Tag: Human Rights Watch

  • The Wall Street Journal Has Many Ways to Deny Genocide

    Spread the love

    Original article by Gregory Shupak republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

    As more and more scholars, and one rights group after another, confirm that Israel is carrying out a genocide in Gaza, it’s becoming ever more obvious that those who deny the genocide are the intellectual and moral equivalents of people who deny other genocides, such as the ones inflicted on the Indigenous peoples of the Americas, or the Holocaust, or the Armenian Genocide.

    Yet the Wall Street Journal persists in running genocide denial. Looking at how the paper does so enables us to not only refute their falsehoods, but also to gain insight into the tactics Gaza genocide denialists, and genocide deniers in general, employ. These include:

    • Hand-waving: brushing off the cataclysmic damage Israel and the US have done to Palestinians as merely the unavoidable byproducts of war;
    • Victim-blaming: saying that Palestinian resistance groups such as Hamas are to blame for the suffering in Gaza;
    • Inverting perpetrator and victim: presenting Palestinians, and not Israelis, as genocidal, with Israelis, rather than Palestinians, cast as the targets;
    • Obscurantism: offering dubious pieces of information, usually in a decontextualized manner, as if they showed that Israel has pursued its military objectives humanely;
    • Repudiation: flatly rejecting well-documented facts while offering little or no counter-evidence.

    ‘Justifiable, even necessary’

    WSJ: ‘Zionist’ Contains Multitudes

    Avi Shafran (Wall Street Journal, 7/22/25): “When critics distort Israel’s goal of self-preservation into a desire for genocide, the accusers have gone from righteous protesters to ignorant haters.”

    Ami Magazine columnist Avi Shafran’s Journal piece (7/22/25) utilized both hand-waving and victim-blaming. He asserted:

    When critics distort Israel’s goal of self-preservation into a desire for genocide, the accusers have gone from righteous protesters to ignorant haters…. Civilians suffer and die in the prosecution of justifiable, even necessary, wars. That tragedy is intensified when you are fighting an enemy who hides behind human shields. Eradicating the engines of terror in Gaza requires attacking the places from which they operate: hospitals, schools and mosques.

    Israel’s supposedly “justifiable, even necessary” war has entailed such policies (as Human Rights Watch—12/19/24—notes) as

    intentionally depriv[ing] Palestinian civilians in Gaza of adequate access to water since October 2023, most likely resulting in thousands of deaths and thus committing the crime against humanity of extermination and acts of genocide.

    Rather than offering a reasoned, evidence-based defense of such Israeli conduct, Shafran blithely wrote as if consciously withholding drinking water from a civilian population were as natural and inevitable as water boiling at a hundred degrees Celsius.

    The author’s next move was to blame Palestinians for Israel killing Palestinians. Shafran, of course, didn’t offer a scintilla of proof for his claim that Palestinian fighters force their own people to be human shields, probably because it’s Israel—not Hamas—that routinely uses Palestinians as shields (FAIR.org, 5/13/25).

     ‘Systematically and deliberately devastated’ 

    Common Dreams: US Doctors Tell Biden, Harris They ‘Witnessed Crimes Beyond Comprehension’ in Gaza

    From the health workers’ open letter (Common Dreams, 10/2/24): “The human toll in Gaza since October is far higher than is understood in the United States. It is likely that the death toll from this conflict is already greater than 118,908, an astonishing 5.4% of Gaza’s population.”

    Equally weak is Shafran’s suggestion that it’s Palestinians’ fault that Israel attacks Palestinian hospitals, schools and mosques. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory said that Israel damaged and destroyed more than 90% of the school and university buildings in Gaza, and found just one case where Hamas had also used a school for military purposes. The commission also said that Israeli attacks have damaged more than half of all religious and cultural sites in Gaza, and noted that

    all ten religious and cultural sites in Gaza investigated by the Commission constituted civilian objects at the time of attack, and suffered devastating destruction for which the Commission could not identify a legitimate military need.

    Similarly, the UN Human Rights Commission published a report late last year examining 136 Israeli strikes on at least 27 hospitals and 12 other medical facilities, and said that Israel did not substantiate its claims that Palestinian armed groups were using the structures for military purposes. In some cases, the report pointed out, Israel’s “vague” allegations “appear contradicted by publicly available information.”

