The New Republic

Often times I get the sense that authors like this are writing to themselves. Some of these arguments are so weak it actually makes a mockery of those who support Israel. 1. The no country would tolerate line. Israel acts as though it should have the same lifestyle as America. But their is a difference. America isn't occupying a hostile population on our borders. We smartly chose to occupy a people who live far far away, long out of home made missile range. Israel has said it is at war with Gaza many times. It should not expect to be free from violence. 2. The home made rockets are terrorists argument. How do you think that is going to play in the country that destroyed Dresden, Tokyo, and Hiroshima. And, then dropped more ordinance than expended in the entirety of WWII on North Vietnam's cities, burned villages to the ground, Napalmed small girls and then based our defense strategy on Targeting Russia's cities with Nukes. If you read the American's governments defense of the bombing of Dresden, it is impossible to conceive that an honest American could fault the Hamas use of rockets. 3. Israel has opened self up to much more powerful charges of attacking civilians. Israel boasted of bombing the police graduation of 60 to 70 academy graduates whose first posting would be as traffic cops . As mentioned in 2. not many Americans can have much to say about this. But to the Palestinians, the people whose behaviour Israel is trying to change with the bombing, this will look like a purposeful attack on civilians as will many of the attacks on Hamas's civilian buildings. It really doesn't matter if the Israelis or Americans are ok with it, it matters if Hamas can effectively argue that Israel targets civilians so the Palestinians should too. They will be able to make this argument 4. See above, this dog ain't going to hunt 5. This might have been nice if there was somewhere to evacuate to. 6. A selective blockade is still a blockade and an act of war. The blockade of Gaza has been stricter than most. Certainly stricter than the US blockade of Cuba and the Union blockade of the Confederacy. The final and most glaring hypocrisy is the demand that Palestinians start negotiations with the acceptance of Israel and the agreement to honor all previous agreements. Israel frequently elects leaders who do not recognize the Palestinian Authority or the elected government, which is functionally the same thing. They elected Ariel Sharon who repeatedly said that they wanted to end the peace talks, intent personally threatened to desecrate the Al-Aqsa with the intent of ending the peace process. The argument that the Palestinian response was preplanned is irrelevant to his intentions. The sum of all this is that Israeli partisans are trying to differentiate their behaviour from the Palestinians on technicalities. This may work with some but it won't work with the Palestinians with whom they make peace. It is not about winning the argument it is about securing Israel's future. Arguments such as those presented by Bernard-Henri Levy simply make this process harder.

- Robert Hotchkiss

January 9, 2009 at 2:11am

Let's take this idiotic Israeli propaganda piece by piece, using Bernard's numbering system. 1) Any civilized country in the world faced with this problem and with a diplomatic solution of simply recognizing the results of the democratic election and lifting the economic blockade in return for peace in the area or immediately massacring the general population to prop up their chances in the impending elections, would , I believe opt for the diplomatic route (except, of course, Israel). 2) Nightmarish conditions? And what then would you call the condition of four tiny children, abandoned with no food or water for 3 days sitting by the corpses of their dead parents because the Israeli forces refuse to allow Red Cross rescue? And what would you do if you lived in an open air concentration camp with no access to the outside world except what Israel occasionally allows to keep the press at bay and you had to watch daily the growth and intellectual development of your children stunted by malnutrition from the Israeli blockade of the prison gates? And what would you do when you cried out to the world for help and even the UN representatives cried out for help and the whole world ignored you? Would you simply sit there and do nothing to help your family? 3) And in the smallest, most densely populated area in the world where would you have them put these things? Across the border in Israel? 4) And if the cowardly IDF would actually try to go after the Hamas fighters like men instead of lobbing tank shells from a safe distance into schoolyards and houses of worship and dropping one ton bombs on buildings housing women and children to kill one man in the building, there would be less “collateral damage”. Statistically, Israel knows full well how many civilians, women and children it will kill with each operation. They cannot be heard to say that they didn’t “intend “ it. These innocents are just as dead. 5) First, this was just another terror tactic used by Israel. Secondly where were they to go? Out into the street to be cut down by artillery fire and bombs? Maybe they were supposed to go to France or Britain. 6) How dare you, from the safety of your distance repeat this Israeli lie when the people actually there, the independent UN observers have said that there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis? You obviously base this comment solely on the word of the attacking force which also tries to deny the deliberate shelling of Red Cross and UN aid workers. Bernard, have you no shame? You cannot possibly believe this nonsense in the light of the reporting of people actually there.

- Jack

January 9, 2009 at 2:48am

Mr. Levi, I read your article and heard your interview with Fareed Zakaria with interest and agreement. But as I wrote to Marty Peretz yesterday on the subject, it seems to me that there is a subconcious world-wide desire to CONTINUE not to stop the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this case, if the world [and CNN] noted even one or two of the six items you did at the outset [Ben Weideman ought to be fired for his early "reporting"], this conflict would end and it would have ended many years ago. The truth is that anti-semitism, consciously or not, is at the root of this problem. The world, insanely, does not want this to stop, really. Just as it has not for 5000 years. I realize this is a reactionary position; nevertheless, I have come to believe it strongly.

- Phyllis Kahan, Ph.D.

January 9, 2009 at 5:18am

Witness the protracted rigor mortis of the French public intellectual, as the heir to Voltaire, Zola and Sartre, the great BHL, rehearses the most conventional Hasbara talking points in defense of state violence against a civilian population. Which is the more laughable, BHL's pretensions to moral authority or the New Republic's supposed reputation for lively and uninhibited discussion?

- pyoung

January 9, 2009 at 8:21am

First the Palestines had Arafat who robbed them blind while sending the young off to die, then came Hamas who started with helping the sick and needy who then turned to war sending all the civilians to die. Maybe the Palestines need to bring in fresh new faces who understand that waging wars does not help the economy, but, unfortunately Palestines are still tied to the old ways of strongest tribe controls the rest.

- Gene44

January 9, 2009 at 8:25am

Well said, Mr. Levy. The press has, as usual, been atrocious in its coverage of Israel. Israel is undoubtedly, and in cosmic proportions, unfairly, the most vilified nation on the earth. As has been stated time and again, Israel has become the vilified "Jew" among nation states. It is not a recent development, but it is always depressing beyond words to ponder.

- Darren Pinsker

January 9, 2009 at 8:33am

This is, of course, the real issue. Namely, when the Palestinians themselves have taken their own destiny upon their own shoulders without 'help' from their obdurate and short-sighted leaders. I deem this to be a cultural issue, though. To feel shame, to be beaten, and especially by Jews is cuts very deep. This is, in my mind, one of the biggest challenges to the Palestinians. Once that happens, progress may be forthcoming. I'm not holding my breath, though.

- Cy Stanway

January 9, 2009 at 9:53am

A sad rehashing of the tired IDF excuses for slaughter.

- Jay Spux

January 9, 2009 at 7:58pm

Let's not forget firing rockets into another nation's cities is an act of war. The so-called "massacre" will stop as soon as Hamas cease to fire the rockets. If the Israelis stop their operation Hamas will continue to fight them. This in itself justify the principel of proportionality. The objective is the erradication of a fighting organization that had refused to surrender. The Israelis used the force commensurate to the task. Another commentator had bleated so much hot air as to say that if the IDF has the guts to close on the Hamas with more ground units instead of aerial bombardment, there would he less casaulties. Nonesense. Anyone with a rudimentry knowledge of urban warfare would know this is false. There will be no identifying a target and eliminating it with a limited effect, precision weapon. As for the measures taken against Germany during World War II, maybe it should be remembered that by the initiation of strategic bombing, Germany had already began the policiy of razing England's cities and slaughter millions in Eastern Europe, and would not desist from this course of action until it had been stopped.

