Story was a biased one

Dear Editor,

The opinion column that ran in the April 24 Statesman entitled “The Parables of Palestine” was unfairly biased.

Whether the author was uneducated as to the conflict or thought we as readers were, he was mistaken. Whether intended or not, to say suicide bombers have a legitimate right equal to a legitimate police force is unmoral.

To conveniently leave out the fact the Middle Eastern arms race was not only not one-sided but skewed in favor of the Arab Nations to begin with is irresponsible. The U.S. policy in the region for the bulk of the conflict favored a balance of power so conflict would be discouraged.

It was the Palestinians and their supporters that through Soviet intervention sought to tip the scales and throw off that balance. To compare the IDF to the Gestapo is about as sick as can be.

To compare the Camp David Accords using the Temple Square analogy would be OK if it were similar. If the Israelis were occupying Saudi Arabia then the analogy would hold. Let us not forget the Israelis entered Palestine quite peacefully, and to use a more appropriate analogy, were persecuted and driven by those who resented their growing influence in the region much as the early Mormon Pioneers.

Everything since has to be related back and understood in the light of one people’s struggle to survive in a world without a home. Were it not for those who initially denied them that basic human right the conflict would not exist in it’s current form.

I do agree the Palestinians should be fairly treated and compensated for losses not directly tied to their own hostile actions. However, I feel they also have lost any right to the land they claim as a result of their own arrogant hostilities.

In short, there are no sidelines in this conflict and for those who seek to understand it, they cannot find their answers in some biased analogy. I encourage you to spend the little time necessary to study and form your own opinion.

Jeremy Parker