The PG is naive about the goals of Palestinian leaders

In a distorted effort to be "evenhanded," your eloquent July 4 editorial refers to a "new" crisis between the Israelis and the Palestinians ("A New Crisis: Israelis, Palestinians Head Down a Doomed Road").

Do you seriously believe that the Palestinians are "severely divided" in their vision or that extreme "violent elements" are responsible for the failure of the illusory "peace process" you nostalgically long for? The Palestinian Authority was taken over earlier this year by Hamas, labeled a terrorist organization by the U.S. government since 1997. Hamas, like the Nazi party, was democratically conceived, with a virulent anti-Semitic foundation. With their suits and ties, Hamas terrorists masquerade as statesmen.

Your editorial naively refers to the kidnapped soldier as "a relatively minor diplomatic problem," as though Palestinian terrorists (or "militants" as your newspaper routinely calls them) did not tunnel under the Gaza fence to murder Israelis and launch thousands of rockets over it to rain terror on innocent Israelis.

It should be noted that there have been recent diplomatic efforts to get Hamas to "implicitly" recognize Israel's right to exist. Would that be a positive step in the "peace process" or a calculated tactic to gain international respect and funding? Why not take Hamas at its word, as supported by its actions? The Palestinian people overwhelmingly voted for Hamas and its raison d'etre: the annihilation of Israel, replaced by one state, Judenfrei.

Will Hamas finally realize the error of its ways as Israel further cranks up the pressure cooker? Of course not. But if Hamas continues to wage war on Israel, there might come a time when Gaza and the West Bank are Palestinian-free.

RODNEY W. FINK
Rosslyn Farms

---

This isn't minor

Regarding "A New Crisis: Israelis, Palestinians Head Down a Doomed Road" (July 4): I feel that your editorial is extremely one-sided and biased in favor of the terrorists who happen to call themselves Palestinians.

You state that the kidnapping (you called it capture) of Gilad Shalit was "unwise" even if the logic of it were sound, given the number of Palestinians held prisoners by the Israelis. How would the U.S. government react if someone tunneled into its sovereign country, wounded and killed U.S. soldiers and then proceeded to kidnap a wounded U.S. soldier?

You wrote about how Israel continues to shell Gaza. How would the United States respond if hundreds of Kassam rockets were fired at its towns and cities? The shelling of Kassams into the towns of Sderot and Ashkelon has been going on for months.

You mention that Palestinians bemoan the humanitarian impact of the Israeli siege. You failed to mention that when the Palestinians were pleading to have medicine and food shipped into Gaza, that they had no problem getting 111 truckloads of large-screen TVs shipped into Gaza. The Palestinian terrorists (the high number of Palestinians you mentioned) who have been arrested have all been processed under Israeli law (Prevention of Terrorism Law); I know of no law that Gilad Shalit broke (other than faithfully serving his country), yet you don't seem to mention his unlawful imprisonment.

You stated that this is a relatively "minor" diplomatic problem; I beg to differ with you.

SUSAN HIRSCH
Jerusalem, Israel

The writer is a former resident of Pittsburgh.

---

Uncivil editorial

I am writing in response to your July 6 editorial "Untimely End: Kenneth Lay Died With a Debt Unpaid."

Someone needs to remind the editorial writers of a short quote from "Life's Little Instruction Book": "Use the tone of your voice and your words carefully. It's your advertisement to the world."

In excusing the tone and timing of your writings, you off-handedly dismiss manners, decency and a civil tone as an "ancient tradition." After all, you continue, in death former Enron chief Kenneth Lay "thwarted justice." I am not writing to defend Kenneth Lay -- he committed terrible crimes, was caught and convicted. That is human justice in a civil society. His case was taken as far as possible.

Unfortunately it was not enough to satisfy your grudge or your desire to behave poorly. In the end his "empire" reflected his person just as your words reflect you. Would it not have been prudent to catch your breath and moderate your tone? After all you relentlessly pummel those, such as President Bush, who refuse to moderate their tone. You depict Mr. Bush as swaggering, self-assured, ignorant and unthinking. Incapable of nuance. Where is yours?

Is this the best we can expect from a group of people who consider themselves well-educated, articulate, cultured and well-informed? If it is your best, you are pitiful people. If you were my children, all of the backs of your heads would be a little sore this morning.

SEAN C. HOFFMANN
Shaler

---

Thwarted revenge

Your July 6 editorial "Untimely End" about the death of former Enron chief Kenneth Lay could be an illustration of something I have long suspected about the opponents of the death penalty. Perhaps their real goal is to keep criminals alive until their thirst for revenge has been quenched.

Those who claim to believe in God have an even bigger concern. Once a person dies his fate is in God's hands, and He may not be as vengeful and unforgiving as they would like.

ROBERT D. REEPING
Freeport

---

Oreo's fine family

I would like to commend Brian David on his June 24 Saturday Diary about Oreo (and family) ("The Heroic Rescue of Oreo, a Damsel Feline in Distress"). I enjoyed this story during my wake-up coffee break and can't recall ever enjoying one more. It depicted panic, frustration, compassion and, above all, humor at just the right points. I found myself laughing out loud at times.

The David family sounds like one that I would love to have in my neighborhood, with all the excitement going on with all the animals (and, now, five more).

I hope that the next delivery his family is expecting will arrive in a more "normal" fashion.

MILDRED ZELLMER
Shaler

---