University of Florida is the latest battleground in the war between free speech and “tolerance.” In a campus-wide email Patricia Telles-Irvin, UF’s vice president for student affairs, asked students to apologize for putting up fliers on campus promoting a screening of the documentary “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.” The fliers read: “Radical Islam Wants You Dead.”
On liberal U.S. campuses, those who challenge Catholicism are applauded as rebels, and critics of Israel are revered as brave dissenters who expose some dangerous truth. Yet criticism of an ideology that publicly advertises its homicidal aims as a point of pride elicits accusations of bigotry.
From Patricia Telles-Irvin’s email:
At the University of Florida we have embraced a set of values, one of which is diversity. Diversity is not just about having representation from various cultures on campus. It also is having each member contribute to an inclusive and safe environment and collectively enhancing our understanding and appreciation of the richness brought by such differences.
“Diversity” is exactly what suffers when patronizing bureaucrats lump non-fundamentalist Muslims together with the proponents of Jihad, as Telles-Irvin’s response implicitly does. One only need look at Iraq’s emerging socio-political dynamic to note the majority of Muslims waste no tears on the identification and destruction of their radical co-religionists. That Telles-Irvin thinks she needs to protect all Muslims from criticism of jihadists indicates the shallowness of her version of diversity.
State Attorney General Bill McCollum has written a letter accusing Telles-Irvin of creating a “chilling effect on the free speech rights of students,” and is so far unsatisfied by the school’s efforts to clarify its position.
It’s been 20 years since I read TIME magazine as anything other than a barometer of what academic/media-type liberals have on their agenda. Occasional essays — *not* one of the “reported” articles — by someone like Brookhiser have shown who and what liberals consider to be the Rightward-most limit of polite discourse.
The reason the media (and rest of the world outside of the US) is against Israel now is because of her policies, not some latent discrimination. Get back to me when Israel stops the shelling of innocent civilians at a ratio of 100:1 with respect to hamas. Thanks.
OK, Scholar, we’ll get back to you. Don’t call us, we’ll call you . . .
israel doesn’t call the shots anymore. get used to it
The real question is ‘Can Israel Survive the Assualt by the Media?’
Interesting, or, rather, not surprising, is the fact that the ‘dream’ of a Biblical Israel ‘from the Jordan to the Sea’ is brought up as criticism, yet nothing, or little, is made of the palestinians’ very real and current desire for a ‘Palestine’ that not only occupies that same ‘dream’ territory, but insists upon it being Judenrein as well . . . .
Ros:
This is nothing. The Time Middle East Blog is really where it’s at. There, McGirk and Macleod (who loves to call out “Jewish” members of the Obama administration) publish some of the most ridiculous anti-Israel propaganda this side of the mainstream Atlantic.
Gag.
Scholar in Training, FYI, Israel isn’t shelling innocent civilians. Hamas is using trying to use their civilian population – who by the way is 100% behind them – as shields while making unprovoked random attacks on Israeli civilians (or anyone else who happens to be standing in the vicinity.
And also FYI, fashionable anti-semitism can scarcely be described anymore as “latent”. It’s pretty upfront and in-your-face these days.
You act as though Hamas chose, after the elections, to be snubbed by the US. By Israel. By every beholden-to-Washington government that could have recognized and engaged them but didn’t. You act like Hamas was supposed to accept a power grab by the not-elected-by-majority Abbas and Fatah, and that Palestinians were supposed to get to vote but were to be forced to ignore the results. While that does sound like a very Bush-centric approach to government, it’s apparently not one that Palestinians are willing to live with.
Numerian, being opposed to the actions of the state government of Israel is not anti-Semitism. It is morally just to oppose any government that occupies territory and kills civilians indiscriminantly, even if they are being used as “human shields”. I don’t agree with the policies of Hamas as much as I don’t agree with the policies of Israel, but the issue here is how both sides are allowed to continue the status quo of not having to listen to anyone while accomplishing nothing. Calling anyone an anti-Semite for questioning the response of sending a missile into a house full of people in reaction to a rocket fired from that house landing in some field somewhere only demonstrates your own anti-Arabism, which is in and of itself as bad as any anti-Semitism anywhere else.
“Numerian, being opposed to the actions of the state government of Israel is not anti-Semitism.”
Well, duh. Who’s talking about that? Not me.
“It is morally just to oppose any government that occupies territory and kills civilians indiscriminantly, even if they are being used as “human shields”.”
