Posted by David Bernstein:
Pollack on Human Rights Watch:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_26-2009_08_01.shtml#1249097844


   I just ust noticed [1]this piece in yesterday's Wall Street Journal by
   Noah Pollack, discussing HRW's bias against Israel.

   Pollack is actually too soft on HRW. He focuses on one aspect of the
   problem, that HRW gives wildly disproportionate attention to what it
   considers Israeli violations of human rights. But he neglects another
   aspects of the problem, that HRW's reports on Israel are frequently
   either inaccurate, or based on information from eyewitnesses that
   can't be verified. And even when HRW is proven wrong about Israel, it
   absolutely refuses to apologize or retract, [2]although it has done so
   when it's come under criticism from pro-Palestinian sources.

   Is it really possible that HRW has NEVER made an error in its many
   reports and releases on Israel? Well, no it's not, especially because
   [3]NGO Monitor, CAMERA, and others including [4]Professor Avi Bell
   have pointed out such errors. Unfortunately, given that HRW director
   Ken Roth dismisses such critiques as [5]"lies and deception" and HRW
   Middle East Director Sarah Leah Whitson says they amount to
   [6]"griping and whining," it's not terribly surprising that they
   ignore them.

   Over at Opinio Juris, HRW fan Kevin Jon Heller pointed to [7]this
   Jerusalem Post article, reporting that HRW's expert investigator of an
   incident in Gaza "conceded for the first time since the incident that
   [HRW] could not contradict the IDF's exonerating findings" and that
   the investigator "praised the IDF's professional investigation into
   the blast."

   Heller takes this as evidence that HRW is indeed willing to
   apologize/recant/retract when it's wrong about Israel. But oops, this
   information never made it on to HRW's website, nor was there any other
   official correction or clarification. Quite the contrary, ten days
   after the Jerusalem Post piece appeared, [8]HRW reasserted its
   original accusation, and alleged that Israel's investigation, praised
   by its own researcher, "betray[ed] a lack of interest in arriving at
   the truth of what happened." So HRW's leaders will contradict their
   own researchers' conclusions--at least when it makes Israel look bad.
   Though challenged, Heller has yet to come up with another example.

References

   1. 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574318344040299638.html
   2. http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_19-2009_07_25.shtml#1248569574
   3. http://blog.camera.org/
   4. http://opiniojuris.org/2006/08/28/human-rights-watch-strikes-again/
   5. http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_12-2009_07_18.shtml#1247680827
   6. 
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1246443832672&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
   7. 
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150355528023&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
   8. 
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/06/30/israelgaza-strip-rockets-and-shelling-violate-laws-war

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to