It is not yet a week since the escalation of rocket launches by Gazan rocket scientists was met by an escalation of IDF responses, but the world, initially somewhat critical of the Gazan rocket bombardment, has returned to its usual groove.
Of course, the moment that our air force switched from meaningless attacks on open spaces and empty buildings - actions that usually cause much hilarity to Hamas best and finest, the moment when IAF started hitting real targets, e.g. Hamas and Jihad functionaries, is also the moment when the numbers of killed and wounded innocent civilian bystanders started to mount.
And it is also the moment Hamas propaganda masters and their collaborators (willing and unwitting) around the world rev up their well oiled generator of crocodile tears.
Palestinian Ambassador to the UN Riyad Mansour accused Israel of the "rapid deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Gaza". He stressed that most of the civilians in Gaza are refugees.Of course, the party to blame in the above mentioned deterioration is Israel. No questions. And here is another guardian of innocent civilians, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, voicing his humanitarian concerns (ridiculous as it may sound, coming from a butcher of his magnitude):
Russian President Vladimir Putin told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the armed conflict between Israel and Hamas is leading to a large number of casualties among civilian population, and should be stopped as soon as possible, the Kremlin said.And the august international peacemaking body, as usual, threw itself into feverish activity only after IDF got offensive:
Gaza cannot afford another all-out war, says Ban Ki-moon
UN chief urges restraint from both Israel and Hamas and tells security council that region is 'on a knife-edge'Strangely (or not), UN is not willing to distinguish between the criminal and the victim, exactly as it is unwilling to do so during the period when "only" two or three rockets from Gaza fall on their neighbor. Strangely (or not), the concern for innocent civilians rises quite a few notches when IDF responds, rarely (if at all) so when the Gazan rockets are being launched.
But asking Mr Ban Ki-moon about the awfully strange "impartiality" of his position is not going to bear answers, that much must be clear to anyone who is familiar with the inner works of the "dictators' club" (TM Dick Stanley). For a better exhibition of the "balanced view" phenomenon I warmly recommend the usual bastion of progressive thought - the Guardian. Here comes one, but a very typical example of the so called impartiality:
'Israel under renewed Hamas attack', says the BBC. More balance is needed
And here is the (also too typical to be surprised) example of the balance:
There is no defence for Hamas firing rockets into civilian areas, and as sirens wail in Israel, the fear among ordinary Israelis should not be ignored or belittled. But the media coverage hardly reflects the reality: a military superpower armed with F-15 fighter jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters, Delilah missiles, IAI Heron-1 drones and Jericho II missiles (and nuclear bombs, for that matter), versus what David Cameron describes as a "prison camp" firing almost entirely ineffective missiles.Imagine the author of this tirade, one Owen Jones, seemingly a regular modern metrosexual, responding to the continuous barrage of "entirely ineffective missiles" aimed at London (or wherever this luminary of progressive thought chooses to reside). Imagine him baying for blood of the terrorists (yes, the progressive British press doesn't shun the term "terrorist" when terror is applied to British subjects). Of course, being a progressive, Owen Jones will find a way to blame his PM, David Cameron, for being the (imperialist post-colonial, capitalist...) cause of the terrorism, but this will come later...
You can read the rest of that ridiculous (but oh so standard) piece that decides on the guilt according to the number of dead on each side... but here comes another example of impartiality that makes one want to barf: a description of the foiled attempt by five Gazan "commandos" to infiltrate kibbutz Zikim, which has a misfortune to be close to Gaza strip.
Israel claims to have foiled amphibious Palestinian assault
Let's ignore the doubtful tone of the headline: the article, after all, is a relatively benign description of the event. What would have happened inside the kibbutz, hasn't it been for the watchfulness of the IDF girl at the shore surveillance post, doesn't bear thinking about. But back to the point: what image did the Guardian's editor in charge of the article choose to illustrate the story? Here it comes:
|Palestinians run following what police said was an Israeli air strike on a house in Gaza city.|
All in all, I have only one answer to the distasteful and hypocritical Olympic "impartiality" of the Western talking heads. But it is way too short, so before going there, imagine a criminal trial, where the judge sends both the criminal and the victim to jail, using as an argument "I don't care who started first"...
You see, your honor, we do care who started first. And now to our answer to the conundrum:
Do not try to kill us, because we shall do our considerable best to kill you first.
And meanwhile: this is how the last hour and a half in our lives look (click on the image):
P.S. And if you desire to see more people unencumbered by the Western hypocrisy I talk so much about, here comes the Hamas political head honcho, one under-assassinated Khaled Mashaal, with a not very much publicized quote:
Palestinian Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal said that “the abduction of the three teens in the West Bank is part of the Palestinian rage. That was a starting point."So there. At least there are people who know where they stand and where they start, even if they can't be so sure where they will end up.