It’s truly remarkable that on the very same day that US officials were being grilled for not eliminating Bin Laden before 9/11, Israel’s elimination of a Hamas leader was criticized from coast to coast. Just a few of the efforts to whitewash Yassin and castigate Israel:
? LA Times:
The Hamas cleric had a moral authority that motivated many to give their lives to kill others.
One shudders to think of the moral order proposed by the Times in this statement.
? Knight Ridder (printed in all their papers):
Yassin called for violent resistance to Israeli occupation, but he wasn’t simply a Palestinian Osama bin Laden, as Israeli leaders prefer to cast him. The elderly, partially blind quadriplegic was the beloved leader of a popular movement to create an Islamic Palestinian state.
This was in a “news” article, not an editorial! Here’s what Hamas’ idea of a ‘Palestinian state’ includes (from Hamas Covenant):
Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.
Israel’s sin is a political, not a moral one. It is foolish to repeat the same action time and again expecting a different result … Israel strays very close to the line separating peace lovers and those who kill when it refuses to take the moral high ground.
Note that Israel, not the one who ordered the cold-blooded murder of hundreds of civilians, is the ‘sinner.’ Note also that, according to this, ‘peace lovers’ simply don’t ‘kill’. So News-Journal editors are pacifists…and we’re waiting for their next editorial to call for the dismantling of the United States Armed Forces.
On the other hand, editorials in support of Israel’s removal of Yassin were published in the Times of London, Detroit News, UK’s Sun, New York Post, Providence Journal, Canada’s National Journal, The Australian, and Access Middle East.