238 Violations of Media Freedoms in Palestine In 2012 Documented By NGO

[SherriMunnerlyn]

it was a legitimate op though. In any debate you pick a side to argue for. And even highly biased sources are not necessarily wrong. I just thought it appropriate to offer an opposing point of view since i don't believe the idf targeted journalist in palestine or otherwise have intentionally tried to muzzle the press.

hrw disagrees, they issued a report identifying israels targeting of journalists and asserting the attacks violated the fourth geneva convention.

i've been following the iraeli/neo palestinian issue for a number of years now--certainly since carter brokered a (mostly worthless as it turned out) deal between begin and arafat--i don't believe i have ever seen hrw take israel's side in anything and it has often criticized israel while not mentioning any action by the palestinians. On the rare occasion that they do take the palestinians to task for war crimes, they have thus far assigned equal or greater responsibility to israel.

So in rebuttal to your use of hrw as a source to condemn israel:

In defense of itself through ngo:

(hrw's) impact is particularly pronounced in the arab-israeli conflict:
Hrw exerts major influence on the un and on the policies of governments through condemnations of israel for alleged violations and demands for “independent investigations.” these allegations then become amplified through the media.

In this detailed, empirical research study, we present and analyze hrw’s activities concerning the arab-israeli conflict in a systematic manner, from 2001 through the middle of 2009. Our investigation shows a consistent pattern of ideological bias, lack of professional qualifications, and unsupported claims based on faulty evidence and analysis on the part of hrw. These are then replicated by governments and international organizations, including the united nations, that adopt these allegations.

The report consists of three main sections:

1) an examination of the key hrw staff members with respect to their professional backgrounds, research expertise, and ideological bias concerning israel.

2) five detailed case studies of hrw campaigns and publications between 2001 and 2009 which reflect consistent bias, false and contradictory statements, and the use of irrelevant evidence and inappropriate methodologies, including sources (“eyewitness testimony,” ngo and journalist reports, “weapons assessments&#8221 that are neither credible nor verifiable.

3) a broader quantitative analysis of hrw publications from 2002 to 2009, showing greatly disproportionate emphasis on israel in the middle east and north africa (mena) division, double standards in the use of terminology such as “war crimes,” “collective punishment,” etc., and in distorted uses of international legal terminology.
experts or ideologues? A systematic analysis of hrw?s focus on israel, executive summary (english)

and from the new republic:

on october 19 of last year, the op-ed page of the new york times contained a bombshell: A piece by robert bernstein, the founder and former chairman of human rights watch (hrw), attacking his own organization. Hrw, bernstein wrote, was “helping those who wish to turn israel into a pariah state.” the allegation was certainly not new: Hrw had been under assault for years by american jews and other supporters of israel, who argued that it was biased against the jewish state. And these attacks had intensified in recent months, with a number of unflattering revelations about the organization. In july, hrw found itself under fire when a wall street journal op-ed noted that the organization had solicited donations in saudi arabia by trumpeting the criticism it faces from “pro-israel pressure groups.” in august, the blogosphere leapt on one of the organization’s top middle east officials for having once been part of a team that edited a radical anti-israel journal. And, in september, hrw suspended one of the primary contributors to its reports on the wars in gaza and lebanon after his private hobby—collecting nazi memorabilia—became public.
minority report | new republic

unless you can show that these reports are in error or a misrepresentation of the truth, i submit that hrw is not a reliable source to use in assessing israel's 'crimes'.

I do not accept Zionist Hasbara propaganda sources as valid sources. IT IS NOT only HRW who is criticizing Israel for these war crimes against journalists, all the other human rights organizationds do, as well! I do not accept Israel as having some impunity by which she is allowed to freely murder and steal in violation of intl laws that are supposed to apply to all nations!

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israeli Military Must Permit Video Documentation in Occupied Territories and Conduct Investigation of Attack on Photographers | B'Tselem

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israeli Military Must Permit Video Documentation in Occupied Territories and Conduct Investigation of Attack on Photographers | B'Tselem

BTSELEM addresses Israeli attack on Photographers!

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israeli soldiers assault two Reuters cameramen. ISRAELI soldiers assault two Reuters cameramen. I GOT this link from Btselem's website.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

 

[irosie91]

it gets more and more idiotic------so consistent with the 1930s

 

[toastman]

it gets more and more idiotic------so consistent with the 1930s

Did you hear that rosie, sherri doesnt believe anything in the ZIONIST media, but she believes everything from Palestinian news sources. Interesting.
Maybe now is a good time to tell her that Hamas doesn't let in any Israeli media. In fact they are very selective in what media they let in. Geeze, not bias at all

Oh and Israel allows in all media

 

[Foxfyre]

Israeli Military Must Permit Video Documentation in Occupied Territories and Conduct Investigation of Attack on Photographers | B'Tselem

BTSELEM addresses Israeli attack on Photographers!

