Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes

[azurnoir]

We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.

The final report by the U.N. committee of independent experts — chaired by former New York judge Mary McGowan Davis — that followed up on the recommendations of the Goldstone Report has found that “Israel has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza” while “the de facto authorities (i.e., Hamas) have not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel.”

<snip>

While I welcome Israel’s investigations into allegations, I share the concerns reflected in the McGowan Davis report that few of Israel’s inquiries have been concluded and believe that the proceedings should have been held in a public forum. Although the Israeli evidence that has emerged since publication of our report doesn’t negate the tragic loss of civilian life, I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes.

Israel’s lack of cooperation with our investigation meant that we were not able to corroborate how many Gazans killed were civilians and how many were combatants. The Israeli military’s numbers have turned out to be similar to those recently furnished by Hamas (although Hamas may have reason to inflate the number of its combatants).

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

[shira]

1. Oops, nevermind? Israel really didn't intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy?

After all this time...

And now this tool is blaming the non-cooperation of Israel for his blood libel, when he admits the UNHRC has a bias against Israel that "cannot be doubted"? (His words).

What an asshole.

Then again, I expect nothing more from an unrepentant, lying, hanging apartheid Judge...

[azurnoir]

2. well someone liked it

Lieberman lauds new Goldstone conclusions about Gaza war

"I want to congratulate Goldstone's new conclusions, but I am not surprised by them," Lieberman told Channel 2 news. "We knew the truth, and we had no doubt that it would eventually come out."

<snip>

"After the Goldstone Report we excreted great efforts in hasbara . Two committees that were set up afterward came to the same conclusions and I was glad to hear that Jurist Goldstone came to the same conclusion," said Lieberman.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-lauds-new-goldstone-conclusions-about-gaza-war-1.353677

[shira]

3. so, do you still think the IDF deliberately targeted Gazan civilians as a matter of policy? n/t

[azurnoir]

4. I didn't think that they really did what I said on the subject was that IDF

did not care much one way or the other, which is different than deliberately targeting an example would be the bombardment of a mosque during evening prayers

[Ken Burch]

70. Hairsplitting

It's just as bad if there were repeated incidents of intentional targeting. Goldstone did not say that all civilian Gazan deaths were accidental.

[shira]

5. The BBC, Guardian, Reuters, NYT, and other major media aren't reporting this.

Surprise!!!

:eyes:

[oberliner]

6. Israeli press is

Goldstone: Claims of Israel's Gaza war crimes should be reconsidered

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/goldstone-claims-of-israel-s-gaza-war-crimes-should-be-reconsidered-1.353630

PM: UN must retract Goldstone report

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4051053,00.html

Goldstone: Israel didn't target civilians

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=214830

And here is a story from a Palestinian source:

Goldstone: Hamas failed to investigate allegations

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=374830

Edit to add:

Nothing on Al Jazeera English online as of yet - surprising because they gave the report a lot of coverage at the time.

[azurnoir]

9. do you find it somehow strange that an editorial in an American

newspaper is not 'news' in the US or the UK did you forget the EU, Africa and the 'Far East", but is 'news' in Israel and perhaps those in the OPT and Gaza? Do you think it makes a prima facie case that there is some kind of anti{Israel bias in th e American media?

[oberliner]

10. The piece was written by Richard Goldstone himself

His remarks do seem to be getting coverage now from sources around the world.

Especially considering that the PM of Israel is asking the UN to retract the report in light of these comments.

[azurnoir]

15. BBC, NYT, CNN, AlJazeera surprise

Israel calls on UN to bury Gaza crimes report

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/04/201142231017418.html

Israel urges UN to nullify Goldstone Report on Gaza war

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12949016

Author of Israel-Hamas report: Would reconsider findings

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/04/02/israel.goldstone.report/index.html

Head of U.N. Panel Regrets Saying Israel Purposely Killed Gazans

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/world/middleeast/03goldstone.html

[oberliner]

17. Clearly there is something "new" here after all

Anything from The Guardian yet?

