The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Goldstone gazumped on Gaza > Comments

Goldstone gazumped on Gaza : Comments

By David Singer, published 7/4/2011

Richard Goldstone's faulty report should be expunged from the public record, along with all the UN discussion relating to it.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Israel would certainly like observers to interpret Goldstone’s latest comments in the Washington Post as an exoneration. However, what we are seeing here with Mr. Singer’s selective offering is yet another example of Israel’s new public line to justify their murder of women and children in Gaza.
Goldstone's report will remain as originally submitted to those who know the truth.

Goldstone has been blackmailed and been the subject of abuse by his own Zionists. The timing of Goldstone’s article has raised additional concern among Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups that he has definitely succumbed to enormous political pressure, standard practice in the state of Israel as we know.

Late last month the UN’s Human Rights Council, which set up the fact-finding mission, recommended that the General Assembly refer the Goldstone Report to the Security Council – the decisive stage in moving it to the International Criminal Court. It is expected that the US, which has consistently opposed such a referral, will block the report’s progress to this Criminal Court – further embarrassing Washington after its recent veto at the UN of a Palestinian resolution against Israeli settlements.
The israeli attack dog wagging the limp American tail, yet again.

Debbie Menon in her editorial from My Catbird Seat stated that “unlike most Zionists, Justice Goldstone spoke the truth first, and then the lie. Perhaps this is something which the Zionists cannot understand, and don’t know how to deal with… because they are fumbling and stumbling about like fools vainly trying, like the proverbial cat on the tin roof, to cover up this mess which is fouling their domain which they do not know how to handle. Trying to put Goldstone’s truths back in the bag but, like the proverbial cat once let out of the bag, is nigh on impossible.

The world knows it.

Their incredible protests and affirmations of his “retraction,” only draw more attention to the lie, and validate the assertion that a man will lie and give up his life and honor, to protect his family from abuse and to secure their place in their social community.
Posted by Rhys Stanley, Thursday, 7 April 2011 9:44:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The only thing of substance is the truth where you say;

Israel's bombardment of Gaza is not self-defence - it's a war crime.

In addition, the letter continued:

The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence…Israel's actions amount to aggression, not self-defence.

It would make a world of difference if leaders themselves could figure out the right from wrong. Save the endless wasteful spending on token diplomacy, and show an even hand to both sides of the equation.

The scar deepens as Israel crys wolf and continues to inflict a lack of equity and rights to others as it expects for itself.

If the world can not sort this issue - what hope is there for a future in the Middle East?

I am sure many more peaceful lives have been lost over the past decades under as hostile conditions of ww2 in the immediate middle east over these issues. The comparison however is defunct when we look at the human right promises made in the aftermath of ww2 and the promises made by the accords for the people of Palestine.

What is occurring is a shambles. A mirror of out own virtues - based on power over people, one sided and narrowing.

Goldstones edit is hardly indicating a change within the whole of the report. It is simply and edit of a line or two that does not over-ride the excessive force delivered by a "developed power" as the world protested, yet stood by and watched. Lost is the fact that Palestine [especially Gaza] is illegally ocuppied and the issues of Jewish Settlements... Add more fire to a weeping sore.

Posted by miacat, Thursday, 7 April 2011 1:00:18 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A further comment is warranted

The real analysis of this story comes from Lawrence Davidson who “ looks at the flawed logic and political pressures that may have led Richard Goldstone, the South African Jewish judge who authored the report of the UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict, into altering his original verdict which suggested that Israel committed war crimes during its invasion of Gaza in December 2008” and who, with Gilad Altzon argued that “Judge Richard Goldstone's shunning of his own report into possible Israeli war crimes in Gaza is a "point of no return".

These are the real truths as compared to the careful structured and misrepresented comments by today's writer Mr. Singer who identifies himself as an ‘Australian’ lawyer but who has as his main theme the propaganda of Israel. In this particular matter he is parroting the comments from Netanyahu who instructed his cabinet to do whatever they could to immediately maximise the “retraction” of the original report.
The truth was hurting Israel, if that is possible.

In October 2009, Goldstone told CNN, “I’ve got a great love for Israel” and “I’ve worked for many Israeli causes and continue to do so”.
How could this love not have been at least weakened by what he discovered when writing his original truthful report along with other members of the UN commission?.

