Disgusting @Amnesty parrots lie that IDF shot tear gas at a hospital

Amnesty International's response to Israel's raid at a terrorist nest in Jenin yesterday is yet more evidence of its anti-Israel and ultimately antisemitic bias.

Responding to the killing of at least nine Palestinians by Israeli forces during a military raid on Jenin refugee camp this morning, Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Research and Advocacy Director at Amnesty International, said: 

“In the space of just a few hours this morning, Israeli forces killed at least nine people and injured 20 more; blocked ambulances from accessing the wounded; and fired tear gas at a hospital, reportedly causing suffocation injuries to sick children. 

The charge that Israel fired tear gas at a hospital came from PA health minister Mai Al-Kaila who absurdly claimed that the IDF "stormed" the hospital and "deliberately" fired tear gas to the children's ward. 

Luther knows that she is lying, because he doesn't mention her charge about "storming" the hospital, which makes no sense. 

The IDF denied the charge immediately:

Israel's army denied a Palestinian claim that soldiers deliberately fired tear gas at a hospital during a raid in the occupied West Bank on Thursday.

"No one shot tear gas on purpose at a hospital," an army spokesman told AFP. "But the activity was not far away from the hospital and it is possible some tear gar entered through an open window."

Amnesty's statement was published ten hours after Israel's emphatic denial.

Which means that Amnesty chose to parrot the obvious lies of a Palestinian minister, watering it down a little because they knew her  entire statement was propaganda. Then they chose to ignore Israel's denial as not being even worth considering.

To Amnesty, Palestinians are trustworthy and Jews are simply liars whose words aren't even worth considering.

And what really happened in the hospital? Middle East Monitor published video that they claimed shows the mothers and children choking:

There's no panic, no running, no choking, no one looking like their eyes hurt, and the women aren't even covering their own or their children's faces to protect from the tear gas.  

The IDF explanation makes perfect sense - the mothers and nurses smelled the tear gas and are looking for a room that didn't have an open window, and hospital staff directs them where to go.

Middle East Monitor knows this, so they caption the video with what they want you to believe, not what you are actually seeing - a time honored Pallywood propaganda technique. People are conditioned to implicitly trust captions and then view the photo or video through the lens that the propagandists helpfully provide.

But even worse than repeating obvious lies and treating Israeli rebuttals as not even worth considering, from reading Amnesty's  statement one wouldn't even know that there was a three hour battle going on. Amnesty makes it sound like the IDF went into Jenin to kill a bunch of civilians because of "impunity." No one reading Amnesty's statement would know that this is what nearly all of those killed were doing at the moment of their deaths:

The statement also doesn't even hint at the reason the Israeli forces must go into Jenin to begin with  - because a wave of deadly attacks in Israel last year where Jenin was the source. 

While Amnesty rushes to condemn Israel going after armed terrorists, Amnesty did not condemn a single one of those attacks on Israeli civilians. Here are their press releases during the time period between March and May 2022 when there were five multiple-casualty terror attacks in Israel:

This is beyond simple bias. This is the world's leading human rights organization actively choosing to support Islamic terrorism over the Jewish state. 

---

---

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.  Read all about it here!

 

Read More

The exact same playbook @Amnesty and @HRW took on "apartheid" can be used to accuse Israel of "genocide"

The path that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch took to declare Israel guilty of "apartheid" can be used to claim that Israel is guilty of the crime of "genocide" against Palestinians.

Sounds absurd? It isn't.

The "apartheid" charge began in earnest at the NGO Forum of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance held at Durban in September 2001. Amnesty and Human RIghts Watch were there among the 3000 delegates and did nothing to stop the final declaration, which repeatedly accused Israel of apartheid, racism, and genocide.

In the preamble:

 Recognizing further that a basic “root cause” of Israel’s on going and systematic human rights violations, including its grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention 1949 (i.e. war crimes), acts of genocide and practices of ethnic cleansing is a racist system, which is Israel’s brand of apartheid. 

In the main body:

We declare and call for an immediate end to the Israeli systematic perpetration of racist crimes including war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing (as defined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court), ... and state terrorism against the Palestinian people, recognizing that all of these methods are designed to ensure the continuation of an exclusively Jewish state with a Jewish majority and the expansion of its borders to gain more land, driving out the indigenous Palestinian population. 

We declare Israel as a racist, apartheid state in which Israels [sic] brand of apartheid as a crime against humanity has been characterized by separation and segregation, dispossession, restricted land access, denationalization, ¨bantustanization¨ and inhumane acts. 

And in the recommendations, which sound a great deal like the recommendations at the end of the Amnesty and HRW reports:

Call for the establishment of a war crimes tribunal to investigate and bring to justice those who may be guilty of war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing and the crime of Apartheid which amount to crimes against humanity that have been or continue to be perpetrated in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Condemnation of those states who are supporting, aiding and abetting the Israeli Apartheid state and its perpetration of racist crimes against humanity including ethnic cleansing, acts of genocide.

At Durban, the absurd accusations against Israel of apartheid was accompanied by the equally absurd accusations of racism, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

And just as with apartheid, the NGOs at Durban twisted international law to justify their accusations of genocide. 