[azurnoir]

20. or it's the weekend, in none of these cases was it headline news

and somehow I just somehow knew there would be complaints about the Guardian perhaps should be checked CIF Watch

[oberliner]

30. Certainly not "headline news" but the internet never sleeps - even on the weekend!

You, of all people, ought to know that. You've posted articles that were published online over weekends, have you not?

The Guardian ran two op-ed pieces from Goldstone in the past, so it is somewhat surprising that this would go unmentioned.

[LeftishBrit]

27. The BBC definitely are; I heard quite a lot about it on the radio last night.

[shira]

28. Good. Still nothing from the Guardian as of this moment. n/t

[oberliner]

29. Especially odd considering two Goldstone op-ed pieces were published by The Guardian previously

He wrote an op-ed for them in October, 2009 and in May of last year.

[azurnoir]

31. from th Guardisn

Judge Goldstone expresses regrets about his report into Gaza war

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/goldstone-regrets-report-into-gaza-war

[LeftishBrit]

32. Here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/goldstone-regrets-report-into-gaza-war

[shira]

33. The Guardian was slow to respond, but now where's J-Street, HRW, AI?

Maybe they haven't heard yet?

:shrug:

[azurnoir]

35. I couldn't have hoped for a better response

it says oh so much for a certain mind set, anyone else that hasn't been mentioned? What about all the government officials, especially in the US, that have not yet said anything

Israel may owe Goldstone a thank you, after all he may just have cleared the road for OCL2

[shira]

36. It's about credibility. J-Street, HRW, and AI backed the Goldstone findings.

The media outlets mentioned in the above threads couldn't report enough on Goldstone a year ago, as they gave saturation coverage to his bogus findings - while ignoring all reports refuting and debunking what he accused Israel of doing.

Let's see them report real news for once rather than fabricate or exaggerate it, shall we?

[azurnoir]

37. Goldstones'bogus' findings were due to Israels non cooperation

as to debunking that is a matter of opinion, as neither Hamas or Israel has allowed international investigations

[shira]

38. LOL....Goldstone had plenty of information available to him that he deliberately ignored. n/t

[azurnoir]

40. How did Goldstone have info from a source that refused to participate and more over

why should he accept that info, from a nonparticipant that only after the fact investigated itself and found itself innocent

[eyl]

47. Can one do an investigation

before the fact?:)

And if you read the editorial (or the other articles which describe it, like the Haaretz or Guardian links elsewhere in this thread) it appears that he does consider the Israeli investigations credible.

[azurnoir]

48. thanks you made my point quite well

the question if you read back was why did Goldstone not simply take Israel's word for it while Israel was refusing to participate in his investigation

[shira]

49. He had info. from media and other sources, including what the IDF published prior...

....including testimony from Breaking the Silence that he used in his report.

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)

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

He ignored the testimony he didn't like, especially all evidence WRT human shields (which he claims there's no evidence for).

There's also this...

As revealed by a documentary on the Goldstone Report by Israeli Channel 1, Mabat Sheni, December 23, 2009, Daniel Reisner, former Head of the International Law Branch, the IDF Legal Division, served as an unofficial representative of the Israeli point of view and spoke for hours with the mission members. Goldstone’s use of that testimony is restricted to a single mention (¶1183-84), without any consequences for his report’s conclusions. See also the extensive dossier published by the Israeli government while the mission was preparing its report: The Operation in Gaza - Factual and Legal Aspects, July 29, 2009.

http://www.goldstonereport.org/procedural-flaws/incredulity/540-richard-landes-goldstones-gaza-report-part-one-a-failure-of-intelligence

Other people submitted evidence in favor of Israel to Goldstone, with his blessing...
http://www.goldstonereport.org/procedural-flaws/concealed-evidence

Goldstone ignored a lot in Israel's favor.

He's a liar.

It goes without saying Israel had VERY good reason not to participate.

[azurnoir]

50. So your saying he should have accepted so called 'testimony'

from a source that refused to testify, how's that work?