FYI, Israel isn’t occupying Gaza.
“I don’t agree with the policies of Hamas as much as I don’t agree with the policies of Israel, but the issue here is how both sides are allowed to continue the status quo of not having to listen to anyone while accomplishing nothing.”
Since when are the Israeli’s not listening to and responding to their critics?
“Calling anyone an anti-Semite for questioning the response of sending a missile into a house full of people in reaction to a rocket fired from that house landing in some field somewhere only demonstrates your own anti-Arabism, which is in and of itself as bad as any anti-Semitism anywhere else.”
My “anti-Arabism”? Is that a real word? Whatever.
In actual point of fact, I am neither anti-Arab nor philo-Semitic; I merely recognize that the Israelis are tolerant, civilized, democratic, and a staunch ally of the US. Hamas, on the other hand, consists of murderous, authoritarian religious fanatics not much different than the stone-age fundamentalists of the Taliban. The Israelis have done nothing wrong, while Hamas does wrong as a matter of policy.
Mredder4 & Scholar,
I suggest you read the Hamas Charter before you talk such nonsense. Hamas is a radical religious movement committed to the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews. The Hamas Charter is online. It’s clear. It’s not an invitation to a nice little dialogue session. Here’s a sample from Article Seven:
” Hamas is one of the links in the Chain of Jihad in the confrontation with the Zionist invasion. It links up with the setting out of the Martyr Izz a-din al-Qassam and his brothers in the Muslim Brotherhood who fought the Holy War in 1936; it further relates to another link of the Palestinian Jihad and the Jihad and efforts of the Muslim Brothers during the 1948 War, and to the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brothers in 1968 and thereafter. But even if the links have become distant from each other, and even if the obstacles erected by those who revolve in the Zionist orbit, aiming at obstructing the road before the Jihad fighters, have rendered the pursuance of Jihad impossible; nevertheless, the Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! ”
Is there some reason you don’t take this and the rest of the document seriously?
I have noticed a tendency in the media to approach middle east issues as if Israel were our 51st state instead of an independent nuclear-armed country. Let Israel be Israel. My concern is with US policy, which appears to me to be Israel right or wrong, now and forever. Such inflexibility isn’t good for the US and, perhaps not even good for Israel.
The Liberals should stop Israeli bashing and focus more on the larger threat of Global Jihadist aspirations. Unlike the splintered non muslim world, those that see a Caliphate domination over the entire world some day are strongly united in their quest. Non Muslim world is safer with a strong Israel in the middle east. The Jihadist want nothing short of a return to the world order at the peak of Islamic expansion. You can give Israel, Kashmir, Chechnya on a platter to the Jihadists expecting world peace, in reality the United Islamic nation will move on with their next claim that of Spain and other parts of Europe, central India and other parts of India , Asia …………..
marjie- the global jihad is the problem of people who live next to muslim countries, not the US.
“You can give Israel, Kashmir, Chechnya on a platter to the Jihadists expecting world peace, in reality the United Islamic nation will move on with their next claim that of Spain and other parts of Europe, central India and other parts of India , Asia …………..
”
spain will be the line they can’t cross
Dear Scholar in Training & Mcredder4:
Anyone who continues to make excuses for Hamas by citing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is avoiding the question of civilized conduct altogether and is hiding behind the civilian casualties, JUST LIKE HAMAS… Sorry to say, but this is a conflict where you must take a stand. I, for one, stand with Israel…. Why don’t you two take a stand with Hamas? None of this, “I don’t agree with the policies of Hamas as much as I don’t agree with the policies of Israel” (What a puss thing to say). Go ahead, stand with Hamas on their inflexible hatred of the Jewish State and their hiding behind civilians as a method to conduct war. Stand with them on their slaughter of political opponents happening right now under the cover of this confict. Stand with them on the indoctrination for their own children to commit suicide for the State. Stand up and be proud of Hamas! Please tell us how GREAT Hamas is for humanity. Are those crickets? Yea, I thought so…..
For many years, I was neutral/leaning pro-Palestinian in this ancient conflict because I thought the small pro-Israel lobby had a disproportionate amount of power in the US & the fix was in.
This all changed on 9/11, when the towers came down & TV cameras caught the Palestinians cheering in the streets over the deaths of innocent civilians. They were celebrating & posing for the cameras! How sick is that?
