Moral vacuousness

Matthew Hoy
By Matthew Hoy on January 6, 2009

Over the past week-plus Israel has been attacking Hamas in the Gaza strip. First using precision-guided munitions and, since this past weekend, with ground troops. After five years and more than 7,000 rockets launched with the sole aim of terrorizing Israeli civilians, Israel decided it had finally had enough. Instead of being lauded for their patience and restraint (imagine how long the U.S. would've waited if Mexico had started lobbing rockets from Tijuana into San Diego), Israel has been almost universally condemned.

It's not just happening overseas, Tom Trento got this footage of a protest and counter-protest that took place in Ft. Lauderdale last week.

For those of you who don't want to watch the entire 9+ minutes, I created an edited version of the video highlighting the relevant parts.

I'm not sure how scared I should be that there are people in the United States who think that urging Jews to get back in the ovens is proper political discourse. (It also makes me a little dizzy -- half the time they're denying the Holocaust ever occurred and now it seems they're acknowledging it occurred in order to further their hatred.)

While people like those above are scary, I don't think they're nearly as dangerous as people like Glenn Greenwald who actually have a platform other than a streetcorner from which to influence people. Greenwald was interviewed today on Hugh Hewitt's radio show and his blinkered view of the world around him is shocking.

Greenwald appears to operate from one basic misconception: He thinks most of the people in the world are kind, understanding, basically liberal (using the little 'l' definition) and want peace, security and freedom.

Unfortunately, this does not describe a majority of Palestinians -- or Arabs for that matter -- in the Middle East.

Hugh Hewitt: Again, I don’t want to get off course, though, because I’m really, genuinely trying to figure out if you were the king of the world, and you could tell people to do everything, if you could direct Israeli policy right now, Glenn, what would you have them actually do right now? Would you have them pull out of Gaza, and if the rockets kept falling, would you give them an airport, and if the rockets continue to fall, would you give them medicine and food, and if the rockets continued to fall, would you dismantle the West Bank settlements, and if the rockets continued to fall, what would you do then?

Glenn Greenwald: Well, I mean those are huge, huge numbers of ifs. I mean, those are, there are lots and lots of steps that the Israelis can take in order to diffuse that anger. And I mean at the end of the day, it may be the case that there’s nothing that can prevent every last rocket from falling. The question is how do you gain security, maximize security for the Israeli people? That’s the question you have to ask if you’re the Israeli government. And in my view, making those kinds of concessions, showing a true devotion to finding a resolution that works for Palestinians and for the Israelis, is infinitely more likely to secure the peace and security of the Israeli people than continuing to drop bombs on Palestinians. I think exactly the way, probably the best thing that was done for Israeli security was the peace agreement entered into with Egypt. So I would definitely go in the direction of trying to resolve my conflicts with the Palestinians, marginalize the extremists, rather than creating more extremists, which they’re doing every day by slaughtering innocent Palestinian civilians.

I encourage you to read the entire transcript, because Greenwald isn't alone on the Western left in holding the belief that appeasement would somehow defang Islamic terrorism. The scenario Hewitt describes would not, as Greenwald suggests, weaken Hamas' support, but increase it. After all, if Hamas shows it can deliver an end to the naval blockade (designed to keep out weapons), an airport, medicine and food by lobbing rockets, why would that suddenly reduce Hamas' credibility?

It's that sort of reflex to appeasement that got millions of Jews killed 60+ years ago. The same reflex would get more killed today.

0 comments on “Moral vacuousness”

  1. What if Mexico lobbed rockets into San Diego? What would the USA do?

    Well… if Mexico lobbed rockets into San Diego… and IF Mexico were to build walls winding through the streets of the United States designed to separate us from them... and IF Mexico cut off our supply lines to food and medical aid… and IF Mexico controlled our air space… and IF Mexico periodically assassinated our appointed representatives… and IF Mexico cut off our access to our own shores…

    … we would do nothing. Because IF Mexico COULD do all of that we would be to weak to do anything about it. In fact we would probably be content with the fact that only a few rockets were lobbed our way.

    But Mexico CAN’T do all of that.

    Soooo… in response to them lobbing rockets we would be forced to defend ourselves. The most certain way to do that would be to slaughter those who were doing the lobbing. Now if that means innocent women and children die so be it. Wars will be fought.

    But lest we never forget this – for every innocent woman and child slaughtered we would surely create ten times more of those who lob rockets.

    Peace is the only soil where change can grow…


    1. Nick, you confuse cause and effect. Israel didn't do all of that and then the Palestinians started lobbing rockets. The rocket-lobbing came first.

      It's a cliche, but it's true: If the Palestinians laid down all of their arms and acknowledged Israel's right to exist, peace would follow immediately and the dying would stop. If Israel laid down all of their arms, there wouldn't be a live Jew in the Middle East by Saturday.

  2. Hamas had a chance to show real leadership and slowly, but surely, help build a better life for the Palestinian people. Instead, it spent precious resources on munitions meant to perpetuate conflict with its neighbor. Instead of leadership it chose the tired path of victimhood. That strategy seems to win over the likes of Nick, but it doesn't do a darn thing to better the lives of Palestinians.


BREAKING: We just filed a motion asking the Ninth Circuit to lift the stay in our lawsuit challenging California's ban on so-called "assault weapons," which, if granted, would allow the judgment striking down the ban to go into effect. Read it here:

Stole the image from a reddit post, but it appears to be an accurate summary.

The losers in Sacramento are throwing a temper tantrum in response to the ruling in Bruen. Now that they have to issue carry permits, they want to make basically everywhere a "sensitive place".

Load More


January 2009



linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram