Two of my recent articles – one on Jewish history, the other on the current conflict in Gaza – aroused great enthusiasm among some people, and great displeasure among others. One of my critics responded with a post with a video of children dying in Gaza. This image was supposed to prove that the Israeli army does not care about children’s lives and that it is shooting at civilians who have come for food aid.
Photos or videos of this type are intended to turn public opinion against Israel and for Palestinian fighters. I could have deleted the post I mentioned, but I intentionally left it there and I will leave it there for a few more days, because I mention it in this article and everyone has the right to see or read what I respond to. However, I would like to warn you in advance that you will no longer see such drastic images or videos on my website or on my Facebook, and I want to explain why.
In my articles, I have warned more than once that it will be increasingly difficult to find out what is true and what is “fake”. Experts on the Internet and various advanced technologies may be able to tell what is “fake” and what is not; I can’t do it. When something like this appears on my FB, it can be
Maybe you can point out another possibility to me.
It is also necessary to ask who took the picture and how it came to us.
So far, we’ve talked about visual material. Photos – videos – TV, etc. As far as information is concerned, we can distinguish roughly three basic levels: visual material, audio recordings or radio programmes, and written materials.
It would seem that the closest to reality are the visual materials. I think this is a big mistake, and I will try to explain why. But it is definitely true that these visual materials are themost influential. Television evokes much more emotions in us than radio, and radio evokes much more emotions in us than written text. Emotions certainly have their place in our lives – without them, life could not exist. However, emotions can be pleasant or unpleasant. Some emotions help us to know the truth and find solutions to problems, while others obscure the truth and can lead to solutions that are only seemingly solutions.
I will give you an example. When Angela Merkel saw a photo of a drowned three-year-old boy near the island of Lesbos, she decided to open the borders to 1.5 million migrants. Many years later, I learned that she had made this decision under the influence of the emotions that the photograph had aroused in her. I am convinced that this was a wrong and tragic decision. At the same time, I have no doubt about her good intentions. If, in addition to compassion, shehad engaged more reason, European history could have developed in a different direction, especially a safer one.
What about my emotions? Why did my friends and I decide to help persecuted Christians in Iraq? Because I went upstairs to bring my mom groceries, and she had the TV on, which I almost don’t watch, and if I do, it’s on sports and not the news, and I saw a report on that TV about how a three-year-old girl’s mom and dad were killed in front of her eyes. I sobbed and said to myself that if I didn’t do anything at all, I wouldn’t be able to live with myself.
Well, I was also driven by emotions. Then there was a certain effort, consultations with the Ministry of the Interior, and when we had the first press conference, we already had a four-hundred-page material about people who wanted to relocate, about their family circumstances, about their education and about their state of health. Thus, emotions led to certain rational actions.
At this hour, each of us already has an opinion on how things are with Hamas and Gaza. The person who sent me those horrible pictures apparently wanted to prove to me how brutal the Israelis are and that they knowingly and intentionally kill children. How can I respond to this? The childish reaction would be to send him even more disgusting pictures that would prove the barbarism of Hamas. It wouldn’t be a problem for me. But I still wouldn’t convince my opponent or critic, just as he wouldn’t convince me. He would rather confirm his opinion and look for an even more peppery insult for me than that I am a liar and an idiot. I am constantly trying to find some other way than to denigrate those who think differently than me.
Of course, it would be best if a ceasefire was concluded and the conflict was resolved through negotiations. Those who were most sympathetic to the Palestinians in Israel, however, were massacred first. I think that if Israel’s enemies don’t succeed in killing all the Jews – which is their stated goal – eventually there will be some negotiations. It could have happened as early as 1948. It could have happened after the Oslo Accords, which were negotiated by Yasser Arafat. At that time, peace seemed very close.
The Palestinians have provoked several wars, including this most recent one. They all lost something in the process. They start a war, and when they start losing it, they start shouting about how unfair it is.
If Israel really wanted to commit genocide, it would turn off the Palestinians’ electricity and turn off the water taps. However, she will not do that, because she does not want to commit genocide.
Jewish children are not taught from kindergarten that all Palestinians must be killed. That’s important to me. Jews do not rejoice when they see dead Palestinian children. When an Israeli soldier kills a terrorist, he doesn’t film it so that his parents can rejoice at what a hero he is. Israeli soldiers do not rape Palestinian women. These are facts that I know are true, because they are being spread by the Palestinians themselves. Therefore, these facts cannot be taken as Israeli propaganda.
I believe those Palestinian videos.
July 14, 2025