RSS
Why Does This UK Paper Keep Printing Blood Libels Against Jews and Israel?
A person walks past pictures of hostages kidnapped during the deadly Oct. 7 attack by Hamas from Gaza, projected on a screen, in Tel Aviv, Israel, May 31, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Marko Djurica
For the third time since the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre, The Guardian has published an op-ed evoking the antisemitic comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany.
The first piece employing the comparison was written by Swedish Jewish academic Raz Segal. It appeared in The Guardian only two weeks after the barbaric attack by the bloodthirsty pogromists, and was titled “Israel must stop weaponising the Holocaust” (emphasis added, and see our post here). The second such comparison, written by US writer John Oakes, was published last month (see our post here).
The latest such antisemitic libel approved by Guardian editors was written by an Israeli-born Jewish professor at Brown University named Omer Bartov (“As a former IDF soldier and historian of genocide, I was deeply disturbed by my recent visit to Israel,” Aug. 13).
Though editors no doubt thought they were checkmating the Jewish community by publishing two pieces by Jews hurling the Nazi analogy, the cynical exploitation of such “Jews Against Themselves” by non-Jews trying to popularize anti-Jewish lies dates at least as far back as medieval Europe.
During that time period, such Jewish defamers were often converts who Christianity, those who renounced their faith and became “Jewish informers.”
Today, they are more likely to be activists and academics who, rather than denouncing their identity, actually fancy themselves better Jews. Whereas, in the 13th century, such Jews were likely motivated by the desire to escape persecution, today’s variant are often merely trying to ensure social and professional acceptance within their coveted political or intellectual circles.
To get a sense of the flimsiness of the case Bartov makes in the Guardian, he cites, as his first “example” of Israel’s putatively genocidal Nazi tendencies, the anti-terror policies of then Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin during the First Intifada.
It was under Rabin’s leadership, he opines, that the IDF began “heading down a … slippery path” akin to “the indoctrination of the armed forces of Nazi Germany.” Tellingly, he sees no evidence of racist indoctrination of Palestinians in, for instance, the five year campaign of violence largely targeting civilians in the early 2000s known as the Second Intifada — a traumatic period in Israel’s history that he omits entirely from his nearly 7,500 word piece.
Bartov also cites grossly misleading quotes by Israeli leaders to allege genocidal intentions.
For instance, he omitted that on October 9, 2023, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant was referring to the Hamas terrorists who had, two days prior, committed the antisemitic massacres as “human animals” — not, as Bartov would have readers believe, all Gazans. Similarly, the Guardian columnist recycled the disproven framing of comments by the country’s prime minister citing the Biblical reference to Amalek.
Conversely, Bartov sees no such genocidal or Nazi pattern of behavior by Hamas — not in the annihilationist antisemitism codified in their founding charter, not in the savage ethnic cleansing of Jews they carried out on Oct. 7th, and not even in statements made by Hamas leaders promising to repeat the October massacre again and again.
More evidence that the writer was engaged in a pre-determined conclusion in search of evidence is found in the fact that nowhere in his op-ed does he mention — or try to challenge — experts who have argued that the IDF has taken more measures to avoid Palestinian civilian deaths than any army in history, and that the civilian to combatant casualty ratio is among the best of any army engaged in similar urban combat. That ratio is also far, far better than the international average of civilian to combats deaths during conflicts.
The Israeli army’s accomplishment is even more impressive when you consider the challenge posed by Hamas’ human shield policy (their exploitation of civilians and civilian infrastructure for terror activities).
Those, like Bartov, who frame the total number of (Hamas-claimed) deaths in Gaza as evidence of genocide are engaged in an intellectually and historically unserious assertion, as a recent op-ed by six former US Federal prosecutors of perpetrators of Nazi genocide argued:
Genocide is a crime based on intent, not one that is based specifically on numbers. If it were based on numbers, then the World War II Allies would have perpetrated genocide in Germany, where their forces killed 300,000 to 400,000 civilians in air operations alone, even apart from loss of life that occurred during ground offensives. No serious observer would contend that the Allies committed genocide against Germans during World War II.
