Israel Matzav: More lies from Goldstone

More lies from Goldstone

Richard Goldstone attended his grandson's Bar Mitzva in South Africa this past weekend, and unfortunately it became another occasion for lambasting the Israeli government for 'squandering' an 'opportunity' to vindicate itself in front of his biased commission with its biased mandate.

Many words - perhaps too many words - have been wasted on responding to Richard Goldstone's pious recriminations. But there is one charge that cannot go unanswered and that's this one:

It is obvious but must be stated: had Israel provided us with credible information to respond to the allegations we received, they would have been given appropriate consideration and could potentially have influenced our findings.

You will recall that at the debate at Brandeis between Goldstone and former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold, Gold put a series of slides, videos and charts up on a screen for the audience. Those slides, videos and charts demolished the evidence presented in the Goldstone Report. They were so effective that most of the questions in the question and answer session that followed were hard questions for Richard Goldstone. It was clear that Dore Gold had won the debate and that's why Richard Goldstone has refused to debate anyone else about the report that bears his name since that night.

You will also recall that at the time, Goldstone claimed never to have seen those slides, videos and charts.

A month and a half later, I was part of a group that was addressed by Dore Gold at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, which he directs. I asked him whether Goldstone had really never seen all his material before, and how could that be given that I had seen much of it on the internet and posted it on this blog in real time. Here's what he said:

Gold says that they sent reams of material to the Goldstone Commission and much of what he put on the screen at Brandeis had been sent to Goldstone before the report came out. They treated it as footnote material and not as material for the main analysis. The key factor to examine there is who did the staff work - they filtered what Goldstone saw.

I tried to examine the staff work here.

Despite not wanting to officially cooperate with a commission that it knew from the outset would issue a damning report, Israel sent 'reams' of material to the Goldstone Commission. Goldstone ignored that material and continues to pretend - to applauding audiences - that it doesn't exist.

Disingenuous doesn't even begin to describe him.

Israel Matzav: More lies from Goldstone