Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, August 12, 2022

Updated database of Gazans killed in Operation Breaking Dawn - and who killed them

Here is my latest database of those killed in Gaza. I will keep this one updated. Some of the circumstances are still unclear but this is the best information I have. I'm belatedly adding some links to show where I get my information from.

1- Imad Abd al-Rahim Shallah, 50 Gaza.	With PIJ
2- Youssef Salman Qaddoum 24 Gaza.	PIJ
3- Tayseer Mahmoud Al-Jabari, 50 Gaza City.	PIJ
4- Salama Muharib Abed 41 Gaza.	PIJ
5- Alaa Abdullah Qaddoum, 5 Gaza City.	With PIJ
6- Donyana Adnan Attia Al-Amour 22 Gaza.	Likely tank fire ("artillery shell"), see below
7- Mohamed Ahmed Abdel-Fattah Al-Madhoun, 26 Al-Nada Towers.	PIJ
8- Fadl Mustafa Zorob 30 Khan Younis.	PIJ
9- Muhammad Hassan Al-Bayouk, 35, Khan Younis.	PIJ
10- Ahmed Mazen Azzam, 25 Gaza Strip.	PIJ
11- Tamim Ghassan Abdullah Hijazi, 23 Al-Zana.	PIJ
12- Osama Abdul Rahman Al-Suri, 27, Bani Suhaila.	PIJ
13- Hassan Mohamed Mansour, 26, Jabalia.	PIJ/DFLP
14- Naama Muhammad Abu Qaida 62 Jabalia.	Unclear, IDF may have targeted a car nearby
15- Nour El-Din Ali Al-Zubaidi 19 Jabalia	Likely IDF (Qassam Brigades)
16- Hazem Muhammad Salem 12 Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
17- Ahmad Muhammad Al-Nayrab 13 Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
18- Moamen Muhammad Al-Nairab 4 Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
19 - Khalil Iyad Abu Hamadeh, 19, Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
20- Ahmed Walid Al-Fram, 18 Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
21- Misbah al-Khatib 50 Jabalia agreed.	Jabalia rocket
22- Muhammad Muhammad Ibrahim Zaqout 19 Jabalia.	Jabalia rocket
23- Ziad Ahmed Al Mudallal, 36 Rafah.	PIJ
24- Muhammad Iyad Hassouna, 14 Rafah.	With PIJ in Rafah
25- Ismail Abdel Hamid Mohamed Salameh, 30 Rafah.	With PIJ in Rafah
26- Hana Ismail Ali Salameh, 51, Rafah.	With PIJ in Rafah
27- Rafat Saleh Ibrahim Al-Zamili, 45, Rafah.	PIJ
28- Khaled Saeed Mansour 47 Rafah.	With PIJ in Rafah
29- Alaa Saleh Al-Tahrawi, 30, Rafah.	With PIJ in Rafah
30- Ahmad Muhammad Afana, 31, Jabalia.	Hamas, killed by falling wall after PIJ rocket attack
31- Dia Zuhair Al-Borai, 30 Jabalia.	Rocket (House in Jabalia)
32- Jamil Ehab Najm 15 Jabalia.	Rocket (Fallujah cemetery)*
33- Jamil Najm Najm 6 Jabalia.	Rocket (Fallujah cemetery)*
34- Nazmi Fayez Abu Karsh 16 Jabalia.	Rocket (Fallujah cemetery)*
35- Hamed Haider Najm 17 Jabalia.	Rocket (Fallujah cemetery)*
36-Mohamed Salah Najm 17 Jabalia.	Rocket (Fallujah cemetery)*
37- Muhammad Yasser Nimr Al-Nabahin 13	Rocket (Al Bureij)
38- Ahmed Yasser Nimr Al Nabahin 9 Al-Bureij.	Rocket (Al Bureij)
39- Dalia Yasser Nimr Al Nabaheen 13 Al Bureij.	Rocket (Al Bureij)
40 - Yasser Nimr Mahmoud Al Nabahin 45 Al-Bureij.	Rocket (Al Bureij), Hamas police
41 - Khaled Ayman Yassin, 27 Zaytoun	IDF attack - Fatah operative
42- Shady Emad Nimr Kahil, 27 Zaytoun	IDF attack - Hamas municipal worker with #41
43- Abd al-Rahman Jum’ah al-Silk 19 al-Shuja’iyya.	Apparent IDF attack
44- Mahmoud Daoud in Gaza	Apparent IDF attack, Hamas policeman
45- Haneen Walid Abu Qaida, 10	Unclear, see #14
46- Fatima Obaid, 15	Rocket (Beit Hanoun)
47- Ibrahim Shehda Abu Salah, Beit Hanoun	Apparently killed with #15
48- Lian Al-Shaer, 10	Attack that killed PIJ members 8 and 9 above.
49- Anas Khaled Anshasi	Member of Salafist group, probably targeted by IDF

#6, Donyana Adnan Attia Al-Amour, seems to me to have been possibly killed by a PIJ rocket. A projectile went through her window and killed her in her room. There is a spray pattern but not as intense as most PIJ rockets. Her death was reported as coming from an "artillery shell" but I had not heard of the IDF using artillery towards houses and not for attempts to kill a terror leader. Haaretz says that Israel used artillery towards fixed military positions, and this house does not look like that at all.

Amnesty says that it identified the shell as a120mm M339 tank round.

ITIC says a PIJ commander was in her house.

*ITIC thinks that the cemetery attack was from the IDF. I am mystified by that, the pictures and video show no crater and a definite spray pattern from PIJ rockets, and none of the anti-Israel "human rights" NGOs on the ground in Gaza (UN OHCHR, DCI-P, PCHR, Al Mezan) have counted this was an IDF airstrike after investigating. Haaretz also counted it as a definite rocket misfire. Only children were killed. I'm still counting it as a PIJ rocket strike and hoping to get clarification from ITIC.

Haaretz now reports that unnamed Israeli officials admit that the attack was from the IDF. Nothing official.

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!

The Fallujah cemetery in Jabalya, where 5 children were killed by an Islamic Jihad rocket.
Note the spray pattern of tiny holes from the shrapnel that PIJ uses to maximize death and damage.

The response of "human rights groups" to the fighting in Gaza last weekend proves, beyond any doubt, how they try to obscure the truth about Islamic Jihad's killing of over 20 civilians, including at least 12 children - even though they know the truth quite well.

