Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
I do not agree. This is a person, an attorney who has filed lawsuits against organizations identified by the United Nations, the European Union and the United States as terrorist groups. It is not her or anyone else's personal determination - it is a large body of international organizations that have sought to identify terror. Moreover, the article sets out who SHE IS, what cases SHE has filed and what their status is. You cannot simply merge an article about an individual into an article about an organization she heads. That is mindless. It is pretty obvious that ADDITIONAL sections will be written describing other cases she has filed prior to the creation of Shurat HaDin in 2003. She is a very famous lawyer in Israel and the US and the article will eventually have information concerning her carrer both BEFORE and AFTER the Shurat HaDin organization was formed. If you would be more patient you will see the full scope of the article about this person. Geishagrrrl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geishagrrrl ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Why anyone would merge a person into the page of an organization is not clear. Not sure why this tag was added. it should be removed, no one has offered an opinion on why it was placed there in the first place.
Seth J. Frantzman ( talk) 17:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I came here because I saw a banner ad inviting me to come to Israel and swoon over "Targeted Killing Units." Seriously, that was the ad's own wording -- picture of a guy with a machine gun, and everything. And Wikipedia is telling me this is a human rights organization? That it focuses on a wide range of individuals from around the world?
This Wikipedia article is far more circumspect even than the organization's own website, which openly describes its mission as opening a financial front in the "war on terror."
Who wrote this nonsense? EvanHarper ( talk) 03:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
There are so many unreferenced statements, and "to combat terrorism and promote civil rights through research, education and litigation.[1]" - I seriously disagree as the aim is to coerse and force charitable organisations helping Palestinians, and hiding crimes by Israeli Soldiers? I believe this has not been written by a neutral person. Asifkhanj ( talk) 21:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Shurat Hadin is not engaged in legal cases against World Vision in Australia. It has only made complaints to the government. It should therefore be characterised as a complaint, and not as a law suit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larryjhs ( talk • contribs) 15:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Someone with more energy than me should check out the US cables about this organization, in particular stating that it takes direction from the Israeli government, and go through the process of get a ruling on its admissibility here. This cable could be a starting point, see the non-surprising revelations in para 15. Zero talk 11:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Why is this Jewish human rights organization smeared with the accusation that it only "describes itself" as as civil rights organization, and that Arabs who murder Jewish children are somehow not terrorists? Compare this with the article on the terrorist group Council on American–Islamic Relations, which states it as a fact that it "is a Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization that deals with civil advocacy," and you get further proof of Wikipedia's Judeophobic systemic bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.3.146.55 ( talk) 00:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Much of the recently introduced material in the "criticism" section is not a criticism of Shurat HaDin at all, but rather opinions/criticism of the US court's decision in Sokolow et al v. Palestine Liberation Organization et al. I will move that material to the more appropriate article. Brad Dyer ( talk) 15:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Averysoda:: The Law center says it about itself: "Shurat HaDin is at the forefront of fighting terrorism and safeguarding Jewish rights worldwide. We are dedicated to the protection of the State of Israel. From defending against lawfare suits fighting academic and economic boycotts and challenging those who seek to delegitimize the Jewish State, Shurat HaDin is utilizing court systems around the world to go on the legal offensive against Israel’s enemies." [1] It says nothing about protecting "civil rights" generally, as real civil rights agencies do. Instead, it protects Jewish rights and takes the legal offensive against Israel’s enemies and challenging those who seek to delegitimize the Jewish State. Those are political goals, not civil rights. Characterizing it as a "civil rights" organization, like ACLU or CCR, is just plain not there. They may take some of the same cases the others would, but the focus is not the same. Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 01:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ABOUT SHURAT HADIN Shurat HaDin - Israel Law Center is an Israeli based civil rights organization and world leader in combating the terrorist organizations and the regimes that support them through lawsuits litigated in courtrooms around the world. Fighting for the rights of hundreds of terror victims, Shurat HaDin seeks to bankrupt the terror groups and grind their criminal activities to a halt - one lawsuit at a time
