[7] In contrast, the 2015 report of the U.N. Human Rights Council on Operation Protective Edge, chaired by Mary McGowan Davis (a former New York state judge), voiced concerns that "the fact that the political and military leadership did not change its course of action, despite considerable information regarding the massive degree of death and destruction in Gaza, raises questions about potential violations of international humanitarian law.
[9] The Court found that the meaning of both "for such time" and "direct part in hostilities" covered those providing services to unlawful combatants in any period before a potential attack; therefore terrorists did not qualify for this immunity, a ruling that has been accepted into international law.
[citation needed] According to Avi Shlaim, "purity of arms" is one of the key features of "the conventional Zionist account or old history" whose "popular-heroic-moralistic version of the 1948 war" is "taught in Israeli schools and used extensively in the quest for legitimacy abroad".
[25] Benny Morris adds, "[t]he Israelis' collective memory of fighters characterized by "purity of arms" is also undermined by the evidence of [the dozen case] of rapes committed in conquered towns and villages."
[27] He pointed out that contrary to the time of diaspora, Jews established in Israel have the possibility to resort to force and that while in 1948 they may have had no choice, at Qibya the Israeli nation showed its moral limits.
[28] A former head of the Mossad, Zvi Zamir, stated that the fact that Israel Defense Forces soldiers have shot at unarmed people on the Syrian–Israeli border showed the IDF's "purity of arms" was being eroded.