You know if one refuses to defend one self in the 'courtroom' it really makes no difference if one stands on the sidewalk and presents 'evidence'

[shira]

51. He accepted evidence from Breaking-the-Silence but only against Israel, not for....

He interviewed a representative from the IDF unofficially for several hours and also said he would accept evidence in the form of media reports and video from other sources.

He didn't use any of that evidence in Israel's favor.

He cannot claim he didn't have any evidence in Israel's favor due solely to Israel's non-participation.

IOW, he lied.

[azurnoir]

52. No in other words he did not accept testimony from a government that refused to co-operate

but do keep trying oh BTW your own quotes prove that Goldstone did qualify the testimony from Breaking the Silence as being only hearsay

[shira]

53. So you think he was justified in ignoring media eyewitness reports and other video evidence....

...in Israel's favor since Israel didn't officially participate?

[azurnoir]

54. Media eyewitness reports? video evidence? pnce again fom a non co-operative source?

just where was all this so called evidence coming from exactly? and when?

[shira]

55. look at post #49 in the 3rd link. Or here...

http://www.goldstonereport.org/procedural-flaws/concealed-evidence

[azurnoir]

56. you mean the one that 'conceals ' a link to............. CAMERA?

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=118&x_article=1733

really a shrinks opinion as to why a soldier would shoot a child or any other 'medical opinion' concerning the mental state of the combatants is not really evidence

eta an interview with Col Desmond Travers who is quoted in the link

http://harpers.org/archive/2009/10/hbc-90006003

[shira]

57. Face it - Goldstone asked that evidence be submitted to his mission for review - he ignored it.

B'tselem, Breaking the Silence, and numerous mainstream media outlets reported Hamas used human shields. There's video evidence of this - including Hamas spokesman admitting to it.

Goldstone ignored it.

Nothing to be proud of there, Az.

[azurnoir]

58. I am not proud of Goldstone nor am I ashamed

what I am is bemused, at the denials that I encounter here the absolute need to denigrate anything anyone who dares to speak ill of Israel

by all of the additional but yet specific accusations and the amount of time that has passed one must if you have not searched up or something yet more of the Pro almost anything Israel wants or does propaganda video's and websites that seem to get posted here tell am I right there shir?

well post away you seem so anxious to do and copious number with which they are posted here they are so convincing of well something

[shira]

59. You're bemused? Goldstone says he lacked evidence of certain things but that was a lie...

....and you're just bemused?

You're incapable of admitting he lied about lacking evidence due to Israel not participating, aren't you?

He had plenty of evidence as I've proven to you but he chose to ignore it - and you're pretending that's not so?

Seriously?

What makes you think Israeli participation would have helped when it's clear he ignored evidence in Israel's favor - as well as evidence against Hamas?

[oberliner]

60. This editorial is clearly turning some heads

The Mondoweiss crowd can't handle it.

[azurnoir]

61. where you referring to a blog post on Mondoweiss

or referring to a specific set of people?

[oberliner]

64. The interview is with Adam Horowitz

He is the co-editor of Mondoweiss with Philip Weiss.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x348146#348194

[azurnoir]

62. as you've proven what you've proven is that Israel while refusing to actively participate

in the investigation there a lot of hearsay around as I said earlier you can not refuse to defend yourself in the courtroom and then stand out on the sidewalk and present 'evidence' proclaiming your innocence and expect it to be taken seriously by the court, no matter how loudly you do it

[whosinpower]

66. Israel should of participated

And Judge Goldstone has more integrity and honour in his little pinky than most of us - our entire bodies.

You don't see it yet, so blinded by your hatred of him, and by foolish pride....but you owe him a debt of gratitude.

He put his reputation, his honour on the line to investigate something that was widely reported, and even more widely condemned. He took on the the job knowing full well the HRC is biased against Israel - and DEMANDED that Hamas also be investigated. In fact he refused the job unless it included Hamas.

The government of Israel did itself NO favours by refusing to participate in an official open manner. But, the state did take the report seriously enough to investigate the claims, lay charges where foul play was proven, and altered the rules of engagement going forward. These are good laudable things Shira. Not everything in the report was false - and when verified - Israel has dealt with it in a mature and moral manner.

