Connect with us

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.

Continue Reading

RSS

NYC ‘Dyke March’ Bans Zionists From Participating in Annual Demonstration

(Source: Reuters)

(Source: Reuters)

NYC Dyke March, a public demonstration held by members of the lesbian community in New York City, has banned self-proclaimed “Zionists” from its annual event, citing a desire to stand against the so-called “genocide” occuring in Gaza. 

The group revealed in a statement that their decision to ban Israel supporters from their ranks came after multiple members dropped out of the organization due to differences in “political beliefs and values.” After engaging in discussions with frustrated members, the NYC Dyke March committee agreed to adopt “an explicitly anti-Zionist position.” The organization claims that it will “strengthen our commitment” to fighting against Israel and advocating on behalf of Palestinians. 

Last year, the NYC Dyke March previously came under scrutiny after organizers settled on “genocide” as the theme of its 2024 event. In a statement, decrying “ethnic cleansing, violence, and dehumanization,” the organization compared the ongoing war in Gaza, to the mass slaughters occurring in Ethiopia, Myanmar, and Sudan. 

The organization plans on recycling the same theme for this year’s march, titling it “Dykes Against Genocide.” The group released a statement clarifying that Jews are allowed to attend and condemned the Oct. 7 slaughters as a “senseless loss of life.” After an apparent uproar from its members, the organization deleted the post and wrote that the group “unapologetically stands in support of Palestinian liberation.” In addition, the group affirmed that “anti-Zionism is not antisemitism and any language we put out which is not clearly opposed to a Zionist, imperialist agenda is harmful to us all.”

In the 17 months following the Hamas-led massacre of roughly 1200 people throughout Israel, the NYC Dyke March has produced numerous statements lambasting Israel and declaring “solidarity” with Palestinians amid their so-called “ongoing genocide.” The organization also accused Israel of engaging in supposed “pinkwashing” and “manipulative use of Jewish and queer identities,” with the aim of justifying its war efforts in Gaza. 

Israel offers an expansive set of rights for members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transngender (LGBT) community, including recognition of same-sex marriages. Every year in June, Tel Aviv holds one of the largest LGBT Pride celebrations in the world. Meanwhile, members of the LGBT community are routinely imprisoned or murdered in other parts of the Middle East, including the Palestinian territories. 

The NYC Dyke March’s announcement was met with widespread condemnation. 

“You cannot exclude the majority of Jews and call yourself inclusive,” said the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in a post on X/Twitter, adding that the group “essentially equates Zionism with racism” in their announcement. 

The post NYC ‘Dyke March’ Bans Zionists From Participating in Annual Demonstration first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Trump Administration Planning $510 Million Cut to Brown University Budget, Report Says

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with journalists onboard Air Force One en route to Miami, Florida, U.S., April 3, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura

The Trump administration reportedly plans to terminate $510 million worth of federal contracts and grants awarded to Brown University, according to media reports.

Brown University’s failure to mount a satisfactory response to the campus antisemitism crisis, as well as its embrace of the diversity, equity, and, inclusion (DEI) movement — perceived by many across the political spectrum as an assault on merit-based upward mobility and causing incidents of anti-White and anti-Asian discrimination — prompted the alleged pending action by the federal government, according to the right-leaning outlet The Daily Caller.

The announcement comes as Brown scrambles to cover a $46 million budget shortfall and other universities across the country have faced similar funding cuts.

Brown University officials, however, denied that the university had received any directives from the Trump Administration.

“We have no information to substantiate these rumors,” Brown University provost Francis Doyle issued a statement. “We are closely monitoring notifications related to grants, but have nothing more we can share as of now.”

Meanwhile, Brown’s Jewish community rushed to the university’s defense, issuing a joint statement with the Brown Corporation which said that the campus is “peaceful and supportive campus for its Jewish community.”

The letter, signed by members of the local Hillel International chapter and Chabad on College Hill, continued: “Brown University is a place where Jewish life not only exists but thrives. While there is more work to be done, Brown, through the dedicated efforts of its administration, leadership, and resilient spirit of its Jewish community, continues to uphold the principles of inclusion, tolerance, and intellectual freedom that have been central to its identity since 1764.”

Brown Divest Coalition — an anti-Zionist group which recently saw its campaign for the university to adopt the boycott, divest, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel defeated by the Brown Corporation — weighed in too, denouncing the reported cut as “a means of suppressing all forms of popular dissent to the renewed violence of the US war machine abroad.” US Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) also criticized the move, accusing the administration “of a broader pattern of behavior…that will negatively impact communities across the country and lead to layoffs, restrict research, and more.”

As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the Trump administration is following through on its threats to inflict potentially catastrophic financial injuries on colleges and universities deemed as soft on antisemitism or excessively “woke.” The past six weeks has seen the policy imposed on elite universities including Harvard and Columbia, rattling a higher education establishment that has for better and worse operated for decades with little interference from the federal government even as it polarized the public and contributed to a growing sense that elites are contemptuous of Americans who live outside of their cultural enclaves.

In March, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced the cancellation of $400 million in federal contracts and grants for Columbia University, a measure that secured the school’s acceding to a slew of demands the administration put forth as preconditions for restoring the money. Later, the Trump administration disclosed its reviewing $9 billion worth of federal grants and contracts awarded to Harvard University, jeopardizing a substantial source of the school’s income over its alleged failure to quell antisemitic and pro-Hamas activity on campus following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel. Princeton University saw $210 million of its federal grants and funding suspended too, prompting its president, Christopher Eisgruber to say the institution is “committed to fighting antisemitism and all forms of discrimination.”

Additionally,  60 universities are being investigated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights over their handling of campus antisemitism, a project that will serve as an early test of the administration’s ability to perform the essential functions of the agency after downsizing its workforce to increase its efficiency.

One of those universities, Northwestern University, on Monday touted its progress in addressing campus antisemitism, noting that it has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, a reference tool which aids officials in determining what constitutes antisemitism, and begun holding “mandatory antisemitism training” sessions which “all students, faculty, and staff” must attend.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Trump Administration Planning $510 Million Cut to Brown University Budget, Report Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Belgium Joins Hungary in Rejecting ICC Warrant Against Netanyahu, Signaling Shift in International Stance

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a joint press conference with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Prime Minister’s office in Jerusalem, Feb. 16, 2025. Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg/Pool via REUTERS

Belgium announced it would not enforce the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over alleged war crimes in Gaza, should he visit Brussels—marking a significant shift from the government’s previous policies.

In an interview with Belgium’s VRT broadcaster on Thursday, Prime Minister Bart De Wever was asked about Hungary’s decision to not act on the ICC warrant against Netanyahu during the Israeli leader’s visit to Budapest this week.

“To be completely honest, I don’t think we would either,” De Wever said during the interview.

“There is such a thing as realpolitik, I don’t think any European country would arrest Netanyahu if he were on their territory. France wouldn’t do it, and I don’t think we would, either.”

As Hungary welcomed Netanyahu to Budapest with full military honors on Thursday, ignoring the ICC arrest warrant against him, the country also announced its decision to withdraw from the international court.

After their meeting, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said he believes the ICC is “no longer an impartial court, not a court of law, but a political court.”

“I am convinced that this otherwise important international judicial forum has been degraded into a political tool, with which we cannot and do not want to engage,” Orban said during a press conference.

In November, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu, his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and now-deceased Hamas terror leader Ibrahim al-Masri (better known as Mohammed Deif) for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza war.

The ICC said there were reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Gallant were criminally responsible for starvation in Gaza and the persecution of Palestinians — charges vehemently denied by Israel, which until a recently imposed blockade had provided significant humanitarian aid into the enclave throughout the war.

Israel also says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, despite Hamas’s widely acknowledged military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.

Belgium’s center-right government, led by De Wever’s National Flemish Alliance party, took power this year after defeating a left-wing coalition led by the Socialist Party, known for its anti-Israel stance.

Under the previous government, Belgium joined South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Since December 2023, South Africa has been pursuing its case at the ICJ accusing Israel of committing “state-led genocide” in its defensive war against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.

Last year, Belgium’s former Deputy Prime Minister, Petra De Sutter, said, “War crimes and crimes against humanity cannot go unpunished,” referring to the ICC arrest warrants against Netanyahu.

“Europe must comply. Impose economic sanctions, suspend the Association Agreement with Israel and uphold these arrest warrants,” De Sutter wrote in a post on X.

In line with this position, former Prime Minister Alexander De Croo said in November that Belgium would “assume its responsibility” towards the ICC, emphasizing that “there can be no double standards.”

After the ICC’s decision to issue the warrants, several countries, including Hungary, Argentina, the Czech Republic, Romania, Poland, France, and Italy, have said they would not arrest Netanyahu if he visited.

Germany seems to have a conflicting stance on this matter. During a press conference, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he could not imagine the ICC arrest warrant against Netanyahu being executed during a potential visit to Berlin.

However, Germany’s Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, criticized Hungary’s refusal to enforce the arrest warrant against the Israeli leader this week.

“This is a setback for international criminal law,” Baerbock said during a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels.

“In Europe, no one is above the law. And this applies to all areas of law,” she said.

The post Belgium Joins Hungary in Rejecting ICC Warrant Against Netanyahu, Signaling Shift in International Stance first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News