But isn't it interesting that if you go to the Reuters website, you can find nothing of this story? Or if it is there I didn't see it and it didn't come up in a search at their site.

 

[Hossfly]

hrw disagrees, they issued a report identifying israels targeting of journalists and asserting the attacks violated the fourth geneva convention.

i've been following the iraeli/neo palestinian issue for a number of years now--certainly since carter brokered a (mostly worthless as it turned out) deal between begin and arafat--i don't believe i have ever seen hrw take israel's side in anything and it has often criticized israel while not mentioning any action by the palestinians. On the rare occasion that they do take the palestinians to task for war crimes, they have thus far assigned equal or greater responsibility to israel.

So in rebuttal to your use of hrw as a source to condemn israel:

In defense of itself through ngo:



and from the new republic:

on october 19 of last year, the op-ed page of the new york times contained a bombshell: A piece by robert bernstein, the founder and former chairman of human rights watch (hrw), attacking his own organization. Hrw, bernstein wrote, was “helping those who wish to turn israel into a pariah state.” the allegation was certainly not new: Hrw had been under assault for years by american jews and other supporters of israel, who argued that it was biased against the jewish state. And these attacks had intensified in recent months, with a number of unflattering revelations about the organization. In july, hrw found itself under fire when a wall street journal op-ed noted that the organization had solicited donations in saudi arabia by trumpeting the criticism it faces from “pro-israel pressure groups.” in august, the blogosphere leapt on one of the organization’s top middle east officials for having once been part of a team that edited a radical anti-israel journal. And, in september, hrw suspended one of the primary contributors to its reports on the wars in gaza and lebanon after his private hobby—collecting nazi memorabilia—became public.
minority report | new republic

unless you can show that these reports are in error or a misrepresentation of the truth, i submit that hrw is not a reliable source to use in assessing israel's 'crimes'.

I do not accept Zionist Hasbara propaganda sources as valid sources. IT IS NOT only HRW who is criticizing Israel for these war crimes against journalists, all the other human rights organizationds do, as well! I do not accept Israel as having some impunity by which she is allowed to freely murder and steal in violation of intl laws that are supposed to apply to all nations!

How about we don't accept the anti-Zionist Hasbara that you are so fond of, Frau Sherri?

Human Rights Watch (HRW)

Human Rights Watch Again Issues False Allegations vs. Israel

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israeli Military Must Permit Video Documentation in Occupied Territories and Conduct Investigation of Attack on Photographers | B'Tselem

BTSELEM addresses Israeli attack on Photographers!

But isn't it interesting that if you go to the Reuters website, you can find nothing of this story? Or if it is there I didn't see it and it didn't come up in a search at their site.

So Israels own human rights groups are not to be believed either? BTSELEM WAS FOUNDED BY MEMBERS OF THE KNESSET!

 

[Hossfly]

it gets more and more idiotic------so consistent with the 1930s

Did you hear that rosie, sherri doesnt believe anything in the ZIONIST media, but she believes everything from Palestinian news sources. Interesting.
Maybe now is a good time to tell her that Hamas doesn't let in any Israeli media. In fact they are very selective in what media they let in. Geeze, not bias at all

Oh and Israel allows in all media

I think Frau Sherri should be trying very hard to get this person released. After all, she claims to live here in America, and you don't see people jailed here just for insulting someone in the government so you would think she would have a big problem with someone being jailed any place in the world for something like this.

Editor?s choice | Analysis & Opinion | Reuters

 

[irosie91]

it gets more and more idiotic------so consistent with the 1930s

Did you hear that rosie, sherri doesnt believe anything in the ZIONIST media, but she believes everything from Palestinian news sources. Interesting.
Maybe now is a good time to tell her that Hamas doesn't let in any Israeli media. In fact they are very selective in what media they let in. Geeze, not bias at all

Oh and Israel allows in all media

I think Frau Sherri should be trying very hard to get this person released. After all, she claims to live here in America, and you don't see people jailed here just for insulting someone in the government so you would think she would have a big problem with someone being jailed any place in the world for something like this.

Editor?s choice | Analysis & Opinion | Reuters

As to sherri believing the pali reports-----I understand. I was a teen in 1967----
and happened to be doing nothing during "CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST"---The
emergency UN proceedings were televised and----channel 13 devoted ALL its
time to "CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST" Naturally----I heard "both sides"
Credulous idiot that I was ------since each side provided an ENTIRELY contradictory
account----I ASSUMED that the truth lay dead center----like an "average"

when egypt reported downing 200 Israeli planes and Israel said "2" ---little
math freak that I was ----I ASSUMED MAYBE ABOUT 100 Naturally---by
the fourth day of that war----based on reports from arab sources---I assumed
Israel was a pile of ashes. Its not sherri's fault----she believes LOTS OF
CRAP-----read her posts. Its no crime to be stupid. Stupid people like
sherri do cause lots of trouble----but she is not news