When was the last time you saw Americans cheering in the streets over the death of anyone? Not even over dirtbags like Saddam Hussein.
Now I’m 100% behind Israel. They cannot do enough as far as I’m concerned. Not a second of pity for the Palestinians.
For all those like the authors of the Time article, who insist that Israel, and the U.S. for that matter, “constructively engage” in negotiations with Hamas, I pose this simple question;
“How do you constructively engage in negotiations with a group whose entire philosophy boils down to ‘We are going to kill you because your existence offends us?’”
Anyone who does not grasp the basic disconnect in logic of trying to “negotiate” with someone with that mindset is too disconnected from reality to be taken seriously.
clear ether
eon
Israeli apologists (like the author and some here) can ‘justify’ Israel’s renegade actions all they like.
I am waiting for the full-blooded squealing when the chickens that are hatching now, come home to roost.
You cannot treat a people like animals, and expect them to act reasonably.
Expect the next wave of suicide bombers soon, and then lay the blame everywhere but where it belongs, as usual.
But the gullible audience is shrinking fast.
Why is Gaza known as a refugee camp? Because that’s where the Palestinian were sent, by force, when the Israeli state was started.
Why are Palestinian lands begin “settled” by Israelis? Because they believe God gave them that land, and it doesn’t matter to whom it actually belongs.
Why do Palestinians wish Israel would just disappear off the face of the Earth? See above.
There are such deep, deep issues here that are never truly addressed, discussed, nor resolved. Its not Hamas. Its not the Israeli government. Its the injustices that have been piling up and piling up on both sides without anyone actually thinking about the needs of both sides.
BTW, are you sure there was no celebrating when Saddam died, or was that just not shown on the media? We are not better than they, just in a different situation. Israel is not better than the Palestinians, nor is Palestine better than Israel. Israel just has massive amounts of money and weapons given to it each year by the US, since its existence, that have allowed it to become better “civilized”, and the Palestinians have not been given the same. Israel has always had our support and the Palestinians have not. We have always welcomed Israel, but have never welcomed the Palestinians.
Until we see the value in both sides, until we stop villifying one side over the other, until we recognize both sides equally, conditions will remain the same.
Marjie, it is counterproductive to continue your liberal bashing. This is neither a liberal issue nor a conservative one. It is a human one, and to try to divide by political ideology, or religious conviction for that matter, is not helpful.
Instead of viewing this horrible situation in the same way we view a football game, where we cheer for one team and boo the other, why not look at this as a conflict where both sides have valid points that need to be addressed. The US, or some other neutral country, needs to become an honest broker that both sides can trust to look after its best interests and find some middle ground they each can live with. This is a lot harder than pointing fingers and saying the other side is at fault. Maybe that’s why so many people are content with pointing fingers.
Just a note on civilian casualties:
Palestinian-yes-Palestinian figures say that about 50/400 casualties (a few days ago) were civilians.
Yes, civilian casualties are always a bad thing, and the Israeli military could always be more careful, but where was the media when thousands of civilians died in Afghanistan and Iraq at the hands of American forces?
Didn’t Tim McGirk fabricate the Haditha massacre hoax?
mredder4 wrote:
“It is morally just to oppose any government that occupies territory and kills civilians indiscriminantly, even if they are being used as “human shields.”
If clues were for sale, I would point you to the store that sells them.
One of my dreams is this: IF we have another 911, I want it to happen in SF or some other lefty liberal bastion. Only then will people like yourself stop and consider that it is always morally just to protect yourself. Self defense is a right that can never be taken away.
The non-combatants in Gaza are just as responsible for the work of Hamas as Hamas itself.
If some of them need to die in order for change to occur, so be it. It is their choice…and I am very pro-choice!
Scholar in Training, It’s simple. Isreal is using tried and true teaching techniques for the learning impaired. If 1:1, 2:1, 5:1; 10:1, don’t work, then you try 100:1 – eventually the civilians will learn to take control from Hamas and stop firing rockets into Isreal.
CS:
Marvelous logic!
Even a “scholar in training” should understand that. Of course, if he has been in our public schools for very long, he may not be salvageable.
Mr. Rosner suggests that he disagrees with Time’s final point that “Israel eventually will have to pull back to the 1967 borders and dismantle many of the settlements on the Palestinian side, no matter how loudly its ultra-religious parties protest. Only then will the Palestinians and the other Arab states agree to a durable peace.” My questions for Mr. Posner and his supporters here are these: Do you really disagree that such a withdrawal will be required? If you do, under what possible circumstances can you envision a final peace agreement – ethnic cleansing? apartheid? a unified state in which within a few years the Palestinians will outnumber Israelis? Or is it the assumption of Mr. Posner, Commentary, and others that at some point the Palestinians will say, OK, stay on the West Bank, deny us full citizenship and freedom of movement, but we will accept that and never again utter even a cross word? What possible resolution do supporters of Israel’s current settlement policy foresee?
Typical Loony left thinking!
The Time story is perhaps maliciously inaccurate regarding the clear bias against Israel and the overt presumption of Israel’s guilt. I will now boycott Time for the next year. Obviously they are not to be trusted. I urge others to do the same. This sort of pseudo reporting is actually immoral.
I can’t wait for the chickens to come home to roost. As soon as another suicide bomber attacks US civilians on our soil, our lame attempts to reach out to other side will end & we will finally put an end to this thousand-year stalement by any means necessary. Even Obama understands that he cannot allow attacks on US citizens without massive retribution or he will be impeached.
You cannot reason with jihadists – just look at the buffoons posting here on behalf of the Palestinians. They will justify anything and claim that both sides are morally equivalent. I have never heard of an Israeli suicide bomber attacking a bus full of children.
We all saw the video of the female protestor in Florida screaming “You Jews need to go back to the ovens! You all need a big oven!” This is the honest sentiments of almost all pro-Palestinians. These are religious hate criminals and need to be treated like the Branch Davidians & the Klan.
James,
Before talking about surgical strikes to places like SF and LA. You should know that I am a liberal in full support of Israel on this issue of Gaza.
Your blind hatred of the left is no different than Hamas’ blind hatred of the Jews. Get a grip, Mr. Red State.
This author is spot on.
Time magazine has been discredited for many years. It no longer has any journalistic integrity, it’s writers are not respected or trusted, and soon will cease to publish the current ‘tabloid’ version.
Goodbye Time magazine.
How about a three-state solution? Israel, Palestine and Gaza? How often do any political entities with physically divided territories work anyway? Just because the populations of both Gaza and the West Bank are ethnic Palestinians, does that mean they have to be in one country? It seems more like the political and social cultures of Gaza and the West Bank have been diverging in recent years.
If they want to get together in the future, fine. But how did getting Gaza and West Bank on one page became a requirement for a settlement anyway?
What the Palestinian have to understand is that there is no one who is going help them. Lebanon and Jordan are too weak, and have no interest. Egypt dropped out of this mix long ago. Egypt’s civilization has been centered on the the Nile for as long as 10,000 years or more. Syria is not going to go war alone against Israel. Iraq has no common border and is under a pro-Western government right now. The Saudis no ground army and no interest. Iran is too far away.
Another issue is the tortured vocabulary used to discuss the topic of a Mideast settlement. Excuse me for sounding like a surfer dude, but everybody else just has, like, a country. Why the hell does everybody have wring their hands and talk in agonized tones about a Jewish “state” and a Palestinian “state” when this topic comes up?
Let’s try independence, right now. And the consequences that come with it. Maybe with independence, the radical Palestinians will no longer get away with acting liking they cannot be held accountable for what they do. And if they don’t, well, how could it be worse?
RS:
Are you referring to me? hahahahahaha…I can’t stop giggling over your comment.
Surgical strikes in SF or LA? Who said that? IF it does happen here again, I just want it to hit the areas that are full of Jew haters, Red-state haters and mindless lefties.
I happen to live near SF, so don’t tell me what I can see with my own eyes. I also know Berkeley, Santa Cruz, Farifax and other “open-minded” areas of CA…”open-minded” unless you disagree with them.
In closing:
I live in the bluest of the blue states…the wacky, lefty, liberal, insane California. You know, the one run (over-run?) by the left. The laughing stock, completely broke, state of Ca!
Numerian,
You: “Well, duh. Who’s talking about that? Not me.”
Also you: “And also FYI, fashionable anti-semitism can scarcely be described anymore as “latent”. It’s pretty upfront and in-your-face these days.”
You blatantly imply that the media is openly anti-Semitic for reporting on Israel in anything less than a glowingly positive manner.
“FYI, Israel isn’t occupying Gaza. ”
No, they’re actually blockading Gaza as a tactic, which is worse, because at least occupiers generally keep the free flow of goods going through a territory or country.
“Since when are the Israeli’s not listening to and responding to their critics?”
Since they ignore all calls for a cease-fire or explanation of their goals within Gaza, that’s when.
Hamas needs to deal with the fact that Israel will exist and should exist, along with most of the Middle East countries that haven’t made treaties or agreements with Israel yet. But Israel needs to deal with the fact that they won’t get away with taking more land, and they won’t get away with keeping Palestinians as second-class citizens forever.
I feel bad for you that you think that the things that Israel does are examples of a “tolerant, civilized democracy”. The only thing true that you said is that Israel is an ally of the USA, which means that they feel entitled to do what they want, say what they want (even if they do something completely the opposite of that afterwards), and generally push their way around the region. If I was wrong, would Israel even hint at sending warplanes into Iranian airspace to attack targets that they believe are related to a nuclear program? I can’t think of any other country that is allied with the USA that ever speaks about attacking another country for any reason.
Israel is the same as Hamas, no worse or better. The problem is that we’ve let these two ignorant, stubborn sides dictate the situation themselves, rather than impose a real solution.
A lot of sense has been written in the comments, as well as a lot of nonsense.
I am on the political left. I don’t think the dispute between Israel or Palestine can be confidently explicated on an blog’s comment wall. But I do think we’ll be better off if we all stop pretending that our opinion occupies the higher moral ground.
I do believe both Israelis and Palestinians have done ignorant, cruel and destructive things. Yet both sides are in a pressure cooker few of us, outside the situation, can realistically understand or assess. We went completely nuts after a single, horrific terrorist bombing. Imagine what Israelis must experience with the daily reality of a possible suicide bomb. At the same time, it is miserly to minimize the indignity and rage that Gazans must feel, penned in a virtual prison, denied basic necessities by the blockade of a dominant neighbor. Honestly, how would any of us feel in either situation? If we were born and raised in Gaza, we would almost certainly be angry and bitter at Israel. If we were Israel’s situation, we would have to feel some hostility toward Palestinians. Perhaps we would even begin thinking of them as savages, fundamentally unlike us.
Comparing grievances or assigning blame is a fool’s game. It doesn’t teach us a damned thing, and it leads nowhere. The important question is whether there is a path to peace. Asserting that Palestinians have behaved badly is obvious and counterproductive. The only possibly productive thing we can do is try to understand both sides and push both sides to seek a solution where mutual self-interest can converge. The alternative is the status quo, which is getting harder to sustain as regional tensions (not to mention Palestinian population) increase.
McGirk is, as I recall, the reporter who started the Haditha fiasco. He is a dishonorable man that cannot separate fact from his fantasies. If and when he grows up, he will still unfit for responsibility.
Is anyone here as sick of hearing this constant crap about Israel taking the Palestinians land? The Palestinians never held that land as a country they have no universal right to it, they were just wandering bands of noamatic tribes, the jews were there long before any of them, and other peoples before the jews, none of them can claim it as totally thiers from the begining of time, it’s two fleas arguing over who owns the dog their on. But it was Israel and the Jews that givin the chance after 1948 turned that barren strip of sand into a prosperous and important nation not the Palestinians, the Palestinians have no more right to the current nation of Israel and it’s modern accomplishments that the American indians have to modern America.
It’s not possible to make “peace’ with terrorists. Even an attempt to engage a terrorist in talks will promptly lead to more terrorism, as the talks themselves signal that our side is lead by cowards and fools.
Israel cannot allow Hamas on its border for the same reason we would never allow al-Qaeda on ours.
The problem, for those who don’t want to notice, is much deeper than Israel. 200 people were murdered very recently in Bombay, for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with Israel. Russians are murdered in Moscow theatres and in schools in Beslan for reasons having nothing to do with Israel.
And the last paragraph of this article is completely correct. The media lacks the capacity to cover certain issues – and radical Islam is one of them. That’s why they beheaded Daniel Pearl and videotaped it. Result: Hamas fires 6000 rockets into Israel over three years’ time and there’s nary a peep from the media. Israel then defends itself and they are suddently Nazis.
This isn’t news anymore, it’s enemy propaganda.
Given Hamas’ actions in firing the 6000 rockets into Israel since Israel pulled out of Gaza in ’05, how can any rational mind on the planet still believe “land for peace” is a good idea?
What school do I enroll in to get my Ph.D in stupidity? I want to write for Time magazine too.
Time magazine ceased to be relevant years ago. The only readers it has left are the same shrinking group that still cling to the NY Times.
As for peace via a two state or other solution forget it.
Until and unless Hamas and others who fanatically believe in their Islamic duty to kill Jews and eliminate the state of Israel are removed from the decision-making process by Palestinians who finally, if reluctantly, realize the truth as identified by PM Golda Meir – there will be no peace until the Palestinians love their children more than they hate the Jews.
Deja vu! When the Nazis came to power, the wire services and editorialists of the MSM confidently predicated that Hitler would be constrained and restrained by his conservative supporters.
I never thought I would see the outright hatred of the Jews I have read on this site. I now understand the total paranoia the Jews have after almost being exterminated in production line fashion by the Nazis. This country has degenerated so much in 30 years. When you have total morons defending the same people that would gladly kill them is surreal. We have become soft and spoiled. By the way screw the Palestinians and every other terrorist group. I feel nothing for them. Unlike many in this country I still remember the 1972 Olympics and there dancing around and celebrating on 9/11 screw them. When they have 3000 killed I will dance in the streets like they did.
THANK YOU ! Finally a report with FACTS rather than leftist elitist wishful thinking and bias. The Time report would be rejected by most Israelis, certainly those living with constant threat of being shelled by a terrorist radical islamist organization. What ever happened to trying to win a war, is it politically incorrect ? Where would we be if this culture pervailed during WW II ? The clear message Israel is sending is: We can talk about peace and yes, there should be a two state solution but if you shell us, we will kill you. And I mean kill you.
[...] those congressmen are not reading what passes for wisdom in the formerly significant Time magazine. Commentary Blog Archive Dissecting Anti-Israeli Journalistic Bias __________________ The brain is merely a knot that keeps the spinal cord from [...]
“The Israelis have done nothing wrong, while Hamas does wrong as a matter of policy.”
It’s not a matter of the moral value of past actions or agents, only of what will bring peace. Israel’s current aggressive policy is not the most effective to that end (as Olmert recently acknowledged), and should be abandoned.
Obviously, Hamas is at fault for acting as is does, but consisting of religious fundamentalists, it’s not really capable of much more. Israel, on the other hand, as “tolerant, civilized, democratic,” is held to a higher standard, of which they are capable, and which would cause them to employ policy that may actually bring a lasting peace. The fact that they are our close allies only allows us more leverage in persuading them to this, as a Middle East peace would likely benefit the US.
Scholar-in-Training:
The ‘in-training’ part of your name is redundant…it is clear, with your way of thinking, that you are ‘in training’…what is not clear is how you could call yourself a scholar!
James: Your wish that 9/11 happen in a “lefty bastion” has already happened. New York City is just such a bastion, and I live there. It’s strange how people who don’t live here are able to appropriate so easily the anger, fear, and blind hatred we must feel. Incidentally, we haven’t adopted the same anti-terror paranoia driving the most inhuman policies of the Neocon right.
Yet, the very people so righteously indignant on our collective behalf are unable to appreciate the same sense of fear and anger a people must feel when destruction rains down from military aircraft, rather than commandeered civilian ones.
This is not a ‘stand with us or against us’ issue. It’s a problem of understanding human motivations. The Israelis and their American allies demanded a free election in Gaza; when the result did not please them, they blockaded Gaza with the hope that Gazans would blame and oust their elected government, rather than the blockaders manning the checkpoints. This was a fundamental misreading of our collective human nature.
Further, by denying Hamas with essential resources it needed to govern, the Israelis eliminated any possibility of Hamas tempering its extremism in the face of its new gubernatorial responsibilities. Instead, the extremist, combative forces that brought Hamas to the forefront of the Palestinian cause was accentuated. A blockade is no less an act of war than the firing of primitive rockets, though it is a far more effective tactic. I will prompt a people to fight.
Finally, anyone who is untroubled by clear proportionality problems in this war, or by the timing of this offensive is wearing blinders. 100:1 casualty ratios are the kind of rates we expect from cartoonish totalitarian states in fantasy movies, not real-world democracies concerned with human rights. Indeed, Israel at large is a nation bound by law and principles of fairness. Yet its leaders have abandoned these notions entirely, on the eve of an election where ‘national security’ concerns are paramount. As Israelis near the Gaza border pull up lawn chairs to watch the carnage wrought upon their Palestinian neighbors, one is again reminded of the worst, rather than the best, or human nature.