German fatalities instead occurred as a result of the Allied waging of a manifestly defensive war to bring an end to aggression, war crimes, and genocide perpetrated by Germany. And those German civilian fatalities continued to mount until Nazi Germany at last surrendered — just as Hamas can and should do, at once, to end the war and the associated suffering in Gaza and Israel.
Israel too is waging a defensive war against ongoing aggression, war crimes and genocide, but it is taking far greater steps to protect civilian lives than Allied forces did.
Bartov’s myopic focus on Israel contrasts with his lack of intellectual or moral curiosity about the decisions and motivations of those who carried out the worst and most brutal massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, what one journalist who watched the unedited 40 minute film of Hamas’ atrocities described as “pure, predatory sadism”:
“The videos show pure, predatory sadism; no effort to spare those who pose no threat; and an eagerness to kill nearly matched by eagerness to disfigure the bodies of the [Jewish] victims. In several clips, the Hamas killers fire shots into the heads of people who are already dead. They count corpses, taking their time, and then shoot them again. Some of the clips I had not previously seen simply show the victims in a state of terror as they wait to be murdered…”.
It also illustrates what Balas Berkovitz described as the anti-Israel left’s campaign to turn October 7th into a “non-event,” citing the impact of an anti-Zionists’ “ideological edifice” that forces adherents to “dismiss real-world evidence that … challenge their established interpretations.” Instead of engaging in soul-searching, or reactions along the lines of “this is not how we imagined Palestinian resistance,” activists, and outlets like The Guardian, have only doubled down on their hatred of the Jewish State.
Further, the Guardian’s Nazi libel is more than just a morally reprehensible inversion of reality and a “dismissal of real-world evidence.” It also constitutes another example of their editors publishing content that, particularly in light of an unprecedented surge in antisemitism in the UK, serves to incite more hatred against British Jews, granting a permission structure for antisemites by effectively casting British Zionists as not just grossly misguided, but as accomplices to evil.
We’ve argued that The Guardian’s coverage since the Oct. 7 massacre has been effectively pro-Hamas. To that we’ll add that it’s also been antisemitic, in effect if not intent.
Adam Levick serves as co-editor of CAMERA UK — an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Why Does This UK Paper Keep Printing Blood Libels Against Jews and Israel? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Netanyahu Expects to Meet Trump Next Week in the US
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday he expects to travel to the United States next week for meetings with President Donald Trump, after a “great victory” in the 12-Day War with Iran last month.
Netanyahu said in a statement ahead of a cabinet meeting that the visit will also include talks with other top US officials, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.
“We still have a few things to finalize in order to reach a trade agreement in addition to other matters,” he said, referring to Trump’s tariff plans. “I’ll also have meetings with congressional and Senate leaders and some security meetings.”
Trump last month announced a ceasefire ending the hostilities between Israel and Iran.
The US president said last week that his administration would send letters to a number of countries notifying them of their higher tariff rates before July 9, when the duties are scheduled to revert from a temporary 10% level to a range of between 11% and 50% announced on April 2 and subsequently suspended.
The U.S. initially set a 17% tariff on Israeli goods sold in the United States.
The post Netanyahu Expects to Meet Trump Next Week in the US first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Haaretz Claim That IDF Was Ordered to Fire on Unarmed Gazans Refuted by Translation Discrepancies, Contradictions, and Eyewitness Accounts
Gazans receiving humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip. Photo: Col. Richard Kemp
A recent Haaretz exposé accusing the Israeli military of ordering troops to fire at unarmed civilians near food aid sites in Gaza relied on mistranslation, selective quotes, factual omissions, and contradictions to construct a narrative of unprovoked Israeli violence, according to independent observers interviewed by The Algemeiner.
Debunking the claim of indiscriminate fire by the IDF, the experts instead described widespread fear of Hamas, not the Israeli military.
The Haaretz report quickly gained traction in international media. Titled “’It’s a Killing Field’: IDF Soldiers Ordered to Shoot Deliberately at Unarmed Gazans Waiting for Humanitarian Aid,” it was cited by outlets such as NPR, CNN, and Reuters, .
