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.
Appropriating the Holocaust to stick the knife in over genocide accusations against Israel.
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
Syrian Government, Kurds Agree to Integration Deal, US Hails ‘Historic Milestone’
Members of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) queue to settle their status with Syrian government in Raqqa, Syria, Jan. 27, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Karam al-Masri
The Syrian government and Kurdish forces declared a ceasefire deal on Friday that sets out a phased integration of Kurdish fighters into the state, averting a potentially bloody battle and drawing US praise for a “historic milestone.”
The sides announced the deal after government forces under President Ahmed al-Sharaa captured swathes of northern and eastern Syria from the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) group this month. This forced the Kurdish forces to retreat into a shrinking enclave in the northeast.
The fate of the SDF, which took over a quarter or more of Syria during its 2011-24 civil war, has been one of the biggest issues looming over Syria since Islamist insurgents led by Sharaa toppled President Bashar al-Assad 14 months ago.
US envoy Tom Barrack, who has been closely involved in mediation efforts, declared Friday’s accord “a profound and historic milestone in Syria’s journey toward national reconciliation, unity, and enduring stability.”
The SDF was once Washington’s main Syrian ally, playing a vital part in the fight against Islamic State terrorists. But its position grew weaker as President Donald Trump built close ties with Sharaa, a former al Qaeda commander who has now brought almost all of Syria back under the authority of Damascus.
US ENVOY PRAISES ‘COURAGEOUS STEPS’
Under the agreement, forces that had massed along front lines in the north would pull back and Interior Ministry security forces would deploy to the center of the cities of Hasakah and Qamishli in the northeast, both now held by the SDF.
The agreement includes the formation of a military division that will include three SDF brigades, in addition to a brigade for forces in the SDF-held town of Kobani, also known as Ain al-Arab, which will be affiliated to the governorate of Aleppo.
The Syrian official said the military division in the northeast would include “groups from the SDF within brigades, alongside other brigades.”
Governing bodies set up by the Kurdish-led groups in the northeast are to be merged with state institutions. But Elham Ahmad, a senior Kurdish official, told reporters via an interpreter that they would retain the co-chair system developed under autonomy-minded Kurdish authorities, with one male director and one female director.
Damascus and the SDF first struck an integration deal last March, but made scant progress toward implementation before a year-end deadline, paving the way for the government offensive.
“Both sides have taken courageous steps: the Syrian government in extending meaningful inclusion and rights, and the Kurdish communities in embracing a unified framework that honors their contributions while advancing the common good,” Barrack said.
Kurds have been on high alert for a potential government thrust into their remaining enclave, mindful of last year’s violence against minority Alawites and Druze.
Noah Bonsey, senior adviser with the International Crisis Group think tank, said the deal was “a potentially historic turning point” that appeared to lay out a middle ground for both sides.
“It spares northeast Syria what could have been a really ugly military showdown. Implementation will be tricky. There are a lot of challenges ahead,” he said.
Turkey said it was scrutinizing the agreement. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said “genuine integration is in Syria’s interest, and the parties are already aware of its conditions.”
Turkey has sent forces into Syria several times since 2016, deeming the SDF an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which took up arms against the Turkish state in 1984 but began a peace process with Ankara in 2025.
UNIFYING SYRIAN TERRITORY
Ahmad, the Kurdish official, said France and the United States should establish a mechanism to ensure the deal is implemented correctly, citing fears it could be derailed by “spoilers,” without specifying further.
Syrian officials said on Friday they feared figures within the PKK who reject the deal would not abide by the ceasefire.
An SDF statement said the deal “aims to unify Syrian territory and achieve full integration in the region.” The Syrian government shared an almost identical statement with Reuters.
A senior Syrian government official told Reuters the deal was final and had been reached late on Thursday night, and that implementation was to begin immediately.
The statements did not address control of the last remaining SDF-controlled border crossing to northern Iraq, known as Semalka. The Syrian official said the Syrian state would take over all border crossings.
Ahmad said Semalka border officials would be integrated into the central state but that more discussions would need to be held with Damascus.
Uncategorized
US Imposes Sanctions on Iran’s Interior Minister, Businessman
USA and Iranian flags are seen in this illustration taken, Sept. 8, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
The United States on Friday imposed sanctions on Iranian Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni and a businessman it said helped launder money for Tehran, as President Donald Trump’s administration ramps up pressure on the Islamic Republic.
The Department of the Treasury, announcing the move, said Momeni was responsible for a brutal security crackdown in Iran this month as he oversees law enforcement forces it said were responsible for the deaths of thousands of peaceful protesters.
Trump has in recent weeks issued threats to intervene in Iran over the bloody suppression of the protests and has sent warships to the Middle East, even as he has said he plans to talk with the government there.
The financial sanctions on Friday also targeted five other Iranian security officials involved in “violently repressing the Iranian people,” the Treasury said in a statement.
Sanctions were also issued against investor Babak Zanjani and two digital asset exchanges registered in Britain that the Treasury said had processed funds linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US would continue to target Iranian elites and their networks, who he said exploit digital assets to evade sanctions and finance cybercriminal operations.
