David M. Litman is the U.S. Media Research Manager at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where he covers anti-Israel bias in the media. Previously, David worked at an independent watchdog organization focused on anti-Israel bias, international law, and human rights issues in the United Nations and international courts. David graduated magna cum laude from Case Western Reserve School of Law and holds a BA in International Studies.
Amnesty International, having been given multiple opportunities to respond when directly presented with evidence that it inaccurately presented a key figure in its “apartheid” report against Israel, has gone silent.
Hasan’s comments highlight a reality about much of anti-Israel activism. Criticism of Israel isn’t so much based on what Israel does or doesn’t do, as the activists will find a way to criticize it either way. Instead, criticism of Israel is about its existence in the first place.
The statement also exposes the emptiness of the supposed “principles” of individuals like El-Kurd. While openly calling for the ethnic cleansing of Jews, her social media accounts are replete with cries to “#EndEthnicCleansing.” It’s yet another example of how much of anti-Israel activism is not about principled human rights, but about the destruction of the Jewish state and the denial of Jewish self-determination.
Around the same time Palestinian rioters were attacking the Jewish holy site of Joseph’s Tomb, the UN’s latest anti-Israel inquiry was willingly lending its ear to someone who had just a week earlier used a pair of events to claim the Muslim holy site of al-Aqsa Mosque was in danger.
One seeking any more proof of the antisemitism behind much of the obscene accusations of Israel being an “apartheid” state need look no further than the new United Nations (“UN”) report that will be presented to the UN Human Rights Council (“UNHRC”) on March 24.
By labeling Israel as a “colonial occupier,” the Palestinians and their enablers at the UNHRC are using the same antisemitic strategy they frequently employ at UNESCO to delink Jews from their indigenous homeland and their holy sites.
Beinart exposes complete disdain for and ignorance of not only history, but of the very legal concepts he seeks to rely on. He also displays his own inconsistent concern for respect of international law.
There’s something particularly ugly about the accusation that the Jewish State tests technology on Palestinians to make a profit. Part of it is that the suggestion flirts with multiple antisemitic tropes: that Jews are only interested in money, or that the Jews are always engaging in grand conspiracies to manipulate the goyim for their own insidious designs.
Lacking factual and legal support for its claims, Amnesty resorts to repeating emotionally charged, but substantively empty, language and claims that – rather than educate students of the course – work only to demonize Israelis and delegitimize the Jewish State.
Israel is right to snub the U.N. COI, and the U.S. – as well as all fair-minded democracies – need to step up and put an end to this blatant antisemitism coming from the U.N. It's deeply concerning that they would allow their U.N. funding to be used for an inherently anti-Semitic initiative.