No fewer than four human rights groups have investigated every death in Gaza last week. If you parse their statements carefully, every one of them know that Islamic Jihad rockets killed most of the kids.

And not one will say this explicitly, because that would water down their criticism of Israel.

Gaza's Health Ministry says that 48 were killed over the weekend (and from their wounds since) including 16 children. PCHR issued their summary in their weekly report yesterday, after they have had four days to investigate the deaths. They count 27 deaths in Gaza - and say "Meanwhile, PCHR is still investigating other incidents that inflicted casualties and damage to property." They list only 3 children.

They completely ignore the deaths of (by their count) 21 civilians, including 12 children (the last one may have died after their report was prepared.)

What kind of a human rights group ignores the violent death of 12 children, not even mentioning them beyond a laconic mention of "other incidents that inflicted casualties"?

A typical one, it seems. Because we see the same lack of interest in mentioning Islamic Jihad rockets at the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.

According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, 47 Palestinians were killed during the offensive, including 16 children and four women, and 360 others were injured, including 151 children and 58 women. Eighteen residential units were destroyed, while dozens of others were partially damaged.

Al Mezan’s fieldwork team works to document and investigate every single act of hostilities that occurred in the Gaza Strip and has so far verified the killing of 27 Palestinians and the complete destruction of 12 homes by Israeli forces. Al Mezan continues to conduct its own independent field investigations and collect information on all incidents of killing and damaging or destruction of houses, property, and other civilian objects in Gaza.

They know at least 20 civilians were killed by Islamic Jihad - and they refuse to even mention the possibility. 12 kids dead and the two major Palestinian human rights groups ignore them.

But it is not only Palestinian human rights NGOs. The Palestinian division of Defense for Children International has done the exact same thing. As I have reported, their headline is meant to give people the impression that Israel killed 16 children: "16 Palestinian children in Gaza dead after Israeli military offensive." But they can only document 3 children, and say, "DCIP is still investigating the source of four explosions across the Gaza Strip that killed another 13 Palestinian children. "

At least DCI-P mentions the possibility of the children being killed by rocket fire, unlike PCHR and Al Mezan. But even after listing the mysterious unknown explosions, they emphasize that they want to blame Israel alone, saying, "The Israeli military launched airstrikes across the Gaza Strip on August 5, killing at least 44 people and injuring at least 350, according to Al Jazeera." Their own investigations proves Al Jazeera is lying, but they want to blame Israel for the deaths of the children so they artfully write a report to give that impression.

And then there is the UN Human Rights Office of the Commissioner, which issued a press release that heavily implies that Israel is responsible for the deaths of all Gazans, but doesn't directly say it - because they know the truth as well.

UN Human Rights Chief Michelle Bachelet today expressed alarm at the high number of Palestinians, including children, killed and injured in the occupied Palestinian territory this year, including in intense hostilities between Israel and Palestinian armed groups in Gaza last weekend.

The civilian cost of the latest escalation in Gaza from 5-7 August was heavy. The UN Human Rights Office has verified that among the 48 Palestinians killed, there were at least 22 civilians, including 17 children and four women. The status of 22 fatalities remains undetermined.

...In violation of international humanitarian law, Palestinian armed groups also launched hundreds of rockets and mortars in indiscriminate attacks, causing civilian casualties and damage to civilian objects in Israel as well as in Gaza.

You really have to parse the press release carefully to realize that they are barely hinting that some 20 civilians were killed by Islamic Jihad - and they don't mention that the majority of those "undetermined" ones are children.

All four of these human rights NGOs clearly know the truth, and all of them bend over backwards to obfuscate it and direct their audience's anger at Israel only - even though their own investigations indicate that over 80% of the children were killed by Islamic Jihad.

By blaming Israel exclusively for the deaths of the children, they are engaging in a blood libel, saying that Jews either purposefully target children or show a wanton disregard for their lives. In fact, every single child that was killed by Israeli airstrikes had been either a human shield or an unfortunate casualty during an attack on a legitimate military target, and there is no evidence of the slightest bit of Israeli negligence or violation of international law.

But beyond that, they have not issued a single word of condemnation for Islamic Jihad, not even mentioning its name. By ignoring or downplaying the rocket attacks and only blaming Israel, they are exonerating Islamic Jihad's war crimes.

Even worse, these reports from four major human rights NGOs show that the lives of the children really do not matter to them unless they can blame Israel. Their careful language is meant to hide the facts. Unless dead kids can be blamed on Israel, they don't want to talk about them. They try not to technically lie but they sure as hell don't want to tell the truth.

Which means that these are not human rights organizations. They are anti-Israel organizations who use human rights as a weapon against 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!

From Space.com:

Iran will soon have access to sharp orbital imagery, thanks to a newly launched spy satellite.

That spacecraft, called Khayyam, lifted off atop a Russian Soyuz rocket today (Aug. 9) at 1:52 a.m. EDT (0552 GMT) from the Russia-run Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.

Khayyam, which is named after the famed Persian poet and mathematician Omar Khayyam, is a Russian-built Kanopus-V Earth-observation satellite that can resolve features as small as 3.9 feet (1.2 meters) on Earth's surface, The Washington Post reported last week.

"Potentially the most significant benefit," the newspaper added, citing unnamed Western security officials, "will be Iran’s ability to 'task' the new satellite to conduct continuous surveillance on locations of its choosing, including military facilities in Israel, oil refineries and other vital infrastructure in neighboring gulf states."

This is a major danger to Israel. Iran can relay military positions (or civilian positions) to Hamas and Hezbollah in real time.

Can Israel do anything about it?

No one has been speaking about this, but when Israel first started designing the Arrow-3 anti-ballistic missile system back in 2009, an article in Space News said that it could be adapted to become an anti-satellite weapon relatively easily - and it anticipated this exact scenario from Iran 13 years ago:

Israel’s planned Arrow-3 high-altitude ballistic missile defense system could relatively easily be adapted to destroy Iranian spy satellites if and when Tehran manages to deploy high-resolution orbiting vehicles, military space experts here say.

“At the moment, Israel enjoys tremendous superiority in space vis-à-vis its Arab and Islamic neighbors. But it is worthwhile to address ASAT (anti-satellite) technological and political issues in case such operations will be needed in the future,” said TalI Inbar, head of the Space Research Center at the Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies.

