RSS
How the Presidential Debate Failed Viewers on Israel and the Gaza War
Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump points towards Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, during a presidential debate hosted by ABC in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, Sept. 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
What is it about Western media journalists and legitimizing Hamas numbers and figures?
ABC broadcast journalist and Trump-Harris debate moderator Linsey Davis may appear professional and well-composed, but her coverage of Israel leaves a lot to be desire.
One of the hot-button issues brought forth in the Tuesday night debate was the candidates’ position on the Israel-Hamas war and how they would negotiate an end to it.
Davis posed the following question to Harris first:
In December you said, “Israel has a right to defend itself” but you added, “It matters how.” Saying international humanitarian law must be respected, Israel must do more to protect innocent civilians. You said that nine months ago. Now an estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead. Nearly 100 hostages remain. Just last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there’s not a deal in the making. President Biden has not been able to break through the stalemate. How would you do it?
Let’s break this down, and evaluate what is inherently wrong and biased or leading about this.
The fact that Davis did not credit the 40,000 death toll figure to Hamas is obvious. She also did not make a distinction that even Western media tends to make — Hamas numbers never differentiate between civilians and terrorists. Further, after nearly a year of continued war and death, she places most of the fault on Israel rather than Hamas.
So, why is it important to clarify that these are Hamas numbers and, therefore, are unreliable?
Because Hamas, as a terror organization, has a history of inflating numbers and cannot be trusted. One example came as recently as Monday. Hamas claimed 40 dead civilians as a result of an Israeli strike. The strike targeted three senior Hamas commanders directly involved in the October 7 massacre. They were conveniently embedded in a designated humanitarian zone. However, after rolling out the initial number, Hamas later revised it to “at least 19.”
Suggesting that Israel does not do enough to protect civilians
Saying international humanitarian law must be respected, Israel must do more to protect innocent civilians. You said that nine months ago. Now an estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead.
Let’s focus a bit more on the insinuation here.
This is a biased and misleading question. Davis is implying that Israel isn’t respecting or abiding by international humanitarian law. But it is. In fact, the IDF does more than necessary under international law.
When urban military experts like John Spencer as well as lawyers corroborate this, who is this American journalist to suggest Israel is not doing enough to prevent civilian casualties to an audience of approximately 67 million viewers?
Moreover, suggesting that the onus of civilian deaths and continuation of the war belongs to Israel alone is dangerous and despicable. What about Hamas? They could have continued the ceasefire nine months ago by releasing the rest of the hostages under the previous deal.
But they didn’t.
This could have been over long ago. Instead, negotiators have been bending over backwards and pulling teeth to close a new deal for months. Civilians on both sides continue to suffer the consequences.
Yes, civilians on both sides. That’s something often ignored, and ignored by Davis as well in the phrasing of her question. Do Gaza civilians reserve the only right to claim displacement and death? Absolutely not.
Failing to acknowledge that nearly 100,000 Israelis are still displaced since October 7, and that Israelis are still killed by either Hezbollah rockets, West Bank terror, etc. is to ignore the facts on the ground.
Israel’s hostage numbers: a minor correction
Nearly 100 hostages remain.
This estimated digit alludes to the 97 hostages left who were taken on October 7 only. While it is not incorrect in that sense, there are also four Israelis who were taken captive in 2014 and 2015 — Hadar Goldin, Avera Mengistu, Hisham al-Sayed and Oron Shaul. Two of them are still believed to be alive. This brings the real number to 101.
It’s an important distinction to make, and minimizing the number voluntarily to fit a narrative or for any other reason misleads the audience and minimizes the suffering of their families.
Is Netanyahu the reason for a ceasefire and hostage deal stalemate?
Just last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there’s not a deal in the making. President Biden has not been able to break through the stalemate.
False statements again.
Accusing Israel, like much of Western media, for being the hold-up to a deal. In the press conference Davis is referring to, Prime Minister Netanyahu actually said the following:
I’m willing to make a deal. The real obstacle to making a deal is not Israel and it’s not me. It [is] Hamas…. I put forward a proposal by Israel, which Secretary Blinken called extremely generous. On May 31st, having met Blinken again, I said, we agreed to the US-backed proposal, and Hamas refused. On August 16th, the US brought forth what they called the final bridging proposal. Again, we accepted, Hamas refused. On August 19th, Secretary Blinken said, Israel accepted the US proposal, now Hamas has to do the same.
