It's come to this: Israel Television begging 'human rights watch' for comment on 3-year old 'Palestinian' throwing stones at soldiers
Shavua tov, a good week to everyone.
Over the weekend, IDF Lieutenant Colonel Peter Lerner (who runs foreign and social media for the IDF spokesperson's office) posted the following video of a flag waving 'Palestinian' toddler being sent by his father to throw stones at IDF troops.
The so-called 'protectors' of human rights have had NOTHING to say about this video. The Israel Broadcast Authority is now begging 'human rights watch' and Sarah Leah Whitson (who once raised money from the Saudis by bragging about how bad her organization makes Israel look) to comment.
#DoubleStandard When it's okay to pay 'migrants' to leave and when it's not
Norway is offering large sums of money (80,000 Kroner - some $9,300) and free plane tickets to 'migrants' (Muslims) to leave.
“They thought that when they came to Norway they would get protection
rather quickly. And that they would have the opportunity to work or take
an education – and maybe even to get their family to Norway,” Katinka
Hartmann, head of the The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration’s
(Utlendingsdirektoratet - UDI) return unit, told broadcaster NRK.
But with family reunification application processing times taking
years, many have decided that they don’t want to wait and have applied
for financial assistance to return home.
According to UDI, over 900 people have applied to leave Norway with
financial support from the state. A family with two children can receive
upwards of 80,000 kroner ($9,300 or 8,600 euros) in addition to having
their airline tickets bought by the state.
The number of applications is on the rise, according to the Norwegian
division of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which
processes the requests.
“Earlier this year, the number was an average of 100 per month. In
October, there were 150 and in November there were 230 applications,”
IOM spokesman Joost van der Aalst told NRK.
He said that the long family reunification times were a major factor,
but many people were also put off by having to live in remote areas
where they feel it is difficult to put their work experience to use.
You might remember another country where they wanted to pay migrants to leave, and might have even considered paying migrants who had been in the country for many years to leave. Of course, that country was blasted by its leftist media, by its own legislators, and by its Supreme Court, along with 'human rights watch' and other 'human rights' groups. Can you guess what country was blasted for trying to get illegal immigrants to leave? I knew you could....
Here's what gets 'human rights watch's Sarah Leah Whitson all riled up:
despicable, medieval home demolitions by #Israel punish entire family for crime of suspected killers - war crimes http://t.co/JZYzhl2nM5
— Sarah Leah Whitson (@sarahleah1) November 22, 2014
Funny. In the United States, if someone sells drugs in a house, the house is subject to forfeiture, even if the owner knew nothing about it. Does Whitson consider that 'medieval'?
A few days ago, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth, tweeted
the following statement: “Germans rally against anti-Semitism that
flared in Europe in response to Israel’s conduct in Gaza war. Merkel
joins.” Roth provided a link to a New York Times article about the rally, which took place in Berlin.
Roth’s framing of this issue is very odd and obtuse. Anti-Semitism in
Europe did not flare “in response to Israel’s conduct in Gaza,” or
anywhere else. Anti-Semitic violence and invective are not responses to
events in the Middle East, just as anti-Semitism does not erupt “in
response” to the policies of banks owned by Jews, or in response to
editorial positions taken by The New York Times. This is for the simple reason that Jews do not cause anti-Semitism.
It is a universal and immutable rule that the targets of prejudice
are not the cause of prejudice.
Just as Jews (or Jewish organizations,
or the Jewish state) do not cause anti-Semitism to flare, or intensify,
or even to exist, neither do black people cause racism, nor gay people
homophobia, nor Muslims Islamophobia. Like all prejudices, anti-Semitism
is not a rational response to observable events; it is a manifestation
of irrational hatred. Its proponents justify their anti-Semitism by
pointing to the (putatively offensive or repulsive) behavior of their
targets, but this does not mean that major figures in the world of
human-rights advocacy should accept these pathetic excuses as
legitimate.
