In a previous post, I published in full an extensive justification/commentary from Patrick Delaney, one of the contributors at LifeSite News, in which he justifies publishing more pro-Hamas, anti-Israel "journalism."
Despite the facts on the ground, the testimonies from Jews, Arabs, Christians, Muslims, and even independent journalists who have been observing the war between Israel and Hamas, LifeSite News has chosen to attack Israel and go along with much of the pro-Palestinian propaganda.
I am going to respond at length to his remarks, in which he not only justifies calling Israel's act of self-defense against Hamas "a genocide," but how he repeats the libelous fraud that a so-called "Zionist lobby" controls the media.
It is really disturbing the lengths to which these pro-Palestinian propagandists will go to justify publishing lies about the current conflict!
(My comments will be provided in bold letter and Times New Roman font)
------------------------Hi Arthur,
Thank you for your correspondence below, and we all understand the shock that some of our fellow Americans can go through when reading these reports on Israel / Palestine because, in my experience, each of us had to go through a similar process of discovering that we have pretty much been lied to on this topic by our Western media, and others, for decades.
Notice right away that he juxtaposes Israel and Palestine, as though they are both legitimate states, even though in Gaza, the residents elected Hamas to govern them, and similar terrorist factions still govern the West Bank.
I certainly went through this progressive realization following a pilgrimage I made to the Holy Land in 2006, and I know Steve has had to realize that many of the presumptions he also held (as so many of us have) were radically erroneous due to widespread and systematic propaganda.
With that background, I will offer some brief thoughts here on your note:
‘Genocide’ has a definition
First, if you want to argue that “there is no genocide,” shouldn’t you first define the term? Certainly, anyone can concede that according to your apparent personal understanding of this definition you might well be able to subjectively and very confidently conclude there is no such “genocide” being committed against the Palestinian people, as you did below.
However, it should not be surprising that useful discourse on this topic must operate according to a standard objective definition which happens to be recognized throughout the world in international law, specifically in the Genocide Convention from 1948 of which Israel is a signatory.
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Thus, according to international law, the threshold for “genocide” is likely much lower than you have presumed it to be.
A couple of responses:
1. This threshold is so low, that one could easily castigate any military power in a conflict as a genocidal actor. That is not the proper purpose of a definition. If a definition becomes too broad, then it is meaningless.
But let's put that aside. Even if one accepts this very broad definition of genocide, Israel and the IDF are clearly not perpetrated genocide. They are not deliberately targeting civilians. They never have. This is a bold-faced lie. So, right away, Mr. Delaney is not really answering my questions, but obfuscating with distracting arguments about definitions.
In fact, here is an article from 2016 by a Jewish attorney arguing that the brutal Israeli occupation and colonization of internationally recognized Palestinian territory had already fit this definition of the crime of genocide for quite some time.
This article was published by Al Jazeera, which right away undermines its credibility. As I wrote to Mr. Delaney, Al Jazeera anything is Islamic propaganda, funded by the terrorist-supporting state of Qatar, where the leaders of Hamas live in luxury, stealing the foreign aid from their own people while they live in the lap of luxury.
Further, this attorney Stanley Cohen, is offering an opinion piece, nothing more.
Here's an example of the blatant editorializing in Cohen's piece:
Predictable in immediacy and urgency, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threw his weekly tantrum, accusing the world of a dark conspiracy organised by the soon to be ex-President of the United States, Barack Obama, who on his way out of the door after years of obsequious obedience to Israeli will, has suddenly discovered that it’s OK to say no … well … maybe … or perhaps, to its glaring intransigence.
No one can call this a serious editorial, using terms like "tantrum" to describe a head of state, or referring to former President Barack Obama's "obsequious obedience to Israeli will."
Delaney's response continues below:
And, of course, thirteen of the fifteen judges at the International Court of Justice provided a preliminary ruling last January, that according to this definition sufficient evidence was present to conclude that it was “plausible” Israel was committing this war crime and the case brought by South Africa could proceed. See the article below for more, including video embeds of presentations from prosecutors around the world demonstrating that genocide was indeed taking place.
