Reporters sympathetic to Palestinians attempt to bludgeon Israel’s best spokesperson

As a spokesperson, they don’t come any better than Eylon Levy. He’s articulate, exudes confidence, is fast on his feet and has a vast wealth of historical knowledge and precise detail on specific incidents, many of which are calculated and purposeful attempts to trip him up or get him to make unwise comments. But, it never happens! 

In fact, he adeptly uses the most charged and antagonistically-framed accusations to springboard from them in a way that only a masterful orator is capable of.

After hearing some of his recent interviews, two things became quite clear.  What comes across is that a number of these news reporters are really not interested in getting at the truth or even acknowledging the night and day contrast between a country that operates with a moral compass as opposed to a barbaric terrorist government that has no qualms using its people to die for their cause.  In their incomprehensible inability to differentiate between good and evil, these reporters are both disingenuous and lack all objectivity, two important elements that they owe to their listeners.

The second thing that was very evident is that their goal seems to be geared towards how much damage they can inflict upon the spokesperson by way of accusation, defamatory innuendo and libelous claims, all of which are intended to decimate any thoughtful rebuttal that may be offered.

While this is certainly not true of all media outlets, here are two recent interviews that showcase these points in such obvious and transparent ways.  

The first program is entitled, “Three Times Lewis Goodall, held Israeli spokesperson to account.” Goodall, a British journalist, whose podcast is aired on Global, begins by asking when the Israeli government will produce “compelling evidence” that the Al Shifa Hospital has been a center of Hamas activity.

Levy responds by saying that it has already been proven through the filming of the large arsenal of weapons discovered there as well as the enormous tunnel network beneath the hospital. Surely, Goodall was aware of that, but by using the words, “compelling evidence,” he suggests that these disclosures are not convincing enough. 

Goodall went on to make the outrageous claim that Israel is purposely withholding water from thirsty patients in the hospital, but when Levy refuted him, by stating that a very large consignment of humanitarian aid, including needed medical equipment, had been brought to them by the IDF, Goodall’s response was that two trucks were woefully insufficient and not in keeping with the high standards to which Israel, as a non-terrorist state, should be held.  

The clear inference was that these people were dying of thirst because of us. Although Levy went on to debunk the claim by informing him that two water pipes had been supplied to Gazans, including one which had to be repaired, under fire, something which UNWRA was forced to admit, but, for Goodall, it still wasn’t enough.

So, he kept hacking away, going for the kill shot. As Levy continued to explain the outrageous acts of Hamas, stealing supplies meant for citizens, you can see Goodall, looking down at his notes, not even paying attention to one word of what was being presented, because none of it was relevant or mitigating to him. He was after a much larger trophy. So, his next question was whether or not there is a limit to how many people Israel is willing to see die, a question to which he returned, several times, despite being answered. In fact, one of the contrasts, expressed by Levy, was that Hamas is encouraging citizens to martyr themselves while the IDF is warning them to leave the area for safer parts. 

Goodall, who insisted that a solution must be found for the two peoples to live together, wasn’t keen to hear Levy’s response that Hamas doesn’t want a two-state solution but, rather, a final solution.

A second particularly galling interview took place with British journalist, Victoria Derbyshire of Newsnight who did her very best to trap Levy by hurling the most incendiary charges imaginable. What starts off as a series of sympathetic questions, quickly regresses into a relentless attack, designed to solicit an admission of guilt or at least cop to sins of omission.  

Derbyshire, like Goodall, asks, “Have too many people been killed?” Levy reminds her that had October 7 never happened, all those people, on both sides, would still be alive. Her response was, “This war could end tomorrow, if you stopped bombing them,” to which Levy commented, “We’re not going to leave 136 hostages in the hands of the rapist Hamas regime.” Switching tactics, she reminds him that Israel is the stronger and bigger nation and, therefore, in our hands to stop this cycle.

After a good response to that claim, she moved onto the Hague proceedings, playing a clip of a South African lawyer, accusing Israel of genocide, by leaving a massive amount of Gazan children orphaned. Derbyshire jabs, “All of that is true, isn’t it!” It’s incredulous that she thought Levy would agree that Israel is guilty of genocide. He, instead, replied, “South Africa has decided to play advocate for the devil and serve as the legal arm for Hamas.” Her only comeback was to say his answers were not relevant to the questions she was asking.  

Levy, unrelenting, went on to say that a topsy-turvy version of events has been put forth, almost as if Israel decided to initiate a war on October 7. But it was Israel who suffered an act of genocide when Hamas invaded our country – burning, beheading, raping and mutilating as many as it could - as brutally as it could, and we have launched a defensive campaign to destroy the Hamas regime and return our hostages. Categorically stating that we have done all of this in full accordance with international law, she immediately interjected, “Well that’s disputed.” 

Her last attempt to undermine Levy’s credibility came in the form of what she characterized as careless statements made by Israeli government officials who voiced their commitment to destroy all of Gaza (implying the people). Levy quickly corrected her by saying that the people of Gaza are not our enemy, Hamas is – which is why we’ve gone further than any army in the world to safeguard civilians by urging them to go to a safe zone. Her final accusation, repeated twice was, “There are no safe zones in Gaza,” as if to say, due to Israel’s actions.

These two highly biased interviews lack any honest exchange, as they seek to paint Israel as the villain and verbally bludgeon any spokesperson who suggests otherwise. We just happen to have the "superman" of all spokespeople, who are neither rattled nor outwitted by those doing the bidding for our enemies. How blessed we are to have Eylon Levy at such a time as this!