Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

09/16 Links Pt1: Obama's self-defeating fight; Iron Dome: Israel ends the battlefield reign of the missile

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Obama's self-defeating fight

After a week of talks and shuttle diplomacy, aside from Australia, no one has committed forces. Germany, Britain and France have either refused to participate or have yet to make clear what they are willing to do.
The Kurds will not fight for anything but Kurdistan. The Iraqi Army is a fiction. The Iraqi Sunnis support IS far more than they trust the Americans.
Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan will either cheer the US on from a distance, or in the best-case scenario, provide logistical support for its operations.
It isn’t just that these states have already been burned by Obama whether through his support for the Muslim Brotherhood and the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi. And it isn’t simply that they saw that the US left them hanging in Syria.
They see Obama’s “strategy” for fighting IS – ignoring the Islamic belief system that underpins every aspect of its existence, and expecting other armies to fight and die to accomplish the goal while the US turns a blind eye to Turkey’s and Qatar’s continued sponsorship of Islamic State. They see this strategy and they are convinced America is fighting to lose. Why should they go down with it? Islamic State is a challenging foe. To defeat it, the US must be willing to confront Islamism. And it must be willing to fight to win. In the absence of such determination, it will fight and lose, in the region and at home, with no allies at its side.

Chloe Valdary: Stealing from the Palestinians

Instead of condemning Abbas and the PA in the highest terms for their ill treatment of their people, we in the West have coddled them, made excuses for them, and have refrained from holding them accountable for their criminal activities. Moreover, we have proclaimed that in the name of peace, the Palestinian Arabs should be consigned to a life of perpetual misery and oppression by being made to live under the regime of the PA . We advocate for the sanctioning of the PA ’s war crimes vis-a-vis the creation of a Palestinian state while claiming that we care about the dignity and worth of Palestinian Arabs; this makes us accountable and guilty of giving the same lip service that Abbas gives to his people.
Indeed, many in the West routinely praise Fatah as the more “moderate” party. Thus, reporters attempt to make it their business to be au courant with the Arab-Israeli conflict but often miss the nuances and idiosyncrasies that fuel and prolong they very hostilities they claim to hate.
For example, in July, journalist and MSNBC commentator Rula Jebreal described Abbas in The Daily Beast as a “moderate,” who is allegedly “humiliated and ignored” by Israel. Haaretz columnist Peter Beinart also touts this line. He describes Abbas in an article as attempting “to bring [his] people dignity and justice” in contrast to Hamas. This is risible, to say the least; Abbas himself humiliates and ignores the plight of his own people. He encroaches upon their rights and rules by fiat; he is a dictator and there is no “justice” in this.
Indeed, Abbas perpetuates and profits from his people’s misery – all while claiming it is Israel who is to blame. In this, Abbas is able to provide a smokescreen for his own misdeeds. Anytime poverty is rampant or some other ill befalls Arabs, Abbas can simply blame Israel — all while stealing money from his people.
This is the real cycle of violence that fuels the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is a con game masterfully and brilliant played by Abbas and his ilk. The losers are the Arabs who are constantly told by the West that Abbas is the moderate savior who will rescue them from the sins of Israel. (h/t MtTB)

Bill Clinton: Netanyahu ‘Not The Guy’ For Peace

Bill Clinton said he agrees Benjamin Netanyahu is “not the guy” for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal during an on-camera conversation at Sen. Tom Harkin’s steak fry fundraiser on Sunday.
An unnamed man approached Clinton in a rope line and said of Netanyahu: “If we don’t force him to make peace, we will not have peace.”
“First of all, I agree with that,” Clinton said. “But in 2000, Ehud Barak–I got him to agree to something, and I’m not sure I could’ve gotten Rabin to agree to it, and Rabin was murdered for giving land to the Palestinians.”
“But Netanyahu is not the guy,” the man replied.
“I agree with that,” Clinton said.