This is the most laughable section of Mr. Delaney's response yet.
South Africa has turned into a neo-apartheid regime, in which heads of state, like the ANC and Julius Malema, the leader of another left-wing party in the Johannesburg government, have literally shouted "Kill the Boer!," i.e. kill the white South African farmers.
That is genocide, and yet human "rights" groups and LifeSite News ignore this clear targeting of white South Africans. The hypocrisy is just unbelievable.
Not only that, but this so-called International Court of Justice has no legitimacy, and no power. The fact that they would entertain charges filed by South Africa, but not call out South Africa's own genocidal intentions, is really disturbing.
Oh, and one of the judges on this court is from South Africa! (Click here) That is a conflict of interest, to put it mildly.
Such arguments as these are what you will have to contest with should you wish to legitimately argue “There is no genocide.” (And just as an aside, were you even aware of these proceedings, and this definition? If so, why did you not address them below? If not, why not? What media outlets didn’t tell you about them that likely had an obligation to do so?)
The reason why I did not address such arguments is that the general definition of genocide has been well-known for a long time.
Here's a basic dictionary definition I can provide right now:
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
His question about media outlets not providing an answer or definition is a neat little dodge, but does not undermine my larger criticisms.
Thus, the article which I wrote, and you cited as “claim[ing] that Israel is committing genocide,” was actually quite conservative and restrained in its use of the term. I wrote, “As much of the world charges Israel with committing crimes of genocide against the Palestinian people …”
The definition of genocide provided by Mr. Delaney in that treaty is too broad, too liberal.
And any reasonable person (especially those willing to follow the links) should have to agree this statement is 1.) True, and 2.) Relevant for reporting especially for those of us who wish to consider ourselves to be pro-life and especially Catholic and Christian, as it responds to the call of our brother and sister Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant churches in the Holy Land who have essentially begged Western Christians to speak out against such Israeli atrocities as their “only hope” for peace and an end to the oppression continually inflicted upon them by the Israeli government. And many of our Jewish brothers and sisters agree with them.
Many of these Christian populations are putting the blame squarely on Israel, and that is wrong. Liberal activists like Munther Isaac outright lie about the Christian faith, and they are corrupting their calling to preach the Gospel.
I read a post recently, in which an Orthodox Christian priest actually defended chanting "Allahu Akbar." That phrase does not mean "God is Great," but rather "Our God is Greater." It is not commensurate in any way with Christian doctrine, but rather shows the perverse extremes which some religious leaders will take to appease Islamic militants in the region.
The fact that Delaney continues to use the tainted language of "Israeli occupation" is counter-factual and ahistorical. The reason why Israel has not released its supervisory grip over the West Bank is that if an election took place today in the West Bank, Hamas would be elected, and there would be more terrorism, violence, and mayhem in the region.
Further, if you had kept reading this article, you saw that it quoted sources explaining these matters including Jewish scholar Norman Finkelstein who provided significant evidence (linked in the story) which helps illustrate Israel’s explicit intent to commit genocide.
Norman Finkelstein is a long discredited anti-Zionist hack. He has resorted to repeated emotional arguments in his his speeches, and has about as much credibility as Kevin MacDonald of The Culture of Critique.
Thus, to the contrary of your own assertion, I would offer that it would be “beyond irresponsible” for a Catholic pro-life news organization, especially based in the United States, to gloss over the committing of a (to be restrained again) plausible genocide of which its own government is a necessary accomplice, especially as that genocidal attack continues to pile up the corpses of tens of thousands of children, women and men until it figuratively blots out the light of the sun.
Delaney did not make any argument justifying the charge that Israel is committing genocide. What he did reveal is the bankrupt leaps of logic which pro-Palestinian propagandists must make in order to cover for themselves.
