How is forced starvation allowed?

[Tinycatnoise]

The top story in the BBC right now is the starvation of Gazans by Israel. The images are horrifying and not dissimilar to seeing those images of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. I cried seeing those and am crying now. I am sure someone will claim antisemitism because of this statement, but anyone looking at these images of starving children would agree.

How is this still going on? I feel like we are watching a genocide take place that the world has turning a blind eye to. The daily shooting by Israel of people trying to get aid too is just barbaric. If nothing is being done to stop this, what is the next horror that will unfold in the world that people will just accept?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9xkx7vnmxo

Russia invaded Ukraine
Gaza invaded Israel

You're switching the roles around here.

In Ukraine, MSF reported atrocities clearly blaming Russia as the aggressor, they spoke plainly about the invasion, named Russia in war crime allegations, and never suggested both sides were equally responsible.

With Israel, they rarely mention Hamas’ role in starting or perpetuating the war, don’t acknowledge the October 7 massacre in any detail, routinely frame Israel as the singular cause of suffering, ignoring Hamas theft of aid, use of hospitals for military purposes, or rocket fire from civilian areas and use loaded language like “genocide” - language they avoided using even for Russia.

They documented bombed maternity wards in Ukraine, and named Russia.

In Gaza, they show a child and blame “the siege,” skipping over Hamas stealing fuel from hospitals or embedding fighters inside them.

So yes, it is different. And the selective framing makes it political.

Oh please.

Let's look at just one of those organisations

Amnesty International's bias against Israel is blatant and well-documented. In 2021, they published six major reports on Israel but didn't dedicate a single full report to China's treatment of the Uyghurs. North Korea got just one. Iran’s executions and suppression? Barely touched. But Israel gets the spotlight.

In 2022, Amnesty released a 278-page report accusing Israel of apartheid, a label they never applied elsewhere. Only Israel. Their Secretary General Agnès Callamard dismissed criticism by saying accusations of antisemitism are just meant to silence debate. That says it all.

They barely touch Hamas, even though it regularly commits war crimes like firing rockets at civilians and torturing its own people. In 2021, Amnesty’s report mentioned Israel 53 times, Hamas only 5, and didn’t mention Islamic Jihad at all. They routinely report Israeli airstrikes without noting the hundreds of rockets being fired into Israeli cities. They erase context to frame Israel as the aggressor.

Amnesty UK’s campaigns director Kristyan Benedict posted antisemitic tweets comparing Israeli leaders to ISIS and joking about Zionists controlling the media. Nothing was done. He stayed in the role.

They accuse Israel of being a racist state because it’s Jewish, but say nothing about Pakistan being an Islamic Republic or Armenia being a Christian nation. They apply international law selectively, always to Israel.

Worst of all, after Hamas’s mass rape, torture, and murder of civilians on October 7, Amnesty stayed silent. Over 1200 Israelis were slaughtered. Women were raped beside the bodies of their children. The UN confirmed that the sexual violence was likely systematic. Amnesty took four months to say a word. Four months.

This isn’t human rights advocacy. It’s political warfare dressed up as morality. Amnesty has lost all credibility and when this is pretty patiently pointed out to you, you dismiss it because it just so happens that their bias mirrors your own.

Would you say you find it difficult to tolerate moral complexity- for example, that Israel can be both vulnerable and responsible for harm?

You raise some serious concerns about bias and selective reporting, which definitely deserve scrutiny. It’s true that Amnesty and other NGOs have faced valid criticism over how consistently they apply international law and human rights standards globally. No organisation is beyond reproach, and holding them accountable is important.

At the same time, when doctors and aid workers report bombed hospitals, overwhelmed clinics, or civilian casualties, their primary role is humanitarian- documenting medical harm, not adjudicating political responsibility.

I think it’s important to acknowledge the crimes committed by Hamas (including the horrific attacks on October 7) whilst also recognising the very real suffering of civilians in Gaza under blockade and bombardment. Can you not see how the killing of nearly 20,000 children might be seen as a disproportionate response?

The challenge is in holding all accountable, without dismissing medical and humanitarian reports as politically motivated just because they highlight the suffering on one side.

