Everything Israel says that makes it look less than monstrous is triple-checked and publicly doubted. Gaza "witnesses" and "humanitarian workers" - who are all either working with or are deathly afraid of Hamas - are trusted without any verification or skepticism.
The trope of the untrustworthy Jew is well over a century old.
The new Amnesty blood libel report accusing Israel off genocide continues that antisemitic tradition. But something that happened outside the report itself is, in many ways, more illuminating than he hundreds of examples of how Amnesty believes anything a Palestinian says and nothing a Jew says.
Amnesty Israel issued a statement that it disagrees with its parent organization Amnesty as to its conclusions. But more interesting still is that the Israeli branch says that they were not involved in the report at all. Their press release says Amnesty Israel "is not one of the initiators of the report; it is not one of its authors, and that the branch in Israel was not a partner in financing or approving the report,"
The question everyone should be asking is...why not?
Why didn't Amnesty ask their Israeli branch to contribute to a report about the country that they know better than any other Amnesty researcher?
Amnesty complains in the report that Israel didn't cooperate with them. But they themselves didn't cooperate with their own Israeli branch!
Certainly the Amnesty Israel people could have added context, color, and depth to the report, not to mention correct the many mistakes like taking Israeli officials' quotes out of context. Apparently the parent organization didn't even use Amnesty Israel to help translate Hebrew!
Amnesty interviewed scores of seemingly ordinary Gazans and aid workers. But they didn't interview any Israelis. or IDF soldiers who fought in Gaza. Amnesty Israel could have looked out their window and found a dozen IDF reservists willing to talk about what they did (and didn't do) in Gaza.
Clearly, Amnesty didn't want to pollute its blood libel report with facts and context.
The report is book-sized. It takes a lot of resources to put something like that together. Not using Israelis who have a more accurate perspective on how the IDF works - indeed, many of the Amnesty Israel employees probably served in the IDF - can only be because Amnesty doesn't trust Jews.
This is further proof that Amnesty wrote the report from the start to make the libelous "genocide" claim against Israel, and always intended it to be one-sided. Amnesty Israel - which is still far -Left and highly critical of Israel's conduct in Gaza - would have watered down what Amnesty wanted to say. It would have pointed out mistakes. Amnesty knows that its thesis is precarious to begin with (after all, they had to make up a new definition of genocide) , and if their Israeli branch would have been involved, the pre-determined conclusion would have been endangered.
This is echoed by some Amnesty Israel employees who can say with authority that the conclusions were written before the "investigation."
In a separate statement obtained by the Haaretz newspaper, several members of Amnesty Israel and Jewish members of Amnesty International went one step further and accused the report of producing an “artificial analysis” of the situation in the Gaza Strip.“From the outset, the report was referred to in international correspondence as the ‘genocide report,’ even when the research was still in its initial stages,” Haaretz cited the Amnesty members as saying.“This is a strong indication of bias and also a factor that can cause additional bias: Imagine how difficult it is for a researcher to work for months on a report titled ‘genocide report’ and then to have to conclude that it is ‘only’ about crimes against humanity,” they added. “Predetermined conclusions of this kind are not typical of other Amnesty International investigations.”They accused the report of having been “motivated by a desire to support a popular narrative among Amnesty International’s target audience” that stemmed from “an atmosphere within Amnesty International of minimizing the seriousness of the October 7 massacre. It is a failure – and sometimes even a refusal – to address the Israeli victims in a personal and humane manner.”
At the very least, Amnesty's not using the Israelis shows a shocking level of disrespect that Amnesty has towards its Israeli branch. To Amnesty, their Israeli employees are untrustworthy and must be marginalized.
Which is yet more evidence that Amnesty is irredeemably biased. They are practicing BDS against even the most progressive Israelis who fully subscribe to Amnesty's ideals.
If Amnesty Israel had any self respect at all, it would quit the organization. Clearly they are treated as if they are worthless.
Right now their entire role is to be the token Jews that Amnesty can point to in order to pretend they aren't antisemitic.
Here's a Soviet-era cartoon from 1972 that sums up the entire Amnesty report. (Caption: "In his likeness and image.")
|
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. Read all about it here! |
|
