Between Goldstone and Gold Is A Stone

Here's how one Brandeis student views tonight's debate:

Thus, by inviting Dore Gold to debate Goldstone, the center is framing the Nov. 5 discussion as a "balanced debate" between two visions of the Gaza War of January 2009. In no way is Richard Goldstone to be considered anti-Israel in his beliefs or his criticism of the manner in which the Gaza war was organized and executed. However, by inviting Dore Gold to speak after Goldstone, Brandeis is putting Gold in the uncomfortable position of having to defend his views as a Zionist. This is doing a clear injustice to both parties: to the Palestinian narrative by giving it no representation other than an international lawyer condoning certain acts committed by the Israel Defense Forces and to the Israeli narrative by reducing it to the voice of Dore Gold, who is far to the right of the Israeli political spectrum.

Students can be so dumb at times.

Maybe this debate is to be balanced between two scholars, two academics, two Jews, two diplomats, two people?

Or two different views on morality?