Would you agree that the complexity of this conflict demands nuanced discussion, rather than framing all reports as inherently biased or propagandistic? That there’s a discomfort in accepting that Israel- a state with military might and Western alliances- can also be capable of causing disproportionate civilian harm?

No. I just have a low tolerance for obvious bullshit, and anything involving Israel is drowning in it. You can’t have a nuanced discussion when it’s just nonstop propaganda ping-pong. Most people aren’t interested in truth; they’re interested in bashing Israel.

To me, it’s just the modern-day version of 1930s antisemitism, they can’t openly target Jews anymore, so they project all that hatred (in a pretty much almost identical format) onto the Jewish state instead. I'm pretty sure most people don't know they're doing it or they feel that they've demonised Israel sufficiently that it's justified.

I think maybe as a society (and I'm speaking broadly) that maybe the best way forward is actually removing nuance as people often misuse it in this context. They try very hard to draw false equivalence or dig around for anything that can enable them to cling on by the skin of their teeth to what's essentially tacit support for a genocidal terror organisation that really, really openly tells you what it is, what it wants and what it's going to do.

People are crazed right now. Obsessed. And the situation has nothing to do with a need for nuanced discussion. Nothing they or you or I discuss is going to change a damn thing in the middle east, but what we do have an opportunity to change is what's going on here, at home.

We have an opportunity to recognise what's going on: obsessive denomination of israel, Jews being attacked, Jewish people being boycotted out of their careers, normalisation of mobs with racial hatred, posters of kidnapped people being ripped down.

People have an option to choose if they're going to join in, sit in silence or reject that. And I think it's that, rather than Gaza, that is actually our responsibility.

Gaza will be okay when the majority of people in it believe Israel and Jews have a right to be in the middle east and have a right to independence. It basically exactly that simple. But if people om mumsnet can't accept that then I honestly doubt the people of Gaza will anytime soon.

Never fail to shoe horn antisemitism when Israel is criticised. I don’t think it’s working like it used to.

I just described Jews being attacked, Jewish people being boycotted out of their careers, normalisation of mobs with racial hatred, posters of kidnapped people being ripped down - none of which is criticising Israel.

I really think the reverse is true, and antisemites hiding behind "I was just criticising Israel" are not really fooling anyone anymore.

On every thread about Gaza. It has nothing to do with children starving.

This

Agree with all of this, but especially this.
Nothing they or you or I discuss is going to change a damn thing in the middle east, but what we do have an opportunity to change is what's going on here, at home.
The obsession with Gaza is wildly disproportionate in terms of what is actually going on in the rest of the world. But meanwhile we, at best, turn a blind eye to growing antisemitism at home. Two Jewish comedians cancelled at Edinburgh this week. Where is the outcry?

But an awful lot to do with how the situation is discussed.

We have Trump now making clear he wants more food in but there will be little praise or even comment about this. As I have said on another thread in a way Hamas wanted the hunger to continue for its own PR and to undermine support of Israel by western governments. At least with aid getting in Hamas have lost a PR lever and they are probably a bit pissed off.

The UN needs to go in and keep the peace.

There are peace talks you know (though faltering). There seems to be little coverage of them though.

@mids2019 The only angle I’ve seen mentioned on here is how even Trump has said the children look starving.

Leaving out the other part of what he said which is “they’re stealing all the food” - presumably referring to Hamas.

I’m genuinely sorry you feel that way. From where I sit, asking questions about proportionality, accountability, and humanitarian law isn’t obsession- it’s a response to an unfolding catastrophe where over 20,000 children have been killed.

You say nuance has no place, but that’s a dangerous route. Removing nuance doesn’t make a situation clearer. It just makes it easier to dehumanise one side.

I reject antisemitism, unequivocally. I also believe Palestinian lives matter, and that neither truth nor justice can exist without the ability to hold power to account- whoever wields it.

Yes, it’s shocking those comedians have been cancelled. Antisemitism must be taken seriously, but that can’t be used to shut down criticism of state violence.

Think what’s happening here reflects something deeper than just political disagreement. The conflation of criticism of Israel with antisemitism often isn’t about bad faith- it’s about fear.

i appreciate that for many Jewish people, history isn’t abstract. The Holocaust, pogroms, centuries of exile and persecution- those traumas are alive in memory and identity. So when people strongly criticise Israel, especially using words like “genocide” or “apartheid” it can feel like another wave of existential threat. Even if the critique is about state policy, it registers emotionally as: “the world is turning on us again.”

