RSS
UN Admits Hamas Lied on Casualty Numbers; But the Damage Is Done
An Israeli tank maneuvers, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, near the Israel-Gaza Border, in southern Israel, May 7, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Numbers are funny things.
After shouting about Israel and “genocide” — and touting Hamas’ casualty numbers with no verification and obvious flaws — the UN changed its mind this weekend. The old numbers (up to May 6, 2024) looked like this:
34,735 dead, including over 9,500 women and over 14,500 children. [You could, if you wished, extrapolate the number of men/terrorists, but the UN wasn’t going to help you.]
The new numbers (May 8, 2024) are:
24,686 people, including 10,006 men, 4,959 women, and 7,797 children
The UN blames “the fog of war.” Baloney.
There is always fog, but the UN acceptance of Hamas casualty figures led directly to South Africa’s complaint to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing Israel of genocide. The ICJ declined to say there was genocide, but Israel was still smeared again across the international media.
The UN and others ignored the work of John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, and a follower of the nuances and statistics of Israel’s war in Gaza. He has given a master class over the past six month on evaluating military to civilian casualties in urban warfare, and the unprecedented steps that Israel took to minimize those casualties.
His numbers boil down to this:
The current (March 31) Hamas-supplied estimate of over 31,000 does not acknowledge a single combatant death (nor any deaths due to the misfiring of its own rockets or other friendly fire). The IDF estimates it has killed about 13,000 Hamas operatives, which would mean some 18,000 civilians had died, a ratio of roughly 1 combatant to 1.5 civilians. Given Hamas’ likely inflation of the death count, the real figure could be closer to 1 to 1. Either way, the number would be historically low for modern urban warfare.
According to other sources, Spencer notes, civilians usually account for 80-90 percent of casualties, or a 1:9 ratio, in modern war (though this does mix all types of wars). In the 2016-2017 Battle of Mosul, the AP reported some 10,000 civilians were killed compared to roughly 4,000 ISIS terrorists.
How did it happen that theoretically neutral/reliable sources including the AP, Reuters, NPR, the UN itself swallowed those blatantly false Hamas numbers whole and ignored an actual expert in the field?
Oxfam reported that the death rate in Gaza was higher than any other major conflict in the 20th century.
On October 7, Hamas and its friends entered Israel and killed 1,163 people — a verified number. The victims included a baby who died 14 hours after birth, and a 94-year-old woman. The world was horrified by the numbers and the manner of their death, which included rape, torture, and the burning of people alive.
The world was similarly horrified to discover that 240 people, including Americans, had been dragged into Gaza — most living but some already dead.
Israel’s initial military response was met with a degree of understanding around the world.
Hamas had a dilemma — but also a war strategy to turn the tables.
Having built its military infrastructure under streets, houses, schools, mosques, and UNRWA facilities, Hamas was assured that Israeli action to clear those spaces of terrorist operatives would kill the human shields sitting above. (Especially after Hamas warned Gazans not to flee and fired on Palestinian civilians using the “safe passage” route.)
In fact, Hamas planned it that way. The more civilians that died, the more Israel would be seen as an out-of-control monster, killing the defenseless in retribution. Committing “genocide.”
And Hamas’ strategy worked.
The first big test was at the Al-Ahli Hospital, where an explosion killed people outside the building. The Gaza Health Ministry (run by Hamas) claimed 500 dead from an Israeli air strike on a protected site. Media around the world went with it. Later evidence showed it was caused by an errant Palestinian rocket aiming for Israel, and that the casualty figure was closer to 50 than 500.
At that point, the “narrative” changed: “I don’t think the question will ever get fully resolved using open source intelligence,” an assistant professor of political science opined. If actual evidence won’t let you blame Israel and politics won’t let you blame Hamas, best to call it foggy and move on.
That’s how it worked. And the numbers caused the flood.
In January, it was the ICJ.
In February, President Biden said Israel’s response was “over the top,” and began to institute sanctions on individual Israelis and Israeli companies that he intimated were only the beginning.
And, indeed, in May, as Israel geared up for the Rafah battle, the administration announced the withholding of weapons already approved for delivery by Congress. There was also the blackmail/bribe strategy of offering Israel intelligence information if it would limit its incursion. The UN vote elevating Palestinian status was likely a way member states could slap at Israel without repercussions.
Israel is likely to do what it has to do to defend its people. The UN through UNRWA has already shown itself to be an accessory to Hamas and a participant in Hamas war crimes — both in Israel and against its own people. Later, when the “fog of war” dissipates, and the outcomes are closer to the John Spencer model than the Hamas model, the UN should find itself in the dock.