The agile, exoatmospheric, hit-to-kill Arrow-3 interceptor being developed by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) of Lod, Israel, and Chicago-based Boeing Co. is inherently multirole, and could be adapted, if needed, for A-Sat roles, said retired Maj. Gen. Yitzhik Ben-Israel, chairman of the Israel Space Agency.

“If there’s a threat from space, a logical answer is the Arrow upper tier” system, said Ben-Israel, a former director of Israeli military research and development.

In a rare public acknowledgement of Israeli interest in the A-Sat mission, a Tel Aviv University workshop, co-sponsored by Israel’s Ministry of Defense and leading de-fense firms, included a presentation on space warfare that alluded to Israel’s ability to blast orbiting spacecraft much in the way that the United States in early 2008 used an Aegis ship-based Standard Missile-3 interceptor to destroy a wayward U.S. satellite. The Nov. 3 workshop was entitled “Israeli Space: Crisis or Opportunity.”

“It’s proven that an anti-ballistic missile system capable of operating at higher altitudes like the SM-3 also will have the ability to shoot down low-Earth orbiting satellites,” Yair Ramati, IAI’s corporate vice president for marketing, told participants at the workshop.

Ramati, a leading Israeli missile engineer and former Arrow program director, told workshop participants that security restrictions prevented him from discussing how Israeli systems, such as the Green Pine radar, could track satellites. “Most of the radars used to track surface-to-surface missiles are also capable of tracking objects in space,” he said.

I have not seen much about these ASAT capabilities in the intervening decade, but this article from January about a successful Arrow-3 test sure seems in retrospect to be talking about exactly this satellite threat:

Israel conducted a successful test of its Arrow 3 anti-ballistic missile system on Tuesday morning

outside the Earth’s atmosphere, the Defense Ministry said.

The trial tested a number of “breakthrough” capabilities for the missile defense system, which can be used immediately by the Israeli Air Force, the Defense Ministry’s Missile Defense Organization head Moshe Patel told reporters on Tuesday.

“We have made a breakthrough in every part of the system, in the detection arrays, in the launches, even in the interceptors themselves, so that they match the threats that are expected in the region. There were highly, highly significant technological breakthroughs here that were assessed and can be used by the air force in its operational systems immediately,” Patel said.

Boaz Levy, the president and CEO of the Israel Aerospace Industries, which manufactures the Arrow 3, said the breakthroughs were principally in the area of “algorithms,” the ways in which the systems detect incoming threats and calculate launch trajectories for interceptors.

“I won’t elaborate, but it gives the system more capabilities in dealing with threats,” Levy told reporters.

If Israel attacks Iran's satellite, it would be a game changer for the entire world - war would enter space.

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!

08/11 Links Pt2: The 'forever war' against the West; The Extraordinary Bad Faith of Mehdi Hasan; The forgotten heroine of the deadly 1975 Savoy Hotel terror attack

From Ian:

Clifford D. May: The 'forever war' against the West

Following an 11-day conflagration with Hamas last May, the Israelis have been attempting to make life easier for Gazans. That has meant assisting efforts to rebuild infrastructure and provide more reliable electricity. Up to 14,000 Gazans have been permitted to enter Israel to work for higher wages than they could command at home. Hamas leaders, thinking strategically, have not been uncooperative.

PIJ, however, cannot abide even a temporary détente. Israeli intelligence learned that the group was preparing terrorist attacks not only from Gaza but also from the northern West Bank. PIJ fighters have been gradually displacing the PA security forces in this area and clashing with the Israeli Defense Forces, which have been responding to a wave of terrorist attacks that has claimed 19 Israeli lives since March. Knowing PIJ's intentions, the Israelis decided it was necessary to do what they could to degrade its capabilities.

On Monday, the IDF arrested the PIJ leader in the West Bank, Bassem al-Sa'adi. On Friday, the IDF launched a precision airstrike in Gaza, killing PIJ northern Gaza division commander Taysir al-Jabari. On Saturday, the IDF killed PIJ southern Gaza division commander Khaled Mansour and several other senior PIJ officials.

PIJ fired more than a thousand missiles at Israeli cities and towns. Many fell short, killing Palestinians, including four children in Jabalya in southern Gaza, according to Israeli officials. Other missiles were destroyed by the Iron Dome system. On Monday, with Egypt acting as broker, a ceasefire was announced.

PIJ leader Ziyad al-Nakhaleh spent the weekend in Tehran meeting with Ebrahim Raisi, the president of the Islamic Republic. What are they planning to do next? Your guess is as good as mine (though perhaps not as good as the Mossad's).

Israelis today are at peace with more of their neighbors than ever before. Though they are always willing to participate in "peace talks," they understand the Reaganesque doctrine that peace is achieved through strength. And strength must be demonstrated – repeatedly and consistently.

Al-Qaida and PIJ have been hit hard. But neither organization will be "gone" anytime soon.

Al-Qaida will soon have a new emir. The frontrunner appears to be Saif al-Adel, a 62-year-old former Egyptian special forces colonel, a longtime Al-Qaida leader who has been living in Iran as the regime's guest.

As for PIJ, I'd guess Iran's rulers will want to build their proxy back better. That will be expensive, but the Biden administration has been offering those rulers hundreds of billions of dollars they can use to support whichever terrorist/jihadi organizations they like. All that's asked of them in return is a promise to slow-walk their nuclear weapons development program. To believe such a promise would be a fatal mistake.

The Extraordinary Bad Faith of Mehdi Hasan

MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan has a book coming out later this year entitled “Win Every Argument: The Art of Debating, Persuading, and Public Speaking.” But in times of economic uncertainty and high inflation, why spend $27.99 when you can learn Hasan’s “art” for free just by observing his public tirades?

Based on a pair of his most recent displays of this “art,” it appears to boil down to three tactics Hasan commonly employs:
1. Master the art of the straw man fallacy;
2. Make outlandish claims and hide them behind false appeals to authority; and
3. Constantly lie by omission.

So with apologies to Hasan for stealing his thunder, here is a primer on the Mehdi Hasan “art” of debating.

Lesson #2: Hide Your Outlandish Claims Behind False Appeals to Authority
On the Mehdi Hasan show, whenever the topic of Israel comes up, inevitably the phrase “the UN says” will be repeatedly wielded alongside any number of hotly disputed, controversial, or dubious factual and legal claims.

That’s how, for example, on Sunday, Hasan got away with claiming Israel “still technically occup[ies]” Gaza, notwithstanding the only living Israelis in Gaza are two mentally handicapped civilians held hostage by Hamas.