‘Terrorism’ too must have a definition
Now, to be briefer, the next term you need to define is “terrorist” and “terrorism” if you want to use it in a logical fashion. You mention a “pro-terrorist narrative.” But what is “terrorism” and who are the main “terrorists”?
Interestingly, as is their custom, Zionists, at the slightest pretext, often conflate and construe the actions of their enemies into the gravest most outrageous and inflammatory crimes as a rationalization to isolate, dehumanize and aggressively punish them.
Notice the ad hominem argument. He just blocks someone who disagrees with him into a category, but does not respond to the substantive issue.
Thus, in their brutal occupation (that we are not allowed to acknowledge or discuss in the West) they rule these territories as a military dictatorship, and thus, with military orders have redefined virtually any protest or resistance to their occupation, including flag waving, participating in a non-violent protest, handing out fliers or writing something the Zionists don’t like on social media, as “terrorism.”
People have the freedom to claim that Israel is engaged in a "brutal occupation." They are not free from criticism or pushback, especially considering the fact that Israel has repeatedly offered peace deals including a Palestinian state. The fact is that Palestinian leaders do not want peace with Israel. They want to destroy, and no country committed to its own self-preservation should settle for its own destruction. Israel gave away Gaza, and look what has happened!
Thus, the Israelis simply use mass calumnies to refer to virtually all Palestinians as “terrorists.”
What happened on October 7th, 2023 was absolutely terrorism. Delaney refuses to acknowledge this. This is beyond outrageous! Islamic miltants from Hamas parachuted in, targeted innocent civilians, murdered babies in their cribs, raped mothers in front of their own children. How can anyone ignore this?!
But the world generally understands and accepts the definition of terrorism to be “the use of violence, especially against civilians, for political ends.” And as has been covered at LSN and elsewhere, a fundamental objective of Zionism has always been to expel the Palestinian population from their ancient lands which many see as being the obvious objective in these present massacres.
That notion that Zionism means the expulsion of another people from their "ancient land" is one of the most fatuous lies yet offered up by Delaney. First of all, there is no fundamental right to return. Property rights cannot be contravened because bad actors from previous conflicts instigated atrocities against the Jewish State.
Second, the very term "Palestinian" is a relic of colonial occupation, from the Romans to the Ottomans to the British, who had the wherewithall to leave the region after thirty years, committing themselves to a decolonizing project.
Third, Zionism as a definition is "the belief that Jewish people should have a homeland." It is a positive, not a negative definition.
So, who are the terrorists?
Would it be considered a terrorist act if Hamas legitimately threatened violence against Israeli civilians requiring them to be displaced for months? Would this crime against humanity and act of genocide be excusable if they said they were “going to great lengths” to protect them by this crime? And what if Hamas then bombed and massacred these Israeli civilians in the “safe spaces” they had directed them to go? Would that be an act of terrorism?
The lack of moral logic diplayed here is just astonishing.
There is no right for any military force to deliberately attack cilivians. None.
The fact that the pro-Palestinian groups refuse to recognize that
a. Hamas started the terrorism
b. Israel is fighting back with the proper determination to wipe out Hamas.
c. Israel is taking every precaution possible not to kill Gaza civilians.
d. Hamas and other Palestinian leaders in the region have no problem putting their own civilians, their own people in harm's way
e. War is hell, and sadly, there will be civilian casualities, in large part because of Hamas' deliberate actions of placing women and children in harm's way.
It is just breath-taking how far LifeSite News will go in their pro-Palestinian front's hypocrisy. Just astonishing!
How about if Hamas droped hundreds of American-made 2,000-pound bombs on Israeli residential areas destroying an estimated 50 percent to 62 percent of all buildings in their region by January alone? Would this be an act of terrorism?
Notice first of all the spelling error "droped."
Second, he refuses to acknowledge--yet again--that Israel is responding to Hamas' terrorism.
And what if Hamas killed at least 16,251 Israeli children who included, according to reliable testimonies, children “incinerated,” “shredded,” “missing body parts,” “being crushed by buildings,” starving to death and toddlers being “definitively” and intentionally shot by Hamas snipers. Would these be considered acts of terrorism?
