Saying that Israel practices apartheid policies is "unfair and inaccurate slander," Richard Goldstone wrote in an Op-Ed for The New York Times.
Congratulations, David Suissa, you finally proposed a peace plan that makes sense to me (“Bibi Needs a Plan, Fast,” April 15). Yes, Netanyahu should offer the Palestinians a peace plan that is essentially the Clinton Parameters. The Clinton Parameters are effectively the 2008 Palestinian offers. As reported in the Palestine Papers, those were the very offers rejected by Israel. The Clinton Parameters seems to be what the Palestinian leadership think they need for acceptance by the Palestinian people. They are a route to peace.
Three members of the United Nations fact-finding mission on the Gaza war say they stand by the report. Calls to retract the Goldstone report disregard the rights of the victims, the international law experts said in a statement published Thursday in the British newspaper the Guardian.
Three members of the United Nations fact-finding mission on the Gaza war say they stand by the report. Calls to retract the Goldstone report disregard the rights of the victims, the international law experts said in a statement published Thursday in the British newspaper the Guardian. "Aspersions cast on the findings of the report cannot be left unchallenged," the statement said.
Richard Goldstone's retraction of key findings in his report to the United Nations on the Gaza war has spurred a new round of anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories in the Arab world, according to the Anti-Defamation League.
Letters to the editor.
Despite Israel’s rejection of the Goldstone report on the Gaza war a year-and-a-half ago, the international criticism it engendered has led the Israel Defense Forces to make a number of significant changes in policy and doctrine. And they'll stay even though Richard Goldstone has recanted one of the most significant findings of his committee's report -- that Israel intentionally targeted civilians and may have perpetrated war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.
Legislation calling on the United Nations to rescind the Goldstone report is circulating in both houses of Congress. A Senate resolution, introduced April 8 by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and James Risch (R-Idaho), calls on the U.N. Human Rights Council to "reflect the author’s repudiation of the Goldstone report’s central findings, rescind the report, and reconsider further Council actions with respect to the report’s findings."
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told President Shimon Peres in a meeting in New York on Friday that the UN would not be retracting the Goldstone Report, despite its author's renouncement of some of the report's claims.
Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, says the Goldstone report is probably beyond fixing and should simply disappear. Rice, speaking to a hearing Thursday of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, was reacting to congressional calls on Richard Goldstone to amend the 2009 report on the Gaza War that was based on an investigation of a panel convened by the U.N. Human Rights Council.
A group of American Jewish lawyers is set to file a civil lawsuit against Richard Goldstone initiated by Israeli lawmaker Danny Danon. The class action suit against the author of the Goldstone Report, a United Nations document about Israel's conduct during the monthlong Gaza war in the winter of 2008-09, is set to be filed next week in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan by attorney Steve Goldberg, according to a statement issued Wednesday from Danon's office.
President Shimon Peres will ask United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to nullify Judge Richard Goldstone's damning report on the Gaza war in light of the author's expression of regret regarding some of his claims, sources told Haaretz on Wednesday.
South African Judge Richard Goldstone said he will not seek to quash his report to the United Nations on Israel's conduct during the Gaza war, despite his retraction of a key finding. Goldstone told the Associated Press that reports that he told Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai that he would seek to quash the report prepared at the behest of the U.N. Human Rights Council are false. The report presented to the council in September 2009 accused Israel of war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.
Richard Goldstone’s reconsideration of the controversial fact-finding report on the Gaza war of 2008-09 is the latest Rorschach test for the Jewish community. It has elicited a wide range of reactions, from ecstatic claims of exoneration to lingering bitterness at the report’s “blood libel,” as Caroline Glick and Jeffrey Goldberg have branded it. My own sense in reading Goldstone’s Washington Post op-ed was a measure of relief that the report’s most serious allegation — that Israel intentionally targeted civilians in Gaza — was unfounded.
Better late than never, but not much better. How else can one respond to the belated retraction by Judge Richard Goldstone of the key allegations in the outrageous report he authored into Israel’s Operation Cast Lead against Hamas terrorists in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009? Blatantly dishonest and biased, what became known as the Goldstone Report served as the most vicious instrument of defamation and delegitimization against the Jewish state for decades. It gave heart to terrorists; it gave hope to anti-Semites; and it gave every twisted calumny against the State of Israel a new lease on life.
What happens now with the Goldstone Report may well be up to Goldstone. Richard Goldstone’s April 2 Op-Ed in the Washington Post disavowing his earlier assumption that Israel had committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity during the 2009 Gaza war has left pro-Israel activists wondering: What next?
With Richard Goldstone himself admitting that the infamous Goldstone Report was critically flawed, this is the best opportunity we have had in two years to bring to light the misconceptions of Operation Cast Lead. In his April 2 Op-Ed in The Washington Post titled “Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and War Crimes,” Goldstone rebukes the very principles linked to Israel following the report submitted under his name to the U.N. Human Rights Council.
The New York Times has denied rumors that it refused to print an opinion piece authored by jurist Richard Goldstone in which he retracted some of the statements made in his UN Human Rights Council report on the war between Israel and Gaza in 2008-2009, political columnist Ben Smith reports in Politico.
The United Nations Human Rights Council said it will continue to use the Goldstone Report as written, despite its author's retraction of a key finding.
Richard Goldstone’s original U.N. report on the Gaza war of 2008-09 landed like a bombshell in the PR war over Israel, damaging Israel’s reputation around the world with its finding that Israel potentially committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during its three-week war against Hamas.
You really screwed up. You screwed up so badly that Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic says you contributed, more than any other individual, to the delegitimization and demonization of the Jewish state.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would launch an international campaign to cancel the Goldstone Report after its author, ex-South African Judge Richard Goldstone, wrote in an Op-Ed in the Washington Post that Israel did not intentionally target civilians as a policy during the Gaza War, withdrawing a critical allegation in the report.
Richard Goldstone will attend his grandson's upcoming bar mitzvah in South Africa, following an agreement with local Jewish groups.
It long has been considered almost axiomatic at the United Nations that there’s no real sense for Israel to try to muster opposition to U.N. resolutions it considers hostile, particularly when those resolutions don’t carry the force of law.