Support for Palestinians Is Based on Principle

The Times has sunk to a new low in publishing “Traveling With Bad Companions” by Martin Peretz (Commentary, June 23).

No responsible person supports terrorism, but the terrorists in the first instance are the Israelis who oppress the Palestinians, siphon off their water from the Jordan River, attack the Palestinians and their territory at will, violate all ethical norms for savagery -- killing leaders (and women and children) from helicopters -- and blow up homes with heavy military equipment, devastating a civilized people.

Calling the supporters of this oppressed group morally wrong is repugnant.

William H. Hopper Jr.

Duarte

*

Peretz derides supporters of Palestinian statehood as “fellow travelers” who “romanticize Palestinian (and Islamic) terrorism” and overlook what he sees as the inevitable reality that “Palestine will not be a democratic state because Palestine is not a democratic or tolerant society.” There are many responses to this.

Many of us support an independent Palestinian state not out of any illusions as to its likely obstacles or failings, but rather because we believe the alternative, i.e., the continued Israeli military occupation and settlement of the West Bank and Gaza, increasingly threatens the survival of Israel as a “democratic” and “tolerant” society as well.

David Karnes

Los Angeles

*

It is beyond outrageous to compare the heroic members of the International Solidarity Movement (and all others who are appalled by the destruction of the Palestinian people) to fellow travelers of the former Soviet Union. Is Palestine a graveyard of nationalities? Does Palestine invade its neighbors, or threaten them with nuclear weapons? Are there Palestinian fellow travelers in high governmental positions, from which they pursue policies designed to serve the interests of another country? Of course not. Palestine does not exist.

Israel, however, with its official policy favoring one group over another, its socialized industries, its huge investment in prison camps and military resources and its once-upon-a-time status as something that people hoped would be more than just another country, an example to the world ... now, there’s a resemblance that might be worth looking into.

While it’s not wrong to learn from the mistakes of history, Peretz and his fellow neoconservatives should be ashamed to make use of the fellow-traveler smear.

Edward Strauss

Oakland

*

A question for Peretz: What were the combatants fighting for an Israeli state called when the British were the occupying force in Palestine? It’s easy to forget that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Also, the young American who died so valiantly facing an Israeli bulldozer was Rachel Corrie. She was not stupid; she was an idealist who died in the cause of peace.

John M. Gillis

Manhattan Beach

*

Re “Sharon Lauds Hebron Killing,” June 23: It takes both hypocrisy and chutzpah for Secretary of State Colin L. Powell to criticize Israel for targeting a traveling Hamas terrorist leader and doing so at the same time that American forces in Iraq have unsuccessfully targeted a traveling Iraqi convoy in the hope of killing Saddam Hussein and his sons. The only difference between these two events is that the Israelis got the job done but we failed.

Perhaps instead of criticizing the Israelis, Powell should take lessons from them.

Gideon Kanner

Burbank