To be fair, it is hard to sound serious arguing that Israel exercises the functions of government and can project effective control in Gaza (absent a full-scale military invasion) while over a thousand rockets are being lobbed from Gaza at Israeli communities and everyone acknowledges Hamas is the “de facto authority” of the territory.

But that’s the value of lesson two. As demonstrated by Hasan, one can sidestep these obvious deficiencies by hiding behind the dubious claims of others. This way, Hasan avoids having to delve into important details like who at the UN said it, what authority or expertise they have, whether they’re a credible source, or even whether it came from a fundamentally political entity proclaiming political viewpoints, not factual or legal claims.

Another example from Sunday is when Hasan suggested that 70% of Gaza’s population are refugees – “according to [the] UN” – notwithstanding these “refugees” never actually left the “Palestinian territories” from which Hasan suggests they are refugees. By lazily relying on “according to [the] UN,” Hasan avoids dealing with the obvious complications of his argument, such as how if one were to apply the actual definition of a refugee, only about 5% of the five million “Palestine refugees” would likely qualify as refugees.

Pro-Israel groups hold meetings with multiple state officials over Morningstar’s anti-Israel bias

Following last week’s Reuters report that Missouri’s attorney general opened an investigation into the practices of the Chicago-based investment research firm Morningstar and its subsidiary, Sustainalytics, multiple sources told JNS that Missouri is far from the only one looking into the issue.

Officials from agencies in multiple states have had conversations concerning Morningstar’s anti-Israel bias in its investment ratings in recent weeks, JNS has learned.

“There have been meetings with all kinds of state officials: governors’ representatives, attorney general representatives, treasurers’ representatives,” Elan Carr, a member of the Combat Anti-Semitism Movement’s advisory council, told JNS. “States need to know that this is nothing other than BDS dressed up as social-justice investing.”

Carr, a former U.S. State Department Special Envoy on Monitoring and Combating Anti-Semitism, said he and others have briefed state officials about the practices of Morningstar and Sustainalytics, and the potential that they violate various states’ anti-BDS laws. Carr, referred to Sustainalytics’ practices as “backdoor BDS,” and said the task force is “laser-focused” on the Morningstar controversy. He noted that a wide swath of Jewish American organizations from both the center-left and center-right are in consensus on the issue.

“We believe that BDS through the guise of ESG (environmental, social and corporate governance) investing is extremely dangerous for Israel. The Morningstar/Sustainalytics model is especially egregious, replete with biased sources and fundamentally anti-Israel assumptions. They lead to terribly biased reviews of Israel and anyone conducting business in Judea, Samaria or Jerusalem,” said Carr. “We regard this as nothing other than a manifestation of the BDS movement.”

Even anti-Israel DCI-P NGO tacitly admits that 13 of 16 children who died in Gaza were killed by Islamic Jihad rockets

Defence for Children-Palestine is a rabidly anti-Israel NGO that uses the deaths of children as a means to attack Israel.

To give an idea of how little context they give their stories, they are counting 16-year old terrorist Hussein Taha, being mourned as a jihadi fighter, as a "child" killed by Israel.

In an article about the children killed over the weekend in Gaza, their headline is written to imply Israel was responsible for 16 children being killed:

But when you read the article, you see that they really only know about three - and the other 13 are still being "investigated."

Israeli forces killed three Palestinian children in three separate airstrikes between August 5–7, according to information collected by DCIP, while DCIP field researchers continue to investigate four other incidents where 13 Palestinian children were killed.

Which means they know very well that the 13 were killed by Islamic Jihad rockets in four separate incidents:

DCIP is still investigating the source of four explosions across the Gaza Strip that killed another 13 Palestinian children. Each explosion coincided with Israeli drones flying over the areas as well as the launches of rockets from Palestinian armed groups.

Four children killed (plus three adults) from a rocket in front of a supermarket in Jabalya.

Five children killed from a rocket at the Fallujah Cemetery in Jabalya.

Three child siblings and their father killed in a rocket that hit their home in te Bureij camp.

One child killed and her sister injured from a rocket in Beit Hanoun. There is video of this out of control rocket corkscrewing to the ground and its massive explosion:

What about the other three (now four) children? They were either human shields or they were unfortunately killed when Israel targeted major terrorists.

One killed during the strike on Taysir al Jabari.

One killed when Israel killed southern PIJ leader Khaled Mansour in Rafah.

One killed when Israel apparently targeted a car in Jabalia (I'm still not sure if this was Israel or a PIJ rocket.)

One killed when Israel targeted two PIJ terrorists in Khan Younis.

This is not irresponsible. This is how wars are fought - do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties but civilians cannot shield legitimate military targets of great value.

Defence for Children Palestine, despite trying to spin these deaths as being from Israeli airstrikes, knows quite well they were killed by Islamic Jihad. And they are not defending those children.

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!

Activist Torn Between Helping Native Americans, Claiming Palestinians There First (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

native American attire Chattanooga, August 11 - A man who campaigns for the recognition of indigenous status for the descendants of the tribes who inhabited the Americas before Europeans colonized the land acknowledged today his ambivalence about his efforts, because those efforts conflict with two key axioms of his worldview, namely that Palestinians were there first and that their claims take priority among all progressive causes.

Michael Hayes, 23, shared his internal conflict with a group of fellow activists during a drive from the Washington, DC, area to a retreat just outside Memphis where like-minded campaigners for human rights will share experiences, ideas, and reflections on their work. "There's this tension I've been sensing for some time," he confessed to his two car-mates at a rest stop. "I get that solidarity with other rights gives smaller groups the ability to generate greater impact and make more noise. The thing is, the only pattern I know is for other causes to cede primacy to the Palestinian cause, and I'm struggling with how to do that effectively in my work."

"Let's take Indian reservations," he explained. "Anyone can see the neglect, even outright hostility, that animates official policy on reservations. But I'm having trouble determining where the transition is supposed to begin from combating that systemic abuse and dispossession, with all the associated traumas and side-effects, to using the phenomenon merely as a prop to illustrate what Palestinians face. Like, are we actually supposed to care about indigenous Americans, or does the importance of their suffering and their status as victims of injustice exist only while it can serve as leverage for the true cause, Palestine? I need clarity."