- Triple C

January 9, 2009 at 11:44pm

Resolving the Israeli-Palestanian Conflict A fable related by Roger Dawson in his book on negotiating, “You Can Get Anything You Want”, may hold the key to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian crises. It’s about a very old couple who lived in a small, somewhat sordid thatched hut in a tiny village, which after a particularly nasty storm was completely demolished. Being much too old and poor to rebuild, the couple moved in with their daughter and her husband and four children. This arrangement precipitated an unpleasant domestic situation, as the daughter’s hut was barley big enough for her own family of six. So the daughter went to the wise man of the village, told him the problem, and asked “What shall we do?” The wise man while taking puffs from his pipe asked the lady if she had any chickens, and responding that she had ten, was told to bring the ten chickens into the hut. Although the wise man’s decision seemed ludicrous to the woman, she obeyed but the problem was soon unbearable, with feathers as well as words now flying about the hut. The woman returned to the wise man, pleading once again for advice. On learning that the woman had three goats, the wise man told the woman to bring the goats into the hut. That seemed positively ridiculous but to disobey the wise man was unthinkable, so she brought the three goats into the hut. And now life was unlivable, with eight people, ten chickens, and three goats sharing one tiny, noisy hut. The next day the woman, fearing for her sanity, approached the wise man for the last time crying and pleading for help as life in the hut had become intolerable. This time, the wise man’s response was encouraging: “Remove the chickens and the goats from your home” The animals were quickly evicted and the entire family of eight lived together happily in the hut for the rest of their days” In a way this fable captures the reality between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the only difference being that the old couple has taken over the hut. It is good to examine the circumstances under which the old couple came to live in the hut, but more important to examine how the hut can be made more habitable for all. Let’s assume that the Israelis are the old couple and the Palestinians the younger couple, while the United Nations, America and others are the wise man of the village. The issue to be resolved is how the Israelis and the Palestinians can live together happily although the available land is barely enough to satisfy both parties concerned. It is also safe to assume that the chickens and goats are already in the picture as can be seen by the intensity of the ongoing Israeli offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza. Another way of saying this is that the reason why the crisis has remained unresolved for the better part of a century is because of the chickens and the goats. So what are some of these chickens and goats that the United Nations, America and other countries pushing for a settlement must identify and help eliminate from the hut? The first would have to be a change in the mindsets of the Israelis and Palestinians towards the land of Palestine. The Israelis regard Palestine as their ancestral land dating back to the time of Abraham, but it is also true that for hundreds of years those lands were occupied by others. The Palestinians say that before the founding of the nation of Israel they were the ones in occupation of these lands, but so have other nations in centuries past. Second would be the need to appreciate that Israelis and Palestinians have the same needs in terms of peace and the other necessities that make for quality living. Good education, quality health care, infrastructural development, technological advancement, economic progress are now recognized as forming basic rights of peoples. Third, is respect of the sanctity of life both of Palestinians and Israelis and understanding that human life once extinguished cannot be restored. This means that the targeting of civilian populations whether or not they have access to bunkers or are sitting on top storage facilities used for weapon has to stop. Four will be the need for all nations and organizations mediating in the Israeli-Palestinian crises to maintain their neutrality and work for quick resolution of this age old conflict. The Americans and other Western nations on the one part and the Syrians and Iranians on the other part need special mention in this regard. Finally, it is ultimately in the collective interests of the Israelis and the Palestinians to cooperate with the nations and countries that are committed to the resolution of the crises. Only nations and peoples that are short-sighted believe that the solution to preserving their existence is to deprive others of their own existence. The chicken and goat issues identified above are not exhaustive and neither will addressing them be simple, but then again attaining peace is worth the sacrifice.

- Kingsley Omose

January 10, 2009 at 12:44am

To Robert Hotchkiss: 1.) I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Your argument is incoherent. Are you suggesting that Hamas has a legal right to launch rockets at Israel? 2.) No country in the world has ever bombed Hiroshima, Nagasaki, AND Dresden. I suggest you read a book or three on the matter and come back when you understand both the nature of your historical error and the difference in moral justification between the American bombings and the British bombing. 3.) Contrary to popular belief, there ARE places in Gaza which are not schools, mosques, hospitals, and apartment buildings. I would direct you to Google Earth, but I would hope that you are smart enough to not need it to realize the absurdity of your statement. Even Hamas' defenders acknowledge that they are enthusiastic practitioners of human shield use... if they weren't, Gaza would have an adequate civil defense infrastructure instead of elementary schools that go up in mushroom clouds when someone lights a cigarette. 4.) See above. Mr. Levy's dog is hunting quite capably. 5.) Gaza has a border with Egypt as well. 6.) Of course a selective blockade is an act of war. So is firing rockets at civilian homes inside another country's borders. There's nothing aggressive about fighting back.

- Craig Johnson

January 10, 2009 at 1:01am

To Jack, 1.) Surely you don't believe that Hamas' only foreign policy goal is to end the sanctions and be recognized as a legitimate political party, do you? There is a reason those sanctions were imposed to start with... Hamas has at its core a belief that Israel should be entirely destroyed. I do not believe this is a negotiable matter for Israel. I would think that even a nice nation such as, say, Poland would have be unable to reach a diplomatic solution with a country that pledged to overthrow its government and depopulate its people so that said country's citizens would have more living space. Hypothetically. 3.) Again, there are places in Gaza that are not schools, hospitals, mosques, or apartment blocks. They could have put them there. I hear Hamas politicians have family residences... maybe they could store their weapons and ammunition under them? 4.) You seem to be under the impression that war is a sporting endeavor, to be fought between equal combatants on an open plain. While I'm sure the IDF would be more than happy to accept such an arrangement, your notion is easily disabused by Hamas' willingness to wrap children and adolescents with explosives and send them walking toward pizza parlors. 5.) They could at least know to get away from any sort of high-explosive-filled building. Like chemical plants, fireworks factories, military buildings, hospitals, schools, and mosques. 6.) Of course there's a humanitarian crisis. It's a war. But Mr. Levy's point is that Israel is continuing to deliver humanitarian aid in the midst of said war... a fact, as opposed to your baseless conspiracy theories.