Note that they mentioned the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Antisemites can read that as if Israel is guilty of genocide just as the antisemites of HRW and Amnesty read the various legal definitions of "apartheid" to damn Israel alone.

Article 6

Genocide

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Amnesty and HRW already laid the groundwork to prove that Israel does all of those things! Their tendentious reports try to prove a Jewish attempt at supremacy or domination, to prove Jewish racism, and especially to prove Jewish intent to destroy "in whole or in part" Palestinians. 

The accusation of "intent" was the major part of the discredited Goldstone Report and they are key parts of the newer NGO "apartheid" reports. 

Amnesty and HRW regularly pretend to know Israel's intent in all their anti-Israel reports - Israel intended to attack civilians, the IDF intended to cause disproportionate damage to Gaza, and now Israeli Jews intend to dominate the non-Jewish minority in Israel as well as the Palestinians in territories. 

Intent is the entire underlying structure of their reports. The very first sentence in Amnesty's report is a quote from Benjamin Netanyahu saying that Israel was the nation/state of the Jewish people alone, while they didn't quote his next sentence that Arabs have the same rights as all. It doesn't fit their "intent" narrative so therefore it must be ignored.

In real life, proving intent is difficult, because no one can read minds. The bar to prove intent in international law is very high for that reason - one must have a preponderance of evidence of statements and actions that indicate that the criminal had intent to persecute people because they were of a different race or ethnic group. 

That is what HRW and Amnesty have been pretending to do in their 200+ page reports. 

That's the pattern in all these reports: only quoting bits and pieces of Israeli officials' statements to prove Israeli Jewish racism and ignoring all statements and actions that prove Israeli liberalism and intent to ensure equal rights for all. 

The half-truths meant to prove Israeli racism are a direct result of antisemitism. The NGOs only look for evidence that proves their pre-judged verdict of Jewish racism and anything that disproves it is considered hasbara, or purposeful misdirection by the evil Jews to throw the righteous NGOs off the trail. Amnesty's Philip Luther pretty much said that in his dumpster fire of an interview at Times of Israel:

It’s because the Israeli state has made it so difficult to penetrate. They have tried to create a smokescreen around, and of course there is a democratic system, and there are judicial institutions that of course then call the state to account, or at least challenge their decisions. But that’s what makes it so challenging in some ways then to disentangle them when you put it all together.

So I would put it back on the Israeli state. In some ways, it ends up being a driver of complexity and a driver of resources unnecessarily spent on investigations by anybody, because it’s made so damn complicated.

Amnesty's job to accuse Israel of racism and apartheid is made difficult by the "smokescreen" of a fair legal system, freedom, democracy, laws, practices and facts that prove the exact opposite. 

In a nutshell, that is the proof of Amnesty's antisemitism - they must work really hard to ignore any evidence that Israel is not as evil as they always intended to prove it is. They know the Jews are up to no good, and it is their job to uncover it. 

So what's the difference between accusing Israel of apartheid and accusing it of genocide? Nothing. Luther alluded to years of modern antisemites accusing Israel of apartheid - i.e., "Israel apartheid weeks" on campus - to say that this was the opening to Amnesty writing this paper now:

...Part of the reason for that on Israel/Palestine is because there is a growing debate on the subject. We thought it was absolutely right and proper that we brought up….When you’re looking at the question of whether you’re going to be looking at any particular place, well, is there a debate on it? There are external factors, that’s part of the strategic landscape.  Do we have something to say on it, is it something that we might have a contribution.

... To my knowledge, the Chinese activists are not currently using the [apartheid] term.

Here, Amnesty is admitting that it bases its research on what "activists" accuse a country of doing, and not any objective factors. Since no one is accusing Lebanon of apartheid with their anti-Palestinian laws, there is no reason for Amnesty to do so . Objective truth is not the goal: Amnesty is choosing what it will call apartheid "strategically," by following the lead of the antisemites and allowing them to define the "debate."

In Durban, Amnesty official Claudio Cordone slightly distanced the group from the genocide charge: "We are not ready to make the assertion that Israel is engaged in genocide," he said. He didn't say it wasn't true, just that Amnesty wasn't yet "ready" to pursue that avenue of attack. 

It is twenty years later. Amnesty has already shown what it needs to be "ready" to accuse Israel of genocide - a "debate" created by Jew-haters. 

If today's antisemites change their annual "apartheid weeks" to "genocide weeks," that it what would create the "debate" that would give Amnesty and HRW the opening to write their next generation of reports accusing Israel of the worst crimes against humanity possible.

The apartheid charge is just as absurd and antisemitic as the genocide charge. Anyone who has visited a mall in Jerusalem see there is no apartheid. Anyone who sees that the current Israeli government has an Arab coalition partner knows that the charge is a blatant lie. But both the apartheid and genocide/ethnic cleansing charges were given legitimacy in Durban where major NGOs signed on to the final statement, both of those accusations are regularly hurled at Israel by "activists" and Palestinians, both of them have legal definitions that can be twisted by the lawyers at the NGOs against Israel. All that is missing is the "debate," and today's antisemites could create that "debate" over the next few years.

HRW and Amnesty already have the "genocide" reports half-written.

 

---

---

Read More