Soccer Dad: A platform of lies

January 31, 2006

A platform of lies

There were a number of excellent responses to the Washington Post's ill considered decision to give prime editorial real estate to a "political" leader of Hamas. (via memeorandum)

Captain Ed / Captain's Quarters: WaPo Gives Op-Ed Space To Terrorists
Dr. Rusty Shackleford / The Jawa Report v3.0 Beta: WaPo Sinks to New Lows: Terrorist Editorial
Chad Evans / In the Bullpen: WaPo Prints Convicted Terrorist's Editorial
Jimmie / The Sundries Shack: Giving a Killer the Megaphone.
The American Thinker: WaPo op-ed for Hamas
Gateway Pundit: Hamas Calls Demands to Recognize Israel "Unfair Conditions"
Richard / Hyscience: Washington Post Goes Completely Off The Charts - Turns Total Dhimmi
Lawhawk / A Blog For All: So It Begins � We saw this happen with Yasir Arafat and the PLO.
lgf: confusion and paradox: WaPo Columnist: Hamas Leader Mousa Abu Marzook

Unfortunately the Washington Post has offered the prime real estate of its op-ed page to Mahmoud Abu Marzook for "What Hamas is Seeking". The blogs mentioned above all have well argued briefs against the Washington Post for allowing Marzook a place to make his case as well as some refutations of his arguments. But I'd like to quote one other:

THE ASCENDANCY of the the terrorist group Hamas to take control of Palestinian Authority poses a familiar problem for democracies: how to react when groups inimical to the values of a society come to power by democratic means? Sometimes such forces threaten democracy directly; sometimes they frighten onlookers for other reasons, such as Hamas's case repeated friendly calls for the destruction of Israel. Blocking the democratic process in such cases generally produces backlash and even less democracy; staying silent can spell complicity.

There's a lot to recommend this quoted editorial. And if its authors believe that "...staying silent can spell complicity" what do they believe giving a platform to such ideas means?

Actually, the mystery editorial is the view of the Washington Post. (It was titled "Renegade Austria" and was dated Feb 2, 2000) But the subject, before I edited it, was Joerg Haider and his ascendancy in Austria. The editorial encouraged Europe to take the necessary diplomatic steps to show its displeasure of the Austrian government including someone such as Haider. And by the way, as far as I've been able to tell the Post didn't give Haider an op-ed opportunity to pretty himself before its readers. Apparently those who wish to kill Jews are given an extra chance to defend themselves.

The Post has gone down this road before. In two circumstances that I recall, it has allowed Israel's enemies to distort current events and history to demonize Israel.

On January 16, 2002, the Post gave Marwan Barghouti, a leader of the Al Aqsa war against Israel a soap box to write "Want Security? End the Occupation" and claim

And while I, and the Fatah movement to which I belong, strongly oppose attacks and the targeting of civilians inside Israel, our future neighbor, I reserve the right to protect myself, to resist the Israeli occupation of my country and to fight for my freedom. If Palestinians are expected to negotiate under occupation, then Israel must be expected to negotiate as we resist that occupation.

In a few months, Barghouti was to be arrested and eventually tried and convicted of five counts of murder stemming from several terror attacks. The legal proceedings gave lie to his claim of opposition to targeting innoncence. The existence of the "Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades" proves his claim about Fatah equally false.

Yet the Post allowed him to present his views.

A few months later the Post gave op-ed space to Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then Saudi Ambassador to the United States to explain "Why Israel must stop the terror" (This link does not go to the Washington Post's website.)

I believe that the Islamic world, with its 1.2 billion people, will continue to fight terrorism, but priority should be given to a united stance in the face of Israel's terrorism against Palestinians. Israel's actions are changing the equation of, and seriously affecting, the international war on terrorism. This change has been imposed on us as Arabs and Muslims; we did not choose it.

We know now that the "Al Aqsa Intifada" (or more correctly Oslo War) started not by opposition leader Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount. It was orchestrated by Yasser Arafat. We know that the war was financed in part by Saudi Arabia. So it was chutzpah for Ambassador Bandar to blame Israel such undiplomatic (and false) terms. But it was OK with the Washington Post.

One last note, Abu Marzook pines for the days when Islam protected the Jews in its midst

We ask them to reflect on the peace that our peoples once enjoyed and the protection that Muslims gave the Jewish community worldwide.

His memory must be very selective because the record shows that Jews were barely tolerated in Arab lands. And given his organization's desire to start taxing Christians one can assume he's not being especially honest about the wonderful times ahead for Jews living near a new Hamas run state.

Technorati Tags: Hamas, Abu Marzook.