January 05, 2009

Dopey WNJ Letter of the Week

In an astonishing – and preposterous – bit or moral equivalence, Dennis Madeleine of Wilmington thinks the Gaza crisis “requires equal empathy for Hamas’ view”:

In speaking to the latest violence in Gaza in a story last Tuesday, Rabbi Chuni Vogel was quoted as saying, “We in Delaware have to put ourselves in the place of those who are living under the constant threat. It wouldn’t take more than a couple of missiles to hit Delaware, and we would be jumping up and down.”

Fair enough. Mr. and Mrs. Delaware, let’s follow the rabbi’s advice, except let’s put ourselves in the place of the Palestinian. Consider your reaction if you were robbed of your land, house or farm, were forced to live in a refugee camp, or watched as your family was dispersed and destroyed.

Our country fought the British over fewer indignities than those suffered by the Palestinian people at Israel’s hands.

My emphasis. Madeleine might have a point if the Jews (Israelis) were actually responsible for that happening. The original UN partition plan required both Arabs (Palestinians) and Jews to move to different areas as said plan divided the former British Mandate into two countries, one primarily Jewish and one Arab. The land allotted to the Palestinian Arabs was not accepted by them. This was primarily due to the influence of the surrounding sovereign Arab states which did not want a Jewish state as their neighbor. Once again, the Palestinians HAD their state back in 1948 with the original UN plan. After the Arabs attacked the new Israel, much of the land given to the Palestinians by the plan was gobbled up by Egypt and Jordan (namely, the West Bank and Gaza).

How is Israel “responsible” for this? Why wasn’t these lands – as originally planned – given to the Palestinian Arabs? Why did Egypt and Jordan maintain control of these areas? (See here.)

Then, in 1967, the surrounding Arabs states again went to war with Israel. The IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) won the war in six days (hence the name “Six Day War”) and in the process captured the West Bank , Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula. (Again, keep in mind who was administering the two former areas prior to 1967; it was NOT Israel.) It’s maintained control over these areas since, including during an additional all-out war with its Arab neighbors in 1973 (the "Yom Kippur War"). Israel had offered the return of the West Bank, Gaza and the Sinai shortly after the Six Day War in return for peace – but the Arab countries refused at the [1967] Khartoum Conference.

Now, based on these factual historical events, how anyone can say “at Israel’s hands” when describing the historical neglect of the Palestinians – without even mentioning that of [the much more] prominent role of the Palestinians’ Arab neighbors – is just beyond disingenuous. The only grievance I can even consider that requires empathy towards Hamas (actually, the Palestinians in general) from an Israeli perpective might be the settlements Israel has constructed in the territories (since dismantled in Gaza … and look what that got ‘em).

Have some IDF mistreated Palestinians over the years? Sure. Have some Israeli settlers done same? Yeah. But this is what happens when you’re in a de facto state of war. The simple fact of the matter is that the Palestinians can have a state any time they wish. All they have to do is renounce violence against Israel and Jews in general, and recognize Israel’s right to exist (the complete opposite of which are in the Hamas Charter, by the way). Gaza is – was – already back in their hands. An acknowledgment of peace and Israel's existence would get them most of the West Bank, as well.

As I said, it’s really quite simple.

Posted by Hube at January 5, 2009 04:01 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Actually Hamas is getting a measure of empathy, The Guardian (unsurprisingly) published an op-ed by Khaled Meshaal (http://www.guardian.co.uk /commentisfree/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-hamas). And the LA Times (shockingly) published one by Meshaal's deputy Moussa Abu Marzouk.
So yes the West's free media is willing to give away its valuable opinion space to hardened terrorists. They wouldn't want to have one-sided debates or anything.
For good measure the Guardian also published an obituary for Nizar Rayan - the Hamas thug who sent his own son on a suicide mission (he killed two Israelis in addition to himself) - whom Israel sent to a hotter place last week.

Posted by: soccer dad at January 6, 2009 03:49 PM

People still read the News Journal, huh? I gave up on it myself years ago because of its functioning as a propaganda outlet for "Joe" and the banking industry that owns the Democratic party here.

The writer merely reflects the moral relativism that is rotting our civilization, as propagated by Pop Culture. The Right needs to wake up and begin to understand this culture; if not we're doomed by mushy-headed thinkers like this writer.

Posted by: Scott Kirwin at January 8, 2009 04:15 PM

If it's a refugee camp, where are the TENTS?

These are Cities, not "camps". In these "camps" the UN provided free apartments, free food, free utilities and free schools. no wonder nobody leaves and the population has swelled from 400,000 in 1948 to over 3 million today.

Posted by: anonni at January 10, 2009 03:31 PM