IDF is not deliberately targeting children. Delaney is a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen.
Of course, you understand that these are not the acts of Hamas, but criminal terrorist acts committed by the Israeli army, and they are just a few examples, there are many, many more.
An army taking steps to defeat a terrorist threat is not committing a crime. What Hamas perpetrated on October 7th, 2023 was not just a crime, but an atrocity against humanity.
These all fit the definition of acts of terrorism, and systematic acts of terrorism are committed by people called, “terrorists.”
Therefore, as explained by Miko Peled, a former Israeli soldier whose father was a general in the 1967 war, and whose grandfather signed Israel’s declaration of independence, the Israeli army is “one of the best trained, best equipped, best fed terrorist organizations in the world. And yes, they have generals, and they have nice uniforms. But their entire purpose is terrorism.”
About Miko Peled, he also repeats the hollow libel that Israel is an apartheid state (see here). The fact that he would lie so shameless is just disgusting.
Also, he makes the same fallacy of misusing the word "terrorism." He further excuses Hamas and their cruel terrorist acts against Israel by pointing out that Gaza is one of the most densely populated regions in the world. So, Miko Peled buys into the morally perverse argument that a a terrorist can kill children if he runs away and hides behind more children.
I reject his perverse arguments. Peled is another amoral progressive virtue-signaling his contempt for right and wrong to promote himself among liberal apologists around the world.
And as far as I can see, there is no terrorist organization or effort in the entire world that compares to the Israeli genocidal terrorist enterprise.
Yawn. The same empty smears from Mr. Delaney never cease.
So, when you mention “the pro-terrorist Qatari government” which “is complicit with funding and fomenting terrorism around the world,” have you considered what government is the greatest funder of terrorism in the world? Didn’t they just approve another $20 billion to rearm Israel so they can continue to massacre displaced children, women and men in Gaza?
See the irony? Who is the biggest funder of “terrorism around the world”? You are, through your tax dollars being spent by your government and more importantly through your material cooperation in defending these crimes as you have done here.
For the record, I oppose all foreign aid to all countries.
Media Bias at Al Jazeera?
Now you mention having read “numerous” reports treating this topic on LSN, yet I don’t see much of any evidence that you even completed reading one such report. You cite only a single article and then raise an objection within your missive which is thoroughly treated within the text of that article itself. Apparently, you didn’t get that far, or even beyond the article’s lead paragraph.
Now he adds another strawman to his hollow arguments, attacking me for not citing other articles on LifeSite News. The purpose of my letter to Mr. Delaney was to confront him about the lies in his article. However, I have complained to LifeSite News about the pro-Palestinian propaganda, repeating lies from other articles on their site.
“Al-Jazeera news, the source of the video in your article, is funded by the pro-terrorist Qatari government, and is hardly reliable for information,” you wrote. Besides being an ad hominem fallacy, your statement also betrays that you didn’t even read the section in the same article titled, “Al Jazeera a highly credentialed news network, Western legacy media ‘skewed by a systemic and institutional bias’ toward Israel.”
What I wrote about Qatar is true. Hamas' leaders have been living in Qatar! They are stealing the foreign aid meant for their own people and spending the money on themselves! My goodness, Delaney can't refute anything that I have written.
Please read it for a response to your statement. I will not reproduce it here but will point out a further irony.
In supporting your case that the “Israeli military forces go to great lengths to warn residents to flee targeted military areas,” you cite a July BBC report which explains how Israel drops leaflets from aircraft to instruct Palestinians to leave their homes to avoid a “combat zone.”
Can you imagine this happening in your neighborhood? Leaflets dropped from a hostile military instructing you and your family with your children to evacuate your home, disrupt your lives and the lives of your children to seek refuge in some area with little humanitarian assistance for an indefinite period of time?
