I have said before that liberal writers annoy me more on Israel than right-wing writers, for more than the one obvious reason (that they don't sound as liberal when they talk about Israel). They sound like Saudi Wahhabi liberals in their contradictions and inconsistencies. Look at this silly statement: "Palestinian radicals antagonized the West, and, when militant leaders turned to hijackings and rockets, they undermined the Palestinian cause around the world. They empowered Israeli settlers and hard-liners, while eviscerating Israeli doves." Holy shit. Palestinian political violence did all that? Let me get this straight: so before the Palestinians turned to violence in the late 1060s, the world was all sympathetic to their cause? And it is historically untrue: the sections of the world outside of US and Israel, did not become less pro-Palestinian after the hijackings, but even became more pro-Palestinian. That can't be disputed, regardless of one's assessment of those methods. In fact, it can be argued that even Western governments which had ignored the plight of the Palestinians for decades only paid attention to the Palestinian question after those methods. Secondly, how can one respond to the silly notion that Palestinians are to blame for the right-wing leaders of Israel? It does not make sense. But this makes full sense: Arabs can legitimately blame Israel AND US for the right-wing reactionary dictators that rule over them. Thirdly, there is a principle among liberal writers on Israel: notice that they only fault Israel for settlements but not for on-going killing of Palestinians, for assassination and bombing raids, or for racism. All that does not count as bad for them.
PS Oh, I forgot. Kristof also asks that Palestinians refrain from throwing rocks at Israeli terrorist soldiers. It is bad terrorism if they do, he said.
PS Oh, I forgot. Kristof also asks that Palestinians refrain from throwing rocks at Israeli terrorist soldiers. It is bad terrorism if they do, he said.
