Jeffrey Goldberg's recent attack on J Street included a swipe at Justice Richard Goldstone. Emphasis mine:
J Street helped arrange visits by Judge Richard Goldstone, the South African jurist appointed by the U.N. to investigate the most recent conflict in Gaza, to Capitol Hill. Goldstone's work, heavily reliant on Hamas for uncorroborated information, has been condemned on both the left and the right....
This is a serious charge, and a chestnut of the Israel lobby. Last year AIPAC said that the Goldstone investigation was "rigged." Alan Dershowitz elaborated: the report "could have been drafted by Hamas extremists" and members of the fact-finding mission "were accompanied on their investigations in Gaza by actual Hamas activists who showed them only what they wanted them to see."
Goldstone specifically refuted the charge in an interview with Bill Moyers in October 2009:
BILL MOYERS: What were your standards of evidence, as you conducted these discussions, investigations and hearings in Gaza?
RICHARD GOLDSTONE: Well, we spoke to well over 100 witnesses. We didn’t, obviously, take at face value everything we were told.
BILL MOYERS: Yeah, one criticism was that those witnesses were supplied by Hamas militants.
RICHARD GOLDSTONE: Well, in fact, that’s not correct. We made our own inquiries, and we decided who we would see. We weren’t given a list by Hamas or anybody else. We chose incidents, 36 out of as I say, could have been hundreds. But we chose the people we wanted to see, and certainly, there was no Hamas presence anywhere near the vicinity of where we saw people. There were malicious statements to the effect that they were, but I can give you every assurance that it didn’t happen. And I can assure you that if it did happen, I wouldn’t have been prepared to continue to operate under those situations. I would have insisted that they leave. And if I couldn’t achieve that, I would have abandoned the investigation.
So Goldberg is calling Goldstone a liar.
Goldstone's description of his methods is borne out by a reading of his report. You will find that while the UN Human Rights Council mission interviewed Hamas officials on such issues as the character of the police force that was devastated by Israeli attacks, the mission relied overwhelmingly in its investigation on interviews of scores of Palestinian individuals (including for instance, the Fatah father whose 13 and 18-year-old sons were killed by an Israeli mortar). It also refers to many reports of non-governmental organizations, from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society to B'Tselem to Human Rights Watch to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. There are extensive quotes from, say, Eyad el Sarraj of the Gaza Community Mental Health Program, and Sara Roy of Harvard, and Breaking the Silence's Israeli soldier testimonies about their actions in Gaza.
Even the report's finding that it could not credit or discredit Israel's allegation that Palestinian militants fired from alongside Al Quds Hospital before Israelis destroyed that hospital-- Goldstone didn't base that conclusion on interviews with Hamas, but on interviews with doctors and other witnesses.
I don't see any "uncorroborated information" that comes from Hamas.
Furthermore, the Goldstone report goes after Hamas. It accuses the military wing of Hamas of likely war crimes in its attacks on southern Israeli towns. And it accused Hamas of human rights violations:
[S]ecurity services under the control of the Gaza authorities [Hamas in Goldstone's definition] carried out extrajudicial executions, arbitrary arrests, detentions and ill-treatment of people, in particular political opponents, which constitute serious violations of the human rights to life, to liberty and security of the person, to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, to be protected against arbitrary arrest and detention, to a fair and impartial legal proceeding; and to freedom of opinion and expression, including freedom to hold opinions without interference.
So I wonder. What facts support Goldberg's damaging assertion?
I did not know that J street had helped arrange visits to the hill by Judge Goldstone. Great to know
In the meantime, two IDF thugs have been convicted of using a Palestinian child as a human shield, confirming what Goldstone said.
If the treatment of Goldstone had been done by anyone else but AIPAC, it would be condemned as the worst antisemitism.
>> If the treatment of Goldstone had been done by anyone else but AIPAC, it would be condemned as the worst antisemitism.
And that’s just the kind of hypocrisy a “humanist” can really get behind.
good point.
I have so much respect for Judge Goldstone. A brave man committed to international law. So much pressure put on that man. And he continues to stand by his report. Not many people like this in the world.