A question: If a mosque in Europe or in the U.S. were to be attacked
(God forbid) by Islamophobic arsonists, would Ken Roth describe such an
attack as a manifestation of “anti-Muslim hatred that flared in response
to the conduct of Muslim groups in the Middle East?”
...
I don’t know what motivated Ken Roth to blame the Jewish state for the
violent acts of anti-Semites. I do hope that he reconsiders his position
on the root cause of anti-Jewish prejudice.
Think about this the next time 'human rights watch' asks you for money:
Can you tell if Hamas tunnel used to attack/capture combatant (IHL allows) or take hostage/attack civilian (illegal)? pic.twitter.com/HgVe8rAcN6
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) August 19, 2014
Gee, Ken. Why would they be digging tunnels underneath Israeli kibbutzim if they didn't plan to take civilians hostage?
Their greatest strategic asset is the knowledge that, however
outrageous their behavior, large segments of the press and political
class (especially in Europe), and the “human rights” and international
communities led by the United Nations will effectively side with them,
directing their wrath primarily at Israel, and protecting them from
total defeat, so that they can proclaim victory from the ruin and
devastation they authored.
Hamas knows that, despite the consistent evidence of their mendacity,
their fabrications will be widely disseminated as facts by news and
human rights groups. These lies inflict enormous damage on Israel even
when the truth later emerges. Any honest observer appreciates that the
Israel Defense Forces exert greater efforts to minimize civilian
casualties than any army in history, and actually have a
civilian-to-fighter casualty ratio that is relatively low for modern
warfare (despite the fact that Hamas designs its chosen battlefield
specifically to maximize civilian damage).
But Hamas knows that the press will gleefully play the body-count game,
as though its infographics speak to causation or moral culpability.
They also know that every conflagration they provoke causes the world’s
oldest hatred to bubble up again, more virulently each time.
These are the carcinogens that feed this cancer and fan the flames of
violence in the region. When Kenneth Roth, head of Human Rights Watch
(HRW), arguably the world’s most powerful human rights organization,
tweets that, “Tunnels used to attack or capture soldiers isn't [a human
rights violation],” Hamas is encouraged to dig more tunnels.
When MP David Ward says that he would fire a rocket if he lived in
Gaza, Hamas is urged to fire more rockets.When Business Secretary Vince
Cable decides to suspend UK arms export licences to Israel when Hamas
violates cease-fires and Israel retaliates, Hamas is incentivized to
violate cease-fires.
When Sarah Leah Whitson, HRW’s Middle East and North Africa director
declares it, “abhorrent that Israeli forces are . . . blatantly
violating the laws of war" (based solely on interviews with Gaza
residents), when the United Nations Human Rights Commission orders yet
another lopsided anti-Israel “fact-finding” mission, and its High
Commissioner Navi Pillay offers platitudes of moral equivalence accusing
“both sides” of “indiscriminate killing of civilians,” when
empty-headed celebrities blabber incoherently about Israeli “massacres”
and “genocide,” then Hamas knows that its diabolical tactics are
working.
The blood of those Palestinian children (and Israel’s children) is on
the hands of those who irresponsibly, even if unwittingly, give Hamas
such support, hope and inspiration.
Video: Hillel Neuer destroys PLO's Diana Buttu and 'human rights watch's Bill van Eswald
Al Jazeera tries to silence UN Watch's Hillel Neuer, but even a bit of
truth managed to throw ex-PLO lawyer Diana Buttu & Human Rights
Watch's Bill van Esveld on the defensive.
For those who still don't believe that Hamas uses human shields, get a good look at the picture above. It's a group of 'Palestinian civilians' (perhaps that is becoming an oxymoron too) on the roof of a building that Israel wanted to destroy. In this case, the human shields accomplished Hamas' purpose: Israel did not destroy the building.
In a screenshot of a television broadcast from July 8, civilians
gather on the roof of the home of a Hamas terrorist who was targeted by
the IDF. They did so in order to act as human shields and deter an
imminent IDF attack, explained the military blog.