Bloggers here are prepared to walk in the shoes of an Israeli in Sderot, but not of a Gazan right next door. The IDF is collectively punishing the Gazans for the ineffectual acts of their elected leadership. That alone is illegal under international law. The solution to the rocket problem does not exist in the present; it’s been two years in the making, ever since the Israelis decided to deny Gazans access to essential supplies from the outside world. Curiously, few commentators here can appreciate the unfairness of that decision, allowing Gazans to wither and die in under-equipped hospitals, or from chronic malnutrition. Gazans are not cartoonish evil characters like the ones we watched in our Saturday morning cartoons; they are a hopeless people whose sufferings are caused, in no small part, but Israeli actions.
If there is to be lasting peace in the region, both sides need to acknowledge the mistakes that have been made.
The disgusting title of the most recent issue of Time, “Why Israel Can’t Win,” proves all by itself that the magazine is not an objective news and information magazine, but instead only a political vehicle with a particularly ugly agenda. Front-page titles such as that front load public opinion and, ultimately, outcome, which a historically respected news magazine has no business doing on a topic as lethal as the survival of Israel and Jews. What a shameful company Time has become.
E Foster
[...] So the 1967 borders are the key to peace. Thanks for that. Now we know what must be done. But who is speaking ex cathedra on the ultimate key to lasting harmony. Ah, the authority is Tim McGirk. Where have we seen that name before? (HT: Commentary) [...]
When I read this Time article it didn’t sit particularly well with me, but I think I can empathize with why journalists polarize themselves and jump to conclusions so quickly. The entire matter is morally difficult for most Americans to consider; the many conflicting feelings over the right of Israel to exist, blame for each new conflict, frustration over this half-century struggle that constantly draws us in on some level and so on balls together into an emotionally incomprehensible mass. Trying to navigate through this mass has a way of turning intelligent thought into nonsense and considerate people into ideologues. It feels impossible to take a stand on Israel and its Arab neighbors without feeling like you are ultimately supporting tough decisions, civilian casualties, and the rights of one people over another. The writer here seems to be on to this, Time’s piece is more of an outlash than an editorial.
Chatman, I fully realize that Gazans/Palestinians are not cartoonish super-villains, but I see little alternative to Israel’s current actions. The end of Israeli occupation in Gaza was followed almost immediately by rocket and mortar attacks, as the security barrier made suicide attacks much harder to employ. Hamas had made its genocidal intentions towards Jews clear, extending to uninvolved countries like Australia and Ethiopia. And even if it did gain democratic legitimacy during the 2006 elections, how could Israel simply ignore these factors? Are Israelis obligated to put the best interests of Hamas before their own lives? Hamas has used brutal tactics, including torture, maiming and extra-judicial killings to cement its hold on power, and it has cultivated ties with Iran. This last fact perfectly legitimizes the blockade, since Iran would arm Hamas as comprehensively as they have Hizballah. As it stands, Hamas appears far more interested in diverting scare resources from Gazans towards constructing an endless array of rockets, which are fired off solely with the intention of killing non-combatants. Although more Gazans have died at the hands of Israeli ordnance than the opposite, Israel has confined itself to military targets while Hamas has done everything within its power to heighten the civilian death-toll. Hamas’s own propaganda reveals that it sees its own civilian population as a weapon, and they are using that weapon cynically and ruthlessly. The civilian deaths that have occurred are Hamas’s responsibility, and nobody else’s.
With all respect to Frank, I do not feel conflicted about this issue. Hamas is an organization based on religious supremacisim, and is devoted towards ensuring the dominance of Islam through military means. Like all religious fanatics, not only is the well-being of their civilians of minor concern, they believe that such civilians should be eager to offer themselves as martyrs. The only way that this endless back-and-forth killing will end is if Hamas is destroyed as an organization and a rational party brought in to administer the area. Whether this party is the United Nations, Egypt, the Arab League, or Fatah is immaterial. If Israel pulls back and accepts a ceasefire, they will be back in the same position in the not-too-distant future.
Quite frankly, Frank has said all I wanted to say. Cheers!
Oops, I meant Craig, not Frank
[...] Shmuel Rosner: What journalism has done to the conflict In Uncategorized on January 12, 2009 at 8:24 am From Commentary. To read the whole article, click here. [...]
[...] Commentary » Blog Archive » Dissecting Anti-Israeli Journalistic Bias [...]