A sub-head to gladden Hamas hearts
The lead headline in the May 18 New York Times was bad enough, declaring that "BIDEN / BACKS A CEASE-FIRE."
What must have been a source of glee to Hamas, however, was this sub-head: "He Avoids Placing Blame — Israel Vows to Keep Hitting Hamas Targets."
And so, the inhuman strategy perpetrated by Hamas, placing in harm's way the residents of Gaza, has paid great propaganda dividends to the perpetrators of the current round of "Mideast violence."
The president of the United States, grudgingly acknowledging Israel's right to defend against Hamas aggression, is incapable of finding the words to blame Hamas for its renewed aggression against the Jewish state — aggression spokesmen for Hamas say will not end until Israel capitulates to terms set by Hamas.
The Times story noted, some nine paragraphs down, that Biden had not demanded an "'immediate'" ceasefire. Given his refusal to place blame on the aggressive party, given denunciations of Israel from Biden's Democrat colleagues, can there be any doubt that Biden will follow the totalitarian-minded Democrats and pressure Israel to relinquish its right to effective self-defense?
Apologists for the radical left claim that they apply social justice concerns to "the plight of the Palestinians." But clearly, such concerns accept undemocratic rule, not only for the residents of Gaza, but for the Palestinians ruled by Mahmoud Abbas, whose term in office expired well over a decade ago. As for Gaza, is there freedom of speech in the Strip? Is political dissent permitted? Do the residents support aggressive war conducted by the ruling party that transforms the civilians into human shields? Indeed, are radical Democrats at all concerned by such transformation? Apparently not. We have yet to hear Hamas condemned by Democrats for its strategic use of its people in its aggression against Israel.
And President Joe Biden cannot find the words to blame Hamas for placing the lives of Gazans in peril to make propaganda points to those quite receptive to anti-Semitic propaganda, in Europe, and among U.S. leftists.
Current media accounts fail, however, to take note of the curious difficulty in the Democrat party to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Jewish state. Yes, President Truman recognized the establishment of Israel, May 14, 1948 — but he also accepted the arms embargo placed on Israel, as well as Arab belligerents, demanded by the anti-Israel Department of State, led by the anti-Israel Secretary George C. Marshall. The Arabs had access to British arms, and Israel had to get weaponry from Czechoslovakia, scrounge around elsewhere in Europe, and be satisfied with whatever it could "illegally" obtain from the U.S.
In March 1957, Israel withdrew from Sinai, with assurances from President Eisenhower that U.N. forces would make sure that the peninsula was demilitarized. In May 1967, Egypt's President Nasser ordered the U.N. force out of Sinai and resumed blocking the Suez Canal, and the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson claimed that it was unable to find the Eisenhower guarantee. The June 1967 round of conflict followed — but with Egypt (and the Arab world) committed to continued belligerency against Israel.
(The recitation of events set forth here is based on personal memory, as the life of this writer has been more than coterminous with the existence, thus far, of Israel; I was eight years old when five Arab armies invaded the Jewish state, May 15, 1948, and became politically aware of the Arab-Israel War October 1956, when Israel [then allied with Great Britain and France] sought to end infiltration from Egypt of irregular fedayeen, causing havoc to Israeli lives and property. In 1956, Egypt held Gaza, and Jordan held the West Bank — and there was no demand for a Palestinian state. State Department documents from the late 1948 period, and on into 1949, declared acceptance of Jordanian rule over the West Bank.)
The truth is, it was not until President Nixon, and the October 1973 round of fighting between Israel and Egypt and Syria, that America became Israel's most significant arms supplier. And Mr. Nixon most assuredly was not a Democrat. Freedom-lovers the world over must hope today's Republicans will stand steadfast with the Jewish state as did Richard Nixon, October 1973, and that such standing requires the GOP to be actively vigilant against the totalitarian-minded Democrats, whose anti-democratic bias extends to their support of Hamas in its campaign of aggression against democratic Israel.
Hamas will not be defeated, thoroughly, until people of good conscience place blame, unequivocally and solely, upon this ruthless, blood-lusting group for all deaths consequent to its murderous aggression against Israel. But the unthinkable thought is that the totalitarian-minded Democrats do not want to see Hamas defeated.
To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.