Diary
The Goldstone hate fest continues...
9 March, 2010
The UN sponsored hate fest against Israel (aka the Goldstone report) has spawned a number of intense debates over the legitimacy of Israel's actions in 2009. One of these was held at the London School of Economics featuring some members of the 'fact finding' team (Colonel Desmond Travers and Professor Christine Chinkin). For a full report read here.
Strikingly, the LSE abandoned the opportunity for a proper debate by refusing to invite an Israeli debater who actually supported the operation. The Israeli speaker on show was Ami Ayalon, a former Labour MK and former head of the Domestic security service who disagreed with Operation Cast Lead.
Much has been made about the presence of Professor Christine Chinkin, one of the investigating team who had already publicly condemned Israel before she was selected. This is a clear breach of the protocols governing UN investigations. But less has been said about retired Colonel Desmond Travers. As you can see at the website Middle East Monitor (http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/downloads/interviews/interview-with-colonel-desmond-travers.pdf), the Colonel was highly evasive when he was asked to comment on his outrageous and bigoted assertion that 'Britain's foreign policy interests in the Middle East seem to be influenced strongly by Jewish lobbyists.'
Worse, his entire methodology has been taken apart in a masterful article from the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs. Here is a sample of what they say:
A Fundamental Bias against the Israel Defense Forces: While Travers assumes the worst of intentions on the part of the Israel Defense Forces, he praises Hamas for their cooperation with the Mission. When he was asked about Hamas intimidation that affected the Mission's inquiries, he replied that that there was "none whatsoever." Yet the Goldstone Report itself noted in Paragraph 440 that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of Palestinian armed groups because of a "fear of reprisals." He rejects the notion that Hamas shielded its forces in the civilian population and does not accept the idea that Israel faced asymmetric warfare.
False Information Reported About Weapons Systems: Travers comes up with a story that the IDF had unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's) that could obtain a "thermal signature" on a Gaza house and detect that there were large numbers of people inside. Incredibly, he then suggests that with this information that certain houses were "packed with people," the Israeli military would then deliberately order a missile strike on these populated homes. The primary technical problem with his theory is that Israel does not have UAV's that can see though houses and pick up a thermal signature.
4. Lack of Professionalism in Conducting Thorough Investigations: Travers relies on his own prejudices when he looks into the question of whether Gazan Mosques had been militarized by Hamas and turned into weapons depots. In an interview with Harpers, published on October 29, 2009, Travers makes a sweeping generalization: "We found no evidence that mosques were used to store munitions." He then dismissed those who suggested that was the case by saying: "Those charges reflect Western perceptions in some quarters that Islam is a violent religion." How many mosques did Travers investigate? He admits that the Mission only checked two mosques.
These are damning methodological flaws and biases which highlight the twisted nature of Travers' thinking. The man had the temerity to dismiss other military voices, such as those of Tim Collins and Richard Kemp, whose testimony has revealed the lousy conclusions reached by the one sided Goldstone report. Quite appalling.
Post to Delicious
