As HRC noted in our March 11 letter published in the Star, the AI report was both flawed and replete with bias against Israel.
Anti-Israel report flawed and biased
Re: “let’s hear the truth about Israel”, Frank White, March 8
Mr. White criticizes Windsor Star readers for not endorsing a hateful boycott of the world’s only Jewish state, and tops off his ignorance by citing an Amnesty International (AI) report accusing Israel of “war crimes”. Cynically released during the anti-Israel “Israel apartheid week” on college campuses in an effort to ramp up incitement against Israel, Amnesty International’s report has been roundly criticized for it’s anti-Israel bias.
The report consists of unverified Palestinian testimonie and as Amnesty itself admits, it lacks the expertise to assess and assign responsibility in the context of Palestinian violence, which is one of the reasons the Israel government condemned the report. How did Amnesty produce such a flawed report? Amnesty’s related research team are individuals with “backgrounds in anti-Israeli political activism,” not military and legal expertise.
Indeed, according to NGO Monitor, “the Israel researcher based in London, Deborah Hyams, was a human shield in Beit Jala; the Amnesty US Israel researcher, Edith Garwood, used to be a member of the anti-Israel International Solidarity Movement. Also, another one of the researchers, Rasha Abdul-Rahim, describes herself as ‘a ranty Palestinian activist‘ on Twitter.” Outside of the Arab-Israeli conflict, AI partner Moazzem Begg was arrested in the UK “on suspicion of attending a terrorist training camp and facilitating terrorism overseas.” It is the degeneration and politicization of AI that led Christopher Hitchens to call for the suspension of its funding until AI cleans up its act.
The Windsor Star rightly ignored Amnesty International’s flawed and biased report.