Israel-Hamas Thread II

Benaiah468 said:

Sanders demands that "Palestinians" be treated with ‘dignity and respect.’ One should ask him why people who promote genocide and incite murder deserve to be treated that way.

Click to expand...

Because 'the Palestinian people' and 'the terrorists' are not identical groups of people.

But, over the last two years, Israel has not simply defended itself against Hamas. Instead, it has waged an all-out war against the entire Palestinian people.

essentialsaltes said:

Because 'the Palestinian people' and 'the terrorists' are not identical groups of people.

But, over the last two years, Israel has not simply defended itself against Hamas. Instead, it has waged an all-out war against the entire Palestinian people.

Click to expand...

"All-out war" is pretty much the last word that should come to mind when we see how Israel is really acting in Gaza. Those responsible for "all-out-war" do not provide for their alleged victims, do not warn them of attacks, and do not set up escape routes or humanitarian zones.

UN panel that determined genocide in Gaza...

The “Sumud flotilla” is a propaganda tool of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Behind the supposed “peace flotilla” sailing to Gaza with celebrities and activists are, in reality, Hamas officials and the Muslim Brotherhood. Greta Thunberg serves as a media figurehead, nothing more.

The “Sumud Flotilla,” currently heading for the Gaza Strip, is often portrayed in the European media as a pacifist solidarity campaign. However, a report by the Israeli Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, presented by Minister Ami chai Chikli, exposes the mission for what it really is: an internationally supported propaganda project by Hamas and its ideological allies in the Muslim Brotherhood.

The flotilla's “steering committee” boasts prominent names, most notably Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. However, according to the report, Thunberg is merely a “front figure”, not responsible for the political line and by no means a central part of the organization. The real leadership lies with individuals whose connections to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood have been documented for years.

One of these actors is Saif Abu Keshk, a "Palestinian" activist based in Barcelona. He is a member of the steering committee and was arrested by Egyptian security authorities in Jun 2025 for his leading role in the “March to Gaza” campaign. He organized this campaign together with Yahia Sarri, an Algerian preacher affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Sarri is in direct contact with Hamas officials such as Zaher Jabarin and Osama Hamdan.

The report cites further examples:

Muhammad Nadir al-Nuri, a Malaysian activist who founded several Hamas-controlled projects in Gaza.

Marouan Ben Guettaia, a close associate of Sarri who is also active in the flotilla.

Wael Nawar, a member of the organizing committee, documented in meetings with Hamas and other terrorist organizations.

According to the ministry, the Global Sumud Flotilla is not focused on humanitarian aid, but rather on political impact:

“The so-called freedom project is nothing more than a propaganda tool for Hamas jihadists. Their leaders and spokespeople maintain open contacts with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist groups.”

Click to expand...

Chikli put it clearly: European parliamentarians participating in this mission must ask themselves whether they stand for peace or provide cover for terrorists.

The revelations fit into a larger pattern: for decades, the Muslim Brotherhood has been using NGOs, associations, and social movements as a facade to occupy political and media platforms. In Europe, it is financially supported by Qatar, while Turkey acts as its protective power. Hamas emerged from this ideological and organizational environment and deliberately exploits Western credulity to camouflage its war propaganda.

The fact that personalities such as Greta Thunberg lend their names to such projects brings international attention to the initiators. But while the media focuses on the celebrities, the real leadership hides behind terrorist networks. The flotilla, which gives the impression of being a “peace voyage,” is in reality an extension of Hamas propaganda, with the aim of delegitimizing Israel internationally.

Europe now faces a clear question: Will it knowingly allow terrorist organizations to exploit Western societies for their PR work? Or will it take action by finally setting limits on the political and financial structures of these front organizations?



The revelations of the Diaspora Ministry are a wake-up call. Those who side with this flotilla are not supporting peace, they are backing Hamas.

He is considered the last strongman of Hamas in Gaza: Izz al-Din al-Haddad, architect of the Oct 7 massacre, now commands the fight in the narrow streets of Gaza City. For Israel, this means a tough but inevitable battle against a terrorist network that continues to prioritize violence over life.

The Israeli ground offensive in Gaza City has a new focus: the last major commander still holding together the shattered terrorist organization Hamas. Izz al-Din al-Haddad, 55, is nicknamed “Ghost of the Shadows”, a remnant of his years of underground activity. After the targeted killing of Mohammed Sinwar, he effectively took over the leadership of Hamas' military wing.

His role is doubly perfidious: Al-Haddad was a co-planner of the Oct 7 massacre, responsible for the abduction of hostages and for building the terrorist structures that are now turning Gaza City into a battlefield. Security circles assume that up to 10,000 armed men are waiting for Israeli soldiers in the narrow streets, tunnels, and ruins, led by a man who solemnly swears to his own fighters that he will be “on the front line.”

A former hostage reported that al-Haddad had stored photos of numerous abductees on his cell phone and told him to his face: “I am responsible for you.” In the first few months after the kidnapping, he had been demonstratively caring, but later changed his attitude radically, after his eldest son was killed in an Israeli airstrike.

For the hostages, he thus became a symbol of arbitrariness and power. For his own people, he remains the commander who threatens escape and surrender with death. In a recently intercepted letter, he ordered his subordinates to remain in the city and prepare for a “long defensive battle”: weeks and months of resistance, whatever the cost. Anyone who disobeys the order must expect to be executed by their own comrades.

A few weeks ago, the Israeli army published a photo documenting al-Haddad's grotesque attempt to change his face. A man who claims to be a “people's hero” undergoes cosmetic surgery to remain unrecognized amid the rubble. The image speaks volumes: while residents of Gaza City survive in tents and ruins, the Hamas leader ensures his own survival and continues to play the fighter.

This is the contradiction on which Hamas has built its reputation for decades: its leaders preach self-sacrifice and “martyrdom” while they themselves survive in bunkers or tunnels and alter their appearance so as not to be recognized.

For Israel, one thing is certain: the battle for Gaza City will not only be a military struggle, but also a symbolic one. Eliminating al-Haddad would mean the loss of the last coherent leader of Hamas' military wing. This would leave the remaining 10,000 fighters without leadership and at the same time show that terror against Israel always leads to defeat in the end.

But the price is high: street fighting in a destroyed city, the danger of booby traps, and the risk of further losses. Israel's army emphasizes that it is acting systematically, with the greatest possible consideration for the civilian population – while Hamas continues to abuse them as a human shield.

Al-Haddad tries to portray himself as a hero. But reality paints a different picture: a man who has led his people to ruin, who changes his appearance to save his own life while sending others to their deaths. For the residents of Gaza, he is not a “ghost,” but the embodiment of the catastrophe that Hamas has brought upon them.

The battle for Gaza City is thus more than a military operation. It is an attempt to close a dark chapter and to put an end to a man who has long since proven himself to be the gravedigger of his own society.

Benaiah468 said:

In 2014, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) conducted a study on anti-Semitism in one hundred countries and entities. The top ten countries, in each of which over 80 per cent of the population holds anti-Semitic views, all belong to the Arab and Muslim world. The "West Bank" and Gaza topped the list with 93 per cent. Despite this fact, Sanders believes that good relations between the United States and Israel should depend on Israel improving its relations with the "Palestinians".

Click to expand...

For some reason, people continue to use the term 'anti-Semitic' by which they mean anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist or anti-Israel.


The point being that many of the people in this conflict are Semitic people, so it is just as useful to accuse Netanyahu of being anti-Semitic in his endeavour to obliterate Gaza to create a playground for the rich and famous, as it is to accuse HAMAS or the Palestinian people of being anti-Semitic.

Philip_B said:

The point being that many of the people in this conflict are Semitic people, so it is just as useful to accuse Netanyahu of being anti-Semitic in his endeavour to obliterate Gaza to create a playground for the rich and famous, as it is to accuse HAMAS or the Palestinian people of being anti-Semitic.

Click to expand...

When speaking of the "rich and famous for whom a playground is to be created," one must first mention the current beneficiaries: the Hamas billionaires who currently live in marble-floored villas and luxury hotels while profiting from the misery and terror in impoverished Gaza.



Several hundred millionaires are registered in the coastal strip. While Hamas denies the people of Gaza basic services, it uses aid and funds to enrich itself. The group will not use its funds to help the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas officials have become particularly wealthy over the years, including Mashal, Marzook, Younis Qafisheh, and the group's political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, whom Israel assassinated in Tehran in July 2024. Haniyeh was considered the richest of the four, even though he once vowed to live on nothing but olive oil and za'atar spice.

However, the wealth amassed by Hamas' top officials is only the tip of the iceberg. Hundreds of Hamas leaders are sitting on millions thanks to taxes on goods imported into the territory and international donors, primarily from Qatar.

