Character Assassination and Faulty Reasoning

David Bernstein, at Volokh Conspiracy, has been posting repeatedly about Marc Garlasco of Human Rights Watch. Bernstein is, shall we say, not a fan of HRW because he thinks it is anti-Israeli. However, the posts about this particular individual are such outrageously fallacious attacks on one person’s character, that someone has to say something. As Bernstein typically does not permit comments on his posts, I’m doing it here. Please note that this is intended to be an exercise in exposing bad reasoning put to evil ends; I have no opinions about HRW or Mr. Garlasco.
Bernstein’s first post on Garlasco was entitled: Is Human Rights Watch's Marc Garlasco A Nazi-Obsessed Collector?...
Another (he keeps posting) is entitled: “Human Rights Watch Responds.”
Here is the full text:
“ It's only sporting to publish the response HRW's press office has sent regarding its Nazi memorabilia obsessed military analyst, Marc Garlasco [UPDATE: I think it's also fair to point out that the response, not surprisingly from HRW, is at best disingenuous. For example, it describes Garlasco's 400+ page book on German World War II "Flak" badges as "a monograph on the history of German Air Force and Army anti-aircraft medals," leaving out the World War II part.]

[The HRW post]

Several blogs and others critical of Human Rights Watch have suggested that Marc Garlasco, Human Rights Watch's longtime senior military advisor, is a Nazi sympathizer because he collects German (as well as American) military memorabilia. This accusation is demonstrably false and fits into a campaign to deflect attention from Human Rights Watch’s rigorous and detailed reporting on violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by the Israeli government. Garlasco has co-authored several of our reports on violations of the laws of war, including in Afghanistan, Georgia, and Iraq, as well as by Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
Garlasco has never held or expressed Nazi or anti-Semitic views.
Garlasco's grandfather was conscripted into the German armed forces during the Second World War, like virtually all young German men at the time, and served as a radar operator on an anti-aircraft battery. He never joined the Nazi Party, and later became a dedicated pacifist. Meanwhile, Garlasco's great-uncle was an American B-17 crewman, who survived many attacks by German anti-aircraft gunners.
Garlasco own family's experience on both sides of the Second World War has led him to collect military items related to both sides, including American 8th Air Force memorabilia and German Air Force medals and other objects (not from the Nazi Party or the SS, as falsely alleged). Many military historians, and others with an academic interest in the Second World War, including former and active-duty US service members, collect memorabilia from that era.
Garlasco is the author of a monograph on the history of German Air Force and Army anti-aircraft medals and a contributor to websites that promote serious historical research into the Second World War (and which forbid hate speech). In the foreword he writes of telling his daughters that "the war was horrible and cruel, that Germany lost and for that we should be thankful."
To imply that Garlasco's collection is evidence of Nazi sympathies is not only absurd but an attempt to deflect attention from his deeply felt efforts to uphold the laws of war and minimize civilian suffering in wartime. These falsehoods are an affront to Garlasco and thousands of other serious military historians. [DB’s emphasis added]

[DB again] “ And here [go to Vokh to see the photo] is "serious military historian" Garlasco hanging out in his favorite "Iron Cross" sweatshirt, you know, the one that all the serious military historians wear, but that everyone thinks is a biker shirt (a screenshot from the German Combat Awards website)

After Garlasco posted this picture, the following dialogue ensued” [apparently from the website to which Garlasco posted his picture]:
Skip: Love the sweatshirt Mark. Not one I could wear here in germany though (well I could but it would be a lot of hassle)
Garlasco: Everyone thinks it is a biker shirt!
Skip: Yeh, were you come from but imagine walking around in Berlin with "das Eisene Kreuz" written across your cheat. Either you get beaten to pulp by a group of rampaging Turks or the police arrest you on suspicion of being a Nazi.

“UPDATE: By the way, I don't suggest that Garlasco is a Nazi sympathizer--as noted in my previous post, lots of people collect Nazi stuff for innocuous reasons. [Several readers have emailed me about the significance of the Iron Cross. As weird as it is to walk around in an Iron Cross sweatshirt, without the WWII-era swastika it's not a banned Nazi symbol in Germany. Indeed it was revived, in a denazified version, as the symbol of the German armed forces in 1957. However, the West German government stopped awarding Iron Cross medals after WWII--thanks Wikipedia! The Iron Cross medal, which the shirt seems to allude to, is still widely associated with the Nazi era in Germany. I take it that "Skip" thinks that walking around in Germany with an Iron Cross shirt that says "das Eisene Kreuz" is taken as a reference to the medal, not the modern German armed forces, which would also make sense for a medal collector like Garlasco.]
But Garlasco is much more than a casual hobbyist [contrary to HRW's release, there is no indication that Garlasco is an avid collector, in general, of American and German military stuff, as opposed specifically to WWII era German military medals, on which he wrote a 430 page book, and other WWII German stuff], and I think it's a rather strange obsession for a human rights investigator who spends much of his time investigating Israel for HRW. Strange, first, because human rights activists aren't typically obsessed with collecting mementoes of Nazi war achievements. As one blogger wrote, it's like an animal rights activist avidly collecting vintage furs. There's nothing inherently wrong, by most lights, with collecting such furs, but it's not the kind of thing you'd expect an animal rights activist to find enjoyable. Not to mention that in Garlasco's case, you wind up hanging around with the type of people who casually refer to “rampaging Turks" and make not-so-oblique references to their frustration at having to obey laws banning them from wearing Nazi regalia; or, as I saw on one memorabilia forum defending Garlasco, with people who refer to Israel as the "Jew country."
And strange because one would think that HRW, under fire for years for its anti-Israel bias, would not want to hire someone with this rather strange avocation given the obvious p.r. implications--all HRW really has, after all, is its reputation. But then again, if HRW was concerned about its reputation for objectivity, it would start by not hiring pro-Palestinian activists (and no pro-Israel activists) to run and staff its Middle East division. [Put differently, I think HRW poobahs think that being hostile to Israel is an objective position, one that any reasonable person would share.] Solomania has much more.”
****************************************************************************

Ok.
Let’s play rational person engaged in good-faith discourse. What would we make of Bernstein’s post?

