RSS
An Israeli first responder recalls tending to the body of a baby burnt in an oven
(JTA) — It was on the fourth day of the war between Israel and Hamas, Asher Moskowitz recalled, that he saw the baby among the corpses at Camp Shura.
Moskowitz had come to Shura, a military base near the central Israeli city of Ramle, as a volunteer with the United Hatzalah emergency response corps. The base had been transformed into a center for identifying those killed in the Oct. 7 massacre by Hamas, the terror group that controls Gaza, and Moskowitz was soon pulled into the gruesome task of helping to unload and transfer dozens of bodies that arrived there.
The baby came from Kibbutz Kfar Aza, one of the communities hardest hit in the attack. It arrived in a small bag whose contents told a grim story: a tiny body, burnt and swollen, with the telltale marks from being pressed against a heating element.
“They took the baby and put it, literally, in a kitchen oven,” Moskowitz said in a video testimony recounting the assessment of professional staff at the base.
The video was recorded at Hatzalah’s request to preserve a firsthand account of what Moskowitz saw, and it was shared with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on Tuesday. The video, one of several recordings of Hatzalah volunteers describing what they saw, had not been made public as of Tuesday afternoon.
“The body hardened and, unfortunately, appeared to have also swollen,” he said. “And really, the heating element of the oven was on the body itself.”
The list of atrocities that has emerged from Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel is so long as to feel endless. First responders and survivors have related stories of burnt bodies, of people tied up and murdered, of partygoers gunned down en masse at a music festival.
But the story of the baby burnt in an oven has attracted particular attention this week for a number of reasons, in addition to the tender age of the victim. The presence of an oven evokes the horrors of the Holocaust in graphic terms, creating a link between the antisemitic genocide of 80 years ago and Oct. 7, which was the bloodiest day for Jews since then.
The story has also drawn attention because it was shared publicly for the first time when Hatzalah’s founder and president spoke at an American political convention in Las Vegas.
“We saw a little baby in an oven,” Eli Beer, the founder and president of Hatzalah, said in a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual conference on Saturday night.
As the story spread on social media, some responded with shock that there were yet more revelations to come about atrocities committed on Oct. 7. At least one prominent Palestinian voice drew condemnation for responding with a joke. And a few people wondered aloud whether the story was true, given that it had not previously been reported.
The Israeli government has been engaged in efforts to head off or refute claims that the massacre and its attendant atrocities were fabricated or exaggerated. In the days after the massacre, Israel invited foreign journalists to tour Kfar Aza and other ravaged communities, and last week, it showed them 43 minutes of raw footage from Oct. 7 to counter what a government spokesperson called “a Holocaust denial-like phenomenon evolving in real time.”
Beer said he’s aware that people are denying that the atrocities took place, or are casting doubt on their scale — something he considers akin to Holocaust denial given the depth and breadth of evidence. But he said he had “not at all” worried about people denying this story because of the time that had elapsed since Oct. 7.
“I wasn’t concerned,” he said. “I don’t understand why people think this is the worst. This is not even the worst. Why is an oven the worst? Why is [it] not murdering children in front of their parents?”
Destruction caused by Hamas in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, near the Israeli-Gaza border, in southern Israel, Oct. 10, 2023. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)
Speaking to JTA on Tuesday, Beer said he learned of the atrocity from at least two of his volunteers. He first heard of it soon after it occurred, from a volunteer who was on the scene on Oct. 8 when a team of first responders discovered the baby’s body, along with the bodies of the murdered parents. Moskowitz then called Beer “a day or two” after he saw the body at Shura.
That story was swirling in his head, Beer said, along with hundreds of others, as the days went by and more victims were identified. While that was happening, Beer continued his work with Hatzalah while under Hamas rocket fire. In addition, two Hatzalah volunteers were killed in Hamas’ attack, and many more are suffering post-traumatic stress, he said. His son is serving i the Israeli military.
Only on his trip to Las Vegas, Beer said, was he able to get a good night’s sleep and clear his head a bit. On the day of the speech, he thought of the story of the baby burned in an oven and decided to include it in his remarks.
“I said, you know what, I heard these stories, and people have to hear it,” he said. “And even so, it’s hard to believe that all these tragedies were happening. But it happened. All these bad things happened.”
There is still much that is unknown, and that may never be known, about the baby’s death — including, for now, the child’s name and age. The parents were killed alongside the baby, and the house was torched, Beer said. According to a Washington Post report on Tuesday, Israeli officials have yet to identify some 200 bodies because they were mutilated or burned.
That paucity of knowledge leads, Beer said, to a number of gruesome questions: Did Hamas terrorists put the baby in the oven, then kill the baby as they turned the oven on? Did the baby’s parents hide the child in the oven to keep them safe from the attackers, only to burn as the house was set aflame? When was the baby killed?