Judge Goldstone walking back from his initial report shines a bright light on that simple fact. It is my belief that these days, that has value. You are free to disagree with me, and I am confident you will. The heart of the matter is that there are people in the world who have lost confidence and trust in Israel....Judge Goldstone walking back as a result of Israeli actions regarding the Goldstone Report restores some of that confidence lost.

To date, Hamas has done nothing whatsoever in regards to the report. That too has become glaringly obvious.

[azurnoir]

67. as admirable as Israel's actions in self investigation are

the question of would those investigations have ever taken place without Goldstone's report should be asked because I for one doubt that they would have

[whosinpower]

68. I don't have the answer to that

It is my hope that they would have been - but you could be correct.

Obviously - it would have been far better if Hamas had actually investigated and charged its own as well....not at all surprised that they did not bother.

[King_David]

43. Hamas has not done ANY investigation.

[King_David]

39. I think it depends on Hamas et al

and all of a sudden they (Hamas) seem determined to again bring upon their people ,whom they claim to represent, more war and destruction and loss of life and economy.

Just sitting back and 'taking' these rockets is not an acceptable route for any self respecting nation.

(and I am 100% sure the Democratic Congresspeeps and Senators and President Obama and Richard Goldstone would agree)

[azurnoir]

41. you mean if the Arabs in Gaza respond to Israel's assassination(s)

of their people last Friday? If they just "sit back and take it" then all will be well huh? Perhaps they could use the many diplomatic channels open to them to complain.......But you are right it is in the interest of the career politicians in Washington on both sides of aisle to support Israel's on going efforts and an embattled President whom will soon be seeking a second term would I am sure agree

[King_David]

42. Nope thats NOT what I mean !

As far as Israels assassinations (self defense) are concerned,this is what I mean:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=347942&mesg_id=347980

[azurnoir]

44. yes that did happen 9 years ago so that gives Israel the to

commit assassinations on the claim it might happen again?

[King_David]

46. So what if its 9 years ago?

They (Israelis) do not want a repeat, whereas they (Hamas) do.

[azurnoir]

45. 'Goldstone retraction reduces chance of similar probe'

During future Gaza operation, Israel will have to do better documenting its actions in real time, senior IDF officer says.

Judge Richard Goldstone’s retraction and new-found faith in the Israeli legal system will likely contribute to Israeli efforts to prevent the establishment of a new probe following military action in a future conflict with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, a senior IDF officer predicted on Sunday.

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=215018

could sound like plans are being made

[TomClash]

7. LOL

Gee, I wonder if Israel put pressure on Goldstone and/or doctored the investigation of the 400 allegations of misconduct.

Whitwwash.

[azurnoir]

8. actually there is nothing really new in the editorial

Goldstone has said that the report would have been different if Israel has co-operated with his inquiry

[oberliner]

11. "If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document."

That is in the first paragraph.

Clearly there is something new here.

[azurnoir]

14. are you saying that Goldstone has never before said that the report might have been different had

Israel co-operated?

[oberliner]

16. No, he said that all the time

What is new is that he is now saying that the allegations in the report of possible "crimes against humanity" by Israel were unfounded.

He is now saying: "civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy".

The initial report claimed that they were.

From the NY Times:

Head of U.N. Panel Regrets Saying Israel Purposely Killed Gazans

JERUSALEM — The head of a United Nations panel that investigated Israel’s invasion of Gaza two years ago has retracted the central and most explosive assertion of the report — that Israel purposely killed Palestinian civilians there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/world/middleeast/03goldstone.html

[azurnoir]

19. yes the NYT and CNN had 'fascinating ' interpretations

of Goldstone's words links to those plus BBC and al Jazeera are posted above

[TomClash]

21. I know what you wrote

You are right. But if Israel cooperated with his inquiry, it would have been his inquiry, not theirs. And it might well have taken a road less traveled if his Commission verified the Israeli evidence.

[King_David]

34. Thats funny nt

[oberliner]

65. "crucial repudiation of the report's central thrust."