Furthermore, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby recently said Hamas was the reason there is no deal — not Israel. That is the official statement of the US government, and it was ignored in the debate.
Davis’ follow-up question for Trump
President Trump, how would you negotiate with Netanyahu and also Hamas in order to get the hostages out and prevent the killing of more innocent civilians in Gaza?
By phrasing her question in this way, Davis equates Netanyahu, the prime minister of a democratic country, with a terror organization that brutally massacred 1,200 people, burned down homes, looted and raped, and took 251 women, children, the elderly, and men hostage.
Additionally, she is putting a potential US president in the position of negotiating directly with terrorists, when that is against US policy. The US generally speaks with third parties only when dealing with terror organizations like Hamas.
Bottom line: Americans deserve better from their media, and certainly from a moderator of such a high-profile debate.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post How the Presidential Debate Failed Viewers on Israel and the Gaza War first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2c632/2c6321ab5d806296562c58698c53869d596a205e" alt=""
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on Thursday apologized for “unacceptable” and “serious flaws” during the filming of a documentary about Palestinian children living in the Gaza Strip.
The admission came after the BBC removed the documentary, titled “Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone,” from its iPlayer streaming platform on Feb. 21 when it was discovered that the film’s 13-year-old Palestinian narrator (now 14), Abdullah Al-Yazouri, was the son of a senior Hamas official.
The documentary was also taken down after it was revealed that two of the cameramen who worked on the BBC documentary had voiced support for Hamas, and following revelations about inaccurate translations in the film that masked the antisemitism of some participants. Examples of the latter issue include mistranslations in the film that refer to Hamas terrorists as an “army” and “jihad against the Jews” as “resistance against the Israelis,” according to Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), a British volunteer-based charity. The Telegraph cited at least five instances in the film where the Arabic word for “Jew”— “Yahud” or “Yahudy” — was mistranslated as “Israel” or “Israeli forces,” or removed altogether.
The BBC has also now admitted that licensing fee payments were given to the family of Al-Yazouri, who is the son of Hamas’s Deputy Minister of Agriculture Dr. Ayman Al-Yazouri. Pro-Israel researcher David Collier said the father and son come from the same family as Hamas founder Ibrahim Al-Yazouri. Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by both the United Kingdom and United States.
Deborah Turness, the CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, sent an e-mail to staff on Thursday that included a statement about the documentary, remarks which were publicly shared on Friday by a BBC spokesperson.
In the statement, the BBC said it takes complete editorial responsibility for the film and admitted that the corporation and Hoyo Films, the production company behind the documentary, have made “unacceptable” flaws in the making of the documentary. “BBC News takes full responsibility for these and the impact that these have had on the Corporation’s reputation. We apologize for this.”
The spokesperson added that the BBC was not informed in advance by Hoyo Films about Abdullah’s family connection to Hamas.
“During the production process, the independent production company was asked in writing a number of times by the BBC about any potential connections he and his family might have with Hamas,” the corporation explained. “Since transmission, they have acknowledged that they knew that the boy’s father was a deputy agriculture minister in the Hamas government; they have also acknowledged that they never told the BBC this fact. It was then the BBC’s own failing that we did not uncover that fact and the documentary was aired.”
Hoyo Films told the corporation that it paid Abdullah’s mother “a limited sum of money” for narrating the film by way of his sister’s bank account, according to the BBC. Hoyo Films “assured BBC” no payments were given to Hamas members or its affiliates “either directly, in kind, or as a gift,” and the corporation is “seeking additional assurance” about the film’s budget. The BBC said it will initiate a full audit of the film’s expenses and is asking Hoyo Films for financial accounts to help with the audit.
The BBC said the controversy surrounding the documentary had “damaged” public trust in the corporation’s journalism, and that “the processes and execution of this program fell short of our expectations.” The BBC also has “no plans to broadcast the program again in its current form or return it to iPlayer.” It added that it launched a review into the film, an initiative that the BBC Board discussed on Thursday.
Hoyo Films said it is working with the BBC to “help understand where mistakes have been made.” The production company added, “We feel this remains an important story to tell, and that our contributors – who have no say in the war – should have their voices heard.”
