Human Rights Watch has no crediiblity

[rhodescholar]

I was stunned to read this article in the WSJt:

Human Rights Watch Goes to Saudi Arabia - WSJ.com

I then went to the NGO Monitor's website providing the backgrounds of the HRW staff covering the middle east, and in particular, Israel:

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/hrw_hires_another_pro_palestinian_activist

These 2 events have irreparably harmed the reputation and imparitality of HRW, and I find it obscene that in a telephone call with Ms. Whitson, she prefers to hide behind a fig leaf, claiming that HRW "only hires staff with a commitment to human rights law," whatever that vague nonsense is supposed to mean.

Given that she was unable to substantiate or discredit the NGO Monitor's historical claims about her and her colleague's backgrounds, merely claiming "everything NGO-M puts out is propaganda," I have lost all and any confidence in this organization, and will no longer pay ANY attention to its reports - nor should ANY reasonable-minded person.

Even if one hated Israel outright, they would HAVE to accept that stacking the deck there with anti-Israel staff would do anything BUT reinforce an impartial position.

Ms. Whitson even declared that HRW completely supports the Right of Return for the refugees, a totally unacceptable position even to the Israeli left. Clearly, they have abrogated any desire or inclination of non-bias with respect to Israel, and even their reports, few and far between they may be on Arab muslim delinquencies, will be ignored as useless.

 

[Nik]

I was stunned to read this article in the WSJt:

Human Rights Watch Goes to Saudi Arabia - WSJ.com

I then went to the NGO Monitor's website providing the backgrounds of the HRW staff covering the middle east, and in particular, Israel:

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/hrw_hires_another_pro_palestinian_activist

These 2 events have irreparably harmed the reputation and imparitality of HRW, and I find it obscene that in a telephone call with Ms. Whitson, she prefers to hide behind a fig leaf, claiming that HRW "only hires staff with a commitment to human rights law," whatever that vague nonsense is supposed to mean.

Given that she was unable to substantiate or discredit the NGO Monitor's historical claims about her and her colleague's backgrounds, merely claiming "everything NGO-M puts out is propaganda," I have lost all and any confidence in this organization, and will no longer pay ANY attention to its reports - nor should ANY reasonable-minded person.

Even if one hated Israel outright, they would HAVE to accept that stacking the deck there with anti-Israel staff would do anything BUT reinforce an impartial position.

Ms. Whitson even declared that HRW completely supports the Right of Return for the refugees, a totally unacceptable position even to the Israeli left. Clearly, they have abrogated any desire or inclination of non-bias with respect to Israel, and even their reports, few and far between they may be on Arab muslim delinquencies, will be ignored as useless.

The president of NGO Monitor is an advisor to Ariel Sharon.

I wonder, just wonder, if it might be biased

Wow....HRW has its credibility ruined with organizations that are funded by one particular side. Aside from fooling morons like you, its credibility is intact.

 

[Foxfyre]

It seems reasonable to me that Israel should not stand in the way of creation of a Palestinian State, and, in fact such a Palestinian state should be in Israel's interest in that the international community could no longer credibly insist that the Palestinian's are Israel's responsibility. And it would settle once and for all who has legitimate right to utilize whatever land is allocated to the Palestinians for a homeland.

It seems reasonable to me that all credible human rights watch groups should allow Israel to do whatever Israel must reasonably do to protect Israeli citizens against kidnappers, suicide bombers, saboteurs, rocket attacks, terrorist attacks.

I don't have a lot of faith that there are many, if any objective human watch groups out there, and I don't have a lot of faith that there are enough objective thinkers left in the world to reach agreement on either of these points.

 

[Shogun]

Cast Lead fans calling out the Human Rights Watch..


it just doesn't get any funnier than that, folks.

 

[rhodescholar]

The president of NGO Monitor is an advisor to Ariel Sharon.

He breathes too, what does that mean? And BTW, Ariel Sharon has not been in the israeli gov't for what, 4 years now?

