For those who have been watching news from Israel and the Jewish world, you might be aware that Richard Goldstone was uninvited from attending his grandson's Bar Mitzvah in South Africa. Many people had different reactions to this: Martin Solomon felt like Goldstone got exactly what he deserved. Avraham Burg at Ynet thinks that what has made Judaism great is it's inclusiveness and willing to criticize it's own members and itself, and therefore Goldstone's family was wrong to shun him like that. On the Huffington Post, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote a scathing editorial condemning the family's decision.
It's not such an easy question: The anti-Zionists will naturally claim that Goldstone is a man of vision, of justice, who put this name to the report because he cares about Palestinian human rights and punishing the evil Israelis. Later reports about Goldstone show that this may not exactly be the case. While working in South Africa Goldstone was quite willing to stand up for the apartheid regime, including sending children to jail simply for protesting it. That story was covered by the Huffington Post. That's not even to comment on the blatant biases within his own report, which he knew about big ignored. More reports, including those on Solomon's link, indicate that Goldstone took the job in Gaza so that he could work his way up the ranks of the United Nations. If so, one might conclude that he sold out his fellow Jews for personal gain. If so, his family might be justified in making it personal.
In the end, though, I feel like ostracizing him from the community is ultimately the wrong direction to take. Make him feel unwelcome, sure, but try to remove him altogether? That's what Israel's enemies would do. I am with Avraham Burg and Rabbi Boteach on this one, condemn what he did and his report, but let the man see his grandson. If he doesn't know what the Jewish community of the world thinks of him by now, he'll get the message real soon.