Connect with us

RSS

It’s Not ‘Israel’s War in Gaza’ — It’s the Israel-Hamas War; But the Media Is Trying to Harm Israel

A youth march calling for the return of the kidnapped in Gaza. Organized by the youth of Kfar Aza. December 27, 2023.

What should we call the current conflict between Israel and Hamas?

In a war between two nations, a hyphenated noun phrase, like the “Spanish-American War” and the “Iran-Iraq War,” is the way to go.

Even though the terrorist organization that runs the Gaza Strip is not a nation state, logic dictates that we should call the conflict now approaching the one-year mark either the “Hamas-Israel War” or the “Israel-Hamas War.”

But the world’s media has taken sides, so instead of logical, objective language, journalists and editors have concocted a way to indemnify Hamas and blame Israel for the conflict by calling it “Israel’s war in Gaza.” It is a disingenuous phrase, and it is ubiquitous.

The most virulent of Israel-hating media outlets take it a step further with the term “Israel’s war on Gaza” (The Middle East Eye, The Electronic Intifada, and Al-Jazeera), but “Israel’s war in Gaza” is the term of choice among the establishment left-wing media.

CNN, naturally, is always ready with “The latest on Israel’s war in Gaza,” or a warning about how “Israel’s war in Gaza has exposed a deepening global divide.”

The Associated Press in January published its “Key takeaways from the U.N. court’s ruling on Israel’s war in Gaza.”

The New York Times might avoid the term in its headlines, but from its mainstay writers like Thomas Friedman to its daily briefings, it is very comfortable with the phrase.

April was a busy month for the phrase as, ABC explained how “Israel’s war in Gaza became a political flashpoint,” PBS declared that “Israel’s War in Gaza becomes a major U.S. election issue,” and NPR showed “How 6 months of Israel’s War in Gaza have upended the Middle East.”

Also in April, no less than seven scribes at USA Today co-authored a story titled “30,000-plus lives lost: Visualizing the death and destruction of Israel’s war in Gaza,” while Axios announced that the “Tide turned sharply against Israel’s war in Gaza.”

In May, Reuters wrote about a “Nurse in New York fired after calling Israel’s war in Gaza ‘genocide’” and NBC tweeted a dire warning that, “Students protesting Israel’s war in Gaza have faced disciplinary action including suspension or expulsion. They may also face financial setbacks, experts say.”

In June, Vox looked to the future with “the next phase of Israel’s war in Gaza, explained.”

In August, a Washington Post headline screamed: “More than 40,000 killed in Israel’s War in Gaza, Health Ministry Says,” noting in the article that “the 40,000 figure is probably an undercount.”

Currently, The Washington Post seems to be in league with The Electronic Intifada, as it has begun labeling its war coverage the “Israel-Gaza War,” as though Israel is at war with the entire Gaza Strip rather than Hamas, ignoring the facts that Israel has established safe-travel zones, provided relief, and even sent texts to Gazans telling them that to avoid areas where attacks against a Hamas command centers will occur.

British outlets also prefer the term “Israel’s war in Gaza.”

The BBC began an article in December with the sentence, “Israel’s war in Gaza may take ‘more than several months,’” and The Guardian frantically warned in January that “Emissions from Israel’s war in Gaza have ‘immense’ effect on climate catastrophe.”

Politico gave Elizabeth Warren a platform to bloviate with the headline, “Elizabeth Warren says she believes Israel’s war in Gaza will legally be considered a genocide.”

Popular specialist outlets prefer the term too.

At Foreign Affairs, Mohammad Shtayyeh pontificates on “The Best Way to End Israel’s War in Gaza,” while the Atlantic Council ominously warns that “For Israel’s war in Gaza, vengeance is a downward spiral.”

Ten days after the Hamas attack, The Economist published a war news briefing titled “Mapping Israel’s War in Gaza.” In November 2023, it treated its readers to a piece ominously titled “The pace of Israel’s war in Gaza far exceeds previous conflicts.”

Israel’s most popular left-leaning outlet, Haaretz, ran an article in March with the title “Even Jews Who Oppose Israel’s War in Gaza Can’t Escape It.”

Niche outlets also get in on the action.

The scientists at Scientific American worry that “Israel’s War in Gaza Is Creating Enormous Hidden Health Problems.”

In February, The New Statesman pondered “The fractured reality of Israel’s war in Gaza.”

The Coalition for Women in Journalism ran a piece in August titled, “I have been forcibly displaced 12 times by Israel’s war in Gaza.”

On the far left, Slate wonders, “Is Israel’s War in Gaza Strengthening Hamas?” while the loonies at Mother Jones worry about “The Staggering Carbon Footprint of Israel’s War in Gaza.”

If the phrasing of “Israel’s war in Gaza” is familiar, it should be.

The nearly identical term has seeped into the media culture since February 2022 when “Russia’s war in Ukraine” became the term universally used to describe what might otherwise be called the “Russia-Ukraine War.”

Virtually every outlet that uses the term “Israel’s war in Gaza” also uses the term “Russia’s war in Ukraine,” including Reuters, the Associated Press, The Washington Post, New York Times, USA Today, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, PBS,NPR, Vox, Axios, and Politico.

The British media too (the BBC, and The Guardian) call it “Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

The term is also favored by the popular specialist outlets, including Foreign Affairs, Atlantic Council, and The Economist.

And niche outlets also use the term, including Scientific American, Nature, Slate, Mother Jones, The New Statesman, and the Coalition for Women in Journalism.

The parallels here are unavoidable and wrong. The term “Russia’s war in Ukraine” fits because Russia invaded Ukraine. It was the belligerent party that launched a war of aggression, largely against civilians.

The term “Israel’s war in Gaza,” however, does not fit because it implies that Israel rather than Hamas is the belligerent party, when in fact Hamas broke a ceasefire with Israel on October 7, 2023.

Hamas was the belligerent party that launched a war of aggression, largely against civilians.

For most of the media, the phrasing is meant to be a subtle, almost subliminal way to blame Israel for the war.

Objectively, the media should use the term Robert Satloff uses at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy uses: the “Hamas-Israel War.”

Better yet, “Israel’s effort to destroy the terrorist organization Hamas.”

Better still, though a bit wordy, “Israel’s attempt to free Israeli and American hostages from the terrorist organization Hamas.”

Israel is winning on the physical battlefield where terrorist cowards lurk in subterranean Gaza abusing their captives, but it is losing on the verbal battlefield where keyboard cowards lurk in newsrooms and dingy cubicles, abusing their readers with Newspeak blather and agitprop bias.

Chief Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) Political Correspondent A.J. Caschetta is a principal lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology and a fellow at Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum where he is also a Milstein fellow. A version of this article was originally published by IPT.

The post It’s Not ‘Israel’s War in Gaza’ — It’s the Israel-Hamas War; But the Media Is Trying to Harm Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 225
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Doorstep Postings: The unbearable lightness of Justin Trudeau’s final Hanukkah as prime minister

This is a special year-end edition of Doorstep Postings, the periodic political commentary column written by Josh Lieblein for The CJN.

You all know the story that we tell this time of year: a group of Jews decided they were done with Jewish particularism and said, “Let us go an make a covenant with the nations around us” (1 Maccabees 1:11) and decided to gaslight the rest of the community into seeing things their way—and it ended very, very badly for them.

As such, Hannukah is a time for the revealing of secrets, the banishing of shadows, and the airing of grievances. Having recently reached a milestone age associated with acquiring Jewish wisdom, my own personal miracle is that after enduring 40 years of threats/promises of the imminent collapse of society and sweeping revolution, 40 years of lectures about the moral and physical decay of the West, 40 years of the most obnoxiously self-righteous folks walking the planet breathlessly informing us all of the latest irreconcilable contradiction within capitalism, I’ve finally gotten to the point where I can’t muster anything more than an eye roll anymore. 