Is it Israel's fault that Hamas killed innocent women and children? Should Israel have to hold back in any effort to take down these awful terrorists, who terrorize their own people in Gaza? Delaney's so-called rebuttal is meaningless here, once again showing that he would rather attempt to tug on heart strings with the sympathy card, all while ignoring what started this horrendous latest conflagration in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
While you see this as a virtue when it is committed by the Israelis, it actually qualifies as an act of terrorism, a crime against humanity, and an act of genocide according to the definition above. Additionally, when the Israelis further bomb and massacre such displaced children, women and men in these “safe zones” the war crimes compound to a much higher gravity.
No, it doesn't. Delaney continues to proceed from false premises over and over again, not making his case.
And a likely scenario that follows includes the Israeli army wantonly bombing or otherwise destroying your home and neighborhood in an attempt to ensure you have nothing to return to and will have to leave the area to pick up your lives. This has been a routine process for the Zionist enterprise since 1948 when they wiped out hundreds of Palestinian villages in a similar way.
You can hear about it in a lecture here by Melkite Archbishop Elias Chacour who lived through it as a boy in Palestine (book here). First the Israeli army asked the population to leave, and then prevented them from returning and bombed their village to smithereens.
So, even what you see as an act of virtue by the Israeli army is part of an enormous crime violating at least both moral and international law.
And why didn’t your trusted news outlet the BBC tell us this? Likely, because as many of their own employees complained last January, their coverage has been “biased against Palestinians.”
In fact, Norman Finkelstein has stated that the “ethnic element” relating to “a large Jewish presence” in the Western mainstream media and a resulting “sense of Jewish ethnic solidarity [with Israel]… plays a role” in the presentation of a broad media bias in favor of the Jewish state.
Of course, while the Zionists have been successful at bending the coverage of the Western media toward support and protection of their interests, it should be admitted that every media outlet has some type of bias.
And unlike the West, Al-Jazeera’s bias would include being less likely to suppress news revealing massive bloody crimes by the Israeli state, which is likely why they were expelled from Israel itself and why an “unparalleled” number of journalists, including from AJ, have been apparently targeted and killed by the Israeli army.
My own bias is to support and uphold the objective moral law which is binding on every human being endowed with reason, even, and I mean even, Zionist Jews. As St. John Paul II taught, there are “no privileges or exceptions for anyone” when it comes to the natural moral law. The Israelis don’t get to impose a bloody occupation over many decades, massacre and starve to death hundreds of thousands of children, women and men and not be called-out by authentic Christians and pro-lifers. In fact, disciples of Jesus Christ are morally bound to oppose this.
Still believe the ‘burning babies in their cribs’ narrative? You need better news sources.
You have also asked “why is there not attention paid” to Hamas atrocities such as “burning babies in their cribs”? We have covered that topic (here and here) reporting on how Israeli media themselves confirmed such propaganda tales never happened but rather had a purpose to create “more political space to destroy all of Gaza, kill a large percentage of the population and commit genocide.”
Mr. Delaney has lost whatever crediblity he claimed. He "covered" the topic about the Israeli media, which is not an answer. He just repeats himself.
This is old news. Why are you not aware of these facts? What media sources do you rely on who have not had the integrity to fulfill their moral obligation to tell you the truth on these matters? In other words, why do you rely on news sources that lie to you by omission?
He then claims that the news sources reporting on the conflict post Octobert 7th are lying by ommission. Which is it, Delaney?
The same is the case for the concocted “mass rape” stories, along with the “beheaded babies” and the “fetuses cut from women” lies. Why are you still in the dark on these fabricated stories which have been debunked since late last year?
Now, they have not been debunked. Hamas terrorists literally recorded themselves committing these atrocities. Here is one example.
Here are the stories of some of the survivors: (testimony)
Citizens killed in warfare is inevitable and tragic. Those deaths are not deliberate. Hamas perpetrated a deliberate, systematic terrorist attack. Wow, Delaney's gaslighting is quite tiresome!
