Advanced Search
You searched for:
NGOs: | Human Rights Watch (HRW) |
---|---|
Other Content Types: | Press Releases, In The Media, Presentations, Posts, , Key Issues |
Publications: | Reports, Books, Academic Publications, Submissions, Resource Pages |
Start date: | 1 Jan 1988 |
End date: | 26 Jun 2017 |
HRW's "Rain of Fire": Neither Thorough Nor Impartial
As in HRWs other statements on Gaza, this report reflects a manipulation of "evidence" and lack of professionalism to support pre-determined political and ideological positions. The charges of "war crimes" are unjustified, based on dubious interpretations of international law, and reflect HRWs role in the wider Durban strategy of demonization. The lack of credibility results from reliance on unreliable and tampered evidence; false and inaccurate claims; and internal contradictions. The authors include a pro-Palestinian activist who has worked at the highly politicized PCHR.
Topics
Betrayed by Silence: NGOs ignore Gilad Shalit's rights
Gilad Shalit is not a high priority for human rights NGOs. There is no evidence that NGOs have undertaken sustained campaigns in support of Shalits rights. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have made only infrequent references to Shalit, always in the context of condemning Israel for "war crimes," "wanton destruction," and "collective punishment." Most Israeli groups have published only one or two statements in support of Shalit.
Topics
The NGO Front in the Gaza War: Compilation of NGO statements
A compilation of over 500 statements by 52 NGOs on "Operation Cast Lead" (December 27, 2008 - January 29, 2009).
Topics
The NGO Front in the Gaza War: Exploitation of International Law
The exploitation of international legal rhetoric is a major weapon in the political war to delegitmize Israeli anti-terror operations. During the Gaza conflict, NGOs have selectively charged Israel with "violations of law," "crimes against humanity," "war crimes," "disproportionate force" and "indiscriminate attacks." Many NGOs are already calling for international "investigations" and "lawfare" based on these accusations, in order to harass Israeli officials and promote a negative media image of Israel. At the same time, the violation of Gilad Shalits human rights and Hamas use of human shields are ignored.
Topics
HRW, anti-Israel Campaigns, and White Phosphorous: Condemn First, Correct (Maybe) Later
On January 10, HRW launched a public relations campaign condemning Israel for allegedly using white phosphorus weapons unlawfully in the conflict with Hamas. HRWs large budget, and its media access via the "halo effect" results in the amplification of these reports in the press and through other NGOs, without independent investigation or verification. HRWs disproportionate focus on this issue diverts attention from Hamas systematic use of human shields, its indiscriminate rocket attacks, and Irans role in fomenting the conflict.
Topics
Examining Human Rights Watch in 2008: Double Standards and Post-Colonial Ideology
Quantitative and Qualitative analysis of HRW in 2008 reflect the portrayal of Israel as the second worst abuser of human rights in the Middle East. HRW's use of international legal and human rights terminology singles out Israel for condemnation, while other serious human rights abusers receive little coverage. Evidence suggests that specific HRW personnel (Joe Stork, Sarah Leah Whitson and Marc Garlasco) are responsible for responsible for much of the bias, and when other individuals are centrally involved, the reports are less tendentious