Sir, - In his reply to my letter of December 6th, Guy Gordon (December 10th) admits that "Israel is in breach of more UN resolutions than any other country on earth" but asserts that this is "because no other country has been singled out. . . by the UN as Israel has."
Apart from its circularity, this argument has the flaw that anybody can use it to reject any law that interferes with their crimes. However, given that Israel is one of only two states actually created by the UN, to assert that "The UN is a body which contends the country's very right to exist" seems a little puzzling.
To re-name torture "moderate physical pressure" is to play the euphemism game: a spade remains a spade even if you call it a shovel. To state that "Israel has no other means of eradicating terrorists" than "legalised assassinations" amounts to asserting that "the murderer has no other means of eradicating his victim than murdering him", again a circular argument that deals with none of the pertinent issues.
I share Mr Gordon's aversion to Arab "thugocracies", two of which (Egypt and Jordan) have signed opportunistic peace treaties with Israel. As for Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the rest of the oil sheikdoms, democracy might lead to the resources of these countries being used for the benefit of their citizens rather than that of the US, so their ruling tyrants can depend on long-term US backing.
Mr Gordon is also correct to rail against "the murderous actions of Hamas", but he neglects to mention that that organisation was initially funded by Israel itself in order to split the Palestinians. In this shortsighted aim Israel was only too successful, and is now reaping the whirlwind.
Finally, would Mr Gordon please point me to that "civilised world" he keeps mentioning? He certainly can't be referring to this sorry planet. - Yours, etc.,
Raymond Deane, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.