The Anti Human 'Palestinian' Arabs use of 'Human rights' organizations
One of the propaganda tools the Arab "Palestinians" have been using to further its goals of eradicating the mostly non-Muslim / non-Arab entity Israel, was/is the use of international "human rights" organizations.
The demoization of Israel that dares to fight for its survival as a 'bad guy' has been since the 1970's well oil-ed by Saudi Arabia and other filthy rich Arab tycoons that never seem to have an iota of sympathy for the Arab 'Palestinian' brethren and their situation, instead they rather shed its billions to destructive anti Israel propaganda.
Using the image of a "weak" people vs a "mighty" Israel, they have psychologically gained the upper hand, as it looks pretty convincing and even more convenient for an Amnesty or HRW personnel to side with the supposed "victim".
Even though the real source of Arab 'Palestinian' misery, which was always largely due to its 1) mass corruption, 2) oppression, stepping all over human rights of its people & 3) culture of hatred of Israel substituting for all "love" for its own population.
HRW does not disclose its private donors identity, one can only imagine the Arab oil lobby connection here.
Israel as a whole and Israelis are always edgy from Arab attackers, ever since 1920's massacres on the Jews in Israel/Palestine.
As Israel is and always was under threat upon its existence, it mobilizes force, understandably, to the gullible eye it might look like the goliath is Israel, when it's never the case in reality.
An inhumane Arab bomber hiding under its kids' shoulders presents a far greater danger than the restrained Israeli hesitating to fire if a non-combatant is able to get hurt, this explains why the casualties are not in the thousands each time humane Israel conducts an anti terror-war operation.
The famous fact of terrorizing journalists by Arab "Palestinians" have forced all that are in [or all those wishing to gain access to] their area to be biased.
And so, Arabs, as the real Goliath, masked as poor-poor people have been managing the HRW organizations to report in a total Arabist way, condemning Israel based on unreliable sources, hardly condemning the Arabs for their constant real human rights abuse upon it's kids and on Israeli victims of Arab terror.
NGO Monitor’s 2007 Report on HRW: Bias and Double Standards Continue
April 29, 2008
The following analysis demonstrates that HRW's own activities related to Israel continue to fall short of this basic standard of universality
Summary:
* Analysis of Human Rights Watch's use of the rhetoric of international law and other terminology shows continued double standards and misleading or false claims.
* HRW accuses Israel of “collective punishment” of Palestinians in a way that is inconsistent with both international law and past and present usage of the term by HRW itself.
* HRW’s focus on Israel in 2007 dropped to 2005 levels after 2006 marked a return to the extreme bias of the 2000-2004 period. The change in 2007 allowed more resources to be focused on countries committing major human rights violations.
* However, disproportionate emphasis on Israel continued, with major reports covering 400 pages in 2007, using the same methodologies as in 2006 that lack credibility.
* This contrasts with the limited attention on human rights violations in Libya, Syria, and other countries in the region.
* Israel was the focus of more multimedia items (audio, video, graphics) than any other country in the region.
* Reports on Israel continue to be based on unverifiable evidence provided by “eyewitnesses,” selected journalists, and other inappropriate sources. In some cases hard evidence has shown this testimony to be blatantly untrue.
* HRW mentioned one or more of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers in a total of only 6 publications. Of these, only two refer to them by name; the other references are in passing.
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/ngo_monitor_s_report_on_hrw_bias_and_double_standards_continue
Terrorists: Amnesty shamnesty! We prefer human slaughterTerrorists: Amnesty shamnesty! We prefer human slaughter ... Today, Palestinian Information Minister Riyad al-Maliki told Israel's Haaretz daily Olmert ...
