Mouthpiece
What in HELL is the Washington Post thinking? They are giving op-ed space to Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas Prime Minister of the Palestinians? A terrorist front man gets top space in a top American newspaper?
Are you kidding me?
The current Gaza invasion is only the latest effort to destroy the results of fair and free elections held early this year. It is the explosive follow-up to a five-month campaign of economic and diplomatic warfare directed by the United States and Israel. The stated intention of that strategy was to force the average Palestinian to "reconsider" her vote when faced with deepening hardship; its failure was predictable, and the new overt military aggression and collective punishment are its logical fulfillment. The "kidnapped" Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit is only a pretext for a job scheduled months ago.
In addition to removing our democratically elected government, Israel wants to sow dissent among Palestinians by claiming that there is a serious leadership rivalry among us. I am compelled to dispel this notion definitively. The Palestinian leadership is firmly embedded in the concept of Islamic shura , or mutual consultation; suffice it to say that while we may have differing opinions, we are united in mutual respect and focused on the goal of serving our people. Furthermore, the invasion of Gaza and the kidnapping of our leaders and government officials are meant to undermine the recent accords reached between the government party and our brothers and sisters in Fatah and other factions, on achieving consensus for resolving the conflict. Yet Israeli collective punishment only strengthens our collective resolve to work together.
Notice the scare quotes around kidnapped? The Washington Post, which I have been fairly tough on, but regarded pretty much as a reliable news source on many - not all - subjects, has just taken a nose dive in my personal credibility index. This is the willful publishing of propaganda for terrorists. There is no mention of the continuing rocketing of civilians, there is no mention of the sending of bomb-wearing fools into restaurants. There are only more pronouncements.
We present this clear message: If Israel will not allow Palestinians to live in peace, dignity and national integrity, Israelis themselves will not be able to enjoy those same rights. Meanwhile, our right to defend ourselves from occupying soldiers and aggression is a matter of law, as settled in the Fourth Geneva Convention. If Israel is prepared to negotiate seriously and fairly, and resolve the core 1948 issues, rather than the secondary ones from 1967, a fair and permanent peace is possible. Based on a hudna (comprehensive cessation of hostilities for an agreed time), the Holy Land still has an opportunity to be a peaceful and stable economic powerhouse for all the Semitic people of the region. If Americans only knew the truth, possibility might become reality.
The reality is that the Palestinians, as represented by Haniyeh want Israel destroyed. Nothing else will do.
And the Washington Post has decided to be their mouthpiece.
UPDATE: A Blog For All notes additional WaPo agitprop. Postwatch also has a roundup. Don Surber isn't thrilled.
Other Links to this Post
-
PartisanTimes.com — Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 12:12 pm
-
Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » Terrorist Propaganda From The Washington Post — Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 12:13 pm
-
Don Singleton — Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 1:22 pm
By violet, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 2:27 am
That is ridiculous. I’d say that the WaPo should know better, but… well, it’s the WaPo.
By Yakov, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 7:37 am
Washington Post and Al Qaeda mouthpiece. Haniyeh and Bin Laden are both terrorists cut from the same cloth.
By lawhawk, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 8:49 am
That’s not all. Across the page, the WaPo editors wrote an editorial that favors the cause of the Butcher of Beslan - Basayev, whose main fault was that he went too far for his cause by becoming a mass murdering terrorist.
By Gaius, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 8:50 am
Lord. I missed that one.
By Joseph, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 9:05 am
I can’t take issue with most of what Haniyeh said. The Palestinians did hold a free and fair election that Hamas won. They are living under occupation and/or besieged by Israel. They should have the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem for a sovereign state. That IS the 2-state solution to the conflict. Meanwhile, the right to resist hostile military occupation, by force if necessary, is enshrined in international law, codified after WWII. The rights of war refugees. including the Palestinian refugees, are also enshrined in international law.
Yes, missiles fired from besieged Gaza have caused some casualties and property damage, but it’s miniscule comparted to all the casualties and damage Israel routinely inflicts on Palestinian civilians. Similarly, Palestinian militants captured one Israeli soldier participating in the siege of Gaza. But Israel has abducted and tortured thousands of Palestinian civilians and holds them without due process or subjects them to illegitimate kangaroo courts.