Clinton Pops Off On Netayahu

Ben-Dror Yemini - "The Industry of Lies", an interview

Arutz-7 reports:

A fire broke out in a synagogue in the Belgian capitals of Brussels Tuesday, in what appears to be a "criminal" act, according to reports.

Belgian daily La Dernière Heure said that several people broke into synagogue, which is located in the predominantly Muslim neighborhood of Anderlecht, and ignited several fires on the fourth floor of the building.

The wife and two children of the synagogue's caretaker suffered slight smoke inhalation in the fire on the top floor of the building, where they lived, said Laurens Dumont, a spokesman for the city prosecutor. The caretaker was absent at the time.

Dumont said "it would seem that the fire was set deliberately" at the synagogue in the Brussels neighborhood near the main train station, but the investigation was in its early stages.

Here is the news video about the story in French.

Evidence mounts of child terrorists in Gaza, but no one reports it

Here is part of a Harvard Medical School podcast with plastic surgeon Sumner Slavin who, after spending time in the Middle East, started a fellowship program to teach plastic surgeons from the region advanced techniques and procedures.

Audio is here, start at about 7:15.

Despite the conflict, some amazing things happened.

To give you an example: About a year or two ago, a Palestinian boy in the Gaza Strip threw a grenade at Israeli soldiers. A not unusual event. In doing so, because he was ten years old, he blew his arm off. His arm was on the ground. The soldiers picked him up, and his arm, lifted him by helicopter from the Gaza Strip to Beersheba.

A team of microsurgeons went to work immediately to restore the arm and reconnect it. Both of those were plastic surgeons trained in microsurgery here.

They were successful; the boy's arm was reattached, he was returned to the Gaza Strip.

This is not an isolated incident, as Dr. Slavin indicates. There is evidence that recruiting children for fighting is widespread in Gaza - including pre-teens.

In a pro-terror message forum, the obituary for nine-year old Obaid Fadel Abu Hwaisehl says that he was killed helping his uncle performing jihadi tasks. The boy was buried with full Hamas honors and wrapped in its flag, just like mujahadin.

Using the most recent list of Gaza dead that included ages and genders, 88 out of 124 kids from ages 9-17 were boys - 70%. The ratio goes up the older the teens are, from 62% of those 9-11 to 79% of those between 15-17.

It is apparent that terror groups are recruiting teens. The statistical evidence indicates that recruitment is happening much earlier. One would expect a similar amount of boys and girls being killed in Gaza, but that simply isn't the case.

We already know that Hamas gives paramilitary training to teens in high school and to younger children in summer camps.

But no "human rights' group is even looking at this.

On the contrary, NGOs like "Defense for Children International - Palestine" go out of their way to hide the issue of child fighters, identifying them as innocent victims even when other NGOs admit that they were militants.

The world media has no hesitation reporting about child terrorists in ISIS. Why are those in Gaza being ignored?

(h/t Jason, Bob Knot)

Ken Roth uses "antisemite" straw man to avoid answering critics. Time to grow up, Ken.

This interview with Human Rights Watch's Ken Roth on Dutch TV reveals how Roth avoids answering the many substantial, provable criticisms of his clear anti-Israel bias.

He simply claims that all his critics are accusing him of antisemitism.

In the past ten years, I can find only a single serious critique of Ken Roth, by professional pundits or writers, that criticized him for his opinions of Judaism. Here it is, from The New York Sun, July 31, 2006:

Mr. Roth concludes his letter with a slur on the Jewish religion itself that is breathtaking in its ignorance."An eye for an eye — or more accurately in this case twenty eyes for an eye — may have been the morality of some more primitive moment," Mr. Roth writes. The reference is to the phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," found in Exodus 21, in Deuteronomy 19, and Leviticus, Chapter 24. The sages have long made clear that this referred to monetary compensation, as the Talmud points out in Baba Kamma 84a. To suggest that Judaism is a "primitive" religion incompatible with contemporary morality is to engage in supersessionism, the de-legitimization of Judaism, the basis of much anti-Semitism.

The ADL's Abraham Foxman referred to this incident as an aside in a much wider-ranging attack on Roth that same year.