“They have many bodies that aren’t identified yet,” Beer said. “Luckily today there is technology that they can do DNA and everything, but what happens when the whole family are murdered?”
He added, “A lot of the stories will never be told because the people that saw it and witnessed it are not with us anymore.”
In his video testimony, Moskowitz also recognized the need to counter denial of the massacre’s horrors.
“In the context of these horrors we need to show the world and tell the world that it is impossible to deny what they did,” he said. “They raped women, they killed bodies, they killed living people. They amputated limbs, cut off heads — horrors that have already been seen. But this is a horror that we must tell the world.”
—
The post An Israeli first responder recalls tending to the body of a baby burnt in an oven appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
Israeli Cabinet to Meet Tuesday to Approve Lebanon Ceasefire Deal
A view shows the moment of an Israeli strike on a building, amid the ongoing hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, in the Chiyah district of Beirut’s southern suburbs, Lebanon, Nov. 25, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
A senior Israeli official said on Monday that Israel‘s cabinet would meet on Tuesday to approve a ceasefire deal with Hezbollah, and a Lebanese official said Beirut had been told by Washington that an accord could be announced “within hours.”
Israeli officials had said earlier that a deal to end the war was getting closer though some issues remained, while two senior Lebanese officials voiced guarded optimism even as Israeli strikes pounded Lebanon anew.
US news website Axios, citing an unnamed senior US official, said Israel and Lebanon had agreed to the terms of a deal, and a senior Israeli official told Reuters that Tuesday’s meeting was intended to approve it.
Israel‘s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, said Israel would maintain an ability to strike southern Lebanon under any agreement.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office declined to comment on the Axios report.
The US has pushed for a deal to end over a year of hostilities between the Iran-backed terrorist organization Hezbollah, which is based in Lebanon and wields significant political and military influence in the country, and Israel that erupted last year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel.
Since the Hamas onslaught, which launched the war in Gaza, Hezbollah has been firing barrages of rockets, missiles, and drones at northern Israel almost daily, forcing tens of thousands of Israelis to flee their homes. Israel had been exchanging fire with Hezbollah but drastically escalated its military operations over the last two months, seeking to push Hezbollah forces further away from the Israel-Lebanon border. The intensified fighting has raised fears of a wider Middle East war.
In Beirut, Lebanese Deputy Parliament Speaker Elias Bou Saab told Reuters there were “no serious obstacles” left to beginning implementation of a US-proposed ceasefire with Israel.
Bou Saab said the proposal would entail an Israeli military withdrawal from south Lebanon and regular Lebanese army troops deploying in the border region, long a Hezbollah stronghold, within 60 days.
He said a sticking point on who would monitor compliance with the ceasefire been resolved in the last 24 hours with an agreement to set up a five-country committee, including France and chaired by the United States.
A Western diplomat said another stumbling block had been the sequencing of Israel‘s withdrawal, the Lebanese army’s deployment, and the return of displaced Lebanese to their homes in south Lebanon.
Efforts to clinch a truce appeared to advance last week when US mediator Amos Hochstein declared significant progress after talks in Beirut before holding meetings in Israel and then returning to Washington.
“We are moving in the direction towards a deal, but there are still some issues to address,” Israeli government spokesperson David Mencer said, without elaborating.
Michael Herzog, the Israeli ambassador in Washington, told Israel‘s GLZ radio an agreement was close and “it could happen within days … We just need to close the last corners,” according to a post on X by GLZ senior anchorman Efi Triger.
A second senior Lebanese official, speaking on condition of anonymity earlier in the day, said Beirut had not received any new Israeli demands from US mediators, who were describing the atmosphere as positive and saying “things are in progress.”
The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiraled into full-scale war in September when Israel went on the offensive, pounding wide areas of Lebanon with airstrikes and sending troops into the south.
Israel has dealt major blows to Hezbollah, killing its leader Hassan Nasrallah and other top commanders and inflicting massive destruction in areas of Lebanon where the group holds sway.
Diplomacy has focused on restoring a ceasefire based on UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended a 2006 Hezbollah-Israel war.
It requires Hezbollah to pull its fighters back around 30 km (19 miles) from the Israeli border, behind the Litani River, and the regular Lebanese army to enter the frontier region.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said the test for any agreement would be in the enforcement of two main points.
“The first is preventing Hezbollah from moving southward beyond the Litani, and the second, preventing Hezbollah from rebuilding its force and rearming in all of Lebanon,” Saar said in broadcast remarks to the Israeli parliament.
Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said Israel must press on with the war until “absolute victory.” Addressing Netanyahu on X, he said “it is not too late to stop this agreement!”
