The objective media shows its Israel bias: Say, remember my former coblogger, Soccerdad? You know what he was wondering this weekend? Why Goldstone’s op-ed was published in the Washington Post, when his three previous pieces were in the New York Times. Did they reject Goldstone’s op-ed? Turns out that Soccerdad is right. The Times refused to publish it. Why? Draw your own conclusions, but I think “We can’t possibly publish a retraction of the report that we used to slam Israel in dozens of editorials, articles, and op-eds” comes immediately to mind. So this one has to be: Bloggers 1, NY Times, 0.
It’s okay, they’ll be the moderate Virtue Police: The Muslim Brotherhood is calling for a virtue police force along the lines of the Saudi Wahabist entity. That’s the one that caused the death of dozens of girls for refusing to let them flee a school fire without their hijabs. Yep. The Muslim Brotherhood is a totally secular, moderate force for the liberation of Egypt.
It’s okay, he’s the moderate Egyptian leader: Mohammed ElBaradei, late of the UN committee that swore that Iran was not trying to create nuclear weapons, says that he would declare war on Israel if the IDF attacks Gaza in force to stop the rockets from Hamas. In all seriousness, this means that the more radical candidates will not possibly say that they wouldn’t attack Israel. The bar has just been raised, and peace with Israel is at risk. Sure, it’s in the “just words” stage now. But let me remind you that the world keeps on insisting that Iran doesn’t really mean it when they clearly state they want to wipe Israel off the map.
A master of grownup scorn: If you read only one op-ed on the travesty that is Richard Goldstone, read David Horovitz.
Notwithstanding that absent formal cooperation, however, the truth about what happened in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009 – the truth that Goldstone now disingenuously claims to have discovered only after he filed his malicious indictment of the IDF and of Israel – was readily available to him at the time.
Israel did informally make the necessary information available to his committee in the shape of detailed reports on what had unfolded.
If I were writing it, I’d be saying something like “Liar liar pants on fire!”
I think this would be better with a header lin.
Goldstone is guilty of “motzi shem ra” and not “lashon hara”. Technically, it is not “lashon hara” unless the evil speech is true.
He should be told the method used to repent in a famous Chasidic story.
1. At midnight go to a crossroads in the country with a feather pillow, rip open the pillow and scatter the contents around.
2. The following noon, return to the crossroads, collect all the feathers and refill the pillow.
Once all the feathers have been collected, and the pillow fixed, the repentence will have been accepted.
In these terms, he must go to everyone hurt by his lies and ask for forgiveness (individually).
Goldstone is Haman. I place the deaths of all Israelis since his ‘report’ was published squarely on his head. He belongs on trial for crimes against an entire people.
Haman was Amalek and was pushing the interests of his people (to kill all the Jews). Goldstone is more like Ravshakeh who addressed the people in Hebrew to get them to surrender to Sancheruv.