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57234
Amnesty is a Travesty
One would have thought that after so many heinous acts, Amnesty International, which claims to be "Protecting Human Rights Around the World", would have issued 16 reports condemning each and every one of these terrible acts of Palestinian terrorism. In fact, AI issued only one report and even though it pertained to the Park Hotel slaughter, the heading "Deliberate Killing of Civilians is Never Justified" was pretty benign and totally belied the atrocity of this appalling act. The three short paragraphs was almost non-committal. While apparently recognizing the massacre as "a grave breach of the fundamental principle of international humanitarian law", Amnesty then refuse to call Hamas a terrorist organization, but made a pathetic plea to "armed Palestinian groups" to cease killing civilians.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/4025
Amnesty International's Reporting of Human Rights
The report does not make use of the latest research on what happened in Jenin (accepted by the UN, the vast majority of the international press and governments) and does not define its terms when talking about international law. Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan has been quoted on numerous occasions talking of 'war crimes'... To sprinkle the vocabulary of 'war crimes' in reports is misleading and reveals an ideological bias...
Moreover, there is a disturbing amount of inaccurate and anecdotal evidence used in the report...
http://www.jcpa.org/ngo/ngo-4-AI.html
UPDATE to The Red Cross Ambulance Incident:
The Human Rights Watch Report
A Point-by-Point Examination of the Document Titled "The 'Hoax' That Wasn't"
On December 19, 2006, the international advocacy organization Human Rights Watch issued a detailed, intensively researched report unequivocally affirming the factuality of an intentional Israeli attack on Red Cross ambulances at Qana on July 23. The report (titled "The 'Hoax' That Wasn't") by Human Rights Watch was created specifically to counter the claims made in my original essay titled "The Red Cross Ambulance Incident."
This commentary is a response to Human Rights Watch's new allegations.
http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/hrw/
Amnesty International's Reporting of Human Rights
The report does not make use of the latest research on what happened in Jenin (accepted by the UN, the vast majority of the international press and governments) and does not define its terms when talking about international law. Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan has been quoted on numerous occasions talking of 'war crimes'... To sprinkle the vocabulary of 'war crimes' in reports is misleading and reveals an ideological bias...
Moreover, there is a disturbing amount of inaccurate and anecdotal evidence used in the report...
http://www.jcpa.org/ngo/ngo-4-AI.html
Human Rights Watch, Watched | Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International both jumped the shark a long time ... claims are blatantly untrue and indicative of a strong anti-Israel bias.
August 21, 2006
Human Rights Watch, Watched "Who will guard the guardians?" asked Roman satirist Juvenal. Now we must ask, who is watching Human Rights Watch, one of the world's best-financed and most influential human rights organizations? It turns out that they cook the books about facts, cheat on interviews, and put out pre-determined conclusions that are driven more by their ideology than by evidence. These are serious accusations, and they are demonstrably true.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/the-human-rights-watch-_b_27701.html
Human Rights Watch - Conservapedia Its annual budget is 22 million, ten million behind Amnesty ... with the Palestinians and Hezbollah has brought about serious questions of HRW objectivity. ...
http://www.conservapedia.com/Human_Rights_Watch
WATCH OUT for 'Human Rights Watch' and 'Amnesty' !
Copy of a letter to the New York Sun
from Maurice Ostroff: A critic's first duty is to get his facts right
To The Editor
There couldn't be a more perfect time
Dec 10, 2006 3:18
Today, December 10, marks International Human Rights Day, and the presence in Israel of Irene Khan, head of Amnesty International, highlights the demise of once-lofty goals. Amnesty International is a superpower with an annual budget of almost $200 million, used to promote radical political agendas and photo-ops for its leaders.
Amnesty International Secretary-General Irene Khan, right, tours a house damaged last month by IAF shelling during a visit to Beit Hanun, in the northern Gaza Strip, Saturday, Dec. 9, 2006. Khan is leading a mission to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza to discuss human rights issues.
Photo: AP , AP
As a result, little remains of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in the shadow of the Holocaust. Officials of Amnesty and other non-governmental organizations focus their attacks on democracies attempting to defend against terror, with far fewer resources to oppose totalitarian and genocidal regimes such as Sudan and Iran.
The silence of Khan and other officials regarding the human rights of the Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Palestinians and by Hizbullah, and the human rights of Ron Arad, is damning. Amnesty and HRW (founded as Helsinki Watch) gained their legitimacy by campaigning on behalf of political prisoners, including Natan (then Anatoly) Sharansky. Genuine human rights groups would be leading the campaigns to win the freedom of Israeli prisoners held by terrorists.