    Moreover, 99 American healthcare professionals who volunteered in the Gaza Strip in the months following October 7, 2023, published a letter saying that the signatories

    spent a combined 254 weeks inside Gaza’s largest hospitals and clinics. We wish to be absolutely clear: Not once did any of us see any type of Palestinian militant activity in any of Gaza’s hospitals or other healthcare facilities.

    We urge you to see that Israel has systematically and deliberately devastated Gaza’s entire healthcare system, and that Israel has targeted our colleagues in Gaza for torture, disappearance and murder.

    Shafran pretended such evidence doesn’t exist, perhaps hoping that his audience is racist enough to believe his diatribes about wily Arabs who use places of healing, learning, worship and sanctuary to conceal “engines of terror.”

    ‘That side isn’t Israel’

    WSJ: Hamas Starves Jews and Palestinians, and Israel Gets Blamed

    Israel blockades food going into the Gaza Strip, and the Wall Street Journal (8/5/25) blames Hamas.

    Former Journal editor-in-chief Gerard Baker wrote a Journal piece (8/5/25) that inverted victim and perpetrator in Gaza. He asserted that, in the war between Israel “and its enemies in Gaza,” one side “would, if it could, conduct a genocide against the other, wiping every last remnant off the face of the planet. That side isn’t Israel.”

    Baker’s strategy is to focus on what he claims Palestinian fighters “would” do in imaginary circumstances, rather than on the genocide that is actually taking place. Such speculation is pointless, because by definition it’s not possible to know what would happen in made-up scenarios. Since Baker doesn’t even bother to explain the reasons for his view that Palestinians “would” commit genocide if they could, his make-believe does not merit serious consideration.

    While it is by definition impossible to decisively prove what might happen under nonexistent conditions, there is zero doubt that Israel has—in the really existing world—carried out a genocide and engaged in a pattern of conduct consistent with trying to “wip[e] every last remnant [of Palestinian life in Gaza] off the face of the planet.” Days before the Journal ran Baker’s screed, the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem published a report (7/25) documenting the Israeli genocide in Gaza:

    Israel’s conduct of warfare in the Gaza Strip, which has included—among other things—massive, indiscriminate bombardment of population centers; starvation of more than 2 million people as a method of warfare; attempts at ethnic cleansing and formally including the ethnic cleansing of Gaza’s residents in the war aims; systematic destruction of hospitals and other medical facilities, which are entitled to special protection under international law, along with the vast majority of civilian infrastructure there; and the unprecedented killing of medical personnel, aid workers, persons in charge of maintaining public order, and journalists. Israel’s claim that Hamas fighters or members of other armed Palestinian groups were present in medical or civilian facilities, often made without providing any evidence, cannot justify or explain such widespread, systematic destruction.

    Baker’s inversion of victim and perpetrator depends on ignoring the voluminous proof that Israel is carrying out a genocide, focusing instead on fantasies based on nothing more than orientalist depictions of Arabs as bloodthirsty savages.

    ‘Every martyr is a trophy’

    WSJ: Three Big Lies About the Israel-Hamas War

    Bernard-Henri Lévy (Wall Street Journal, 9/3/25): “To speak of genocide in Gaza is an offense to common sense, a maneuver to demonize Israel, and an insult to the victims of genocides past and present.”

    The notorious French intellectual Bernard-Henri Lévy published an op-ed in the Journal (9/3/25) headlined “Three Big Lies About the Israel/Hamas War.” In his view, one such lie is that “Israel is committing ‘genocide’ in Gaza.” He explained: “To say ‘genocide’ means a plan—a deliberate, targeted initiative to destroy a people. That isn’t what the Israeli army is doing.”

    Here Lévy engaged in the repudiation approach to genocide denial, writing as if a well-established body of Israeli intent weren’t readily available to anyone with access to the internet. Just six days into the US/Israeli onslaught, Israeli historian Raz Segal wrote (Jewish Currents, 10/13/23) that what Israel had undertaken was “a textbook case of genocide.”

    One piece of evidence Segal pointed to was Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant’s announcement that the state was “imposing a complete siege on Gaza. No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly.”

    For Segal, Gallant’s use of the phrase

    “complete siege”…explicitly indexes a plan to bring the siege to its final destination of systematic destruction of Palestinians and Palestinian society in Gaza, by killing them, starving them, cutting off their water supplies, and bombing their hospitals.

    Similarly, in February, US President Trump put forth a genocidal plan (Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, 2/5/25; Truthout, 2/9/25) to empty Gaza of its Palestinian inhabitants so that the US could annex the territory. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded by saying he was “committed to US President Trump’s plan for the creation of a different Gaza.” Subsequently, Netanyahu suggested that implementing Trump’s scheme was a condition for ending the conflict.

