Commentary
The condemnation of terrorism is widespread, except when the target is Israel. The criticism of Hamas is often hesitant and qualified. Why is this the case?
O’Neill delves into the moral failings of those who remained silent or attempted to justify the brutality carried out by Hamas. Here are three significant examples of how liberal values faltered in the face of a moral test.
He highlights academia’s support for terrorism against Israeli Jews, where university campuses became hotbeds for protests against Israel’s actions in Gaza. Jewish students were marginalized and prevented from voicing their opinions. Despite evidence linking these protests to external funding, no action was taken to address the situation.
O’Neill questions the underlying politics of these actions.
Related Stories
O’Neill provocatively asks if there has ever been a nation as vilified as Israel and points out the double standards in Western responses to human rights violations in other regions, particularly in Muslim-majority countries. While thousands perish in conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Sudan, and Myanmar, there is minimal protest. Yet when Israel defends itself against aggression, activists quickly mobilize.
He also criticizes the feminist movement for its silence on Hamas terrorists committing atrocities against Israeli girls, contrasting it with their vocal stance on other issues. It took UN Women 57 days to acknowledge Hamas’s violence against women.
But why the double standard?
O’Neill argues that the root cause lies in a culture of self-loathing towards colonial history, leading some to support Hamas’s ‘anti-colonialism’ out of a sense of guilt.
He emphasizes that the justification of violence by Hamas as a form of resistance against occupation, particularly when directed at Jews, is a return to barbarism. O’Neill asserts that Hamas is not a liberation movement but a war machine fueled by Jew-hatred.
He highlights the West’s abandonment of moral standards and human rights principles when it comes to Jewish victims.
O’Neill warns against complicity with such ideologies, emphasizing that turning a blind eye is detrimental to civilization.
He calls for a rejection of Hamas’s propaganda that blurs the line between terrorism and political rights, urging society to confront regressive trends.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Can you please rewrite this sentence for me?
Source link