His buddies offered encouragement. "You'll get to an equilibrium," predicted Mason Fletcher, whose activism against over-policing in minority communities has overlapped with anti-Israel campaigns alleging Israeli complicity in the phenomenon. "I know my focus area isn't the same as yours, but we're all fighting an oppressive system from different directions and each of us has to decide for themselves what weight to give Palestine in that constellation of considerations. A lot of it depends on funding, to be honest."

"Ain't that the truth," spat Haida Batar, a women's rights campaigner whom both Fletcher and Hayes have tried to impress with their feminist credentials, so far without success. "Goddamn Zionists and all their money. We wouldn't need money like this if the patriarchy weren't so entrenched. That's exactly why we have to liberate Palestine. Everything flows from that. I don't know how, exactly, but social justice language has always featured prominently in anti-Jewish stuff, which must mean we're on the right track."

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!

08/11 Links Pt1: The ‘Fix’ Is In: How Hitler-Praising Palestinians Are Warping Gaza Conflict Coverage; Progressives for jihad; A look back at the first disastrous ‘Two-State Solution

From Ian:

Honest Reporting: The ‘Fix’ Is In: How Hitler-Praising Palestinians Are Warping Gaza Conflict Coverage

New York Times’ Fady Hanona Urges Missile Attacks on Israel
Out of the eight articles produced by The New York Times during the three-day PIJ-initiated conflict, six credit Fady Hanona as having contributed from Gaza City (see here, here, here, here, here, and here).

Hanona, a freelance producer and fixer who has also been hired by the BBC, The Guardian, and VICE News, appears to be working to further the anti-Israel narrative promoted by Palestinian terror organizations that seek the destruction of the world’s only Jewish state.

For one, he supports arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti, having backed him repeatedly on Facebook (here, here, and here). Prior to his incarceration, Barghouti co-founded and headed the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, an organization that murdered dozens of Israelis in suicide bombings and shooting attacks during the Second Intifada (2000-2005).

Hanona moreover made light of the escape from prison of members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in September of last year (see here and here). Most of the escapees were serving life sentences for their roles in attacks on Israeli citizens. Ayham Kamamji, for example, was convicted of kidnapping and murdering teenager Eliyahu Asheri.

Indeed, Hanona makes no attempt to hide his desire that Israel be removed from the map, referring to the country’s sovereign territory as the “[19]48 lands,” while putting “Israel” in scare quotes.

During 2014’s Operation Protective Edge against Hamas in Gaza, the New York Times freelancer took to social media to threaten the murder of Ghassan Alian, an Israeli Druze who commanded the IDF’s Golani Brigade at the time.

Then, on August 18, 2014 — days before a ceasefire took effect between Israel and Hamas — Hanona urged the Palestinian “resistance” to reject a truce and continue its missile attacks on Tel Aviv, which had at that point already cost the lives of five civilians.

In another online post from the same month, he went as far as invoking Nazi leader Adolf Hitler to support his point about the strength of Gazan fighters. “As Hitler said, give me a Palestinian soldier and a German weapon, and I will make Europe crawl on its fingertips,” Hanona’s post read, citing an unconfirmed quote attributed to the man responsible for the murder of six million Jews.

Furthermore, the NYT fixer shared a now-deleted propaganda video of terrorist groups in Jenin on Facebook, telling his followers that Palestinians should return to “the culture of fighting and killing Israelis.”

“I don’t accept a Jew, Israeli or Zionist, or anyone else who speaks Hebrew. I’m with killing them wherever they are: children, elderly people, and soldiers,” Hanona asserted, adding: “The Jews are sons of the dogs… I am in favor of killing them and burning them like Hitler did. I will be so happy.” According to his Twitter feed, Israel’s security services subsequently flagged his name when he applied for a permit to travel to Jerusalem.

Brendan O'Neill: Progressives for jihad

Remember when progressives were opposed to hardline religious movements that use violence to try to destroy democratic states? Islamic Jihad is a thoroughly regressive movement that says it will settle for nothing less than the obliteration of Israel. It wants to create an Islamic State of Palestine in which Sharia would rule and all who fall foul of it - uppity women, homosexuals, atheists - would suffer.

Islamic Jihad is not a national liberation movement. It is a violent and extremist religious organization generously funded by Iran's Revolutionary Guards. It rejects the political process and has executed numerous acts of indiscriminate slaughter in Israel in recent years, massacring hundreds of Israeli citizens in restaurants, at supermarkets, on buses.

Name me one nation on Earth that would turn a blind eye to such existential threats? If there was a well-armed group of religious fundamentalists a few miles from Britain that had sent suicide bombers to slaughter British men, women and children, we would act, no? And yet Israel is always condemned for acting.

Islamic Jihad is not good for the Palestinian people. Its activities in recent years have in part been designed to weaken the Palestinian Authority (PA), the Mahmoud Abbas-led government of the West Bank. It wants to dislodge the PA. That will help the Palestinian people, will it?

A look back at the first disastrous ‘Two-State Solution

To fully understand its origins, we must go back to the early years of the 20th century.

In 1920, Great Britain was given the responsibility by the League of Nations to oversee the Palestine Mandate after the ending of the 400-year-old Ottoman Turkish Empire’s occupation of much of the Middle East. Britain was to uphold the League’s express intention of reconstituting within the Mandatory territory a reborn Jewish national home.

The League of Nations created several articles in line with the original intent of the Balfour Declaration of November 29, 1917. At the last minute, however, a new article was introduced by the British Colonial Office: Article 25.

It became apparent that its inclusion directly enabled Great Britain in 1921-22 to tear away all the vast Mandatory territory east of the river Jordan and give it away to the Arab Hashemite tribe: The territory to become Trans-Jordan, led by the emir Abdullah.

British officials claimed that the gift of Mandatory Palestine east of the Jordan River was in gratitude to the Hashemites for their contribution in helping defeat the Turks. However, T.S. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) described in derisory terms the Hashemite role as “a side show of a side show.”

Ironically, Britain was aided far more by the Nili underground movement in defeating the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which had ruled geographical Palestine for 400 years.

This was the first partition of the non-state geographical territory known as Palestine and the first two-state solution. It created a new Arab entity some 100 years ago called Trans-Jordan, covering some 35,000 square miles, or nearly four fifths of the erstwhile Palestine Mandate. Immediately,

Jewish residence in this new Arab territory was forbidden in an act of Islamic apartheid (which no one protested on US college campuses...), and it is thus historically correct to state that Jordan is Palestine. Note too that Jordan’s population is comprised of well over 75% Arabs who call themselves Palestinians.