- Craig Johnson

January 10, 2009 at 1:15am

Without the shedding of blood or the making of significant sacrifices there can be no correction of or making right an error, a wrong, or mistake. In other words, errors, omissions, mistakes and wrongs rarely do get self corrected especially when they are the products of differing ideologies or beliefs. The millions of Jews murdered by Nazi Germans during World War 11 contributed in no small measure to the establishment and recognition accorded the state of Israel. This has to a large extent defined the special relationship between the nation of Israel and many Western nations save of course for majority of the nations of the Middle-East. They still regard the formulation of the nation of Israel as an aberration believing that the lands it presently occupies rightly belong to the Palestinians and other Arab nations. Going down into history, we must acknowledge that the rise and fall of nations over the centuries has resulted in a constant reshaping of borders and occupants of lands. Few countries today can assert authoritatively that the lands they presently occupy have been theirs for thousands of years. No where is this more true than in the continent of Africa where European powers in the 1800s cobbled different ethic groups and tribes to form the countries of today. These countries were initially colonized and it was not until the 1950s and 1960s that most of them were granted so called independence status by former colonial masters. Even nations like the United States of America, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand were not in existence some hundreds of years ago. Also India and Pakistan used to be part of the same nation until the British Crown decided to keep the major Hindu and Muslim populations apart in separate countries. What I am driving at is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to be contextualized against the shifting sands of time to enable a workable solution to be attained. That the nation of Israel is the dominant power in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only goes to show that the history of nations is about their rise and fall, demise and formation. It does not matter today that the Palestinians are on the receiving end as there is nothing to indicate that there will not be a role reversal in another 50 to 100 years. Every time the blood of a Palestinian or Israeli is shed over the on going conflict the need for a solution or resolution becomes more apparent. The killing of another human being is not a natural act as can be seen from the extent to which the Israelis have gone to find justifications for the recent bombardments of Gaza. Also no terrorist wakes up and decide to kill others by strapping bombs to his body for the sheer fun of it. There is usually an existing conflict providing the fuel for suicide acts and more importantly, there is a period of preparation prior to embarking on the mission. Just as Nazi Germany in spite of their best efforts could not exterminate the Jewish race so will Israel even if given a free hand will not be able to raze Gaza to the ground. The same applies to the Arab nations who may be under the impression that given the opportunity, they can jointly wipe out the nation of Israel from the face of the earth. Not even the use of nuclear bombs can extinguish humanity from planet earth as there will always be remnants that will be available to repopulate the earth. Will the use of nuclear bombs result in a substantial set back in the development of the human race? Of course yes but the spirit of the human race will ultimately prevail. Monuments stand as testimonies capturing the events of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by Americans in the 1940s with the atomic bomb, We have to recognize that human conflicts especially conflicts between nations are a necessary part of life. But this does not mean that I love conflicts and that they should of necessity be encouraged or welcomed. Conflicts, especially of the type between the Israelis and Palestinians, point to the need for their resolution to address their consequences. It does not really matter that some nations who ordinarily have the ability to push for immediate resolution will indulge in double speak. Or those who are spoiling for a full scale war will have their way. Whichever way the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be resolved; it is only a question of time. For the simple fact that the position of having to kill others to maintain the status quo is unnatural and that the spilling of blood only serves notice of the need for solutions. It is at the point where peoples realize the unnaturalness of the positions that they uphold sustained with human blood that conflicts become resolvable.

- Kingsley

January 10, 2009 at 1:35am

I don't see the groundswell of interest in this crisis and, except for a few days last week when the ground troops went in, the media has backed off to a large extent its 24/7 coverage. The issues are coming into focus and people have largely made up their minds over who is to blame. A few on the left are hyperventilating over collateral damage but the whole thing has been quite predictable. Basically it's a big yawn. Hamas will bury its thousands of dead, bring in the media and declare victory and then go deeper underground. World opinion will condemn Israel and whine about the need for a 2-state solution, but will never acknowledge that there is no real basis for peace or reconciliation in this part of the world.

- RTF

January 10, 2009 at 1:40am

Gaza is a 21st century Concentration Camp. Power drunk occupiers are free to crush all voices and resistance from the natives and the UN. They have killed the people in schools, bomb shelters, and UN aid workers to name a few. The Zionist regime, has no friends in the world, why? Their blockade of the whole population and constant expansion has no parallel in modern history. The killing ratio is 100:1, if it were even 10:1, these cowards (more extreme right wing than Hamas) would not dare attack. Give 1% of the Israeli power to Palestinians and the result would be obvious. Hamas is all the population of Gaza and not an occupier. People would not accept any puppet regime imposed by Israeli occupiers.

- Sam

January 10, 2009 at 8:59am

Bravo Mr Levy. The haters of Israel and the United States will say anything to enable Hamas' subjugation and destruction of it's own men, women and children. Giving them Gaza was supposed to be a step in securing the peace, instead it provided a launching pad. Whether it's missles from Gaza or idiotic commenters such as Hotchkiss and Jack, there would ne no hate if not for ignorance.

- harkin

January 10, 2009 at 9:08am

i'm just a simpleton so i have only a simple solution here, which is let's put each part in interest to this conflict to its proof. let barack obama go into the white house press room and state the following: "i am inviting the israeli government, the palestinian authority, hamas, and the arab league to the white house next week. anyone who attends accepts by the act of attending and forevermore (1) that israel is a legitimate state, jewish in character, roughly, but not necessarily exactly, within its 1967 borders, but not less than those borders; provided that nothing will prevent israel at the meeting from trading small amounts of territory with the palestinian state to be formed to make borders more sensible for each; (2) that a palestinian state is to be formed in the west bank and gaza; (3) that the palestinian state and israel will sign a formal peace treaty within 30 days of the meeting that is NOT a mere truce or armistice, but a permanent, good faith, reconciliation of their differences; (4) an accommodation will be made regarding a palestinian political presence in jerusalem; and (5) a political accommodation will be made regarding both the palestinians and their descendants who left the west bank and gaza due to the political turmoil there of the past 100 years or so between arabs and jews, but which accommodation will not materially affect the jewish character or demographics of israel, and the jews who left arab countries during that time because of such turmoil in those other countries, and both of which accommodations and all other negotiations, actions, and documents related to the meeting, the issues involved, and the peace treaty will be in the spirit of reconciliation and not blame placing or incitement against any party. if any party does not attend who is invited under these terms, the united states reserves the right to negotiate a peace with those who do and to enforce it." then, anyone who wants real peace, it will be at hand, and anyone who's just faking about peace, let's impose it and enforce it. keevan d. morgan, chicago

- Keevan D. Morgan

January 10, 2009 at 9:24am

Why should Israel provide ANY supplies whatsoever - fuel, food, water, electricity, medicine - to a country with which it is at war, and which is committed to Israel's destruction by its Nazi-like charter? A country that cannot provide for itself must find an ally to help it. Let that ally be Egypt. If it cannot find an ally, then let it make peace with its neighbor Israel instead of war. If the Gazans want leaders who think it is a good idea to make war against a neighbor 100 time more powerful than they are, then they should reap the consequences of their own insanity.

- Harry

January 10, 2009 at 9:34am

Does anyone disagree that if the Palestinians had embraced nonviolent protest and civil disobedience in the past two decades that Gaza and the West Bank would be a very different place? As long as the Palestinians accept terrorism as way to change policy there wil be nothing but misery and brutality.

- Thuycdides

January 10, 2009 at 10:36am

Israel is entirely justified, as pointed out, in its actions in Gaza and the blood of any innocents in on the hands of Hamas. The hypocracy of the international community also needs to be pointed out. Hundrends of thousands of innocents have been killed in Darfor, and more innocent people have probably been killed thee in the last 10 days by the Sudanese government & its allies then in Gaza. Where are the security councel meetings and condemnation of that? What we have here are countries toadying up to the Arabs because they have the oil, and out and out Anti-Semitism (Nazi Style). It amazing to this day to watch the crazy Anti-Semitism that comes out of Europe. Amazing and Shocking!

- valwayne

January 10, 2009 at 11:52am

I am reminded of a saying from the 60's;The Syrians & Jordanians would fight the Israels to the last drop of Egyptian blood. The up-date would be; Hamas will fight the Israels to the last drop of Palestinian human-shield blood (that would be women & children). Is this the way Muslims fight? I think not. Speak out Islam!

- Robert S

January 10, 2009 at 12:28pm

The only and lasting liberation is from the occupation that began in 1947. Let the people of Palestine arabs, jews and christians choose their government, not a zionist one, a united one, that is not based on religion but on providing service to citizens. Chame on Israel fro killing innocent civilians: children, womens and elders. Gaza is a concentration camp created by the Israel occupation.