    More recently, Human Rights Watch (5/15/25)  commented that an Israeli government plan codenamed “Gideon’s Chariot” was designed “to demolish what remains of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure and concentrate the Palestinian population into a tiny area,” and that this “would amount to an abhorrent escalation of its ongoing crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and acts of genocide.”

    Thus Lévy’s denialism depends on repudiating the extensive record of Israeli leaders articulating “a plan” to “destroy a people.”

    Lévy’s next move was to victim-blame: “Perhaps [Israel] is waging the war badly,” he wrote, but wondering, “who would do better in an asymmetric conflict when the enemy’s goal isn’t to minimize casualties on its own side but to maximize them, so that every martyr is a trophy?” Here Lévy traded on the racist myth that Palestinians are fanatical barbarians indifferent to the suffering of their own people.

    His language is vague, so it’s hard to know for sure what he’s talking about, but it sounds like he might be invoking, as Shafran did, what Craig Mokhiber, former director of the New York office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), calls the “double lie of ‘human shields’” (Mondoweiss, 9/21/24).

    ‘A genocidal army doesn’t take two years’

    Al Jazeera: Foreign doctors say Israel systematically targeting Gaza’s children: Report

    Al Jazeera (9/14/25): “Fifteen out of 17 doctors described encountering children under 15 with single bullet wounds to the head or chest. Together, they identified 114 such cases during their missions in Gaza.”

    Lévy then engaged in obscurantism, denying the genocide by selecting questionable tidbits that he seems to think cast Israel in a positive light:

    A genocidal army doesn’t take two years to win a war in a territory the size of Las Vegas. A genocidal army doesn’t send SMS warnings before firing or facilitate the passage of those trying to escape the strikes. A genocidal army wouldn’t evacuate, every month, hundreds of Palestinian children suffering from rare diseases or cancer, sending them to hospitals in Abu Dhabi as part of a medical airlift set up right after October 7.

    That Israel hasn’t conquered Gaza to this point is a non sequitur. What Israel’s inability to subjugate Gaza shows is that Israel isn’t omnipotent, and that Palestinian fighters and their allies have mounted an effective resistance to the attempt to exterminate Gaza-based Palestinians (FAIR.org, 1/24/25). That tells us nothing about Israel’s intent or the severity of the devastation it has inflicted. (It’s worth recalling that the Warsaw Ghetto survived more than two and a half years under siege from genocidal Nazi forces.)

    The SMS warnings that Lévy hails add to the “confusion, chaos and mass displacement” characterizing life in Gaza for the last two years (NPR, 12/7/23). More to the point, any “warnings before firing” that Israel has sent out aren’t going to save many Gaza residents when these messages are disseminated in the context of Israel leveling much of the Strip (BBC, 7/18/25; Guardian, 1/18/25) by bombing it with the “equivalent to six Hiroshimas,” leaving the population with effectively nowhere safe to go.

    Approximately 70,000 Palestinians—the overwhelming majority of them civilians—are known to be dead, or are presumed dead under the rubble (to say nothing of the many more dead due to starvation, disease, unsanitary conditions, and lack of access to clean water), so it’s as absurd as it is obscene for Lévy to suggest that Israel is making a sincere effort to reduce Palestinian casualties. That’s what Lévy’s paragraph seems to be suggesting, irrespective of all data to the contrary.

    For instance, a group of 45 American physicians and nurses who volunteered in Gaza wrote a letter to the Biden/Harris administration describing treating children whose injuries the medical professionals were sure had been intentionally inflicted; “specifically, every one of us on a daily basis treated pre-teen children who were shot in the head and chest,” the letter said (CNN, 7/26/24). Deliberately sniping children every day is, to paraphrase Lévy, something a genocidal army does.

    ‘Delayed or denied’

    MSF: Medical evacuation from Gaza: Thousands need care no longer available in the Strip

    Bragging about the IDF evacuating “hundreds of Palestinian children” is actually an admission of the inadequacy of Israeli relief efforts (MSF, 7/17/25).

    Nor was Lévy on solid ground when he denied that Israel policies are genocidal by claiming that it “evacuate[s], every month, hundreds of Palestinian children suffering from rare diseases or cancer.” Compare that to Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières report (7/17/25) that

    an estimated 11,000–13,000 people—including more than 4,500 children—require medical evacuation to access care unavailable in the Strip. Yet Israeli authorities have allowed only a few of those requesting medical evacuation to do so, with many critical cases being delayed or denied regardless of medical urgency….

    Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has only managed to medically evacuate 22 patients, including 13 children to our reconstructive surgery hospital in Amman, Jordan, for comprehensive rehabilitative care.

    The World Health Organization (WHO) told a similar story (4/14/25):

    Far too few patients have been able to leave Gaza for the urgent care they so desperately need. We estimate that up to 12,000 patients need medical evacuation but, since [Israel intensified its blockade of aid in March] we have only been able to evacuate 121 people, including 73 children.

    The number of people allowed to leave Gaza for healthcare has been a minuscule portion of those who need it—never mind that the reason Palestinians need to leave Gaza for medical treatment could have something to do with destroying the Strip’s health system by “deliberately attacking and starving healthcare workers, paramedics and hospitals to wipe out medical care” in the territory. Because that’s the reality of Israel’s assaults on Palestinian healthcare, and because Lévy’s project is genocide denial, he has no choice but to obscure what Israel has done and is continuing to do.

    ‘Charges are a travesty’

    WSJ: The Only Man Mamdani Wants to Arrest Is Netanyahu

    Alan Dershowitz (9/16/25) combines two of the Wall Street Journal‘s favorite causes: defending genocide and demonizing New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani (FAIR.org, 7/30/25).

    Attorney Alan Dershowitz—himself rather notorious—also engaged in genocide denial on the Journal’s op-ed page (9/16/25), selecting obscurantism and repudiation as his rhetorical weapons. Dershowitz mocked New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani for saying that, if elected, he will enforce the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrant for Netanyahu, should the prime minister visit the city:

    The ICC’s charges against Mr. Netanyahu are a travesty. Its arrest warrant accuses him of intentionally starving civilians in Gaza—never mind that Israel has facilitated the delivery of more than a million tons of food to the strip. Mr. Mamdani also accuses the Jewish state of “genocide,” a charge that not even the ICC levies.

    Dershowitz wrote as though it is self-evidently absurd for Mamdani to say that Israel is carrying out genocide, pointing to the fact that the ICC has not charged Israel with doing so. Yet the International Court of Justice ruled in January 2024 that it’s “plausible” Israel is committing genocide, and is working toward a definitive ruling (Guardian, 7/27/25). This is to say nothing of the many scholars and rights groups, already cited in this piece, who have concluded that the term aptly characterizes Israel’s actions. Dershowitz simply pretended this evidence doesn’t exist.

    Dershowitz obfuscated Israeli policies by celebrating the volume of food allowed into Gaza, as though it were sufficient. A “million tons of food” sounds like a lot, but divided among 2 million people over two years, it amounts to a little more than one and a third pounds of food per day. (A pound and a third of rice has about 800 calories,while “the standard humanitarian ration is 2,100 calories per person per day”—London Review of Books, 5/14/25.)

    It’s uncontroversial that Israel is deliberately starving civilians in Gaza. The UN’s Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) assessed that “half a million people—a quarter of Palestinians in Gaza—are suffering from famine,” a catastrophe resulting from Israeli policies, including what aid groups describe as its “systematic obstruction” of food entering the Strip (BBC, 8/22/25).

    Even more contemptible

    As I’ve argued previously (Electronic Intifada, 7/15/24), denying an unfolding genocide like the one in Palestine is even more contemptible than denying genocides that happened in the past, because an ongoing genocide can be stopped before even more people in the targeted population are killed, maimed and bereaved. That’s why every genocide denial is at the same time pro-genocide propaganda: Fewer people with an accurate grasp of the US/Israeli attempt to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a people means fewer people to try and stop it from happening.

    Fortunately, despite all the lies from outlets like the Journal, millions of people around the world have made Palestine solidarity activism a regular part of their lives. The more widely genocide-enabling mendacities can be exposed, the more likely to succeed will be the movements to stop the crime of crimes—and to achieve peace through liberation across the Middle East.

    Original article by Gregory Shupak republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza's hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
    Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA
    Vote Labour for Genocide.
    Vote Labour for Genocide.
  • A global army to liberate Palestine: An investigative reading of Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s speech

    Spread the love

    This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

    Gustavo Petro, Colombia’s president, during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, US, on Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2025. [Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images]

    by Dr Rassem Bisharat

    In one of the most daring and controversial political interventions to echo through the halls of the United Nations in decades, Colombian President Gustavo Petro, in his address to the UN General Assembly on 23 September 2025, called for the creation of an international army that transcends the traditional balance of power and whose first mission would be the liberation of Palestine from Israeli occupation and the cessation of the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

    The speech drew widespread global attention, opening the door to a complex debate on the future of the international order, the limits of international law, and the possibility of a fundamental transformation toward a new architecture of international relations that moves beyond bipolarity and the centrality of U.S. power.

    Petro: The end of words and the beginning of action

    In his speech, President Gustavo Petro sharply criticised the current international order, asserting that a world dominated by a single power and complicit in genocide cannot credibly claim to defend democracy or human rights. He emphasised that statements and declarations are no longer sufficient amid the mass killings in Gaza, calling for the creation of an international armed force composed of states that reject genocide, tasked with protecting threatened populations and enforcing international justice. Petro declared: “We need a strong army of nations that do not accept genocide… We must gather weapons and armies. We must liberate Palestine.”

    Invoking Simón Bolívar, he added: “We are tired of words… It is time for the sword of liberty or death.”

    In later remarks posted on X (formerly Twitter), Petro announced plans to submit a draft resolution to the UN General Assembly to establish a “global army for justice,” with its first mission focused on liberating Palestine,” marking a dramatic call for action over [sic]

    READ: Saudi Arabia warns global inaction on Gaza war threatens regional, world stability

    A paradigm shift in international politics

    Petro’s proposal marks a significant shift in international political discourse. Since the UN’s founding in 1945, international forces have primarily focused on post-conflict peacekeeping, operating under limited mandates and with Security Council approval. Petro, however, envisions a force designed not to maintain the status quo but to actively change it, intervening militarily to prevent genocide and end occupation. This transition from neutrality to action challenges core principles of international law, including state sovereignty and non-intervention, while contesting the Security Council’s monopoly, particularly its five permanent members, over the authorised use of force. Petro suggested that such a force could be established through the General Assembly, referencing the 1950 “Uniting for Peace” resolution, when the Assembly bypassed a deadlocked Security Council to authorize military intervention in Korea, setting a precedent for acting when conventional mechanisms fail.

    Enormous political and legal obstacles

    Despite Petro’s bold proposal, formidable obstacles make its near-term realization highly unlikely. The UN’s legal framework restricts the use of force to the Security Council, where the US holds veto power and would never allow the creation of a force that could act against Israel, its key Middle Eastern ally. Geopolitical realities also hinder the formation of a global coalition outside the Western security umbrella. Even countries critical of Israeli policies, including EU members and Global South states, may resist joining a force that risks direct confrontation with Israel or the U.S Additionally, there is a significant lack of collective political will: while smaller and medium-sized states often use strong rhetoric, turning such words into military action demands a consensus that is currently absent. Past struggles to reform the Security Council or establish war crimes tribunals underscore how difficult it is to translate ambitious ideas into action within today’s entrenched power structures.

    The significance and timing of Petro’s speech

    Despite significant practical obstacles, Petro’s speech carries profound symbolic and political weight in shaping global discourse on Palestine and the international order. He reframes the Palestinian issue from a mere “conflict” to an act of “genocide,” shifting the debate from political negotiation to one centered on liberation and international justice. His references to “Bolívar’s sword” and an “army of justice” seek to place Palestine at the core of a broader struggle against double standards and for global legitimacy.

    Moreover, Petro’s call sparks renewed debate on reforming the United Nations. Beyond advocating for a force dedicated to Palestine, he highlights the failure of the current system to prevent genocides in Rwanda, Syria, Myanmar, and now Gaza. The proposed army thus symbolizes a deeper demand for rebuilding the international order on fairer, more pluralistic foundations.

    Finally, the speech underscores a shift within the Global South. From Colombia to South Africa and Brazil, states on the geopolitical periphery are increasingly using the UN stage to challenge the Global North’s dominance and redefine concepts of legitimacy. Petro’s message aligns with this momentum, adding new strategic depth to the Palestinian cause within emerging international alliances.

    READ: Malaysia urges sanctions on Israel at UN meeting

    Justice in the age of genocide

    President Petro’s speech comes at a critical moment, as Gaza endures one of the most brutal Israeli military campaigns since the Nakba. UN agencies and human rights organizations, including OCHA, Oxfam, and Human Rights Watch, report the killing of tens of thousands of civilians and the widespread destruction of vital infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and relief centers. The UN has also documented the deaths of hundreds of humanitarian workers, in what international organizations describe as the largest targeting of the humanitarian sector in modern conflict.