But the fear, however real, doesn’t mean that reporting mass civilian death is antisemitic. It doesn’t make it “propaganda” to show bombed hospitals or starved children. Denial of suffering isn’t protection and it certainly isn’t justice.

We must hold all parties accountable, including Hamas. But silencing criticism of Israel because it triggers deep fear isn’t protecting Jews- it’s protecting impunity.

Real safety for everyone- Jewish, Palestinian, Israeli, Muslim- requires space for truth, grief, and accountability. Not just loyalty to one side.

Wow, thats a twist. Where did she say nuance has no place? She said you can't have a nuanced discussion because of the propaganda driven nature of the debate.

Antisemitism must be taken seriously but.....

Err i did say the appointment of Iran on any form of HR forum is very wrong, but it was not the UN Human rights council which you said had appointed an Iranian.

The UN is not a NGO but have you ever considered that Israel may not respect Palestinian human rights, hence so many condemnations, many of which refer to settlers taking property/killing from Palestinians in the West Bank.

Its incredible you think so many charitable NGO's are antisemitic, perhaps you should take your evidence to the charity commission?

Just because someone has a different take on the actions of the Israeli govt, doesn't make them antisemitic.

No one on here wants to see Israel eradicated, i thought that was clear, bt you appear to be a mind reader.

I also said re IRA it was not a direct comparison, however, it does show that there were alternatives to what Israel has done.

Gaza isn't a separate country is it? as well you know nor do you ever want it to be, what about Israel's actions in the West Bank?

Interesting that Israel has banned the filming of Gaza from the air by journalists allowed on Jordanian flights.

The "war" didn't start on 7/10 either.

She said “maybe the best way forward is actually removing nuance”, that’s more than just saying it’s hard to have a nuanced discussion. That’s actively arguing against nuance as a principle.

It’s precisely because the situation is so politicised and emotionally loaded that nuance is essential not disposable. Otherwise we’re just choosing a side and silencing everything else.

Well I'm sure people can judge who has been capable of the most nuanced thinking in these threads.

Comments like that really aren’t helping.
Can you hear how it sounds, @SharonEllis ?
‘20,000 children have been killed but…’

I very much agree

I also feel that- if you’re genuinely worried about rising antisemitism, I’m honestly horrified you’d comment on a thread downplaying, deflecting from, and minimising the forced starvation of nearly 2 million people. This doesn’t help- it actually risks making antisemitism worse.

Have you ever considered that Israel may not respect Palestinian human rights, hence so many condemnations, many of which refer to settlers taking property/killing from Palestinians in the West Bank.

No. I don't. And here's why. For the sake of this post I'll focus on Gaza as that was what was being discussed and for the sake of this post I'll focus on "human rights" from a standpoint of our own interpretation of those.

Here is a direct breakdown of the Human Rights Act examining whether Palestinians in Israel and Palestinians in Gaza enjoy them, and if not, who is responsible for the deprivation:

Right to Life (Art. 2)

In Israel: Yes. Arab Israelis (including Palestinians with citizenship) have full legal protection of life.

In Gaza: Regularly violated.

By: Primarily Hamas and other armed groups who embed military assets in civilian areas and use human shields, placing civilians in danger.

Also: Israel has been accused of excessive force during military operations, but those military operations are started (every time) by Hamas.

Freedom from Torture or Inhuman Treatment (Art. 3)

In Israel: Yes. Protected under Israeli law and monitored by independent courts and NGOs.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas. There are widespread reports of torture of detainees, political opponents, and suspected collaborators.

Freedom from Slavery/Forced Labour (Art. 4)

In Israel: Yes.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas has used child labour in tunnel construction and forcibly conscripted minors.

Right to Liberty and Security (Art. 5)

In Israel: Yes. Palestinians with Israeli citizenship have due process and access to the courts. Palestinians in the West Bank can face administrative detention by Israeli military courts.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas, which arrests dissidents, journalists, and anyone accused of “collaboration” without fair trials.

Right to a Fair Trial (Art. 6)

In Israel: Yes. Full access to courts for citizens. Military courts in the West Bank are separate, and controversial, but are monitored.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas. Summary executions and sham trials are well documented.