Philip_B said:

The point being that many of the people in this conflict are Semitic people, so it is just as useful to accuse Netanyahu of being anti-Semitic in his endeavour to obliterate Gaza

Click to expand...

Obliterate Gaza refers primarily to the destruction of the infrastructure of the Islamist terrorist organisation Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Of course, Hamas's terrorist infrastructure must be eliminated.

One of Hamas' worst war crimes is the use of hospitals to hide its terrorist infrastructure.

Time and again, Hamas' murderous gangs fire rockets from residential areas and hide weapons near mosques, schools and hospitals, because they are counting on these places of refuge not being attacked.

Throughout the war, Israel has released photos and videos showing weapons and other military installations in or next to mosques, schools and hospitals. Israel's top military spokesman, Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, has released footage of a Hamas weapons cache found in the basement of the Rantisi Children's Hospital in Gaza.

The Israeli army is aware of the complexity of the situation, but Hamas terrorists cannot expect immunity. It does not intend to take control of hospitals. It wants to dismantle their infrastructure.



The Gaza Strip itself is about 45 kilometres long and about 6 to 14 kilometres wide. Imagine Gaza as one plane for civilians and another for Hamas.

The Islamists' tunnel network, colloquially known as the ‘Gaza Metro’, poses an enormous challenge for the Israeli armed forces. It is up to 720 kilometres long and contains around 5,700 separate shafts leading to the underground passages. There are around 240 kilometres of tunnels beneath the city of Khan Yunis in the south of the Gaza Strip alone. A strategically important tunnel connected the north and south of the Gaza Strip. At a depth of nine metres, it ran under Wadi Gaza, the riverbed that separates northern and southern Gaza. There are also said to be weapons depots and command rooms underground. Some of the passages can only be traversed on foot, while others are accessible to vehicles. Beneath the Al-Shifa Clinic in Gaza City, the most important hospital in the Gaza Strip, there was even a large command centre shared by Hamas and the terrorist group Islamic Jihad. The human rights organisation Amnesty International also reported independently in a 2015 report that the hospital serves Hamas's purposes. The report stated that parts of the clinic are used by Hamas for detention, interrogation and torture.

Hamas has been working on its tunnel system for around 20 years. Even before Israel withdrew its army from the Gaza Strip in 2005 and cleared the settlements in the coastal strip, there are said to have been the first tunnels. However, things only really took off after Hamas came to power in 2007 and the Gaza War of 2014.

There are different types of tunnels: attack tunnels that lead into Israeli territory, but also smuggling tunnels, which were particularly widespread along the border with Egypt before the government in Cairo flooded them with seawater and caused them to collapse. Finally, and this is currently the challenge for Israel's ground forces, there are the tunnels within Gaza that allow Hamas terrorists to move around clandestinely. They enter the tunnels and return to the surface via air shafts, inconspicuous doors or through the basements of private homes.

Israel has been surprised by the extent, depth and quality of the tunnels in Gaza.

Underground warfare reduces the imbalance and makes it attractive to terrorist groups everywhere.

As a rule, the risk to an army comes from the front and from above, i.e. from enemy ground forces or the air force. But as soon as tunnels come into play, the threat also comes from below. Nor can it be ruled out that enemy forces will suddenly appear behind you. One must always fear that the enemy will suddenly appear behind you via the tunnel systems.

Tunnels can be effectively destroyed by bunker-busting weapons or weapons that penetrate deep into the ground and explode 30 or 40 metres below the surface. Theoretically, he says, it would be possible to flood the tunnels like the smuggling tunnels on the border with Egypt, but Hamas' network is too extensive for that. As long as the entire network is not destroyed, the tunnels remain a challenge for the Israeli army. Recently, four soldiers were killed by an explosion in a tunnel rigged with booby traps.

The balancing act for Israel consists of inflicting such extensive damage on the tunnel network that repairs would not be feasible within a few years, while at the same time protecting its own troops and keeping an eye on the number of casualties on the Palestinian side.

Philip_B said:

The point being that many of the people in this conflict are Semitic people, so it is just as useful to accuse Netanyahu of being anti-Semitic

Click to expand...

Semites are not the enemies of Israel. Beyond the military movements, the Israel-Hamas war is a spiritual war. During the war in Gaza, Benjamin Netanyahu emphasised the OT text on the Amalekites.