Since 2006, Roth and HRW have been criticized for their obsession with Israel from many quarters besides this blog. Here is a small sample:

Noah Pollak in the Wall Street Journal
NGO Monitor, many times
Natan Sharansky
Israel's Prime Minister's office
CAMERA
The New Republic
David Bernstein in WSJ
Jennifer Rubin in WaPo
David Feith in WSJ,
Ron Kampeas of JTA
Times of London
The JC
Commentary
The original founder of Human Rights Watch, Robert Bernstein

None of these critiques, many of which are quite substantive, accuse Ken Roth or Human Rights Watch of antisemitism.

The reality isn't close to what Roth claims in the video. HRW's critics are not using a charge of antisemitism to silence the organization or Ken Roth. On the contrary, Ken Roth is using accusations of antisemitism charges to avoid answering his many critics!

Roth is playing whatever games he can to avoid facing reality: His over-the-top anti-Israel bias is provable from his own words and from what he doesn't say. There is no impartiality in his organization, whose very moral force is dependent on its appearance of fairness.

Roth has a choice. He can keep trying to weasel out of addressing the valid points made by his critics, or he can take their criticism to heart and revamp his organization to address the very real problems it clearly has. There are specific things that HRW can do to prove to the world that it can be a real force for good, and not filled with the corrupt, self-promoting hypocrisy as it appears to be today.

At this point in time, Roth has chosen to act in ways that are worse than the countries his organization criticizes. There is no transparency in HRW's methodology for fact finding, no transparency in HRW's funding sources, no transparency in how HRW hires employees or chooses researchers, no transparency as to what topics it has actual expertise in and what topics that it doesn't. Despite its clear ignorance of military strategy and forensics - critical fields when evaluating the facts - HRW writes reports suffused with ignorance and hand-waving.

HRW likes to accuse its targets of acting with impunity, but that is exactly what Human Rights Watch does under Ken Roth's leadership, by using childish excuses to avoid self-reflection.

It is not unreasonable to demand that an NGO act with at least the same degree of morality and responsibility that it demands from others. Yet its leader, with a salary of over $400,000, reacts to well-founded criticism petulantly instead of responsibly.

Isn't it time for HRW to stop running away from criticism and to actually address these issues head on? That's what one would expect from a multi-million dollar for-profit corporation, and one should expect no less from an NGO that pretends to be the world's moral conscience.

(h/t Mark)

Incidentally, when Roth claims that he takes antisemitism seriously - that isn't true either. By ignoring the major sources of antisemitic incitement today, namely, the Arab and Muslim world, it is Roth that cheapens the term, not his critics.

Egyptian military expert says Judaism is not a religion but a system of theft

Albawabh News reports that Egyptian general Muhammad Ghabari, head of a military academy, has pronounced Judaism to be nothing more than a scheme for looting.

.Ghabari said that Judaism is not ideological. Its entire purpose is to steal the land from Arish (not the Nile, surprisingly) to the Euphrates.

All of this is in the Talmud, this expert says.

The plan was to create Israel in stages, including espionage, usurping land, expansion. The Iraq war on Kuwait provided them with the means to finish their expansion.

And Hebrew isn't a language but rather a dialect,, and there are no Jews but only Zionists, he added.

This is the country Israel has been at "peace" with for over three decades. And while the guy is nutty, so are a great number of his fellow Arabs.

For all his craziness, Ghabari hates Hamas also. The Egyptian military is what is keeping the border with Israel peaceful.

This is as good as it gets.

Anyone who thinks that there can ever be peace between Israel and its neighbors is delusional. But the detente that Israel has with Jordan and Egypt is literally the best it will ever be. And that is the best that can ever be hoped for if there is a Palestinian Arab state.

09/15 Links Pt2: Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism; Briton encouraged Arab armies to invade Israel in 1948

From Ian:

Ben-Dror Yemini: Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism

We have yet to witness a military campaign devoid of anomalies, and Operation Protective Edge was no different. Rule of law presides in Israel, and as such, even if Israel's anomalies are far smaller than those of other countries in similar situations, state has a duty to investigate them all.
For two left-wing groups, B'Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories and Yesh Din – Volunteers for Human Rights, the probes to be conducted by the Israel Defense Forces will not do.
And they are already preparing excuses to cooperate with the commission of inquiry set up by UN Human Rights Council, with its findings already a foregone conclusion, and with William Schabas appointed to deliver the goods. According to Yesh Din attorney Michael Sfard, the IDF investigations do not meet the necessary international standards.
I asked the spokeswoman for Yesh Din for information about investigations conducted by countries such as the United States and Britain, which Israel would do well to follow. After all, there have been an endless number of reports pertaining to war crimes on the part of both countries.
I received a vague response to the effect that Sfard was not referring to Britain and the US. Then who was he referring to? After all, these are the two Western countries that over the past decade have been more involved in wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, than any others.

Uncovered: U.K. intel encouraged Arab armies to invade Israel in 1948

September 11, 1947. On the eve of the Arab League’s political committee meeting to decide on the Arab response to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) report [supporting the end of the British mandate and partitioning the land between Jews and Arabs], the Lebanese newspaper L’Orient published an article. “Bloc Oriental et extension de la Ligue” argued that, like the Greater Syria plan [that aimed to unite Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine], the Oriental Bloc – a French term for Britain’s planned regional defense pact – hung over the independence of Arab countries and the Arab League like the Sword of Damocles, and that its authors were one and the same: [Iraqi Prime Minister] Nuri al-Sa’id and [Jordanian] King Abdullah.
On September 20, the Lebanese newspaper Le Jour reported that after the Arab League meeting in Saoufar, Lebanon, Brig. Iltyd Clayton – whom it defined as “head of the British intelligence in the Middle East” – had left for Damascus. It quoted a Syrian newspaper speculating on whether his visit was connected to the Greater Syria scheme and the tense relations between the Syrian and Lebanese presidents (Shukri al-Quwatli and Bishara al-Khuri) and Jordan’s King Abdullah, or to events in Palestine.
On February 19, 1948, the Lebanese newspaper Le Soir published an article titled “Claytonmade.” Based on “Zionist sources,” it reported that Brig. Clayton – “architect” of the Greater Syria plan, the Oriental Bloc and the bilateral defense treaties with the Arab states – was now advocating a new scheme for the partition of Palestine. The plan proposed that : “Imperialist Lebanon will annex the Western Galilee up to Shavei Zion; Syria the northeastern part of the Galilee and part of its southern region; Egypt will have part of the cake; and Transjordan will swallow up the rest.”
In fact, these and other reports in the Lebanese press on the activities of British secret agents were part of a secret war being waged by French intelligence against the British.
[copy and paste link if you get paywalled]

In Germany a gap between 'Never Again-Jew-Hatred' and real action?

German Chancellor Angela Merkel delivered a characteristically excellent speech against anti-Semitism on Sunday in the heart of the country’s government district.
She lambasted “pretend criticism of Israel” as an “expression of Jew-hatred at pro-Palestinian demonstrations.”
Her contempt for anti-Jewish activists and sentiments was crystal-clear. “It’s our national and civic duty to fight anti-Semitism,” she declared.
During Israel’s Operation Protective Edge to stop Hamas rocket fire, Germany was engulfed with anti-Semitic violence, including the firebombing of a synagogue in the city of Wuppertal and attacks on Jews wearing kippot.
Given the vanishing line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism in Europe, some German Jews questioned why the rally was not called “Stand up: Israel Hatred – Never Again!” instead of “Stand Up: Jew Hatred – Never Again!” Nathan Gelbart, a prominent Berlin lawyer and chairman of the German branch of Keren Hayesod-United Israel Appeal, told The Jerusalem Post a banner stressing “No denial of Israel’s right to self-defense” would have carried more weight.

Muslims truly threatened by real dialogue with Jews

In June, an American Muslim woman named Rabia Choudry wrote in Time about her experiences in joining a year long fellowship at the dovish Shalom Hartman Institute in Israel.

After a year we built the trust necessary for a needed exchange of admissions. The Muslim fellows understood Jewish fear and the Jews’ deep desire for a homeland after thousands of years of being a mistrusted minority. And Israeli Jews affirmed to us the daily devastation of the occupation and the shattering of Palestinians through which Israel was born. These exchanges between Zionists and pro-Palestinians were monumental.

They are also an affirmation that there is still hope for dialogue and relationships that can actually make a difference. Until now, both parties have been speaking inside their own bubbles, safe in dialogue with people that agree with them. The walls have been built so high that breaching them to reach out to the other side is tantamount to treason. Hartman and the participants both took huge risks in being part of this program with hopes to forge a new way forward. This fellowship proves that building relationships between people who fundamentally disagree can uncover empathy and mutual recognition that despite differences, everyone deserves dignity, security, prosperity and self-determination.

Now, an UK-based Arab site has slammed not only Choudry, but the entire idea of dialogue with Jews.

According to the article, her article is proof that Israel's foreign ministry is trying to brainwash American Muslims. Choudry, we are told, is the first fruit of the project, where she now outrageously believes that Zionism means,as she writes,

The Jewish people’s longing of thousands of years for a homeland, a return from exile, a sanctuary from being a hated minority in the diaspora, an opportunity to establish Jewish values and honor God, a Biblical promise, a chance for redemption. As someone with years of interfaith experience I should have known all this, but I didn’t.

This shows, we are told, that Choudary "shows complete ignorance on Zionism itself."

The Arab article also notes that the majority of the Muslims who went on the fellowship did not go public, no doubt because of the fear of backlash by bigots like this author. But he uses this proof of Arab intolerance as proof that the program "betrays the trust and transparency that are supposed to govern relations between the activists and leaders of the Muslim communities."

Finally, the Arab author says, the entire concept of "dialogue" with Jews is flawed, because the Jews use it to push the idea that Zionism is not a wholly evil concept. This proves that they aren't interested in dialogue but in pushing their viewpoints.

Projection, anyone?

Hamas, Islamic Jihad stress importance of using media as "resistance"

Ismail Haniyeh gave a speech on May 25 (translation from BBC Monitoring, received via email) describing Hamas' views of the media:

We have to develop a media strategy that supports resistance and jihad on the land of Palestine. The resistance person who carries a rifle must have another resistance person standing behind him and carrying a pen so as to provide the media and political cover for this resistance and to embrace this blessed jihad. This is the necessary integration between the resistance of the bullet and the resistance of the word. This is essential and necessary so that we can accomplish the project of national liberation, God willing.”
(Al-Aqsa Satellite TV, Gaza)

This makes his words after the war that I had noted a bit more understandable:

[T]he Palestinian people has won the war on the military front, the political front, and the media front. Our narrative has gained the upper hand in the media and was the more credible. Our image in the media was the more effective.

The media analysis and the men of the [Palestinian] media everywhere constituted the river from which the global media quenched its thirst for information about what was happening on the ground.

In a similar vein, the Islamic Jihad terror group just gave out awards for the reporters from satellite channels and media agencies who were the best at spouting jihadist propaganda during the war.

[An Islamic Jihad delegation praised the reporters for] their generosity in giving over the image of the resistance, and to highlight the sacrifices of the Palestinian people, and expose the crimes of the Zionist enemy during the battle.

..The journalists stood side by side next to the gun battle in the operation, and achieved a great victory over the Zionist media machine.

The delegation said that the media battle with the enemy isno less important than the battle in the battlefields, and that both complement each other.

They also praised the media members who died, calling them "mujahadin."

(h/t Asher)

Israel appoints its first female ambassador to Arab country

From i24:

Currently heading the international division of the Foreign Ministry's diplomatic research center, Einat Schlien will replace Daniel Nevo in Jordan as Israel's ambassador. Schlien has been with the Foreign Ministry for 22 years and she was posted in Amman at the beginning of her diplomatic career, after which she also served in Israel's embassy in Washington.

