Comments on: Goldstone attacks House resolution on his report as ‘sweeping and unfair… devoid of truth’

By: Citizen

Citizen — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 01:50:57 +0000

Witty: “How many of you have read the report, all of it?”
I did, Witty. You remind me of the Grand Inquistor in Fyodor Dostoevyski’s novel , the Bros Karamazov. We know your answer to a single Palestinian baby’s tears. You could be a jesuit, Inquisitor, except you are even worse since you are ethnocentric.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:32:49 +0000

I read the resolution, and saw the Goldstone interview and read his NY Times op-ed.

I assumed that his two presentations accurately summarized his views, intentions, conclusions.

How many of you have read the report, all of it?

Can you drop the character assassination as commentary. It makes this site look more like a lynch mob.

By: lyn117

lyn117 — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 04:58:22 +0000

Well, lets see. The argument by RW against the Goldstone report went something like, it didn’t do a statistical sample of Israeli attacks civilians or civilian structures or food supplies during the offensive, therefore, it was erroneous to conclude that Israel intentionally killed any unarmed civilians or intentionally destroyed any civilian structures or targetted the food supply. The Goldstone investigators, had they done such a statistical sample, would have concluded that Israel was innocent, its hands clean as a whistle, and all those kids incinerated by white phospherous bombs, well, they were militant kids like the Israeli army t-shirt shows, although in fact they only joined the militant resistance after they were dead.

By: potsherd

potsherd — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:39:27 +0000

HERE link to supportgoldstone.org
is a petition from Jewish Voices for Peace.

By: Chaos4700

Chaos4700 — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:52:04 +0000

Oh that’s easy, he doesn’t.

By: Chaos4700

Chaos4700 — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:51:19 +0000

Eeep. It’s not a pretty thought — Joe Lieberman being the precedent for J Street. Lieberman wasn’t exactly good for the American Left — he didn’t play a positive role as as Vice Presidential candidate in Gore’s presidential run. (Imagine how different things would be if Gore had won the election — oh wait, he did. Imagine if he’d been President, anyway.)

Democrat in name only, and not even that any more. Is it bad that I’m now musing about when J Street’s Lieberman moment might hit us?

By: Nolan

Nolan — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:47:12 +0000

Hey guys, check out this guy’s argument.

He goes from asking about the exact wording of the resolution – therefore implying that he hasn’t read it – to using the resolution in criticizing the Goldstone report, which he hasn’t read either.

How does someone like that interact with the reality around him?

By: Nolan

Nolan — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:43:03 +0000

J Street is starting to remind me more and more of Hillary prior to the 2008 elections and Joe Lieberman.

Hillary was supposedly Democratic, but her platform was mostly Republican light. Joe Lieberman went from being a Democrat, to being an Independent and now he’s threatening to side with the Republicans over some Health reform issue.

By: marc b.

marc b. — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:04:43 +0000

Eva, you are an optimist.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:34:33 +0000

The Americans for Peace Now approach is the right one.

The wording of the House resolution was more misrepresentative than the Goldstone report that it criticizes.