The Spirit of Amalek is the oldest enemy of Israel. The Amalekites were the first people to attack Israel when they left Egypt for the Promised Land. Without provocation, Amalek brutally attacked the weakest and most frail among the Israelites and struck down those who lagged behind.

Amalek is the force that seeks to physically exterminate the Jews. In every generation, Amalek takes on a different mask.



Hamas goes one step further. Before they invaded Israel on Oct 7, the murderers were instructed to ‘desecrate Jews’ and ‘prostitute Jewish women’.

In Hebrew, the word chamas means violence. It could not be more fitting.

The spirit of Amalek is an anti-Semitic spirit

For he said, Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation. Ex 17:16

Therefore it shall be, when the Lord thy G-d hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the Lord thy G-d giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it. Deu 25:19

The people of Israel and we, as creatures of the one new man, must never forget this (cf. Ephesians 2:14-16)!

These real descendants of Esau and his grandson Amalek manifest themselves under constant scrutiny as spiritual forces of Satan. Like Satan, they want to destroy and kill. However, the G-d of Israel is greater! Israel is still the apple of G-d's eye (Zechariah 2:8).

In biblical times, the threat posed by Amalek was not completely destroyed because it would have been inadvisable for political, economic and a number of other reasons.

Today, Israel is prepared to destroy Amalek-Hamas. Western leaders, however, believe that they know better and that Israel must not be allowed to actually defeat and humiliate its enemies, especially if ‘too many’ (a vague, undefined number) could die in the process.

The political consequences of such a scenario would be too great for these politicians, just as Saul felt they would be for himself with regard to the total destruction of Amalek.

Will Israel's leaders remain steadfast and do what must be done for Israel's sake?

Or will they follow in King Saul's footsteps and leave the task unfinished, to the detriment of future generations?

Amalek is the root of irrational anti-Semitism throughout all generations and must be fought accordingly. That is what Netanyahu is doing. Exodus instructs the people of Israel to unite with G-d in the battle against Amalek until the memory of Amalek is wiped out.

Philip_B said:

For some reason, people continue to use the term 'anti-Semitic' by which they mean anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist or anti-Israel.

Click to expand...

Antisemitism being used and understood to mean hatred against Jews is the standard usage and meaning of the word in English. Trying to disassemble its to mean something other than its common usage is the lowest order of bad arguments.

No more red lines: Netanyahu's decision has changed the rules of the game.

The attack in Doha was more than a failed assassination attempt: it marks the end of tolerance for terrorism abroad. Anyone who thinks Israel has lost control is mistaken, Israel has regained control.

The decision to attack members of the Hamas leadership in Qatar was not only a military act, but also a political message with explosive impact. The ensuing debate is not just about hit rates or diplomacy, but about deterrence, credibility and the question of what signals a state sends when it is serious about its security promises. This step has broken with a line that has been questioned too often in the past: the hesitation, the leniency, the hope that escalation can be avoided through restraint. The result of this hesitation was visible on 7 Oct, now a different logic prevails: no more immunity for terrorist leaders, wherever they hide.

Why this decision matters now cannot be measured by individual images. It is about systemic change: for years, senior Hamas representatives moved between Doha, Cairo and other safe havens as if they had invisible status. Their freedom to operate openly, give interviews and coordinate political work was part of a reality in which violence and negotiation existed in parallel, often to the detriment of the victims and internal deterrence. The attack, even if it is judged to have failed in this individual case, shatters the self-evident nature of this freedom. It says: the world you knew is over.

The immediate message hits those who have previously relied on territorial or diplomatic inviolability. Anyone who feels safe abroad will have to re-evaluate their morning routine at the window in future. It is psychological pressure that creates deterrence not only through material destruction, but also through uncertainty. Those in positions of responsibility who believed they could hide behind international relations or negotiation processes are now under scrutiny: there are no more places of refuge that effectively serve as shelters for terrorists.

At the same time, this policy is not without risk. Criticism from parts of the security apparatus or from abroad is justified when it points to possible diplomatic costs, the endangerment of hostages or the risk of escalation. But when politics has traded security for peace for years and the result is bloody surprises, change is necessary. The responsibility for making decisions in critical moments lies with political leaders. Those who want leadership must also bear the burden of decisions and, if necessary, take responsibility for the consequences.

