The 1948 displacement of Palestinians - sorry - the October Seventh attack on Israelis (phew - hope the censors didn’t catch that one!) has led to much outrage and confusion. And with outrage and confusion comes a whole slew of questions from across the societal spectrum. Critics young and old asking, “Why is the US supporting genocide?” Peace activists and human rights advocates with their modest request of, “Why won’t the US support a ceasefire?” And, of course, Israelis with a look of complete bafflement on their face as they wonder aloud: “Why is everyone in the world an anti-semite?”
Along with all these questions comes a staggering amount of vitriol, kindly sprinkled into our political discourse and leading to that familiar sense of bewilderment we all experience on a daily basis. (Modernity truly is a cruel enchantress!) But if We The People on our Home And Native Land wish to solve the intricacies of the grand geopolitical chessboard, we must ignore the barbs and the bullying, focusing instead on questions, inquiry, and conversation. Only through an endless parade of “civilised” debates can we here in developed countries pretend we are accomplishing anything. Indeed, it was Winston Churchhill who once remarked,“There is no such thing as a bad question; only lies, damn lies, and taxes.” And so, with a Winston Churchill quote successfully inserted into my essay (thus making it a work of bona fide scholarship), it is high-time we smother all these blazing passions with the suffocating foam of rigid, solid, objective analysis. (In other words, we’re going to do what true science does best: bore the absolute Hell out of everyone.) That is why I am here: to provide answers to all the questions just screaming for a resolution. The UN can’t seem to do it; maybe I’ll have better luck!
Q: Does Benjamin Netenyahu have a moral responsibility to protect the innocent civilians living in Gaza?
A: We are confronted immediately with a very thought-provoking question steeped in morality; a question that not only understands Great Leaders must possess a sense of ethics, but also recognizes the total helplessness of the Palestinians trapped in Gaza. A question as meaningful as this deserves a carefully formulated response - anything less would be a gross injustice to readers and a violation of my duties.
The answer to this delicate question is: No.
Remember, democratic citizens: the Palestinians getting killed in Gaza are human shields used by Hamas. This means that it is their fault for sticking around in the first place. If they want to stop dying, just stop being a human shield: problem solved! Have you not been reading all the expert analysis? Besides, the IDF (Israeli Demolition Frigate) has made it perfectly clear they are doing everything they can to save civilians. Strategies include establishing safe-zones that are not safe; indiscriminate shelling; and filming innocent men in their boxer-shorts for propaganda purposes.
As for the Zionist-in-Chief (“Herr Bibi”), I’d wager he doesn’t believe Palestinians exist in the first place. And he’s not alone! Many Israelis do not believe in Palestinians, either - which might explain why all these radical Zionists were elected to the Knesset in the first place.
Democracy sure is grand, wouldn’t you say?
Q: Will killing 20,000 people lead to more extremism, and therefore more conflict?
A: This question comes from some autodidactic 30-something still living in his parent’s basement - and it is, may I say, the best question I have ever been asked. Clearly, this young buck is an extremely perceptive individual; I’m certain he will accomplish incredible things after casting a vote for Pierre Poilievre and getting his hands on some affordable housing! No doubt the Conservative Party of Canada will give him that much-needed start in life he’s fallen so desperately behind on! Poor suck.
But I digress. Only a prominent Israeli could help me uncover the answer to this difficult question; I immediately contacted public intellectual and “historian” Yuval Noah Harrari at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem for his thoughts. His response? “War is obsolete. You’re more at risk of commiting suicide than dying in armed conflict.” And to think this frail reed is a New York Times bestseller. (Then again: if Michael Wolff can do it, anyone can.)
Q: Should displaced Palestinians be offered shelter within Israel? Perhaps a decent camp without fetid water and open sewage?
A: It may interest the reader to know there are two camps for Palestinians located in Israel already: they are - or were - called “the Gaza Strip” and “the West Bank,” respectively. As you are no doubt aware, both are in the process of being razed, making a third highly unlikely. In fact, I doubt Israel will even pitch a tent for a single IDP at this point.
Q: Should Israeli families open their homes to Gazan refugees, just to show how compassionate ordinary Israelis really are?
A: This would make an excellent propaganda piece, particularly for a public broadcaster just dying to dress it up as a documentary; PBS would have a field day with it. I have contacted some of the major news outlets and hope to begin shooting immediately. With luck, the film will lead to a boost in Western public approval - Yaweh knows Israel could use it.
The only problem I can see is finding any Israelis willing to do it.
Q: Instead of mercilessly bombing an entire city, wouldn’t it be better to screen refugees at the Israeli border and carefully filter out the potential Hamas suicide bombers living amongst the population?
A: An excellent idea: Israel should immediately start screening Palestinians at the Israeli borders, only allowing non-suicide bombers to enter. Personally, I am astonished that the Israelis aren’t putting those massive barbed-wire fences to use already. What is the point of all those gates in the West Bank if you aren’t going to utilise them! Chalk up another major intelligence failure to the only democracy in the Middle-East.
Q: Once Hamas has been cleared, along with any other potential threats, will the Palestinians be allowed to return home safely?
A: Ah, a paradox! How thrilling! I didn’t expect one of these to pop up! I thank the inquirer for this challenging brain teaser; I confess I was stumped for hours until it came to me in a sudden burst of comprehension, as all brilliant insights are wont to do. (Isn’t consciousness weird?)
The problem is straightforward: Palestinians are considered major threats to the Holy Land - so how can a major threat be allowed to return once the major threats are cleared? Strict logic dictates it simply won’t happen. This fallacy is being dealt with by the Israelis in a way our simian ancestors would be proud of.
Q: Does the Israeli government have a moral obligation to rebuild the Gaza Strip once the war is over?
A: Absolutely! Israel considers it morally imperative to build as many settlements as possible in the Gaza Strip once it has been successfully demolished. I have no doubt there are some great Kibbutzim just waiting to be constructed! They’ll probably be named after October Seventh to instil a sense of victory in the nation.
Wait - you weren’t talking about the Palestinians, were you?
Q: Shouldn’t Israelis be treating their fellow Palestinians with decency and respect?
A: We end as we began, with a thoughtful question centered on morality. It’s a good one - and to answer it, I shall quote the basic principles of Israel’s 37th government:
“The Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel - in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan and Judea and Samaria.”
My advice? Don’t hold your breath: You’ll asphyxiate.
***
And so concludes another day of inquiries: sorted, scrutinised, and solved! It has been an absolute pleasure serving You, The People, as we all struggle to comprehend this horrific day and age. I’m Ed Earnest, leaving you with a final word of advice: Don’t Read Newspapers, Read Me Instead!
Add new comment