Famous Last Words

Really Richard Goldstone?

Just listen to the first 20-30 seconds (or go here)




Try these

House of Cards: NGOs and the Goldstone Report, NGO Monitor, October 1, 2009
The Goldstone report relies on material from highly politicized and biased NGOs. Adopting the NGOs’ flawed methodologies, false claims, and distortions of international law renders the entire report and its conclusions invalid. Goldstone and other commission members have conflicts of interest involving close links to HRW, Amnesty International, and PCHR.

Goldstone Report: 575 pages of NGO “cut and paste”, NGO Monitor, September 16, 2009
By relying on NGO material, the Goldstone report copies the NGO biases, flawed methodology, and baseless claims. The report follows Amnesty International and HRW in ignoring evidence of human shields and repeats NGO distortions of international law, including the false legal claim that Gaza remains occupied.

The Goldstone “Fact Finding” Mission and the Role of Political NGOs, NGO Monitor, September 7, 2009
Officials from radical anti-Israel NGOs were chosen to “testify” before the Mission, including the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme (GCMHP) which used “Nazi” rhetoric. HRW obsessively supports Goldstone, a former board member. Seven NIF-funded Israeli NGOs claimed that Israel acted “punitive[ly].” The Mission violated the London-Lund guidelines, lacking objectivity, transparency, neutrality, and professionalism.

NGO Monitor’s Submission to the Human Rights Council Inquiry on the Gaza War, Led by Judge Richard Goldstone, NGO Monitor, June 9, 2009
NGO Monitor’s submission details NGO abuses of international law – including distortions and demonization by PCHR, HRW, Amnesty, and Al Mezan, and “lawfare” campaigns – and urges Goldstone to carefully examine the credibility and biases in NGO claims.