A state that credibly signals that it will not tolerate impunity for such crimes gains strategic ground. Deterrence does not only work in the days following an operation; it changes calculations over weeks, months and years. Isolation, pressure and internal tensions could drive those who were previously considered superior and unassailable to the negotiating table or reduce their operational capabilities. This is no guarantee of immediate solutions, but it does create a new starting point for political and security policy options.

Anyone who now claims that Israel has ‘lost control’ has confused the perspective. Control does not mean that every mission must run flawlessly; control means having the power to act and the willingness to make decisions to set new rules. It is a moment of power that, if wisely accompanied, by diplomatic work, intelligence precision and political communication, expands Israel's room for manoeuvre.

Ultimately, it comes down to something fundamental: credibility. Countries that consistently distinguish between words and deeds change the behaviour of their opponents. The attack in Doha has brought this distinction into sharp focus. Whether it will have a lasting effect now depends on perseverance, careful consideration and political backbone and on politicians not shying away from responsibility for their decisions.

A terrorist cell in Ramallah built rockets, tested their launch and wanted to target Israeli locations beyond the Green Line. Their arrest by the IDF, Shin Bet and special forces shows that terrorism has long since begun to establish a new front.

The night-time raid by the IDF, Shin Bet and the Yamam special unit in the Ramallah area has brought an explosive reality to light: "Palestinian" terrorists have begun manufacturing rockets in Judea and Samaria and targeting Israeli cities and communities outside the area. Dozens of finished rockets were found in a building stormed by security forces, along with explosive devices, explosives and a workshop designed for mass production. Three suspects were arrested and handed over to Shin Bet for further questioning.

Initially, the military had described two previously seized rockets as ‘dummy rockets without warheads’. However, the latest investigation showed that they did indeed contain explosives. This makes it clear that these are not symbolic threats, but a dangerous escalation. A few days ago, the cell had already fired an improvised rocket from a village near Ramallah, which flew several hundred metres. Now we know that this was not a harmless test, but the beginning of a new strategy.

The discovery triggered fierce political reactions. Representatives of the Settlers' Council demanded the immediate application of Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, arguing that those who fail to take responsibility are inviting the next major attack on Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich spoke of a direct consequence of the international debates on the recognition of a Palestinian state: ‘The hope for a terrorist state in the heart of the country motivates these groups. Those who want to weaken Israel are adding fuel to the fire.’

Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir also issued an urgent warning against a repeat of the ‘Gaza Strip syndrome’:

‘If we do not remove the "Palestinian" Authority from power, we will wake up one morning and it will be too late.’

Click to expand...

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar called the discovery ‘further proof of the catastrophe that the establishment of a "Palestinian" state would mean. Without Israel's security control, the entire country would be threatened.’

The reality is clearer than ever: rockets from Judea and Samaria are no longer a distant nightmare. They are technically possible, ideologically motivated and logistically in the works. Already, security forces have arrested over 75 suspects in various locations within a week, including Hamas activists, arms smugglers and suspected terrorist planners. The arrest of the cell in Ramallah is not an isolated event, but part of a growing wave.

This is a turning point for Israeli society. Anyone who still believes that the rocket threat is limited to the south is mistaken. With each passing day that these networks continue to operate, the scenario in which Tel Aviv, Jerusalem or Haifa are targeted not only from Gaza or Lebanon, but also from within the country itself, becomes more likely.

Israel cannot afford any illusions: every rocket produced in a workshop is not just metal and explosives, but a message to the heart of Israeli society. And any half-hearted political response is a risk that the whole country must bear.

Benaiah468 said:

A terrorist cell in Ramallah built rockets, tested their launch and wanted to target Israeli locations beyond the Green Line. Their arrest by the IDF, Shin Bet and special forces shows that terrorism has long since begun to establish a new front.

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar called the discovery ‘further proof of the catastrophe that the establishment of a "Palestinian" state would mean. Without Israel's security control, the entire country would be threatened.’

Click to expand...

"Palestinians" have been offered a Two-State solution four times in history, granting them more land than they have now. They refused each time because freedom and a country they could call their own was never the goal. The complete eradication of Israel is their only objective.



The only answer is the complete eradication of Hamas.

Do you take the time to type all this out or does it arrive in a press packet?

Benaiah468 said:

No more red lines: Netanyahu's decision has changed the rules of the game.

The attack in Doha was more than a failed assassination attempt: it marks the end of tolerance for terrorism abroad. Anyone who thinks Israel has lost control is mistaken, Israel has regained control.