This is because, just like every year before it, 2024 was a year of unmitigated disaster for our self-appointed reformers. I’m not just talking about Trump’s resurgence, Ukraine’s persistence, the overthrow in Syria, Hamas’s withering away, proclamations that we have reached ‘peak wokeness’, the rise of artificial intelligence and the tech bros, and the failure of centrist electoral projects everywhere but here in Canada. This was the year where the left willingly and gleefully discarded the one thing they had going for them: their tenuously held moral authority.

The success of any left-wing project hinges on successfully convincing a critical mass of undecideds that they are not like the amoral and callous right who wants you to die for their profit motive. They’ve got your best interests at heart. They’re going to sit down and hear you out and govern with joy and hope and kindness, which are alien concepts to those weird, cruel, genocidal and greedy conservatives. 

Now those of us who have been on this merry-go-round for a few turns know that it’s not that simple. Plenty of left-folks want to actively harm the rich and those they deem to be colonizers, bigots, and other associated ruling class bootlickers. The violence perpetrated by those in power justifies violence in return. This is a somewhat difficult platform to get elected on, however, because people have a bad habit of hardening their hearts in response to being threatened. And so we need suitable empty vessels to try and convince the voters that the radicals are just that: loud angry voices on the margins. The political operatives charged with laundering the baser left-wing impulses must carefully use language to make it seem that there is some daylight between them and the ends-justify-the-means crowd. 

This is a difficult task to perform because it involves not only fooling a plurality of people, if not all of the time, then for as long as the particular political project lasts. First, the operatives must trick themselves into believing in their own unimpeachable moral authority. Only once they have convinced themselves that they are the most empathic and equity-minded folks to ever draw breath can they engineer the rise of someone like Justin Trudeau. Anyone who was paying attention a decade ago could see the parallel rise of two movements: lifelong Liberals working on earned media pieces announcing the return of the Trudeau dynasty, and mostly anonymous lunatics on Tumblr who were still licking their wounds from the failure of the Occupy Movement, claiming that it was literally impossible to be racist against white people because ‘racism’ against white people wasn’t systematic. 

And as it happened, a lot of the self-proclaimed radicals bought the hype, because they saw in Trudeau something they know all too well in themselves. The desire to be loved and celebrated and told they are good, kind and moral despite, and in many cases because of, their own desire to commit and justify violence in the name of creating a better and more equal world. The Trudeau of 2015 was no less authoritarian than the figure clinging to power at the end of 2024. All that’s changed is that the radicals can no longer excuse Trudeau’s narcissism while holding out for him to bring about a world that is more equal—which is to say, a world where they have the power to do harm to their enemies. These days, Mr. Grow the Economy From the Heart Outward seems more interested in trying and failing to implement GST holidays while forcing Canada Post workers back to actual work. 

Still even as the Liberals try to envision a future without Trudeau, they remain engaged in other muddled projects, such as trying to sell the idea that Canada is engaged in an ongoing genocide but must somehow endure lest we be absorbed into the sucking Trumpist hellhole directly below us. Clearly, the Liberal Party is no longer a place for voters who are into sexy CEO-murderers, or who think Oct. 7 was an act of righteous resistance to oppression, or take China’s claims of imminent world domination seriously while denouncing Elon Musk’s similarly ridiculous pronouncements. 

But even though both the more and less radical wings of the progressive movement have had an off year and are barely speaking to one another again, we can rest assured that so long as they have to convince themselves of their own goodness they will continue to try and split this atom. Attempts to reject binaries will lead to more black and white thinking. Progressive governments will fall back into the status quo. Tumblrs will give way to Blueskys. Trudeau will fall out of favour for a few years only to be asked back after a few years of Poilievre—or some other Liberal saviour will rescue the brand. They will cast about for a new podcast hero or a leftist version of the Hawk Tuah Girl. They will insist that senile politicians are fit as fiddles, anoint barely literate fan-fiction writers as cultural arbiters, and cast lawbreakers as secular saints while vilifying anyone who’s afraid of being attacked on the street or public transit.

