Ben-Dror Yemini was born in Tel-Aviv, Israel in 1954. He studied Humanities and History in Tel Aviv University, and later on he studies Law. After his university studies, he was appointed advisor to the Israeli Minister of Immigration Absorption and then became the spokesman of the Ministry. In 1984, he began his career as a journalist and essayist. He worked as a lawyer and was a partner in a law firm. He has worked for the daily newspaper Maariv, and in Spring 2014 began writing for the daily Yedioth Ahronoth. The author of "The Industry of Lies."
Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:28 pm Author of report against Israel supported Munich massacre
Author of report against Israel supported Munich massacre
By Ben-Dror Yemini
Ma'ariv
August 16, 2009
Joe Stork, a senior official in Human Rights Watch, which accuses the IDF of killing Palestinians who waved white flags, is a fanatical supporter of the elimination of Israel. He was a friend of Saddam, ruled out negotiations and supported the Munich Massacre, which "provided an important boost in morale among Palestinians."
Last Thursday, many world media outlets covered the press conference in which a senior Human Rights Watch official, Joe Stork, presented the report accusing Israel of killing twelve Palestinians in the Gaza Strip who waved white flags during Operation Cast Lead. Stork, the person identified with the report, has a unique history of Israel-hating: He supported the murder of Israeli athletes in Munich, was an avid supporter of Saddam Hussein and more.
Several times in the past, Stork has called for the destruction of Israel and is a veteran supporter of Palestinian terrorism. Already as a student, Stork was amongst the founders of a new radical leftist group, which was formed based on the claim that other leftist groups were not sufficiently critical of Israel and of the United States' support of it. Already in 1976, Stork participated in a conference organized by Saddam Hussein which celebrated the first anniversary of the UN decision that equated Zionism with racism. Stork, needless to say, arrived at the conference as a prominent supporter of Palestinian terrorism and as an opponent to the existence of the State of Israel. He also labeled Palestinian violence against Israel as "revolutionary potential of the Palestinian masses" – language that was typical of fanatical Marxists.
In articles which he authored during the 1970's, Stork stated that he was against the very existence of Israel as an "imperialistic entity" and, to this end, provided counsel to Arab regimes on how to eliminate the Zionist regime. He also was opposed to any negotiations since this meant recognizing its existence: "Zionism may be defeated only by fighting imperialism," wrote Stork, "and not through deals with Kissingers."
On other occasions, Stork expressed his position that the global Left must subordinate itself to the PLO in order to strengthen elements that opposed any accord with Israel. It would seem that he has not changed his ways since then. He is still conceptually subordinate to those who have maintained their opposition to the existence of the State of Israel. Once the world's radical left supported the PLO. Today, part of the global Left supports Hamas.
Stork, of course, is not alone. The hate ships that arrive from time to time, or attempt to arrive, to the shores of Gaza, are full of radicals of his ilk. They do not identify with efforts towards compromise or peace. On the contrary, they identify with those who are continuing the old line that supports the elimination of Israel. And what would happen if the PLO should decide to enter the negotiations track? Stork already recommended years ago that the Palestinian left splinter in order to continue the resistance. Hamas obeyed. It is possible to guess where Stork's heart lays.
Where does Stork stand regarding matters of objectivity and neutrality? He criticized Professor Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, himself a PLO figure, because he edited an anthology which tried, at least seemingly, to produce a balanced presentation. "Academic neutrality is deceitful," wrote Stork. And what about factual accuracy? Stork claimed that Menachem Begin said that, 'The Palestinians are two-legged animals." In fact, Begin said that those who come to kill children are "two-legged animals." The difference is, of course, huge. Stork, time after time, justifies his high standing in the industry of hate and lies against Israel.
Stork reached his peak in a statement published by the Middle East Research and Information Project, which dealt with gathering information on the Middle East conflict, and in which Stork was a leading figure. This was a statement that included explicit support for the murder of the eleven Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics: "Munich and similar actions cannot create or substitute for a mass revolutionary movement," the statement said, "But we should comprehend the achievement of the Munich action…It has provided an important boost in morale among Palestinians in the camps." Murder and terrorism, if so, are a matter of morale.
