Esposito Shills for Hamas

Wow! This was even worse than I would have expected from Esposito. He writes (bolding mine):

The pretense for the bombings and threat to invade Gaza with ground troops is HAMAS breaking the ceasefire by shelling Israel. However, HAMAS started shelling after the talks to renew it failed. Israel ignores the fact that during the ceasefire, Israel put up blockades to stop essential goods from getting in. The siege created a humanitarian catastrophe for Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinian residents by restricting the provision of food, fuel, medicine, electricity, and other necessities of life. The US and Europe were complicit in the blockade of a democratically elected HAMAS government, a siege whose primary victims have been Gaza civilians. HAMAS militants vented their anger by firing rockets.

First, the talks to renew the ceasefire "failed" because Hamas refused to agree to a renewal. Second, while it's true that Hamas democratically came to control the PA parliament, that's not how they came to control Gaza. The drove their opponents, mostly Fatah, out by force and killed hundreds.

Then there's this nugget: "Despite the fact that the militant[']s shelling did not kill a single Israeli, Israel acts as if it has been driven to a 'fight to the bitter end.'" I guess it's alright to shoot at people as long as your aim is bad, at least if they're "juice." I guess the Israelis are supposed to sit around and wait for Hamas's aim to improve. Professor Esposito: Exactly how many Jews have to die before they're allowed to defend themselves?

Come to think of it, the Japanese only killed 3,000 Americans at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. And what right did we have to the Philippines, Guam, or Wake? Wasn't our war in the Pacific a vast overreaction? Didn't we employ disproportionate force?