Yaacov Lozowick’s book “Right to Exist” provides one of the best insights into the Middle East conflict, and Israel’s efforts to be both secure and moral, in a hostile sea of undemocratic regimes and post-modernist thought.
In a recent item in his blog, Lozowick provides an assessment of the Goldstone Report that also delves into potential motivations behind Goldstone and his report colleagues.
For instance, Lozowick writes :
“Perhaps something more fundamental is going on: the Report is serving as a cognitive litmus test, a philosophical fork in the road where people part and lose the ability to understand each other. There are three levels of this mutual inability to communicate: 1. Incompatible and incomprehensible narratives of Mideast history; 2. Unacceptable methodology for understanding the battlefield; 3. Contradictory concepts of democracy, freedom, and human rights.”
“The authors of the report complain endlessly that the Israeli authorities didn’t cooperate. Whatever one’s opinion about this, it left the investigators with no way of knowing what the Israeli intentions had been, and the only intellectually honest response would have been to admit it. Their insistence in dozens of cases to compensate for what they couldn’t know by inventing damning assumptions from whole cloth, is breathtaking. This intellectual dishonesty alone proves the Israeli authorities were right when they refused to cooperate: if Goldstone and his colleagues are capable of inventing things they have no way of knowing, how much more could they be relied on to twist whatever evidence Israel might have supplied into the mold they wished it to have.”
Lozowick’s report is well worth reading; it also includes links to various sources, including the recent Goldstone-Gold debate at Brandeis University.
Although there is a tendency to think that the biases and viewpoints about Israel are unique, it was interesting to recently hear on the radio a Sydney academic complaining how the difference between fact and opinion is increasingly blurred on campus.
To a man with a hammer, everything is a nail; and that has been reinforced when one examines who responds how to the Fort Hood killers in the U.S. by Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan. The Wall St Journal has a good take on it.