NYT Still Advocates Moral Equivalence

Palestinian terrorists kill five Israelis who were busy eating at a falafel stand and Israel takes out a bunch of terrorists in response. Yet, the New York Times sees the action and reaction as two sides of the same coin. They think that this latest violence puts the cease fire in doubt.

What cease fire? Israel has repeatedly been attacked by Palestinian terrorists month after month. Sure, some of them have not resulted in casualties, but why should that be the indication? The terrorists have been trying to kill Israelis at every opportunity. Terrorists have repeatedly fired missiles and rockets into Israeli territory hoping to kill Israelis. Only luck and the poor aim of the terrorists have resulted in limited Israeli casualties.

Israel responds to all the attacks with what must be done - killing the terrorists before they can strike again. That's why they've killed terrorists getting ready to deploy more missiles to strike at Israel or going after the terrorist leaders themselves.

Then, there's the issue of the security fence and how it has reduced the violence against Israel. The fences have worked, but some still complain that it is too restrictive on the Palestinians. Unless and until the Palestinians can be shown to have cracked down on the terrorists in their midst and that they are truly partners in peace (complete with the fulfillment of all the responsibilities set forth under Oslo, the Road Map and all the other 'agreements'), Israel must do what is necessary to protect its people from further attack.

We would not expect anything less from our own government, so why should the NYT force some silly standard of conduct on the Israelis.

But, this is what passes for reporting on Israel at the New York Times.

UPDATE:
Linked to the following blogs: MacStansbury, The Junction, The The Florida Masochist, The Blue State Conservatives, Publius Rendezvous, Point Five, Ipso Facto, and Real Teen. Also, Two Babes and a Brain, Common Sense Run Wild, Jo's Cafe Saturday Special, and the Indepundit.