If Israel wants peace they need to treat Palestinians with respect, the same respect they currently reserve for Jews only.
By Gaius, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 9:17 am
There is no equivalence here. None. Trying the “they did it first” defense is bull. There is plenty of blame to go around, but the side that decides to send dimwits wearing bombs into fast food restaurants loses the moral argument hands down.
Period.
By Charley, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 9:57 am
Joseph wrote: Meanwhile, the right to resist hostile military occupation, by force if necessary, is enshrined in international law, codified after WWII.
Okay, so let’s at least get the facts right as long as we’re talking about international law, codified after WWII. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and the Golan Heights were lands taken as a result of a DEFENSIVE war on the part of Israel. According to international law, lands gained in a defensive war remains with the country that needed to take them. Israel did not start the war in 1967. This is the first time in history that land gained in this manner has been demanded to be given back.
By Donna, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 10:23 am
Okay, Charley…..please get your facts straight. Israel did start the 1967 war. I was in Europe in June of 1967 and kept awake all night by the outrage over Israel’s actions.
By Joseph, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 11:56 am
Charley wrote: Okay, so let’s at least get the facts right as long as we’re talking about international law, codified after WWII. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and the Golan Heights were lands taken as a result of a DEFENSIVE war on the part of Israel.
Sorry Charley, but Israel started the 1967 war with a Pearl Harbor-like attack that wiped out the Egyption air force on the ground. SC Resolutions 242 and 338 defined all the land Israel occupied in that war as occupied territory. They also denied Israel’s claims to the occupied territories, referring to a principle of internation law which was strengthened after WWII, “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force.”
By Donna, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 12:41 pm
Well, I actually read Haniyeh’s op-ed. Can’t say that I agree he is ‘airing hate-induced’ grievances as much as speaking plainly. Mmmm, there must be a lot of sacred cows that are threatened by his succinct op-ed piece.
Oh, yeah, ‘there’s two sides to every conflict, but our side is always right’, and we can even change history to prove it. I forgot about that for a moment, as I tried to pay attention to both sides. “It is a sin against God to hold anyone in a position of irredeemable hell” unless, of course, you are a Palestinian and all of you and yours can be labeled ‘terrorist’.
By Jack Anagadir, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 1:19 pm
Re: GAZA, Palestine — As Americans commemorated etc., etc.
We continue missing the point. The issue is not about what happened last week, last month, or yesterday between Gaza and Israel but what happened in 1948 - this is the bottom-line issue. Because of the killing during WW2 of some 7 million Jews all of Europe felt totally guilty and shameful - as they should. My family in the Netherlands, schools, universities, newspapers, etc. wouldn’t bring this up for some 40 years - it took a lot more than just Hitler to implement these atrocities. But now times have changed and we should have a hard look at Israel, what is happening with the Palestinians, etc. These two groups will never live in peace together because it is forced and artificial. The only way out is to get back to 1948 and let the right blend evolve. Look at other Arab countries, South-Africa, etc. as examples. Indeed the USA is supporting and financing Israel - the $64 question however is “WHY and HOW LONG.” When that is no longer required Israel has to stand on its own feet and that will be difficult. They better look ahead and make friends in the Middle East itself!
By Larry Madrid, Tuesday, 11 July , 2006 @ 3:21 pm
What about the 500,000 Jewish refugees from Arab lands? When has the UN cried for them. And why didn’t their beloved Arab brothers get the Palestinian refugees out of those horrendous UNRWA camps and craete a state between 1948-1967? The Israeli ‘Pearl Harbor like strike’ was against a force massing against them, and after Egypt blocked Israeli shipping which is an act of war. And try to also remember that Israel asked for peace, but the Arabs had their big conference in Khartoum and declared no negotiations, no peace and no recognition. If you want peace for Palestinians, tell them to get realistic and see how they’ve been used by their own leaders and by the dictators of the other Arab countries, and to stand up like men instead of consistently shooting themselves in the foot and crying for big-Daddy UN to bail them out.