar him from attending his grandon\u2019s bar mitzvah. His op-ed was a transparent attempt to appease his Zionist detractors. But further than that, it was a disgraceful betrayal of truth and justice, as Goldstone outright lied about the UN report\u2019s findings in his attempt at appeasement.<\/p>\n<p>The occasion for Goldstone\u2019s betrayal was the report of a follow-up UN committee charged with inquiring into the credibility of Hamas\u2019s and Israel\u2019s self-investigations into the allegations of war crimes. In this context, Goldstone wrote that had the UN Fact-Finding Mission known then what was now known, it would not have arrived at the conclusions it did.<\/p>\n<p>Goldstone, however, was\u00a0<em>lying\u00a0<\/em>about the contents of the both the Goldstone Report and the follow-up committee\u2019s report. He claimed the Fact-Finding Mission had not examined any evidence presented by Israel. That was false. In fact, the Mission fully took into account Israel\u2019s own reports of its self-investigations that had occurred.<\/p>\n<p>Goldstone also set up his op-ed on the premise of a strawman argument: the claim was ostensibly now retracting was that Israel had a policy of deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians for death. In fact, this was\u00a0<em>not\u00a0<\/em>a finding of the Fact-Finding Mission\u2019s report. Rather, the Mission concluded that Israel\u2019s policy was to\u00a0<em>punish\u00a0<\/em>the civilian population through the deliberate use of disproportionate force. By setting up this strawman argument, Goldstone avoided having to \u201cretract\u201d the Mission\u2019s\u00a0<em>actual\u00a0<\/em>findings.<\/p>\n<p>Further, he quoted the follow-up committee\u2019s finding that\u00a0\u201cIsrael has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza\u201d, but he\u00a0<em>withheld\u00a0<\/em>from readers the fact that the committee found\u00a0<em>that these investigations lacked credibility<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>After Goldstone\u2019s disgraceful betrayal of justice, his three co-authors publicly criticized his op-ed and pointed out\u00a0that information that had since come to light \u2014 including the findings of the follow-up committee Goldstone was \u00a0deceptively relying on to support his own argument \u2014 did\u00a0<em>not\u00a0<\/em>change the Mission\u2019s conclusions, but\u00a0<em>bolstered\u00a0<\/em>them.<\/p>\n<p>For a complete debunking of this Zionist hasbara talking point, see Chapter 7, Subchapter \u201cGoldstone\u2019s Betrayal\u201d in\u00a0<em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"10\">\n<li><strong> Hamas was responsible for initiating the round of violence that culminated in Israel\u2019s launching of \u201cOperation Pillar of Defense\u201d in 2012.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>As with Operation Cast Lead, the truth is dramatically different.<\/p>\n<p>Israeli apologists \u2014 including US government officials and US mainstream media commentators \u2014 cited as the initiating event a Hamas attack on an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) jeep just days before Israel launched its operation. What was withheld from readers in this Zionist hasbara was the fact that this was an attack on IDF forces\u00a0<em>that had invaded Gaza\u00a0<\/em>and was in part retaliation for the IDF\u2019s murder of a thirteen-year-old Palestinian boy shortly prior.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, just the day before Israel launched its operation, once again Hamas had agreed to a ceasefire that was then\u00a0<em>violated by Israel<\/em>. In fact,\u00a0Israel took advantage of the opportunity created by Hamas\u2019s acceptance of the ceasefire to draw out and assassinate a senior Hamas official, Ahmed al-Jabari one of the initiating events of its \u201cOperation Pillar of Defense\u201d. Israel\u2019s Orwellian justification for this operation was that it was intended to re-establish calm \u2014 the very calm that was shattered by its launch of the operation and assassination of Jabari.<\/p>\n<p>For a complete timeline of events leading up to \u201cOperation Pillar of Defense\u201d and details of events occurring during that assault on Gaza, including Israel\u2019s commission of further war crimes, see Chapter 10, Subchapter \u201c\u2018Operation Pillar of Defense&#8217;\u201d in\u00a0<em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\/\" >Obstacle to Peace<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>For peace and justice to be realized, the lies have to be exposed and the true nature of the conflict must come to light. There needs to be a paradigm shift in which it is no longer feasible for mainstream media outlets \u2014 which effectively serve the role of manufacturing consent for the US policy of supporting Israel\u2019s crimes against the Palestinians \u2014 to mindlessly parrot US and Israeli government claims and peddle deceitful propaganda.<\/p>\n<p>Zionist apologists for Israel\u2019s behavior employ numerous hasbara talking points to try to justify its crimes. Knowing how to effectively counter the propaganda is key to effecting the necessary paradigm shift for peace to be achieved.<\/p>\n<p>You as an individual can play an important role in helping to effect that paradigm shift.<\/p>\n<p>Empower yourself with the knowledge you need to become an effective voice for peace.<\/p>\n<p>Educate yourself and gain the confidence you need to speak up and correct those around you who have been misinformed about the true nature of the conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Challenge the Zionist apologists when you encounter them on Facebook or Twitter and know how to destroy their propagandistic talking points with the truth.<\/p>\n<p>_______________________________________<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/jeremy-r-hammond-square-web-170x170.jpg\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft wp-image-84020\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/jeremy-r-hammond-square-web-170x170-150x150.jpg\" alt=\"jeremy-r-hammond-square-web-170x170\" width=\"100\" height=\"100\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/jeremy-r-hammond-square-web-170x170-150x150.jpg 150w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/12\/jeremy-r-hammond-square-web-170x170.jpg 170w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 100px) 100vw, 100px\" \/><\/a>Jeremy R. Hammond is an award-winning independent political analyst and editor and publisher of <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\" ><em>Foreign Policy Journal<\/em><\/a>. Described by <em>Barron&#8217;s<\/em> as &#8220;a writer of rare skill&#8221;, he is the author of <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\" ><em>Obstacle to Peace: The US Role in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict<\/em><\/a> (2016), <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.jeremyrhammond.com\/ron-paul-vs-paul-krugman\/\" ><em>Ron Paul vs. Paul Krugman: Austrian vs. Keynesian Economics in the Financial Crisis<\/em><\/a> (2012), and <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.jeremyrhammond.com\/the-rejection-of-palestinian-self-determination\/\" ><em>The Rejection of Palestinian Self-Determination: The Struggle for Palestine and the Roots of the Israeli-Arab Conflict<\/em><\/a> (2009). <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.obstacletopeace.com\" ><strong>Read the first chapter of <\/strong><em><strong>Obstacle to Peace<\/strong><\/em><strong> and sign up for his free email course on the Palestine conflict!<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\/2016\/11\/28\/10-zionist-arguments-youve-encountered-but-didnt-have-answers-to\/\" >Go to Original \u2013 foreignpolicyjournal.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here are ten popular arguments Zionists use to defend Israel&#8217;s crimes against the Palestinians and how to answer them effectively.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[54],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-84018","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-palestine-israel-gaza-genocide"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84018","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=84018"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84018\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=84018"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=84018"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=84018"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}