#1: Israel has come up with a somewhat smart compromise to Goldstone’s demand for a good-faith investigation into Operation Cast Lead. Israel is proposing that a panel of respected Israeli jurists [Aharon Barak, Michael Cheshin] review internal IDF investigations into Cast Lead, and if they’re OK, to say so, in the hope that this will be enough to ward off the UN from demanding a more thorough, independent investigation, which, if Israel doesn’t establish, will land it in the Hague court on charges of war crimes. Israel is hoping this will be enough, but will it? Doubtful. The Human Rights Council and UN General Assembly is too heavily stacked against Israel. Other outstanding questions: what real powers will the judicial panel have? If a probe seems inadequate, can the judges order a more thorough investigation? What access will it have to documents, officers, witnesses? How transparent will the process be?

#2: Israel has carried out at least 3 serious probes of varying depth into its actions in Cast Lead. Hundreds of incidents are being investigated. The Foreign and Justice Ministries have carried out probes and released reports. The army is working on a word-by-word response to Goldstone’s report. Facing an international legal onslaught, Israel is taking this very seriously. What has Hamas done? Answer: not one thing. Is this something the UN will take into consideration? Answer: Probably not.

#3: In a recent interview, judge Goldstone said that Israel did not have to change the laws of war in order to fight asymmetrical wars, i.e. wars against enemies that deploy within civilian populations and use guerrilla tactics. He said the current laws of war, the Geneva Conventions, allow Israel to fight effectively against these sorts of enemies. Goldstone’s solution: instead of bombing targets from the air and using armor against Hamas and Hizbullah fighters, the IDF should [in his own words] deploy small, elite commando units. These tactical teams should get in on the ground and fight in close quarters against highly trained and motivated warriors fighting inside houses and tunnels, using booby traps, suicide bombers, kidnapping techniques, and above all, hiding behind civilians. This way Israel would not be in danger of violating international humanitarian law, there would be no collective punishment of the civilian population, and no serious damage to civilian infrastructure. Sounds perfect for Hamas and Hizbullah, who would neutralize any advantage the IDF would hope to bear on them. I think the IDF tried this once, in Defensive Shield’s Jenin operation, in which a dozen IDF soldiers were killed in close-quarters fighting, and Israel was in any case accused of a massacre [which there wasn't].

#4: There’s ample evidence of Hamas and Hizbullah now, at this very minute, deploying rockets in civilian areas. Thousands of rockets, in hundreds of villages and towns. Everyone knows this. Some of the evidence is even exploding in warehouses. Where is the UN Human Rights Council now? Where is Amnesty now? Why are they waiting until the next round of fighting to release their reports?

#5: Outgoing UNIFIL commander Claudio Graziano, in an interview with Army Radio yesterday, said there was no smuggling of weapons into Lebanon. What planet is he living on? Why is he lying?

#6: Internationally respected human rights judge Richard Goldstone took on the Israeli-Gaza case after having worked on South Africa, Kosovo, and Rwanda. All these previous cases saw massive ethnic cleansing, genocide and wholesale murder. The fact that he then comes after Israel, in the minds of some, is a statement in and of itself: Apartheid = Kosovo = Rwanda = Israel. Israel’s enemies obviously accuse it of genocide and ethnic cleansing, but does Goldstone himself accuse Israel of this? Does he think they’re all comparable events? Will he list them one after the other on his CV? Goldstone’s very presence on the probe pairs Operation Cast Lead with his previous work in those other places. Is this fair? Depending on which side you’re on.

#7: Israel’s public information minister, the man tasked with defending Israel’s image abroad, and to coordinate the fight against anti-Semitism, today said the Goldstone report is anti-Semitic. According to Ynet: The information minister is expected to tell the UN chief that the report “must not be an expression of the new anti-Semitism, which is directed at Israel’s soldiers. “The connection between the Goldstone Report and the international Holocaust memorial day is not an easy thing. On the other hand, however, we must learn the lessons from what happened. Then too, those who yelled out were told that Hitler is a clown and that all the gloomy predictions of the 1930s were nonsense. On the Holocaust memorial day of all days, which also marks the battle against global anti-Semitism, we must discuss this connection, because today the soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces are accused of harvesting organs, murdering children and raping women.” Is this the official public diplomacy line adopted by Israel now? To equate the Goldstone Report to anti-Semtism and the Holocaust? If so, is this wise? Similarly, is it wise that the same man who is tasked with defending Israel’s image abroad is also given the job of officially coordinating the fight against global anti-Semitism? Maybe it is, seeing as the two seem to be linked more and more. Or maybe it’s not, seeing as not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. Not by far.