- Citizen of the World

January 10, 2009 at 2:55pm

Why, I wonder, do some commenters read an article defending Israel and dismiss it as "Israeli propaganda?" Is the writer opposed to Israeli policies always just writing dismissible Palestinian propaganda? If not, why not? And what kind of argument is it? And besides, how is BHL writing Israeli propaganda if he is a Frenchman? Because he's Jewish? As for the meat of the argument: Israelis, and Jewish Palestinians before them, have consistently accepted peaceful coexistence with the Arab Palestinians. The Jewish Agency for Palestine accepted a very small state offered by the Peel Commission in 1937; the Arabs decided that there would be no Jewish state "even if it were the size of a postage stamp." Had Arabs accepted this tiny Jewish state then, the Jews would not have reacted to the prospect of having Hashemi (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, racist, anti-Semite, friend to Hitler and one of the organizers of the Bosnian SS) rule them by defensively declaring a unilateral independence. All of this suffering would have been unnecessary. As for colonialism and "occupation," a great many parcels of land have been "occupied" by someone at some time. Arabs and their converts to Islam, for example, colonized Palestine themselves, as did the Jews before them, as did many other migrating people. The hand of history is read in patterns of migration. When Jews and only Jews are to be considered exempt from all the laws of man, nature and history and subject to contempt for simply seeking an existence... this is nothing but barbaric anti-Semitism. And why is the Jew always singled out (and make no mistake - Israel is hated for being Jewish, not the other way around)? Because even 2 millennia after the coming of Christ the world still needed law. That's what stuck in the craw of Toynbee, what sticks in the craw of every utopianist: that man needs to either rule himself, be ruled, or be destroyed. Hamas will not rule their passions and they refuse to be ruled by anyone else. What options do you think they ought to have that not one of us ever has in life? To destroy the other?

- Abu Nudnik

January 10, 2009 at 2:57pm

I'm a lefty in the US, a real liberal on health care, personal privacy, wealth redistribution and very pro-secular. But as a social and economic liberal, I'm often stunned at how brain dead my fellow liberals are whenever the nasty issue of having to use force comes up. I amy be a liberal, but I'm not Mahatma Ghandi. I don't believe it is the call of liberalist to simply except every bully as a "misunderstood person of goodwill who just needs more of our love." Having been born with a facial deformity, which most of my better-looking liberal friends were not, I knew from the time I got old enough to walk among the other kids, who the bullies were. Sadly, the school administrators were liberals of the type who felt, whenever I was attacked, that "all of us bear some responsibility" and so on. So I'm walking down the street and some mean guy shove me to the ground and begins torturing me and now the answer is "a search for understanding?" My fellow liberals are too sheltered to actually believe in really real bullies. I'm not. I know they exist. While the founding of the state of Israel was problematic, perhaps unfair, and while many brutalities went down and lots of innocent people were displaced, we have to be honest and admit that most of the people hurt back then are now deceased, and many millions of Israelis were born in Israel, and, as such, however wrongly their state was formed, now have a right to believe it is their home. Most of the people in Hamas were not there when the greatest of the injustices and brutalities took place. The new Hamas members look familiar to me. They look like people who get off of having a violent life, (since the other jobs available to them, if any were available, were boring). We have to admit running around beating other kids up is more adrenalin-filled than doing dull homework. Getting to run around with rockets and machine guns makes one feel more important than driving a taxi. Hard, hard truths, ones my fellow liberals can never, ever face. So, at some point, Israel, initially the bully, became civilized. The countries of the Middle East, however, never liked civilization because honor killings, brutality against women and all kind of privileges and arbitrarinesses are forbidden in real culture. So, seeing how dull uptight western guys in business suits are, (and they are so shockingly dull), and seeing the drudgery of, for instance, having to have a spread sheet ready by tomorrow morning, they opted for more masculine, more virile lives of brutality. I confess, for a short time, as a child, I tried my hand at a little petty vandalism. I gave it up because I saw it was senseless cruelty, but I know for a fact it was more enthralling than biology homework. Biology homework is the kind of "dull" thing that marks the bothersome hum-drum of western civilization. Stalking around like a macho guy with a machine gun and beating one's wife when the mood suits you just seems more invigoration to a lot of people than attending motivational meetings at one's craven clerical job. I really feel the pain of the Middle East. This civilization trip is just dull, dull, dull. Plus, you know, the more you work with computers and study math, the harder it gets to believe in certain doctrines of certain religions, and so the mullahs and ayatollahs are rightly rather afraid that, in the end, piety and satellite dishes may not really be so compatible, that somehow 150 channels of cable television might really undermine their current hegemony. Meanwhile, over in Israel, people are hard at work doing really boring stuff, lots and lots and lots of homework and math and literature and just super uninvigorating stuff that just doesn't have that many outer edge to it that so many desperately need. Over in Israel folks are bogged down in accounting, business meetings, concert rehearsals, practicing their scales over and over and over again while their teacher browbeats them. "Yuck," the terrorists feel deep down. Naw, they'd rather be the medieval anti-crusade or horseback with weapon in hand and slave-like women in tow to serve them. That just has a better ring to it. The bullies are really Hamas. They've latched on to this age-old grievance, which has merit. But the merit of the grievance is the last thing in anyone's heart. The truth is that the modern world is harsh. You get confronted with the status of your health, your sex life, your material success. It's enough to bring a macho guy down. "What?" he thinks, "I'm going to give up my machine guy and my divine ultimatums to the infidels in order to get a Masters in Child Development? Forget that!" The psychological truths are the reality here, not the political ones. Rather the political excuses, while based in very real injustices, are not the driving force. At last, while Israel started out as a rogue invader, it ended up civilized, and it's constantly showing up it's neighbors in every way that's modern, and the combination of jealousy and boredom with the agenda of the modern world drives them to their current stance. Hey, I'm in the modern world and I don't like it. I can almost sympathize with anyone who becomes a political madman to avoid it, but understand, in avoiding the modern world completely, you do finally become a madman. And that's what Hamas is, a collection of madmen with a brilliant, undefeatable political excuse.

- Mel C. Thompson

January 10, 2009 at 3:10pm

Of course Mr. Pinsker and Mr. Levy, Israel that is bombing schools and ambulances is the victim, and the dead children are the agressors. Such comments can only come from ignorants who choose to be blind to the truth or so called intellectuals that receive paychecks to act as spokespeople.

- Omar

January 10, 2009 at 3:12pm

I am curious about the West Bank and the Palestinian reaction to what is happening in Gaza. It seems very quiet - one would think it would be highly agitated. Maybe you all know what is happening, but I have read some reports that it is "relatively peaceful" and outside investment has been coming in and there is better level of economic activity and they don't want to go backwards. A sign of some hope for these people?

- Lee V. Merrick

January 10, 2009 at 3:25pm

Jew hatred is at the heart of Islam--a death cult masquerading as a religion. It's an absurd utopian fantasy to imagine the fanatics of Hamas or Fatah will accept the Jewish state--ever. Therefore, all talk of giving them another state from which to launch jihad--slow variety under Fatah, fast under Hamas-is like quietly getting on to the trains to Auschwitz. The Jew haters are like the Nazis, in Churchill's words: either at your throat or at your feet.

- Stephen

January 10, 2009 at 3:44pm

OK, lets get this straight. The palestinians are in the WRONG because the target civilians, and have killed FOUR Israeli civilians since this war started. The Israelis are the GOOD guys, since they do NOT target civilians but have managed to kill HUNDREDS and hundreds of citizens in gazas. Now you tell me, how INSANE is your logic ? because israel does not INTEND to kill civilians, but end up killings HUNDREDS upon HUNDREDS MORE of them than do the palestinians, then they are the good guys? by the way, i am Jewish, i am a HUGE supporter of Israel, and i defent their right to defend themselves, but i do NOT defend their actions unconditionally as you do, and you use perverse logic to "rationalize" their war crimes.

- Dave

January 10, 2009 at 3:48pm

The real question, is whats to do done with 5/6 million racists.

- ehross

January 10, 2009 at 4:08pm

I have never understood what it means, as Bernard Henry Levy puts it, that Israel has "invited" Palestinians to leave the areas it intends to bomb. Where, as a previous writer has said, are they to go? Do you know how impossible, it is to apply for a visa to go to France? Do you know how difficult it is to obtain asylum status if you're lucky enough to be in France? Let's not heap insult on people who are suffering enough from injury.