In 1923, the British and French colonial powers also divided up the northern part of the Palestine Mandate. Britain stripped away the Golan Heights (with its ancient Biblical Jewish roots) and gave it to French-occupied Syria.

The Balfour Declaration issued by Lord Balfour, British foreign secretary, never envisaged that the Jordan River would be the eastern boundary of the reconstituted Jewish homeland.

As early as September 19, 1919, the London Times newspaper had thundered in an editorial: “The Jordan will not do as the eastern frontier of Palestine … Palestine must have a good military frontier east of the river Jordan … Our duty as Mandatory is to make Jewish Palestine not a struggling state but one that is capable of vigorous and independent life.”

During its administration of the remaining Palestine Mandate’s tiny territory, between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, (a mere forty miles in width) Britain severely restricted Jewish immigration and purchases of land while turning a blind eye to massive illegal Arab immigration into the territory from neighboring stagnant Arab territories. This had been Britain’s policy since it was given the Mandate from 1921/22 up until 1947 and Israel’s subsequent independence in 1948.

Britain’s sorry record of appeasement of the Arabs, at the expense of Jewish destiny in the remaining tiny territory, culminated in the infamous 1939 White Paper, which limited Jewish immigration to a total of just 75,000 souls over the next five years. This draconian policy, coming as it did on the eve of the outbreak of World War 2 and the Holocaust, was a deathblow to millions of Jews attempting to flee extermination by Nazi Germany.

Despite the warm peace between Israel and the UAE, at least one member of the royal family has maintained her hate for Jews.

Sheikha Hind bint Faisal Al Qasimi has been sending out some outrageous tweets recently, displaying her hate and ignorance.

One was a bizarre attempt at a comparison between Jews killed in an organized, planned genocide in the Holocaust and millions of Muslims killed mostly by...each other.

Of course, Israel killing terrorists is the exact same thing as the Holocaust, in her twisted mind:

To hammer the point, she says that what Israel is doing is the "systematic annihilation" of Palestinians, just like the Nazis.

Yet she insists she is not antisemitic - one of her best friends is Jewish!

Al Qasimi makes her antisemitism crystal clear in this tweet:

"You know who."

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!

Even Islamic Jihad doesn't claim it was "defending Gaza"

One of the dumber memes that came out during Operation Breaking Dawn was that "Palestinians have the right to defend themselves."

Given that virtually the only military actions by Gaza militants were shooting rockets into Israeli civilian communities (each one a war crime,) it is unclear how that defends Palestinians. Yet that is what these people are justifying: war crimes.

But there is a more fundamental issue: The idea that Islamic Jihad was "defending Gaza" is completely made up.

Islamic Jihad never claimed that this micro-war was about defending Gaza. It was all about...Islamic Jihad.

Their name for the fighting was "Unity of the Arenas," meaning that the message they wanted to give to Israel is that any Israeli actions against their terrorists and allies in the West Bank will result in responses from Gaza.

This article in the Islamic Jihad military wing website that declares that the battle was a success describes the goals and accomplishments from Islamic Jihad's perspective. And the safety and defense of Gazans is not even on their radar.

On the land of Palestine, no voice is louder than the voice of the resistance.. Once again, Gaza returns to the fore and the Mujahideen of Saraya al-Quds lead the stage of clashing with the Zionist enemy in the battle of unity of the arenas in order to keep the flame of the conflict burning with the usurping entity, and to confirm that Gaza is like Jenin, Nablus and Jerusalem, and that any aggression on the land and people are crossing all red lines and that all arenas will remain present to respond to the Zionist arrogance in all the cities of the occupied West Bank, and that all the desperate attempts of the occupation to eliminate Islamic jihad and resistance and break the rules of engagement that have been established by blood and fire will be broken on the rock of defiance and violence among the children of the school of (PIJ founder) Dr. Fathi Al-Shaqaqi .

The article is about a speech by Muhammad Hamid, a member of Islamic Jihad's political bureau, where he praised the fighting and described its goals.

Not once does he use the word "defend." Not once does he even mention the security or safety of Gazans. He does say, "the battle for the unity of the arenas is clear in purpose. There are no exceptions in the struggle of our Palestinian people, and there is no distinction between the blood spilled in the occupied West Bank and the blood spilled in Gaza, and therefore this battle has been of great strategic importance in the history of our Palestinian people."

Hamid gave two reasons for shooting the rockets at Israel. The first and primary one was as a response to Israeli arrests and attacks against terror cells in the West Bank, and the second was the assassination of terrorist Taysir al-Jabari on Friday. he was proud that they responded with hundreds of rockets within hours of the airstrike.

Notably, Hamid does not claim victory based on Israel's supposed agreement to release a couple of Islamic Jihad prisoners. In fact, Israel today said the opposite, that the Islamic Jihad terrorist leader Bassem Saadi will remain in custody for some more time.

Also, his words seem to lend support for Israel's charge that Islamic Jihad was planning a major attack in response to Saadi's arrest. Hamid is confirming that Islamic Jihad planned a major response to Saadi's arrest in order to "unify the arenas."

But defending Gaza? That is the least concern for Islamic Jihad. And the people of Gaza know this very well.

The Mehdi Hasans of the world who go on about "the right of Gazans to defend themselves" are doing nothing but defending terror. Just ask Islamic Jihad.

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!

Amnesty Australia hosted someone who threatens Jewish businesses in Australia

Last month, Amnesty Australia held an event:

Join us for a special screening of ‘My Love Awaits Me by the Sea’. We have invited Muhib Nabulsi, a representative of Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement Australia and programmer for the Palestinian Film Festival to speak.

Nablusi must be an admirable human rights activist to be invited to speak by Amnesty, right?

Here is a thread that Nablusi posted on Twitter where he published a hit list of Australian Israeli restaurants for targeting.

This is a barely-veiled call for violence against Australian Jews and Israelis. It is an antisemitic conspiracy theory that somehow Israeli-themed restaurants are part of a worldwide network of anti-Palestinian operatives.

It is an unhinged display of hate and intolerance.

And Amnesty Australia considers Nablusi a role model.

You can guarantee that they will not disavow him, because he is a Palestinian, he is disabled, and he is the type of person who incites violence. Amnesty will never go against that trifecta.

(h/t Joel T)

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!

