Human Rights Watch - The latest Useful Idiots

[Elind]

I was watching an interview with the HRW spokesman on O'Reilly this evening.

Of course they are in the news lately for condemning Israel of war crimes for indiscriminately and deliberately targeting civilians, and also they condemn Hizbullah for the same, but the headlines don't mention that latter part. Why bother I suppose

However what struck me was the sincerity of this spokesman explaining how they had conducted in depth investigations (? nobody else has such immediate access to unsanitized "atrocity" sites) and they have great experience in determining the "truth" of what they are told. He specifically referenced what they considered to be deliberate and not accidental stikes against civilians, by questioning locals after the fact. According to him, all accounts were that there were NO Hizbullah people in the area in any of these cases, including Qana.

It seems incredible to me that he thinks they can walk into a village where everyone knows everyone, and has married everyones cousin for generations, and who are 100% supporters of Hizbullah by their own statements and expect them to admit that their cousin was shooting missiles from their roof.

However he seemed really sincere.

Human Rights Watch seems to be staffed by people who have the gift of equating emotional sincerity with truth. Useful idiots to the core.

Pity, since the concept is good, but the execution is so obviously human.

 

[Mycroft]

That particular NGO has had credibility issues in the past.

This is a great website for critically analyzing NGOs:

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/index.html

 

[Skeptic]

For example, one of its "activists" had declared that the death of a family in Gaza was a deliberate massacre, too.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Did you know that there's a dating website specifically for people who don't cheat?

 

[Art Vandelay]

Other issues:
The fact that they don't know that there wass Hizbollah doesn't mean there wasn't.
Even if there was no Hizbollah, that would hardly prove that the killing of civilians was deliberate.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Elind, did you bother investigating how Human Rights Watch actually investigates incidents? They have a number of people actually there and they collect information from multiple sources. They also report on the other side's abuses.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Interesting how Mycroft blames the messenger but does not address one single claim by HRW.

Why is that I wonder?

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Originally posted by Elind

According to him, all accounts were that there were NO Hizbullah people in the area in any of these cases, including Qana.

Please provide evidence for this claim.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

For example, one of its "activists" had declared that the death of a family in Gaza was a deliberate massacre, too.

What caused the death of the family? The tooth fairy?

 

[Katana]

Please provide evidence for this claim.

This is a link to the report:

http://hrw.org/reports/2006/lebanon0806/

Villagers interviewed privately in one-on-one settings stated credibly and consistently that Hezbollah was not present in their homes or the vicinity when the attacks took place, and Human Rights Watch found no other evidence to suggest that Hezbollah had been there.

Unfortunately, their methodology is somewhat suspect. How did they go about establishing credibility? A hunch? Sincerity?

This is what they have to say about the Hezbollah using civilians as shields:

Human Rights Watch research established that, on some limited occasions, Hezbollah fighters have attempted to store weapons near civilian homes and have fired rockets from areas where civilians live. However, such practices do not justify the IDF’s failure to distinguish between combatants and civilians.

(my bold)
Even I have to admit that this calls HRW credibility into question. I wonder if they are successfully distinguishing the two.

 

[webfusion]

What caused the death of the family? The tooth fairy?

Although we are not sure what family is being referred to ---

if you want to make reference to the Ghaliya family that was blown up on the Gaza beach June 9th, then yes, as of now, the 'tooth fairy' would be as good an explanation as any. It wasn't the IDF, that much we know.

 

[Elind]

Elind, did you bother investigating how Human Rights Watch actually investigates incidents? They have a number of people actually there and they collect information from multiple sources. They also report on the other side's abuses.

I know what they claim, which is the point of the post. You don't seem to be paying attention to what was posted.

 

[Elind]

Originally posted by Elind
According to him, all accounts were that there were NO Hizbullah people in the area in any of these cases, including Qana.

Originally posted by Elind


Please provide evidence for this claim.

You think I made up what I heard the head of HRW say? Call FOX and ask for a transcript.

 

[a_unique_person]

Can we retire the "Useful Idiots" phrase.

 

[Elind]

Can we retire the "Useful Idiots" phrase.

What would you suggest we replace it with; or is it the concept that you would rather see removed from the realm of reality?

 

[Cleon]

What would you suggest we replace it with; or is it the concept that you would rather see removed from the realm of reality?

I find that the phrase usually describes the people using it, rather than the people they direct it towards.

Not a single substantial criticism of HRW has been made in this thread. Not one. But because their report critical of Israel, they're "useful idiots."

Which is a strong indication that the phrase has no significant meaning beyond "WAAAAAH! They won't make excuses for the US/Israel!"

 

[WildCat]

Not a single substantial criticism of HRW has been made in this thread. Not one. But because their report critical of Israel, they're "useful idiots."

My oh my you are being willfully ignorant. Several posters have questioned the criteria HRW uses, which is a substantial criticism. And being critical of Israel does not make you a useful idiot. Taking whatever Hezbollah says at face value, however, does.

 

[a_unique_person]

ZN has used a HRW report criticising the use of anti-personel ordnance in the Hezbollah missiles.

 

[gumboot]

Which is a strong indication that the phrase has no significant meaning beyond "WAAAAAH! They won't make excuses for the US/Israel!"

I think this comment reveals something about your own bias...

What does the USA have to do with Israel's alleged "war crimes"?

I am astounded at the number of times I have seen people make comments implying Israel AND the US are invading Lebanon. Simply does not compute.

-Andrew

 

[senorpogo]

The real question - did O'Reilly talk over the spokesperson and badger them?