I want to post this link to Hybrid states ‘New Israeli report on Operation Cast Lead confirms Goldstone report’s main findings’
link to hybridstates.com
Defense Minister Ehud Barak described it as “false, distorted, and irresponsible“. Information Minister Yuli Edelstein called it “anti-Semitic“. Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren said it “insidiously… portrayed the Jews as the deliberate murderers of innocents“. Foreign Minister Lieberman argued that its true purpose “was to destroy Israel’s image, in service of countries where the terms ‘human rights’ and ‘combat ethics’ do not even appear in their dictionaries“. And the US House of Representatives banded together in bipartisan harmony to pass a resolution (344–36) that called “on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration” of it.
For nearly a year now, vicious attacks on the Goldstone report and on Judge Goldstone himself have been the thing for Israel’s numerous apologists to do.
There is just one not-so-minor problem with this knee-jerk criticism of the report and infinite stream of ad hominem libel against its main author. A majority of the most damning—and damaging—war crimes that are alleged to have taken place have now been confirmed by the IDF’s own investigations into the matter, themselves only conducted in an effort to derail the Goldstone report’s referral to the International Criminal Court.
IDF confirms over 20 gravest findings of the Goldstone Report
Several of the most dramatic instances of war crimes, which previously stirred Israel’s defenders into fits, are now publicly admitted by the IDF in the recent update to its official response (which can be found here).
Some examples of war crimes include:
White phosphorous in urban areas: This one is probably the most famous admission that emerged after a series of easily disproved lies. Israel’s initial response was one of absolute denial, indeed indignation, that people would suggest it had used banned chemical weapons in densely populated areas. But the steady stream of photos and videos depicting phosphorous burns on children and buildings eventually forced Israel to admit it had used these prohibited weapons.
The murder of two unarmed Palestinians carrying white flags of surrender.
The Al-Fakhura Street incident: Israeli mortar fire at a site adjacent to a UN Relief Works Agency compound resulted in multiple civilian deaths.
The use of innocent Palestinians as human shields: The Goldstone report explains that in order “to carry out house searches as human shields the Israeli soldiers took off AD/03’s blindfold but he remained handcuffed. He was forced to walk in front of the soldiers and told that, if he saw someone in the house but failed to tell them, he would be killed. He was instructed to search each room in each house cupboard by cupboard. After one house was completed he was taken to another house with a gun pressed against his head and told to carry out the same procedure there. He was punched, slapped and insulted throughout the process.” The new Israeli report identifies this anonymous human shield AD/03 and confirms this episode. Other cases of human shield use, e.g. Abbas Ahmad Ibrahim Halawa and Mahmoud Abd Rabbo al-Ajrami, were also confirmed.
Al-Samouni family massacre: The Israelis attacked two houses of the Samouni family, killing 23 people in total. Subsequently, they prevented the Red Cross and PRCS from providing care to the wounded and dying for three days. Confirmed by Israel and the subject of a military investigation.
Firing on Al Maqadmah and other mosques during prayer time.
In total, a quick scan through the IDF’s new report provides direct confirmation of more than 20 of Goldstone’s findings. A number of these are the subject of internal IDF investigations, which are infuriating large swaths of the military. Of course, decent people everywhere should hope that those investigations are conducted in the most unbiased and professional manner possible, and that justice is served appropriately to all those who have committed war crimes. I am not holding my breath, but it’s good to throw this wish out there.
Israel admits it did not minimize civilian casualties
The IDF report states: “IDF orders include the obligation to take all feasible precautions in order to minimize the incidental loss of civilian life or property” [emphasis added]. Israelis accept this statement as an article of faith and become unglued at the suggestion that “everything possible” wasn’t done to ensure the safety of innocent people. This expression of faith is often followed by the questions: “What? Do you think Israel wants to kill civilians?” These questions are of course answered far more accurately with data on casualties than with ideological blindness.
They are also answered, however, through inadvertent slips in the public relations machine that shapes international media coverage of Israel/Palestine. Today, we are treated to a spate of articles across the English and Hebrew-language press (e.g. here and here) about how Israel “promises” to do a better job of not killing innocent human beings next time around.
“The IDF has … implemented operational changes in its orders and combat doctrine designed to further minimise civilian casualties and damage to civilian property in the future,” it said.
“In particular, the IDF has adopted important new procedures designed to enhance the protection of civilians in urban warfare, for instance by further emphasising that the protection of civilians is an integral part of an IDF commander’s mission.”
