A couple of weeks ago I wrote about how the Senior Editor blasted her organization for being antisemitic in an email she sent to her colleagues on her way out the door.

Danielle Haas spent over 13 years as editor of their publications, so she was in a position to know and was hardly a typical disgruntled employee. She was unsparing in her critique:

“Following the Hamas massacres in Israel on October 7, years of institutional creep culminated in organizational responses that shattered professionalism, abandoned principles of accuracy and fairness, and surrendered its duty to stand for the human rights of all…

Others have begun to notice just how indifferent it is to actual human rights if the “right” people are targeted for violence.

For instance, it took nearly two weeks for HRW to say that the Israeli hostages should be freed. They barely scratched Hamas for their rape and murder spree on October 7th. One might think that would qualify for comment.

Human Rights Watch has enormous credibility, and it has been using its credibility to smear Israel and soft-pedal Hamas’ tactics. In fact, after the Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket hit the Al-Ahli hospital on October 17 it helped lead the charge to blame Israel and claim massive casualty numbers that were completely overblown.

2/ HRW has two standards for assessing evidence, speed of reaction, and language used.

If Israel can be blamed, they treat every Hamas claim as fact, immediately condemn Israel, with dramatic flourish.

If it's a Hamas crime, they need time to verify, using very cautious words.

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 26, 2023

Now, over a month after the incident, it has completed its “investigation” into the incident and concluded what everybody knew weeks ago: Israel did not bomb the hospital, and bodies were not stacked up like cordwood. Admitting these facts now is irrelevant, given the enormous propaganda benefit that Hamas reaped in the aftermath of the non-existent Israeli strike.

It was HRW’s own Israel and Palestine Director who led the charge to inflame passions against Israel after the strike. Now he is releasing a report that admits it wasn’t an Israeli airstrike, but he still uses weasel words and claims even further investigation is needed to determine what everybody already knows.

4/ When he thought it was Israel: “I've been to morgues, I've seen mass killings, anguish & cruelty. But the scenes I'm seeing have left me at a loss for words. Abject horror. THIS MUST END.”

When he knows it's the Jihad: “An investigation is needed.”https://t.co/jpUzCrnxA0

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 26, 2023

Omar Shakir left no room for interpretation. He was an eyewitness to the horror and tweeted out his commentary on top of a story stating that Israel had committed a war crime. Now he is suddenly being super careful about what happened.

Notice the change in tone? When it mattered he helped light a bonfire, now he is measured and careful. Wouldn’t want to inflame opinion against Hamas or PIJ, would we? Suddenly his abject horror has moderated. One wonders if he saw much of anything. It’s not like we have ever seen the scene before it was rapidly cleared of all evidence, and Shakir has proven himself to be an unreliable narrator.

Unreliable, but influential with the MSM.

6/ More than a month after the White House and other Western governments concluded that it was a Palestinian rocket, and even after his own group has now done so, @OmarSShakir has never deleted his blood libel below. Never retracted. Never apologized. https://t.co/jpUzCrnxA0 pic.twitter.com/e5Yp7ZprBh

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 26, 2023

Shakir is in a position to shape the narrative of the conflict, and he uses Hamas press releases to guide what he tells the world. And he certainly knows how to do so. Putting out the most inflammatory statements based solely on Hamas propaganda.

8/ A veteran Human Rights Watch editor says: “HRW has so little credibility for most Israelis they do not even trust it with their corpses. Zaka, the emergency responder group that collected body parts after the Hamas massacres, said it did not want to talk to HRW because its…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 26, 2023

This is just the sort of thing we have seen in media outlets such as the New York Times, which relies on a Nazi sympathizer to cover the war, even defending his reporting despite knowing that he wants Jews exterminated. He has picked a side, and they have picked his side.

NEW: The New York Times has rehired a reporter who has a history of publicly praising Adolf Hitler.

Soliman Hijjy, a Palestinian reporter, has contributed 9 articles for the New York Times since the Israel-Hamas war began.

Back in 2018, Hijjy took to Facebook to voice his… pic.twitter.com/swz2lRN56q

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 20, 2023

This is part of a pattern, in which news organizations have been employing Hamas sympathizers as their correspondents in Gaza and using their reports to defame Israel.

Let's face it. Orgs like CNN, NYT, AP, and Reuters are straight up forbidden by Hamas from sending their own reporters into Gaza, and are reduced to hiring "freelancers" from a handpicked Hamas "press pool."

At this point it isn't an extraordinary claim that these local…

— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) November 9, 2023

The United Nations partners with Hamas in Gaza, and it is in UN schools that Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews and aspire to become terrorists.

Human Rights Watch is a key part of this propaganda network, pushing anti-Israel narratives, amplifying Hamas propaganda, and working alongside terrorists. The Associated Press famously shared offices with Hamas at one point.

In the midst of a war, I wouldn’t expect Israel to not do its best to spin and push propaganda because all belligerents do so. The difference is that their claims are not only hyper-scrutinized but Hamas is used as a reliable source to debunk any Israeli claim. Given the record, I think we can all agree that Israel is a million times more reliable a source than Hamas.

I’ve made no secret where my sympathies lie, but it would be inconceivable to me to learn that any of my colleagues intentionally spread falsehoods in order to further a narrative. Not only is it unethical, but speaking practically we all know that the Left is poised to jump on every mistake we make. We don’t just get fact-checked, but intentionally slandered by the fact-checkers at times–usually by simply editing our claims to make them different from what we write.

But nobody actually fact-checks the “right” people. Media folks still interview proven liars as “experts” all the time.

Among those liars are the folks at Human Rights Watch.