THE HYPOCRISY and political bias of these NGOs, in collaboration with the United Nations Human Rights Council, is particularly blatant in the case of Israel. Amnesty, Human Rights Watch (HRW), Christian Aid (UK), and pro-Palestinian partners actively implement the 2001 Durban agenda using the rhetoric of human rights to demonize Israel. Adopting the version of history starting with "Israeli occupation," these groups advance an ideology that presents Arabs as victims and Israelis as aggressors.
The war between Hizbullah and Israel produced another wave in which defensive actions were automatically condemned as "war crimes," "collective punishment" or violations of international law. Amnesty and HRW together issued dozens of press releases, almost all of which focused on allegations against Israel. Without providing criteria, Amnesty statements declared that the Israeli strikes in Beirut were "grossly disproportionate," while acknowledging this was where "Hizbullah had its headquarters," directing the firing of thousands of rockets against Israel.
No one seemed to notice the logical disconnect.
THE "DISCOVERY" of Hizbullah's cluster bombs and human shields came weeks or months later. In another surreal statement demonstrating their detachment from reality, Amnesty officials observed that "No investigation into violations of international humanitarian law by Hizbullah is known to have been conducted by Hizbullah commanders...."
The NGOs that dominate the human rights discourse also feed journalists and diplomats with false or unverifiable claims. Their reports are based on "eyewitness testimony," such as by Palestinians in Gaza and Lebanese in areas controlled by Hizbullah.
During the recent war, HRW and Amnesty claimed to have found no evidence of Hizbullah activities in the areas struck by Israel. There is no reason to conclude that these "researchers" and "military experts" bothered to check the allegiance and credibility of their sources. But HRW's 49-page report - the largest PR effort during the war - entitled "Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon," was headlined without question by journalists around the world.
IN ADDITION, the European Union and its member states fund many groups that also use the language of human rights to promote conflict and demonization of Israel. The grandly named Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) issued a torrent of political statements and one-sided condemnations during the Lebanon War. Other EU-supported "human rights" groups campaign against Israel's security barrier, with terms such as "apartheid wall" and call for boycotts, sanctions and other measures that are part of the political war.
Some of these NGOs refer to "resistance" and "martyrdom" operations against "Israel Occupation Forces," meaning terror attacks and suicide bombers that have killed hundreds of Israeli civilians.
In this way, European governments, including Switzerland and Norway, are contributing to the destruction of human rights based on universal principles, and undermining peace efforts they claim to promote.
This moral decay is also evident in the activities of the newly reformed United Nations Human Rights Council, which has focused on gratuitous Israel-bashing. The pseudo-reform process was strongly supported by the NGO network, which criticized the US and Israel for warning that the new UNHRC was no better than the old, discredited version.
IT WAS ONLY after the activities of the new UNHRC brought the use of double-standards to record levels that these human rights NGOs finally began speaking out against the abuse. (HRW's recent criticism of the Palestinian use of human shields to protect terrorists was attacked by fringe groups seeking to paint this illegal practice as non-violent protest.)
To reverse course, and restore the credibility, universality and substance of human rights the credibility and accountability of groups like Amnesty and Human Rights Watch must also be restored. Ideology and political preferences can no longer dominate their agendas and publications, and human rights cannot use double standards which punish democracies and reward dictatorships.
Gaza Anomalies Blow PCP’s Circuits: Result - The Sounds of Silence
August 4, 2008
A few friends of mine went to a party in Jerusalem that was primarily made up Anglophone reporters, people who work for NGOs and UN agencies. What amazed them was the pervasive sense of the people they met and spoke with that Israel was the greatest human rights violator in the world and that the dismantling of Israel would be a great step forward for global human rights.
