Shallowest View of Terror: Globe & Mail
Hamas, under the leadership of Khaled Meshaal, dispatched no shortage of suicide bombers, fired thousands of rockets, violently took over the Gaza Strip, stymied Palestinian unity, kidnapped Gilad Shalit, and is in bed with both Iran and Sinai jihadis.
But when it was reported in February that Meshaal considered stepping down as the Hamas politburo chief, the Globe & Mail‘s Patrick Martin painted him as a pragmatic individual whose moderation was needed more than ever.
Martin also depicted lulls in violence to Meshaal’s loftiness, not Israeli security measures. But as Islamic Jihad chief Ramadan Shalah conceded in a moment of candor, the lack of terror was due to the lack of Palestinian ability, not desire. He told Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV:
For example, in the West Bank, there is
the separation fence which is an obstacle to the resistance. And if it
were not there, the situation would be entirely different.
If that’s moderation, what would the Globe & Mail consider “radical?” As liberal American columnist Michael Tomasky pointed out after the speech:
But I ask you how any progressive person
can fully support a movement like Meshal’s. Granted, the world doesn’t
always offer us clean choices. We must prioritize, and the clear
priority here is opposing occupation and working to end it.
But secular liberal people must also have
the fortitude to demand that leaders of the occupied move away from
destructive positions like Meshal’s, which just make for a downward
spiral to nowhere.
Labels: Communication, Corruption, Heros and Villains, News Sources
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home