08/10 Links Pt2: Normalizing Relations Between Israel and the Arab World Continues Calmly in a Turbulent World; Israeli students accuse Ben & Jerry’s of occupying tribal land in Vermont

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: Why Jews don’t control America’s foreign policy

That ought to be painfully obvious, not least because, as (Walter Russell) Mead points out, the United States has not been consistently supportive of Israel. Indeed, it was not until after its astonishing victory in the 1967 Six-Day War when Israel was first perceived as a potentially important strategic ally for the West in the Cold War did the United States start to really help the Jewish state.

Even after the alliance became a reality, different schools of thought emerged to try to explain why America cared about Israel and usually provided the wrong answers to the question. So-called realists believed that Israel was an impediment to better relations with the Arab world and blamed it for American problems that had nothing to do with sympathy for Zionism. The American left, which had been supportive of Israel in its early years, eventually turned on it because it, too, came to view it in an ideological context that was equally detached from the reality of Israel. Meanwhile, Jacksonians liked Israel for the same reasons that others detested it: their tough response to terrorism and assertion of national rights. For those seeking simple explanations to complex questions, Israel and the notion of hidden Jewish power manipulating America to do things against its interests is an easy answer, yet always a wrong one.

Israel has a powerful and perhaps far more loyal non-Jewish constituency among evangelical Christians. It’s also true that the two most pro-Israel presidents with respect to policy—Richard Nixon, who provided crucial help to save it during the 1973 Yom Kippur War and Donald Trump, who recognized Jerusalem and aligned himself very closely with the Jewish nation—were also the two presidents most despised by the majority of American Jewish voters.

Above all, successive American administrations took up the search for Middle East peace on the false premise that achieving it would solve a host of other problems. Belief in the peace process became, especially among the foreign-policy establishment of veteran diplomats, academics and journalists who are considered “experts” in the field,” a holy grail that took both Democrat and Republican presidents down a rabbit hole from which none emerged unscathed or successful.

Mead points out that the peace process was not only not a holy grail but actually a “MacGuffin,” the term filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock coined to describe a plot device that seems to motivate and drive the main character’s actions, but which is actually of very little intrinsic value. That ought to have been conclusively proven by Trump’s Abraham Accords in which Arab states essentially abandoned the Palestinian cause in favor of normalization with a Jewish state that is a valuable strategic ally and trading partner. Even after that, belief in the importance of the grail that’s really a MacGuffin persists.

Mead provides a valuable history of successive American administration approaches to the Middle East from the failures of the two Bushes, Clinton and Obama, and then Trump’s surprising partial success. It’s important to understand that America has always pursued policies that were the function of its leader’s beliefs—whether avowed realists like the first Bush, convinced that democracy could be spread like the second Bush, true believers in the peace process like Clinton and Obama or a Jacksonian like Trump—about what they thought was in America’s best interests, not Israel’s.

Yet despite the changing script in which America’s political parties have flipped their positions on Israel and the shifting geostrategic realities of the Middle East have been made apparent, credence in the existence of a “hidden Jewish hand” manipulating America continues to exist on both political extremes. That this is so is a testament to the fact that anti-Semitism remains a far more powerful force than most of those who think about America and the Middle East are prepared to admit.

Normalizing Relations Between Israel and the Arab World Continues Calmly in a Turbulent World

Even in the Palestinian Authority and Gaza, these moves elicited only a cursory response. The same scenes that played out in Arab cities were played out among Palestinians.

It is not surprising, then, that Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s meeting with Jordan’s King Abdullah, in which they agreed to develop a joint economic hub near the King Hussein bridge where Israeli and Jordanian businessmen could meet, was met with calmness – in almost prophetic contrast to the reaction to Bourguiba fifty-eight years ago.

Neither the meeting nor the proposal demonstrated any bravery on the part of the Hashemite King. Jordan signed an agreement six years ago to purchase 45 billion cubic meters of Israeli gas for ten billion dollars over fifteen years.

There was so little opposition on the “Jordanian street” that security forces took no action against Hisham al-Bustani, the coordinator of “the Campaign Against the Enemy’s Gas,” who accused by name the Jordanian ministers involved in the agreement’s ratification. If the regime had felt threatened, it would have arrested him for incitement. They were correct: two years after the video in which al-Bustani appeared, only 145 people viewed it, with only one comment supporting the King.

Normalization with Israel is not met with equanimity in so many Arab states because of a love for Israel. Nor has the realization of Israel’s technological achievements changed public attitudes toward the Jewish state.

The transformation is far more fundamental and internal. Arab publics are engrossed by the challenges that they face in their states. For example, in Lebanon, there are economic burdens, growing animosity toward Hizballah, and the threat of renewed civil war that Hizballah control evokes. In Iraq, there is the danger of political and economic meltdown not as a result of the Shi’ite/Sunni divide as it was a decade ago, but more ominously, in the intra-Shi’ite conflict fueled by Iranian meddling. And in Egypt, there is the perennial concern of keeping Egypt above water economically, not to mention Tunisia.

In short, when the “Arab street” takes to the streets, they cannot add the burden of the Palestinians to their concerns. Last year, a Syrian opposition member who Palestinian students heckled at Hebrew University responded, “You live in paradise compared to what Syrians face!”

The Arab street’s lack of reaction allows Arab leaders to pursue their relations with Israel to benefit themselves and their constituents.

It’s time to address the horrific injustice done to Jews from Arab lands

When addressing the defining moment of the 20th century in terms of man’s inhumanity to man, we often reflect on the sheer barbarism of the Holocaust. But throughout the blood-stained annals of Jewish history, many other anti-Semitic massacres have been committed.

Tragically, what is often neglected and summarily dismissed is the forced expulsion, evacuation and flight of 921,000 Jews of Sephardi and Mizrachi background from Arab countries and the Muslim world, primarily from 1948 to the early 1970s.

For over 2,500 years, Jews lived continuously in North Africa, the Middle East and the Gulf region. The first Jewish population had already settled there at least 1,000 years before the advent of Islam.

Throughout the generations, Jews in the region were often subjected to various forms of discrimination—and in many cases, ranked lower on the status of society than their Muslim compatriots—but they were nevertheless loyal citizens who contributed significantly to the culture and development of their respective countries.

Despite the positive influence that Jews brought to the places where they lived, more than 850,000 Jews were forced to leave their homes in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Morocco and several other Arab countries in the 20 years that followed Israel’s 1948 War of Independence. Another major forced migration took place from Iran in 1979–80 following the Iranian Revolution and the collapse of the Shah’s regime, adding 70,000 more Jewish refugees to this number.