- hope

January 10, 2009 at 5:14pm

War is the way that you resolve disputes that cannot be negotiated. Hamas adopted, and the voters of Gaza endorsed, a charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel. Until they change that provision--in an authentic and public way--there is nothing to negotiate. Israel should do to Gaza what America did to Dresden and Tokyo (and what Hamas would like to do to Israel with its rockets) until the people of Gaza accept Israel's right to exist. Only then can there be peace. Hamas leaders have said that "You love life, we love death". Israel should give them what they love.

- SMIA1948

January 10, 2009 at 5:44pm

Dear Mr Hotchkiss, Hamas has sworn itself to the destruction of all Jews . Tell me, what would be the starting point of diplomatic compromise within that premise? Hamas has not only declared it is at war with Isreal, but has openly, and proudly sworn to exterminate all Jews. By your logic, they have forfeited any expectation to live free of violence. Any country that lobs missiles into another country, cannot dare to complain about the response, however disproportionate it may seem. If one pokes a bear repeatedly, there will eventually be severe consequences. Perhaps if the people of Gaza would spend more energy on actually building their communities, and altogether quit "poking the bear", there would be a sustainable peace. Instead, they willingly elected a "government" who has sworn to "poke the bear". Poking the bear serves no purpose, other than to knowingly, and intentionally provoke a response. Now ( again) we see the response. Bears do what bears do. This is not a surprise. If it were up to me, I would quit poking the bear. But is Allah willing? Let me know when he changes his mind.

- Steve Gee

January 10, 2009 at 6:22pm

Responses to responses: 1) Israel should only be treated as a hostile occupying force if you think it should be expunged from the map. 2) Saying historically nations have done worse doesn't help what we think a war should be. More to the point, you can't engage in total warfare if you are dragging out a war rather than bringing it to a swifter end. Also, maybe the Palenstinians should put a little more effort into making the land fertile if they have problems with food instead of building bombs out of jealousy. 3) Hamas militants call themselves police so that they count as civilians when they die. Of course it is important to have a legitimate security force, which is why terrorists groups that have no organization are problematic leaders of governments. I think it is reasonable to expect that military compounds remain separate from civilian ones - even in a dense area. It has much more to do with the correct allocation of space than the space provided 4) You're right- it would be better for Israel to invade Gaza than to bomb it (actually that's what it's doing now). But the anti-Israeli sources find that easier to spin into the negative. 5) Where should they evacuate to? That is an excellent question: Why hasn't the Hamas government secured the defense of it's people in the form of bomb shelters before they decided to lob random rockets into Israeli cities - who have bomb shelters. 6) Sure, you could say Hamas only acts in the form of terrorism because it doesn't believe it will get land of it's own any other way. Except for as anti-Israeli as the world climate is right now, there would be no way for Israel to keep its land under international pressure. Israel has successfully traded land for peace (for example Egypt), but when it did so with Hamas it got more, not less, violence. One can say that Israel is trying it's darnedest to work out a lasting peaceful solution, one cannot say the same for Hamas.

- Jeff

January 10, 2009 at 7:23pm

When the Palestinians want peace, voilà, there will be peace. It is no simpler than that.

- Ken McCracken

January 10, 2009 at 7:37pm

Those that condescend on Israel refuse to understand that that there is no alternative to the way Israel must deal with Hamas given its core belief that Israel must be eradicated? Should Israel make believe that Hamas will change? And what if it doesn't? What if Hamas gets stronger and stronger and the missles more and more powerful and accurate? At what point do we have a military conflict that sees hundreds of thousands being killed? This is what happens when two peoples square off against each other and the conflict definition is one where only one people survives. Now Israel has a powerful argument on its side that it merits continuing to exist. This existential argument is very simple: It already exists and exists on the land that is Israel. Now maybe the Palestinian argument is just as righteous, maybe it isn't. But that is beside the point. From Israel's perspective it has the right to exist and if it does, it must regard Hamas as a potential mortal threat and in so doing pursue a policy that does not allow Hamas to gain the power to destroy it. Your point of view may be humanistic in the short run but in the long run it will result in hundreds of thousands dying. There is no way around this as long as Hamas is committed to destroying Israel and is in power. Your view point is humanistic in the short run and anti-humanistic in the long run. it is you who want to create the conditions that will foresee many children sitting on the streets next to their parents corpses. You may not want to see this occur but your policies will assure that this will inevitably occur. Of course, there is a solution: Defeat Hamas.

- Jay Kaplan

January 10, 2009 at 7:51pm

Those that condescend on Israel refuse to understand that that there is no alternative to the way Israel must deal with Hamas given its core belief that Israel must be eradicated. Should Israel make believe that Hamas will change? And what if it doesn't? What if Hamas gets stronger and stronger and the missles more and more powerful and accurate? At what point do we have a military conflict that sees hundreds of thousands being killed? This is what happens when two peoples square off against each other and the conflict definition is one where only one people survives. Now Israel has a powerful argument on its side that it merits continuing to exist. This existential argument is very simple: It already exists and exists on the land that is Israel. Now maybe the Palestinian argument is just as righteous, maybe it isn't. But that is beside the point. From Israel's perspective it has the right to exist and if it does, it must regard Hamas as a potential mortal threat and in so doing pursue a policy that does not allow Hamas to gain the power to destroy it. Your point of view may be humanistic in the short run but in the long run it will result in hundreds of thousands dying. There is no way around this as long as Hamas is committed to destroying Israel and is in power. Your view point is humanistic in the short run and anti-humanistic in the long run. it is you who want to create the conditions that will foresee many children sitting on the streets next to their parents corpses. You may not want to see this occur but your policies will assure that this will inevitably occur. Of course, there is a solution: Defeat Hamas.

- Jay Kaplan

January 10, 2009 at 7:51pm

Let's take this idiotic pro Hamas propaganda comments by Jack, by piece by piece: 1) Problem with recognizing Hamas’ legitimacy is that it took over Gaza illegally and has imposed sharia law been killing its rivals including trade Unionists. In any other context this would be obvious to Jack except when Jews are the enemy. 2) Nightmarish conditions created by Hamas even before Israel counterattacked in order to stop rockets being fired at its cities and towns. 3) “And in the smallest, most densely populated area in the world where would you have them put these things? Across the border in Israel? “ No Jack, Tel Aviv is more densely populated than Gaza. Using hospitals, mosques, schools to store rockets and munitions is the same as taking civilians hostage. 4) “And if the cowardly IDF would actually try to go after the Hamas fighters like men…” This is pathetic, Jack. Is it the best you can do. The IDF has been going after them house by house. I’d like to see you take on any IDF soldier mano a mano, BIGOT! 5) “First, this was just another terror tactic used by Israel.” So according to Jack defending oneself from missile attacks is a “terror tactic” but launching missiles is something only brave Hamas “fighters” do. 6) “How dare you, from the safety of your distance repeat this Israeli lie when the people actually there, the independent UN observers have said that there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis?” Easy, Jack, the “humanitarian UN” observers have been known to lie before about the conditions in Gaza. Many of this “humanitarians” are Jew haters just like you. Finally, Jack Hamas had an option” stop launching missiles and there would have been no war. Israel’s only option was to defend itself or to cease existing. Now, we know that the latter option is what appeals to you. However, Jack, the days when Jews will roll over and let themselves be slaughtered are long gone.

- shriber

January 10, 2009 at 8:11pm

The flood gates opened up. After Walzer now Henri Levy is beginning to make sense. The most serious fact is that the Palestinian leaders have failed their people. Let us rescue them from their captivity. The Iranian Khomeneinists moved in, and helped Hamas to take over Gaza against the better interest of Gaza. I am crying with the good Palestinians at the death of every baby. Sad fact, an ordinary Palestinian is not allowed under Hamas rule to empathize with the victims of the Hamas suicide terror. Banal Barbarism, nothing more. Lock the leaders of Hamas into a jail cell, and liberate the Palestinians from the Meshals, the Haniyehs. Wake up the TNR writers and their readers to think like Bernard-Henri Levy.

