.jpg)
A.P. photo/ UN Mark Gratin -- Goldstone
Earlier reports left it unclear how much the New Israel Fund (NIF) financed the UN Goldstone Report accusations against Israel. I found a clearer explanation on the website of Israel Resources Review.
The Israeli student organization that scrutinized the Goldstone Report found that 42% of its quotations against Israel from Israeli sources contained 92% of the Israeli-based accusations against Israel, and they came from 16 NGOs subsidized by millions of dollars from NIF. Those NGOs are anti-Zionist to the point that some of them seek the destruction of Israel.
Thus the Goldstone report largely is dependent upon and indirectly subsidized by NIF ( http://www.israelbehindthenews.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=3880&q=1 ). The website posted this information a week ago, but it clarifies my earlier report.
Not everything about this issue is clear. One question is what percent of the Israeli anti-Zionist NGOs are financed by the New Israel Fund and the EU. Another is what other Israeli sources made anti-IDF statements used by Goldstone. A third is how many accusations came from outside of Israel, and whether they were made by committed jihadists, who are not reliable, or by UN investigators. Did Goldstone come up with much information on his own? What constructive purpose had the UN in assembling the assorted defamation already publicized by the NGOs and largely debunked? The purpose was to make the calumny seem legitimate or to give people an excuse for claiming to believe it.
Jihadist organizations, and the beneficiaries of NIF largess, have been shown by earlier reports to falsify news and accusations. The Goldstone Report is based on a form of perjury. Its reliably unreliable sources remind one of the old expression about computer data, coined when I was in the field, “garbage in, garbage out.”
(For earlier report on NIF, click here
Comments