Jump to content

Criticism of Human Rights Watch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Historicist (talk | contribs) at 14:55, 16 September 2009 (→‎Allegations of methodological inadequacies and errors). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The international non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch (HRW) has been criticised for being influenced by United States government policy[1], in particular in relation to reporting on Latin America[2][3][4][5][6]; for ignoring anti-Semitism in Europe or being anti-Semitic;[7] for biases in relation to the Arab–Israeli conflict; and for unfair and biased reporting of human rights issues in Eritrea and Ethiopia.[8][9][10]. Accusations in relation to the Arab–Israeli conflict include claims that HRW is biased against Israel[11][12][13] and that requesting or accepting donations from Saudi Arabian citizens causes it to be biased[14][15]; it has also been accused of unbalanced reporting against Hezbollah in Lebanon[16][17] and against the State of Palestine[18].

HRW has publicly responded to criticisms relating to its reporting on Latin America[19][20][21] and in the context of the Arab–Israeli conflict[22][13][23][24][25].

Staff qualifications

The Israeli tabloid Maariv has strongly criticized Marc Garlasco's work alleging numerous errors. [26] HRW says that he "covered Iraq as a senior intelligence analyst at the Pentagon"[27] The Guardian states that he served in this role for 7 years. In addition they say that he was chief of high-value targeting during the Iraq war in 2003. was on the Operation Desert Fox (Iraq) Battle Damage Assessment team in 1998, and led a Pentagon Battle Damage Assessment team to Kosovo in 1999. He also participated in over 50 interrogations as a subject matter expert[28]. Marc Garlasco, was criticized for being an avid collector of Nazi memorabilia. HRW had initially thrown its full support behind the analyst, but then it suspended him with pay, “pending an investigation“He has written a book, about Nazi-era medals. In one post he wrote: "That is so cool! The leather SS jacket makes my blood go cold it is so COOL!" [29][30][31] Commenting on allegations concerning Garlasco in the media, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's policy director said on September 9 2009 that Human Rights Watch's employment of "a man who trades and collects Nazi memorabilia" as its senior military expert is a "new low". HRW issued a rebuttal to the allegations which stated that the "accusation is demonstrably false and fits into a campaign to deflect attention from Human Rights Watch's rigorous and detailed reporting on violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by the Israeli government." noting that Garlasco, "has never held or expressed Nazi or anti-Semitic views."[32] On her Blog Helena Cobban has said that " also share some of the concerns his critics have voiced about the actual military expertise Garlasco brought to the job at HRW," and that "made some serious-- and very basic-- mistakes during the Russian-Georgian war"[33].

Allegations of methodological inadequacies and errors

Ron Kampeas in an alalysis published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency criticizes HRW reports for "Reconstructions of the horrific death of civilians replete with painstakingly gathered evidence are coupled with bewildering omissions of context and blended into a package that assumes an inherent Israeli immorality," and "efforts to turn criticism of individual officers and soldiers into a wholesale indictment of Israel’s military establishment and the decision to resort to military force."[34]

According to Kampeas, the HRW reports on the 2009 fighting in Gaza "fail to assess evidence -- including videos of Israeli forces holding their fire because of the presence of civilians -- that Israel has provided to show that such incidents were the exception to the rule; they fail to examine what measures Israel has taken to prevent civilian deaths, which would be pertinent in examining any claim of war crimes."[35]

Allegations of bias concerning Latin America

Claims have been made regarding alleged HRW bias with regards to Haiti, Venezuela and Honduras. Robert Naiman, policy director of Just Foreign Policy,[6] has claimed that HRW is "often heavily influenced" by United States government policy.[1]

Haiti

The 2004 Haiti rebellion was a coup d'etat that removed elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti either voluntarily (according to US authorities)[2] or involuntarily (according to Aristide and supporters)[3] from the Americas on a US plane accompanied by US security personnel[3] on 29 February 2004. Z Communications author Joe Emersberger claimed that HRW had accurately reported on human rights violations in Haiti following an earlier coup against Aristide, in 1991, but that it was inaccurate in reporting the relative numbers of violent deaths before and after the 2004 coup.[4] Emersberger estimated the relative numbers of deaths as about 20–30 per year before the 2004 coup versus 1000 in the first month following the coup. He stated, "HRW's reports were not only inexcusably sparse, but they legitimized the overthrow of Aristide" and that HRW "knew that criminals were being incorporated into the police; yet they were silent about this contributing factor to the abuses that occurred under Aristide."[4]

