A Word for Israel's Enemies
A Word for Israel’s Enemies
I’ve been trying to think of a word – besides “crazies” -- that would accurately describe the people in the Woodstock area who are implacably hostile to Israel.
“Closed-minded” certainly seems appropriate. For years, Israeli civilians in the Sderot area endured rocket attacks from Gaza – 7,000 rockets. Even Justice Goldstone admitted that Israel had a right to retaliate. And President Obama, as a candidate, said, “The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. And so I can assure you that if...If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.”
None of the Israel haters has expressed any sympathy for those Israelis or any condemnation for the Hamas terrorists.
One response from the closed-minded was: Those rockets were primitive. Well, they were sophisticated enough to kill 13 people. And since when is trying to kill someone with a rusty .32 less heinous than trying to kill someone with a brand-new .45?
But “only” 13 were killed? Well, how many had to be killed for Israel to determine to retaliate? I know the answer. None. The fact that innocent civilians were imperiled was enough. And if relatively few died, it was because the Israelis installed warning sirens (as Goldstone himself noted, they had only 14 seconds to seek shelter), and buttressed their buildings.
Another word besides “closed-minded” suggests itself: “contemptible.” These people really are saying that they don’t care about deaths -- so long as it’s Jews who die.
Israel’s response was disproportionate?
First, the thousand or so who were killed in Israel’s attack included a great many Palestinian soldiers – cowards who hid among the civilian population and didn’t wear military uniforms. And the Israelis apparently did their best to target only the military.
A British colonel, Richard Kamp, former commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, has written: “When possible the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] gave at least four hours' notice to civilians to leave areas targeted for attack…. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. This sort of task is regarded by military tacticians as risky and dangerous at the best of times. To mount such operations, to deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands, is to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.”
Later, “the IDF unilaterally announced a daily three-hour cease- fire. The IDF dropped over 900,000 leaflets warning the population of impending attacks to allow them to leave designated areas. A complete air squadron was dedicated to this task alone…. The IDF phoned over 30,000 Palestinian households in Gaza, urging them in Arabic to leave homes where Hamas might have stashed weapons or be preparing to fight. Similar messages were passed in Arabic on Israeli radio broadcasts warning the civilian population of forthcoming operations.
“By taking these actions and many other significant measures… the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other Army in the history of warfare.”
Why didn’t Israel cooperate with the U.N. Human Rights Council? Because the council is notorious for its anti-Israeli bias. As the Associated Press reported recently, Israel tends to ignore reports of the Human Rights Council, "which includes many Arab and Muslim countries [and] is hopelessly biased against Israel."
I have a question: Why didn’t Goldstone, who is actually an honorable if misguided man, agree to debate Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor? Dershowitz has nothing but contempt for the biased Goldstone report.
Another question: Why is Israel blockading Gaza? Isn’t it to keep weapons out of the hands of the Hamas terrorists? Is there something wrong with that?
And then there is Bill Campion of Mount Temper, who (1) bizarrely accused me of abusing St. Francis, (2) claims that I “celebrate” the killing of Palestinians (a lie), and (3) that I have really ticked off Osama bin Laden. I sure hope that (3) is true. And I want add that whenever someone as filled with blinding hatred as Campion is becomes apoplectic with rage, an angel sings.
As for those Jews who side with the crazies, I think that they are simply desperate for attention. They are life’s losers, lonely and unloved, like Tarak Kauff, the pretentious housepainter who writes all those ignorant, otiose, and verbose letters. “Crackpots” is another appropriate word.
Someone I respect a lot argues that these anti-Israel people are really neo-Nazis. “They are full of hate for Israel,” he tells me, “because Israelis are Jews. They want Israel and its Jews wiped off the map.”
I’m not sure that I would go that far.
But they sure are a loathsome bunch of creeps.
Creeps! That’s le mot juste, the perfect word!
