Surprise, Surprise, Surprise

[DC]

Personally, I want to say that--with one limited exception--an "international tribunal" cannot be fair by definition.

Such international tribunals do not have jurisdiction over the citizens of nation-states. The Israelis have their own duly constituted government, that has sole responsibility and authority over Israeli citizens. Unless Israel formally, democratically ratified an international tribunal, and voluntarily subjected itself to such tribunal's judgement, then any decision made by the tribunal is totally non-binding and unenforceable, except by violating Israeli sovereignty against the will of its citizens and its government.

Internal tribunals may or may not be fair, but an international tribunal cannot be fair.

I wonder if Dictator Cheney would feel the same way if an international tribunal decided that Switzerland owed substantial reparations to victims of Nazi Germany, for the part the Swiss played in enabling that regime. What would be more fair? For the Swiss to discuss the issue amongst themselves, and democratically agree on what was appropriate for Switzerland to do? Or for the rest of Europe to ignore Swiss sovereignty and impose judgement upon them against their will?

i see your point. and your example about switzerland is excellent. and i would accept it.

 

[Chaos]

Of course I CAN read minds, Cleon. My method is truly special: I read what people write about a subject and -- presto! -- I know, in a flash of psychic inspiration, what they think about it.

You must be reading a different forum than the rest of us, then.

I see you and the rest of the gang screaming "crucify them!" the moment someone makes any accusation of Israeli "war crimes", not waiting a microsecond for any proof apart from that; and yet suddenly turn "skeptical" and refuse to accept any "tainted" (= "disagrees with me") evidence the accusations are NOT true. All this, of course, without having a shread of evidence, apart from the original rumors, that the "war crimes" occured in the first place.

I see that the subtle difference between your imagination and objective reality continues to elude you.

This is the writing of a "true believer" in the "israelisevil" dogma: they, and only they, write like that. Why is me figuring this out considered some sort of "psychic mind reading"? It's simple reading comprehension.

How someone with your way of thinking calls himself "Skeptic" with a strait face never ceases to amaze me.

 

[BPSCG]

Well, BPSCG, you've got Tinfoil Timothy on board. Deserves some sort of consolation prize, I guess.

Nah, TFT is a wannabe.

Now if I could get him and EJ and leftysergeant al on the same thread, I do believe I would literally pull my head off my shoulders with my bare hands, I would be so happy.

(C'mon EJ, you're out there, my spider-sense is tingling...)

 

[BPSCG]

Happy birthday, Chaos!

 

[Doctor Evil]

This thread is yet another example for the sad, even miserable, level of debate on any subject related to Israel/Palestine. This is particularly sad, because this story touches a subject relevant to skepticism. This is after all the JREF.

The issue of interest here is the quality of evidence, as well as the way the press have handled it. The claims have emerged from an article in Haaretz, which came from a collection of stories of IDF soldiers. Haaretz led us to believe that the soldiers were direct witnesses to the incidents reported, and the world press followed suit.

Within a couple of days, other Israeli journalists identified the source of one of the stories. As it turned out, the soldier did not serve in Gaza, and was just repeating a rumor he heard. Essentially, this turned out to be the equivalent of "my mate at the pub told me that ..." This was not picked up by the world media. Now the IDF claim that they have followed the sources of the other story, and have found that it is also based on rumors.

There are two aspects of this story which I have found interesting. One has to do with the press, and the other with the discussion here.

The press, with the exception of the journalist who hunted the first source, and found out he was not an witness to the incident he reported, acted with lack of journalistic professionalism. Haaretz' first article mistakingly lead me, and others, to believe they had first hand witnesses to the reported incidents, while , in fact, they did not. The world press not only repeated the story, but also refrained from correcting it when it became clear that there was no direct evidence for the reported incidents. In my opinion, this story nicely demonstrates the need to evaluate the quality of available information. (Not always possible, unfortunately.)

