Human Rights Watch Markets ISIS As Safe Haven, Then Laments About It
A piece in the New York Times reports about second generation immigrants in Britain who now emigrate to the Islamic State:
Leaving behind the Western opportunities their parents came to Britain for, those young Muslims make for a promised land of religious virtue, Muslim community and righteous revolution.“It’s the ultimate marketing success,” said Mr. Akunjee, who represents the families of three teenage girls who recently absconded to Syria. “They manage to sell a war zone as a Muslim safe haven.”
One Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, finds that lamentable:
“They manage to sell a war zone as a Muslim safe haven.” says the NYT quote. But who are "they"? is t the Islamic State? Are the dozens of beheading videos the Islamic State publishes really promoting a safe haven? Why would anyone feel safe with all such killing and gore? Are "they" maybe others involved in such a lying "safe haven" marketing campaign?
How about the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch?
"A surprising safe haven is ISIS area" said Kenneth Roth. It is Kenneth Roth who is promoting Islamic State territory as "safe haven". He also laments that such marketing stunts lure people to emigrate there.
Not only is Kenneth Roth a lying piece of shit when he falsely promotes damage pictures from Israel's war on the people is Gaza as damage done by the Syrian government. He is also an active promoter for the Islamic State selling it as safe haven for Muslims to then lament about the "ultimate marketing success" of his campaign.
Well, I guess donors to Human Rights Watch get what they pay for.
h/t @les-politiques
Posted by b on July 30, 2015 at 13:55 UTC | Permalink
If you scan through the beginning of last summer in the Reports section of the Human Rights Watch web page, you will find nary an entry for Islamic State and its assorted sordid practices -- sexual slavery, decapitations, mutilations, destruction of world heritage sites -- but you will find critiques of Iraqi militias and the Syrian branch of the Kurdish PKK.
HRW is a CIA shill.
Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jul 30 2015 15:58 utc | 2
Yes, HRW is a CIA cut-out
This destruction was distinct from damages resulting from air strikes and heavy artillery and mortar fire prior to ISIS’s retreat from Amerli, which Human Rights Watch separately identified using the satellite imagery.
There are 19 airstrikes shown on the map below that quote. there's no way they could 'verify' the quote.
Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 30 2015 17:32 utc | 3
The former Helsinki Watch certainly hews very closely to the State Department's assessments of America's friends and foes. It is worth noting that Roth's description of ISIS areas as safe-zones from SAA attacks props up the "moderate" insurgent propaganda that Assad secretly supports ISIS because the SAA only attacks the FSA. Whereas his comment about ISIS promoting its safe-zones to British Muslims has an Islamophobic edge. I can't imagine him posting that American Jews are lured to Israel to fight in the IDF because Israel is promoted as a safe-haven for Jews or that more American Jews fight in the IDF than in the US military.
Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jul 30 2015 17:54 utc | 4
Roth is such a despicable ass-wipe.
b and Mike Maloney described it well.
So Roth wants to stop Assads barrel bombs, with the hegemonic Wests far more damaging and destructive and killer missiles. Which will then create an even larger safe haven for ISIL.
That's of course until those who emigrated to ISIL controlled areas are then bombed by the Empire. Maybe then Roth will ask back for Assads barrel bombs. Not going to happen of course, but just to complete the immoral absurdity by Roth.
Posted by: tom | Jul 30 2015 20:22 utc | 5
In the post above, is it the same three girls who spent over a dozen hours waiting in Turkish transport depot, in front of cameras the whole time, while there was a hysterical 'girl-hunt, on for these teenagers in the UK press ?
if so ,then How obvious and despicable was that propaganda fear campaign.
Posted by: tom | Jul 30 2015 20:27 utc | 6
"Well, I guess donors to Human Rights Watch get what they pay for."