British military analyst Andrew Fox criticized the article for its framing and language. One of the discrepancies he pointed to was the shift in the English version of the story from soldiers firing “towards” civilians, as stated in the Hebrew original, to “at” them. The original Hebrew subheader also specified that soldiers were told to fire “towards” crowds “to distance them” from the aid sites, suggesting the shooting took place as a means of crowd control.
“It’s a matter of intent,” Fox told The Algemeiner. The phrase “‘at civilians’ means they are trying to kill them. It’s misleading because they’re firing warnings to avoid harm rather than shooting to cause harm.”
“Warning shots are something all armies do — we did in Afghanistan — but when you pull the trigger there’s always a risk of harm, and that’s not great,” explained Fox, a think tank researcher and former British Army officer. “Still, there’s a huge difference between that and deliberately targeting civilians.”
Colonel Richard Kemp, a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, said that “shooting towards,” as in the original Hebrew, was “quite reasonable as a means to exercise crowd control in a war zone.”
“It is highly unlikely the IDF would be ordered to shoot at unarmed civilians unless they directly endangered them,” Kemp told The Algemeiner, citing Israel’s interest in the success of US-backed humanitarian relief efforts in Gaza. “The IDF rigidly follows laws of war. It makes no sense for the IDF to want to damage aid efforts. They cooperate with and facilitate [the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation] and want it to succeed. The ones who want it to fail are Hamas because it deprives them of control and funds. If anyone has been doing this shooting, it would be Hamas. They have the motive the IDF do not.”
There were other discrepancies in the original headline and its translation. Whereas the Hebrew version reads “Soldiers testify: IDF deliberately shoots towards Gazans near aid collection points,” the English version not only omitted any reference to mediating testimony or attribution, but also framed the event as an empirical fact: “IDF soldiers ordered to shoot deliberately at unarmed Gazans waiting for humanitarian aid.” Further, the phrase “waiting for humanitarian aid” may carry specific legal implications under international law, suggesting heightened vulnerability, whereas the Hebrew version referred more vaguely to crowds “near aid collection points.”
The subheader — which claimed soldiers were ordered to fire at unarmed civilians “even when no threat was present” — conflicted with the body of the text, which acknowledged that Israeli soldiers were wounded near the aid distribution zones. One sentence, appearing for the first time in the 21st paragraph, stood out: “There were also fatalities and injuries among IDF soldiers in these incidents.” The piece offered no explanation for how such casualties could occur if, as the article claims, no one else present was armed.
Elsewhere in the article, a soldier is quoted describing the IDF creating a “killing field,” supposedly involving heavy machine guns, mortars, and grenade launchers. But if such weapons were used with lethal intent, as Fox pointed out in a Substack post, the casualty rate would be far higher than the one to five reported per day. “That’s not a massacre,” he wrote, going on to quip that the only massacre to take place was one of “journalistic standards by Haaretz.”
“Could some soldiers accidentally miss and hit someone?” Fox wrote. “Yes. That is tragic and warrants investigation. However, the article itself acknowledges that the IDF is already examining those incidents. To jump from that to ‘deliberate killing fields’ is not responsible reporting. It is narrative laundering.”
The lack of video footage of the alleged mass shootings near GHF sites raises questions, given the large volume of media typically produced from Gaza, according to Fox, who noted that Hamas has repeatedly circulated images and clips for propaganda purposes.
“Every Gazan has a mobile phone, and numerous videos of other events have been released,” he wrote. “Why is there a total absence of any credible footage of these supposed IDF combined arms assaults on queuing civilians?”
Kemp, who visited two of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s distribution sites in the days following the report’s publication, described hearing distant gunfire but reported that the aid operation proceeded mostly without disruption.
Col. Richard Kemp at humanitarian aid site with Gazans. Photo: Provided
“None of the Gazans there showed any concerns [about the IDF] whatsoever,” he said. Many of the civilians identified Hamas, not the IDF, as the main threat to the aid effort — a dynamic not acknowledged in the Haaretz report — telling Kemp they could not return home for fear of being recognized and targeted by Hamas.