Venezuela

Human Rights Watch's work in Venezuela became the subject of controversy in late 2008. In September 2008, Venezuela expelled two HRW staff accused of anti-state activities[36] Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro said "These groups, dressed up as human rights defenders, are financed by the United States. They are aligned with a policy of attacking countries that are building new economic models."[37]. On December 17 2008 an open letter was sent to the HRW Board of Directors in response to an HRW report, entitled, A Decade Under Chávez: Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela.[38] 118 scholars from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, México, the United States, the U.K., Venezuela, and other countries openly criticized HRW for a perceived bias against the government of Venezuela. The open letter criticized the report by stating that it "does not meet even the most minimal standards of scholarship, impartiality, accuracy, or credibility."[39] The letter also criticizes the lead author of the report, Jose Miguel Vivanco, for his "political agenda", and calls Mr. Vivanco to discuss or debate his claims in "any public forum of his choosing"[5]. Hugh O'Shaughnessy has accused HRW (on the Newstatesmen web site) of using false and misleading information, and has said the report was "put together with the sort of know-nothing Washington bias...". Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch responded, claiming the letter misrepresents "both the substance and the source material of the report." [19]. Tom Porteoushas Human Rights Watch's London director (on the Newstatesmen web site) counters claim of bias and says that "...not only fails to provide any evidence for these allegations" and that "...more seriously he misrepresents HRW's positions in his apparent determination to undermine our well earned international reputation for accuracy and impartiality."[20]

Honduras

On 21 August 2009, 93 academics and authors, many of them professors at United States universities, published an open letter in which they criticised HRW for HRW's "absence of statements and reports" on human rights violations in Honduras after 8 July 2009, following the coup d'état of 28 June 2009.[6] The authors of the statement said that after 8 July, HRW had not "raised the alarm over the extra-judicial killings, arbitrary detentions, physical assaults, and attacks on the press - many of which have been thoroughly documented - that have occurred in Honduras, in most cases by the coup regime against the supporters of the democratic and constitutional government of Manuel Zelaya." The authors requested HRW to make a strong statement against the human rights violations and to conduct its own investigation into them.[6] The letter signers stated that the Obama administration was supporting the de facto Roberto Micheletti government, by providing "aid money through the Millennium Challenge Account and other sources" and by training Honduran military students at the School of the Americas, and that the Obama administration was ignoring Honduras' human rights situation.[6]

Four days later, HRW published[21] a summary of a preliminary version of a major human rights report in Honduras by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) that had been released by IACHR on 21 August.[40] HRW referred to its earlier reports published up to 8 July, stating "Given the scope of alleged abuses, and the region's history of bloody coups leading to massive violations, human rights advocates believed the situation warranted the direct intervention of the region's most authoritative human rights investigative body, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights."[21] HRW did not state whether or not its summary of the IACHR preliminary report constituted a response to the 93 academics' and authors' appeal.[21]

Claims of ignoring human rights violations in Europe and anti-Semitism

There have been a number of accusations that HRW has either ignored anti-Semitism, or is anti-Semitic itself. Ana Palacio, former Foreign Minister of Spain, in a speech given to the Anti-Defamation League in 2005 said, “NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International pay little attention to anti-Semitism.”[7] NGO Monitor has accused HRW of outright anti-Semitism and of trying to cover this up[41], it has also been suggested (by ADL) that criticism of Israel may be motivated by anti-semitism[42]. Abraham Foxman writing in the New York Sun has said "not in an "eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth" fashion which Mr. Roth cited and is a classic anti-Semitic stereotype about Jews"[43].

Claims of bias in relation to the Arab–Israeli conflict

Further information: Arab–Israeli conflict

Some criticisms of HRW relate to the roughly one century of political tensions and open hostilities of the Arab–Israeli conflict.

