I am not an historian, decent author or a journalist, and the chances are that unless there is a link or reference to somewhere else, the perpetrator is yours truly – Renaud Sarda. I created this blog as a focal point, to arm people with arguments and facts that they can perhaps use to counter biased media reporting and anti-Israel propaganda, and to help counter (BDS) campaign. I am a Zionist/Sephardi/Jew who will fly the Israeli flag, and defend whatever Israel does.
You would think that history taught a lesson. But somehow, it has not. The Jew hate that is happening in today’s world is frightening. If you watch this video and hear what is going on in France, it will give you the chills. It seems like it would be Germany in 1939. But it is not. The video is from 2019. Recently. Now. Today, this is still happening.
Just over 70 years after the end of the Holocaust, and people are still shouting things like “Jews are all criminals!” History apparently means nothing. Too many have not learned the destruction that hate causes. It is too recent since the Holocaust has happened for antisemitism like this to already be the norm. What will the future bring if this antisemitism is still occurring today
A staff-editorial reflects the official view of a newspaper, which is why The Guardian’s is so horrifying. What follows is a vicious attack on Israel’s credibility. Here are some of the “highlights.”
‘Shelling and gassing’ harmless protesters
The Guardian attacks the IDF for its actions to prevent Palestinians breaching the Gaza border fence:
Most of the dead were unarmed and posed no danger to anyone, with little more than rocks in their hands and slogans on their lips. Yet Israel continued with an immoral and unlawful policy that sees soldiers of its military, which is under democratic civilian control, shoot, gas, shell and kill protesters, including those who pose no credible threat.
There is something almost ironic about presenting the protesters as harmless only one day after an IDF soldier was injured in an exchange of fire after a Hamas sniper opened fire during a border riot? “Posed no danger to anyone?”
There have been plenty of documented cases where Palestinians have attempted to or actually breached the border fence, which is only meters from Israeli towns and villages. All of this under the cover of what The Guardian claims are harmless protesters.
The Guardian then puts out a deliberate lie accusing Israel of ‘shelling’ protesters. Israel has never shelled protesters at the Gaza border fence and to claim otherwise is an outright falsehood.
As for the charge of ‘gassing’ protesters, Israel uses non-lethal tear gas as a means to disperse riots. That The Guardian simply refers to gas rather than tear gas is most likely to lead its readers to picture Nazi death camps and says a great deal about the media outlet’s attitude towards the Jewish state.
It’s worth remembering that the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism (that HonestReporting endorses) includes “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
Israel as lying propagandists
The Guardian continues:
In its defence, Israel’s diplomats cast Hamas, the Islamist militant group that controls Gaza, as terrorists who are organising demonstrations in “a war zone”. It would appear, sadly, that Israel wishes to conduct a war over the airwaves, as well as one on the ground, against the Palestinians. This blatant disregard for Gazan lives and the lack of accountability is underpinned by a politics of resentment and dissembling that has profound repercussions for Israel. If one can kill with impunity, then can one lie without consequence?
The editorial is essentially accusing Israel of conducting a propaganda campaign of lies against the Palestinians. This is laughable given that Israel itself has been on the receiving end of a well-organized and vicious campaign of delegitimization and propaganda for many years, in part fueled by media outlets like The Guardian. The only “war over the airwaves” is that being waged by the Palestinians and their supporters.
Why does Israel not have the right to defend itself in the media against these slurs?
Attacking Israel’s democratic character
The Guardian then goes on to address Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s legal issues in the context of the upcoming elections. It has every right to do so given that Israelis are also addressing the very same things.
Like the US president, the message from Mr Netanyahu is that democratic norms, those unwritten rules of toleration and restraint, are for the weak, not for the strong. Yet without robust norms, constitutional checks and balances are less mainstays of democracy than a mirage.
But that is entirely the point. Israel does have robust norms that have already seen a former prime minister and president sentenced to jail time for criminal acts. That a sitting prime minister finds himself in his current predicament is testament to Israel’s democratic character and the rule of law.
Not content with attacking Netanyahu, The Guardian goes after former IDF chief of staff and leader of a new political party, Benny Gantz:
Mr Netanyahu’s nearest rival brags that he sent parts of Gaza “back to the stone age” when in the military.
Relying on a hyperlinked news source from the United Arab Emirates is questionable but at least the article, unlike The Guardian, mentioned that Gantz also expressed his desire to pursue peace and to prevent the very military actions that he referenced in his campaign videos.
Delegitimizing Israel’s right to exist
The Guardian also references historian Benny Morris:
who made his name by lifting the veil on the ethnic cleansings on which Israel was founded.
Perhaps this is really the crux of The Guardian’s view of Israel. For if the state was founded on ‘ethnic cleansing’ then it can only be an illegitimate state.
The Guardian’s editorial is replete with lies, distortions and delegitimization of Israel. The media outlet is entitled to express its distaste towards Israel and does so on a regular basis. But this time, by including blatant falsehoods, it’s crossed the line.
