60 Minutes Goes Full Propaganda on the Israel-Hamas War
The program's latest on Israel-Hamas war is a showcase of bias and propaganda with CAIR-tied voices, dubious sources, and zero context
The 60 Minutes segment "Dissent within the State Department over U.S. role in Israel-Hamas war" is a brazen attempt to vilify Israel and undermine U.S. policy. Featuring anti-Israel former State Department officials like Hala Rharrit and Josh Paul, relying on dubious sources like Airwars, and ignoring critical military context, the piece sensationalizes claims of civilian harm while letting Hamas’s atrocities go unchallenged. Through selective reporting, unverified data, and a skewed narrative, the program portrays Israel as reckless and unjustified in its military operations, while whitewashing the complicity of Hamas and its apologists in the bloodshed. Let’s break it down.
Hala Rharrit: The Agitator Masquerading as a Diplomat
Hala Rharrit, featured as a whistleblower, is far from an impartial source. She has been a featured speaker for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), appearing at events such as “How Islamophobia & Anti-Palestinian Racism Fuel Biden Administration’s Gaza Policy” and another hosted by CAIR in Connecticut. CAIR is an organization tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and terror financing, and was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror financing case in U.S. history.
Josh Paul & DAWN
Josh Paul, another featured voice, resigned from the State Department post-October 7, when 1,200 Israelis were slaughtered and 200 were taken hostage, to demand peace negotiations with Hamas. Now working for DAWN, a Soros-funded organization chaired by CAIR’s Nihad Awad, who praised Hamas’s October 7 massacre, Paul’s criticisms lack credibility and expose his alignment with pro-Hamas narratives.
Brian L. Cox’s Analysis: A Thorough Deconstruction of 60 Minutes’ Misleading Coverage
Dr. Brian L. Cox, a retired U.S. Army serviceman and expert in military law, methodically dismantled the flawed narratives presented in the 60 Minutes segment about Israel’s use of 2,000-pound bombs. His analysis highlights the segment’s reliance on dubious sources, lack of critical context, and misleading conclusions.
Framing Israel’s Use of 2,000-Pound Bombs
The 60 Minutes segment begins by casting suspicion on Israel’s request for 2,000-pound bombs, framing them as excessively destructive and controversial. The narrative emphasizes that these munitions are “among the most powerful in the U.S. arsenal,” used for large targets like weapons depots. It introduces a case study of an Israeli airstrike on the al-Taj building in Gaza to suggest that these bombs cause unacceptable civilian harm. By framing the discussion this way, the segment sets the stage for a conclusion that Israel’s actions and its arms requests are reckless.
The segment leans heavily on Airwars, a British nonprofit, to claim that an Israeli strike on October 25, 2023, killed over 100 people, including 81 women and children. Dr. Cox exposes significant flaws in Airwars’ methodology. Airwars aggregates casualty data from unverified social media posts, many of which are unverifiable and lack independent corroboration. Despite these limitations, 60 Minutes amplifies Airwars’ claims without addressing their reliability.
Furthermore, Airwars fails to distinguish between civilians and combatants. Many casualties in the Gaza conflict are Hamas fighters actively participating in hostilities, yet Airwars categorizes all deaths as civilian. This omission inflates casualty figures and misrepresents the reality on the ground. Dr. Cox notes that even if Airwars’ numbers were accurate, they lack analytical value without considering the military necessity and measures taken to mitigate harm.
Evidence of Mitigation Techniques Ignored by 60 Minutes
The segment completely overlooks evidence that Israel used mitigation techniques during the al-Taj strike. Dr. Cox highlights physical evidence, such as the shape and depth of impact craters, which suggests the use of delayed fuses. This technique, known as “burying the bomb,” allows the munition to penetrate the ground or a structure before detonation, reducing the blast’s overpressure, fragmentation, and thermal effects. By absorbing much of the explosive energy, this technique minimizes harm to nearby civilians and buildings.
Such measures demonstrate a deliberate effort by Israel to comply with the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) and reduce collateral damage. However, 60 Minutes fails to acknowledge or even investigate these factors, leaving viewers with a one-sided and misleading impression of Israel’s actions.
Weaponized Rhetoric: Biden’s “Indiscriminate Bombing” Comment
The segment references President Biden’s remarks about Israel’s alleged “indiscriminate bombing,” implying a legal violation. Dr. Cox clarifies that Biden’s use of the term was colloquial rather than legal, and the administration later walked back the statement. “Indiscriminate bombing” in the legal sense is a war crime, and Biden’s communications team worked to distance the president from that implication. Yet 60 Minutes amplifies the original statement without addressing these clarifications, perpetuating a damaging and inaccurate narrative.
The Political Context of U.S. Arms Transfers
The report also ignores the political pressures surrounding arms transfers to Israel. Dr. Cox points out that public relations campaigns, like #AllEyesOnRafah, influenced the Biden administration to pause shipments of 2,000-pound bombs in May 2023. This pause, intended to placate activists concerned about civilian casualties, nearly allowed Hamas leadership to escape from Rafah. By omitting these details, the segment fails to provide viewers with the full context of U.S. foreign policy and the consequences of such decisions.
A Broader Media Pattern of Misleading Coverage
Dr. Cox situates the 60 Minutes segment within a broader pattern of uncritical and biased media coverage of the Gaza conflict. He emphasizes that the media often amplifies flawed sources, ignores mitigating factors, and frames Israel’s actions in the worst possible light while failing to hold Hamas accountable for its atrocities. By perpetuating this false narrative, the media undermines public understanding and inflames tensions.
60 Minutes Failed Its Audience
The 60 Minutes segment on the Israel-Hamas conflict distorts reality through unreliable sources, biased voices, and a lack of critical context. It vilifies Israel while glossing over Hamas’s atrocities, leaving viewers misinformed and misled. The segment is a clear example of manipulation, and it undermines honest discourse on the conflict.