Anti-Israel or pro-Arab-League bias

HRW has been accused of bias against the state of Israel[11] of issuing "one-sided and hostile" reports "attacking Israel"[44] and of having an anti-Israel agenda[12][45] by general circulation newspapers, the Israeli government and supporters of Israel. Political Science Professor Gerald M. Steinberg of Bar Ilan University, head of NGO Monitor, a pro-Israel NGO[46] accused HRW of having "a strong anti-Israel bias from the beginning".[47] He claimed their reports based primarily on "Palestinian eyewitness testimony"—testimony that is "not accurate, objective or credible but serves the political goal of indicting Israel".[48] According to David Bernstein HRW is "maniacally anti-Israel".[49] Mark Regev (spokesman for Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu) has said that "We discovered during the Gaza operation and the Second Lebanon War that these organizations come in with a very strong agenda, and because they claim to have some kind of halo around them, they receive a status that they don't deserve," in reference to HRW's and Amnesty International’s allegations of human rights violations by Israeli forces during those conflicts.[50] Anne Bayefsky has accused HRW and other human rights organizations critical of Israel of operating on the basis that "poor treatment of Israel is a price worth paying for progress on other fronts".[51]

In August 2009, Israeli journalist Ben-Dror Yemini accused HRW's Joe Stork, Deputy Director for Middle East and North Africa[52] of being "a fanatical supporter of the elimination of Israel", "a veteran supporter of Palestinian terrorism", a "radical Marxist whose positions have not changed over the years" and alleged that he supported the 1972 Munich Massacare.[53] Yemini's article in Maariv followed the publication of HRW's "White Flag Deaths: Killings of Palestinian Civilians during Operation Cast Lead" report which documented alleged violations of the laws of war by Israeli forces during Operation Cast Lead.[13] David Bernstein responded to the claim that Joe Stork supported the 1972 Munich massacre "one thing that Stork did NOT do...is support the 1972 Munich massacre of Israeli athletes by Palestinian terrorists". He goes on to say that "it ultimately says" (the report by HRW)", as a bit of an afterthought, that all of these factors do not justify it. This hardly amounts to the sort of unequivocal condemnation one would expect from people with any decency, but it's simply inaccurate to say that this amounts to "supporting" the massacre."[54]


Natan Sharansky, from whose group Helsinki Watch formed, said of HRW, "Here is an organization created by the goodwill of the free world to fight violations of human rights, which has become a tool in the hands of dictatorial regimes to fight against democracies" adding that in his view "The real activity of this organization today is a far cry from what it was set up 30 years ago to do: throw light in dark places where there is really no other way to find out what is happening regarding human rights".

Sarah Leah Whitson, director of HRW's Middle East and North Africa division, responding to the criticism said "in the case of Israel, where our focus is primarily on the violations of international law and humanitarian law in the occupied Palestinian territories, the fact that government is a democracy is completely irrelevant because the rule in place in the occupied territories is military rule, it is not a democracy". [12] In July 2009, Larry Derfner writing in the Jerusalem Post in response to the criticism of HRW accused Israel's Prime Minister's Office and NGO Monitor of "smearing" human rights organizations.[22] In August 2009, Iain Levine, Program Director for HRW stated "If the Israeli government wants to silence critics, it should fully investigate allegations of wrongdoing and take action to end the abuses."[13]

Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, wrote an editorial in The Jerusalem Post in August 2009 that the reports on recent Israeli human rights violations had "given rise to an intense campaign by the Israeli government and some of its uncritical supporters to smear the messengers and change the subject." He went on to write that the "problem is not the messenger carrying news of that misconduct, whether Judge Goldstone or the human rights groups that have been the target of a disinformation campaign launched by the Israeli government and some supporters. The problem is the conduct of the Israeli military."[55]

Criticism of fund raising in Saudi Arabia

Some columnists have criticised Human Right Watch for requesting, encouraging or accepting financial donations in Saudi Arabia, and have criticised HRW's methods in which it requests, encourages or accepts these funds. According to the critics, these methods include the descriptions of HRW's "battles" and arguments with Israel and its supporters. Herb Keinon, a columnist for the Jerusalem Post, and Jeffrey Goldberg, a correspondent for the Atlantic (magazine) and former columnist for the Jerusalem Post, claim this compromises HRW's integrity. [56] In an email exchange, Jeffrey Goldberg asked HRW director Kenneth Roth if funds were raised to fight back against pro-Israel lobbying groups. Roth responded, "The Saudis obviously are aware of the systematic attacks on us by various reflexive defenders of Israel. Everyone is." During fundraisers, he states that these complaints are common in "discussions" and is not just exclusive to Saudi Arabia. [57] Mark Regev (spokesman for Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu) has said that "A human rights organization raising money in Saudi Arabia is like a women's rights group asking the Taliban for a donation," in response to HRW's fund raising visit to Saudi Arabia[58].

David Bernstein of the George Mason University School of Law writes, something's "wrong when a human rights organization goes to one of the worst countries in the world for human rights to raise money to wage lawfare against Israel."[15] although IPS latter claimed he apologized for suggesting that HRW didn't also discuss Saudi human rights abuses during the meetings.[59] Mr. Bernstein has said that "For my part, if Ms. Whitson did indeed criticize Saudi human rights abuses during her trip, I apologize for suggesting otherwise," but added that he had no knowledge of such criticism beyond Ms. Whitson's own claim that she "discussed" Saudi human rights issues during her trip.[60]

Human Rights Watch says the allegations that HRW had "compromised its neutrality" by meeting with Saudi donors were based on "misleading assumptions and wrong facts". HRW notes that staffers made two presentations in Saudi Arabia in May 2009 in private homes to people who were interested in Human Rights Watch. Among an estimated 50 guests at a reception in Riyadh, there were three with governmental affiliations, "the spokesperson for the Ministry of Interior; the deputy head of the Human Rights Commission, a governmental organization; and a member of the Shura Council, a government-appointed consultative body."[23] According to HRW, none of those individuals were solicited for funds and HRW never accepts funds from government officials in any country.[24] HRW stated that there is no reason why Saudi citizens cannot legitimately want to support human rights. [24] Gerald Steinberg, the executive director of NGO Monitor, said that the HRW defense was an "absurd attempt to cast a distinction between soliciting Saudi officials and prominent members of society who owe their very position to the regime."[61]

HRW told IPS that the notion "that any money from Saudi Arabia is tainted because it comes from a country with a totalitarian ruling regime is a gross generalisation." adding "The ethnic background of our donors is irrelevant to the work we do,...It's not relevant to our work in Israel that many, many of our donors are Jewish. And it's not relevant for the work that we do that we get money from Arab countries".[59]

According to HRW, its work in Saudi Arabia was discussed at the receptions, including "coverage of women's rights, the juvenile death penalty, domestic workers, and discrimination against religious minorities". HRW also claimed, "No other human rights group has produced a more comprehensive, detailed, and thorough body of work on Saudi Arabian human rights issues in recent years than Human Rights Watch" (HRW Saudi Arabia). Although the Gaza situation was covered, HRW claimed that the coverage was justified as the Gaza war dominated worldwide headlines and is a regional issue in Saudi Arabia. Criticism of HRW as anti-Israel was juxtaposed against the accusations HRW faces in much of the Middle East that HRW is soft on Israeli human rights violations.[24]

In 2008, HRW issued five single-country reports and one multi-country report criticizing the Saudi Arabian government[62] and in August 2009, HRW issued a report "Human Rights and Saudi Arabia's Counterterrorism Response: Religious Counseling, Indefinite Detention, and Flawed Trials" criticizing the Saudi Arabian government's counterterrorism program.[63]

Anti-Arab-League or pro-Israel bias

In regard to reporting on the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, Israel-based journalist Jonathan Cook claimed that by making statements regarding the intentions of Israel and Hezbollah to target or to avoid targeting civilians that were not justified by the available evidence, HRW "[seemed to distort] its findings to placate the Israel lobby". Cook stated, 'HRW is accusing Hezbollah of committing graver war crimes than Israel, even though it killed far fewer civilians both numerically and proportionally, because its rockets are "less accurate"'.[16] A representative of HRW responded, defending the organisation's objectivity.[25] Cook countered that he did not criticise the empirical aspects of HRW's research, only its interpretation of that research.[17] HRW has also been criticised for taking Israel's side in its condemnation of the Palestinian use of human shields [18][64][65]. Norman Finkelstein has criticised HRW for "seeking to appease pro-Israel critics after taking the heat for its report documenting Israeli war crimes in Lebanon?". [66]

Africa

HRW has also been accused of unfair and biased reporting of human rights issues in Eritrea and Ethiopia.