The decision to attack members of the Hamas leadership in Qatar was not only a military act, but also a political message with explosive impact. The ensuing debate is not just about hit rates or diplomacy, but about deterrence, credibility and the question of what signals a state sends when it is serious about its security promises. This step has broken with a line that has been questioned too often in the past: the hesitation, the leniency, the hope that escalation can be avoided through restraint. The result of this hesitation was visible on 7 Oct, now a different logic prevails: no more immunity for terrorist leaders, wherever they hide.

Why this decision matters now cannot be measured by individual images. It is about systemic change: for years, senior Hamas representatives moved between Doha, Cairo and other safe havens as if they had invisible status. Their freedom to operate openly, give interviews and coordinate political work was part of a reality in which violence and negotiation existed in parallel, often to the detriment of the victims and internal deterrence. The attack, even if it is judged to have failed in this individual case, shatters the self-evident nature of this freedom. It says: the world you knew is over.

The immediate message hits those who have previously relied on territorial or diplomatic inviolability. Anyone who feels safe abroad will have to re-evaluate their morning routine at the window in future. It is psychological pressure that creates deterrence not only through material destruction, but also through uncertainty. Those in positions of responsibility who believed they could hide behind international relations or negotiation processes are now under scrutiny: there are no more places of refuge that effectively serve as shelters for terrorists.

At the same time, this policy is not without risk. Criticism from parts of the security apparatus or from abroad is justified when it points to possible diplomatic costs, the endangerment of hostages or the risk of escalation. But when politics has traded security for peace for years and the result is bloody surprises, change is necessary. The responsibility for making decisions in critical moments lies with political leaders. Those who want leadership must also bear the burden of decisions and, if necessary, take responsibility for the consequences.

A state that credibly signals that it will not tolerate impunity for such crimes gains strategic ground. Deterrence does not only work in the days following an operation; it changes calculations over weeks, months and years. Isolation, pressure and internal tensions could drive those who were previously considered superior and unassailable to the negotiating table or reduce their operational capabilities. This is no guarantee of immediate solutions, but it does create a new starting point for political and security policy options.

Anyone who now claims that Israel has ‘lost control’ has confused the perspective. Control does not mean that every mission must run flawlessly; control means having the power to act and the willingness to make decisions to set new rules. It is a moment of power that, if wisely accompanied, by diplomatic work, intelligence precision and political communication, expands Israel's room for manoeuvre.

Ultimately, it comes down to something fundamental: credibility. Countries that consistently distinguish between words and deeds change the behaviour of their opponents. The attack in Doha has brought this distinction into sharp focus. Whether it will have a lasting effect now depends on perseverance, careful consideration and political backbone and on politicians not shying away from responsibility for their decisions.

Click to expand...

Benaiah468 said:

Obliterate Gaza refers primarily to the destruction of the infrastructure of the Islamist terrorist organisation Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Click to expand...

Like orchards.

essentialsaltes said:

Like orchards.

Click to expand...

Clear all Islamist plots.

essentialsaltes said:

Like orchards.

Click to expand...

None of this is making Hamas back down. It insists on continuing its terror and shirks any responsibility for ending the war. The situation is reminiscent of numerous events in the Arab world, where regimes clung to power while their populations perished. #4745

US vetoes (again) UN Security Council resolution demanding immediate Gaza ceasefire and hostage release​

The 14 other members of the United Nations’ most powerful body voted in favor of the resolution, which described the humanitarian situation in Gaza as “catastrophic” and called on Israel to lift all restrictions on the delivery of aid to the 2.1 million Palestinians in the territory.

The change came quietly, but with great effect: the IPC Hunger Index, the internationally recognized tool for measuring famine, has adjusted its criteria so that Gaza is now considered “affected by hunger”, even though previous standards would not have allowed this. The result: a global narrative that blames Israel.

At the end of Jul, the IPC, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, supported by the UN and 29 Western countries, published its new report. It states that Gaza is experiencing “widespread, extremely severe hunger.” This term, known in technical jargon as “famine,” is the strongest international classification for famine. Those classified as such are considered victims of an acute, life-threatening disaster.

The message of this report quickly became clear in international headlines: Israel is responsible for a hunger crisis in Gaza. Within hours, major media outlets around the world picked up on the wording – and thus conveyed an image to the public that carries heavy political and moral weight.

