David M. Litman is the U.S. Media Research Manager at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where he covers anti-Israel bias in the media. Previously, David worked at an independent watchdog organization focused on anti-Israel bias, international law, and human rights issues in the United Nations and international courts. David graduated magna cum laude from Case Western Reserve School of Law and holds a BA in International Studies.
There is something deeply objectionable about leaving three individuals known for making antisemitic statements empowered to use the imprimatur of the UN to uniquely delegitimize Jewish self-determination.
FIRE has played an important and admirable role in American society, standing up for one of our most important democratic values. It’s thus perplexing that the group’s position on the IHRA definition rests on an obvious factual error.
At a certain point, when a discussion throws important facts aside in favor of a narrative that points at a perceived Jewish organization as “corrupting,” “poisoning,” and “dominating” a country’s politics, it begins to reek of a certain phenomenon known as “antisemitism.” No amount of tokenizing a “really Jewish” congressman can paper over that.
Based on his latest piece for Salon, it appears Chris Hedges understands the only way to support his superficial worldview is by falsifying the record.
For a case study in confirmation bias, one need only look at the statement issued by a UN spokesperson for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (“OHCHR”) on the death of Shireen Abu Akleh.
MSNBC’s audience deserves, at the very least, a clear view of all the relevant facts and evidence. By omitting material information, Mohyeldin instead turned his partisan commentary into active dishonesty.
Reality – with which HRW has a tenuous relationship – can be rather inconvenient and complicated. But if HRW seeks to maintain any shred of credibility as a fact-driven, impartial institution, it cannot simply sweep away these complicating and inconvenient factors in pursuit of a partisan narrative.
The UN’s newest anti-Israel “Commission of Inquiry” published its first report on June 7. The report itself is mostly recycled allegations against Israel published in past UN reports, but it would be a mistake to dismiss the report as a complete dud.
Given the UN’s history, it will be unsurprising to most that the report is riddled with dubious narratives of villainous Israelis and powerless Palestinians. As is also usually the case with the UN, the report is also filled with basic factual errors.