- Wake-UP-TNR

January 10, 2009 at 8:18pm

@Robert Hotchkiss, 1.Israel stopped occupying Gaza in 2005. (curious how you forgot to mention this) Many people hopeful for diplomacy said, "Now we get to see how the Pals will run their own affairs." Well, have we seen? Israel got 7000 rockets on its head. If Texas got 7,000 rockets on its head from Mexico, the US would be occupying a hostile population on its borders in a heartbeat. 2. It is true, many more German civilians than American civilians died in WWII. So are you arguing that the Nazis were the good guys, and Americans the bad guys who should have lost? If not, what are you arguing? 3.Hamas police grads are Hamas. Touching, your faith the separtion of police from terrorists in a terrorist government. 4.Hamas doesn't need to "react" to any "provocation". Their charter commits them annihilate the Jews. All of them, everywhere. Allah told them to do it. What part of this can't you understand? 5.Of course there was a place to evacuate to - across the street. Israel is using precision strikes. If it weren't, instead of 800 dead with most of the dead being men you would have 20,000 dead with the same proportion of women and children as in the general population. In fact, nothing would be simpler than pointing artillery at the cities of Gaza and leveling them. Just like the Russians did to Grozny. 6.Of course a blockade is an act of war. And shooting missiles, what is that? Hamas put itself into a state of war when it reneged on the previously signed PA agreements, bombed the crossings, and shot rockets and mortars into Israel. Hamas BOASTS of being in a state of war with Israel, except when wailing about being victims to the gullible. 7. Even Bibi Netanyahu and Arik Sharon never revoked recognition of the PA, even when the PA was fighting a terror war against Israel, so your statement is false. No Israeli PM has ever declared that every Arab in Palestine must be killed to "liberate" the land. But this is Hamas' stated intent.

- nadine

January 10, 2009 at 9:23pm

The war in Gaza isn't just between Israel and Hamas. It's also among the Palestinians. Hamas has murdered many Fatah supporters in Gaza. There are plausible rumors that the effectiveness of Israeli bombing of Hamas targets in Gaza is partly due to intelligence provided to the Israelis by Fatah supporters in Gaza.

- bulbman1066

January 11, 2009 at 12:09am

The idea that all Israel has to do is open the blockade of Gaza and in return it would have peace, is a ridiculous farce. A blockade is necessary to prevent more armaments being transferred to the Hamas. Hamas runs a terrorist state whose only goal is eliminate Israel. Hamas may have won an election, but then it overthrew the Palestinian Authority, throwing some of their Palestinian competitors from Fatah off of rooftops. Democracy didn't last long. Just prior to the Israeli assault Hamas shot more than 70 Fatah loyalists in their legs to avoid a possible uprising. The best solution is weaken and defeat Hamas, perhaps with secularists assuming control of Gaza for the purpose of an independent Palestinian state at peace with its neighbors.

- Steve

January 11, 2009 at 12:53am

Yes, Hamas is a problem. Yes, they use civilians as human shields. But it's not clear to me how this war helps Israel one bit. They will not be able to eliminate Hamas. They will only strengthen them in the eyes of the people and emasculate Fatah as collaborationists. You can't bomb your way out of this miserable never-ending conflict. Not when you have to live next to these people. Unless you plan on killing them all. This senseless war will just create more martyrs, more dead children, more hatred, more revenge, and more suicide bombers. Good luck with that in the years to come.

- Kartik in Brooklyn

January 11, 2009 at 1:40am

The fact of the matter is, in the years leading up to the 2006 blockade, relations were improving rapidly, borders were being opened and the voices of radical Hamas was decreasing. Once Israel initiated the blockade, living conditions quickly deteriorated in Gaza. This in turn increased support for the Hamas; and understandably so. The only way to resolve this conflict is to promote peace and prosperity; this nullifies the prospects of radical organizations. Not an easy road, but the only one.

- Lars

January 11, 2009 at 1:43am

1. Israel has shown restraint. Absolutely not because Israel has inflicted a disproportionate number of casualties on Palestinian civilians. 2. The missiles have cause minimal casualties. True but your hyperbole about Israeli's lives relative to the lives of thousands of Palestinians that are really being killed or terrified does not match the the inconvenience of rockets that don't kill anyone. 3. Israeli shells do kill hundreds of innocent civilians. In your eyes What is the minimum for a massacre, 100, 1,000, 10,000? 10 civilians is a massacre in my opinion and Israel has committed 30 fold such massacres and counting. 4. Israeli as targeted schools and other civilian targets not military targets this is just inaccurate. 5. Close DOES count when it comes to bombing targets near civilian areas because the results are civilian deaths. 6. Humanitarian effort has been stalled because aid drivers have been killed. You do not have any logical basis for your argument whatsoever. Moreover your title is misleading. Israel controls what goes in and out of Gaza more than Hamas and Israel is the one treating Gaza like a concentration camp.

- Kevin

January 11, 2009 at 4:31am

Before commenting on this mess, everyone should be required to read the Hamas Charter WHILE watching Palestinian children being blown to bits. Finding the moral high ground in Gaza is an exercise in futility. "They started it!!!" The world (U.N.) really needs to step in and stop hostilities for a generation or more. MAYBE then, some kind of negotiated agreement could be reached.

- Istanbruce

January 11, 2009 at 5:20am

Before commenting on this mess, everyone should be required to read the Hamas Charter WHILE watching Palestinian children being blown to bits. Finding the moral high ground in Gaza is an exercise in futility. "They started it!!!" The world (U.N.) really needs to step in and stop hostilities for a generation or more. MAYBE then, some kind of negotiated agreement could be reached.

- Istanbruce

January 11, 2009 at 5:34am

The lengthy rants criticising Levy's argument perfectly illustrate the hysterical, ill-informed and malign forces lined up against Israel. Lenin would have called them 'useful idiots'. They cynically wrap their rhetoric in the flag of humanitarianism yet the sum total of their arguments is that the Jewish State should be more Christian than the Vatican: it should not only turn the other cheek, it should beat its swords into ploughshares even though wolves are still tucking into lamb dinners. As Levy almost says, the Palestinian Arabs' greatest enemy is themselves - not just their extremist leaders but they themselves. For it is they who - rightly exasperated by a corrupt and violent Fatah administration - wanted change but chose to vote into power an avowedly antisemitic, genocidal, death cult. The Nazis, too, took advantage of democratic structures to gain power. Had the world been stringent in isolating Hitler's nascent regime and choking it into submission hundreds of millions of lives would have been saved. Like the Nazis, Hamas is committed to murdering Jews wherever they are. Its own constitution commits its members to the eradication of Israel, the killing of Jews, the re-instatement of an Islamic Caliphate across the Middle East and into Europe and, absurdly, respect for human rights. Frighteningly, many journalists focus on this last element in the Hamas charter and lose sight of the other stated goals. And they never question the responsibility of Arabs who voted for the proponents of such a bloody, expansionist vision. That is not to say that Arab civilians in Gaza 'deserve' what they get. But it does indicate that those civilians should, when the fighting stops, review their anguish and consider how much of what they sowed they have ended up reaping - and resolve to choose moderate, peaceful and productive paths in the future. They would find Israel and its citizens to be very willing partners in creating a new reality of calm co-existence. 'Jack', in his comment, states that Gaza is the most densely populated place on Earth. This is a cliche of contemporary anti-Israel propaganda and easily disproved by checking official sources. Should 'Jack' and his comrades care to check, they would find that the Gaza Strip has a population density of 4,270 people per square km according to the CIA, 4,167 people per sq km according to anti-Israel British politician George Galloway, and 3,822 people per sq km according to Daoud Kuttab. By comparison, according to official figures, Mumbai has a population density of 27,209 people per sq km; Tel Aviv 7,445 people per square kilometre (5,050 people per sq km when taking in all its suburbs); London 5,100 people per square kilometre; Moscow 4,900 people per square kilometre; Warsaw 4,300 per square kilometre. But, as anti-Israel activists the world over have discovered, the facts have never been allowed to get in the way of a good Israel-bashing story.