If the past 40 years are anything to go by, they will be as confused as ever as to why capitalism persists, why people don’t accept carbon taxes, why the world fails to condemn Israel to their liking, why poor and rural folks don’t “vote their interests”, why voters fall for Poilievre’s slogans, and why there are attempts to draw an equivalence between CEOs who condemn people to death and the people who kill those CEOs. The answer to all these questions are the same, and it’s that impure oil just burns differently—and trying to pass it off as holy can only come off as gaslighting. 

Josh Lieblein can be reached at joshualieblein@gmail.com for your response to Doorstep Postings.

The post Doorstep Postings: The unbearable lightness of Justin Trudeau’s final Hanukkah as prime minister appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Post Views: 10
Continue Reading

RSS

Doorstep Postings: The unbearable lightness of Justin Trudeau’s final Hanukkah as prime minister

This is a special year-end edition of Doorstep Postings, the periodic political commentary column written by Josh Lieblein for The CJN.

You all know the story that we tell this time of year: a group of Jews decided they were done with Jewish particularism and said, “Let us go an make a covenant with the nations around us” (1 Maccabees 1:11) and decided to gaslight the rest of the community into seeing things their way—and it ended very, very badly for them.

As such, Hannukah is a time for the revealing of secrets, the banishing of shadows, and the airing of grievances. Having recently reached a milestone age associated with acquiring Jewish wisdom, my own personal miracle is that after enduring 40 years of threats/promises of the imminent collapse of society and sweeping revolution, 40 years of lectures about the moral and physical decay of the West, 40 years of the most obnoxiously self-righteous folks walking the planet breathlessly informing us all of the latest irreconcilable contradiction within capitalism, I’ve finally gotten to the point where I can’t muster anything more than an eye roll anymore. 

This is because, just like every year before it, 2024 was a year of unmitigated disaster for our self-appointed reformers. I’m not just talking about Trump’s resurgence, Ukraine’s persistence, the overthrow in Syria, Hamas’s withering away, proclamations that we have reached ‘peak wokeness’, the rise of artificial intelligence and the tech bros, and the failure of centrist electoral projects everywhere but here in Canada. This was the year where the left willingly and gleefully discarded the one thing they had going for them: their tenuously held moral authority.

The success of any left-wing project hinges on successfully convincing a critical mass of undecideds that they are not like the amoral and callous right who wants you to die for their profit motive. They’ve got your best interests at heart. They’re going to sit down and hear you out and govern with joy and hope and kindness, which are alien concepts to those weird, cruel, genocidal and greedy conservatives. 

Now those of us who have been on this merry-go-round for a few turns know that it’s not that simple. Plenty of left-folks want to actively harm the rich and those they deem to be colonizers, bigots, and other associated ruling class bootlickers. The violence perpetrated by those in power justifies violence in return. This is a somewhat difficult platform to get elected on, however, because people have a bad habit of hardening their hearts in response to being threatened. And so we need suitable empty vessels to try and convince the voters that the radicals are just that: loud angry voices on the margins. The political operatives charged with laundering the baser left-wing impulses must carefully use language to make it seem that there is some daylight between them and the ends-justify-the-means crowd. 

This is a difficult task to perform because it involves not only fooling a plurality of people, if not all of the time, then for as long as the particular political project lasts. First, the operatives must trick themselves into believing in their own unimpeachable moral authority. Only once they have convinced themselves that they are the most empathic and equity-minded folks to ever draw breath can they engineer the rise of someone like Justin Trudeau. Anyone who was paying attention a decade ago could see the parallel rise of two movements: lifelong Liberals working on earned media pieces announcing the return of the Trudeau dynasty, and mostly anonymous lunatics on Tumblr who were still licking their wounds from the failure of the Occupy Movement, claiming that it was literally impossible to be racist against white people because ‘racism’ against white people wasn’t systematic. 