But I'm sure you know more than the NY Times.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/ny-times-we-turned-down-a-different-version-of-goldstone-retraction-1.354214

[King_David]

12. Sounds like he has regrets

And is trying to redeem himself.

[King_David]

13. Richard ,Its not Yom Kippur yet

[azurnoir]

18. actually 2 Yom Kippur's have gone since the report was published n/t

[King_David]

22. He seems to have regret NOW though , This yom Kippur is his chance nt

[azurnoir]

23. yeah I think he regrets Israel not co-operating in the first place

one just can not imagine why they did not though, especially seeing as how it was Goldstone himself that redefined the mission to include both Israel and Hams

[King_David]

24. Actually now to me,he seems to regret his whole participation

in the UNHRC sham report.

[King_David]

25. A comment under the article:

davidka wrote:
This is an amazing statement--it is nearly a full recanting of the original report, an apology to Israel for anti-Israel allegations in that report, and an unqualified condemnation of Hamas. Question is, will anyone notice?
User ID:http://washingtonpost.com/9GbQQL7o1Q13z/4cbxEzCMgoWI6YUHMFVlNQOUtKBgd/tT03sC7QkQ%3D%3D/


Sums it up perfectly.

[King_David]

26. Hamas: Goldstone retreat doesn't negate war crimes committed in Gaza

In wake of Richard Goldstone's op-ed in which he said Hamas 'has done nothing' to investigate itself over Gaza war actions, Hamas says they cooperated fully with fact-finding mission.
By Barak Ravid, Natasha Mozgovaya and Reuters

Hamas dismissed on Saturday the remarks made by Richard Goldstone who expressed regret in a column over the damning Goldstone report on alleged Israeli war crimes during the Gaza war.

"His retreat does not change the fact war crimes had been committed against 1.5 million people in Gaza," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said, adding that the group had cooperated fully with Goldstone's fact find finding mission.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-goldstone-retreat-doesn-t-negate-war-crimes-committed-in-gaza-1.353716

[bemildred]

63. What's behind Goldstone's flip-flop?

Few recent events in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been as wildly controversial and polarizing as the release of the Goldstone report, a United Nations-sponsored study prepared in the aftermath of Israel's devastating, 3-week-long assault on the Gaza Strip in the winter of 2008-09.

The report was the work of a U.N. fact-finding mission chaired by Richard Goldstone, a former justice of South Africa's highest court. Although Israel had publicly defended Operation Cast Lead as a tough but legitimate response to months of cross-border rocket attacks by Hamas militants, Goldstone and his colleagues saw it differently: They concluded that Israel had intentionally targeted civilians in "a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population." A blunt, no-holds-barred broadside against Israel, the report was dismissed as biased and exaggerated by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which felt it gave moral support to those seeking to "delegitimize" the Jewish state. But it was taken extremely seriously by many others, because of Goldstone's respected mainstream credentials and the U.N.'s imprimatur, and because about 1,400 Palestinians were killed during the assault, compared with 13 Israelis.

For much of the world, that's where the story ended. Until Friday, that is, when, in a bizarre denouement, Goldstone himself disavowed one of the central claims of his report. In an op-ed article in the Washington Post, Goldstone shocked supporters and opponents alike by saying that he no longer believes that Israel intentionally killed civilians in Gaza and that "if I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone report would have been a different document."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-goldstone-20110404,0,4784231.story

[Ken Burch]

69. OK, here's what the OP does and does NOT do

It says that there wasn't intentional targeting of civilians AS A MATTER OF POLICY.

It does NOT say there was NO intentional targeting of civilians by anyone in the IDF at any point.

And it doesn't vindicate the IDF in its prosecution of OCL or discredit the entire report.

It says The Israeli government SHOULD have cooperated with Goldstone, and it should hold all investigations in public forums.

This was NOT a recantation of the entire Goldstone report, and it does not prove that the months of abuse Judge Goldstone received from "pro-Israel" extremists was justified. It was still unspeakably evil, for example for the attempt to be made to stop Judge Goldstone from attending his grandson's Bar Mitzvah.

[Ken Burch]

71. I've started a related link from another perspective and drawn from another article here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x348960