Thank you for being one of our most loyal readers. Please consider supporting community journalism by subscribing.
Re: Palestinian slaughter a human rights crisis,” by Joe Exum, Saturday:
In describing Israel’s policy relative to the recent Gaza demonstrations as, simply, “shoot to kill” is not unlike describing “Gone With the Wind” as a little movie with Olivia DeHaviland — you are omitting relevant, germane details that misleads the reader and misrepresents the facts.
First, the demonstrators were part of or led by Hamas, a group that has repeatedly lobbed rockets and tunneled into Israel to harm innocents there. Not a civil, civil rights group.
Second, Israel announced — I knew this so I have to assume the demonstrators knew this since they were closer to the event than Wilson — a sequence of consequences if the demonstrators rushed the fence and tried to cross the border. The sequence includes, in order, water cannons, then tear gas, then rubber bullets and then real bullets. Real bullets were the final option, not the “only” option.
Third, slingshots were not the only tools used against the defensive forces present.
Fourth, with the military power Israel wields, is there any doubt if Israel wasn’t exercising “restraint,” the death toll would be more like 60,000 and not 60?
The litmus test in determining the morality of each side rests in this hypothetical: If Hamas and their ilk laid down all their weapons and vowed never to fire another shot under any circumstance, there would be immediate, complete peace in the region But if Israel laid down all their weapons and vowed never to fire another shot under any circumstance, there would be complete slaughter.
Though simple, that question clearly illustrates the problem.
In other words, you left out Vivian Leigh, Clark Gable, the burning of Atlanta, Tara, Scarlett’s marriages and the Civil War.