This is the man. A radical Marxist whose positions have not changed over the years. On the contrary. Objectivity, neutrality or sticking to the facts are not Stork's strong suit. He even proudly exclaims that there is no need for neutrality.
Is it possible to relate seriously to a report against Israel which this man stands behind? Both Camera and Professor Gerald Steinberg have revealed worrying data on the leaders of Human Rights Watch and on the two people who head its Middle East Department – Sarah Leah Whitson and Joe Stork – even before its latest report and unconnected to it. The organization, as part of its false presentation, issued polite condemnations of Hamas rocket fire. But it seems that such blatant anti-Israel bias leaves room for doubt. A Stork produced report on Israel is about as objective as a report by Baruch Marzel on Hebron.
Israel is called upon to provide explanations in the wake of Human Rights Watch reports. It is about time that Israel publicly exposed the ideological roots of several of this organization's leaders and demands the dismissal of these supporters of terrorism and haters of Israel. Until then, Israel, justifiably, cannot seriously comment on criticism from such a body.
In a world in which hardly an eyebrow was raised when Arafat a leading terrorist monster who advocated the indiscriminate massacre of civilian innocents, was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, it is fitting that one whose actions and beliefs negate Human Rights is a leader of this organization.
Israel and the age old Jewish people have been conditioned to survive, nay thrive, confronted by unholy hatred. We trust in the Almighty and as He admonished, put not our faith in 'princes'.
This article contains very important information about the total one-sidedness of the leader of the HRW report. However, in my opinion, it is not well written. It seems more like an ad-honimen attack on Stork, rather than laying out a logical brief on why he is not trustworthy to make a fair report. It should be rewritten to be convincing to those who tend to trust the HRW reports.
Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:24 am Author of Human Rights report on Israel supports terrorism
Author of Human Rights report on Israel supports terrorism
By Ethel C. Fenig
The American Thinker
August 17, 2009
Noah Pollak at Commentary Contentions has done outstanding work exposing the racism and bigotry of the grossly misnamed Human Rights Watch. Supposedly an objective organization documenting human rights abuses around the world, HRW is anything but. Its extensive focus on Israel is one-sided and highly critical, often issuing reports condemning the country for its actions without putting them in the proper context while ignoring Arab/Muslim words and actions against Israel in addition to the extensive human rights abuses in their own countries.
This is an organization which receives extensive funding from Saudi Arabia where women aren't allowed to drive, religions other than Islam are banned by law, where hangings are a national sport, and where hatred of Israel and Jews is freely and approvingly expressed. Billionaire investor/market manipulator and Israel basher George Soros is another deep pocketed generous HRW contributor.
Just last week HRW's Joe Stork, deputy director of HRW's Middle East and North African section, authored a scathing report against Israel, charging Israel's army murdered peaceful, white flag waving Arabs civilians during Israel's incursion into Gaza last winter to stop daily rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel has totally denied these unfounded accusations.
Until a few days ago, when HRW admitted for the first time that oh by the way, this constant bombardment by Gazans against Israeli civilians isn't really very nice, HRW has been conspicuously silent about these rocket attacks.
And now this week Pollak has presented what he aptly describes as a "blockbuster article" by Ben-Dror Yemini from the Israeli paper Ma'ariv on the real Joe Stork.
Quote:
Joe Stork, a senior official in Human Rights Watch, which accuses the IDF of killing Palestinians who waved white flags, is a fanatical supporter of the elimination of Israel. He was a friend of Saddam, ruled out negotiations and supported the Munich Massacre, which "provided an important boost in morale among Palestinians." (snip)
Several times in the past, Stork has called for the destruction of Israel and is a veteran supporter of Palestinian terrorism. Already as a student, Stork was amongst the founders of a new radical leftist group, which was formed based on the claim that other leftist groups were not sufficiently critical of Israel and of the United States' support of it. Already in 1976, Stork participated in a conference organized by Saddam Hussein which celebrated the first anniversary of the UN decision that equated Zionism with racism. Stork, needless to say, arrived at the conference as a prominent supporter of Palestinian terrorism and as an opponent to the existence of the State of Israel.