“I must have spoken to at least 50 Gazans at each site,” he said. “Many told me they feared Hamas and Hamas threatened them if they used the sites.”
Kemp added that the atmosphere was chaotic but manageable, with GHF workers — most of them local Gazans — interfacing directly with the crowds. He described people smiling, holding up food packages, and expressing gratitude for the aid.
“The overwhelming impression was how grateful they were to be getting free aid for once, as opposed to buying aid looted by Hamas and sold at a premium,” he told The Algemeiner.
Many Gazans at the GHF sites who spoke to Kemp voiced hatred for Hamas and praised the US-backed aid effort, with some chanting “kill Hamas” while others said “I love America” or expressed admiration for President Donald Trump. The alignment between Hamas and UN criticism of the food program was “shocking,” Kemp added, particularly given the visible gratitude expressed by many recipients.
“They associate this aid program with the US,” he said. “They seem to like it, whereas Hamas and the UN seem to be its greatest enemies.”
The post Haaretz Claim That IDF Was Ordered to Fire on Unarmed Gazans Refuted by Translation Discrepancies, Contradictions, and Eyewitness Accounts first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Former Australian Nurses Charged Over Threatening Viral Video Banned from NDIS
Illustrative: Supporters of Hamas gather for a rally in Melbourne, Australia. Photo: Reuters/Joel Carrett
Two former Australian nurses who were charged over a viral video in which they allegedly threatened to kill Israeli patients have been banned from working under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), four months after being suspended from their jobs at Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital in Sydney.
Earlier this year, Ahmad Rashad Nadir and Sarah Abu Lebdeh, both 27, gained international attention after they were seen in an online video posing as doctors and making inflammatory statements during a night shift conversation with Israeli influencer Max Veifer.
The widely circulated footage, which sparked international outrage and condemnation, showed Abu Lebdeh declaring she would refuse to treat Israeli patients and instead kill them, while Nadir made a throat-slitting gesture and claimed he had already killed many.
Following the incident, New South Wales authorities suspended their nursing registrations and banned them from working as nurses nationwide. They are now also prohibited from working with or providing any services — paid or unpaid — to NDIS participants for two years.
This latest ban, which took effect on May 9, applies nationwide and prohibits Nadir and Abu Lebdeh from working with NDIS participants or performing any role for or on behalf of NDIS providers in any Australian state or territory.
Abu Lebdeh was charged with federal offenses, including threatening violence against a group and using a carriage service to threaten, menace, and harass. If convicted, she faces up to 22 years in prison.
Nadir was charged with federal offenses, including using a carriage service to menace, harass, or cause offense, as well as possession of a prohibited drug.
Currently, both of them remain free on bail and have not yet entered any pleas, with a court appearance scheduled for July 29. They’ve been prohibited from leaving Australia or using social media while their cases proceed.
According to Nadir’s lawyer, the video was captured “without the consent and knowledge” of his client, and he intends to argue for its exclusion from court.
“We will be challenging the admissibility of the video recording because it was a private conversation which was recorded by the person overseas without my client’s consent and without his knowledge,” Nadir’s lawyer said. “That video recording was made secretly overseas and was unlawfully obtained.”
This incident, which drew international attention, occurred amid a surge of antisemitic acts across Australia since the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza began in October 2023, with Jewish institutions targeted in arson attacks and businesses defaced.
Antisemitism spiked to record levels in Australia — especially in Sydney and Melbourne, which are home to some 85 percent of the country’s Jewish population — following Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities, with the escalation continuing amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran.
According to a report from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), the country’s Jewish community experienced over 2,000 antisemitic incidents between October 2023 and September 2024, more than quadrupling from 495 in the prior 12 months.
The number of antisemitic physical assaults in Australia rose from 11 in 2023 to 65 in 2024. The level of antisemitism for the past year was six times the average of the preceding 10 years.
The post Former Australian Nurses Charged Over Threatening Viral Video Banned from NDIS first appeared on Algemeiner.com.