    In this context, Petro’s speech becomes more than a theoretical proposal, it is a cry against a world that remains silent in the face of genocide. His call to form an “army of justice” is, at its core, an expression of the failure of the international system to fulfill its most fundamental duty: protecting civilians and enforcing international law.

    And while the idea may be unattainable at present, it exposes the glaring gap between the UN’s rhetoric and its reality, opening the door to rethinking the mechanisms of collective international action.

    Conclusion

    President Petro’s project to form an international army to liberate Palestine may seem, in the realpolitik balance, a utopian dream difficult to achieve amid current power dynamics. Yet, in the realm of symbolic and strategic politics, it reflects a profound shift in how international justice, Palestine, and the global order itself are conceived.

    The speech will not change the world tomorrow, but it could mark a turning point in a longer trajectory toward reshaping international institutions so that they are capable of confronting genocide and injustice. And just as Simón Bolívar’s words once ignited the liberation of entire continents, President Petro’s speech may, even if only in the long run, be the spark that drives the world to contemplate a global army for justice, one whose first mission would begin in Gaza, if Gaza, as we know it, still exists.

    OPINION: Paraguay’s fluctuating positions on Palestine: Between interests and justice

    The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

    Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
    Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA
    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza's hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Vote Labour for Genocide.
    Vote Labour for Genocide.

  • Gaza aid flotilla rejects Israel’s demand to dock in Ashkelon, calls request part of blockade

    Spread the love

    This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

    People, holding Palestinian flags, gather at the Port of Tripoli to show their supports as the “Omar al-Mukhtar” ship, which will join the Global Sumud Flotilla from Libya, prepares to leave in Tripoli, Libya on September 16, 2025. [Muhammed Semiz – Anadolu Agency]

    The Global Sumud Flotilla on Tuesday rejected Israel’s demand that its vessels dock in Ashkelon to transfer humanitarian aid to Gaza, describing the request as part of Tel Aviv’s long-standing blockade of the Palestinian enclave, Anadolu reports.

    Israel’s Foreign Ministry on Monday warned that flotilla ships would not be allowed to enter what it called an “active combat zone” and accused the Palestinian resistance group Hamas of organizing the mission.

    It said aid could instead be unloaded at Ashkelon Port in southern Israel and transferred to Gaza “quickly and in a coordinated manner.”

    In a statement, flotilla organizers dismissed the Israeli proposal, stressing that it is not a neutral logistical request but a tactic to obstruct relief and delegitimize those who challenge the siege.

    “Since May 2025, after lifting its so-called ‘total blockade,’ Israel has permitted an average of only 70 trucks per day into Gaza, while UN agencies estimate that 500 to 600 trucks are required daily to meet basic needs,” the statement said.

    It cited Israel’s record of intercepting vessels, blocking convoys and restricting routes as evidence that the intent “is not to facilitate relief but to control, delay and deny it.”

    READ: Drone activity monitored over Gaza-bound aid flotilla

    The flotilla noted that rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned Israel’s restrictions as violations of international law and obstructions of impartial humanitarian assistance, Anadolu reports.

    “Painting a peaceful humanitarian mission as a ‘breach of the law’ is a pretext for violence against civilians acting lawfully to deliver aid,” the statement continued, warning that such rhetoric “flouts international law” and places lives at risk.

    The group urged governments, UN agencies and humanitarian organizations to ensure safe passage and protection for aid workers, uphold international humanitarian law by rejecting Israel’s siege, and act decisively to end what it described as “the ongoing genocide in Gaza.”

    It warned that “anything less risks entrenching a system of forced starvation, deprivation and collective punishment that is costing thousands of Palestinian lives.”

    The flotilla includes vessels carrying humanitarian aid, international activists and parliamentarians seeking to break Israel’s blockade by directly reaching Gaza.

    On Sept. 16, the International Committee for Breaking the Siege of Gaza announced that the flotilla’s ships would gather near the island nation of Malta to sail together across the Mediterranean toward Gaza’s shores, without specifying a date.

    It is the largest effort of its kind, aiming to reach Gaza, where 2.4 million Palestinians live under an Israeli blockade that has lasted 18 years.

    Israel has previously intercepted Gaza-bound ships, seizing the vessels and deporting those on board.
    UN investigators recently concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, where more than 65,300 people have been killed since October 2023.