The number change is an attempt to deflect its guilt.
Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of The Jewish Policy Center and Editor of inFOCUS Quarterly.
The post UN Admits Hamas Lied on Casualty Numbers; But the Damage Is Done first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New York Times Campus ‘Middle-of-the-Road’ on Israel Is Actually Pretty Far Out
The New York Times building in New York City. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
“It Can Be Lonely to Have a Middle-of-the Road Opinion on the Middle East,” is the headline over a recent New York Times news article. “Some college students and faculty members are seeking space for nuanced perspectives on the Israel-Hamas war on deeply divided campuses,” a subheadline explains.
What examples does the Times offer up of “nuanced perspectives” and “middle-of-the road” opinion?
One person named in the Times article is a Columbia student named Aharon Dardik. The Times describes him as “a pacifist who spent his teen years with his family in the West Bank but who ultimately refused to serve in the army in Israel. He believes in working with Israelis and Palestinians toward collective liberation and a world not divided by ethnonationalist allegiances.”
A “world not divided by ethnonationalist allegiances” seems like an extremist utopian fantasy, not “nuanced” or “middle of the road.”
The Times doesn’t mention Dardik’s extreme description of Israel’s actions in Gaza as a “plausible genocide,” his praise of extreme anti-Israel congresswoman Ilhan Omar, or his support for gradually phasing out Columbia’s partnership with Tel Aviv University, all of which were mentioned in a piece about him in RealClearPolitics. The Times doesn’t mention that he was court-martialed by the Israel Defense Forces six times and spent about 4 months in an Israeli military prison, as Moment magazine has reported. It doesn’t report Dardik’s expression of support for the Columbia “encampment” and for the takeover of Hamilton Hall by anti-Israel protesters, which are also in the Moment account.
It all doesn’t sound too nuanced or middle of the road to me.
Another person named in the Times article is a professor at Swarthmore College, Sa’ed Atshan. The Times claims the professor “tries to make sure there is complexity in everything he teaches in his Contemporary Israel and Palestine class.” Atshan told NPR that he is a pacifist, and that “it’s difficult to be a pacifist in the U.S. where guns are so pervasive and a world where violence is so pervasive. In a world where the military industrial complex is transnational and has its tentacles everywhere we go.” The Philadelphia Inquirer has described him as a supporter of the movement to Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel, and as a proponent of a “one state solution” that would be an end to Israel as a Jewish state.
Another of the Times’s examples is Dov Waxman, a professor at UCLA who “wrote on social media that he supported the International Criminal Court’s request for an arrest warrant for Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, a position he said he took as a supporter of international law.”
These people don’t seem that “middle of the road” or “nuanced” to me. That the Times would describe them as such says more about the Times and its biases than about the realities of the situation on American college campuses.
It’s not even clear how “lonely” these characters are. The Times claims Dardik started a group at Columbia that has “over 100 members.” Waxman recently was invited to speak at a Harvard conference on antisemitism on campus, convened by Derek Penslar, who describes himself as “Head of Harvard’s Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias.” There, according to an account in Harvard magazine, Waxman asserted that “the media often exaggerated campus antisemitism.” Atshan gathered support from a petition signed by 750 people, according to the Inquirer. They’re all getting adulatory press coverage from the New York Times describing them, not that accurately, as “middle of the road.”
Maybe they look like “middle of the road” from the vantage point of the New York Times newsroom. Not so, though, from the perspective of the Israeli or American public. The real loners are the Times editors, who persist in pushing a point of view about Israel that is far out of the mainstream. It may boost Times circulation on a few formerly elite college campuses, but it also explains a lot about the newspaper’s fading credibility.
Ira Stoll was managing editor of The Forward and North American editor of The Jerusalem Post. His media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.
The post New York Times Campus ‘Middle-of-the-Road’ on Israel Is Actually Pretty Far Out first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Republican Jewish Coalition Endorses Mike Johnson to Retain Speaker of the House Role
US House Speaker Mike Johnson speaks to members of the media at the Capitol building, April 20, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Ken Cedeno
The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) has endorsed Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) to retain his title as speaker of the House of Representatives, citing his strident advocacy for Israel and commitment to combating antisemitism.
“[Rep. Mike Johnson] has shown courageous leadership and moral clarity in taking bold action to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the American Jewish community against unprecedented levels of antisemitism, and resolutely defended the State of Israel as it continues to fight an existential war against Iran and its terrorist proxies,” RJC wrote on X/Twitter.