This marks the first time that a woman has been appointed as an Israeli envoy to an Arab country.

During Israel's Operation Protective Edge, enmity was boiling over in Jordan against Israel with a number of demonstrations where Israeli flags were burnt in front of the embassy. A plot against the Israeli embassy in the Hashemite Kingdom was foiled by Jordanian forces in May of last year. The suspects in that case included a Syrian and the suspects are also accused of trying to recruit people to Hezbollah as well as plotting to attack US soldiers.

Haaretz adds that Schlein is fluent in Arabic.

I know that Egyptians created crazy rumors around the female US ambassador to that country, and I always wondered if it was because she was a woman. I have a feeling that there will be far more vitriol against Schlien in Jordan than there were was for her predecessor, Daniel Nevo.

She won't start for ten months.

09/15 Links Pt1: ISIS targets Israelis, Jews abroad; Compromise with political Islam is impossible

From Ian:

ISIS may target Israelis, Jews abroad, Counter-Terrorism Bureau warns

The National Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Bureau released a biannual travel advisory on Monday, ahead of the High Holy Days, warning that Western Europe may become the scene of Islamic State terror attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets.
"During this period, the potential threat has grown," the Counter-Terrorism Bureau warned.
The Bureau referred to the May 4 deadly shooting attack on the Jewish Museum in Brussels, in which a French-Muslim gunman killed four people – two of them Israelis. The gunman had returned from Syria, where he fought alongside radical rebel groups.
"There are concerns about additional attacks on Israeli and Jewish targets around the world, with an emphasis on Western Europe, by global jihadi elements (including the Islamic State), particularly by veterans of Syria and Iraq who return to their countries," the Bureau stated. Recent combat in Gaza has also led to a rise in anti-Israel demonstrations, it added.
At the same time, Iran and Hezbollah continue to wage a global campaign of terrorism, targeting Israeli and Jewish targets, with an emphasis on soft targets such as tourists, rabbis, Chabad homes, and heads of Jewish communities, the communique said.
Iranian and Hezbollah terrorists are also seeking to target Israeli business people and senior former officials for kidnapping or murder.

Hezbollah could advance into Israel in next war, official warns

A senior IDF official warned Sunday that while Hezbollah has no immediate plan to attack Israel, a minor security incident could erupt into a full-fledged war on Israel’s northern front during which the terror organization would likely try to capture swaths of the Galilee.
“The situation in the north is quiet; we don’t assume we are headed toward war,” the Northern Command official said, according to Channel 2. “On the other hand, there are many developments, there are small things that can create larger events. The instability can develop and erupt into war.”
The army also distributed pictures Sunday showing armed Hezbollah members near the border with Israel.
In the event of a confrontation with Hezbollah, the fighting would likely last some four months, would have the Israel Defense Forces face some 30,000 troops, would incur extensive civilian casualties on the Lebanese side, and may see infiltration into northern Israeli towns to carry out attacks, the IDF official predicted.

Khaled Abu Toameh: Why Many Arabs and Muslims Do Not Trust Obama

Many Arabs and Muslims identify with the terrorists' anti-Western objectives ideology; they are afraid of being dubbed traitors and U.S. agents for joining non-Muslims in a war that would result in the death of many Muslims, and they are afraid their people would rise up against them.
Many Arab and Muslim leaders view the Islamic State as a by-product of failed U.S. policies, especially the current U.S. Administration's weak-kneed support for Iraq's Nuri al-Maliki. Some of these leaders, such as Egypt's Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, consider the U.S. to be a major ally of the Muslim Brotherhood. Sisi and his regime will never forgive Obama for his support for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Also, they do not seem to have much confidence in the Obama Administration, which is perceived as weak and incompetent when it comes to combating Islamists.

NYC "Muslim Day" parade was really a Muslim Brotherhood parade

Yesterday in Manhattan was the 29th annual Muslim Day parade.