But Agriculture Minister Avi Dichter said Israel should reach an agreement in Lebanon. “If we say ‘no’ to Hezbollah being south of the Litani, we mean it,” he told journalists.
Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem said last week that the group had reviewed and given feedback on the US ceasefire proposal, and any truce was now in Israel‘s hands.
Branded a terrorist group by the United States, the heavily armed, Shi’ite Muslim militant group has endorsed Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri of the Shi’ite Amal movement to negotiate.
The post Israeli Cabinet to Meet Tuesday to Approve Lebanon Ceasefire Deal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Take Action Now: Help Stop These 6 Media Outlets From Running Biased Stories Against Israel
The Wall Street Journal’s previous office in Palo Alto. Photo: Wiki Commons.
If we’ve learned anything about the reporting from inside Gaza in the past year, it’s that there is virtually no such thing as professional journalism inside the Strip.
On multiple occasions, HonestReporting has exposed Gazan journalists who have disqualified themselves from claiming to be reporting objectively. Some have publicly expressed their antisemitism or blatant anti-Israel bias. Others have been revealed to be active supporters of terrorism, or friends of Hamas.
Media outlets have taken action against several of these exposed journalists, and their bylines can no longer be found on mainstream media reports from Gaza.
But others have continued to report, as media outlets prefer to sweep the issue under the carpe,t hoping that the problem will simply disappear.
But it won’t.
It’s not enough to expose the biased, antisemitic, or terror-supporting journalists. It’s time to expose the six media outlets whose silence has protected 20 biased journalists.
HonestReporting is launching a social media campaign to hold these outlets accountable. We demand they stop letting these “journalists” report on Israel-related issues.
Six major outlets employ 20 journalists tied to bias or even terror groups. Despite clear evidence, accountability is ignored. Over the next few weeks, we’ll expose how they infiltrated newsrooms—why it matters, and what you can do about it.
Stay tuned. pic.twitter.com/BOZ3r4k6Yd
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 19, 2024
Reuters
The agency still employs eight journalists exposed for infiltrating Israel, expressing biased views, or having unethical ties with Hamas:
- Yasser Qudih: Infiltrated Israel on October 7, and was honored by Hamas. He also won the 2024 Pulitzer prize with Reuters photography staff.
- Doaa Rouqa and Hamuda Hassan: No action taken after they celebrated images of October 7 atrocities.
- Iraq Bureau Chief Timour Azhari: Covers the Israel-Hezbollah conflict, yet demonizes Israel online.
- Suhaib Jadallah Salem, Mohammed Jadallah Salem, Fadi Shanaa, and Ibraheem Abu Mustafa: All received awards from Hamas. But Reuters had no problem with this, or with the terror groups‘ paraphernalia that decorated the Reuters office:
The Associated Press
The wire service still employs seven journalists who either infiltrated Israel or collaborated with terror groups:
- The agency hasn’t taken action against Hatem Ali and Ali Mahmud, who were in exactly the right place on October 7 to capture images of Israelis kidnapped to Gaza:
- Adel Hana, Hatem Moussa, Fatima Shbair, and Khalil Hamra: All participated in official Hamas propaganda events, yet were and are defended by AP. Adel Hana also taught media courses for the Hamas-run Information Office.
- Mohammed Zanaty: A Lebanese cameraman who supported an ally of Hezbollah online, yet AP kept silent on the matter.
AFP
The wire service stood by Mohammed Baba, a photojournalist who participated in a Hamas promo and was honored by the terror group.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), New York Times (NYT), and CBS News
Zero action has been taken against the following journalists:
- Abeer Ayyoub, WSJ: Shared terrorist propaganda.
- Samar Abu Elouf, NYT: Honored as Hamas “work partner.”
- Yousef Masoud, NYT: Infiltrated Israel on October 7.
- Marwan Al-Ghoul, CBS News: Spoke at an official event of the PFLP, a proscribed terror organization.
These 20 identified journalists have proven they cannot report on Israel objectively. It’s past time for these outlets and journalists to be held accountable.
How You Can Help
Take action now. Demand accountability from Reuters, AP, AFP, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and CBS News: These journalists must no longer be allowed to report on Israel for any respectable publication.
Go to HonestReporting’s dedicated Call Out Complicity page, where you can sign the petition, send emails to editor,s and post our campaign content to social media.
We must get loud.
We must demand action.
HonestReporting is a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Take Action Now: Help Stop These 6 Media Outlets From Running Biased Stories Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Will Donald Trump Continue to Allow US Weapons to Be Used By Ukraine for Offensive Purposes?
US President Donald Trump is interviewed by then-Fox and Friends co-host Pete Hegseth at the White House in Washington, US, April 6, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
On the night of November 19, 2024, a strike targeted the 1046th Logistics Support Center of the Russian Armed Forces near the city of Karachev in the Bryansk region. The Ukrainian Defense Forces (UDF) used American ATACMS ballistic missiles to carry out this strike, according to media reports.