But now the US newspaper The Washington Free Beacon has revealed that the IPC changed the rules shortly before publication, without any public debate. The key change: previously, a famine was only declared when at least 30% of children in an area were suffering from severe malnutrition. This threshold has been lowered to 15%, in other words, halved.

At the same time, the measurement method was changed: instead of recording the weight of children, as was previously standard practice, the circumference of the upper arm is now sufficient. This may sound like a technical detail, but it is a significant change that leads to completely different results.

In Gaza City itself, the proportion of severely malnourished children is 16.5% according to the new IPC report. Under the old rules, this would not have been enough to qualify as “famine.” Under the new rules, however, it certainly does. Without this change, there would have been no international declaration of famine in Gaza and thus no global wave of headlines incriminating Israel.

The US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, responded sharply:

“Technically, it sounds complicated, but the message is clear: the rules have been changed so that Israel can be indicted.”

Click to expand...

Richard Goldberg, former member of the National Security Council under President Donald Trump, put it even more bluntly:

“The UN is changing the rules of the game to get the result it wants.”

Click to expand...

A long-time humanitarian aid worker confirmed to the newspaper:

“In all previous cases of famine, the 30 percent threshold based on weight measurements applied. Now that threshold is simply being lowered.”

Click to expand...

Israel does not deny that the supply situation in parts of Gaza is difficult. But the issue here is not whether there is hardship, but how that hardship is classified in official reports. The new definition transforms a serious but regional supply problem into a global scandal with maximum political explosiveness.

This is precisely where the problem lies: international institutions enjoy a trust bonus among many people. When they change their criteria in the middle of an ongoing conflict, it does not come across as neutral assistance – but rather as political action under the guise of scientific objectivity. This not only weakens the credibility of the IPC, but also fuels suspicions that one side of the conflict is being deliberately subjected to political pressure.

The fact that such reports are exploited by Israel's political opponents is not speculation, but has been a reality for years. They are quoted in diplomatic forums, presented at UN votes, and shared millions of times on social media, often without context, but with clear blame assigned to Jerusalem. Regardless of how nuanced the original reports may be, only one message sticks in the public perception: Israel is starving people.

This makes it clear that this lowering of standards does not occur in isolation, but is part of an international communications landscape in which Israel is regularly portrayed as the main culprit, even when the facts are much more complex.

Lowering the bar in such an environment does not contribute to a solution, but rather adds fuel to the fire of political polarization. This has consequences, for the credibility of the UN, for the value of international standards, and for the possibility of still being heard in genuine humanitarian crises.

Last week, the IPC declared that the criteria for famine had been met in the Gaza district, which includes Gaza City. The UN claims for humanitarian aid in Gaza



Israel, however, describes the portrayal of the situation as “falsified” and demands that the report be withdrawn. The Director General of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Eden Bar Tal, called it “falsified.” He accused the IPC of using methodological violations to produce a politically motivated result. If no new report is presented within two weeks, Israel intends to present its alleged evidence of the report's inaccuracy to the IPC's donors and ask them to withdraw their financial support for the initiative.

The IPC report is methodologically fabricated: it relies on fabricated and cherry-picked data, inflated mortality figures, and invented thresholds to fit a political agenda. The IPC excluded Israel from the review process, broke its own standards and rules to validate terrorist claims of famine, concealed contradicting data, and ignored Israel’s extensive efforts to facilitate the entry of thousands of tons of humanitarian aid.

Over 1.9 million tons of aid have been delivered since the start of the Swords of Iron war; nearly 100,000 large trucks. Just this week, Israel has overseen 23,000 tons of aid, and 1,200 trucks have entered Gaza.

Israel has not only been supplying aid, but has also restored infrastructure in Gaza. In coordination with the Israel Electric Corporation, a power line now supplies energy to a desalination plant serving 900,000 Gazans.

The IPC document is a disgrace. Instead of showing neutrality, the IPC has chosen to repeat the lies of a terrorist organisation directly responsible for the bloodshed and suffering in Gaza and for the massacre of Oct 7.

The UN's obsession with Israel is shameful. Israel has already done its part in providing humanitarian aid.



Basically, it is not obliged to potential Hamas voters. The notion that Israel owes water, electricity and food to an entity that seeks its destruction is both absurd and suicidal. Respect does not belong to the humane, but to the one who relentlessly atones every aggression. Israel must take tough action, not out of cruelty, but out of clarity. Not to match the barbarism of its enemies, but to defeat them.