As for the discussion here, I will just point out that it is all too common to find posters which disregard the quality of evidence because they 'know the truth' regarding some claim. (This is true for some people from both sides of the debate.) Needless to say, I am not claiming that I am immune to this.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Good for them! They investigated themselves and found they did nothing wrong!

A more transparent and thorough investigation, the world has never seen.

Because only investigations where Israeli servicemen are found guilty and punished are "transparent and thorough", right?

 

[Cleon]

Because only investigations where Israeli servicemen are found guilty and punished are "transparent and thorough", right?

Ah, I see we have another person trying for the mind-reading act. Who knows? Maybe Randi's million will be yours!

Personally, I rather doubt it.

 

[WildCat]

This thread is yet another example for the sad, even miserable, level of debate on any subject related to Israel/Palestine. This is particularly sad, because this story touches a subject relevant to skepticism. This is after all the JREF.

The issue of interest here is the quality of evidence, as well as the way the press have handled it. The claims have emerged from an article in Haaretz, which came from a collection of stories of IDF soldiers. Haaretz led us to believe that the soldiers were direct witnesses to the incidents reported, and the world press followed suit.

Within a couple of days, other Israeli journalists identified the source of one of the stories. As it turned out, the soldier did not serve in Gaza, and was just repeating a rumor he heard. Essentially, this turned out to be the equivalent of "my mate at the pub told me that ..." This was not picked up by the world media. Now the IDF claim that they have followed the sources of the other story, and have found that it is also based on rumors.

There are two aspects of this story which I have found interesting. One has to do with the press, and the other with the discussion here.

The press, with the exception of the journalist who hunted the first source, and found out he was not an witness to the incident he reported, acted with lack of journalistic professionalism. Haaretz' first article mistakingly lead me, and others, to believe they had first hand witnesses to the reported incidents, while , in fact, they did not. The world press not only repeated the story, but also refrained from correcting it when it became clear that there was no direct evidence for the reported incidents. In my opinion, this story nicely demonstrates the need to evaluate the quality of available information. (Not always possible, unfortunately.)

As for the discussion here, I will just point out that it is all too common to find posters which disregard the quality of evidence because they 'know the truth' regarding some claim. (This is true for some people from both sides of the debate.) Needless to say, I am not claiming that I am immune to this.

Some people just have to believe that Israel is going sround committing war crimes. Remember the thread parky started on this, where he claimed soldiers were admitting to this stuff? His OP and link was nothing but soldiers repeating what they heard, not what they did. It was easy for me to see what was going on, let's recap!

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072040.html

I applaud these Israelis for having the courage to admit to what they had done...and what they were ordered to do. They will be attacked as self-hating Jews, Arab-lovers, Judenrat, traitors, etc.

But the only thing they have exposed is an ounce of humanity, and they will be judged by real human beings and by God as honest and true.

I was expecting to actually see something in that story to back up the claims in the OP, but apparently this is about parky making stuff up again.

Presumably the anti-Israel crowd here would also claim Bigfoot exists if the IDF investigated and found no evidence, such is their desire to believe.

 

[Brainster]

Discussed here:

In particular, the results of the investigation referred to a testimony from a soldier named Aviv, who claimed to have known of a soldier who had been given orders to fire at an elderly Palestinian woman. During his interrogation, the IDF said, Aviv admitted he had never witnessed such an incident and that he'd based his statement on a rumor he had heard.

(snip)

Aviv admitted that he had not witnessed additional incidents he had described during the conference.

A claim made by a different soldier, Ram, who had supposedly been ordered to open fire at a woman and two children, was also found by the probe to be false.

After checking the claim, it was found that IDF troops had opened fire in a different direction, toward two suspicious men who were unrelated to the civilians in question.

Ha'aretz takes a purportedly skeptical look at the IDF report, but headlines it with an obvious false dichotomy:

Gaza probe / Either troops are liars, or the IDF is pure as snow

 

[Chaos]

Because only investigations where Israeli servicemen are found guilty and punished are "transparent and thorough", right?

BS.

