Human Rights Watch and Israel (or Syria)

Somebody should do a study of Human Rights Watch in its coverage of Syrian repression versus its coverage of Israeli repression and war crimes.  There is a difference, just as Western media cover Syrian repression in a very passionate and advocate way.  Human Rights Watch for example calls for monitors to be dispatched to Syria: has HRW ever called for monitors to be dispatched to Israel when Israel is busy committing war crimes and perpetrating massacres?  Also, it is interesting how free HRW watch is in its coverage of Syria and how it acts like a political party when its coverage of Israeli war crimes is always expressed in terms of :on the one hand this, and on the other hand that, etc.  When HRW covers Israeli war crimes, it always now adds something about the need to investigate war crimes by the victims, whether they are Lebanese or Palestinians.  Human Rights Watch never says a word now about Israeli war crimes without condemning the victims of Israeli war crimes.  It is essential language and method necessitated by what Human Rights Watch director called in one internal memo "Pro-Israel supporters" of the organization.  If HRW is to apply its own standards on Israeli war crimes to the situation in Syria, it would have said that there is a need to investigate war crimes by Syrian victims.  Even in Libya: when the Bin Ladenite gangs committed war crimes, HRW used very cautious and respectful language.  Notice how polite and restrained HRW was when Hariri led the government after 2005 and sponsored campaign of murder and repression against Syrian workers in Lebanon.  Human Rights Watch clearly has double standards: repressive governments that are aligned with the US and Israel get better treatment than repressive governments that are on bad terms with the US and Israel.