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.
RSS
Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself. Really?
JNS.org – If I asked you to name the most famous line in the Bible, what would you answer? While Shema Yisrael (“Hear O’Israel”) might get many votes, I imagine that the winning line would be “love thy neighbor as thyself” (Leviticus 19:18). Some religions refer to it as the Golden Rule, but all would agree that it is fundamental to any moral lifestyle. And it appears this week in our Torah reading, Kedoshim.
This is quite a tall order. Can we be expected to love other people as much as we love ourselves? Surely, this is an idealistic expectation. And yet, the Creator knows us better than we know ourselves. How can His Torah be so unrealistic?
The biblical commentaries offer a variety of explanations. Some, like Rambam (Maimonides), say that the focus should be on our behavior, rather than our feelings. We are expected to try our best or to treat others “as if” we genuinely love them.
Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, in his classic text called the Tanya, argues that the actual feelings of love are, in fact, achievable provided that we focus on a person’s spirituality rather than how they present themselves physically. If we can put the soul over the body, we can do it.
Allow me to share the interpretation of the Ramban (Nachmanides), a 13th-century Torah scholar from Spain. His interpretation of the verses preceding love thy neighbor is classic and powerful, yet simple and straightforward.
“Do not hate your brother in your heart. You shall rebuke him, but do not bear a sin because of him” by embarrassing him in public. “Do not take revenge, and do not bear a grudge against your people. You shall love your fellow as yourself, I am God” (Leviticus 19:17-18).
What is the connection between these verses? Why is revenge and grudge-bearing in the same paragraph as love your fellow as yourself?
A careful reading shows that within these two verses are no less than six biblical commandments. But what is their sequence all about, and what is the connection between them?
The Ramban explains it beautifully, showing how the sequence of verses is deliberate and highlighting the Torah’s profound yet practical advice on how to maintain healthy relationships.
Someone wronged you? Don’t hate him in your heart. Speak to him. Don’t let it fester until it bursts, and makes you bitter and sick.
Instead, talk it out. Confront the person. Of course, do it respectfully. Don’t embarrass anyone in public, so that you don’t bear a sin because of them. But don’t let your hurt eat you up. Communicate!
If you approach the person who wronged you—not with hate in your heart but with respectful reproof—one of two things will happen. Either he or she will apologize and explain their perspective on the matter. Or that it was a misunderstanding and will get sorted out between you. Either way, you will feel happier and healthier.
Then you will not feel the need to take revenge or even to bear a grudge.
Here, says the Ramban, is the connection between these two verses. And if you follow this advice, only then will you be able to observe the commandment to Love Thy Neighbor. If you never tell him why you are upset, another may be completely unaware of his or her wrongdoing, and it will remain as a wound inside you and may never go away.
To sum up: Honest communication is the key to loving people.
Now, tell me the truth. Did you know that not taking revenge is a biblical commandment? In some cultures in Africa, revenge is a mitzvah! I’ve heard radio talk-show hosts invite listeners to share how they took “sweet revenge” on someone, as if it’s some kind of accomplishment.
Furthermore, did you know that bearing a grudge is forbidden by biblical law?
Here in South Africa, people refer to a grudge by its Yiddish name, a faribel. In other countries, people call it a broiges. Whatever the terminology, the Torah states explicitly: “Thou shalt not bear a grudge!” Do not keep a faribel, a broiges or resentment of any kind toward someone you believe wronged you. Talk to that person. Share your feelings honestly. If you do it respectfully and do not demean the other’s dignity, then it can be resolved. Only then will you be able to love your fellow as yourself.
May all our grudges and feelings of resentment toward others be dealt with honestly and respectfully. May all our grudges be resolved as soon as possible. Then we will all be in a much better position to love our neighbors as ourselves.
The post Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself. Really? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Nonsense’: Huckabee Shoots Down Report Trump to Endorse Palestinian Statehood
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee looks on during the day he visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in Jerusalem’s Old City, April 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
i24 News – US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on Saturday dismissed as nonsensical the report that President Donald Trump would endorse Palestinian statehood during his tour to the Persian Gulf this week.
“This report is nonsense,” Huckabee harrumphed on his X account, blasting the Jerusalem Post as needing better sourced reporting. “Israel doesn’t have a better friend than the president of the United States.”
Trump is set to visit Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. The leader’s first trip overseas since he took office comes as Trump seeks the Gulf countries’ support in regional conflicts, including the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza and curbing Iran’s advancing nuclear program.
However, reports citing administration insiders claimed that Trump has also set his sights on the ambitious goal of expanding the Abraham Accords. These agreements, initially signed in 2020, normalized relations between Israel and the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. The accords are widely held to be among the most important achievements of the first Trump administration.
The post ‘Nonsense’: Huckabee Shoots Down Report Trump to Endorse Palestinian Statehood first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US to Put Military Option Back on Table If No Immediate Progress in Iran Talks
US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy-designate Steve Witkoff gives a speech at the inaugural parade inside Capital One Arena on the inauguration day of Trump’s second presidential term, in Washington, DC, Jan. 20, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Carlos Barria
i24 News – Unless significant progress is registered in Sunday’s round of nuclear talks with Iran, the US will consider putting the military option back on the table, sources close to US envoy Steve Witkoff told i24NEWS.
American and Iranian representatives voiced optimism after the previous talks that took place in Oman and Rome, saying there was a friendly atmosphere despite the two countries’ decades of enmity.
However the two sides are not believed to have thrashed out the all-important technical details, and basic questions remain.
The source has also underscored the significance of the administration’s choice of Michael Anton, the State Department’s policy planning director, as the lead representative in the nuclear talks’ technical phases.
Anton is “an Iran expert and someone who knows how to cut a deal with Iran,” the source said, saying that the choice reflected Trump’s desire to secure the deal.
The post US to Put Military Option Back on Table If No Immediate Progress in Iran Talks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.