Richard Goldstone is a noble man

[oberliner]

Richard Goldstone is a noble man. How humble and professional a man can be, when he publishes a text whose main message is that he has changed his position. This is a person with enough self-confidence to allow him to examine a situation again on the basis of new data. Goldstone is a model to be emulated of a culture of discourse which is strange to us, which is opposite to our fundamental psychological mindset.

He published an article in The Washington Post entitled "Reconsidering the Goldstone report on Israel and war crimes." Why the "reconsideration"? Because the final report of the UN panel, comprising independent experts, which continued its investigation following the recommendations of the Goldstone Report, found that Israel had examined "400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza," while Hamas "has not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel." The committee also concluded "that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy" by Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/richard-goldstone-is-a-noble-man-1.353946

[Douglas Carpenter]

1. from MIFTAH: Goldstone, We’re Disappointed

Goldstone, We’re Disappointed
Date posted: April 04, 2011
By Joharah Baker for MIFTAH

The pieces of the puzzle just don’t fit. Why would Justice Richard Goldstone backtrack on a report he penned and defended tooth and nail two years ago only to say he would have written things “differently” now? There has to be something more than just a sudden epiphanic reconsideration into Israel’s Cast Lead Operation into Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009, which left 1,400 Palestinians dead. The only possible and credible explanation for his strange and unbecoming Washington Post article on April 1 is that Goldstone succumbed to pressure... No other explanation is fathomable for the simple reason that no dynamics of the conflict in Gaza have changed, except maybe for the worse.

snip:

No, Goldstone knows all about Israel’s atrocities during Cast Lead; how ambulances were not allowed to reach dying and dead bodies for days; how whole families were slaughtered in their homes when Israeli officers bombed their neighborhoods even as they knew people were sleeping inside.

Justice Goldstone first charged Israel with possible war crimes in the report that has now lost its luster. At the time, the Palestinians praised the judge for his impartiality, something rarely seen in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel, of course, was livid, calling the report one-sided and wrongly criticizing it for its right to defend its citizens.

It looks now that the once-deemed courageous Judge Goldstone is a bit of a cowardly lion. Understandably, the man must have come under tremendous pressure from even his own community. Last year, the South African Zionist Federation barred Goldstone from attending his grandson’s bar mitzvah, justifying the move by saying they were “pro-Israel.” One can only imagine what other unpublicized pressures Justice Goldstone might have come under.

Still, it is disappointing that a prestigious and highly credible judge would cower in the face of coercion. His Washington Post article was full of scathing criticism of Hamas more probably as a way of countering his backtracking on Israel. What Justice Goldstone fails to point out is that Hamas is not a “responsible and democratic” government of a sovereign state by which it can be held to the same standards as Israel. This is not to deflect from any wrongdoing that Hamas has committed – which it has – but to ensure that Hamas (no matter how much we want to demonize it) cannot be compared to Israel and its military might.

In this sense, Israel is much guiltier than Hamas could ever be. It has a moral duty to uphold the democracy it claims to embrace – a democracy obviously applicable only to its Jewish Israeli citizens. The Gaza war caused unspeakable destruction and misery to its residents, and regardless of whether we condone Hamas’ tactics or not, it is disappointing to see a dignified man such as Richard Goldstone excuse Israel’s atrocities because he could not take the heat.

Joharah Baker is Director of the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH).

http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=23317&CategoryId=3

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. That MITFAH is displeased does not surprise anyone

The report was flawed to begin with. Goldstone was stoned walled by Israel and steered by the Hamas, all of which was predicted and expected. He could not help but to produce a flawed product. At first he defended it as being the best that could be done. It is good to finally see that he has the intellectual integrity to acknowledge its serious flaws at this point and ask that it not be approved.

Conspiracy buffs will only speculate about how Israel must of gotten to him some how. However, at this point it smacks of intellectual integrity and reflection, not some evil deeds.

[King_David]

7. ' Why would Justice Richard Goldstone backtrack on a report he penned and defended'

'' Why would Justice Richard Goldstone backtrack on a report he penned and defended tooth and nail two years ago only to say he would have written things “differently” now? ''

I believe that the author of the OP answered the question for Miftah :

''Richard Goldstone is a noble man. How humble and professional a man can be, when he publishes a text whose main message is that he has changed his position. This is a person with enough self-confidence to allow him to examine a situation again on the basis of new data. Goldstone is a model to be emulated of a culture of discourse which is strange to us, which is opposite to our fundamental psychological mindset.''

[azurnoir]

3. I find this hilarious in a cynical sort of way

first off one should actually read what Goldstone says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html

but more over and aside from Israel's grasping on to the OP as some sort of exoneration and/or a distraction from current events Goldstone may have cleared the way for OCL2, all in all Goldstines legacy is now a sad one as the evidence that Hasbarim leveled against him concerning his past career in SA can now be used by 'the other side' albeit the other side has had the honor to not do this-so far, but here is an op-ed from Haaretz that speculates on Goldstones reasoning

What made Goldstone change his mind about the Gaza war report?

According to an article published on the 'International Middle East Media Center' website (a site describing itself as a "joint Palestinian-International effort"), Goldstone sat in the audience of a debate between two lawyers who had visited Gaza as part of a National Lawyers' Guild Delegation, and two Zionist academics who represented Israel.

<snip>

Bell told Haaretz that, in his opinion, the whole experience of the last few months – where Goldstone has heard what many people have to say about him and his report – "caught up with him."

"He tried to claim that he did not make a mistake, but after that night – it seems to me – he understood that he could not claim such a thing and be taken seriously," said Bell.

"If hadn't have sat there and people hadn't have confronted him at other events, he would not have done it," said Bell, referring to the column Goldstone wrote in the April 1 edition of the Washington Post, entitled 'Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/what-made-goldstone-change-his-mind-about-the-gaza-war-report-1.353905

[oberliner]

4. What is the hilarious part?

Can you elaborate on that?

[azurnoir]

5. as I said in a "cynical sort of way" perhaps you missed that

or perhaps it is an example of what I find cynically hilarious about the whole affair, but now that Goldstone has repeated what he has said before in way that the Israeli government has as I said before "latched on to" he is a "honorable man" where as before he was a tool, Israel hating traitor or some such nonsense

[oberliner]

6. What is hilarious in a cynical sort of way?

You didn't explain it in the post.

In case it is not clear, this article is written by a reporter for Ha'aretz, not a representative of the Israeli government.