Perhaps in a future “update” the IDF can enlighten the world as to how it was previously taking “all feasible precautions” and yet finds only now new tactics to protect civilians. Perhaps the IDF spokesperson can further explain how emphasizing to its soldiers that “protection of civilians is an integral part” of the mission is considered an “operational change” from earlier practice. One must presume that protection of civilians has not been given sufficient attention until now, and only Goldstone’s courageous and now confirmed report has forced Israel to reconsider the meaning of “all feasible precautions” and “minimize civilian casualties”. As Magnes Zionist has pointed out, Israel seems to think it can get away with a “I didn’t do it but will try harder next time” approach.
Or perhaps the IDF’s commanders and soldiers got a bit confused by all this talk of “protecting civilians” and that talk of the “Dahiya Doctrine.”
But all of this gives the IDF a bit too much credit, too much benefit of the doubt. This new report is nothing more than a desperate tactic to try and avoid criminal prosecution for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity in the ICC. Most of the IDF’s “investigations” have already been dismissed as part of this whitewash, notwithstanding all the irate IDF officers unaccustomed to the pretense of accountability.
All it teaches us is four concrete things: (1) the Goldstone report did a stunningly good job in identifying possible war crimes despite Israel’s concerted non-cooperation with the commission, (2) Israel has by its own admission failed to adequately protect civilians in war, (3) many people owe Judge Goldstone a sincere, begging apology for the disgraceful manner in which he has been treated, and (4) justice for the Palestinian victims of Israeli terrorism is still far away.
None of which we will hear about from the likes of Goldberg, nor any admission from the US Congress that they signed on to a vicious lie.
I’d like to see a list of those congress persons who signed on to the lie about the Goldstone Report. Or rather, I I’d like to see a list of those who did not sign. I imagine AIPAC has that shorter list, and those people are targets.
“I want to post this link to Hybrid states ‘New Israeli report on Operation Cast Lead confirms Goldstone report’s main findings’”
Thanks Memphis.
As soon as I read this headline, O thought of that link.
Memphis, this is really an excellent analysis from Hybrid States. Reich accurately portrays the battle between plain common sense and willful ideological blindness, with all the predictable results. The apologies to Goldstone will never materialize, of course, and I hope he realizes how many people of good will admire his courage and excellence.
excellent refutation of goldberg’s lies phil
I’ll go the distance: AIPAC’s treatment of Goldstone is either anti-Semitic or self-hating. Depends on who said it. If words defaming a noble Jew (as Goldstone is) were spoken or written by a Jew, he or she is, by common if not universal current practice, to be described as “self-hating” (apparently on the theory that all Jews are one person and that a Jew who besmirches any Jew besmirches himself). Otherwise the speaker is, again, by common if not universal practice, called “anti-Semitic”.
BTW, I’ve heard and read that Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel, Monk Eastman, and Arnold Rothstein (to say nothing of at least two Israeli soldiers) were (gasp) “thugs” or “mobsters”. By even repeating these scurrilous assertions I may expose myself to attacks as “self-hating”, etc. though, to be fair, I have not heard those fine gentlemen described as “noble”.
Here is Dershowitz on Goldstone as a ‘hanging judge’ and comparing him with Mengele:
link to youtube.com
I thought, fool that I am, when I first read about this: this, surely and finally, MUST be the end of Dershowitz — at Huffpo for sure, perhaps at AIPAC, maybe even at Harvard (well, no, not really). What he says about Goldstone is a lie and gross defamation: Goldstone did not issue death penalties for blacks in South Africa because they were black, but because they were murderers. The death penalty would have equally applied in the US and any other country that issues an automatic death sentence for grave murder cases without mitigating circumstances or reasonable doubt. And this guy is not just some Sanchez-type journalist , but a law professor at Harvard. There is no way Dersh doesn’t know the difference between criminal law and racial law, such as the SA apartheid laws. And then he proceeds from this obscene distortion to comparing Judge Goldstone with the mad Nazi doctor Mengele at the Auschwitz selection ramp, committing crimes against humanity! In addition, I know of no Nazi laws that forced Mengele to conduct his ‘medical research’ on Auschwitz prisoners. He wanted to do them, and nobody stopped him. But there is Dersh telling people who don’t know any better, that Goldstone’s ‘excuse’ — ‘I had to follow the law’ — is no more valid than it was in Mengele’s case? The analogy is completely out of orbit. And then they fire Sanchez for anti-semitism for calling Stewart a bigot and denying that Jews are an oppressed minority in the US. Please.