I wonder, just wonder, if it might be biased

I posted the link to the NGO-M site listing the HISTORY of the people of HRW, and even they, when asked, do not deny these facts. Their history is not in question, and reporting it cannot by definition, be biased. If a person spent the last 20 years inside extremist pro-pal organizations, they are not suitable to work inside a purportedly unbiased, impartial human rights group.

What NGO-M is or is not is totally irrelevent; it is simply listing the biographies of the people working at HRW.

And just like the person at HRW, you prefer to make personal attacks and obfuscate with nonsense what you cannot defend.

Wow....HRW has its credibility ruined with organizations that are funded by one particular side. Aside from fooling morons like you, its credibility is intact.

Fucking idiot, HRW went to SA to fundraise by promoting its anti-Israel stance.

At this point, only a moron would accept their reporting anymore. And that is unfortunate, since, like the ACLU, were once a decent, reliable group - but no longer.

 

[Shogun]

 

[MaggieMae]

The president of NGO Monitor is an advisor to Ariel Sharon.

He breathes too, what does that mean? And BTW, Ariel Sharon has not been in the israeli gov't for what, 4 years now?

I wonder, just wonder, if it might be biased

I posted the link to the NGO-M site listing the HISTORY of the people of HRW, and even they, when asked, do not deny these facts. Their history is not in question, and reporting it cannot by definition, be biased. If a person spent the last 20 years inside extremist pro-pal organizations, they are not suitable to work inside a purportedly unbiased, impartial human rights group.

What NGO-M is or is not is totally irrelevent; it is simply listing the biographies of the people working at HRW.

And just like the person at HRW, you prefer to make personal attacks and obfuscate with nonsense what you cannot defend.

Wow....HRW has its credibility ruined with organizations that are funded by one particular side. Aside from fooling morons like you, its credibility is intact.

Fucking idiot, HRW went to SA to fundraise by promoting its anti-Israel stance.

At this point, only a moron would accept their reporting anymore. And that is unfortunate, since, like the ACLU, were once a decent, reliable group - but no longer.

Netanyahu previously held the same position from June 1996 to July 1999 and he's back as Prime Minister again. Your point? None of them who have been in leadership positions since the '67 war are very far off the radar.

 

[rhodescholar]

Netanyahu previously held the same position from June 1996 to July 1999 and he's back as Prime Minister again. Your point? None of them who have been in leadership positions since the '67 war are very far off the radar.

You are aware that Sharon is brain dead and in a coma for over 4 years, right?

 

[Shogun]

ONE SHOT, TWO KILLS, bitch.

 

[Nik]

The president of NGO Monitor is an advisor to Ariel Sharon.

He breathes too, what does that mean? And BTW, Ariel Sharon has not been in the israeli gov't for what, 4 years now?

You don't understand the difference between him breathing and being an advisor to a former leader of Israel? Honestly?

I wonder, just wonder, if it might be biased

I posted the link to the NGO-M site listing the HISTORY of the people of HRW, and even they, when asked, do not deny these facts. Their history is not in question, and reporting it cannot by definition, be biased. If a person spent the last 20 years inside extremist pro-pal organizations, they are not suitable to work inside a purportedly unbiased, impartial human rights group.

You can't include and omit specific facts in order to create a biased perspective? Really?

What NGO-M is or is not is totally irrelevent; it is simply listing the biographies of the people working at HRW.

Bullshit. Its very relevant.

Wow....HRW has its credibility ruined with organizations that are funded by one particular side. Aside from fooling morons like you, its credibility is intact.

Fucking idiot, HRW went to SA to fundraise by promoting its anti-Israel stance.

No, they didn't. They went by promoting their ability to be independent from pro-Israeli groups. That does NOT mean they are anti-Israel, merely that they are independent.

 

[rhodescholar]

You don't understand the difference between him breathing and being an advisor to a former leader of Israel? Honestly?

The poster said that people in israel have a habit of coming back into the government, clearly that is NOT the case with Sharon barring a miracle/act of god.

You can't include and omit specific facts in order to create a biased perspective? Really?

