The New York Times just doesn't get it

There they go again, editorializing on the front page. Palestinian "malnutrition" once again featured in a story about the latest Israeli attempt to stop suicide bombings.

The relevant excerpt:

"The stricter controls came as a study financed by the American government reported significant malnutrition among Palestinian children."

That tells us that it must be the "stricter controls" that somehow led to the malnutrition.

But - is it possible, just barely possible, that it's the Palestinians themselves who might be the root cause of both the clampdown and whatever malnutrition there might be? Hard lefties will cry, "you're blaming the victim"; sane people (yes, the inference is that those on the hard left are not sane; deal with it) must ask if the Palestinians' wanton disregard for Israeli human rights might somehow be at fault. Yeah -- believe it or not, to bomb a pizzeria, restaurant, bus, or whatever, is a human rights violation.

The second editorializing point concerns that ever-lovin' "cycle of violence". This time, the story reports that "violence flared again", as if violence were some uncontrollable force of nature. Tropical storms and hurricanes "flare"; violence is instigated by humans. To use the "cycle of violence" or the "violence flared" approach is to, once again, blithely ignore true cause and effect.

Let's keep it simple. Cause is the Palestinian Authority's embrace of terrorism as policy; this is now also embraced by a large majority of the Palestinian people. Hence those evil celebrations of murder. Effect is Israel's right to defend herself against terrorism.