The average gentile is baffled by this double standard. I remember Finkelstein pointing out (in ‘Defamation’) that Jewish Israelis, among each other, employ Holocaust-analogies liberally on a daily basis (bad food or clothes = ‘just like Auschwitz’ etc). Who knew? But try comparing Gaza to Auschwitz, and there will be outrage, even though the analogy is as hyperbolic in either case. Haaretz just ran an article on (unofficial) code names such as “Mengele Squad” (gassing Palestinian houses) or “Schindler’s List” (evacuation of civilians during Cast Lead) in IDF slang.
What is it that makes such Nazi-analogies acceptable, and what makes them anti-semitic? It’s clearly not the identity/ethnicity of the speaker but the “Israel: right or wrong” divide. Everybody who criticizes Israel’s policies against the Palestinians is an anti-semite and may be compared to a Nazi. But it’s ok to fight like a Nazi against Palestinians: that’s self-defense. All criticism of Israel is by definition irrational (anti-semitic), and may be deflected with equally irrational arguments, made by Jews against Jews. Whatever works. It’s completely insane.
It’s actually very sane, given the goal: say/do nothing to besmirch Israel, no matter what Israel actually does or does not do, and do everything to make Israel look good. In all situations, remember that facts are to be perceived as such only when they further the subject. Universal principles of logic, ethics, humanism, individualism, morality, etc–are simply tools for the survival of the jews as a collective, which is the holy grail, and that grail lies in Israel, the jewish insurance policy against future pogroms. If those universal tools don’t fit, ignore them or cover them up with red herrings.
When I think of integrity, I think of Jeff Goldberg.
When I think of integrity, I think of Jeff Goldberg.
When I think of Goldberg, I think of a journalist too afraid to have a comments section on his articles, unlike most of the others that write for The Atlantic.
Having witnessed the Israeli atrocity “Cast Lead” against the undefended population of the Gaza Concentration Camp from Europe where, with few exceptions, a responsible press still operates, the propaganda aimed at destroying the name and earned reputation of Judge Goldstone and his measured report upon those atrocities clearly highlights the growing dysfunction of numerous here-to-fore “respectable governments”. The Washington/Tel Aviv axis of evil has become openly vile and have surrendered all considerations of legitimacy as democratic entities. Their place in history as tyrannical and despotic governments is now assured, their power derived by force, fear and coercion. Both governments rely upon the power of police and military for intimidation and coercion of dissent, of their populations or external populations. Al Jazeera provides a forum for Cindy Sheehan’s in a brilliant report on this development of the police state that should be read.
link to english.aljazeera.net
The quenching of dissent in the Washington/Tel Aviv axis of evil is identical and should be of the gravest concern for any dissenting democrat.
Re: the responsible European press
I wonder what Chancellor Merkel reads, why Germany suffers from Finkelstein phobia, why dozens of politicians over the past decade have been excluded from their parties for criticizing Israel, why every talk show on Israel, Gaza and the occupation turns into a discussion of anti-semitism?
not another ‘axis of evil’ simplification, please
link to globalresearch.ca
‘The Washington/Tel Aviv axis of evil has become openly vile and have surrendered all considerations of legitimacy as democratic entities.’
Couldn’t have said it better myself, Formerly T-bear.
Rock on.
RE: “Jeffrey Goldberg’s recent attack on J Street included a swipe at Justice Richard Goldstone.” – Phil
A PERTINENT FACEBOOK GROUP
Name: Richard J. Goldstone: Integrity Personified
Category: Common Interest – Beliefs & Causes
Description: A group for individuals who respect Justice Goldstone and admire his integrity.
Open: All content is public.
LINK – link to facebook.com
Let’s call Jeff Goldberg what he is: pig.
I do wonder if the latest acts (or in-actions) addressed by the Septet, and, Bibi, truly speaks volumes towards the Peace Farce’s chances…
My latest Diary…
‘Israel Is Addicted To Occupation’
Mearsheimer’s take on it sure puts a hole in any illusions
The Richard Goldstone attacks: a moment of sheer shamelessness. That the attacks continue is not surprising. They will attack him as long as they talk, like chanting to themselves, so they don’t hear the truth in their own minds or aren’t left alone with his ghost.
Chattering keeps the demons at bay.