Warren Boroson
Woodstock
I’ve been trying to think of a word – besides “crazies” -- that would accurately describe the people in the Woodstock area who are implacably hostile to Israel.
“Closed-minded” certainly seems appropriate. For years, Israeli civilians in the Sderot area endured rocket attacks from Gaza – 7,000 rockets. Even Justice Goldstone admitted that Israel had a right to retaliate. And President Obama, as a candidate, said, “The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. And so I can assure you that if...If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.”
None of the Israel haters has expressed any sympathy for those Israelis or any condemnation for the Hamas terrorists.
One response from the closed-minded was: Those rockets were primitive. Well, they were sophisticated enough to kill 13 people. And since when is trying to kill someone with a rusty .32 less heinous than trying to kill someone with a brand-new .45?
But “only” 13 were killed? Well, how many had to be killed for Israel to determine to retaliate? I know the answer. None. The fact that innocent civilians were imperiled was enough. And if relatively few died, it was because the Israelis installed warning sirens (as Goldstone himself noted, they had only 14 seconds to seek shelter), and buttressed their buildings.
Another word besides “closed-minded” suggests itself: “contemptible.” These people really are saying that they don’t care about deaths -- so long as it’s Jews who die.
Israel’s response was disproportionate?
First, the thousand or so who were killed in Israel’s attack included a great many Palestinian soldiers – cowards who hid among the civilian population and didn’t wear military uniforms. And the Israelis apparently did their best to target only the military.
A British colonel, Richard Kamp, former commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, has written: “When possible the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] gave at least four hours' notice to civilians to leave areas targeted for attack…. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. This sort of task is regarded by military tacticians as risky and dangerous at the best of times. To mount such operations, to deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands, is to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.”
Later, “the IDF unilaterally announced a daily three-hour cease- fire. The IDF dropped over 900,000 leaflets warning the population of impending attacks to allow them to leave designated areas. A complete air squadron was dedicated to this task alone…. The IDF phoned over 30,000 Palestinian households in Gaza, urging them in Arabic to leave homes where Hamas might have stashed weapons or be preparing to fight. Similar messages were passed in Arabic on Israeli radio broadcasts warning the civilian population of forthcoming operations.
“By taking these actions and many other significant measures… the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other Army in the history of warfare.”
Why didn’t Israel cooperate with the U.N. Human Rights Council? Because the council is notorious for its anti-Israeli bias. As the Associated Press reported recently, Israel tends to ignore reports of the Human Rights Council, "which includes many Arab and Muslim countries [and] is hopelessly biased against Israel."
I have a question: Why didn’t Goldstone, who is actually an honorable if misguided man, agree to debate Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor? Dershowitz has nothing but contempt for the biased Goldstone report.
Another question: Why is Israel blockading Gaza? Isn’t it to keep weapons out of the hands of the Hamas terrorists? Is there something wrong with that?
And then there is Bill Campion of Mount Temper, who (1) bizarrely accused me of abusing St. Francis, (2) claims that I “celebrate” the killing of Palestinians (a lie), and (3) that I have really ticked off Osama bin Laden. I sure hope that (3) is true. And I want add that whenever someone as filled with blinding hatred as Campion is becomes apoplectic with rage, an angel sings.
As for those Jews who side with the crazies, I think that they are simply desperate for attention. They are life’s losers, lonely and unloved, like Tarak Kauff, the pretentious housepainter who writes all those ignorant, otiose, and verbose letters. “Crackpots” is another appropriate word.
Someone I respect a lot argues that these anti-Israel people are really neo-Nazis. “They are full of hate for Israel,” he tells me, “because Israelis are Jews. They want Israel and its Jews wiped off the map.”
I’m not sure that I would go that far.
But they sure are a loathsome bunch of creeps.
Creeps! That’s le mot juste, the perfect word!
Warren Boroson
Woodstock
Labels: Israel Hamas Goldstone
posted by WarrenBoroson at 12:56 PM
<< Home