- Stefan

January 11, 2009 at 8:56am

Good job posting my previous comment.

- Lars

January 11, 2009 at 1:44pm

I despair of ever having peace when comments like those above spewing hatred for "Israel" when they really mean "Jew" continue unabated. "Don't confuse me with facts my mind is made up" is the thinking that drives people like Robert or Jack. I would like them to live one day in Sderot and then let them speak. The lie that Israel belongs to those who call themselves Palestinians sickens me. Before 1948 the Jews living in, then, Palestine were the ones called Palestinians. The name Palestine was given to Israel by the Romans in 70 CE when they destroyed the land of Israel by burning it and expelling the Jews who were living there. I could go on but of course I will be answered by those whose "mind has been made up" by hatred of the Jew.

- Brenda Reiss

January 11, 2009 at 3:04pm

Dear Mr. Levy, Thank you for exposing the Palestinian propaganda ceaselessly used to influence world opinion. Unfortunately, it will not help much because so many in the world secretly hope that Israel is defeated they simply won't be so blatant about their wishes. Antisemitism lives on, I expect it always will, and as always Israel will either have to forgo it's existence or much better will learn to use the media as the Palestinians have. Why is it that one of the most technologically advanced countries with so many brilliant people have not learned to master the media to make their case? If Mr. Levy's letter were read word for word in front of the UN Security Council it would be far more effective than what Israel has been doing to influence world opinion.

- Larry Moskowitz

January 11, 2009 at 6:12pm

Let's just imagine for a moment that an extremist leader comes to power in Mexico, and his party declares that Texas is really Mexican land, and that all Texans must leave or die. Then this group begins shelling Texan border towns and even manages to get a few long range missiles to hit suburban Austin and Houston. Central and South-American arms dealers begin selling really serious missiles to the Mexicans. Suicide bombers kill hundreds in a busy shopping mall in Houston. The Mexicans hide their arms in basements under schools, hospitals and historic churches. Mexican farm workers in Texas give interviews to the press about how their great grandfathers used to own Houston, but the land was stolen from them. The USA shells missile launching sites near the Texas-US border, killing 450 civilians in the process, and trys to blockade arms shipments by sea from reaching Mexico. The Mexican tourist industry dries up completely and thousands of young Mexicans take to the street denouncing the USA, burning it's flag and shouting DEATH TO TEXANS! Hundreds of shells rain down on Texas daily, and there is a run on bulldozers and concrete as Texans start building bunkers everywhere. Thousands of American residents of Mexico barely get out of Mexico with their lives: their land and bank accounts are seized. The USA now occupies border areas of Mexico, and starts to move whole sections of 'The Wall' onto Mexican land, sometimes cutting Mexicans off from their families, farmland and schools. Mexican youths pelt US soldiers with rocks and Molotov cocktails. A US soldier shoots one of these youths. The US has to veto a UN Security Council vote to declare the US guilty of war crimes. Palestinians around the world now demonstrate alongside Mexicans denouncing Israel and the USA. More Mexicans die, and then a shell lands in an Austin suburban garden full of children celebrating a birthday. The US begins a serious air assault on the border regions, while the European nations try to broker a ceasefire. The Mexicans refuse to accept a ceasefire, demanding that Texas be declared a sovereign state and claiming a right of return for all Mexican decendants who have any ancestor who ever lived on Texan soil. What's the proportional response now, Robert Hotchkiss, Jack & Pyoung?

- LDW

January 11, 2009 at 6:51pm

In my youth, I was rabidly anti-Zionist and anti-Israel. However, that was before I really began to investigate Arab/Muslim and Hamas propaganda. After Israel withdrew from Gaza, and Hamas gained political control, it was Hamas that controlled much of the electrical power grid in Gaza. Yet, they would deliberately cut off electrical power . . . even when they had supplies . . . and ALWAYS blame Israel for cutting off that power. I have videos to prove it. They deliberately destroyed perfectly good greenhouses and facilities that were left by the Israelis. Hamas is so filled with spite and blind hatred as to be totally devoid of what should be "common sense". The claim that Israel has cut off all humanitarian aid is MANIFESTLY false. Israel HAS obviously been trying to PREVENT the importation of arms, and anything that can be used as WEAPONS, into Gaza. Yet, it is also obvious that weapons, and other supplies, are being smuggled in from Egypt. Does anyone in their right mind seriously believe that Hamas is NOT deliberately targeting civilians and schools in Israel? By any OBJECTIVE statistical measure, if there is such a thing, the number of Palestinian deaths caused by Israel is a small fraction of those Arabs and Muslims -- not to mention CHRISTIANS -- killed by OTHER dominant Arabs and Muslims, in places like Sudan, Nigeria, Chad and Algeria, etc. Are THEIR lives any LESS important than the lives of Palestinians who foolishly elected an extremist Islamic sect to power? Why are Arabs and Muslims so fixated on the alleged crimes of Israel rather than the demonstrably greater crimes committed elsewhere by other Arabs and Muslims? Has Hamas, or Fatah for that matter, EVER tried to SERIOUSLY engage in non-violent civil-disobedience against Israel, in order to achieve their objectives for a Palestinian state? Have they ever even TRIED to win the world's sympathy by using non-violent resistance? If so, where is the evidence? Israel itself is not going to go away, no matter how many apologists for Islamic extremism try to demonize it.

- Myk

January 11, 2009 at 8:44pm

The fact is that Palestinians, in a collective sense, will believe anything they want to believe . . . regardless of any objective facts to the contrary. Their own mind-numbing impulsive emotionalism is really their worst enemy. Arabs in general, and Palestinians in particular, have never wasted an opportunity to waste an opportunity. And, the mindless, smarmy, knee-jerk condescension of the international "intellectual" Left will never waste an opportunity to demonize Israel, and put a halo over the heads of those who want to create another dogmatic Islamic tyranny on what is now Jewish-inhabited soil.

- Myk

January 11, 2009 at 8:56pm

Please post comments!

- alain

January 12, 2009 at 9:28am

Here is a more serious assessment of why the revival of antisemitism in the world today is a necessary consequence of a misplaced and pseudo Utopian thinking and which endorses Levi’s view of contemporary politics: From the article: “A Revivified Corpse: Left-Fascism in the Twenty-First Century” by Ernest Sternberg “The most remarkable feature of the cult of Empire-hatred is that it produces disdain for those whose suffering does not meet the cult's attribution of global evil. Exhibit number one is Darfur. Though an "an ocean of indifference and cowardice" condemned the Darfuris, the anti-liberals, anti-imperialists, and anti-globalists "earned a special distinction" (p. 141). It is this anti-imperial obsession that makes Rony Brauman, onetime president of Doctors Without Borders and author of the French postscript to Norman Finkelstein's Holocaust Industry, "blind and deaf to the tragedy of the Darfuris" (p. 137). Brauman, Robert Nesbitt, Noam Chomsky, and other intellectuals turn strangely silent on Darfur or attribute the whole hullabaloo to an American or Zionist plot. The NGO anti-racism meeting in Durban in 2001 mustered the crowds to chant "One Jew, one bullet," but cold-shouldered the Africans who wanted to spotlight Rwanda genocides; forgot the plight of the 260 million Dalit untouchables; ignored the cause of the Roma in Eastern Europe; and omitted from its final declaration the massacres in Chechnya and the Balkans….” You can find the whole article at the telospress web site. It’s a very long article and I suggest people read the whole thing before they start posting on it.