An IDF bird's eye video shows civilians gathering on a roof of a
terrorist's house after the IDF fired a warning shot to indicate it was
about to bomb it. Hamas achieved its aim in this case, because the IDF
decided not to bomb the home.
Let's go to the videotape.
Here's a video about human shields that the IDF did during Operation Cast Lead in 2008-09.
Let's go to the videotape.
Why aren't the 'human rights' groups criticizing Hamas? Because they're not about human rights. They're about anti-Semitism and Jew hatred.
What amazed me was the fact that this Hamas facility was so close to a
“non-Hamas” neighborhood. It is not a secret and this is a common
practice and I’m telling you, it’s frightening. Of course, my first
thought was “Why is Israel bombing this neighborhood?” Then I was told
about the Hamas facility. Yes, they do tuck their operations into
residential areas and let civilians endure the consequences.
As soon as the facility was hit, there was no further bombing that night.
I attended church while in Gaza, and I was surprised to find a Hamas
headquarters located directly across the street from the church, again
in an area of Gaza City where I was told you wouldn’t necessarily expect
to find Hamas supporters. I soon learned that the church has sustained
damage during bombing one night.
When I worked in a school there, it was well known that Hamas
occupied the high rise overlooking our school field. We could often see
people staring down on us. The school kids would often stop and shout up
at the people, telling them off, telling them to stop watching us. It
was obvious to me that if that building ever became a target to bomb,
the school would again sustain heavy damage. In fact, it did in the last
large military action. Hamas is everywhere.
There seems to be no separation at all between terrorist and civilian
areas, which is disgusting because they know there are civilians who
don’t support them and yet they pop up everywhere.
Just wondering why 'human rights watch,' B'Tselem, the UN 'human rights council' and all those other groups that claim to support human rights have nothing to say about this.
'Human Rights' Watch comments on teenagers' kidnapping
A 'Human Rights' Watch spokesperson had the following comment on the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers by 'Palestinian' terrorists (Hat Tip: Mrs. Carl).
To ensure the proper response to the kidnapping by Palestinians of
three Israeli teenagers last week, Human Rights Watch has hired a team
of crickets, which will chirp at regular intervals to highlight the lack
of condemnation emanating from the organization.
HRW is among the quickest to denounce alleged Israeli violations of
Palestinian rights, often parroting Palestinian activists’ accusations
without thorough investigation. To avoid the impression that the
organization’s one-sidedness stems from incompetence or negligence, HRW
specifically engaged a troupe of the musical insects to stress that it
had a consistent approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that
the anti-Israel bias is not haphazard.
“It would be unprofessional of us to waffle on where we stand
vis-à-vis Israel and Palestine,” said the organization’s executive
director Kenneth Roth. “We made a strategic decision long ago that when
it comes to those two entities, we must always consider a given case
through the same lens: how can it be interpreted to depict Israel as
immoral and unworthy of continued existence?” The crickets, he said, had
experience filling the silence on other issues, notably the persecution
of Christians in Palestinian areas, of homosexuals throughout the
Muslim Middle East, and of antisemitism in Europe.
“Chirp,” said the crickets.
Hillel Neuer explains why Roth has hired the crickets: They do a better job of commenting than Roth does.
After repeated appeals from
Twitter users for HRW Executive Director Kenneth Roth to end his
silence on the abductions, Roth finally responded with this
carefully-constructed tweet:
Attending school at illegal settlement doesn't legitimize apparent kidnapping of #Israel teens. They should be freed http://t.co/EO1jeWh8Ht
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) June 14, 2014
But why would Roth even bother to mention that the youths — two of them aged 16 — studied in an “illegal settlement”?
In all of history, was there ever a case where
the head of a human rights group issued a statement concerning innocent
hostages — while they were still in the hands of kidnappers
— which deliberately connected them to an “illegal” act, let alone
devoting half the text to it?
Although Roth appears to insist that this fact
“doesn’t legitimize” their kidnapping, the only possible reason he
mentioned it was to equivocate his appeal, which amounted to nothing
more than “they should be freed.”