This means that the Israeli army killed maybe hundreds of its own citizens, as has been reported by the Israeli media themselves. And Netanyahu, who is at least remotely in charge of the murdering army goes before Congress and the American people and lies about it, blaming these bloody deliberate deaths at the hands of his own army on Hamas.
"Murdering army ..." Armies are not social experiments. They are designed to break things and kill people. That is the whole point. The conflict was not instigated by Israel, but by Hamas. This is the basic reality, and Delaney does not care.
As Max Blumenthal commented, “Israel’s whole mission, its reason to exist, is supposed to be to keep Jews safe. And here they are killing more Jews than any other anti-Semite in recent history and doing it deliberately for political reasons.”
Blumenthal's crass hyperbole is one of the most laughable statements I have read yet. Again, the opinion of one commentator or journalist does not constitute a fact on the ground. The moral collapse in the Western media spaces is quite disturbing.
‘Combatants’ and ‘Militants’?
Though I didn’t see a citation for it, you state “The death rate ratio of civilians to combatants… is two to one.” This is clearly hogwash. When you investigate your source, you will certainly find that as the Zionists shift definitions such as “terrorists” and “genocide” to fit their narrative, I expect you will find “combatant” has a ridiculously broad definition, likely to be, I would guess, any male between 16 and 60 or the like.
I got that information from Cameron Hughes. He is not a right-wing conservative, for the record.
In fact, many in power in Israel have classified the entire population in Gaza as essentially being combatants. “There are no innocents there,” stated lawmaker Yitzhak Kroizer last November pronouncing “there should be one sentence for everyone there – death.” And others such as Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu claimed “there are no uninvolved [civilians]” in the Gaza Strip, meaning all of them including women and small children are virtually considered “combatants.”
Mossab Yousef has also submitted post October 7th, 2023, that there is no difference between the Palestinians in general and Hamas in particular. It's difficult to refute this sentiment, considering that a record 90% of Palestinians support--yes, SUPPORT--what Hamas did!
Is it any surprise that Israelis, especially the elected leaders, are getting exasperated by the on-going terrorism launched out of Gaza (and the West Bank)? What are Israeli citizens supposed to do?
Indeed, you seem to use this shifting of definition yourself stating, “What I see is Israeli soldiers mocking male MILITANTS… Notice how the prisoners are men, not women and children.”
Logically, the category of “men” is not the same as the category for “militants.” The facts are these are men just rounded up from the streets, sheltering in schools, hospitals or other residences to be detained, humiliated, tortured and interrogated apart from any evidence of their being involved with Hamas. A report from B’Tselem, the Israeli Center for Human Rights, states 4,781Palestinian men “were detained without trial, without being presented with the allegations against them, and without access to the right to defend themselves, in what Israel terms ‘administrative detention’” (See “Welcome to Hell”). This report from the UN details the same as do many other articles on the topic in the mainstream press.
I am really disgusted with how Delaney defends militants, terrorists, and their sympathizers. This is really disgusting.
Obviously, LSN needs to assess and pass along the best factual information available, even if it contradicts what Arthur Christopher Schaper thinks he “sees,” or what he would like to see, and even if we have to risk his disappointment with our reporting it.
Concluding
I could continue, but suffice it to say that, in summary:
You have a very long way to go to prove that Israel is not committing the grievance crime of genocide against the Palestinian people, especially in Gaza. In fact, my personal opinion is that such an effort on your part is futile. I agree with Holocaust scholar Amos Goldberg when he says Israel is “undoubtedly” committing genocide. Irony: An objective definition and application of the words “terrorism” and “terrorist” reveal the Israeli army to be “one of the best trained, best equipped, best fed terrorist organizations in the world,” and that the “pro-terrorist narrative” in no way comes from LSN but, according to logic, is rather being promoted by you in your material support for these many crimes in the correspondence below.
