Guardian editor defends Hamas’s right to kill Israelis, AGAIN.

During the last war in Gaza two years ago, Guardian associate editor Seumas Milne defended the Palestinian ‘right’ of armed resistance, while arguing that Israel, as the ‘occupying power’, had no such right to defend itself against Hamas (It’s Palestinians who have the right to defend themselves, Nov. 20, 2012).

“So Gazans are an occupied people and have the right to resist, including by armed force (though not to target civilians), while Israel is an occupying power that has an obligation to withdraw – not a right to defend territories it controls or is colonising by dint of military power.

Now, here is the relevant passage from Milne’s latest op-ed, published today (Gaza: this shameful injustice will only end if the cost of it rises, July 16th) at the Guardian:

So the Palestinians of Gaza are an occupied people, like those in the West Bank, who have the right to resist, by force if they choose – though not deliberately to target civilians. But Israel does not have a right of self-defence over territories it illegally occupies – it has an obligation to withdraw.

The only difference between the passages in the two op-eds relates to Milne’s expanded right of resistance. Note that in 2012 it was only Gazans who had the right to engage in acts of terrorism, while in 2014 both Gazans and West Bank Palestinians enjoy the inalienable ‘right’ to kill Israelis. 

However, Milne is consistent in both op-eds with regard to one thing: Israel has no right to defend itself from Hamas terror. 

While Milne’s justification for the intentional killing of Israelis is not surprising given his history of praising anti-imperialist “resistance movements” across the globe, the mere fact that his latest polemic is consistent with his broader political orientation certainly doesn’t make it any less morally repulsive.

26 replies »

    • Avi with the likes of Milne it is not his ‘ability to read’ that causes the problem. But his inability to read a book without twisting or selectively quoting or even quoting out of context its contents to suit his own pre-set agenda.

    • It’s not as simple as that, Avi. Shameless is educated, yes, and he knows full well where responsibility for this should be placed, but he is in the grip of anti-Israel/anti-Jewish bias to the extent that he cannot speak it how it really is. It’s Judenhass, pure and simple and he probably gets a rush from it. He and ethical reporting have not even a nodding acquaintance.

  1. The horror tonight: four ten-year old children reported killed by Israeli shelling in front of all the foreign press corp in Gaza.

    • Yes, this is terrible. The consequences of living under a religiofascistic murderous terror organization like Hamas whose combattants are hiding behind civilians, including children. Somehow this “foeign press” isn’t interested the same day’s other events, like 42 dead civilians in Afghanistans and 5 civilian deaths in Ukraine. As the saying goes: no Jews – no news.

        • Freddie, you even cherry pick your own expressions.
          It’s suppose to be: “no Jews, no problems we can pin on them so let’s find a new scape goat”.

        • I think the saying is ‘no jews, no problems’, actually…
          In your circles Frederico it is. And now please continue to teach the readers about “international law” and “human rights”.

        • Frederico, people like you actually NEED to hate. It’s the equivalent of a drug fix for them. If there were no Jews they’d quickly find something else that would give them such a fix.

        • Yes we know that is what Hamas and you want. HOwever looking around the world and especailly the ME we see who is causing the prolbems really.

    • “in front of all the foreign press corp in Gaza”

      Amazing that, isn’t it? It JUST HAPPENED to take place in front of the luxury hotel where they all stay.

    • I wonder why they were there, if shells were flying about? Perhaps by invitation? After all there’s precendent isn’t there?

  2. Seumas Milne was one of the Pallywood liars about the Jenin massacre hoax.
    Even after it was proven to be a hoax, Seumas refused to retract his lie.
    Battle of Jenin
    Milne described the Battle of Jenin ( 1–11 April 2002) during Operation Defensive Shield as an “unleashing of state terror” by the Israeli government whilst describing the fierce fighting of Palestinian militants as “desperate Palestinian resistance”.[38] Milne claimed during the fighting in Jenin that as “in other West Bank towns and camps, reports of beatings and executions of prisoners abound, and Israel appears to be preparing the ground for evidence of atrocities”. Milne also stated that “Hundreds [of Palestinians] are reported killed, including many civilians.

    Seuman was also a Hamas liar about the Gaza war in 2008.

    Gaza War
    In the aftermath of the Gaza War (27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009) Milne cited allegations of Israeli war crimes to argue: “With such powerful evidence of violations of the rules of war now emerging from the rubble of Gaza, the test must be this: is the developing system of international accountability for war crimes only going to apply to the west’s enemies – or can the western powers and their closest allies also be brought to book?”[39]

    Columnist Melanie Phillips in an article titled “The Guardian Goes to Pallywood” on her Spectator blog, highly criticized the factual truth of the research and the anti-Israeli stance of the Guardian, describing it as “an evil newspaper”.[41][dead link] At the end of this long article Phillips criticized Milne’s commentary as:

    Lazy, malicious use of partisan, uncorroborated, thin, ambiguous and on occasion demonstrably absurd allegations, with the purpose and effect of demonising and delegitimising the Israeli victims of terrorism by painting them as the terrorists and their Palestinian attackers as their victims.[41]

    The allegations by Milne of Israeli war crimes appeared to have been proven to be true with the release of the UN report into Israel’s invasion of Gaza which accused both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes.[42] However, the lead author of the report, Richard Goldstone, later retracted his findings with regard to accusations of Israeli war crimes: on April 1, 2011, Goldstone published a piece in The Washington Post titled ‘Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes’.[43] Goldstone noted that the subsequent investigations by Israel and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report “indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy” while noting “That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying.”[43] Goldstone wrote that “If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.”[43] He said that the lack of Israeli cooperation had meant that no Israeli officers were interviewed during the writing of the report. In hindsight, incidents that had been interpreted as the deliberate targeting of civilians may have had other explanations, such as poor intelligence information.[43] Goldstone also praised Israel for investigating claims of war crimes while faulting Hamas for its failure to launch any investigations of its own forces.[43] Goldstone commended Israel for responding to his report by revising military procedures to e.g. limit the use of white phosphorus in civilian areas.[43]

    • Shameless has much invested psychologically in not being wrong. To have been found to have been so, and so publicly caused him massive cognitive dissonance. Instead of admitting it and sitting with the discomfort that it brought, he persisted in the delusion and continued to try to alter reality. That smacks of delusion. He should be consigned to the equivalent of the Guardian’s gardening section where he can do less harm to the tatters of the Guardian’s reputation.

  3. Following an article he published in September 1995 in The Guardian, Milne “became characterised as a ‘far-left activist’ and member of the Socialist Workers Party”.[1] Peter Popham argued that connecting Milne to the SWP was a “smear”, but “there is no mistaking that Seumas is on the far left of the Labour Party, of which he has been a member for 20 years”

    Certainly an intended smear, the antisemite is an old Stalinist (which by definition includes to be an “antizionist”) and therefore a staunch defender of Mao, not a trotskyst from the SWP. What a deep offense.
    Under this pretext the capitalist state is terror, suppression and colonialism and every suprressed population has every right to terrorize “back” except in China, Cuba, Russia, etc., of course where such a population isn`t anymore population, but a nazi minority which has to be silenced by all means.
    Well, the perfect human rights activist, isn`t he?

  4. Thank god we can still defend ourselves against the Iranian backed Islamic Jihad, or the anti Semitic Fatah armed wing!

    Sadly though for Milne, Iran and Hizbullah might not like their fighters added to the people we have no right to defend against, and slap Mr. milne for being a naughty careless child…

  5. This comment section has been closed. Please note that anyone advocating or even suggesting violence against a Guardian writer (or anyone else) will be banned from this site.