“Speaker Johnson has more than earned our full-throated and enthusiastic support to lead the Republican Majority in the 119th Congress,” RJC added.
The RJC’s endorsement comes as Johnson has launched a bid to keep his position as speaker of the House of Representatives. Johnson has received immense criticism from the far-right wing of the Republican party after he helped push through a spending bill that failed to raise the federal debt limit. Over the holiday season, Johnson has faced a rebellion from lawmakers within his party and has had to work alongside Democrats to keep the federal government running, calling into question the extent of his support among fellow Republicans.
Over the course of his term as speaker, Johnson has established himself as a stalwart ally of Israel. Last May, the speaker delivered a keynote speech at the US Embassy of Israel, in which he vowed that America will stand with the Jewish state “in their time of greatest need.” Johnson spearheaded an invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address the US Congress, calling out Democrats for expressing half-hearted support to the Jewish state. He subsequently blasted Vice President Kamala Harris for skipping Netanyahu’s address, suggesting that Harris sought to mollify pro-Palestine activists during her failed presidential campaign.
Johnson also placed the “Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act”—legislation which would strip tax-exempt status from charities that lend support to terrorism—on the floor of the House of Representatives. The legislation narrowly passed in the House of Representatives in November.
The post Republican Jewish Coalition Endorses Mike Johnson to Retain Speaker of the House Role first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Ritchie Torres Blasts Columbia Over ‘Intifada’ Student Publication, Calls For ‘Revolution’ Against ‘Far-Left’
US Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) speaks during the House Financial Services Committee hearing in Washington, DC, Sept. 30, 2021. Photo: Al Drago/Pool via REUTERS
Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) blasted Columbia University over the weekend over their lackadaisical approach to combating antisemitism, excoriating the Ivy League institution for allowing a terrorist-supporting student group to exist on campus.
“Columbia University is so embedded in anti-Israel propaganda that it has a publication entitled, quote, ‘The Columbia Intifada.’ What is needed in our society is a revolution of the responsible against the intifada idiocy of the far-left,” Torres said in a statement on Sunday.
Earlier this month, the prestigious university came under fire after it was revealed that ‘Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine’—a cohort of anti-Israel student activists—distributed a publication titled ‘The Columbia Intifada’ around campus. Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) reportedly printed 1,000 copies of the publication, which included articles titled “Zionist Peace Means Palestinian Blood,”and “The Myth of the Two-State Solution.”
When pressed about the publication, Columbia University criticized the students involved and indicated that it would consider administering punishment.
“Using the Columbia name for a publication that glorifies violence and makes individuals in our community feel targeted in any way is a breach of our values,” Columbia said in a statement.
“As we have said repeatedly, discrimination and promoting violence or terror is not acceptable and antithetical to what our community stands for. We are investigating this incident through our applicable offices and policies,” the university continued.
Though the publication is not officially recognized by Columbia University, critics argue that it indicates a thriving anti-Israel sentiment on the prestigious campus.
This is not the first time that Torres has lambasted Columbia over their failure to protect Jewish students on campus. Over the past year, Torres has repeatedly condemned the campus for allowing pro-Palestine students to chant slogans perceived by many to be antisemitic. He has also called Columbia’s anti-Israel professors “pseudo-intellectuals.”
In addition, the congressman has commended New York University (NYU) for expanding its anti-harassment and non-discrimination policies to protect students who support the existence of Israel. NYU’s new hate speech policies state that deploying “code words like ‘Zionist’” do not necessarily shield students from violating the university conduct policies. He has called on Columbia to implement a similar policy.
In the year following the Hamas terrorist group’s slaughter of roughly 1200 people throughout southern Israel, Columbia has become a hotbed of pro-Palestine protests. Immediately following the Oct. 7 massacre, a litany of Columbia student groups issued statements expressing approval of the Hamas attacks and assigning blame exclusively to Israel. A mob of pro-Palestinian protesters held a demonstration in front of the City University of New York Hillel on Tuesday, shouting at Jewish students to get “out of the Middle East” and “go back to Brooklyn.”
Many Columbia campus groups have implemented policies banning self-professed “Zionists” from membership, effectively excluding the majority of Jewish students. Columbia University student Khymani James publicly stated that Zionists “don’t deserve to live.” The Ivy League university has not confirmed if James has been permanently expelled from the campus.
The post Ritchie Torres Blasts Columbia Over ‘Intifada’ Student Publication, Calls For ‘Revolution’ Against ‘Far-Left’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login