Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Talk:Human Rights Watch (view source)
Revision as of 14:54, August 29, 2007
, 14:54, August 29, 2007Aziraphale, I disagree with you sharply.
:I'm not trying to judge anybody's opinion, except for the opinion that HRW is "clearly" not what it says it is, "by all accounts." Sorry for the wishy-washyness, but sometimes there really are two sides no matter how distasteful the other side is. [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 21:59, 28 August 2007 (EDT) ''<-doesn't taste very good either...''
:I'm not trying to judge anybody's opinion, except for the opinion that HRW is "clearly" not what it says it is, "by all accounts." Sorry for the wishy-washyness, but sometimes there really are two sides no matter how distasteful the other side is. [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 21:59, 28 August 2007 (EDT) ''<-doesn't taste very good either...''
::That is not the point of the article or even supported by any evidence you have shown. It simply is not true that the left ''puts more value on human rights than the right'', if by "left" you mean U.S. Liberals and by "right" you mean U.S. Conservatives. It is actually just the other way around!
::The left (or Liberals) are '''inconsistent''' and [[hypocritical]] in their statements on [[human rights]]. They over-emphasize (or even fabricate) atrocities by democratic countries while minimizing or denying atrocities by dictatorships.
::The whole point of the article is that HRW pretends to care about human rights, but is actually distorting the situation to score political points against America and its chief Middle Eastern ally, Israel.
::Not to make this personal, but if you (or anyone) really cares about human rights they ought to have one consistent standard that they apply to all countries. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:54, 29 August 2007 (EDT)