This was removed but re-instated after I protested. There is a mistake in the post I should have referred to mole or agent-provacateur in the first line and not stool pigeon.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/16/richard-goldstone-report-israel-gaza
Kosky must be a Hamas stool-pigeon within the Zionist establishment, either that or an expert satirist. His extremist defence of Israel is so patently incredible it cannot have been posted with the serious intent of defending Israel.
Why else would he discount evidence form the UN, ICRC and many others? Why would he fail to recognise the crime of the blockade of Gaza/ Why would he not se ethat a kill ration of 100:1 in itself raises crucial questions of proportionality? - more rhetorical questions would become tedious.
Kosky complains "Goldstone's so-called investigation is largely reliant upon "eyewitness" Gaza testimony". It has always appeared to me that interviewing witnesses is the normal start of any forensic investigation - if it is unnecessary police forces around the world could save much time and money. It would appear that Kosky's preferred approach would have been a phone call to the alleged perpetrator along the lines 'Did you do do it?', 'No', 'Sorry to bother you have a good day.' Job done. Investigations of the banking crisis seems to have followed that path to much derision
btbLondon
Kosky must be a Hamas stool-pigeon within the Zionist establishment, either that or an expert satirist. His extremist defence of Israel is so patently incredible it cannot have been posted with the serious intent of defending Israel.
Why else would he discount evidence form the UN, ICRC and many others? Why would he fail to recognise the crime of the blockade of Gaza/ Why would he not se ethat a kill ration of 100:1 in itself raises crucial questions of proportionality? - more rhetorical questions would become tedious.
Kosky complains "Goldstone's so-called investigation is largely reliant upon "eyewitness" Gaza testimony". It has always appeared to me that interviewing witnesses is the normal start of any forensic investigation - if it is unnecessary police forces around the world could save much time and money. It would appear that Kosky's preferred approach would have been a phone call to the alleged perpetrator along the lines 'Did you do do it?', 'No', 'Sorry to bother you have a good day.' Job done. Investigations of the banking crisis seems to have followed that path to much derision
btbLondon
No comments:
Post a Comment