HRW’s standard procedure is to call out actions as violations of international law.
Indeed, in other like cases, HRW has issued lengthy press releases and reports condemning the abductions of civilians as a war crime, citing chapter and verse of the Geneva Conventions.
Yet here not only does Roth’s tweet
exceptionally fail to invoke the law against the perpetrators of
the kidnapping, but he instead invokes the law against the victims — for attending school at an “illegal” settlement.
'Human rights watch's vulture an expert in fiction
Peter Bouckaert, the 'human rights watch' official who was quoted prominently trashing Israel in a 'private' Facebook page conversation among a group called the Vultures, is an expert in fiction. Bouckaert wrote 'human rights watch's coverage of the Second Lebanon War in 2006, which in a prelude to the even more toxic 2009 Goldstone Report took uncorroborated testimony of Lebanese as absolute truth.
This was sent to me by email:
EXPERTS OR IDEOLOGUES?
PETER BOUCKAERT
NGO MonitorSeptember 08, 2009NGO Monitor Monograph Series
Peter Bouckaert, “Emergencies Director” for HRW,38
has a background in research in South Africa. His one-sided approach to
the Arab-Israeli context may be the result of drawing a false analogy
between the two very different conflict situations of South Africa and
Israel. Bouckaert worked at the Constitutional Litigation Unit of the
Legal Resources Centre in South Africa 1994-1995 and the South Africa
Department of Land Affairs 1996-1996. 39 He
holds a law degree from Stanford University and received a fellowship
at HRW after graduation in 1997. In his position, Bouckaert “is
responsible for coordinating [HRW’s] response to major wars and other
human rights crises.”40
An interview with Bouckaert described his “maverick style,” his “urgent
headline grabbing activism,” and, as with many other activists at HRW,
his anti-establishment approach (Case 2005).
Boukaert
has authored a number of tendentious op-eds directed exclusively at
Israel during and after the Second Lebanon War. An August 5, 2006
report from Tyre, For Israel, Innocent Civilians Are Fair Game,
claimed that “Time after time, Israel has hit civilian homes and cars
…killing dozens of people with no evidence of any military objective./My
notebook overflows with reports of civilian deaths…” (Bouckaert Aug.
5-6, 2006). Another op-ed inThe Guardian described the
“carnage in Qana” and Israel’s actions as “war crimes” (Bouckaert July
31, 2006). As noted below in the case study on the Lebanon War, HRW
amplified and distorted the events in Qana by publicizing a false
casualty figure and repeating claims of indiscriminate attacks.
Bouckaert also wrote HRW’s September 2007 report on the Second Lebanon War, Why They Died.
This pseudo-research publication followed HRW’s pattern of highly
selective analysis, unprofessional methodology, unverifiable
allegations, and grossly disproportionate criticism of Israel that
includes 122 pages on alleged Israeli abuses, and just 23 pages on
alleged abuses by Hezbollah. This report also reexamines and corrects
some of the most blatant errors in the case studies from HRW’s earlier
report, Fatal Strikes which Bouckaert co-authored (NGO Monitor Digest Oct. 1, 2007). For example, in Fatal Strikes an airstrike on Aitaroun on July 17 is presented as an example of the killing of civilians at a time when “Hezbollah was not operating in the area.” Yet in Why They Died,
the details are changed. Different witnesses report that “The night of
the attack, Hezbollah was firing from inside the village. …At 10:15 p.m., they were firing rockets from near our house. We heard the missiles going out.”41
Commenting
on Jenin in 2002, following the international campaign to accuse Israel
of a massacre and war crimes, Bouckaert alleged that “very serious
violations of the laws of war took place” and claimed that Israel
“clearly failed in [the] important obligation [to minimize suffering to
civilians] by causing the significant loss of civilian life and massive
damage to civilian property.” This assertion erased Israel’s decision to
send soldiers to fight house to house against terrorist infrastructure,
instead of relying on airstrikes, due to the civilian presence in
Jenin.
