We further urged at the time that the report’s critics should refrain from personal attacks on Judge Goldstone or on the human rights advocates who brought the violations to light.Er, what "violations"? As for the first part of the request, no can do, you pack of jihad-abetting, Israel-damaging, Obama-adoring leftist jackals, you.
Update: I didn't know whether to put these comments in the CJN by right wing Israeli academic (I'm stunned to learn such a rara avis exists) Emmanuel Navon here or in my Dizzy Des post, which includes my thoughts about "the hard bigotry of high expectations" confronting Israel. I decided that since it contains info about another faux pro-Israel outfit, the New Israel Fund, I'd put it here:
...Navon, who teaches political science at Tel Aviv University, announced he is running in the upcoming Likud primaries.
He includes former Knesset member Avraham Burg and the New Israel Fund (NIF) and historians Ze’ev Sternall, Avi Shleim and Benny Morris – all highly respected figures in Israel – on his list of those he feels constitute “enemies within.”
Navon called their criticism of Israel “the Jewish tendency towards self-destruction.”Easy-peasy to answer that one: lots of lefty Jews would prefer the former, while those on the right realize we may have to learn to live with the latter.
From Burg advocating to “repeal of the Law of Return” to the NIF, which “funded 92 per cent of the testimony against Israel in the Goldstone Report,” Israel risks becoming a “post-Zionist” entity where the founding principles of Zionism and Jewish identity are abandoned in favour of “universalism,” Navon told a group of about 100 people recently at Beth Israel Beth Aaron synagogue.
He said the mindset of people like this is that Israel has to “adapt to a theoretical moral purity” and make a choice: “Do Israelis prefer peace without a Jewish state or a Jewish state without peace?”...
Update: Here's the NIF's weasely statement on Goldstone.