Guardian editorial on Gaza riots again illustrates its unbridled hatred towards Israel

Guardian accuses Israel of "war crimes" in shooting "protesters" who "posed no credible threat". However, in what world do thousands of rioters attempting the breach the border of a sovereign democratic state, at the behest of a proscribed terror group, not represent a “credible threat”?

The first thing that stands out in the Guardian’s latest official editorial on the Gaza border riots is the absence of even one use of the word ‘Hamas’ in over 600 words of text, despite the fact that the mass riots since March 31st have been organized and funded by the terror group.  This is part of a long Guardian pattern of erasing Palestinian actions from the moral calculus of the conflict. 

The anti-Israel agitprop and lies masquerading as progressive thought begins in the headline 

The Guardian view on Gaza shootings: stop killing unarmed civilians

First, contrary to the headline’s claim, hundreds of demonstrators have in fact been ‘armed’ with molotov cocktails and other weapons and incendiary devices.  Further, it’s not only civilians ‘protesting’, as Palestinian terrorists from Hamas and Islamic Jihad have been present and among the key instigators of the clashes. 

Then, there’s the strap line:

Channelling a reckless Donald Trump, Israeli ministers appear to have adopted a dangerous mindset: to destroy the national aspirations of the Palestinians by military force

The suggestion that the IDF response demonstrates that the leadership is “channeling…Donald Trump” is nonsense, words without meaning likely written by a Corbyn-supporting editor designed purely to incite the insatiable anti-American and anti-Trump appetites of the Guardian base.  It’s also completely counter-factual to suggest that the riots based on the ‘right of return’ have anything to do with “the national aspirations of the Palestinians”.  Israel left the territory in 2005, and since then Gaza has been a Palestinian-run polity.  Gazans’ lack of freedom is owed to the fact that they voted in an Islamist extremist group which rejects liberalism, human rights and democracy. 

The lies continue in first paragraph:

It is inexcusable for soldiers of a military, especially those under democratic civilian control, to shoot and kill protesters, almost all of whom were unarmed, and who pose no credible threat.

In what world do thousands of violent rioters attempting the breach the border of a sovereign democratic state, at the behest of a proscribed terror group, not represent a “credible threat”?

Further into the first paragraph, the Guardian has already deemed Israel guilty of a war crime:

Israel’s army evinced no shame in committing what looks like a war crime. These are serious accusations. Yet they were greeted with little more than a shrug.

The ‘shrug’ they sense is Israelis’ unwillingness to take seriously such immediate, knee-jerk rushes to judgment by the usual band of international delegitimisers, for whom any act of Israeli self-defence is framed as wanton – even sadistic or racist motivated – killing.

The paragraph concludes with another deception:

By blockading Gaza, Israel imprisoned 2 million people behind barbed wire and military towers. Israel treated the violence as a jailer might a prison riot: a tragic fault of the inmates.

First, Egypt controls (and blockades) one of Gaza’s borders, a fact the Guardian has forgotten to acknowledge on previous occasions. Also, the partial blockade only prevents military items (largely weaponry and items that can be used to make weapons) from entering.  Further, thousands of Gazans leave their territory daily, to conduct business, get professional training and receive Israeli and PA medical care.  The image of Gaza painted in the minds of Guardian readers has little resemblance to reality.

The Guardian’s misrepresentation of the goals of the Gaza rioters continues:

This is a dangerous mindset for Israelis to embrace. Yet they have done so because the extreme right in Israel, and most of the present government ministers, nurture the idea that Israel can, through its vastly superior military force, end the national aspirations of the Palestinians.

Again, the suggestion that the border violence instigated by Hamas – a group whose leaders incite the annihilation of the Jews – has anything to do with “national aspirations” is divorced from reality.  Hamas leader Yihya Sinwar has made clear that the marches will continue until Israel’s border is “erased” and “revenge” can be exacted on its inhabitants.

The Guardian then again weaves the US President into Israel’s response to the Gaza riots.

These politicians take succour from US president Donald Trump, who has made good on his promise to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. 

The final two paragraphs carry on with this theme, on the putatively injurious impact to peace of US recognition of Jerusalem. 

However, the Guardian is conflating two separate events.  The ‘Great March of Return’ is not about Jerusalem or the blockade – and it’s not about Donald Trump.  It’s, as its name makes clear, organised around the unlimited right of ‘return’ – the ludicrous idea that millions of Palestinians (over 99% of whom aren’t refugees) should be allowed to live in Israel, thus erasing a Jewish majority and erasing the Jewish state.

Hamas is a violent extremist group whose founding charter (which has never been revoked) calls for the annihilation of Israel, the murder of Jews qua Jews and cites, as proof of the need to eliminate the Jewish entity, Jewish conspiracies to rule the world that have been ‘demonstrated’ in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  Any media outlet that fails to contextualise the current border violence without acknowledging that the Great March of Return has absolutely nothing to do with human rights or ‘national liberation”, and everything to do with the virulent eliminationist antisemitism of the group directing the violence, is obfuscating hardcore racism and abdigating its fundamental journalistic duty to tell the truth. 

Related Articles
Written By
More from Adam Levick
Economist stands by claim that prime minister's office approves Israel Hayom headlines
In two recent posts, we’ve investigated a claim made by The Economist...
Read More
Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *