Hamasturbation
"Hamasturbation" refers to the subtle stroking that Gaza’s most beloved mass murderers receive from certain figures in the press and the diplomatic corps. First, there was this one, that made sure to let us know that even though Israel targeted a Hamas police graduation, not all police officers are true believers. Then there was this piece reminding us that even though the Gaza tunnels are used to smuggle arms, they are also used for civilian smuggling.
Now, we know, we know, it is perfectly legitimate to point these things out. What we have an issue with is that it never seems to be pointed out to the benefit of the Israelis. According to the logic of the above, attacks on Israeli soldiers might as well be marked by a reminder that Israeli soldiers are all conscripts, whose political views often differ from that of the government, and many of them are civilians serving in the reserves. It might also be pointed out that every Hamas missile attack is directed at civilians.
That would be absurd, and Jewdar doesn’t expect that. We are accustomed to Israel being treated like the least popular girl at the dance, and wouldn’t particularly mind it, but do we have to watch Hamas getting its rocks off at the same time?
comments
submit a comment01.05.09 at 4:01 pm
it sure is a good thing they had those elections. Who says democracy can’t thrive outside of Israel in the middle east?
01.05.09 at 6:01 pm
Oh yeah, because Israel’s policies aren’t dependant on collective punishment and the terror that goes with the civilian Palestinian death toll. Maybe these things aren’t mentioned on Israel’s behalf because they’re supposed to be a modern democratic country that should be held to a higher standard that a bunch of terrorist scumbags, elected or not. Anyway, I don’t buy the “least popular girl at the dance” bit, either:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_relations#United_States_military_and_economic_aid
01.05.09 at 6:01 pm
Jed, sometimes in war, bad things have to happen. A democracy has a right to defend herself. This is not a blank check, but a call for realism.
01.05.09 at 7:01 pm
I agree with you Heights, but the constant argument over media bias, along with the race to victimhood on both sides, leaves me tired and distrustful of the zealots that defend one faction or the other’s inexcusable (and so far unproductive) behavior. It’s not so much what Jewdar is saying, but the kind of argument that he’s making that annoys me. Reminds me of my grandfather who started getting all his news from the New York Post, (more like Jew York Post, amirite!!??) so he wouldn’t have to read the NY Times’ “biased” coverage of the “conflict.” Cutting off your brain to spite your face, often. I forgot what I was talking about here…it was our crazy old family members, right?
01.05.09 at 8:01 pm
The constant jostling for underdog status is annoying as fuck. No doubt. But we have to look past tone, and evaluate the specifics of the complaints.
So since we’re speaking of grandparents, let’s take a look at what the wise old Zeideh of the Jewish publishing world has to say on this matter:
http://www.forward.com/articles/14848/
Hamas apologists have managed over time to create an alternative reality in which rockets are a legitimate tool to resist the occupation and relieve the siege Israel imposed on Gaza after withdrawing in 2005. In this telling, the Gaza disengagement was not really a plan to let Gazans live their lives, but a ruse to make Gaza a vast prison and plunge its people into a humanitarian disaster. Supposedly, rockets were Hamas’s only tool to defend the Palestinians.
It’s a popular narrative, but it’s full of holes. The rocket fire was not a response to Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005; it began three years earlier. Nor did the blockade of Gaza begin when Israel withdrew. It began two years later. Israel intended to leave Gaza in the hands of the Palestinian Authority. Supplies of food, fuel, water and electrical power continued in full, though Israel insisted on keeping control of Gaza’s land, air and sea access to prevent arms smuggling. Only in June 2007, after Hamas forcibly seized control of Gaza, did Israel impose the present embargo — with the full backing of most of the international community.
As for the supposed humanitarian disaster created by the blockade, consider what the Gaza director of the United Nations Development Program, Khaled Abdel Shafi, told the Scripps News Service in an interview published December 15. “This is not a humanitarian crisis,” Abdel Shafi said. “It’s an economic crisis, a political crisis, but it’s not a humanitarian crisis. People aren’t starving.”
No part of the Hamas narrative is more outrageous, however, than the claim that its attacks on Israel are meant to resist the occupation and defend the Palestinians. Shelling Israel doesn’t defend the Palestinians. It puts their lives at risk by inviting Israeli reprisal
01.05.09 at 8:01 pm
By the way, apologies to Dreidel Hustler for using a genuine Yiddish word instead of one he made up.
01.06.09 at 12:01 am
The New York Post? Ouch Jed, now that hurts. For what it’s worth, I subscribe to and read the NYTimes (which is why I knew what they wrote), I supported the withdrawal from Gaza, I support the establishment of a Palestinian state in most of the West Bank, and as a leftie Orthodox Jew, I’ve probably spent more time defending the Palestinians than Edward Said did, and to a much more hostile crowd.
That said, I don’t really get the connection between your arguments and what’s going on today. Being a “modern democratic country” doesn’t mean that you have to be a patsy. Your arguments had some appeal before the Gaza withdrawal, but Israel’s moral obligations to the Palestinians there beyond just obeying international law ended once they stopped ruling over them. It is not “collective punishment” to attack the military forces of a hostile government, even if those forces take cover in civilian areas.
Israel left Gaza, and the people of Gaza chose Hamas to lead them. Israel accepted a cease-fire, and Hamas chose to terminate it, and to attack Israel. At that point, Israel is perfectly justified in defending itself, and the high civilian death toll is ultimately a result of Hamas’ policies, not Israel’s.
01.07.09 at 4:01 pm
Jed: “they’re supposed to be a modern democratic country that should be held to a higher standard…”
You mean the impossible standard that leftists and jihadists demand so that they acheive their common goal of destroying the Judeo-Christian “imperialist/crusader” West, and then THEY can fight it out to control the world…
It’s very simple – Hamas’s STATED goal is to destroy Israel. Anyone who excuses Hamas IS HELPING THEM.
Put some bacon on it already…