And as it happened, a lot of the self-proclaimed radicals bought the hype, because they saw in Trudeau something they know all too well in themselves. The desire to be loved and celebrated and told they are good, kind and moral despite, and in many cases because of, their own desire to commit and justify violence in the name of creating a better and more equal world. The Trudeau of 2015 was no less authoritarian than the figure clinging to power at the end of 2024. All that’s changed is that the radicals can no longer excuse Trudeau’s narcissism while holding out for him to bring about a world that is more equal—which is to say, a world where they have the power to do harm to their enemies. These days, Mr. Grow the Economy From the Heart Outward seems more interested in trying and failing to implement GST holidays while forcing Canada Post workers back to actual work. 

Still even as the Liberals try to envision a future without Trudeau, they remain engaged in other muddled projects, such as trying to sell the idea that Canada is engaged in an ongoing genocide but must somehow endure lest we be absorbed into the sucking Trumpist hellhole directly below us. Clearly, the Liberal Party is no longer a place for voters who are into sexy CEO-murderers, or who think Oct. 7 was an act of righteous resistance to oppression, or take China’s claims of imminent world domination seriously while denouncing Elon Musk’s similarly ridiculous pronouncements. 

But even though both the more and less radical wings of the progressive movement have had an off year and are barely speaking to one another again, we can rest assured that so long as they have to convince themselves of their own goodness they will continue to try and split this atom. Attempts to reject binaries will lead to more black and white thinking. Progressive governments will fall back into the status quo. Tumblrs will give way to Blueskys. Trudeau will fall out of favour for a few years only to be asked back after a few years of Poilievre—or some other Liberal saviour will rescue the brand. They will cast about for a new podcast hero or a leftist version of the Hawk Tuah Girl. They will insist that senile politicians are fit as fiddles, anoint barely literate fan-fiction writers as cultural arbiters, and cast lawbreakers as secular saints while vilifying anyone who’s afraid of being attacked on the street or public transit.

If the past 40 years are anything to go by, they will be as confused as ever as to why capitalism persists, why people don’t accept carbon taxes, why the world fails to condemn Israel to their liking, why poor and rural folks don’t “vote their interests”, why voters fall for Poilievre’s slogans, and why there are attempts to draw an equivalence between CEOs who condemn people to death and the people who kill those CEOs. The answer to all these questions are the same, and it’s that impure oil just burns differently—and trying to pass it off as holy can only come off as gaslighting. 

Josh Lieblein can be reached at joshualieblein@gmail.com for your response to Doorstep Postings.

The post Doorstep Postings: The unbearable lightness of Justin Trudeau’s final Hanukkah as prime minister appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Post Views: 0
Continue Reading

RSS

IDF Releases Investigation into Discovery of 6 Hostages’ Bodies

i24 News – The IDF released on Tuesday the investigation into the murder of six abductees at the end of August: Carmel Gat, Eden Yerushalmi,

Goldberg-Polin, Alexander Lubnov, Almog Sarusi, and Sergeant Ori Danino.

According to the findings of the investigation, when the IDF operation began in the area of the tunnel, Major General Nitzan Alon did not believe abductees would be in the area. As the operation continued, the military assessment said the probability was even lower.

The abductee who was extricated, Qaid Farhan Alkadi, was found alone, as neither he nor additional terrorists taken from the area provided indications to the additional abductees.

In the absence of new information, the operation continued in the area, the investigation said. Only then did the forces locate the bodies of the six abductees. In addition, forensic findings were found indicating that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar had been there. It remains unclear whether he gave the order to murder the abductees himself. No signs of struggle during the murder were found in autopsies.

IDF Spokesperson Daniel Hagri visited the tunnel and described the harsh conditions in which the six abductees endured. “They were heroes who were cold-bloodedly murdered by terrorists who build tunnels under children’s rooms,” he said. “We will hunt them down and know exactly who they are, we will find the one who murdered them. The teams here collect all the evidence from the scene.”

“We didn’t know the exact location of the hostages in the tunnel. They were killed before we could reach them. We are investigating the incident of their names being leaked prior to their rescue. This is a very serious event that is harmful to the families and the security of the forces on the ground.”

The post IDF Releases Investigation into Discovery of 6 Hostages’ Bodies first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 19
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News