Asking the Wrong Question about Goldstone

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
04 April '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/04/04/asking-the-wrong-question-about-goldstone/

The lede in the New York Times follow-up to the Goldstone retraction first published on its website on Sunday afternoon spoke volumes about the paper’s difficulty in grasping the international assault on Israel. Rather than focus on the embarrassment of the foreign-funded leftist NGOs that trumpeted slanders about Israel’s counter-attack against Gaza-based terrorism, the paper had this to say: “Israel grappled on Sunday with whether a retraction by a United Nations investigator regarding its actions in the Gaza war two years ago could be used to rehabilitate its tarnished international image or as preemptive defense in future military actions against armed groups.”

The answer to the question is so obvious that it hardly even needs to be asked. Of course, the retraction of inaccurate and inflammatory accusations ought to bolster the country’s reputation. Since Goldstone’s lies were the United Nations-funded legal prop that served as the foundation for false charges of Israeli war crimes, why wouldn’t Israel and its foreign friends seek to give the recantation at least as much publicity as the international press gave the original report?

Even to ask the question you would have to believe that any effort on Israel’s part to defend itself against terror attacks deliberately aimed at civilians is somehow wrong.

But as to whether the damage Goldstone did can be completely undone, that is a thornier query.


Building on the campaign of anti-Zionist invective that has gained increased support and vigor in the years since Israel recognized the PLO and began a peace process aimed at empowering Palestinians, Goldstone’s lies and credulousness about Hamas were eagerly embraced by the Jewish state’s foes. Although his recantation is a blow to them, they are unlikely to be shamed into similar retractions. A spokeswoman for B’Tselem told the Times that despite Goldstone’s disavowals much of the report remains valid. B’Tselem is a leftist NGO “human rights” group that devotes itself to vilifying Israel. Its personnel performed much of the legwork for Goldstone’s team. But rather than press B’Tselem to account for its part in a report that was filled with inaccuracies and false assertions, the Times merely repeats their calls for further investigation of Israel.

Indeed, the article abandoned any pretense of neutrality about Goldstone, let alone objectivity, when it baldly stated that the report “had been misrepresented by those with agendas both pro- and anti-Israel.” But if even Goldstone has now admitted that “its central charge” (in the Times’ phrase) was dead wrong, how exactly were those “pro-Israel” types misrepresenting the report?

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.