Now the idiocy of this position, the suicidal nature of this strategy to advance human rights is nothing short of breathtaking. Take Israel out of the Middle East and the region becomes nothing but Hama rules… especially when the nastiest people — those who want to destroy Israel — would feel empowered by such a victory. But try and tell that to people who are smart enough to believe they can’t be wrong, and credulous enough to believe the demopaths who pull their chains on a daily basis. And as a result, they are prime targets for a hate campaign against Israel.
The latest news from Gaza, Israel, and the West Bank illustrates all the anomalies involved in this fundamental failure of the “human rights” community to understand what’s going on: black hearts and red spades galore. Melanie Phillips has a superb column which analyzes the current, mind-boggling situation in the Arab-Israeli conflict, with the Fatah “refugees” from Gaza seeking asylum in Israel.
Refugees From Whom?
The Spectator MONDAY, 4TH AUGUST 2008
Melanie Phillips
Extraordinary developments in Gaza have given a new meaning to the term ‘Palestinian refugees’. As the Jerusalem Post reports, fierce fighting in Gaza between Fatah and Hamas over the weekend, in which 11 people died and dozens more were wounded, resulted in 180 Fatah refugees fleeing from what they called a ‘war of genocide’ by Hamas against Fatah supporters. And where did they flee to? Why, to Israel, of course — which allowed them in and proceeded to treat 23 of them (some of whom were wounded by the Israeli army after they approached the crossing into Israel) in Israeli hospitals.
This is one of the most important anomalies for those who follow the current PCP narrative about the Middle East in which Israeli crimes against the Palestinian people explain the ferocious hatred of the Palestinians for the Israelis. According to that version of events — largely the one that liberals have taken over by adopting the Palestinian narrative of suffering — the last place these Palestinian “warriors” would go was Israel, their mortal enemy who is trying to commit genocide against their people. If the Israelis want to wipe out Palestinian civilians, how much the more would they want to kill Palestinian “militants”?
And yet, this is not a new story. When King Hussein, “the moderate,” found himself dealing with a restive Palestinian population in 1970, he slaughtered some 10,000 of them — men, women and children — in “Black September.” The Palestinians fled his tender mercies across the Jordan to Israel where the Israelis, obligingly, shipped them over to Lebanon, where, within five years, they plunged that unhappy land into a seven-year war that killed over 100,000 civilians. When Israel finally put an end to that civil war by invading in 1982, and the Phalanage took advantage of their upper hand to slaughter several hundred Palestinians at Sabra and Shatilla in revenge for Damur, the terrified inhabitants of the camps ran immediately to the Israeli positions outside the camp for protection. Why? Because they knew, despite all the “narratives” that when the chips are down, you can expect more mercy from the Jews than your fellow Arabs.
These are revelatory moments, when you see not the “public transcript” but what people really think. In honor-shame cultures they can be deeply embarrassing, since the public transcript is the “honorable” one, and the revelations that reverse that — like in the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes — are almost by definition shameful. Participants might prefer not to remember these, might even seek to reverse them by insisting still more shrilly on the original “narrative.” But outsiders need to pay close attention, because these rare moments are infinitely more revealing than the “public transcript.”
These refugees say they cannot return to Gaza because they will be killed. How fortunate, therefore, that their own Fatah leader, Mahmoud Abbas, can give them sanctuary in the West Bank!
But hang on – Abbas won’t let them in. Yup, with the exception of five individuals whom he did allow in, he’s denied them all sanctuary. He says they should go back to Gaza.
Before we get into the explanations proferred, let me make a medievalist’s remark. This is a staggering act of cowardice. Any warlord has to protect his men above all. If he fails to do so, he loses their loyalty. To refuse safety to men who have suffered from their adherence to your banner — unless it was their fault — shows your weakness.
And the invaluable Khaled abu Toameh tells us the reason why:
PA officials explained that the reason behind their refusal to absorb the new ‘refugees’ was their desire not to encourage other residents of the Gaza Strip to leave. ‘Everyone knows that if we allow people to leave the Gaza Strip, almost all the residents living there would try to cross the border into Israel,’ said a senior PA official.
More... http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2008/08/04/gaza-anomalies-blow-pcps-circuits-result-the-sounds-of-silence/