For criticism of Shurat Hadin from a WP:RS see the Electronic Intifada. https://electronicintifada.net/tags/shurat-hadin With some effort, you can also find criticism in The Forward https://www.google.com/webhp?rls=ig#q=site:forward.com+Shurat+HaDin+ -- Nbauman ( talk) 02:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
There are no WP:RS to support this entry. The only source is a primary source. I couldn't find any WP:RS with a Google search. Unless there is a secondary source meeting WP:RS, it should be removed. -- Nbauman ( talk) 16:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Wikileaks, besides being primary is not a RS. @ Al-Andalusi: restored this quote, retaining the inappropriate wikileaks source. He then added a Reuters source which does mention this cable at all as a source for the cable, and a MEMO source, which beyond being a polemic non-RS, also does not contain the full cable quote (though it is mentioned in brief). Whether an internal US embassy cable (even if properly sourced) allegedly recording a private discussion with a low ranking official is a RS or DUE is also an issue. Icewhiz ( talk) 20:13, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)I agree that the text ("In 2007, the group's director Nitsana Darshan-Leitner confided to US embassy staff that her group "took direction … on which cases to pursue" and "receives evidence" from the Mossad and from Israel's National Security Council.") ..should be changed. But the connection between Mossad and Shurat HaDin/Nitsana Darshan-Leitner has been widely reported...even by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner herself. Seriously, this is one of the most absurd cases of censorship I have seen on Wikipedia, Huldra ( talk) 20:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Why is Philip Giraldi being quoted (and at length) in the Criticism section? He is a Holocaust denier and public anti-Semite. He is not a credible source. Surely some credible critical sources must be available. 45.48.238.252 ( talk) 07:30, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone restore this information on Sderot with the following source to support it?:
-- Watchlonly ( talk) 04:08, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Not done: This source does not seem to be reliable. See WP:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_66#"Independent Media Review Analysis". JsfasdF252 ( talk) 07:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
References
Edit typo "a lost" in Criticism section. Remove it or change it to "a lot"
"It's a "win-win strategy," she argues, because the organization is well-funded enough that it can afford to lose a lost."
SteveBenassi ( talk) 17:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Change the "Israel Law Centre" bit in the lede to "( Hebrew: שׁוּרַת הַדִּין, "Letter of the Law")"
While they seem to style themselves as "Israel Law Centre" on their site, the way the page is set up makes it appear to be the English translation of shurat ha-din, which it isn't. Kyoto Grand ( talk) 19:29, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
See "clarify" tags: several stories left unfinished for over a decade!
They're a nasty lawfare bunch, I get it. But they also rise legitimate issues and win lawsuits in various jurisdictions, which is the truth-revealing pudding. Comments are very one-sided, if it smells of activism it puts off neutral users - and it misinforms, pure and simple.
One donor, Michael Leven, former CEO of the Sheldons' Las Vegas Sands casino company, has almost no enWiki presence, and it seems he should. Arminden ( talk) 11:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
I do not agree. This is a person, an attorney who has filed lawsuits against organizations identified by the United Nations, the European Union and the United States as terrorist groups. It is not her or anyone else's personal determination - it is a large body of international organizations that have sought to identify terror. Moreover, the article sets out who SHE IS, what cases SHE has filed and what their status is. You cannot simply merge an article about an individual into an article about an organization she heads. That is mindless. It is pretty obvious that ADDITIONAL sections will be written describing other cases she has filed prior to the creation of Shurat HaDin in 2003. She is a very famous lawyer in Israel and the US and the article will eventually have information concerning her carrer both BEFORE and AFTER the Shurat HaDin organization was formed. If you would be more patient you will see the full scope of the article about this person. Geishagrrrl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geishagrrrl ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Why anyone would merge a person into the page of an organization is not clear. Not sure why this tag was added. it should be removed, no one has offered an opinion on why it was placed there in the first place.
Seth J. Frantzman ( talk) 17:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I came here because I saw a banner ad inviting me to come to Israel and swoon over "Targeted Killing Units." Seriously, that was the ad's own wording -- picture of a guy with a machine gun, and everything. And Wikipedia is telling me this is a human rights organization? That it focuses on a wide range of individuals from around the world?
This Wikipedia article is far more circumspect even than the organization's own website, which openly describes its mission as opening a financial front in the "war on terror."