Washington and Kyiv had not issued any official statements regarding the approval and receipt of such permissions at the time. However, the confirmation of Ukraine receiving the authorization came by November 21.
Another strike followed, targeting a command post near the village of Maryino in the Kursk region. This attack involved at least 10 British subsonic Storm Shadow cruise missiles.
Earlier, media reports suggested that Ukraine had received a “green light” from the US to use long-range missiles, not only for ATACMS but also for Storm Shadow. Even without official statements, it became evident that the reports were accurate — the permissions were granted, and the first strikes on Russian territory had already occurred.
The process of obtaining approval for Ukraine to strike Russian territory was a long and complex diplomatic effort. The Biden administration consistently denied Ukraine this right, citing concerns about escalation. At one point, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin dismissed the idea, with the implausible claim that there were no significant targets worth using ATACMS on within a 300-kilometer radius of Ukraine’s borders.
In reality, there are more than 200 significant targets in that zone, including 16 airfields used by the Russian Aerospace Forces. Striking these targets, according to UDF command, would significantly ease the situation on the battlefield in Ukraine and improve the country’s defensive capabilities. Priorities included ammunition depots, which would disrupt artillery operations; airbases, which would reduce tactical aviation activity; and command centers, which would weaken operational management efficiency.
The strikes in Karachev and Maryino clearly followed this strategic sequence.
Despite the evident benefits of such strikes for Ukraine, the US delayed granting permission, resulting in avoidable losses. Political considerations, rather than military ones, clearly drove the Biden administration’s decision.
From a broader perspective, Ukraine’s military and political leadership operated under the premise that a country facing aggression has the full right to employ all lawful means of defense, including striking enemy territory. When partner nations provide weapons for defense, it should be assumed that these can also be used on the aggressor’s territory. However, for the first time in the history of wars and conflicts, such a restriction was imposed.
This has led to a paradoxical situation where a country receiving weapons for self-defense is constrained in how it can use them. The situation bears resemblance to the Soviet Union’s receipt of Lend-Lease equipment during World War II, and its prohibition from using it beyond its borders.
Thus, using Western-manufactured missiles on Russian territory is a normal practice, while prohibiting their use is an unprecedented anomaly in the history of warfare — one that cannot be explained solely by fears of escalation.
Since 2022, Ukraine has repeatedly demonstrated that Russia’s so-called “red lines” are ineffective. Strikes, including ones like the attack on the Kremlin, have not led to escalation or fundamentally changed the nature of the war.
Biden’s “Swan Song”?
On the eve of the US presidential elections, there was speculation in Ukrainian political and media circles that granting Ukraine the right to strike Russia might be President Joe Biden’s “swan song” — a final memorable decision in his career. Opponents of this view argued that such permission would only come from the next US president, whether it would have been Donald Trump or Kamala Harris.
This decision was one of those rare foreign policy moves unlikely to provoke significant opposition from either Democrats or Republicans.
Future Prospects Under Trump
It’s possible that Biden’s outgoing administration made this decision as a preemptive measure to counteract fears of a radical shift in US policy on Eastern Europe under Donald Trump. Biden’s move effectively granted Ukraine carte blanche, not just for ATACMS but potentially for other advanced weaponry.
Future plans call for Ukraine to receive US-made AGM-158 cruise missiles and AGM-154 precision-guided bombs. These systems will also require approval for use deep within Russian territory, a decision that would likely fall to the Trump administration. Additionally, Ukraine seeks the ability to shoot down Russian military aircraft in Russian airspace using Western air defense systems and AIM-120C/D AMRAAM missiles for its F-16 fighter jets. These, too, will require US approval, dependent on how effectively Kyiv establishes communication with Trump.
Another key issue will be the continued supply of long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine. Trump might aim to appear as effective as Biden — or even more so — in supporting Ukraine.
Biden’s decision has effectively placed Trump in a politically awkward position with limited room to maneuver. Any attempt to block permissions granted by Biden could politically weaken Trump by making him appear less decisive in comparison to his predecessor. For Ukrainian diplomacy, convincing Trump to grant similar permissions for other long-range missile systems will be a challenging yet critical task.
In the near term, it will be difficult for Trump to reverse permissions already granted by Biden without undermining his own political standing. However, Ukraine’s diplomatic corps will face the formidable challenge of persuading Trump to approve the use of additional advanced weaponry expected to arrive in the short term.
Alexander Kovalenko is amilitary-political analyst of the “Information Resistance” group from Odessa, Ukraine. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Will Donald Trump Continue to Allow US Weapons to Be Used By Ukraine for Offensive Purposes? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.