The speaker in this essay is criticizing Israel because he wants to attract media attention and nothing

else. Will you agree with someone believing this?

Some people think that the speaker in this essay is criticizing Israel because he wants to attract
media attention and nothing else. They might argue that the speaker is biased, uninformed, or motivated
by personal interests. However, I can't entirely agree with this view. The speaker is criticizing Israel
because he cares about human rights, justice, and peace. THE KEY POINTS FOR WHICH I THINK THAT THE
SPEAKER IS CRITICIZING ISRAEL FOR LOGICAL REASONS ARE BREACHING INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS
VIOLATIONS, TALKING ABOUT THE ASPECTS OF BOTH SIDES, AND OFFERING SOLUTIONS ALONG WITH
CRITICIZATION.

First of all, the speaker is not criticizing Israel for any reason. He is blaming Israel for its breaches of
international law and its violations of the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people. He provides several
examples of Israel's illegal actions, such as occupation, blockade, settlement, apartheid, and genocide.
These are not some opinions but these data came from documented and verified by reputable sources,
such as the United Nations, Amnesty International, etc. So, the speaker is not making up these
accusations, but exposing the truth that is often ignored or manipulated by the media.

Secondly, the speaker is not criticizing Israel without acknowledging the other side of the conflict. He
also accuses Hamas of violating international law by targeting innocent civilians. He did not justify the
violence and terrorism of any party. He recognizes that both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to
live in freedom and peace. However, he also points out the disbalance of the conflict, where Israel has
the upper hand in terms of military, economic, and political power and where Palestinians suffer the
most due to less power compared to Israel.

Thirdly, the speaker is only criticizing Israel by offering a solution. He calls for Ireland to lead the way
in stopping the violence and supporting Palestine for peace settlement. He appeals to Ireland's history of
colonialism, oppression, and conflict resolution and urges Ireland to recognize a free, sovereign, and
independent Palestine. He does not advocate for the destruction or isolation of Israel but for the peace
and solving the problem between two countries based on the principles of international law and human
rights.

In conclusion, I'm afraid I have to disagree with someone who believes that the speaker in this essay
is criticizing Israel because he wants to attract media attention and nothing else. I think that the speaker
is criticizing Israel because he wants to raise awareness and compassion for the right of the Palestinian
people.