No Punishment Without Law (Art. 7)

In Israel: Yes.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas applies arbitrary punishments, including execution for “morality crimes” or dissent.

Right to Private and Family Life (Art. 8)

In Israel: Yes. Arab Israelis are entitled to privacy, family unity, and legal redress.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas, which monitors citizens, enforces morality policing, and often harasses families of dissenters.

Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion (Art. 9)

In Israel: Yes. Full religious freedom, including for Muslims and Christians.

In Gaza: Severely limited.

By: Hamas. Converts from Islam are persecuted. Christians have faced intimidation.

Freedom of Expression (Art. 10)

In Israel: Yes. Arab media and dissenting views operate freely, though some restrictions exist in times of national emergency.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas. Journalists are censored, imprisoned, tortured, and sometimes killed for dissent.

Freedom of Assembly & Association (Art. 11)

In Israel: Yes. Arab Israelis hold protests frequently.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas bans and violently suppresses protests or political opposition.

Right to Marry and Found a Family (Art. 12)

In Israel: Yes. Interfaith and civil marriages are limited under religious law, but family life is otherwise protected.

In Gaza: Restricted.

By: Hamas imposes moral codes and cultural/religious restrictions that particularly affect women.

Right to an Effective Remedy (Art. 13)

In Israel: Yes. Arab citizens can and do sue the state, and win.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas. No independent judiciary or access to justice.

Protection from Discrimination (Art. 14)

In Israel: Legally guaranteed. Discrimination exists (as it does elsewhere), but it is challenged in courts and public discourse.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas. Political discrimination is rampant. Women, Christians, and LGBT persons face persecution.

Additional Protocol Rights:

Right to Education

In Israel: Yes. Arab Israelis have access to public education and universities.

In Gaza: Partial.

By: Hamas-run curriculum includes incitement and indoctrination. Educational freedom is limited.

Right to Free Elections

In Israel: Yes.

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas, which has not allowed elections since 2006.

Abolition of the Death Penalty

In Israel: Yes (de facto, not used).

In Gaza: No.

By: Hamas carries out public executions without fair trials.

Palestinians in PA-controlled areas and Gaza live under Palestinian rule. Their rights - freedom of speech, protest, religion, gender equality, free press, elections - are denied not by Israel, but by their own leaders. And everyone knows it. But somehow, Israel is blamed for rights violations in territories it doesn’t control. Or held to account for not giving people citizen rights who are not citizens. It's absurd.

In Israeli-controlled areas of the West Bank, yes, it's under a form of military law, because it's a disputed territory, not sovereign Israel. And yes, the population is hostile and rejects citizenship. So no, they don’t have the same rights as Israeli citizens, because they are not Israeli citizens, and don't want to be and actually anyone talking about settlers should not ignore that the Palestinian population also attacks and even murders Jewish people. Jewish people cannot even set foot in these territories.

People bitch endlessly about Israel not giving Palestinians who aren't citizens equal rights which is in itself absurd in legal terms, but the part I find unbelievable is that in Palestinian-controlled areas, Jews have no right to vote, no right to property, and no right to be alive. But you won’t hear a peep from Amnesty about that.

So what's going on isn't human rights campaigning. Its a relentless campaign to distort human rights language and western understanding of its meaning into political propaganda.

There is no human right to live in the exact house your great-grandfather once lived in.

There is no human right to import weapons.

There is no human right to vote in the elections of a country you’re not a citizen of.

These aren’t rights.

They’re based on genocidal fantasies, and they’re pushed by people whose real goal is the end of Israel, dressed up in the language of international law. “From the river to the sea” isn’t a human rights claim, it’s a genocidal chant.

And when human rights groups adopt this framework, they stop being defenders of rights and become political operatives. If they gave even the slightest genuine shit about human rights in Gaza, they wouldn't be criticising isrsel 10 x more than they do the terrorist dictators who are the ones actually depriving Gazan people of human rights.

Ive thought about Palestinian human rights many times. I think about the fact that they’re abused daily by Hamas and the PA, and the world shrugs. Because unless those rights can be used as a club to beat Israel with, they apparently don’t count. And that tells me all I need to know.