In the picture above, Mohamed al-Dura is seen in his role as the patron saint of Durban, the internationally coordinated political and economic campaign against the existence of a Jewish state.
'Human rights watch' official, AP and AFP reporters, trash Israel in private Facebook group
A 'human rights watch' official, and several foreign correspondents for AP and AFP, trashed Israel in a private Facebook group after the Israeli government released a report exposing Muhammad al-Dura's 'death' as a fraud.
A “secret” Facebook group of foreign correspondents and human rights
activists quickly devolved into an anti-Israel hate-fest on Tuesday
following the release of a new Israeli government report that cleared
the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) of wrongdoing in the 2000 death of a
Palestinian boy.
The Israeli government report
contests the claim that the IDF killed a Palestinian boy, Muhammad
al-Durrah, in a famous 2000 incident in Gaza that helped ignite the
Second Intifada.
Journalists and activists mocked the report, attacked the IDF, and
claimed pro-Israel lobbyists were influencing the media coverage, in a
private Facebook group for foreign correspondents known as the “Vulture
Club.”
Peter Bouckaert, a senior official at Human Rights Watch, dismissed the report as “typical IDF lies.”
“As usual, it takes them a long time to really build up the falsehood,” wrote Bouckaert.
Bouckaert also blasted the New York Times for its coverage of the report.
“It really isn’t good journalism to write this up as if these are credible allegations when it is a pack of lies,” he wrote.
Correspondents from numerous outlets, including the Associated Press and the Agence France-Presse, also piled on.
According to my sources, Bouckaert was the direct supervisor of Marc Garlasco at 'human rights watch.' Garlasco was the organization's senior military analyst until he was suspended in September 2009 after his hobby of collecting Nazi memorabilia was uncovered by bloggers.
Read the whole thing. It includes a screen cap of the Facebook page in question.
The Vulture Club has about 3,500 members. It's not a small group.
'Human rights watch' to give top prize to terror tweeter, advocate of murdering Israelis
Greetings from London Heathrow....
Given what we already know about 'human rights watch,' it should not be too surprising that they are choosing to honor a tweeter for terror and an advocate of murdering Israelis with their highest honor.
GENEVA, April 30, 2013 – A jury comprised of Human Rights Watch and nine other NGOs has nominated an Egyptian activist for the prestigious Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders, even though shetweeets for terror, reports theGeneva-based UN Watch.(See below UNW's open letter to Ken Roth, head of Human Rights Watch, a key member of the jury.)
Several Egyptian human rights activists expressed shock at the nomination. Amr Bakly, who heads the Cairo Liberal Forum, tweeted: "The Martin Ennals Award is not for terrorist supporters. . . Mona Saif is a terrorist supporter!" Maikel Nabil, a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience, jailed by Egyptin 2011for
his human rights activism, also expressed alarm: "The Martin Ennals
Award can be awarded to Mona Seif if its committee is able to explain to
the victims of terrorism why they deserve to be killed by those whom
Mona supports."
The IDF has announced that it will no longer use white phosphorus as a smokescreen for military operations. The IDF came under sharp criticism for its use of white phosphorus during Operation Cast Lead during 2008-09, even though its use as a smokescreen is completely legal and it is so used by armies around the world.
Smokescreen artillery shells containing white
phosphorus "are to be removed from active duty soon" and replaced by
Israeli-developed alternatives "based completely on gas" around a year
from now, the IDF said, without giving details.
During the Gaza
fighting, Israel said troops fired mortar rounds with white phosphorus
warheads to clear brush around trenches used by Palestinian gunmen.
At
the time, Human Rights Watch said Israel appeared to be using white
phosphorus to hide military operations, as permitted in principle under
international humanitarian law.
"However, white phosphorus has a
significant, incidental, incendiary effect that can severely burn people
and set structures, fields, and other civilian objects in the vicinity
on fire," the New York-based organization said.
"The potential
for harm to civilians is magnified by Gaza's high population density,
among the highest in the world," it added, calling on the IDF to stop
using the munitions.