It is an indispensable prerequisite for "transparent and thorough" that the investigations are not carried out exclusively by the accused organization.

 

[theprestige]

BS.

It is an indispensable prerequisite for "transparent and thorough" that the investigations are not carried out exclusively by the accused organization.

I think what you have in mind is "independent".

I'm pretty sure an organization can transparently and thoroughly investigate themselves, if they so choose.

 

[FireGarden]

It's not as if the IDF failed to find any wrong-doing.

(This might be unrelated to the academy debriefing)
IDF soldier demoted for shooting Gaza woman in legs
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1074077.html

An Israel Defense Forces infantryman serving in the Givati Brigades was demoted and placed on probation for firing at an unarmed Palestinian woman in contravention of orders issued by his superiors.

The shooting incident occurred near the ruins of the former Israeli settlement of Netzarim in January during the IDF's three-week long offensive in the Gaza Strip. The soldier fired at the legs of a Palestinian woman and wounded her despite instructions from his commanders to fire warning shots at the ground.

 

[Chaos]

I think what you have in mind is "independent".

I'm pretty sure an organization can transparently and thoroughly investigate themselves, if they so choose.

But they have no reason to so choose.

 

[gdnp]

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise

1) Surprise #1: Israel investigates themselves and finds they did nothing wrong

2) Surprise #2: Skeptic takes this as proof that Israeli troops did nothing wrong.

3) Surprise #3: Skeptic starts a thread on it, with nothing in the title to inform members of the JREF what the topic of the thread is.

some things are soooooooo predictable.

 

[webfusion]

IDF JAG is probably the most accurate investigatory body anywhere.

These Military lawyers are fanatics about the letter of the law.
They have to be -- with everyone breathing down the necks of Israelis for lawsuits all over the place (Spain, England, Argentina, the ICC, you-name-it)

http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3664115,00.html
IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz, Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter, former GOC Southern Command Doron Almog, former National Security Council Head Giora Eiland and Brigadier-General (Res.) Mike Herzog have also been named as 'persons of interest' in the case.

These guys are not dog-soldiers. These are the top brass.

In my view, this current "Gaza War Crimes" thing will go nowhere based on the evidence --- but it will drag on in the Court of Public Opinion (and maybe reach some actual Courts)
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLF572446

 

[WildCat]

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise

1) Surprise #1: Israel investigates themselves and finds they did nothing wrong

2) Surprise #2: Skeptic takes this as proof that Israeli troops did nothing wrong.

3) Surprise #3: Skeptic starts a thread on it, with nothing in the title to inform members of the JREF what the topic of the thread is.

some things are soooooooo predictable.

Surprise surprise surprise, yet another post which presents exactly zero evidence that any of the rumours cited have any basis in reality.

Too bad, I really thought you'd be the first. But I'm sure you could wait weeks or even months and still not be beat out, for some reason nobody seems to have any evidence, but dammit you know Israel did it because they're just so damned evil!

 

[WildCat]

It's not as if the IDF failed to find any wrong-doing.

(This might be unrelated to the academy debriefing)
IDF soldier demoted for shooting Gaza woman in legs
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1074077.html

So you now admit Israel does punish soldiers who do wrong?

 

[applecorped]

Mind-reading and bluster are much easier than making cogent points, too. And you don't have to tell me, I know you already know that trick.

I know that trick too! Alas, I am a one trick pony.

 

[lionking]

Good for them! They investigated themselves and found they did nothing wrong!

A more transparent and thorough investigation, the world has never seen.

Are there any first world nations where investigations into criminal acts by the armed services are not investigated in-house? It seems to be the standard, and the military police and investigators pride themselves on their professionalism and often hand out harsher sentences than civil courts as I recall.

But would it make any difference to Israel-bashers if the investigations were conducted by Israeli civil authorities?

 

[FireGarden]

So you now admit Israel does punish soldiers who do wrong?

Who are you even talking to?
It isn't anybody whose posts you've read.