Readers Write: “The Partial Observer” is a column title used frequently in our publications to clearly identify an opinion piece, and/or that the author has some sort of personal or professional interest in the topic about which they are writing. These commentaries reflect on myriad current political, economic, and social situations in this county, this country, and abroad. The content of such submissions should not be construed to be representative of the views of “The Freeman’s Journal,” “Hometown Oneonta,” or AllOtsego.com. In the interests of our readers and with the right and privilege of free speech in mind, we continue to print “partial observer” pieces as we deem relevant.
The Partial Observer by Richard Sternberg
Nelson Opinion Piece is Objectionable, Not Based in Fact
For three days, I’ve been trying to write a response to Wriley Nelson’s “Israel Grip on the U.S. Is the End of International Law” from “The Freeman’s Journal” of Thursday, October 2. I have no problem with Mr. Nelson’s rights to state his opinions. Some of his opinions are not far from mine. But what I find disgusting and nauseating is the total lack of reality of some of his statements of fact, and the failure of AllOtsego to fact check what he wrote. I’m not suggesting they should’ve changed anything that the author wrote, but I think it should’ve put appropriately documented numbers and facts alongside his. I also object to his characterizations of Israel and Israelis.
There has been a lot wrong happening in and around Gaza since September 7, 2023. This includes a vicious act of total war, and the forcing of innocent civilians to act as human shields while the brave Hamas soldiers hid underground. Any country would have a responsibility to respond to what happened to try and neutralize what is an invading, terrorizing, torturing army in their country. I find it so upsetting to deal with Mr. Nelson’s piece that I’m going to follow it line by line and highlight the author’s flagrant disregard for recognized facts and unsubstantiated statements to try and prove his point. The situation speaks for itself. It cannot continue, but neither can the failure to release the bodies of the hostages and what few hostages who might still be alive.
Starting with the first sentence of the first paragraph, the characterization of Israel as an apartheid state is unsubstantiated. I agree there are plenty of people in Israel that are bigots and racists, but that is not the entire population. Nor is apartheid supported anywhere in the constitution. Neither has there been any attempt to murder 2 million people. I don’t disagree that the United States is supporting this action, but I do not know of any evidence that says it is supporting the entire war effort financially or otherwise.
Second sentence, first paragraph. Israel is not a race-based society, but it does have an official religion, as does the majority of countries in North Africa, the Middle East and large parts of Asia. Judaism is not a race, but a religion, and there are Jews of all “races” in the world. Israel does not ban interfaith marriages. It very clearly tolerates this, and this has been upheld by the Israeli Supreme Court. The United States does not pay for universal healthcare and free college in Israel. Finally, ironically Mr. Nelson even gets the number of civilians killed wrong, on the low side. Based on the statements of the Ministry of Health in Gaza last week, it is 69,000 deaths.
Fourth sentence, first paragraph. There are no reliable sources for Mr. Nelson’s comment putting the number of deaths “well north of 200,000.” He can make up whatever fanciful figures he wants on the back of an envelope; that is not documentation.
Second paragraph. Again, where is the documentation for all the statements made? What does he mean by “another Israeli illegal American settler.” What does he mean by “another Israeli war criminal puts a gun in his mouth?” Where is he getting the stuff? I’m told Mr. Nelson is a journalist. Where is support for his statements?
Third paragraph. The comment that “approximately 80 to 90% of Jewish Israelis” support what is going on completely ignores polls as recent as last month that show over half of all Jewish Israeli citizens want to see an end to the war if the hostages are released, which is not an unreasonable desire from a grieving populace. The rest of this paragraph is a just a rant which should properly be stated as the author’s opinion.
Fourth paragraph. He starts out saying, “I doubt any Zionist will read this far” but does not seem to understand what the term means. The Hebrew liturgy for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, and the Passover service state, “Next year in Jerusalem” indicating a longing for a Jewish homeland, a land where a Jew cannot be persecuted for being a Jew. Modern Zionists felt the time had come to have a homeland. There are a few Jews who are not Zionists, though many still live in Israel in large numbers, who are mostly members of some Ultra-Orthodox sects that believe that there can only be a reconstitution of the biblical kingdom of Judah and Israel after the Messiah returns, which by our tradition, hasn’t happened yet. They still believe in a Jewish homeland. In any event, I read further in his piece so he is wrong again, and sadly we must listen to our enemies to help to keep them from destroying us just for being Jewish. He has no evidence to support his statement that “a significant majority of the world’s Jews outside Israel are either ambivalent about Zionism or leading the fight against it.” What fight against it? Where? Certainly not in New York State and the New York City metropolitan area, which has a majority of the non-Israeli Jews in the world.
Paragraph five. What does it matter that military personnel were a significant part of the tortured and murdered. He says, “Perhaps half were killed by indiscriminate, overwhelming friendly fire by the panicked IDF.” There is no evidence for that and what news articles from reputable journals showed was that IDF troops did not begin to arrive until most of the terrorists had returned to Gaza. His use of the word “perhaps” seems to be his justification for putting out such a canard.
Paragraph six. We have a little agreement of the statement, “after the air strike killed six civilians, none of whom were targets.” The primary targets were not the killed, but five of the six that were killed were other members of the Hamas political leadership. Very brave of these Hamas political leaders to be off being relatively safe in Qatar. That makes it easier for them to refuse to negotiate. They’re not at risk.
Mr. Nelson then diverges to an attack on President Trump, Britain and other regional powers. He makes the most self-incriminating statement of all, “This does not include the Trump and Biden administrations’ superhuman efforts to unite all of Eurasia against us (emphasis mine). He clearly states he is a fully committed mouthpiece for Hamas.
I’d like to end this response but, again, there are further very fanciful, insulting statements. He says that “every single member of the United States Congress has a designated handler from the unregistered, high-dollar foreign influence peddling agency AIPAC.” I think our entire Congress, Republican and Democrats, would take offense with this and of course there is nothing to support this statement. (AIPAC is a lobbying organization that does lobby on behalf of the interests of the State of Israel, but it is very properly registered, and it does not have handlers of our Congress members.)
Finally, the comments about Charlie Kirk are very insulting to a clearly beloved and respected political figure and his followers. He was not threatened by Israeli agents. Why would he? He supported Israel. And if he had been threatened by anyone, I believe he would have stood up to them. His assassination was indeed a loss for members of both sides of the political spectrum.
Again, I am shocked by this screed. How someone who calls himself a journalist could write like this is beyond me. It calls into question the possibility of bias in anything he writes.
Dr. Richard Sternberg is a retired Bassett Hospital orthopedic surgeon.
Editor’s note: Regarding paragraph two, the following footnote was inadvertently omitted from Mr. Nelson’s opinion piece: “May I strongly recommend ‘On Killing,’ by U.S. Army Historian Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.” In response to the question of fact checking, we have examined numerous sources provided by Mr. Nelson.
