Judging by the numbers of casualties on both sides in this almost one-month old war one would be led to the conclusion that Israel has resorted to disproportionate means in fighting a far less- capable enemy. That is as far as what meets the eye. But, it's now obvious that the US and the UN are completely out of touch with the nature of this foe and are therefore not qualified to dictate or enforce the rules of this war - because when it comes to terror there is much more than meets the eye.

I wasn't aware of this, but it seems that the nature of warfare has undergone a major shift over the years. Where wars were usually waged to defeat the opposing side, today it seems - and judging by the number of foul calls it would indicate - that today's wars are fought to a draw. I mean, whoever heard of a timeout in war? An NBA Basketball game allows six timeouts for each team during the course of a game, but last I checked this is a war! We are at war with an enemy whose charter calls for the annihilation of our people. Nothing, then, can be considered disproportionate when we are fighting for our very right to live.

The sad reality is that Israel gets it, but its hands are being tied by world leaders who over the past six years have insisted they are such good friends with the Jewish state, that they know more regarding its interests than even they do. But there's going to have to come a time where Israel feels threatened enough where it has no other choice but to defy international warnings - because this is life or death.

Iran's justice minister has called on his counterparts from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) member states to take legal action against Israel for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip.

"The NAM [member] states...are expected to once again stand in unison against these [Israeli] crimes and lay the groundwork for the punishment of the masterminds and the perpetrators of these crimes," Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi wrote in a letter to NAM justice ministers on Wednesday.

He added that continuation of the Zionist regime's crimes against Palestinians calls into question "international justice and the rule of law."

"Doubtlessly, the Zionist regime's crimes, which are threatening international peace and security today, stem from the condoning of the crimes this regime has been committing against defenseless Palestinians over the past 66 years," Pour-Mohammadi said.

He noted that Israel's ongoing strikes against the Palestinians are "flagrant manifestations of war crimes" necessitating punitive action.

NAM, whose rotating presidency is held by Iran, is an international organization with 120 member states, which is not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. Nearly two-thirds of the member states of the United Nations are NAM members.

The deadly Israeli military attacks against the blockaded Gaza Strip have destroyed nearly 5,000 Palestinian houses. Ashraf al-Qidra, Gaza's Health Ministry spokesman, said on Tuesday that as many as 4,987 Palestinian homes had been destroyed due to the Israeli onslaught on the impoverished territory as of Monday.

The spokesman further said that a total number of 26,270 houses had been partially damaged, of which 4,136 are no longer habitable. It was also noted that the number of the destroyed houses is expected to rise as the Israeli regime keeps hitting the besieged area.

On Tuesday, the United Nations (UN) reported that 215,000 Gazans have fled their homes. As the aria is blockaded, most of the Palestinians take shelter in the places designated by the UN. The Israeli regime, nevertheless, has been targeting UN-designated shelters as well. In less than one week, the Israel regime has targeted two UN-run schools sheltering Palestinian families against the Israeli offensive.

During her maiden meeting with United States' Secretary of Defence, John Kerry, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj has categorically told that alleged snooping of the BJP, which was revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, was 'unacceptable' and asked for an assurance that it will not happen in near future. With this stern message to the Obama administration, the Narendra Modi government has sent clear signals that unlike its predecessors, UPA, it won't tolerate such breach of its privacy laws.

What did Sushma tell Kerry?

"I told Secretary Kerry that this was completely unacceptable to us as India and US are friendly countries. Friends don't snoop on each other," Swaraj told reporters after the 5th India-US strategic dialogue with Kerry.

India's assertion at World Trade Organisation (WTO) meet in Australia has sent shivers down the spine of some Western nations, including the United States. India, in the last global meet, had asserted that it has the right to retain higher stock-holding of food grains. This is the bone of contention in the Bali Agreement, the final Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) for which is to be signed by July 31, this year. For the first time, the Government of India has asserted itself in no uncertain terms.

Defending the Indian stance noted Economic Policy Analyst Dr. Anantha Nageswaran in an Op-Ed in The Mint had this to say:

Let us continue to strive for an original and smarter food security programme from this government but let us not allow that to blind us to the hypocrisy of the arguments made against India for its stance at the WTO negotiations.

