After the events of October 7, we realized that the Western concept of freedom and democracy, which they are attempting to instil in us over the past decades, differs significantly when it comes to Israel. It appears that one is entitled to speak on any matter except for criticizing Israel or reporting the facts when it commits crimes.

For instance, is it reasonable to hinder anyone from reporting news - validated by international human rights organizations - about the Israeli occupation forces' brutal bombing operation that resulted in the death of over 18,000 Palestinian civilians? This operation destroyed tens of thousands of residential apartments and claimed the lives of more than 7,000 children.

Is it reasonable for us, Arabs, to accept that international organizations from the West dictate how we should embrace the principles of accepting the other, democracy, and engaging in dialogue, all while witnessing the suppression of the other? Then, someone comes forward, demanding freedom, and we suddenly realize that freedom implies doing whatever one desires, as long as it doesn't involve criticizing the spoiled child of the West - the entity with the highest number of breaches of international law and the sole occupation in the twenty-first century: Israel.

Let us provide, as an example but not exhaustively, some incidents which confirms our claim. For instance, several Western newspapers prohibited the publication of articles presenting a narrative differing from the Israeli perspective. An instance of this occurred when "The Harvard Law Review" magazine declined to publish an article concerning the situation in Gaza following the attacks on October 7. The article was submitted by “Rabih Ighbariyah”, a Palestinian doctoral student at the Harvard Law School. According to the information discussed in the topic, it seems that the student framed his article within the context of the genocide. However, it appears that the magazine is unwilling to categorize the killing of over 18,000 civilians, the majority being women and children, as genocide.

In other developments, 90% of the content advocating for Palestine has been removed since the "Al-Aqsa flood" on social media platforms, including Facebook. The pressing question that I pose to the entire West is: Where is the democracy and freedom of expression that you always call for? Do I possess absolute freedom to critique Israel, or does freedom cease when critiquing Israel?

Shifting our focus to France, a journalist on the French channel TV5Monde received a warning from the management following a contentious interview with the Israeli army spokesperson, during which it was observed that journalistic standards were not adhered to.

During this interview, which sparked many reactions, the intensity of the conversation quickly escalated between journalist "Muhammad Qasi" and his guest "Olivier Rafovich," the Israeli army spokesman (speaking in French), when the journalist asked: “Will you now take into account the humanitarian emergency in the Palestinian Strip?” The Israeli spokesperson responded, “Do you perceive the State of Israel as a nation unfamiliar with the principles of democracy and international law? We are the military of a democratic state confronting the severe threat of Islamic fundamentalist extremism! What we are engaged in is the defense of Israel and all its citizens, whether they are Jews, Christians, or Muslims.”

Through these words and the response of the French channel, we comprehend that Israel claims the right to cause the deaths of more than 18,000 innocent people and frames this within the context of combating terrorism. Is there anything more terroristic than killing children, women, and civilians? The journalist should have the right to pose a straightforward question about human rights, treating Palestinians as human beings with rights rather than denying their humanity and rights.

We remain in France, where the Palestinian activist, "Maryam Abu Daqqa," faced the prospect of being prevented from participating in pro-Gaza events to which she was invited. The situation escalated to the point of assault, detention, imprisonment, and deportation, all simply for taking part in events and seminars supporting the Palestinian cause in France. Notably, in these activities, Maryam did not employ internationally prohibited weapons, as Israel does in Gaza. She did not even carry a knife but used her voice to express herself.

In London, an exhibition by the Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, renowned for his advocacy of the Palestinian cause, was canceled after he shared comments on social media platforms expressing his support for Gaza and his opposition to Israeli aggression against it - as per the artist himself. Ai Weiwei did not conceal his support for the Palestinians and stated, "I am committed to expressing my point of view."

We won't explore other cases where broadcasters were terminated simply for expressing their views on the actions by Israel in Gaza. We won't delve into the difficulties faced by artists who were warned against participating in upcoming projects due to this standpoint. I believe there are numerous examples indicating that certain Western countries have restricted freedom of expression, and when it comes to "Israel," the ideas of "acceptance of others," "freedom of expression," and "human rights" become questionable.

It is our right to consider: Do these ideas have a specific meaning in some Western countries? Is the claim that freedom and human rights are confined to the white population or those with shared interests with the West? I hope that time will prove otherwise, although I have doubts about this.

* Vice Dean of the Faculty of Media, Middle East University.