Do you have the mental capability to follow and understand what I wrote? I said that HRW has openly brought in people who have a long history of anti-israeli activity, they are not making much effort to deny the history of these people - what they are trying to do is smear the group that is publicizing this history.

Since they are hilariously claiming that these anti-israel activities were not really extremist, they have no credibility.

If HRW's middle east desk was stacked with former Kahane members, I know that hypocritical assholes like yourself would be, along with your arab muslim friends, among the first to scream: "they are biased!"

Bullshit. Its very relevant.

Wrong idiot, when someone posts facts - I don't care WHO they are, if they come from the f--king KKK I wouldn't care, if what they were saying is true.

NGO's biographies of these 4 people IS TRUE, and HRW is NOT disputing that they were involved with these anti-Israel groups.

No, they didn't. They went by promoting their ability to be independent from pro-Israeli groups. That does NOT mean they are anti-Israel, merely that they are independent.

Wrong again. Their language was promoting themselves by the number of instances that they appeared before the UN and US congress AGAINST Israel.

If they had gone to Israel and listed how many times they had done the same against SA's government, and tried to fundraise off of it, again, the arab filth and leftist chimps would be the FIRST to scream about it.

 

[Nik]

You don't understand the difference between him breathing and being an advisor to a former leader of Israel? Honestly?

The poster said that people in israel have a habit of coming back into the government, clearly that is NOT the case with Sharon barring a miracle/act of god.

Incorrect. You were responding to MY post, and I clearly did NOT say that people have a habit of coming back into the government.

You can't include and omit specific facts in order to create a biased perspective? Really?

Do you have the mental capability to follow and understand what I wrote? I said that HRW has openly brought in people who have a long history of anti-israeli activity, they are not making much effort to deny the history of these people - what they are trying to do is smear the group that is publicizing this history.

Since they are hilariously claiming that these anti-israel activities were not really extremist, they have no credibility.

Amusing that you would attempt to claim that I can't follow what you wrote after you stupidly claimed I said something I didn't. But disregarding that idiocy, your actual points have no merit at all. The "anti-Israel" activity they quote consists of....*gasp* criticizing Israel for inhumane actions!!!!!!!!! That you equate criticism of Israel with being anti-Israel merely shows the weakness of your own position.

If HRW's middle east desk was stacked with former Kahane members, I know that hypocritical assholes like yourself would be, along with your arab muslim friends, among the first to scream: "they are biased!"

Kahane members?

Bullshit. Its very relevant.

Wrong idiot, when someone posts facts - I don't care WHO they are, if they come from the f--king KKK I wouldn't care, if what they were saying is true.

NGO's biographies of these 4 people IS TRUE, and HRW is NOT disputing that they were involved with these anti-Israel groups.

Because statistics never lie, right?

How naive can you get?

No, they didn't. They went by promoting their ability to be independent from pro-Israeli groups. That does NOT mean they are anti-Israel, merely that they are independent.

Wrong again. Their language was promoting themselves by the number of instances that they appeared before the UN and US congress AGAINST Israel.

If they had gone to Israel and listed how many times they had done the same against SA's government, and tried to fundraise off of it, again, the arab filth and leftist chimps would be the FIRST to scream about it.

[/quote]

battles with pro-Israel pressure groups in the US, the European Union and the United Nations.

You think they shouldn't be battling pressure groups?

And they should go to Israel and fundraise off of their actions against Saudi Arabia and other inhumane regimes. What mental instability of yours causes you to think that leftists would have a problem with that?

 

[rhodescholar]

Incorrect. You were responding to MY post, and I clearly did NOT say that people have a habit of coming back into the government.

Wrong asshole, I was referring to MaggieMae's post #7. Get a clue.

The "anti-Israel" activity they quote consists of....*gasp* criticizing Israel for inhumane actions!!!!!!!!! That you equate criticism of Israel with being anti-Israel merely shows the weakness of your own position.

You are stupid, and I can see why noone generally responds to your posts. HRW has stacked their deck with people who have spent decades in groups that are extremely anti-israel. Do you understand?

Kahane members?

Look them up if you are too stupid to know...

Because statistics never lie, right?