A separate statement from the BBC Board added, “The subject matter of the documentary was clearly a legitimate area to explore, but nothing is more important than trust and transparency in our journalism. While the board appreciates that mistakes can be made, the mistakes here are significant and damaging to the BBC.”
The CAA said on Friday the grave errors carried out by the BBC in connection to the documentary should result in resignations and a police investigation. The charity also called for an independent investigation into bias at the BBC and said pending the results of the investigation, the license fee should be suspended to stop additional funds from going to Abdullah’s family, and potentially Hamas. “Hundreds of people are contacting us telling us that they refuse to pay the license fee until they can be sure that the BBC is trustworthy,” the charity said.
A spokesperson for the CAA called BBC “a national treasure [that] has become a national embarrassment.”
“The BBC has now admitted that license fee funds were paid to the family of a senior Hamas official. It has not yet been able to rule out that further payments to Hamas were made as it continues to investigate where hundreds of thousands of pounds went,” the spokesperson noted. “The BBC’s statement is an exercise in desperate damage control and shows why an internal review is no substitute for an independent investigation into this documentary and the wider bias at the BBC that allowed it to be made and aired. Clearly those responsible must lose their jobs.”
“It is unconscionable that the British public should have to pay a license fee to an organization that gives that money to proscribed terrorists,” the spokesperson added. “It represents a shocking double standard in our law. Pending an independent investigation, the license fee must be suspended.”
During a press conference on Thursday, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the secretary of state has had a meeting with the BBC regarding the documentary. On Friday, British Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said she was going to have an “urgent meeting” with BBC Chairman Samir Shah that same day.
“I want assurances that no stone will be left unturned by the fact-finding review now commissioned by the BBC’s director general,” Nandy said. “This review must be comprehensive, rigorous, and get to the bottom of exactly what has happened in this case. It is critical for trust in the BBC that this review happens quickly, and that appropriate action is taken on its findings.”
The post BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/260b6/260b6051dac4bfa68dbf6113c0f1fbd0c441c14e" alt=""
David Draiman of Disturbed at Summerfest Music Festival on June 30, 2022, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Photo: Daniel DeSlover/Sipa USA
The lead singer of the rock band Disturbed intensely criticized rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, on Friday after the latter reiterated his desire to make a t-shirt that features a swastika, and now also a swastika necklace.
Ye returned to X on Friday to repeat his hopes of making a shirt emblazoned with the extremist symbol used by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party. In one post, he wrote: “It was always a dream of mine to walk around with a Swastika T on.” In a separate post, he called on jewelers to reach out to him with designs for a swastika chain necklace.
David Draiman responded by writing, “Hey @kanyewest, Here’s a design for you” and he included an emoji of a middle finger. The “Sound of Silence” singer, who is Jewish, then attacked the rapper by saying, “You’re nothing but a Jew hating, misogynistic, pathetic, attention starved A–HOLE. You’ve destroyed any legacy you once had. You will be remembered as a sad, angry excuse of a man, without honor, without decency, and without a soul.”
In early February, Ye sold on his website Yeezy.com only one item – a white, short sleeve t-shirt that featured a large black swastika on the front. He purchased a commercial that aired during Super Bowl LIX on Feb. 9 that encouraged viewers to visit his website and purchase the offensive shirt. The shirt went live on his website — which has since been shut down – two days after Ye went on a rabidly antisemitic tirade on X in which he talked about his hatred of Jews and his admiration for Hitler. He even called himself a Nazi and a racist.
The rapper said last week he has had the idea for the swastika shirt “for over eight years” and has continued to promote his affinity for the Nazi symbol repeatedly on social media.
The post Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel’s Outgoing Military Chief Warns of Potential Threat From Egypt Amid Rising Tensions
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b4569/b456973ec35f0d9ada1ce356490351f233015a52" alt=""
Israeli Chief of the General Staff Herzi Halevi speaks at a ceremony for the 70th cohort of military combat officers, at an army base near Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, Oct. 31, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Israel’s outgoing military chief has warned that Egypt’s expanding military capabilities could pose an unexpected threat to Israel in the future, despite their decades-old peace treaty.
Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, who next week will step down as chief of the general staff of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), told officer graduates during a speech in the Israeli city of Holon that Cairo is not currently a direct threat to Jerusalem. However, he warned that Egypt’s growing military capabilities, including advanced jets, submarines, and missiles, could change that reality at any moment.
“We are very concerned about this,” he said, referring to Egypt’s military buildup, before adding, “This is not at the top of our priorities. We have to give priority to our problems.”
Halevi’s remarks were aired on Wednesday by Israel’s Channel 14. They came after the military chief announced his resignation last month, citing his “responsibility for the IDF’s failure” during the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. His resignation will take effect on March 6.
“Egypt has a large army. It has advanced weapons, advanced aircraft, advanced submarines, and missile ships,” Halevi said during his speech this week. “We believe that this is not a threat now, but this situation can change in a moment.”
He also referred to Egypt’s first democratically elected president, an Islamist, saying, “In 2011, [Mohamed] Morsi took power with the Muslim Brotherhood.”
“Suddenly,” the Israeli military chief added, “this entire army had another leadership, which could have turned against you.”
Halevi’s latest remarks, which came amid rising tensions between Jerusalem and Cairo, did not mark the first time that a senior Israeli official had expressed concern over Egypt’s expanding defense capabilities.
Last month, Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter accused Egypt of a “very serious violation” of its peace treaty with Israel, raising concerns over Cairo’s military buildup and armed presence in the Sinai Peninsula.
“There are bases being built, and they can only be used for offensive operations and offensive weapons. This is a clear violation [of the peace agreement],” Leiter said during a meeting with the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.
While details about Egypt’s military buildup remain unclear, “satellite images have shown the movement of tanks and battalions that exceed the limits set by the Camp David Accords,” Mariam Wahba, research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), told The Algemeiner.
Under the 1979 peace treaty, Cairo can request permission from Jerusalem to deploy more than the 47 battalions allowed. One estimate, however, suggests that there are currently camps for 180 battalions.
“The Camp David Accords have long been a pillar of peace and stability in the Middle East,” Wahba explained. “A breakdown of the agreement would have serious implications, not just for Israel and Egypt but for the broader region. It could embolden actors like Iran and its proxies to exploit tensions and could lead to increased militarization along Israel’s southern border.”
Last month, Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon also raised concerns about Egypt’s military buildup, questioning the need for so many submarines and tanks.
“They spend hundreds of millions of dollars on modern military equipment every year, yet they have no threats on their borders,” he said. “After Oct. 7, this should raise alarm bells.”
“We have learned our lesson,” Danon added, apparently referring to Hamas’s Oct. 7 surprise invasion of southern Israel from neighboring Gaza. “We must monitor Egypt closely and prepare for every scenario.”
Addressing such concerns, Egyptian Ambassador to the UN Osama Abdel Khalek defended the country’s military strategy, emphasizing that its strong army is essential for national security and is purely defensive, aimed at maintaining regional stability.
Despite reports of growing tensions, Israeli defense sources have reportedly affirmed that security coordination between Cairo and Jerusalem remains tight, noting that such coordination has been in the interest of both countries for decades to protect their own national security and promote regional stability.
However, Egypt’s growing military presence in Sinai and ongoing infrastructure projects have raised concerns in Israel, particularly over the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border. Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, tensions between Jerusalem and Cairo have escalated as Egypt continues to demand an Israeli withdrawal from the area.
Egypt’s military buildup, reportedly in part in protest of Israel’s presence at the Philadelphi Corridor and to prevent a mass Palestinian exodus into the country, along with Jerusalem’s control of the corridor, could both violate the 1979 peace treaty.
Cairo has also rejected US President Donald Trump’s plan to “take over” the Gaza Strip to rebuild the war-torn enclave, while relocating Palestinians elsewhere during reconstruction efforts.
Like many other Middle Eastern leaders who rejected Trump’s proposal, Egypt has advocated a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Earlier this week, Egypt rejected any responsibility for governing Gaza after the Israel-Hamas war, reiterating its opposition to a new proposal by Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid, who suggested Cairo take over administrative and reconstruction efforts in the neighboring Palestinian enclave in exchange for the cancellation of its $155 billion external debt.
The post Israel’s Outgoing Military Chief Warns of Potential Threat From Egypt Amid Rising Tensions first appeared on Algemeiner.com.