In 1947, the Political Committee of the Arab League drafted an anti-Semitic law that violently oppressed the Jewish residents in all of its member states. In the international arena, Arab diplomats pretended to ignore the Arab League’s collusion in encouraging state-sanctioned discrimination against Jews, seeking publicly to attribute blame to the Arab “masses”—and even the United Nations itself—for any danger facing the Jews across the region. This covert move was part of the Arab states’ attempt to divert attention from the official discriminatory practices of their governments.

Between 1948-1951, 260,000 Jews from Arab countries immigrated to Israel, accounting for 56% of the total immigration to the newly-founded state. The Israeli government’s policy to accommodate 600,000 immigrants over four years, doubling the existing Jewish population, encountered mixed reactions in the Knesset, as there were those within the Jewish Agency and government who opposed promoting large-scale immigration by Jews from Arab lands.

The footage of the Islamic Jihad rocket doubling back on Jabaliya was like something out of a Cecil B. DeMille movie. Except that it was real. The rocket begins its journey; its target, Israeli civilians. Then, all of a sudden, with a “whoosh,” the rocket reverses course, as if the hand of God itself were guiding it away from the Jewish people (or perhaps playing boomerang). In the background, we hear the Muezzin’s eerie call to prayer blaring from the loudspeakers. It seems a kind of judgment, a biblical moment—one the media does not want to own.

Columnist Daled Amos contends that Israel did a great job getting the truth of the Jabaliya story out to the media. As a result, he says, “Israel was able not only to present its case that it was not responsible, but also to get the media to present a balanced report that presented Israel's contention that the explosion was the result of a misfired rocket from Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”

Daled Amos is right on the mark. For a change, Israel got ahead of the propaganda machine. This time, the Jewish State was quick to supply verifiable facts and footage to show the truth of what had happened: An Islamic Jihad rocket, launched in the direction of Israel with the intention of murdering as many Jewish civilians as possible, misfired and murdered 7 Gaza residents, including 4 children. In other words, Islamic Jihad terrorists tried to kill Jews, but murdered their own, instead.

Daled Amos is also correct in stating that as a result of Israel’s speedy proactive response, the media presented a more balanced account. But perhaps balance was not what was needed here. When there are verifiable facts and footage, it’s not a case of he said/she said, but documenting what happened for posterity.

We know what happened on D-Day, at Pearl Harbor, in Gettysburg. Some things are just not in dispute. The rocket attack on Jabaliya is such an event, something that should be recorded as military history. Yet CNN, for example has the Palestinian Health Ministry saying one thing, and Israel saying another (emphasis added):

In one incident Saturday, four children were among seven people killed in an explosion in Jabaliya. The Palestinian Health Ministry initially said the blast was caused by an Israeli airstrike. Israel rejected the claim and said it was the result of errant rocket fire, and released a video showing what it said was the Islamic Jihad rocket sharply changing course in the air and hitting the building.

Instead of this balanced report, why not a factual report on what happened on August 6^th? “Today in Gaza, an Islamic Jihad rocket misfired, killing seven people in Jabaliya, including 4 children.”

That would have been the unvarnished truth. But reporting the truth is apparently not a CNN value. CNN would rather hedge, presenting the story as a case of competing narratives, under the pretense of “balance.” Forced by facts to exonerate Israel, CNN instead chooses to leave things fuzzy, to leave the reader thinking, “Who knows what really happened? But it was probably that &*$@*%^ Israel, again.”

In other words, the balance is not balance, but a calculated lie, so that even if you know the facts, you begin to question them. The purpose of the lie, of course, is to minimize anything that makes Islamic Jihad look bad: “Yes, they’re terrorists, but they’re OUR terrorists.”

Why? Because Gaza is the darling of the wokerati, while Israel is the object of their hate. So minimize, minimize, and minimize the damage some more, and find a way to “balance” things out.

It’s not only CNN, of course. Daled Amos cited many similar reports, including this one from the NY Times (emphasis added):

Three children were also killed on Saturday, though it was not immediately clear whether they were hit by an Israeli strike or a misfired Palestinian rocket. The Israeli military said they were killed by a failed Islamic Jihad rocket launch.

Instead of reporting the story as is, the NY Times tells its readership that it’s not clear who killed the 7, Israel or the Arab IJ terrorists. But it IS clear. Today, everything is verifiable. People have phones. They love to record rocket attacks and share the clips on social.

The Israeli military didn’t “say” it was a failed Islamic Jihad rocket launch. They proved it. But that’s not how the NY Times chose to report the story. Why exonerate Israel, when you can leave the story fuzzy around the edges, ripe for interpretation and as fodder for the anti-Israel propaganda machine?

The AP, as cited by Daled Amos, begins with the same “balanced” narrative (emphasis added):

The Israeli military said an errant rocket fired by Palestinian militants killed civilians late Saturday, including children, in the town of Jabaliya, in northern Gaza. The military said it investigated the incident and concluded ‘without a doubt’ that it was caused by a misfire on the part of Islamic Jihad. There was no official Palestinian comment on the incident.

This, however, turned out to be not ambiguous enough for the AP. So they did an about-face (much like that IJ rocket) in a subsequent report containing no allegations or reports of a misfire at all. Instead, the new report mentions an “Israeli offensive,” leaving the impression that Israel is somehow responsible for the Jabaliya dead (emphasis added):

Two other militants and five civilians also were killed in the attack, bringing the Palestinian death toll to 31 since the start of the Israeli offensive Friday. Among the dead were six children and four women. The Palestinian Health Ministry said more than 250 people were wounded since Friday.

It is easy to rationalize "balanced" reporting on Israel. One might reason that balance is a whole lot better than the out-and-out shameless lies of Al Jazeera:

Al Jazeera flat out lying.

The “massacre” was the result of Palestinian terrorist rockets misfiring and killing their OWN citizens including children. pic.twitter.com/gAfLgfRZWs
— Emily Schrader - אמילי שריידר (@emilykschrader) August 6, 2022

But the lies of Al Jazeera are not worse, only different. Lies can be blatant or come disguised as “balance.” In the end, lies are lies.

Why would the media lie? In the case of Jabaliya, reporting the facts makes Israel out to be the good guy. As the media well knows, however, a bit of balance can go a long way toward making it seem otherwise.

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!