Actually, quite a few people are claiming that Palestinians are blameless victims. People seem to have short memories about why the Israelis have subjected the Palestinians to such harsh living conditions. It was to prevent Palestinians from bringing bombs into Israel to blow up buses and restaurants. People seem to have forgotten the photos of bloody bodies from Israel. I suspect that if numerous people from, lets say Oklahoma, were setting off bombs at random locations throughout the U.S., then Oklahomans would be subject to stricter security reguirements. There is no question that Israel has overreacted to terrorist attacks. At the same time, there is a reason for their overreaction, and demanding justice from Israel without demanding equal justice from the Palestinians is unfair and unrealistic.

What have Jews been doing in history? They want political emancipation but they cannot achieve it. Why? Is it their religion that prevents it? Renouncing their religion would be especially difficult for Jews, since Judaism is a primitive stage in the development of Christianity. I agree that you have to draw on the stereotype of the Jew as a financially apt "huckster" and posit a special connection between Judaism as a religion and the economy of contemporary society. Practical Judaism and huckstering are the same. Christians have become Jews; and, ultimately, it is mankind (both Christians and Jews) that needs to emancipate themselves from practical Judaism. Israel and the Unites States have no problems living together but they definitely cannot live with Islam. Muslims believe both the Torah and the Gospels are based upon divine revelation but believe them to have been corrupted (both accidentally through errors in transmission and intentionally by certain Jews and Christians over the centuries). I can believe that. There is something wrong with most Christian and Jews today. Count me out of the religious triangle. In the religious world two is company and three is a crowd. But its all about the hucksters wherever you find them. God knows we’ve suffered through the last eight years of them GEORGE W.!!

You keep on throwing them out there. When one ceases to work, you lob another. I read Kamiya's article, and have read many of the letters posted here. Not one can be construed as seeing Hammas as just hunky-dory. How about engaging with what's actually being argued, rather than what's in your own head.

See what you did? You have now unleased Dr. Amy on this comment board for as long as it remains open. (I guess you haven't been over to Open Salon, huh?) She will keep at it and at it and at it. She's that annoying relative who has to be RIGHT about everything, and after everyone at the party has left the room to escape her, thinks that means she has won the argument.

Thanks for nothing.

Signed,

The rest of us

I've seen the issue of the "proportionality" of Israel's response raised in several recent articles. Can somebody tell me, how many Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets since the cease-fire was broken? I think this would be relevant to the debate over whether Israel is "retaliating" vs. "defending", and whether or not it is engaging in collective punishment.

Rule # 1: In the Middle East, it is always the Arabs who attack first, and it is always Israel that defends itself, in what is called "retaliation".

Rule # 2: The Arabs, whether Palestinians or Lebanese, are not allowed to kill Israelis. This is called "terrorism"

Rule # 3: Israel has the right to kill Arab civilians; this is called "self-defence", or these days "collateral damage".

Rule # 4: When Israel kills too many civilians, the Western world calls for restraint. This is called the "reaction of the international community".

Rule # 5: Palestinians and Lebanese do not have the right to capture Israeli military, not even a limited number, not even 1 or 2.

Rule # 6: The Israelis have the right to capture as many Palestinians as they want (Palestinians: around 10000 to date, 300 of which are children, Lebanese: 1000s to date, being held without trial). There is no limit; there is no need for proof of guilt or trial. All that is needed is the magic word: "terrorism"

Rule # 7: When you say "Hezbollah", always be sure to add "supported by Syria and Iran"

Rule # 8: When you say "Israel", never say "supported by the USA, the UK and other European countries", for people might believe this is not an equal conflict

Rule # 9: When it comes to Israel, don't mention the words "Occupied Territories", "UN resolutions", "Geneva Conventions".

Rule # 10: Israelis speak better English than Arabs. This is why we let them speak out as much as possible to explain rules 1 through 9. This is called "neutral journalism".

Rule # 11: If you don't agree with these rules or if you favour the Arab side over the Israeli side, you must be a very dangerous anti-Semite. You may even have to make a public apology if you express your honest opinion.

"Actually, quite a few people are claiming that Palestinians are blameless victims."

Who? Kamiya? I don't think so. What he does say is: "I hold no brief for Hamas. Its use of terror is morally repellent, and its charter is filled with anti-Semitism. "

"People seem to have short memories about why the Israelis have subjected the Palestinians to such harsh living conditions. It was to prevent Palestinians from bringing bombs into Israel to blow up buses and restaurants."

Was that before or after they were expelled from their land and put in refugee camps?

I believe the total of Israeli deaths do to Palestianian rocket attacks since the end of the cease fire has been put at 4 deaths. I don't know how many have been only injured.

Proportionality is a moot point. It's like saying that we should allow people to shoot into a crowd until they kill a certain number of people, then we can try to stop them. Hamas has been lobbing missiles at Israel. Israel has followed the dictates of a cease fire. Hamas didn't. Israel now must either fight Hamas or simply let them keep shooting missiles at Israel. Unfortuneatly, Hamas prefers to fight in a way that wins them PR victories - hiding behind innocents so that when an innocent is killed they can issue a press release condemning Israel for the death. That leads to a lot of bad press for Israel, and a lot of sympathy for Palestinians, which benefits Hamas. They don't really care how many innocents die - they are martyrs for the cause. Involuntary martyrs.