But worse was to come and exactly a year ago, in April 2010, the campaign against him reached new lows. The chairman of the South African Zionist Federation, Avrom Krengel tried to prevent Goldstone from participating in his grandson’s bar mitzvah in Johannesburg since “Goldstone caused irreparable damage to the Jewish people as a whole.” The South African Zionist Federation threatened to picket outside the synagogue during the ceremony. Worse was the interference of South Africa’s Chief Rabbi, Warren Goldstein, who chastised Goldstone for “doing greater damage to the State of Israel.”

Israel and its henchmen used Goldstone’s need for acceptane into a social group to blackmail him.

Now these are the real reason how Goldstone's UN Report was changed.

Posted by Rhys Stanley, Thursday, 7 April 2011 1:46:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David Singer,

Oh dear.

And oh dear.

Do you seriously believe Goldstone’s recanting will change a single mind?

For that matter do you truly believe Goldstone’s original report changed a single mind?

Anyone who things they can change people’s minds about Israel should first try something a bit easier. Reconciling quantum mechanics with general relativity might be a good place to start.

Let’s have a reality check.

The Goldstone report was initiated by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) whose predecessor body was once chaired by Gadaffi’s Libya. And, no, Gadaffi did not turn into a mad tyrant overnight. He was already a mad tyrant back then who hanged his enemies in public.

The current members include such bastions of civil liberties as Cuba (vice presidency), Bahrain, China, Libya (suspended a few weeks ago), Pakistan, Russia (where journalists are murdered) and Saudi Arabia (currently helping fellow member state Bahrain putting down a Shia uprising)

This august body has only one country under permanent review. It’s not North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Libya or Belarus. It’s not China or Russia or Syria or Cuba.

It’s Israel.

Who would take a report commissioned by such a body seriously?

You guessed it. Only people for whom any ally in bashing Israel, even Gadaffi, was acceptable.

And what self-respecting Judge would accept such a commission?

How about an Apartheid era hanging Judge who happened to be Jewish and was prepared to bash Israel.

For that matter who would pay any attention to the words of an Apartheid era hanging judge unless he also happened to be a Jew prepared to bash Israel?

Don’t you get it yet David Singer?

The fix is in
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 7 April 2011 2:54:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Where on earth does Singer get off?

Imagine for a moment that a UN prescribed investigation into rocket attacks by Hamas from Gaza that had killed 1300 Israelis, a sizeable proportion of them civilians, were to appoint as its head an Arab who had a 'taken a deep interest in Gaza, in what happens in Gaza, and' had 'been associated with organisations that have worked in Gaza'. Who then only agrees if the actions of Israel during the conflict were to examined as well, even though they had inflicted only 13 Hamas casualties.

David Singer would be absolutely apoplectic. The bile, invective and innuendo would be pouring forth like the closing of the Red Sea over Egyptian heads.

Yet the opposite situation was in play. Goldstone is a Jew who had “taken a deep interest in Israel, in what happens in Israel, and 'had' been associated with organisations that have worked in Israel”, who refused the UN commission unless Hamas was to be included in the investigation.

Yet Singer delivered bile, invective and innuendo, plus allegations of serious bias at the appointees.

Goldstone proved to be quite honourable in his deliberations and his subsequent reappraisal of the findings. He concluded;

“laws of armed conflict apply no less to non-state actors such as Hamas than they do to national armies. Ensuring that non-state actors respect these principles, and are investigated when they fail to do so, is one of the most significant challenges facing the law of armed conflict. Only if all parties to armed conflicts are held to these standards will we be able to protect civilians who, through no choice of their own, are caught up in war.”

Yet only Hamas co-operated with the investigation.

Israel does not consider itself to be under the jurisdiction of the World Court, nor bound by UN resolutions, nor even the Geneva Convention. In fact it considers itself to be so above the standards of international law that it is difficult to see it ever co-operating with an external investigation.

David Singer – a bullying supporter of a bullying state.
Posted by csteele, Thursday, 7 April 2011 4:33:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Singer is supportive of Israeli army and airforce personnal who shoot at and wound pregnant women at work in plastics factories in Gaza.

Of course the Israeli propaganda lies claim their cowardly men only shot at a 'group of militants digging a tunnel'. And of course Singer will disgracefully swallow that cr-p lock stock and barrel too. And defend them too.

Anything the racist thugs in Israel proclaim is truth to Singer and his ilk .

Pregnant women David ... have you no shame. It's not just Palestinians it's the unborn who also threaten the heroes in Israel now is it?

Utter gutlessness. Contemptable ratbags.

Disgraceful. Don't talk to me ... I am utterly disgusted with your unconsiable support of these actions.
Posted by keith, Thursday, 7 April 2011 5:13:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy