The Los Angeles Times has the most typical of the calls for Israel’s restraint, utilizing the lie of Hamas “moderation:”
ONCE AGAIN, ESCALATING VIOLENCE threatens to derail any hope of a breakthrough between Israelis and Palestinians. It is a depressingly familiar theme in a depressingly familiar struggle, prompting a depressingly familiar response: These latest horrors should not be allowed to affect the prospects for peace.
Oh, look. Israel defends herself, the world rears up on its hind legs and screams “Nooooooooooooooooo!” in perfect George Lucas Star Wars fashion. Say, Mr. Times Editorial Writer, a question? What prospects for peace? You mean the fact that a terrorist organization was elected to govern the palestinians, refuses to deal with, make peace with, or recognize Israel, and praises terrorist attacks on Israel? That prospect for peace? No? How about the one that has sent hundreds of kassam rockets into Israel since the Gaza withdrawal? That one? No?
Make no mistake: The frustration that triggered the Israeli military’s incursion into Gaza on Wednesday is understandable. The Israeli public was aghast to see Palestinians react to the Israeli pullout from Gaza last year by electing the terrorist group Hamas in January.
[…] But there is a broader agenda to this act of violence. Hamas is split between hard-liners who continue to reject Israel’s right to exist (a position that has cost the Palestinian government much of its international support) and more moderate elements who understand that Hamas needs to alter its ways now that it is in power. Some Hamas leaders have even been negotiating with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas of the more moderate Fatah party on an agreement that would implicitly recognize the fact, if not the right, of Israel’s existence. Radical Hamas leaders also may have worried about Abbas’ earlier talk of putting the question of Israel’s right to exist to Palestinian voters in a referendum.
What’s wrong with this editorial? Well, all of it. There are no moderates in Hamas. The prisoners’ document does not recognize, implicitly or otherwise, Israel’s existence. Mahmoud Abbas was never going to put up a referendum regarding Israel’s right to exist. He was going to put the prisoners’ document to a referendum, and oh yeah, for the millionth time: The prisoners’ document does not implicitly recognize the existence of Israel.
For these more intransigent leaders of Hamas, any accommodation with Israel is unacceptable. They must be ecstatic at Israel’s retaliatory incursion into Gaza. Regardless of whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s government is justified, the Israeli military’s destruction of vital infrastructure in Gaza — and its detainment of several Palestinian cabinet ministers and lawmakers in Ramallah — runs the risk of further radicalizing the Palestinian population and further marginalizing more moderate voices within the Palestinian government.
Note how no matter what Israel does, she loses. If she doesn’t defend herself, she looks weak in the eyes of the “more intransigent leaders of Hamas” (and oh, yeah, nice way to say “Jew-murdering scum,” Times). Reread the Hamas charter. The one that quotes the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and insists that “Palestine” is an Islamic waqf and may never be held by infidels. Try taking it seriously for a change.
Hence the calls, from the Bush administration and other governments, asking Olmert for restraint. It isn’t that the world questions Israelis’ right to feel frustrated, or to retaliate. It is simply that we cringe at the sight of a disproportionate response that could undermine prospects of ending the cycle of violence.
Notice the condescension of the words in bold. First, why is it that the Israeli reaction to being attacked on a daily basis is compared to a child’s reaction at being grounded? Rockets are falling in Sderot. Terrorists are attacking Israeli civilians and military. When Israel defends herself from these attacks, it isn’t “retaliation.” It isn’t “frustration.” It is a sovereign nation responding to acts of war by going after the people who attacked her.
And Mr. Times Editorial Writer? Shut the hell up. Because we cringe at the sight of yet another “Israel must use restraint!” editorial from yet another clueless editorial writer who can’t comprehend that when Hamas says they will never recognize Israel, they mean it.
The only thing “depressingly familiar” is the fatuousness of the LA Times, NY Times, Washington Post – ignorant editorials.
But Israel does show restraint. Compare the condition of the PA’s cities with Grozny. Israel shows much more restraint than I would in her situation. After the Palis started the Oslo Terrorist War I would have given them an ultimatum: Either you learn to live at peace with Jewish neighbors or you leave and find neighbors with whom you can live at peace. That would be difficult, since their “Arab Brothers” treat the Palis like dirt, worse than the Israelis do.
The Palis are the cutting edge of the Islamofascists’ satanic death cult, a true example of the self-destructiveness of evil.