Who wrote this nonsense? EvanHarper ( talk) 03:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
There are so many unreferenced statements, and "to combat terrorism and promote civil rights through research, education and litigation.[1]" - I seriously disagree as the aim is to coerse and force charitable organisations helping Palestinians, and hiding crimes by Israeli Soldiers? I believe this has not been written by a neutral person. Asifkhanj ( talk) 21:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Shurat Hadin is not engaged in legal cases against World Vision in Australia. It has only made complaints to the government. It should therefore be characterised as a complaint, and not as a law suit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larryjhs ( talk • contribs) 15:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Someone with more energy than me should check out the US cables about this organization, in particular stating that it takes direction from the Israeli government, and go through the process of get a ruling on its admissibility here. This cable could be a starting point, see the non-surprising revelations in para 15. Zero talk 11:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Why is this Jewish human rights organization smeared with the accusation that it only "describes itself" as as civil rights organization, and that Arabs who murder Jewish children are somehow not terrorists? Compare this with the article on the terrorist group Council on American–Islamic Relations, which states it as a fact that it "is a Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization that deals with civil advocacy," and you get further proof of Wikipedia's Judeophobic systemic bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.3.146.55 ( talk) 00:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Much of the recently introduced material in the "criticism" section is not a criticism of Shurat HaDin at all, but rather opinions/criticism of the US court's decision in Sokolow et al v. Palestine Liberation Organization et al. I will move that material to the more appropriate article. Brad Dyer ( talk) 15:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Averysoda:: The Law center says it about itself: "Shurat HaDin is at the forefront of fighting terrorism and safeguarding Jewish rights worldwide. We are dedicated to the protection of the State of Israel. From defending against lawfare suits fighting academic and economic boycotts and challenging those who seek to delegitimize the Jewish State, Shurat HaDin is utilizing court systems around the world to go on the legal offensive against Israel’s enemies." [1] It says nothing about protecting "civil rights" generally, as real civil rights agencies do. Instead, it protects Jewish rights and takes the legal offensive against Israel’s enemies and challenging those who seek to delegitimize the Jewish State. Those are political goals, not civil rights. Characterizing it as a "civil rights" organization, like ACLU or CCR, is just plain not there. They may take some of the same cases the others would, but the focus is not the same. Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 01:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ABOUT SHURAT HADIN Shurat HaDin - Israel Law Center is an Israeli based civil rights organization and world leader in combating the terrorist organizations and the regimes that support them through lawsuits litigated in courtrooms around the world. Fighting for the rights of hundreds of terror victims, Shurat HaDin seeks to bankrupt the terror groups and grind their criminal activities to a halt - one lawsuit at a time
For criticism of Shurat Hadin from a WP:RS see the Electronic Intifada. https://electronicintifada.net/tags/shurat-hadin With some effort, you can also find criticism in The Forward https://www.google.com/webhp?rls=ig#q=site:forward.com+Shurat+HaDin+ -- Nbauman ( talk) 02:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
There are no WP:RS to support this entry. The only source is a primary source. I couldn't find any WP:RS with a Google search. Unless there is a secondary source meeting WP:RS, it should be removed. -- Nbauman ( talk) 16:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Wikileaks, besides being primary is not a RS. @ Al-Andalusi: restored this quote, retaining the inappropriate wikileaks source. He then added a Reuters source which does mention this cable at all as a source for the cable, and a MEMO source, which beyond being a polemic non-RS, also does not contain the full cable quote (though it is mentioned in brief). Whether an internal US embassy cable (even if properly sourced) allegedly recording a private discussion with a low ranking official is a RS or DUE is also an issue. Icewhiz ( talk) 20:13, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)I agree that the text ("In 2007, the group's director Nitsana Darshan-Leitner confided to US embassy staff that her group "took direction … on which cases to pursue" and "receives evidence" from the Mossad and from Israel's National Security Council.") ..should be changed. But the connection between Mossad and Shurat HaDin/Nitsana Darshan-Leitner has been widely reported...even by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner herself. Seriously, this is one of the most absurd cases of censorship I have seen on Wikipedia, Huldra ( talk) 20:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Why is Philip Giraldi being quoted (and at length) in the Criticism section? He is a Holocaust denier and public anti-Semite. He is not a credible source. Surely some credible critical sources must be available. 45.48.238.252 ( talk) 07:30, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone restore this information on Sderot with the following source to support it?:
-- Watchlonly ( talk) 04:08, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Not done: This source does not seem to be reliable. See WP:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_66#"Independent Media Review Analysis". JsfasdF252 ( talk) 07:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
References
Edit typo "a lost" in Criticism section. Remove it or change it to "a lot"
"It's a "win-win strategy," she argues, because the organization is well-funded enough that it can afford to lose a lost."
SteveBenassi ( talk) 17:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Change the "Israel Law Centre" bit in the lede to "( Hebrew: שׁוּרַת הַדִּין, "Letter of the Law")"
While they seem to style themselves as "Israel Law Centre" on their site, the way the page is set up makes it appear to be the English translation of shurat ha-din, which it isn't. Kyoto Grand ( talk) 19:29, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
See "clarify" tags: several stories left unfinished for over a decade!
They're a nasty lawfare bunch, I get it. But they also rise legitimate issues and win lawsuits in various jurisdictions, which is the truth-revealing pudding. Comments are very one-sided, if it smells of activism it puts off neutral users - and it misinforms, pure and simple.
One donor, Michael Leven, former CEO of the Sheldons' Las Vegas Sands casino company, has almost no enWiki presence, and it seems he should. Arminden ( talk) 11:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)