The donors of HRW are most likely blissfully unaware of even the slightest of the nuanced critiques of this much touted “progressive”, “liberal” beacon of Western “civilization”. Probably, the most enticing attraction to donating to the likes of HRW (and that other shill of the US State Dept., Amnesty International) is that those who need to satisfy “progressive” impulses can simply make the donation (without checking into the credentials of both the personnel and the organization’s linkages) and come away self-satisfied that they have meaningfully “done something”. And then they can smugly brag that they are far from the source of the problem; and proudly affirm that through their contributions to the likes of HRW and AI (not to mention G. Soros' self-serving "charities") that as donors they are part of the solution.
Posted by: bjmaclac | Jul 30 2015 21:36 utc | 7
The US and UK governments couldn't have asked for a better marketing campaign to get young people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, volunteering to join ISIS as a proxy army to do all the dirty fighting against Syria at no cost to themselves.
Plus the same governments don't have to spend any money in training the fighters and later having to provide medical and hospital facilities and veterans' benefits to fighters when they suffer life-threatening injuries, amputations, PTSD and other chronic health problems. These fighters don't even have to come home (or they're prevented from returning anyway).
It really would persuade someone to believe that ISIS is a creation of the US and its allies.
Posted by: Jen | Jul 30 2015 22:48 utc | 8
@1
' Another member of the tribe of liars. It can't be biological, it must be a learned process, a cultural thing. '
That's it. The culture of the political class, lying for $/￡/€. They're all success stories, residents of Neolibraconia.
Advertising is the narrative, all right. Madison Avenue scum 'graduated' to the halls of power, where their method is their product.
Posted by: jfl | Jul 31 2015 0:48 utc | 9
"Not only is Kenneth Roth a lying piece of shit when he falsely promotes damage pictures from Israel's war on the people is Gaza as damage done by the Syrian government. He is also an active promoter for the Islamic State selling it as safe haven for Muslims..."
You've nailed b! Sincere and heartfelt thanks.
This the first (and only) rational explanation I've come across for the "mysterious attraction of ISIS to young Muslims" meme promoted by Western Leaders and the reptiles in the Gossip-or-Bullshit media. I've watched docos and news items about this "mysterious phenomenon" and none of them came close to making sense.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 31 2015 2:08 utc | 10
#8
It is this means by which Western countries can deal with surplus labour; as opposed to bearing the costs of incarcerating them.
Posted by: bjmaclac | Jul 31 2015 2:19 utc | 11
Will Human Rights Watch do the decent thing and call itself ISIS Rights Watch?
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 31 2015 2:22 utc | 12
My question: are there really "a lot" (my terminology) of young Muslims from the UK rushing to "join" (or whatever" ISIS?
I ask bc I don't trust almost anything that I hear or read about ISIS (or whatever variant of the name is these days).
Seems to me that ISIS was created by the USA/CIA/MI6 or whatever for various purposes. Then we get various "media reports" about Muslims from North America & Western Europe "rushing" off to join them. Most of the stories out of the USA (from what I bothered to read up on) seemed like pathetic individuals with a variety of other issues (mental illness, etc) who may have been involved - unknowingly - with the FBI/other to gin them up into "joining" ISIS. And then they're featured in a variety of gasp! shriek! nooz stories.
I just heard a nooz story last night on NPR/BBC about all these Syrian & North African Muslims streaming into Calais and attempting to jump trains thru the Chunnel to the UK.
Color me skeptical.
Yes, Human Rights Watch is a CIA front.
I'm not sure if Amnesty International always was (quite possible) but certainly is now.
Posted by: RUKidding | Jul 31 2015 14:49 utc | 13
Todays Manichean tunnel-vision has apparently left many observers completely unable to recognize irony or sarcasm. The clever use of pictures to expose US and Israeli depredations out of context is 'Lying' and the mocking of someone else's use of the ridiculous term 'safe haven' is 'Promoting the IS', please!
There is one constant that seems to trigger these rants, the Bomb that must not be named, which when brought near a certain Middle East despot creates a certain critical mass that explodes into a Jihad against this man Roth.
Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jul 31 2015 15:09 utc | 14
The comments to this entry are closed.
Another member of the tribe of liars.It can't be biological,it must be a learned process,a cultural thing.
Posted by: dahoit | Jul 30 2015 13:59 utc | 1