1) Bernstein writes that the HRW post is disingenuous, because, For example, it describes Garlasco's 400+ page book on German World War II "Flak" badges as "a monograph on the history of German Air Force and Army anti-aircraft medals," leaving out the World War II part.]
Compare that with the HRW response: Garlasco is the author of a monograph on the history of German Air Force and Army anti-aircraft medals and a contributor to websites that promote serious historical research into the Second World War.
Perhaps if one is functionally illiterate, one might not be able to connect the dots between the references to the monograph and to the Second World War. Or, wanting to see the HRW post as disingenuous blinded Bernstein to what any honest reader could easily make out.
2) Bernstein mocks HRW’s reference to serious historians and calls Garlasco’s inclusion in that group into doubt by, yes, showing a picture of Garlasco at some outdoor event wearing an Iron Cross sweatshirt. Apparently, one’s choice of clothing is an important test of one’s bona fides as an historian.
3) Bernstein disingenuously looks to people who correspond with Garlasco on the collectors’ website as evidence of Garlasco’s views and beliefs. Because, obviously, what ‘Skip’ has to say about the likelihood of wearing said sweatshirt in Germany and ‘Skip’s’ xenophobic crack about Turks in Germany tell us all we need to know about Garlasco.
4) Bernstein seems to sound the voice of reason in noting that one might collect Nazi memorabilia and not be a Nazi sympathizer – but only to undermine that possibility in Garlasco’s case. He asserts that Garlasco is much more than a casual hobbyist.
The evidence for this claim? Well, Bernstein says there is no indication that Garlasco is an avid collector, in general, of American and German military stuff, as opposed specifically to WWII era German military medals, pretending to supply meat to this empty assertion by repeating the number of pages in Garlasco’s book.
Further, Bernstein ‘argues,’ Garlasco’s being a collector of WWII Nazi memorabilia is a rather strange obsession for a human rights investigator who spends much of his time investigating Israel for HRW. Pay attention: a) Bernstein thinks it is a strange obsession - so, it seems Garlasco’s being obsessed is no longer in question; b) it is a strange obsession for someone who has investigated possible human rights violations in Israel; c) it is a strange obsession for one who does such investigations for HRW – which Bernstein constantly accuses of an anti-Israeli bias.
Bernstein claims that human rights activists aren't typically obsessed with collecting mementoes of Nazi war achievements. Don’t let the absence of data distract you; it is the "Nazi war achievements" that does the intended work, here. Because, now we realize that Garlasco does not collect memorabilia; rather, he is, again, obsessed and in fact obsessed with collecting Nazi trophies in celebration of Nazi achievements.
But if this is too subtle for you, Bernstein has an analogy from ‘a blogger’: it's like an animal rights activist avidly collecting vintage furs. There's nothing inherently wrong, by most lights, with collecting such furs, but it's not the kind of thing you'd expect an animal rights activist to find enjoyable.

Students, this is a very, very bad analogy.
Imagine you believe animals should not be killed, as a general rule, and certainly not so humans can wear the skins of animals killed entirely for that purpose. Collecting furs would be, in effect, supporting the killing of animals and the fur trade to which you object. Now, compare that with collecting war memorabilia used by an historical group. Are you supporting said group or its actions? Does your being a collector indicate that you approve of the motivations or beliefs of said group? Think about a different war: the U.S. Civil War. If you collect Civil War memorabilia, either including or even limited to those from the Confederacy, does this imply that you think the Confederates pursued a just cause? That you are in favor of slavery as an institution? That you support or would have supported the Slave Power or are a racist? You get the idea.
And, then, of course Bernstein comes back to the guilt by association meme: Not to mention that in Garlasco's case, you wind up hanging around with the type of people who casually refer to “rampaging Turks" ….. or, as I saw on one memorabilia forum defending Garlasco, with people who refer to Israel as the "Jew country." The last is especially egregious. Now, Garlasco is to be faulted for having a hobby that others who refer to Israel as the ‘Jew country’ also have. Well, there you are; not exactly ‘hanging out’ with any of these people, mind, but apparently good reason to pick your interests carefully – and to be careful of who defends you in your absence or without your knowledge.
5) And, then, finally, Bernstein writes, And strange because one would think that HRW, under fire for years for its anti-Israel bias, would not want to hire someone with this rather strange avocation given the obvious p.r. implications--all HRW really has, after all, is its reputation.

As written, this would suggest that Garlasco’s hobby is a strange one for him, because it is strange that HRW hired someone with such a hobby. When I get something like this from one of my undergraduates, I say helpful things such as, “Now, see, you’ve changed the subject, really haven’t you? You are no longer talking about why/how X is Y; you’ve started talking about why/how Q is Y. And, that’s different, isn’t it? Just remember to keep track of both sentences and paragraphs.”
On the other hand, as Bernstein’s interest in Garlasco seems to be grounded in his antipathy to HRW, perhaps confusing what is ‘strange’ for one with what is ‘strange’ for the other is, well, not so strange.