Eritrea

In April 2009, HRW published a report that accused the Eritrean government of being responsible for serious human rights violations.[8] Sophia Tesfamariam, Director of the US Foundation for the Horn of Africa refuted the allegations in the report which she described as an "anti-Eritrea report" and stated "HRW goes to great lengths to embellish the truth in its attempts to paint a bleak picture of Eritrea and its government". She described it as “not only short on facts and evidence, but also short on intellectual and professional integrity”.[9]

Ethiopia

The Ethiopia government has also raised questions about HRW's methods. It commissioned a report of its own that dismissed Human Rights Watch's allegations of Human rights abuses in the ogeden as hearsay and its methods as slapdash.[10]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Naiman, Robert (2009-08-21). "Latin America Scholars Urge Human Rights Watch to Speak Up on Honduras Coup". Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 2009-08-22. Retrieved 2009-08-22. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ a b Steve Miller and Joseph Curl (2004). "Aristide accuses U.S. of forcing his ouster". Washington Times. Retrieved 2005-12-26.
  3. ^ a b c "Aristide related articles". Democracy Now. Retrieved 2006-07-21.
  4. ^ a b c Emersberger, Joe (2006-03-29). "Haiti and Human Rights Watch". Z Communications. Archived from the original on 2009-08-11. Retrieved 2009-08-11. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ a b Greg Grandin, Miguel Tinker-Salas and Greg Wilpert Respond to HRW's Kenneth Roth's Riposte on Venezuelan Human Rights
  6. ^ a b c d e Grandin, Greg (2009-08-22). "Over 90 Experts Call on Human Rights Watch to Speak Out on Honduras Abuses". Common Dreams. Archived from the original on 2009-08-22. Retrieved 2009-08-22. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  7. ^ a b Anti-Semitism in Europe: Fighting Back,Anti-Defamation League
  8. ^ a b "Eritrea: Repression Creating Human Rights Crisis". Human Rights Watch. 2009-04-16. Retrieved 2009-08-21.
  9. ^ a b Tesfamariam, Sophia (2009-04-29). "Human Rights Watch at Chatham House-A Peddlers Event". American Chronicle. Retrieved 2009-08-21.
  10. ^ a b http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=1521509&story_id=13061682
  11. ^ a b Levy, Daniel (2009-07-20). "The "Swiftboating" of Human Rights Watch". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
  12. ^ a b c Keinon, Herb (2009-07-16). "Diplomacy: Israel vs. Human Rights Watch". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
  13. ^ a b c d "False Allegations about Human Rights Watch's Latest Gaza Report". Human Rights Watch. 2009-08-14. Retrieved 2009-08-17.
  14. ^ Cite error: The named reference keinon_hrw_saudi was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  15. ^ a b Bernstein, David. "Human Rights Watch Goes to Saudi Arabia." The Wall Street Journal. 15 July 2009. 15 July 2009.
  16. ^ a b Cook, Jonathan (7 September 2006). "How Human Rights Watch lost its way in Lebanon". Electronic Intifada. Retrieved 2006-10-14. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  17. ^ a b Cook, Jonathan (September 26, 2006). "Human Rights Watch still denying Lebanon the right to defend itself". Z Communications. Retrieved 2006-10-14. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  18. ^ a b http://www.counterpunch.org/cook11302006.html
  19. ^ a b https://nacla.org/node/5369
  20. ^ a b http://www.newstatesman.com/human-rights/2008/09/hrw-chavez-shaughnessy
  21. ^ a b c d Human Rights Watch (2009-08-25). "Honduras: Rights Report Shows Need for Increased International Pressure". Human Rights Watch. Archived from the original on 2009-08-28. Retrieved 2009-08-28.
  22. ^ a b Derfner, Larry (2009-07-22). "Rattling the Cage: The smearing of human rights organizations". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 2009-08-18.
  23. ^ a b Visit to Saudi Arabia and False Allegations of Human Rights Watch 'Bias' [1]
  24. ^ a b c d "Human Rights Watch Visit to Saudi Arabia". Human Rights Watch.
