What Alan Dershowitz and many others don't understand is that they have to begin directly with this Charter to make any sense because to believe the Hamas/PLO Charter is to believe that every American and Russian soldier who liberated the Nazi death camps was lying.

Alan, it's much more important for you to begin uncovering all the lies of this Charter rather than use up your precious time debating immoral people like Goldstone. You can bring down Hamas by shining neon lights on their Charter.

Kelly Blair

At Human Rights Watch, we always recognized that open, democratic societies have faults and commit abuses. But we saw that they have the ability to correct them through vigorous public debate, an adversarial press and many other mechanisms that encourage reform.
That is why we sought to draw a sharp line between the democratic and nondemocratic worlds, in an effort to create clarity in human rights. We wanted to prevent the Soviet Union and its followers from playing a moral equivalence game with the West and to encourage liberalization by drawing attention to dissidents like Andrei Sakharov, Natan Sharansky and those in the Soviet gulag — and the millions in China’s laogai, or labor camps.

When I stepped aside in 1998, Human Rights Watch was active in 70 countries, most of them closed societies. Now the organization, with increasing frequency, casts aside its important distinction between open and closed societies.

Nowhere is this more evident than in its work in the Middle East. The region is populated by authoritarian regimes with appalling human rights records. Yet in recent years Human Rights Watch has written far more condemnations of Israel for violations of international law than of any other country in the region.

Israel, with a population of 7.4 million, is home to at least 80 human rights organizations, a vibrant free press, a democratically elected government, a judiciary that frequently rules against the government, a politically active academia, multiple political parties and, judging by the amount of news coverage, probably more journalists per capita than any other country in the world many of whom are there expressly to cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Meanwhile, the Arab and Iranian regimes rule over some 350 million people, and most remain brutal, closed and autocratic, permitting little or no internal dissent. The plight of their citizens who would most benefit from the kind of attention a large and well-financed international human rights organization can provide is being ignored as Human Rights Watch’s Middle East division prepares report after report on Israel.

Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective on a conflict in which Israel has been repeatedly attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah, organizations that go after Israeli citizens and use their own people as human shields. These groups are supported by the government of Iran, which has openly declared its intention not just to destroy Israel but to murder Jews everywhere. This incitement to genocide is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Leaders of Human Rights Watch know that Hamas and Hezbollah chose to wage war from densely populated areas, deliberately transforming neighborhoods into battlefields. They know that more and better arms are flowing into both Gaza and Lebanon and are poised to strike again. And they know that this militancy continues to deprive Palestinians of any chance for the peaceful and productive life they deserve. Yet Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of Human Rights Watch’s criticism.

The organization is expressly concerned mainly with how wars are fought, not with motivations. To be sure, even victims of aggression are bound by the laws of war and must do their utmost to minimize civilian casualties. Nevertheless, there is a difference between wrongs committed in self-defense and those perpetrated intentionally.

But how does Human Rights Watch know that these laws have been violated? In Gaza and elsewhere where there is no access to the battlefield or to the military and political leaders who make strategic decisions, it is extremely difficult to make definitive judgments about war crimes. Reporting often relies on witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers. Significantly, Col. Richard Kemp, the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and an expert on warfare, has said that the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza “did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.”

Only by returning to its founding mission and the spirit of humility that animated it can Human Rights Watch resurrect itself as a moral force in the Middle East and throughout the world. If it fails to do that, its credibility will be seriously undermined and its important role in the world significantly diminished.

Robert L. Bernstein, the former president and chief executive of Random House, was the chairman of Human Rights Watch from 1978 to 1998.

Goldstone statements in quotes

We looked at 36 targets in Gaza out of a possible 3000 or more, to make our investigation”

“Israel dropped 100,000 leaflets in Rafah but were not specific”

And what about the thousands of calls Israel made?

“That caused panic among civilians”

Is panic part of war

“No it should not be”

“Hamas does not fall under the Geneva Convention”

“In one case a Palestinian home was being used by Hamas militants but the owner told us that he ran out to his

back yard and yelled at them to leave. So they packed up and left”. If Israel bombed these targets that would have

been a war crime”

“Why punish the civilians in Gaza for what their leaders are doing”

What were the standards of evidence?

“Spoke to hundreds of citizens” . “We chose 36 incidents out of possible Hundreds” or thousands”.

I was frankly nervous going into Gaza”- I was afraid of being kidnapped”. I am a Jew”.

Since they knew you were coming you would expect some hospitality” question.

“Why should me being Jewish deny me the right to investigate Gaza”

Israel complains that holding them to a unfair standard when it comes to terrorists?

“Absolutely not” Look at Kosovo and America, Afghaninstan and how they apologized when civilians were hit”.

“I dont accept that destruction of Gazas infrastructure to fight terror against Israel”

On Netanyahus speech at UN:

“Lets say United States started bombing civilians when attacking ther Taliban”

“That would be a war crime”.

(Taliban is not attacking innocent civilians in America like they do to Sderot, Israel in general , America is in Afghanistan

thousands of miles away from American civilians)

UN is focusing their attack on Israel than anyone else.

“Yes I know , I was hoping to change that”

UN attacks Israel not Hamas.

“I wrote the mandate for Gaza myself not the United Nations”.

“Clearly Israels actions were meant to deal wiith rocket attacks on Israel”

“Hamas and Israel should be punished in their own countries”

(Israel does that routinely, Hamas and terrorists never investigate war crimes, they celebrate them

Saddams Scud Missiles, invasion of Kuwait, rocket attacks on Israel, Hezbollah attack on Israel, terror killing children

in Jerusalem etc.)

Why does the world need an international court of justice?

“Because war criminals did not face justice at home”.-”if they dont investigate themselves than they will have trouble travelling – Israel is worried”.

(Who investigates Crimes in Iran, Gaza, West Bank, etc …Arafat stole Billions from Palestinians, Iran hangs Gays in the street)

“Israel is afraid of the truth”.

“I want the Israeli government to be forced to investigate themselves. They have a great justice system.”

(Does Hamas have a great justice system?)

What about Israels asking US to veto these findings? The US came out and stated your investigation was flawed.

“Let them point it out”

Your investigation undermines peace?

“Contrary it will make a legitimate and lasting peace”.

( The conflict between Fatah and Hamas

You should get him to emigrate to America; he'd be a reliable Democratic voter and then you could love him.