The theme was "Islam and America Share Common Values."

The image that the organizers want you to see look like this, with American flags prominently displayed.:

However, there was a significant anti-American Muslim Brotherhood presence at the parade. (All photos and videos from Urban Infidel site.)

Here is a vehicle sporting the "Rabia" symbol of the Brotherhood:

A representation of Egypt's president Sisi in "Pharaoh's Golden Chariot" was featured:

Here are actors representing Kerry, Obama and McCain:

Here are MB members - some masked - with toy guns pretending to arrest Sisi, I believe:

This clip shows a banner showing where Islamists took over various Middle Eastern countries for a time, including Israel. It also shows the Muslim Brotherhood with a float showing a woman being lynched to symbolize how they were taken out of power in Egypt.

Common values!

More here.

(h/t Jeremy, who was at a separate rally in Manhattan against anti-semitism.)

Human Rights NGOs, including the UN, refuse to adopt anti-bias standards

There has been a long history of international standards on fact-finding missions dating back to at least 1907.

While nearly all of the standards pay lip service to the idea of impartiality, only recent attempts have been made to ensure that the fact-finders themselves are unbiased.

The most comprehensive set of fact-finding standards written to date are the Lund-London Guidelines. They include these sections:

The mission’s delegation should comprise individuals who are and are seen to be unbiased.

The NGO should ensure that all members of the delegation are aware that they must, at all times, act in an independent, unbiased, objective, lawful and ethical manner.

The NGO should ensure that all persons associated with a mission [including interpreters - EoZ] and/or a report are aware that they must, at all times, act in an independent, unbiased, objective, lawful and ethical manner.

The NGO should ensure that the members of the delegation understand the need to be unbiased and not pre-judge any issues during the mission.

In order to enhance the overall quality and credibility of the report, it must be accurate, clear and drafted objectively so that the processes of the mission are transparent. It should fairly reflect all the information gathered and must refrain from bias. It is good practice to identify the standards against which the delegation members weigh the information obtained.

It should come as no surprise that these standards have been rejected by every major "human rights" NGO, including the United Nations.

It is obvious that the appointment by the UNHRC of William Schabas as the main investigator of the Gaza war violates these standards. He admits that he is biased, but he claims, improbably, that he can set his strong anti-Israel opinions aside for the purposes of the investigation. This is absurd. No judge could claim that he has a strong opinion on a case but then declare that he can set those opinions aside, and a fact-finding mission report is essentially a judgment.

Human Rights Watch has a webpage dedicated to its research methodology. It has no language to ensure that its investigators are unbiased at the outset. In fact, the document doesn't mention the word "bias" at all. Amnesty's methodology is similarly prone to abuse by biased researchers. Indeed, these organizations hire - and even seek out - employees who are already biased.

By ignoring the basic pre-requisite that researchers are unbiased at the outset, all of these organizations are fooling the world into believing that they are objective.

There is a relatively easy way to help ensure objectivity when choosing investigators. Choose human rights experts from other parts of the globe. Instead of choosing people who say they specialize in the Middle East, for the purposes of a fact finding mission they should choose human rights experts that deal with Southeast Asia or South America or former communist regimes.

In fact, NGOs should rotate their entire human rights staff among different areas of the globe. That way they aren't only using people who went into the field with a pre-existing political agenda and who truly care about gloabl human rights.

Rotating employees to different areas is a well-established practice in many organizations to help them see things from different perspectives and to ultimately improve their work. Why don't human rights NGOs adopt this very effective practice?

Can you imagine anti-Israel activists like HRW's Sarah Leah Whitson or Amnesty's Deborah Hyams being re-assigned to cover China? They would quit in less than an hour. Because they only joined these NGOs to demonize Israel, not because of a love of human rights.

Unfortunately, the real problems of bias in NGOs are not going to be addressed as long as the heads of these NGOs show that they aren't really interested in an unbiased organization. And their refusal to adopt the Lunn-London Guidelines show that politics is more important than impartiality.