[Jonathan] Steele not only justifies Palestinian violence, he also offers tacit support for foreign leaders who give it their backing:
Until Israel pulls back to the 1967 borders, give or take some land swaps, under international agreement, Palestinian resistance will continue – and other states will be entitled to support it.
Of course, Steele could just as reasonably have concluded that there can be no Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 border as long as “resistance” – a Palestinian term for terrorism – continues. But that would mean acknowledging that terrorism exists. Instead, Steele whitewashes Hamas’s record as a terrorist organization. “Now that Hamas is independent, strong and popular,” he writes, “Israel sees it as the new target.”
In other words, Israel acts against Hamas because it is popular, not because it fires rockets at Israeli civilians, smuggles weapons into the Gaza Strip, or threatens to destroy the Jewish state. He also fails to mention that Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 – a pullback to the 1967 border in that area – resulted in more violence against Israel, undermining his implicit claim that violence would stop if only Israel would withdraw.
The rest of this excellent article is here. It tackles what is becoming the rule rather than the exception in the mainstream press.
No comments:
Post a Comment