Are you fucking capable of addressing what someone posts? I wrote that it is a FACT that these people were members of anti-israel groups in their past. That is a historical fact, not a number.

You think they shouldn't be battling pressure groups?

I think they should hire a mix of people, not just from one side. As the article said, their position has become so one-sided that their traditional supporters are no longer willing to donate to them, so they are seeking money from ever more extremist people.

And they should go to Israel and fundraise off of their actions against Saudi Arabia and other inhumane regimes. What mental instability of yours causes you to think that leftists would have a problem with that?

And you think the left is consistent? How many mass protests - like we saw against israel's cast lead - have you seen the left conduct against iran's recent repressions after their illegitimate election? ZERO.

 

[Nik]

Incorrect. You were responding to MY post, and I clearly did NOT say that people have a habit of coming back into the government.

Wrong asshole, I was referring to MaggieMae's post #7. Get a clue.

Then why were you replying to MY post, fuckwit?

The "anti-Israel" activity they quote consists of....*gasp* criticizing Israel for inhumane actions!!!!!!!!! That you equate criticism of Israel with being anti-Israel merely shows the weakness of your own position.

You are stupid, and I can see why noone generally responds to your posts. HRW has stacked their deck with people who have spent decades in groups that are extremely anti-israel. Do you understand?

Again. That you are too fucking stupid to understand t he difference between criticizing Israel and being anti-Israel shows the weakness of your own opinion.

Look them up if you are too stupid to know...

Ah, a government group. None of these were government groups. They were devoted to criticizing governments for inhumane activities. I know that, to a rabid pro-Israel fanatic like yourself an organization that criticizes governments for inhumane activities hiring people from other organizations that criticize governments for inhumane activities is such a terrible thing

Are you fucking capable of addressing what someone posts? I wrote that it is a FACT that these people were members of anti-israel groups in their past. That is a historical fact, not a number.

No. Its not a fact. Its a fact that they said that Israel commits atrocities, which it does.

I think they should hire a mix of people, not just from one side. As the article said, their position has become so one-sided that their traditional supporters are no longer willing to donate to them, so they are seeking money from ever more extremist people.

A mix of people?

HRW employes 230 people. Your little rightwing NGO monitoring group cited 4.

Some of the evil things these 4 people did?

Sharing a platform with an Anti-Israel speaker.

*gasp*...sharing a platform? You mean they spoke at the same event? Wow...how terrible. After all, we all know all events are only about one point of view, and never, ever have dissenting opinions.

Repeated allegations against Israel. *gasp*, they said that Israel had done something wrong? Lordy, lordy, lordy how terribly anti-Israel!!!!!

And they should go to Israel and fundraise off of their actions against Saudi Arabia and other inhumane regimes. What mental instability of yours causes you to think that leftists would have a problem with that?

And you think the left is consistent? How many mass protests - like we saw against israel's cast lead - have you seen the left conduct against iran's recent repressions after their illegitimate election? ZERO.

Wtf? Way to fail to answer the question and instead respond with nonsensical bullshit.

What mental instability of yours causes you to think that leftists would have a problem with that?

As for the bullshit you spewed about Iran...

Zero? Not quite. Just because you are too fucking ignorant to notice them because you only notice when anyone criticizes Israel, doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[rhodescholar]

Then why were you replying to MY post,

I wasn't idiot.

to understand t he difference between criticizing Israel and being anti-Israel shows the weakness of your own opinion.

Wrong moron, for the 10th time. I said that HRW has stacked their staff - the MIDDLE EAST DESK STAFF - not the whole org - with anti-israel people.

After what 5 posts, you STILL have not addressed that fundamental point.

Sharing a platform with an Anti-Israel speaker....

I am wasting my time, as I said in the other thread, you are rather stupid, and its pretty obvious why the rest of the board does not respond to your posts.

Nadia Barhoum was a member of an extremist anti-israel group for years, the others even longer. An org looking to exhibit BALANCE in their staff would not have hired these people.