Irony: Despite your ad hominem fallacious attack upon Al Jazeera, your apparent ignorance regarding fundamental aspects of this issue reveal your own media sources have deprived you of aspects essential to understanding this conflict, including the definition of genocide, the ICJ’s decision, the debunking of the war propaganda porn put out by the Israeli PR machine, and the fact that the displacing of populations in Gaza is a crime against humanity and an act of genocide. The category of “men” is not the same as “militants” and despite what you think you see, Arthur, the facts reveal these are largely or even mostly just male civilians being detained and systematically tortured.
Finally, the fact that you wrote me this email without apparently even having read the article you were primarily complaining about demonstrates exactly why Steve disabled comments for that piece, as he wrote himself: We “encourage careful reading of our articles and viewing of the full videos BEFORE making any conclusions.”
Perhaps due to heavy information control over many decades in the U.S., some commenters typically jettison any logical discourse whenever Israel is criticized, as if this secular nation in the Middle East is an object of religious devotion or consists of angels from heaven who are beyond any and all criticism and must be automatically deferred to.
Instead of addressing what the piece actually says, along with its sources, they just throw out trite Zionist talking points the West has been swimming in for decades and which consist of half-truths at best (Candace Owens relates her same experience very well, here) and then often bundles them in with vicious calumnies.
In his April interview with Tucker Carlson, Christian pastor from Bethlehem, Munther Isaac reflected on his efforts to lobby on Capitol Hill for the Palestinian people, in which he spoke with diplomats, politicians and congressional staffers. What struck him most was the strange contrast between their significant lack of knowledge “about the reality on the ground” and their resolute and misguided opinions regarding the topic.
“Their knowledge of the situation here [in the Holy Land] seems to be very, very shallow,” Isaac said. “Yet they hold very strong opinions, and oftentimes these opinions are shaped by political parties” and not on “knowing the facts.”
Munther Isaac is a terrorist-apologizing liberal. It is unthinkable that anyone takes his sentiments seriously. He has repeatedly lied about the Israeli government and its people. He does not even point the blame at the right source: the Islamic leaders in the West Bank and Gaza, for the atrocities happening in the region.
Assessing this situation in a more recent (and highly recommended) piece, one supportive commenter wrote Steve explaining his impression: “Steve, you are trying to reason with closed-minded zombies who support Israel irregardless of condemning evidence, or you are dealing with lying propagandists who know the truth but spout the lie. Nevertheless, the truth MUST be told for the sake of the suffering innocents. Thank you and thank LSN!”
"Close-minded zombies." I literally looked at the articles and videos offered by Patrick Delaney, and they did not make his case at all. Frankly, the zombie stance better describes the pro-Palestinian front.
It is precisely due to my desire for restoring “serious journalism when it comes to coverage” of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, that I’m resolved to report the facts in light of Christian moral principles which apply equally to all, even the Zionist Israeli government which has succeeded in basically securing a high degree of control of the United States government, the mainstream media and even many outlets of the so-called alternative media.
Notice that Delaney does not clearly delineate where is Palestine. He uses the same left-wing tropes as the college students at Oxford and Cambridge.
Furthermore, as a pro-life Catholic disciple of Jesus Christ, I am bound to always oppose the grave and deadly violations of human rights perpetrated by anyone including the Israeli occupation regime in Palestine, and, though I do not speak for LSN, it is my understanding the organization shares these same commitments.
Please read and honestly consider the links present within this text or the many more which are easily accessible within these stories for more, clear, truthful and relevant information on this very important matter with the universal moral law as a guide for our analysis.
God Bless+
Patrick Delaney, M.A., M.Div.
Final Reflection
I could not wade through all the gobbledygook, there was so much falsehood and propagandizing. The fact is that LifeSite News editors are proceeding from a set of false premises, then building their whole argument and views on the conflict for there.
If one really falls for the lie that a genocide is taking place in Gaza, when in fact it was Hamas that is determined to wipe out all Jewry (not just from the region, but the world) as well as all Christianity, then there is no talking to them about anything else.
It's really that simple.
