One-sided interpretation was intellectually dishonest

SAXTONS RIVER — Dan DeWalt, there's something wrong with your analysis.

I would suggest you read more history, specifically 1930s German. Maybe Isaac Babel. How about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion? The Turner Diaries?

When an organization such as Hamas says its goal is to kill Jews, builds a war machine to do it, then does it - pillages and rapes like the Cossacks - how is that not a genocidal act?

Where is your sympathy for those victims?

How is that different from the Nazis?

When does "public opinion among the vast majority of Arabs for the Palestinian cause" get translated into other Arab countries actually helping those innocent Palestinian children and those who hate Hamas but have to keep their mouths shut or get thrown off a building, as Hamas did to the Palestine Liberation Organization when they took over Gaza?

No question the response to Oct. 7 is brutal.

What's your plan?

And why does your other collaborator remain anonymous? The Commons shouldn't be publishing anonymous articles, even if the other half identifies himself.

I'm disappointed in this one-sided interpretation and feel it's intellectually dishonest.

This Voices Letters from readers was submitted to The Commons.

Subscribe to the newsletter for weekly updates