Thursday, October 22, 2009

Whither After the Goldstone Report?

The debate over the Goldstone Report is a huge distraction from the real problem: the Report's inadequacy and the futility of bringing the case to the International Criminal Court. The Report itself, written by a Zionist Jew, is extremely flawed and biased in favor of Israel. Richard Goldstone's daughter Nicole told Israeli Army Radio (in Hebrew) that her father, as head of the UN Fact Finding Commission on the Gaza Conflict, had actually softened accusations against Israel.

Goldstone's Report creates a fictional equality of power and obligation between Hamas and the State of Israel. In addition, it incorrectly tries to fit both within the same legal framework, as Goldstone misapplies the Geneva Conventions to Hamas.

The Geneva Conventions apply to Israel because Israel is a state and a signatory while post-WW2 Nuremberg Law provides the appropriate legal framework for resistance movements like Hamas. The Nuremberg indictment of the Nationalist Socialist Government concerning German conquests and the Sudetenland, which was annexed to the Reich under international agreement, charges (International Military Tribunal, vol. 1, p. 63):

"In certain occupied territories purportedly annexed to Germany the defendants methodically and pursuant to plan endeavored to assimilate these territories politically, culturally, socially, and economically into the German Reich. They endeavored to obliterate the former national character of these territories. In pursuance of their plans, the defendants forcibly deported inhabitants who were predominantly non-German and replaced them by thousands of German colonists."

If State of Israel replaces Germany, Zionist State replaces German Reich, and Jewish replaces German, the Nuremberg accusation precisely describes Zionist goals from the start of the Zionist movement until the present day. Until Israel negotiates an agreement with the resistance, all Jewish colonists today just like German colonists back then are legitimate targets for the resistance anywhere throughout the occupied lands of Historical Palestine.

The Palestinian-Jewish conflict has existed since before I was born. The UN essentially caused the conflict and has not solved it. Current UN actions show no evidence of bringing any improvement. Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting to get different results. Maybe we should try something else besides asking for UN help.

Furthermore, why waste time with the ICC? Even if it ruled against Israel, the ICC does not possess the power to enforce its decisions. One can only conclude that the Arabs are so traumatized by perpetual injustice that they confuse ineffective posturing with effective legal tactics.

Few Americans would ever argue that Jewish and Arab Americans should receive unequal treatment under US law. Yet the Department of Justice is unconstitutionally selectively targeting and prosecuting individuals and organizations. Jews file terror victim lawsuits against Palestinian organizations; for example a US judge ordered the PLO to pay $116 million to a Jewish American family; but no one files lawsuits on behalf of non-Jewish American citizens, who like Rachel Corrie and Suraideh Gharbieh have been victims of IDF terrorism.

In the American legal and political process, Jews seem privileged over non-Jews, thanks to efforts of the Israel Lobby, which is actively engaged in Conspiracy Against Rights (US Code Title18, 241). Yet no one in government or media discusses the situation. Obama administration Zionists want to bury the Goldstone Report because it provides specific evidence under US law that the IDF is a terrorist organization (e.g., paragraph 798):

"With regard to the shooting of Muhammad Hekmat Abu Halima and Matar Abu Halima, the Mission notes that the Israeli soldiers had ordered the tractor on which they were transporting the wounded to stop and had ordered the two cousins (aged 16 and 17) to come down. They had complied with those instructions and were standing next to the tractor, when the Israeli soldiers standing on the roof of a nearby house opened fire on them."

US anti-terrorism law is clear with regard to aiding and abetting, material aid, and conspiracy to aid terrorism. Practically all Israel advocates should be arrested forthwith, and their assets should also be seized. Such is the current US practice whenever Jewish Zionist groups or individuals accuse Arab or Muslim organizations of terrorist ties under flimsy, ridiculous or counterfactual evidence. Because Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey is clearly not applying US law to American Jews in the same way that he applies it to American Arabs and Muslims, he is preventing enforcement of US law in time of war and should face immediate charges for Seditious Conspiracy (US Code Title 18, 2384).

Criminal complaints should be filed with US law enforcement officials in order to bring charges against all Zionists violating US law or subverting the US government. If some number of Arab or Muslim American lawyers started to work on the project, US-based legal processes could start within a matter of weeks.

Karin Friedemann is a Boston-based writer on Middle East affairs and US politics. She is Director of the Division on Muslim Civil Rights and Liberties for the National Association of Muslim American Women. Joachim Martillo contributed to this article.


Anonymous said...

First of all, as child of Holocaust survivors, I reject the validity of the Nuremberg show trials process, because Jewish Holocaust survivors were not asked if they wanted such a trial process to occur. Stalin stated that he preferred that the top 50,000 Nazis be summarily hanged under victor's rights, and since the Russians lost more civilians than anyone else, his advice should have been followed rather than that of liberal westerners who lost the least.
Second, as the victors of WWI, the Allies conferred power on the League of Nations to dispose of conquered territories, and they chose to confer Jewish sovereignty to the Jewish nation-in-exile. It was victor's rights. The Nuremberg Trials only opened a Pandora's box of needless complexities.

Stephen M. Flatow said...

It's interesting to see a pro-Hamas writer not happy with the Goldstone report. It certainly brings a different approach to the inadequacies of the report.
Tell me, please, when you say "Jewish colonists" are "legitimate targets" throughout the "occupied lands of historical Palestine," is it your belief that Jews living anywhere in the State of Israel are such "legitimate targets?"

The Expatriate said...

Ignore Flatow. He is a fanatic who sees virtually all who disagree with him as de facto allies of terrorists. I find it interesting that he does not address your other points regarding the differing treatment of Jewish-American and Arab-American victims of violence. Particularly so given the fact that he filed a lawsuit against Iran over the death of his daughter.

As for Anonymous, do you actually think that STALIN is a good model for how we should conduct international law?

Alan Ireland said...

During World War I, Britain and France agreed in the Sykes-Picot Agreement to seize certain Arab territories after the war (in contravention of an understanding they had with their Arab allies). All the League of Nations did, after the war, was rubber-stamp a fait accompli.

Under the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the British Government did not "confer sovereignty to the Jewish nation-in-exile". (Such a "nation", by the way, is just a fanciful notion of Zionist ideologues seeking the trappings of legitimacy for their criminal enterprise.) What the declaration proposed was "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" under British tutelage.