    READ: Spain warns Israel against targeting Gaza-bound aid flotilla

    This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

    Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
    Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA
    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza's hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
    Vote Labour for Genocide.
    Vote Labour for Genocide.

  • Trump’s New Restrictions on Pentagon Reporters ‘Should Alarm Every American’

    Spread the love

    Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

    President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks to reporters as he leaves the Russell Senate Office Building on November 21, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

    “If the news about our military must first be approved by the government, then the public is no longer getting independent reporting,” warned the National Press Club after journalists told of rule changes.

    Journalists and defenders of press freedom are expressing alarm and condemnation after the Pentagon, under the command of President Donald Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, announced new restrictions on reporters that include pre-approval of stories that include even unclassified material and a new pledge to not publish any material without permissions from government officials.

    The New York Times, among the first to report on a 17-page memo detailing the new rules, noted how the “move could drastically restrict the flow of information about the U.S. military to the public.” The National Press Club (NPC) was quick to rebuke the restrictions as an assault on the public’s right to know and fundamental journalistic freedoms.

    “The Pentagon is now demanding that journalists sign a pledge not to obtain or report any information—even if unclassified—unless it has been expressly authorized by the government,” said Mike Balsamo, president of the NPC, in a statement. “This is a direct assault on independent journalism at the very place where independent scrutiny matters most: the U.S. military.”

    Balsamo continued:

    For generations, Pentagon reporters have provided the public with vital information about how wars are fought, how defense dollars are spent, and how decisions are made that put American lives at risk. That work has only been possible because reporters could seek out facts without needing government permission.

    If the news about our military must first be approved by the government, then the public is no longer getting independent reporting. It is getting only what officials want them to see. That should alarm every American.

    Independent reporting on the military is essential to democracy. It is what allows citizens to hold leaders accountable and ensures that decisions of war and peace are made in the light of day. This pledge undermines that principle, and the National Press Club calls on the Pentagon to rescind it immediately.

    Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, explained to the Times that the government is prohibited by law from demanding journalists surrender their right to investigate the government in exchange for access or credentials.

    “This policy operates as a prior restraint on publication which is considered the most serious of First Amendment violations,” Stern said. “The government cannot prohibit journalists from public information merely by claiming it’s a secret or even a national security threat.”

    In comments to the Washington Post, Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, called the new policy part of “the Trump administration’s broader assault on free speech and press freedom.”

    Any journalist, she added, “who publishes only what the government ‘authorizes’ is doing something other than reporting.”

    Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch and now a visiting professor at Princeton University, put it this way: “In Trump’s Pentagon, journalists who venture beyond reporting official propaganda now risk having their credentials revoked.”

    Individual journalists, including veteran reporters who have covered the Pentagon for years or decades, also chimed in.

    Konstantin Toropin, the Pentagon correspondent for the Associated Press, expressed alarm and dismay at the new restrictions.

    “The Pentagon, which has claimed to [have] aspirations of being the most transparent in history, is once again cracking down on basic press access,” Toropin said in a social media post. “Denying access to the Pentagon makes covering our military, our troops, and our actions abroad harder. Full stop.”

    Toropin said the rule forbidding the unapproved release of unclassified material, sometimes marked with the acronym “CUI,” is “an incredibly broad and ill-defined rule that could be easily abused.”

    As his colleague Brian Everstine, the Pentagon editor at Aviation Week, noted:

    At a time when Trump is being accused of severe abuses of power, including a series of attacks on alleged illegal drug runners in the Caribbean Sea, which international law experts have condemned as ”extrajudicial executions,” further restrictions on the ability of journalists to report on the internal workings of the president’s military operations are seen as particularly dangerous.

    Barbara Starr, who worked as CNN’s chief Pentagon correspondent for many years who is now a senior fellow at the University of Southern California Annenberg Center for Communication, Leadership and Policy, told ABC News that the entire effort “is extremely troubling because it’s being done in an era of unprecedented public hostility from the secretary of defense to the news media.”

    Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

    Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn't bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
    Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
    Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
    Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
    Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an insane, xenophobic Fascist.
    Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an insane, xenophobic Fascist.

  • Israel’s Strike on Yemen Newspaper Offices Was ‘Deadliest Global Attack’ on Journalists in 16 Years: Press Freedom Group

    Spread the love

    Original article by Stephen Prager republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

    Honor guards carry coffins during a funeral procession of 31 Yemeni journalists killed in Israeli airstrikes on September 16, 2025, in Sana’a, Yemen.
     (Photo by Mohammed Hamoud/Getty Images)

    The Committee to Protect Journalists said Israel’s attack on a media complex in Sana’a last week killed 31 journalists.