- jdyer

January 12, 2009 at 10:42am

Israel dropped leaflets and phoned civilians telling them precisely where they would be bombing. No one had to move to France - just over a few blocks with their most important possessions, and too bad about the furniture. Oh, and those dead children buried in rubble that made the news in France - they were killed when Hamas explosives accidently detonated while being transported. But Hamas parades every dead body before the cameras as a civilian killed by Israelis. I wouldn't be surprised if they poured chicken blood on heart attack victims removed from a hospital and posed in inconstruction rubble.

- LDW

January 12, 2009 at 12:45pm

Hamas, from its beginning in 1988, has had two central goals: destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. As Yogi Berra might say, "you could look it up." And you should look it up: the Covenant of Hamas is online, English translation, at the Yale Law School website. Examples: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Or, "It is the duty of the followers of other religions to stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region [the Holy Lands]." Or, paraphrasing Hadith Bukhari, the stones will say "O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me, kill him!" So Israel left Gaza in 2005 and forcibly resettled thousands of its citizens in the process. But the rockets and the terrorism continued. This was, of course, because Israel was still in existence and because there were still Jews alive. So everyone knows Hamas wants to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews (which means a few million Americans would have to get the axe, too) and what did the Gazans do? They voted in Hamas. Now you might argue that in 1933 not all German voters knew what they were getting in voting for Hitler but EVERYONE knows what you get with Hamas. And Everyone includes Gazans. So the people of Gaza have the government they want and what their government wants is to kill all the Jews and destroy Israel. Now what exactly is Israel supposed to do about this? Lay down and die? I am thinking that would be ok by Hamas and the majority of Gazans who voted for Hamas, but reality check: Israel should NOT lay down and die and no sane person should expect them to. The US did not lay down and die for Japan; the horror of our retribution is well known and hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of Japanese died because their government (which was NOT elected by the Japanese people) could not comprehend that the US would not bend to the will of Japan and could and would destroy Japan if that was required. The only odd thing about Israel's actions in Gaza is why the Israeli government waited as long as it did. There is no negotiating with Hamas because Hamas accepts only the death of all Jews and the destruction of Israel and will only negotiate about that. And since Gaza elected Hamas knowing all this, it seems that Gaza must want this, too. Inevitable conclusion: so as long as there is Hamas there will be rocket attacks and suicide bombs and anything else Hamas can do to destroy Israel and kill Jews. If Israel wants to live they have no choice but to try to destroy Hamas. When Japan’s militarists were gone the real Japanese finally could step forward. When Hamas is destroyed, perhaps, then others who do not have the core values of killing the Jews and destroying Israel can step forward. Until then be grateful Israel is fighting the fight. Because if you are an American, or if you are not a Hamas-certified Muslim, you can read the Covenant of Hamas and you will see what is coming.

- Bill Baldwin

January 12, 2009 at 8:06pm

The real answer lies in the bigger picture. What is Israel's ultimate goal and fight to survive? Divide to conquer. Israel's absolute dream is a inter palistinian civil war. help hamas when fatah is strong and vice versa. In Gaza, this will hurt Hamas and help Fatah. In the west bank the image of 'resistance' and the inability of Fatah to do anything will help Hamas. All these arguments ar pure BS. Each time a palistinian kid is killed it is because a palestinian terrorist was lying under his bed? this is totally ridiculous. I don't see any reason for Hamas to use civilians as human shields if Israel kills both anyway. The reality is Hamas is hiding.. Of course it is. Do you seriously think they would have any type of chance of even 'annoying' Israel it they didn't? I mean it's not an army..Mr BHL does that mean that unless you have a proper army with tanks and planes you have to accept everything that is imposed on you. The real problem is that the war of civilization is not between the west and the muslims..It is between the muslim integrists and the moderate muslims... The bet Israel makes is a very dangerous bet...It's been 50 years of mouting muslim extremism....and the situation is not improving... I know Isreal always blames the situation on the palestitians (remember it was all Arafat's fault, well now its Hamas and then etc...). The truth is Isreal needs a real forward looking leader who will understand it needs to fully support moderates, grant them true victories and maybe maybe there will be some hope. BHL you are in my opinion an enemy of Israel.

- chris

January 15, 2009 at 5:56am

Israel has a right to exist. She has a right to self defense. How anyone could defend Hamas, without a gun to their head, is baffling. I have seen several videos of Hamas bandits gunning down innocent Palestininians, they are a criminal band of cowards. Israel needs to keep up the pressure, not only for her sake, but someone should liberate the innocent Palestinians from the nightmare of Hamas dictatorial rule. These creeps are just plain evil

- Michael Blackburn, Sr

January 20, 2009 at 7:41pm

Maybe my English is not alwys correct, I hope you can understand what I say. I'm very surprised. So many reactions on the article, and so little facts. I'll tell on forehand that i'm defending international law, including the rights for Palestinians, i'm not a friend of Hamas, neither of Fatah, but I'm a pro-Palestinians-activist/campaigner. (I agree nr. 8, but he doesn't give reasons for his opinion). 1. After Israel left his colonies in Gaza, it continued the control. It was even more easy to kill people from the air, and to use constantly sound-bombs, because there were no Israeli around.... 2. Hamas was highly supported by USA and Israel, for many years, in order to weaken the PLO. Israel liked and likes to create the myth that there is no powerfull peace-partner. 3. Read: David Rose. The Gaza Bombshell. In: Vanity Fair, April 2008. The USA financed the arms and training for Fatah-militias, after Hamas won the democratic elections.( Hamas did prevent a coup d'etat by Fatah: Hamas was allready in power.) This program is still running. (I ask nr. 59 to read this. On the West-Bank Fatah and Shin Beit are acting similar like you say Hamas is doing in Gaza. ) 4. Even Israeli spokesman Regev admitted that during the first four months (juli, august, sept. and oct.)of the ceasefire Hamas did not fire rockets. And Israel violated the ceasefire from the beginning because loosening the blockade was part of the deal. Israel made the closure more and more strict. Hamas dit not react. So to speak: Israel needed to violate the ceasefire by killing more than ten Gazans, before Hamas gave the rockets that Isael needed as a "reason" to start the long-planned slaughtering. 5. The fact that Hamas respected the ceasefire is an indication that it is an enemy Israel can make deals with. People who fear Hamas should read the offer of Hamas for negotiations on the basis of '67. But does Israel want to make a - somewhat - just peace, meaning returning to the fronture of before '67? 6. This last question: "Does Israel want to make a (somewhat) just peace": that's the question mr. Levy does not want to mention. And that is very sad, because that is a clever way to protect Israeli civilians. In general it's not so logic to think being cruel, acting against international laws, stealing grounds, humiliating, starving and killing people ... is the best way to be safe. And mr. Levy lies about the blockade. Allready four years ago many Gazan children were suffering of malnutrition. Some trucks filmed on you tube don't bring food for one and a half million people. Preventing Gaza fisherman to do their work does not supplu proteins. 7. It is clear that I don't defend the violence/military option. Nevertheless I ask the question: Under international law the Palestinians have the legal right to defend themselves against occupation. We agree that rockets that might harm civilians are out of order. In what way, mr. Levy, do you see the legal right to defend their citizans can be obtained by the Palestinians? As a European I feel very ashamed that "we" (not me) accepted the fact that one and a half million people did not have enough food, medicins and fuel. Organised hunger AS A POLITICAL TOOL. An old joke: Question: "What do you think of the European civilisation"?. Answer: "A marvellous idea: civilisation in Europe!". You can also read: USA where Europe is mentioned.

- Fennie Stavast

February 8, 2009 at 8:48am