The Mighty Adventures of Silverrock

This article appeared in the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html

As a result, many people hoped to see a revocation of the Goldstone report.  After all, the person after whom the report was named said: “We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.” He also said: “We made our recommendations based on the record before us, which unfortunately did not include any evidence provided by the Israeli government. Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.”

But instead of witnessing a general uproar and massive media coverage matching that of the original Goldstone Report, we saw a few shy articles hidden behind an impressive amount of redundant “first-page news.”  On CNN, there was not a single article mentioning the story on their first page.  I had to search for articles on the website in order to find this one: http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/04/02/israel.goldstone.report/index.html?iref=allsearch#

Fox News was not much better.  At least an article was featured on the main page, but I really had to look for it: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/04/investigator-admits-shortcomings-israel-supporters-push-recall-gaza-report/?test=latestnews#

I am not sure why we do not see a more extensive coverage of this mind-blowing turn of events.  There is even a rumor going on that the New York Times refused to publish the article mentioned above, and that’s why it appeared in the Washington Post: could that be true?  Wouldn’t that be totally scandalous?  When we stop to think about it, ethics would dictate that anyone who covered or talked about the original Goldstone report has a moral and professional responsibility to follow up with the story and keep the public informed about new information and turnarounds as they become available.  But apparently, ethical behavior is too Godly for our human mentality.  And if that wasn’t enough, the UN and London are against the cancellation of the Goldstone report (http://www.guysen.com/news_Londres-contre-l-annulation-du-rapport-Goldstone_308958.html and http://www.guysen.com/news_Le-Conseil-onusien-des-droits-de-l-homme-refuse-d-annuler-le-rapport-Goldstone_308951.html), even given the new information and opinion provided by Goldstone himself.  Is it me or does the whole thing just make no sense? One thing I know for sure: Silverrock caused a lot of trouble.  For no good reason.