Uncategorized
Amnesty Lied About Israeli ‘Genocide’ — the Media Gladly Joined In
Amnesty International’s latest significant report, “‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza,” is in keeping with the organization’s long history of hostility towards Israel — and accuses the Jewish State of genocide in Gaza.
According to Amnesty, its report:
documents Israel’s actions during its offensive on the occupied Gaza Strip from 7 October 2023. It examines the killing of civilians, damage to and destruction of civilian infrastructure, forcible displacement, the obstruction or denial of life-saving goods and humanitarian aid, and the restriction of power supplies. It analyses Israel’s intent through this pattern of conduct and statements by Israeli decision-makers. It concludes that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
Amnesty’s conclusion, however, is categorically wrong.
Amnesty Redefines Genocide
Having already resorted, in 2022, to formulating a totally new definition of what it calls “the crime of apartheid,” Amnesty has changed the definition of genocide to suit its predetermined conclusions.
Perhaps knowing it doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on, @amnesty has resorted to manufacturing its own definition of ‘#genocide’ against Israel, by claiming in their report that the universally established – and sole accepted legal definition – as outlined in the Genocide… pic.twitter.com/cUTDliObR5
— Arsen Ostrovsky
(@Ostrov_A) December 5, 2024
Despite this, the coverage of Amnesty’s genocide report demonstrates how too many journalists are not prepared to exercise their own critical thinking.
The media commonly suffer from the “Halo Effect,” whereby journalists cite non-governmental and so-called human rights organizations like Amnesty, treating them as beyond reproach and assuming their information is authoritative.
This effect is exacerbated by the need for the media to get the story out quickly. It’s unlikely that a journalist would spend their time properly reviewing the substantial 296-page Amnesty report. So, Amnesty’s talking points in its six-page press release summary or statements at a press conference will be what appears in the media.
And the news cycle moves quickly. By the time those who wish to respond to the report in-depth will have finished reading it and issuing a response, the Amnesty story will be over. The impact of the report, however, and the genocide charge, will last much longer, becoming part of the media narrative, as Israel comes under sustained assault from multiple sources seeking to delegitimize its right to self-defense and even its right to exist.
NGO Monitor did manage to obtain the Amnesty press release in advance, noting in its preliminary analysis that the six-page, 2,500-word embargoed summary “highlights the absence of substance and the dominance of slogans and myths. Following previous practice, the press release declares Israel to be guilty of genocide, regardless of the reality in Gaza. This basic paradigm is evidenced by Amnesty’s highly selective use of ‘evidence,’ including fundamental omission of facts that do not support its political line, and the blatantly manipulative discussion of civilian casualties.”
This discussion of civilian casualties is taken up by Salo Aizenberg, who notes Amnesty’s avoidance of addressing the combatants killed figure and the resulting civilian/combatant ratio would have shown evidence of the IDF’s precision targeting, thus eviscerating Amnesty’s report.
I noticed on page 59 Amnesty cites an IDF claim from Jan 2024 saying they killed 8,000 fighters. I searched for the recent estimates of 17,000-20,000 (I searched several numbers) and read the entire section 6.1.2 “Scale of Killings and Injuries” where casualties are discussed in…
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) December 5, 2024
NGO Monitor also noted that Amnesty had “made an embargoed text of the report and a lengthy press release available to select journalists in an attempt to ensure favorable media coverage. Although under no obligation to adhere to Amnesty’s embargo, journalists who cover Amnesty’s report should avoid this manipulation and incorporate detailed critical analysis.”
It appears that ship has already sailed as media outlets, including Associated Press, CNN, Reuters, AFP, BBC, The Guardian, Washington Post, and Sky News, jump on the story.
Amnesty Israel Rejects the Report
So, it’s unlikely that any international press will do the extra legwork to question Amnesty’s malleable definition of genocide. It’s also unlikely that any will sit up and take notice of the press release (Hebrew) issued by Amnesty’s Israel branch.
While still highly critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza, Amnesty Israel states it “does not accept the claim that genocide has been proven to be taking place in the Gaza Strip and does not accept the operative findings of the report.”
Haaretz, meanwhile, which is followed religiously by foreign media, reports on a joint statement from several members of Amnesty Israel and Jewish members of Amnesty International who:
argue that report’s “artificial analysis” — especially with regard to the widespread destruction in Gaza, which allegedly indicates a genocidal intent — suggests that the authors “reached a predetermined conclusion — and did not draw a conclusion based on an objective review of the facts and the law.”
“From the outset, the report was referred to in internal correspondence as the ‘genocide report,’ even when research was still in its initial stages,” the Jewish employees reveal.
“This is a strong indication of bias and also a factor that can cause additional bias: imagine how difficult it is for a researcher to work for months on a report titled ‘genocide report’ and then to have to conclude that it is ‘only’ about crimes against humanity. Predetermined conclusions of this kind are not typical of other Amnesty International investigations.”