  25. ^ a b Whitson, Sarah Leah (September 22, 2006). "Hezbollah's Rockets and Civilian Casualties: A Response to Jonathan Cook". Counterpunch. Retrieved 2006-10-14. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  26. ^ Maariv, Sept. 9, 2009, Hebrew [2] google translation "Can of Worms discovered Human Rights Watch," is here [3] for non-Hebrew speakers, a more accurate translation by Israel Matzav is here [4] quote taken form Israel Matzav translation, which I corroborate.
  27. ^ http://www.hrw.org/en/bios/marc-garlasco
  28. ^ http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/marc_garlasco/profile.html
  29. ^ [5]
  30. ^ [6]
  31. ^ [7]
  32. ^ 'HRW expert collects Nazi memorabilia', JPost, September 09 2009
  33. ^ http://justworldnews.org/archives/003787.html
  34. ^ Facts, fiction and fury in the battle of human rights groups vs. Israel, News Analysis, Ron Kampeas, August 20, 2009 [8]
  35. ^ Facts, fiction and fury in the battle of human rights groups vs. Israel, News Analysis, Ron Kampeas, August 20, 2009 [9]
  36. ^ http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/09/19/venezuela-human-rights-<watch-delegation-expelled
  37. ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1948835520080919
  38. ^ http://www.hrw.org/en/node/64174/section/1
  39. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/mar/11/state-department-human-rights
  40. ^ "Preliminary Observations on the IACHR Visit to Honduras". Inter-American Court of Human Rights. 2009-08-21. Archived from the original on 2009-08-25. Retrieved 2009-08-26. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  41. ^ http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article.php?id=908
  42. ^ http://www.adl.org/israel/jenin/default.asp
  43. ^ http://www.nysun.com/opinion/no-accident/37146/
  44. ^ Not-so-secret motives, The Ottawa Citizen, September 16, 2009, [10]
  45. ^ Krieger, Hilary Leila (2006-09-19). "HRW slams UN body for anti-Israel bias". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
  46. ^ http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9804231
  47. ^ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1232643745914
  48. ^ [11]
  49. ^ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124528343805525561.html
  50. ^ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443811032&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
  51. ^ http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:p6u71hejS28J:www.antidef.org.au/secure/downloadfile.asp%3Ffileid%3D1010330+anti+semitism+%2B+%22Human+Rights+Watch+%22&hl=en
  52. ^ "Human Rights Watch Staff". Human Rights Warch. Retrieved 2009-08-17.
  53. ^ Ben-Dror Yemini, The Big Lie of HRW : Author of Report Against Israel Supported Munich Massacre, 16.8.2009, orginally published in Hebrew in Maariv
  54. ^ http://volokh.com/posts/1250601131.shtml
  55. ^ Right of Reply: Don't smear the messenger, Kenneth Roth, Jerusalm Post, Aug 25, 2009]
  56. ^ Keinon, Herb. "Diplomacy: Israel vs. Human Rights Watch." Jerusalem Post. 18 July 2009. 18 July 2009.
  57. ^ http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/07/fundraising_corruption_at_huma.php
  58. ^ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443811032&pagename=JPArticle%2FshowFull
  59. ^ a b Gharib, Ali (2009-07-06). "U.S.-Based Leading Rights Group Denies Improprieties". Inter Press Service. Retrieved 2009-09-12.
  60. ^ http://www.volokh.com/posts/1247622550.shtml
  61. ^ Israel obsession leads HRW astray|Rhe Baltimore Sun
  62. ^ "Human Rights Watch - Reports". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 2009-08-31.
  63. ^ "Saudi Arabia: Counterterrorism Efforts Violate Rights". Human Rights Watch. 2009-08-10. Retrieved 2009-08-31.
  64. ^ http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=700
  65. ^ http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=700#rdrl
  66. ^ http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/human-rights-watch-must-retract-its-shameful-press-release/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Human_Rights_Watch&oldid=314351783"