The Gaza Famine is "man-made"

Keeping it real

This week, I watched an episode of NewsNight with Abby Phillip on CNN and was genuinely disgusted by the arguments made by one of the show's regular panellists, Scott Jennings. As a frequent viewer, I can say with confidence that Jennings’s inflated ego routinely clouds what should be sound political judgment. His commentary is often challenged—rightfully so—by Abby herself for lacking both authenticity and basic common sense. And I’m not alone in this assessment. A quick dive into public opinion online confirms what many already believe: Jennings has become one of CNN’s most unwavering defenders of Donald Trump, consistently backing the former president’s policies and rhetoric, even when they are widely condemned as absurd or outright corrupt. I hate (yes, hate) seeing intelligent, Ivy League–educated political operatives behave like sycophants in blind allegiance to “The King” and his court—defending chaos and contributing to the erosion of American democracy. Jennings is like the Teflon Don of punditry: no criticism seems to stick, and he’ll say almost anything to maintain his MAGA credentials. He has, in many ways, become CNN’s go-to apologist for Trumpism, regardless of how indefensible the position may be. And he's so smug!

From Responsible Republican to Trump Loyalist

• Jennings started his career as a Bush–McConnell ally and was initially critical of Trump, calling him an “authoritarian” and warning conservatives about unchecked executive power. (Source: The Washington Post)
• Over time, however, he shifted and became a prominent vocal supporter of Trump, pivoting from cautious commentary to full-throated defence. (Source: The Wall Street Journal)
• He tends to deflect criticism against Trump by accusing Democrats of hypocrisy or exaggeration, effectively positioning himself as the conservative foil to liberal panellists. (Source: The Washington Post)
• In debates over Trump’s controversial proposals—like relocating Palestinians from Gaza—Jennings downplayed framing it as mere "musing," dismissing widespread outrage as “a little dramatic” or overblown. (Source: The Independent)
• Norm Eisen, a former Obama-era legal analyst, accused him of having “sold his soul” and following the “ratings devil” by amplifying Trump's most extreme positions. (Source: The Wall Street Journal)

YES, that is precisely how I would frame it; Jennings "sold his soul" to the devil. Watching him comment on just about any subject makes me squirm. I don't usually single out any one person. Still, when we are talking about innocent children dying from starvation or being shot in the back while waiting for a handout, and all you do is use political talking points to deflect from what is really going on, I'm going to call you out on that. At a certain point, playing politics with human lives at stake is just gross and shameful.

As for Trump, he is nothing more than a billionaire bully who has committed countless crimes and was convicted of 34 felonies—yet the man was permitted to run for President of the United States, and won. But this post is not about the Americans voting for a dictator for president.

It has to do with the mass starvation that is taking place right now in Gaza.

In the episode I reference above, "Why is the US silent about the starvation in Gaza?" I watched a Jewish guest by the name of Peter Beinart discuss his January 2025 book, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning, which addresses how Jewish texts and traditions have been used to justify the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza: a story in which Israeli Jews have the right to equality, not supremacy, and in which Jewish and Palestinian safety are not mutually exclusive but intertwined. I was pulled into the conversation because a Jewish person was standing up for innocent Palestinians being starved to death. It takes courage to take a stand like that, and I congratulate Peter for his willingness to call a spade a spade.

In that Newsnight segment, Beinart argued forcefully that the U.S. is not merely silent about Gaza’s starvation crisis—it is “profoundly complicit”. He highlighted the role of American weapons and diplomatic support in enabling what international courts are treating as war crimes, including forced starvation. He warned bluntly: “The blood is on our hands!"

His claims are legitimate. The U.S. and Israel are complicit in the current starvation crisis that is killing people and children by the thousands. He spoke about Israel’s blockade and the starvation crisis in Gaza, highlighting allegations of forced starvation constituting crimes against humanity—a topic addressed in his recent writings and commentary. The question put forth by Abby was, "Is the U.S doing enough to help these poor, starving people?" Children and adults alike are being shot dead by Israeli forces when attempting to get a ration of food at one of only four distribution centers. I learned that there should and could be 400 distribution centers!

Under the current system operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF)—a U.S. and Israeli‑backed agency—aid is being distributed through only four fortified hubs in southern Gaza. These replace about 400 smaller UN‑run distribution points that existed before the new system was introduced.

Why this is dangerous and controversial: These four sites are located in militarized evacuation zones, requiring many Gazans to walk miles while crossing into active conflict areas to reach assistance. Aid is only available for a few minutes, and private contractors and Israeli military personnel secure the sites.

Over 1,000 Palestinians have been killed trying to access aid since May 2025—and the UN reports 613 deaths near or at these aid hubs as of late June 2025.

Why This Shift Matters: The UN and NGOs operated hundreds of smaller distribution points (about 400) across the Gaza Strip, often closer to communities and considered safer and more accessible.

Now: Centralizing aid through just four GHF hubs has dramatically increased risks—crowd crushes, shootings, inadequate access—and organizations like the UN, WHO, and over 170 NGOs have condemned it as a violation of humanitarian norms.

Live Aid to the rescue

I've also been following the documentary series, LIVE AID, When Rock 'n' Roll Took On The World, on CNN. The interviews with Bob Geldof, the brainchild behind the idea, are fantastic. His pilot project, Band Aid's recording of "Do They Know It's Christmas," unknowingly became the seed that planted the idea for the historic event known as LIVE AID, seen by billions of people LIVE via satellite from Wembley Stadium and JFK Stadium in Philadelphia, July 13th, 1985. He brought the whole world together to try to save the people suffering from starvation in Ethiopia. Live Aid succeeded in raising massive awareness and funds. But it fell short in ensuring the aid reached the right people effectively and ethically. It remains a landmark in celebrity activism, but also a cautionary tale about the importance of accountability, local engagement, and political context in humanitarian efforts.

Despite Live Aid's shortcomings, the intention was there. The world needs another "Bob Geldof moment." Only this time, there needs to be proper oversight to ensure that the food reaches people's mouths, not locked up in a warehouse where it perishes in the blistering sun. Bob, if you end up reading this, Gaza needs you.

I leave you today with the song that started a movement, "Do They Know It's Christmas?". (It's Christmas in July)

"Well, tonight, thank God it's them, instead of you" — Bono

Written by Patrick Franc a.k.a. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Bionicman