By the way, Gaza is not the most densely populated area in the world. In fact, it's not even close.
The 'human rights watch' complaint would never have been made against - or taken seriously by - any other country.
CNN has admitted that a 4-year old who was killed during Operation Pillar of Defense was killed by Hamas and not by Israel. It's a few seconds before the end of this video.
Let's go to the videotape. More after the video.
The picture that man held up as being among the 10 people killed in his house was... you guessed it... a Hamas militant. There was a reason that house was targeted. But then Hamas always uses its women and children as human shields. That's what they're there for. If Hamas lied about the kid at the end, what makes you think they're telling the truth anyplace else in the video?
And as to 'human rights watch,' I would suggest you go here and here. Their bias was proven a long time ago.
'Human rights watch' is criticizing Hamas for failing to 'investigate' the deaths of seven collaborators who were executed by Hamas during Operation Pillar of Defense.
Ihab al-Ghusain, head of the Hamas government media office, denied the
allegation and said an inquiry headed by the prosecutor general was set
up shortly after the incidents and had made recommendations to the
cabinet. He did not elaborate.
The slain men were serving prior jail sentences for passing
information to Israel when, HRW said, gunmen pulled them from their
cells and killed them. Some of their corpses were dragged in Gaza's
streets by motorcycles to chants of "God is Great."
One of the men
was killed on November 16 and his body was left for the public to see
on a busy street. The other six were killed and mutilated four days
later.\
Following the incidents, Hamas deputy leader Moussa Abu
Marzouk called the killings "unlawful" and said the perpetrators "should
be punished and it must not be repeated."
Human Rights Watch said
their convictions may have been based on evidence extracted through
torture, and that an inquiry into their deaths pledged by Hamas seems
not to have begun.
"Hamas's inability or unwillingness to
investigate the brazen murders of seven men makes a mockery of its
claims that it's upholding the rule of law in Gaza," said Sarah Leah
Whitson, Middle East director for the New York-based HRW.
"Even
before the killings, the abuses the men suffered made the criminal
justice system a travesty, regardless of their guilt or innocence," she
said.
Since when is Whitson so concerned about 'human rights'?
And what difference would it make if Hamas conducted an 'investigation' anyway? You don't really expect them to do anything, do you?
“Palestinian armed groups made clear in their statements that harming
civilians was their aim,” said HRW's Middle East director Sarah Leah
Whitson. “There is simply no legal justification for launching rockets
at populated areas.”
The group also found that Gazan groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad,
and the Popular Resistance Committee, justified targeting civilian
centers as reprisal for Israeli strikes, an act also banned under
international law.
Furthermore, such groups "repeatedly fired
rockets from densely populated areas, near homes, businesses, and a
hotel, unnecessarily placing civilians in the vicinity at grave risk
from Israeli counter-fire," the report said.
The detailed report
included examples of rockets being launched from densely populated areas
in Gaza, and noted that groups fired from underground tunnels with
hatches for the first time. HRW faulted Palestinian armed groups for
failing to alert civilians or urge them to evacuate prior to launching
rockets in their vicinity.
As the ruling power in the Strip, the
human rights group said, Hamas was responsible for reining in the
behavior of other groups.
“As the ruling authority in Gaza, Hamas has an obligation to stop unlawful attacks and punish those responsible,” Whitson said.
But lest you get your hopes up for a Goldstone or other style of inquiry into these human rights violations....
A week earlier, HRW reported that Israeli attacks on journalists and
media facilities during the operation also violated laws of war, saying
that Israel provided no specific information to justify claims that they
were military targets.
“Just because Israel says a journalist
was a fighter or a TV station was a command center does not make it so,”
Whitson said. “Journalists who praise Hamas and TV stations that
applaud attacks on Israel may be propagandists, but that does not make
them legitimate targets under the laws of war.”
Well yeah, except that Israel did provide evidence, and Hamas' al-Aqsa television is a designated terror organization.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
