Binish Thomas (Special Correspondent)
Years ago, India was shaken by the brutal gang rape of a young woman on a moving bus in Delhi. We called her Nirbhaya “the fearless one.” Her attackers were caught, tried, and several were sentenced to death.
The entire nation demanded justice, and rightly so. No civilized society tolerates such savagery against the innocent.
Now hold that same moral clarity and look at October 7, 2023.
On that day, Hamas militants stormed into Israeli communities and carried out atrocities that were, by credible international accounts, every bit as horrific as the crime that shook India and far more numerous.
Women were raped. Families were slaughtered in their homes. Young people at a music festival were hunted down and killed. Hostages, including children and the elderly, were dragged into Gaza.
It was the deadliest single day for Jews since the Holocaust.
And yet, in the months since, a strange moral inversion has taken hold in parts of global public opinion.
When Israel exercises its basic right the right every sovereign nation has to defend its people and prevent further attacks, it is met with accusations, condemnations, and protests.
When the attack itself happened, much of the world was slower to react, and some voices abroad went so far as to describe it as understandable “resistance.”
Why the double standard?:
If a group of armed men broke into your house night after night, threatening your family’s survival, no one would question your right to stop them permanently.
That is not aggression that is existence. Israel is a small country that has faced this reality since its founding: in 1948, in 1967’s Six-Day War when it was attacked by multiple neighboring states and prevailed against overwhelming odds, and in repeated conflicts since.
Despite decades of attempts to erase it from the map, Israel has endured and has done so while building one of the world’s most innovative economies, contributing groundbreaking advances in medicine, agriculture, water technology, and computing that have benefited people far beyond its borders.
The information war :
Part of why global opinion is so skewed is the sophistication of the messaging campaign around this conflict.
Certain media outlets, most notably Al Jazeera, have played an outsized role in shaping international sentiment against Israel.
Questions have also been raised and are worth continued independent scrutiny about the neutrality of some humanitarian and international staff operating in Gaza, given documented cases where individuals connected to UN-affiliated agencies were later found to have ties to Hamas.
Separately, disinformation and manipulated imagery have circulated widely on social media during this conflict, as they do in nearly every modern war, making it harder for ordinary people to distinguish fact from propaganda.
There is a bitter irony that platforms built by Jewish entrepreneurs are now among the primary vehicles for anti-Israel messaging.
Meanwhile, some political leaders including certain figures in India and elsewhere publicly characterized the October 7 attack as a legitimate response rather than a terrorist atrocity. Vigils and public gatherings were organized in support of those killed while carrying out the attack.
Sporting figures and even entire national teams have made symbolic gestures of rejection toward Israel.
These are choices people are free to make but they deserve to be weighed against what actually happened on October 7.
What has been built, and what has only been destroyed
It is worth asking plainly: what have Hamas and Hezbollah, and the groups and states that fund them, contributed to human progress?.
What innovation, what medicine, what technology has emerged from their rule?.
By contrast, Israel a nation founded by refugees who had nowhere else to go, who pooled resources to purchase land and build a state from nothing has become a global engine of scientific and technological advancement.
But moral clarity requires starting from an honest accounting of how this war began, and recognizing that a nation attacked has the right indeed, the obligation to defend its people.
For its own survival, and for what it continues to offer the world, Israel’s right to exist and defend itself should not be a matter of debate.
Israel in particular, despite its small size and young age as a nation, has produced an outsized share of global innovation.Drip irrigation technology, pioneered in Israel, transformed agriculture into arid regions worldwide.
The cherry tomato was developed by Israeli researchers. Israeli engineers helped develop the USB flash drive and contributed core technology to Intel’s processors.
The navigation app Waze and the messaging platform ICQ both originated in Israel.
In medicine, Israeli researchers have been at the forefront of stem cell research, and the country is often cited as having one of the highest concentrations of tech startups per capita in the world a reputation that has earned it the nickname “Start-Up Nation.”
Yet in recent years, several European countries have refused to play football against Israel, and at least one prominent footballer has publicly spoken out against the country moves that, in my view, stem more from political pressure or personal gain than principle.
Those who oppose Israel, whether individuals, companies, or countries, often appear to be acting on a broader agenda, sometimes backed by funding from sympathetic groups or governments.
Since its founding, Israel has faced repeated existential threats, yet it has endured and, over time, expanded its territory. Whatever one’s views on the broader conflict, its right to defend itself should not be in question.
It is my responsibility to reveal the truth about the Israel-Hamas conflict. Justice has always stood with Israel they were simply responding to the Hamas attack. Whatever happens, I will declare this truth to the world.
