Reply #107: LB, see if you agree with me that Goldstone has no use for Israel's left [View All]

[shira]

Some examples...

1. Breaking the Silence. Goldstone used their testimony against Israel but Goldstone ignored/minimized it when that testimony was bad news against Hamas (and also exculpatory evidence in favor of Israel).

 Picking and choosing its sources for political effect. At times even the same source is regarded by the Report as reliable insofar as its criticism of Israel is concerned but is discounted to the extent that it indicates wrongdoings by Hamas. The group of Israeli soldiers, "Breaking the Silence", for example, is quoted authoritatively throughout the report for its criticisms of Israel (¶ 457, 725, 800, 949, 996, 1022, 1088 – this last paragraph admitting "the soldier does not appear to have been a direct witness to the incident, but rather heard it from others ", 1089, 1183 and footnotes 362, 558), and yet the statements of the group are given no weight when they confirm that Hamas booby trapped civilian buildings11. (¶ 460)

Needless to say, other testimonies reported by Breaking the Silence providing accounts of soldiers caring for injured civilians, and commanders even forbidding their soldiers from sitting on the sofas of the homes they entered, are not deemed worthy of inclusion in the Report.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Initial-response-goldstone-report-24-Sep-2009.htm

2. David Forman of Rabbis for Human Rights doesn't go quite as far as Dershowitz in calling Goldstone a traitor and evil man, but he goes pretty far in his criticism of both Goldstone and Carter...

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:S13_dNKdbhoJ:www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite%3Fcid%3D1259831449470%26pagename%3DJPost%252FJPArticle%252FPrinter+david+forman+jpost+goldstone+carter&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

3. Jessica Montell and Yael Stein of Btselem also have major issues with Goldstone...

Montell:

"THE GOLDSTONE Report is unsettling. I was disturbed by the framing of Israel's military operation as part of "an overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population for its resilience."

Stein:

“Virtually no one in Israel, including the leaders of Breaking the Silence and the human rights group B’Tselem, thinks that the Goldstone accusation of an assault on civilians is correct. ‘I do not accept the Goldstone conclusion of a systematic attack of civilian infrastructure,’ said Yael Stein, research director of B’Tselem. ‘It is not convincing.’

4. David Kretzmer (Btselem, UNHRC, etc) slams Goldstone too...

"Let me state from the start that I don't agree with the report." He said he thinks the report is flawed because it confused fact finding with political analysis, consistently gave Hamas the benefit of the doubt and made statements that were not factually accurate.

==========================

Do you think any of the above leftists (I'm assuming you agree they count as leftists) really believe Israel's response in OCL had nothing to do with Hamas rockets - and that those rockets were only an excuse Israel used in order to punish Gazans? :eyes:

2. In the eyes of the authors of the Report, Israel's operation in Gaza had nothing to do with the 12,000 rockets and mortars fired by Hamas over eight years on towns and villages inside Israel, nor with the fact that close to one million Israeli citizens had to live their lives within seconds of bomb-shelters because they were in range of Hamas attacks. Nor, in their view, did it have anything to do with the smuggling of weapons and ammunition to terrorist groups through hundreds of tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border. Indeed, neither the right to self defense nor the smuggling of weapons into the Gaza Strip are even mentioned in the Report.

3. Rather, the Report advances a narrative which ignores the threats to Israeli civilians, as well as Israel's extensive diplomatic and political efforts to avoid the outbreak of hostilities. In this narrative self defense finds no place – Israel's defensive operation was nothing other than a "deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population" (¶ 1690(2)1).

===========================

Do you believe the above leftists would agree with Goldstone on the effects of rockets on Ashdod...

 Minimizing the impact of terrorist attacks on Israel. The Report seeks to limit the scope of a State's response to terrorist threats by downplaying and minimizing the effects of such attacks. For example, describing rocket and mortar attacks on the Israeli town of Ashdod, the Report describes the impact as "a brief interruption to economy brought about by the temporary displacement of some of their residents"(¶ 107), simply ignoring the death and injury to Ashdod's residents caused by missile attacks.

===========================

Lastly, what kind of leftist recognizes or excuses Hamas' right to terror when it has nothing to do with self-determination?

 Justification for terrorism. The Report supports the so-called "right" of Hamas to use force against Israel in the name of self-determination (¶ 269), while ignoring the consistent approach of Hamas – as evident in its Charter and the statements of its leaders - which not only rejects the peace process agreed by Israel and the PLO but explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel. The Report describes the rocket attacks from Gaza, including those which immediately followed Israel's withdrawal of all forces and civilians from the area, as “reprisals” (¶109, ¶1662-1665(2)),

================================================================================

Here's the point:

Goldstone isn't even trying to work with Israel's left. His report describes an Israel that leftists in BreakingTheSilence, Rabbis for HR, and Btselem do not recognize. Goldstone uses leftist Israeli criticism of Israel much like Iran, the PLO, or Syria uses it - in order to demonize Israel - while disregarding everything else that either implicates Hamas or exculpates the IDF. If anything, Goldstone should be working with Israel's left and not against it, not using it to bash Israel like Iran, Syria, etc.

Judging by your replies earlier, it appears you don't believe Goldstone's Report to be "leftwing" (I wonder whether you believe HRW and AI's reports to be leftwing since many of their conclusions match Goldstone's - and they endorse his report). So why do you believe so many "true" leftwingers here (whose views are rightwing if they also have no use for Israel's left) are so reluctant to question or criticize the report?