He also labeled Palestinian violence against Israel as "revolutionary potential of the Palestinian masses"-language that was typical of fanatical Marxists.
In articles which he authored during the 1970's, Stork stated that he was against the very existence of Israel as an "imperialistic entity" and, to this end, provided counsel to Arab regimes on how to eliminate the Zionist regime.
There's much more at the link about Stork, including a statement of support for the Black September terrorists who murdered Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics:
Quote:
"Munich and similar actions cannot create or substitute for a mass revolutionary movement," the statement said, "But we should comprehend the achievement of the Munich action...It has provided an important boost in morale among Palestinians in the camps."
Human Rights Watch should be relabeled a propaganda organization incapable of speaking the truth. And its reports should be ignored.
Source:http://www.americanthinker.com.....eport.html
Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:38 am HRW’s ‘White Flags’ Report Surrenders Morality
artcohn wrote:
This article contains very important information about the total one-sidedness of the leader of the HRW report. However, in my opinion, it is not well written. It seems more like an ad-honimen attack on Stork, rather than laying out a logical brief on why he is not trustworthy to make a fair report. It should be rewritten to be convincing to those who tend to trust the HRW reports.
(Jerusalem) – Jerusalem based research organization NGO Monitor has reviewed Human Rights Watch’s (HRW) publication (“White Flag Deaths”) alleging that the IDF killed 11 civilians holding white flags in Gaza. The publication and accompanying publicity campaign contain many fundamental deficiencies and inconsistencies:
* HRW had no presence in Gaza during the conflict. Therefore, the organization's Gaza ‘reports’, including “White Flag Deaths” are based entirely on unverifiable claims wrapped in a façade of research.
* The report’s co-author Joe Stork is a veteran anti-Israel political activist and the antithesis of a professional legal analyst. Before joining HRW, he was a leader of MERIP (Middle East Research and Information Project), whose publications have carried laudatory interviews with terrorist leaders and urged socialists to “comprehend the achievements” of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre.
* HRW’s publication fails to investigate incidents in which "white flags", ambulances and hospitals were used by Hamas to hide military activity. Instead, the entire report is designed to provide "evidence" of alleged Israeli war crimes (a term used 15 times).
* This publication relies on Palestinian ‘eyewitness’ testimony, such as the claims of Khalid Abd Rabbo. But Abd Rabbo's testimony in other reports is highly inconsistent, and fails to provide the information necessary for a serious analysis.
* Six of the seven alleged incidents are based on the unprovable ‘evidence’ from journalists or NGOs with highly biased agendas, including Breaking the Silence, Al Mezan and Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR).
* “White Flag Deaths”, like other HRW "research reports" goes out of its way to reject the well-documented utilization of human shields by Hamas. (In contrast, in an interview with the Jerusalem Post, Bill Van Esveld acknowledged this evidence. This glaring inconsistency further demonstrates the framework of HRW's activities with respect to Israel.)
* The report cites medical and ballistic records as ‘evidence’ of alleged white flag incidents, but these claims provide no information on the circumstances of the injuries, and are irrelevant to HRW's claims.
NGO Monitor’s President, Prof Gerald Steinberg said, “This is another HRW publication that substitutes speculation for serious research. The text reflects HRW’s consistent pattern with regard to the Middle East, with condemnation of Israel as its starting point, particularly in relation to the Gaza conflict. It is further evidence, if any were needed following the Saudi fundraising dinner that HRW is more interested in targeting Israel than in promoting universal human rights”.
Source:http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article.php?id=2547
View previous topic • View next topic 