    Israel’s airstrikes on a media complex in Yemen last week resulted in the largest single attack on journalists the world has seen in 16 years, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

    In a report released Friday, the group said that 31 journalists from two government-run newspapers based in Sana’a were killed in the strikes on September 10, along with four others, including one child.

    Nasser Al-Khadri, editor-in-chief of the newspaper 26 September, called the attack on his newsroom an “unprecedented massacre of journalists.”

    “It is a brutal and unjustified attack that targeted innocent people whose only crime was working in the media field, armed with nothing but their pens and words,” Al-Khadri told the CPJ.

    According to CPJ, it was the second-largest attack on the press they’ve ever recorded, and the worst since 2009, when 32 journalists were massacred as part of a political ambush in the Philippines.

    The Israeli government has often defended its attacks on civilian infrastructure by claiming that it houses militants. But in these strikes, the IDF’s media desk acknowledged that it was targeting what it referred to as the “Public Relations Department” for the Houthis, also known as Ansar-Allah.

    Shortly after Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza began in 2023, the militant group, which controls large parts of Yemen, began to launch drone and missile strikes against shipping vessels in the Red Sea and directly against Israel in what they have described as an effort to support Palestinians under fire. They have said they will stop these attacks when Israel reaches an agreement with Hamas to end the war in Gaza.

    Israel has repeatedly bombed Yemen in recent weeks, including launching a strike on its main airport and large amounts of civilian infrastructure. On the same day it bombed the media complex, it also hit residential areas in Sana’a as well as a medical facility.

    In a post on X, the official account for the Israel Defense Forces justified striking the newspapers by saying that they are “responsible for distributing and disseminating propaganda messages in the media, including speeches by Houthi leader Abdul-Malik and statements from spokesman Yahya Saree.” For this reason, Israel described the journalists as “military targets.”

    But the CPJ says that “as civilians, journalists are protected under international law, including those working for state-run or armed group-affiliated outlets, unless they take direct part in hostilities.”

    Niku Jafarnia, a Bahrain and Yemen researcher for Human Rights Watch, explained in more detail on Monday:

    Radio and television facilities are civilian objects and cannot be targeted. They are legitimate targets only if they are used in a way that makes an “effective contribution to military action.” However, civilian broadcasting facilities are not rendered legitimate military targets simply because they are pro-Houthi or anti-Israel, or report on the laws of war violations by one side or the other, as this does not directly contribute to military operations.

    Al-Khadri said that Israel’s strikes hit his newsroom around 4:45 pm, right when staff were finishing up the publication of the weekly paper.

    Mohammed al-Basha, a Yemen analyst, noted that “Since it is a weekly publication, not a daily one, staff were gathered at the publishing house to prepare for distribution, significantly increasing the number of people present in the compound.”

    The CPJ classified the 31 journalists killed in the strike as having been “murdered” by Israel, meaning that they were deliberately targeted specifically for their work. Over the past decade, the group says, 1 in 6 of the world’s murdered journalists have been killed by Israel.

    While estimates from different groups vary, Israel’s war in Gaza is considered by far the deadliest conflict in the world for journalists, with more killed than any other conflict in the world combined. In August, the CPJ reported that 192 journalists, nearly all Palestinians, have been killed since October 7, 2023, while other groups put the death toll even higher.

    In attacks last month that drew similar worldwide condemnation, Israel conducted what was described as a “double tap” strike on Khan Younis’ Nasser Hospital aimed at killing first responders who arrived after the first strike. Twenty people were killed in total, including rescue workers and at least five journalists.

    Not long before, Israel carried out the targeted assassination of Al Jazeera correspondent Anas al-Sharif and five other journalists, claiming without evidence that they were part of “a Hamas terrorist cell.”

    “Since October 7, 2023, Israel has emerged as a regional killer of journalists, with repeated incidents in Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, and now Yemen confirming Israel’s longstanding pattern of labeling journalists as terrorists or propagandists to justify their killings,” said CPJ regional program leaderSara Qudah.

    “Israel’s September 10 strikes on two newspaper offices in Yemen marks an alarming escalation, extending Israel’s war on journalism far beyond the genocide in Gaza,” Qudah said. “This latest killing spree is not only a grave violation of international law, but also a terrifying warning to journalists across the region: no place is safe.”

    Original article by Stephen Prager republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).