“Like rats on a sinking ship, the regime is frantically wiring funds stolen from Iranian families to banks and financial institutions around the world. Rest assured, Treasury will act,” Bessent said in the statement.
Uncategorized
US Slows Transfers of Islamic State Detainees to Iraq, Sources Say
Syrian security forces stand guard outside al-Aqtan prison, where some Islamic State detainees are held, in Raqqa, Syria, Jan. 23, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Karam al-Masri
Transfers of Islamic State detainees from Syria to Iraq by the US military have slowed this week, seven sources familiar with the matter said, following calls by Baghdad for other countries to repatriate thousands of foreign jihadists.
The US military said on Jan. 21 it had started to transfer the detainees. Its announcement followed the rapid collapse of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in northeast Syria, which caused uncertainty about the security of prisons and detention camps they were guarding.
The United States had expected to transfer up to 7,000 fighters to Iraq within days. But more than a week later, only about 500 have been moved, according to two Iraqi judicial officials, two Iraqi security officials, and three diplomats, some from countries whose nationals are among those transferred.
An Iraqi foreign ministry official put the number at under 500 so far.
Baghdad asked the US to slow the influx to make time for negotiations with other countries on repatriating their own nationals among the detainees and to prepare additional facilities to host the fighters, the Iraqi officials and a Western diplomat told Reuters.
Those moved to Iraqi facilities so far include about 130 Iraqis and some 400 foreigners, the Iraqi judicial sources, the Iraqi security officials and a Western diplomat said.
The slowdown, which has not previously been reported, is linked to Western governments’ reservations about bringing home their own citizens who joined the Islamic State‘s brutal self-declared caliphate across swathes of Syria and Iraq from 2014.
Most foreign fighters were subsequently captured in Syria and held in prisons in the northeast for years without trial.
The US State Department and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment on the transfers.
IRAQ BALKS AT MASS TRANSFER
Iraq agreed to host the detainees being moved by the US military after a brief escape by dozens of fighters from one facility in Syria prompted concerns that more could flee, Iraqi government officials said.
But although it has already tried and sentenced dozens of foreign fighters in recent years, Baghdad balked at the prospect of having the full 7,000 in its custody, the officials said.
The influx could overwhelm Iraq’s courts and prisons, and sentencing detainees to death would prompt criticism from Western countries and rights groups, they said.
“It’s a trap,” one of the senior Iraqi judicial sources said. “These Western countries object to the death penalty, but refuse to receive their terrorists. Why should we bear the burden of being seen as the butcher?”
Responding to questions from Reuters, Hisham al-Alawi, Undersecretary of Iraq‘s Foreign Ministry for Political Planning, said fewer than 500 detainees had been transferred to Iraq so far.
“For years, Iraq has been urging foreign states to assume their responsibilities by taking back their citizens and dealing with them in accordance with their own laws. While some countries have taken the initiative, a large number of states have not responded to our requests,” Alawi said.
The dilemma of what to do with foreign nationals who joined Islamic State has plagued Western countries for the last decade.
Securing guilty verdicts against such detainees in their home countries could be harder than in Iraq, said four diplomats from countries whose nationals were captured in Syria, citing a greater need to prove direct participation in violent crimes.
Governments in such countries could face a public backlash if Islamic State fighters were repatriated and then freed, the diplomats said.
The return of an Islamic State-linked woman to Norway in 2020 caused a cabinet crisis that ultimately brought down the government.
As a result of Western nations’ hesitations, thousands of foreign fighters detained in Syria and Iraq remained there for nearly a decade – even though the US, which repatriated and tried its nationals, urged other countries to do the same.
REPATRIATION THE ONLY ANSWER, EXPERT SAYS
The senior Iraqi judicial source said Baghdad was working with the US State Department on increasing pressure on other countries to begin repatriations.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after transfers had begun that foreign Islamic State members would be in Iraq temporarily. “The United States urges countries to take responsibility and repatriate their citizens in these facilities to face justice,” he said.
Two diplomats from countries with nationals now in Iraq said their governments faced an uncomfortable choice between repatriation – which would be unpopular domestically – and the possibility that their nationals would face the death penalty if tried in Iraq, an outcome that could outrage voters at home.
One of the diplomats said Baghdad had begun conversations with their country about repatriations but that their government’s policy was unchanged.
“It would be difficult for us to accept that they are transferred to Iraq if they are then going to get their head chopped off,” the second diplomat said.
Letta Tayler, an associate fellow at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, said the mass transfer of detainees to Iraq “has mind-boggling legal implications, none of them positive.”
It could prolong their indefinite detention without trial and place detainees at risk of torture and executions based on flawed convictions, Tayler said. The US has raised concerns about unfair trials of Islamic State detainees in Iraq.
“The only viable solution is for countries with fair justice systems to repatriate their nationals,” Tayler said.

(@Ostrov_A)
Accusing Israel of weaponizing antisemitism even in advance of a reaction to an Amnesty report.