Dr.Nageswaran's argument primarily is that:

India is insisting upon change in the method of calculating the legally permissible subsidy. It cannot be based on prices that prevailed in 1986-88. That India has a badly designed and ultimately counterproductive grain procurement and distribution programme today is no reason to agree to the use of an outdated benchmark price to calculate the nation's food subsidy. At a future date, even a well-designed food security programme might still fail to comply with the treaty obligation if the reference prices are not updated. The reluctance to do the same raises many unanswered questions on the intent behind keeping the reference price from nearly two decades ago. Further, the numerical ceiling of the total food subsidy not exceeding 10% of the value of production (calculated at 1986-88 prices) needs to be reviewed

India's stance has been the cause of much consternation with the developed countries.

As I've written many times before, "terrorism" is, and from the start was designed to be, almost entirely devoid of discernible meaning. It's a fear-mongering slogan, lacking any consistent application, intended to end rational debate and justify virtually any conduct by those who apply the term. But to the extent it means anything beyond that, it typically refers to the killing of civilians as a means of furthering political or military goals.

Below are two charts reflecting the deaths of civilians, soldiers and "militants" in both Gaza and Israel since the July 8 Israeli attack began. The statistics used are unduly generous toward Israel, since "militants" in Gaza are often nothing more than residents who take up arms to defend their homes against an invading and occupying army. Even with that generous interpretation, these numbers, standing alone, tell a powerful story:

I don't want to understate how seriously wrong it is that the CIA searched Senate computers. Our constitutional order is seriously out of whack when the executive branch acts with that kind of impunity - to its overseers, no less.

But given everything else that's been going on lately, the single biggest - and arguably most constructive - thing to focus on is how outrageously CIA Director John Brennan lied to everyone about it.

"As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth," Brennan told NBC's Andrea Mitchell in March. "We wouldn't do that. I mean, that's just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do."

Earlier, he had castigated "some members of the Senate" for making "spurious allegations about CIA actions that are wholly unsupported by the facts." He called for an end to "outbursts that do a disservice to the important relationship that needs to be maintained between intelligence officials and Congressional overseers."

Benjamin Netanyahu, yesterday, on CNN, addressing worldwide sympathy for the civilian victims of Israeli violence in Gaza:

They want to pile up as many civilian dead as they can. They use telegenically dead Palestinians for their cause. They want the more dead, the better.

Joseph Goebbels, November 16, 1941, essay in Das Reich, addressing Germany sympathy for German Jews forced to wear yellow stars:

The Jews gradually are having to depend more and more on themselves, and have recently found a new trick. They knew the good-natured German Michael in us, always ready to shed sentimental tears for the injustice done to them. One suddenly has the impression that the Berlin Jewish population consists only of little babies whose childish helplessness might move us, or else fragile old ladies. The Jews send out the pitiable. They may confuse some harmless souls for a while, but not us. We know exactly what the situation is.

Rather than lard up the point with numerous defensive caveats about what is and is not being said here (which, in any event, never impede willful media distorters in their tactics), I'll simply note three brief points:

As of August 1 all blogs having 3,000 daily readers or more will have to follow many of the rules that exist in conventional mass media, such as tougher control on published information or the ban on use of explicit language.

The set of amendments to the Administrative Code, the Law on Information and the Law on Communications , dubbed by reporters as the 'Bill on Bloggers', was signed into force by President Putin in early May this year.

The draft introduced the definition of a popular blogger as someone whose internet page attracts at least 3,000 readers every day (earlier this week the authorities announced that these should be unique visitors, not just page hits). Such authors will now have to register with the state watchdog Roskomnadzor, disclose their real identity and follow the same rules as journalists working in conventional state-registered mass media.

The restrictions include the demand to verify information before publishing it and abstain from releasing reports containing slander, hate speech, extremist calls or other banned information such as, for example, advice on suicide. Also, the law bans popular bloggers from using obscene language, drawing heavy criticism and mockery from the online crowd.

While many have not been shy about calling these crimes genocide, they have come under attack for using the "G" word. Is genocide an appropriate term to use? Well, it is if one has respect for international law and the rules of the genocide convention.

Lets not mince words. Israelis are committing genocide in Gaza. But the United Nations is loath to use the "G" word and it us using the "C" (condemn) word instead. Why? Money talks. The top financier of the United Nations is America with a whopping 22.00% in direct funds (followed by Japan 10.83%, Germany 7.14%, France 5.59%, and GB 5.18%), if the United Nations called out the genocide in Gaza, its top financier would have to be punished for its complicity.