The joint statement further stated that the report “is motivated by a desire to support a popular narrative among Amnesty International’s target audience,” and that it stems “unfortunately, from an atmosphere within Amnesty International of minimizing the seriousness of the October 7 massacre.
“It is a failure — and sometimes even a refusal — to address the Israeli victims in a personal and humane manner.” According to the Jewish staff, the international organization also “ignored efforts to raise these concerns.”
But will Western and foreign journalists take any notice?
Holocaust Appropriation
It says much about a journalist’s mindset when the Holocaust is appropriated to subconsciously associate Israel’s actions in Gaza, which Amnesty is claiming to be genocide, with the very real Nazi genocide against the Jewish people.
Sadly, both the Associated Press and The Guardian went down that road in their stories on the Amnesty report.
Whatever is happening in Gaza, it is categorically nothing like the Holocaust.
So why does @AP need to mention it other than to subconsciously plant an offensive and inappropriate parallel? pic.twitter.com/81VWL1LaPZ
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 5, 2024
Accusing Israel of weaponizing antisemitism even in advance of a reaction to an Amnesty report.
We see you, @guardian. pic.twitter.com/n9u4LXP6Uu
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 5, 2024
The Guardian even went as far as to preempt Israeli reaction to the Amnesty report, claiming it would “generate accusations of antisemitism,” effectively accusing Israelis and Jews of weaponizing antisemitism in bad faith.
AFP didn’t even bother to include any Israeli reaction to the report beyond the boilerplate line: “Israel has repeatedly and forcefully denied allegations of genocide, accusing Hamas of using civilians as human shields.”
The Washington Post quotes Paul O’Brien, executive director of Amnesty International USA who says: “What the law requires is that we prove that there is sufficient evidence that there is [genocidal] intent, amongst all the other complex intents that are going to exist in warfare.”
And this is the crux: The death toll and destruction in Gaza can be explained as an inevitable and tragic outcome of a war where Hamas have done everything possible to put Gaza’s civilian population in harm’s way. And Israel has taken every precaution to avoid civilian casualties, while still allowing humanitarian aid to cross into Gaza.
The inevitable result of Amnesty’s approach is to turn every war into a genocide, thereby stripping the word of its true meaning.
Israel’s actions are not those of a state that shows intent to commit a genocide, and to charge Israel with such a crime shows just how divorced from reality Amnesty International and its cheerleaders are.
Sadly, the international media have given an unquestioning platform for this libel.
The author is the Managing Editor of 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 Amnesty Lied About Israeli ‘Genocide’ — the Media Gladly Joined In first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Uncategorized
Alabama is forcing the Ten Commandments into my children’s classrooms. As a rabbi, I’m horrified
As of this month, many public schools in Alabama are required to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms, libraries, lunchrooms and all other common spaces.
Proponents of Senate Bill 99, signed into law by Gov. Kay Iven on April 10, have claimed that these enforced displays are historical, educational and religiously neutral. As an Alabama rabbi — and a father of two future public school students — I see that defense as not just incorrect, but also deceitful, especially because the version of the Ten Commandments that the law endorses is, itself, not historically accurate.
The Ten Commandments are a sacred Jewish text. They were given to the Jewish people, written in Hebrew, and rooted in a specifically Jewish story of liberation and covenant. This law takes that text, strips it of its context, and reshapes it using a Christian lens.
The version of the Ten Commandments that will be displayed in our schools omits the text’s defining opening: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.” That line grounds the commandments in the narrative of the Jewish people. To remove it is not preservation. It is distortion.
Claims of the law’s neutrality are a strategy meant to give legal and cultural cover to the fact that it clearly privileges one particular Christian worldview in public institutions meant to serve everyone.
This does not reflect the beliefs or desires of all Christians. Many Christian leaders and communities understand that faith loses its integrity when it is elevated or enforced by the state. Many of my Alabama colleagues, across religious traditions, are dismayed by this as well. They understand that this law is an ideological move that uses religion to draw boundaries around belonging, and object to that weaponization of something sacred.
In opposing Senate Bill 99, the American Historical Association made the point plainly, arguing that this law presents a distorted version of American religious history under the label of “historical truth.”
The text of the bill describes the Ten Commandments as “a key part of the Judeo-Christian religious and moral tradition” — a claim that does not reflect the consensus of historians, legal scholars or the judiciary.
The idea of a unified “Judeo-Christian” tradition is itself a misleading modern construction. It did not come from Judaism. It emerged within a Christian framework and recasts Judaism as a precursor to Christianity rather than a living, evolving tradition in its own right.
Alabama students, like students across this country, deserve an education that is accurate, intellectually honest and grounded in real scholarship. Public schools should be places where students can form identities they are proud of, develop the values that guide them, and begin to understand how they can contribute to the world around them. They should be places where students feel safe, nurtured and valued.
