The PowerLine guys admit they don’t “go after Maureen Dowd anymore, because there isn’t any sport in it.” The Chronicle‘s editorial board is fast approaching that point, except that they are the opinion voice for the lone major newspaper in Houston. For example, there’s today’s editorial on Israel’s pullout from Gaza:
With the departure of the last Israeli troops, for the first time in more than a century residents of the oft-occupied Gaza Strip now have a chance to control their communities and destiny as a part of a future independent Palestinian state.
Wham! Right out of the box, the editorial idealists are wrong. Laurence Simon gives them a history lesson:
I’m going to assume that “more than a century” means that the residents of Gaza did not have a chance to “control their communities” since 1905.
There are at least four major problems with this opening paragraph.
The residents of Gaza in 1947, Arabic and Jewish alike, were offered a chance at an independent Palestinian state.
Along with the surrounding Arabic states, the Arabic residents rejected it and engaged in what can only be described as a war to destroy Israel and all Jewish residents within. I say this, because it’s what the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and the leaders of the Arab armies attacking were calling for.
They were offered it once again in 1994 with the Oslo Agreements. In response, Yasser Arafat started what many call The Oslo War.
They were offered it yet again in 2000 with President Bill Clinton’s final attempt at peacemaking between the two sides. Yasser Arafat rejected Ehud Barak’s overwhelmingly generous offer and organized the Second Intifada which has claimed thousands of lives of all faiths.
Laurence’s entire takedown is here, including his letter to the editor and reader rep.
The other day, Victor Davis Hanson wrote that the media is filled with journalists who are slick but poorly educated. This editorial helps to further that argument.
KEVIN WHITED ADDS: This is definitely worse than when the editorialists conjured up a nonexistent treaty in support of some argument they were making. Having spent some time on the Arab-Israeli conflict myself, I was more than a little surprised to see that error. Basic history shouldn’t be that hard, even for editorialists with no special expertise on a particular topic.
