Up to know, I saw no "moral imbalance" in favor of Israel in his argument. Terrorism was used by both parties one for colonization and land grabbing the other for resistance. Both parties have deliberately targeted civilian areas. Israel with its precision weapons and Hamas with its non-discriminant rockets. In addition Israel is the root cause of the situation by its occupation, settlements, walls, blockades, and discrimination against Arabs.
A statement by Amnesty International on Human Shield: Amnesty International is monitoring and investigating such reports, but does not have evidence at this point that Palestinian civilians have been intentionally used by Hamas or Palestinian armed groups during the current hostilities to “shield” specific locations or military personnel or equipment from Israeli attacks. In previous conflicts Amnesty International has documented that Palestinian armed groups have stored munitions in and fired indiscriminate rockets from residential areas in the Gaza Strip in violation of international humanitarian law. Reports have also emerged during the current conflict of Hamas urging residents to ignore Israeli warnings to evacuate. However, these calls may have been motivated by a desire to minimize panic and displacement, in any case, such statements are not the same as directing specific civilians to remain in their homes as “human shields” for fighters, munitions, or military equipment. Under international humanitarian law even if “human shields” are being used Israel’s obligations to protect these civilians would still apply.
What Harris does here is basing his argument on his false allegations to reach a correct conclusion which of course is impossible.We already spoke of human shields, so the whole thing is nonsense with regard to this conflict. Let's see his other arguments. Generalizing a national liberation movement to the whole Jihadist movement is yet another fallacy. The reason of this particular conflict is OCCUPATION. When you occupy someone's land you should expect heavy violent resistance. I argue that Hamas is a resistance movement rather than a Jihadist movement. Prior to Hamas PLO did so which was a secular movement. The argument is simple.
More than 80% of people supported assault on Gaza in OPE which means there is the majority behind these attacks. And These attacks are illegal and immoral as I provided evidence before.
There is also another error here: ultra-orthodox Jews oppose the idea of the State of Israel and have nothing to do with it. He probably meant ultra-Zionists.