Just because you are too fucking ignorant to notice them because you only notice when anyone criticizes Israel, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Wrong - there is no comparison in size or volume between the anti-IRI protests and what was pushed forward against israel in january, not even close.

Any further posts of yours that do not address the bolded statement above will be ignored.

 

[Nik]

Then why were you replying to MY post,

I wasn't idiot.

Yeah, you were. You quoted MY statement, dipshit.

Wrong moron, for the 10th time. I said that HRW has stacked their staff - the MIDDLE EAST DESK STAFF - not the whole org - with anti-israel people.

After what 5 posts, you STILL have not addressed that fundamental point.

Jesus fuck are you dense. Here, I'll write it very large for you.

THEY AREN'T ANTI-ISRAEL JUST BECAUSE THEY CRITICIZED ISRAEL

Comprende, dipshit?

Sharing a platform with an Anti-Israel speaker....

I am wasting my time, as I said in the other thread, you are rather stupid, and its pretty obvious why the rest of the board does not respond to your posts.

Nadia Barhoum was a member of an extremist anti-israel group for years, the others even longer. An org looking to exhibit BALANCE in their staff would not have hired these people.

Except they aren't extremist anti-Israel groups. But then if you weren't such a fuckwit, you might know that.

Just because you are too fucking ignorant to notice them because you only notice when anyone criticizes Israel, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Wrong - there is no comparison in size or volume between the anti-IRI protests and what was pushed forward against israel in january, not even close.

Any further posts of yours that do not address the bolded statement above will be ignored.

And? You said there were no protests. Now you say they weren't an equal size?

 

[rhodescholar]

Then why were you replying to MY post,

I didn't you stupid asshole. READ POST #8 ON THE FIRST PAGE:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1343117-post8.html

Yeah, you were. You quoted MY statement, dipshit.

POST #8 QUOTED MAGGIE U FUCKING MORON.

THEY AREN'T ANTI-ISRAEL JUST BECAUSE THEY CRITICIZED ISRAEL

Barhoum's organization, United for Peace and Justice in Palestine does not recognize the right of israel to exist. Are you so fucking lazy and stupid, that like the Kahane group, you don't even know the agenda of the groups you are discussing?

Except they aren't extremist anti-Israel groups. But then if you weren't such a fuckwit, you might know that.

Except douchebag, you are wrong - and too stupid to admit your mistake.

You said there were no protests. Now you say they weren't an equal size?

I meant there were VERY few in comparison to the massive volume of protests by leftist groups against Cast Lead. With my clarification, that FACT is undeniable.

 

[Nik]

Then why were you replying to MY post,

I didn't you stupid asshole. READ POST #8 ON THE FIRST PAGE:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1343117-post8.html

Yeah, you were. You quoted MY statement, dipshit.

POST #8 QUOTED MAGGIE U FUCKING MORON.

Jesus fuck, am I dealing with a child?

I said:

The president of NGO Monitor is an advisor to Ariel Sharon.

You responded with:

He breathes too, what does that mean? And BTW, Ariel Sharon has not been in the israeli gov't for what, 4 years now?

I responded with:

You don't understand the difference between him breathing and being an advisor to a former leader of Israel? Honestly?

Then you said:

The poster said that people in israel have a habit of coming back into the government, clearly that is NOT the case with Sharon barring a miracle/act of god.

And started rambling on about Maggie.

What Maggie said was NEVER PART OF THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN ME AND YOU. You quoted ME in your response. Post #8 has fuck all to do with this, since my response wasn't to you quoting #8, my response was to you quoting #2...MY POST.

Jesus. Learn to fucking read, and then get back to me. Maybe then you will be a bit more tolerable. Until you can comprehend basic thread structure, there is little use in debating you.

 

[Newby]

Nik loses yet another debate.

 

[rhodescholar]

The poster said that people in israel have a habit of coming back into the government, clearly that is NOT the case with Sharon barring a miracle/act of god.

DO YOU SEE THAT SENTENCE IDIOT?

That sentence refers to MAGGIE - not you moron. THAT IS WHO I WAS REFERRING TO, YOU IDIOT.

END.