Amnesty International criticized for using 'double standards' in report accusing Israel of genocide.

The Amnesty International report that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza has been criticized for being poorly researched and highly politicized.

According to Orde Kittrie, a law professor at Arizona State University, Israeli policies and actions do not meet the legal criteria for genocide.

According to Kittrie, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, accusers must prove that Israel is intentionally killing Gaza civilians due to their Palestinian identity, rather than as an unintended consequence of Israeli self-defense against Hamas and its fighters.

Israel's actions to safeguard Gazan civilians demonstrate that its goal is not genocide but rather to minimize civilian casualties while legally carrying out its rights to liberate hostages, apprehend the perpetrators of the October 7 atrocity, and safeguard its own population from further attacks.

Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, criticized the report in a statement to Planet Chronicle Digital. "Hamas is the only group to have ever shown bloodthirsty genocidal intent in this war. With the support of Tehran, Hamas terrorists filmed themselves on October 7th executing, raping, pillaging, and kidnapping their way through southern Israel."

"Israel did not initiate this war, but Israel will never permit terrorists to go unpunished for harming Israelis and Israelis – and will take any necessary measures to recover the 100 hostages being held in cruel captivity by Hamas," he stated.

The Amnesty report titled "‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza" has concluded that Israel has committed and is continuing to commit genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, according to a report published by the organization on Thursday.

David Adesnik, vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Planet Chronicle Digital that Amnesty International's use of the term "genocide" is biased. Adesnik argued that Amnesty International has never characterized atrocities in Sudan, Ukraine, and Xinjiang as genocide, despite these being cases where the racial or ethnic motive was often clear. Adesnik believes that using the term against Israel suggests a real double standard.

Adesnik, who has reviewed much of Amnesty International’s writing on the post-Oct. 7 conflict, observed that there are only brief mentions of Hamas abusing civilian structures, such as schools, mosques, and UNRWA buildings. What’s intriguing is that they even published a report advising Ukrainian forces to exercise caution when using civilian residences for military purposes. However, they do not provide the same advice when it comes to Hamas.

Amnesty International's report accuses Israel of hindering the delivery of vital services, humanitarian aid, and other life-saving supplies to and within Gaza. However, Adesnik argues that Amnesty International fails to recognize the 58,000 aid trucks and over 1,149,000 tons of aid that have been delivered. Additionally, Amnesty International does not address how the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) has consistently shown declining numbers of Gazans facing catastrophic food insecurity. Adesnik concludes that Amnesty International's assessment of aid treatment is not balanced.

Amnesty International alleges that 22 statements made by senior officials supported or encouraged genocidal actions.

Salo Aizenberg, head of the media monitoring organization HonestReporting, stated to Planet Chronicle Digital that accusations against Israel are often misleading and selectively quote Israeli leaders' statements, as the intent to commit genocide is non-existent. Aizenberg cited the International Court of Justice's case against Israel as an example, stating that it distorted the words of Israeli President Isaac Herzog.

The Times of Israel reported that Herzog criticized the ICJ's case, stating that he was "disgusted by the way they twisted my words, using very, very partial and fragmented quotes."

Amnesty International was questioned by Planet Chronicle Digital about any concerns they had regarding Hamas leaders' statements advocating for indiscriminate terrorist attacks, such as those made by Ghazi Hamad, a Hamas official who stated that the Oct. 7 attack was "just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a fourth."

Amnesty International did not respond to Planet Chronicle Digital's inquiry about condemning Hamas' use of medical facilities and civilian structures, and whether the organization considers conflict in Sudan and Ukraine or ethnic predation in Xinjiang and Afghanistan to constitute genocide.

Recently, Amnesty Northern Ireland invited Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, to speak about Israeli genocide at its annual lecture, providing further evidence of Amnesty International's anti-Israel bias.

The U.N. has been criticized for allowing Albanese to spread antisemitic hate. The location of her Dec. 3 speech serves as a reminder of the impact of anti-Israel sentiments on Jews worldwide following Oct. 7. Despite the small Jewish population in Ireland, after 14 months of increasing hate, Irish Jews are now removing identifying symbols to avoid becoming targets.