This law erodes those principles. Instead, it replaces real education with ideology, narrowing what students are allowed to learn and how they are taught to understand their country. It denies students exposure to the full diversity of American religious life, replacing that rich landscape with a single, imposed narrative.
When a classroom wall presents one version of a religious text as if it were foundational to civic life, it sends a message. Some students will see themselves reflected in the text. Others, like my children, will learn that they are on the outside. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, atheists and others will be further pushed to the margins.
This law is about power: who has it, and who does not. It is about whose story is told, and whose is reshaped to fit someone else’s narrative. And it teaches something dangerous: not to think, but to conform. To get in line. To stay silent. To learn, early on, where you stand.
The United States cannot be great when it elevates one religion over others. Our students deserve better than indoctrination presented as education. They deserve a system that reflects that we are a nation shaped not by one tradition, but by many.
As a rabbi, I am angry that a sacred text from my tradition is being taken, altered and presented as something it is not.
As a Jew, I am furious that our story is being stripped of its context and repurposed in a way that marginalizes others.
And as a father of two children who will be in public school, I am deeply uneasy about what this signals to them about who belongs — and who does not.
That is why we must speak out and do everything we can to oppose and repeal this law. We must work to protect a better kind of American society — one that ensures our public institutions remain open to all, and that our children grow up in a world that reflects the dignity of difference, not the demand for conformity.
The post Alabama is forcing the Ten Commandments into my children’s classrooms. As a rabbi, I’m horrified appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Some Tankers Cross Strait of Hormuz Before Shots Fired, Ship-Tracking Data Shows
A satellite image shows the ship movement at the Strait of Hormuz on April 17, 2026, in Space. EUROPEAN UNION/COPERNICUS SENTINEL-2/Handout via REUTERS
More than a dozen tankers, including three sanctioned vessels, passed through the Strait of Hormuz after a 50-day blockade was lifted on Friday, shipping data showed, before Iran reimposed restrictions on Saturday and fired at some vessels.
Reopening the strait is key for Gulf producers to resume full oil and gas supplies to the world, and end what the International Energy Agency has called the worst-ever supply disruption.
US President Donald Trump said on Friday Iran had agreed to open the strait, while Iranian officials said they wanted the US to fully lift its blockade of Iranian tankers.
Western shipping companies cautiously welcomed the announcements but said more clarity was needed, including on the presence of sea mines, before their vessels could transit.
IRAN RESUMES RESTRICTIONS
The ships that passed through the strait on Friday and Saturday via Iranian waters south of Larak island were mainly older, non-Western-owned vessels and included four sanctioned ships, according to ship-tracking data.
Iran arranged passage for a limited number of oil tankers and commercial ships following prior agreements in negotiations, a spokesperson for Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said.
Other ships have been seen approaching the strait and turning back as Iran said it would maintain strict controls as long as the US continues its blockade of Iranian ports.
The UK Navy reported on Saturday that Iranian gunboats fired at some ships attempting to cross the strait.
Some merchant vessels received radio messages from Iran’s navy saying the strait was shut again and that no ships were allowed to pass, shipping sources said on Saturday.
Ship-tracking data showed five vessels loaded with liquefied natural gas from Ras Laffan in Qatar approaching the strait on Saturday morning.
No LNG cargoes have transited the waterway since the US-Israeli war with Iran began on February 28.
Hundreds of ships have been stuck in the Gulf since the conflict started and Tehran closed the strait, forcing Gulf oil and gas producers to sharply cut production.
Top producers such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iraq and Kuwait say they need steady tanker flows and unrestricted passage through the strait to resume normal export operations.
Uncategorized
Trump Greenlights Russian Oil to Ease Strain on Global Markets After War with Iran
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in Washington, DC, US, March 27, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
i24 News – The Trump administration has authorized a 30-day emergency waiver allowing the maritime purchase of Russian oil, reversing a hardline stance in an effort to stabilize skyrocketing global energy prices.
The Treasury Department announced Friday that the license for crude and petroleum products will remain in effect until May 16, 2026, responding to intense pressure from international partners struggling with the fallout of the war with Iran.
This policy pivot comes as a surprise after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested earlier this week that no further exemptions would be granted:
“As negotiations with Iran accelerate, the administration seeks to ensure oil availability for those who need it most. We must prevent a total price collapse for consumers while the geopolitical situation remains volatile.”
Ensuring global oil availability is paramount for the US as over 80 energy facilities in the Middle East have been damaged by recent war with Iran. With the November midterm elections approaching, record-high fuel prices at the pump remain a primary vulnerability for the Republican party. By allowing Russian oil back into the maritime flow, the administration hopes to neutralize “pain at the pump” before voters head to the polls.