Tearing down posters of kidnapped Israeli children is morally repugnant - Euan McColm

Is it easier for those who have signed up to the blanket condemnation of Israel to maintain their positions if they pretend those taken by Hamas simply do not exist?

What, I wonder, is going through their minds when they do it? Is it hatred? Self-righteousness? An intoxicating cocktail of both?

In the month since Hamas terrorists invaded Israel, murdering more than 1,400 people and kidnapping another 200, Jews across the world have been putting up posters showing the faces of those taken. Many of these hostages are children. Some are still babies.

How anyone, confronted by these images, could react with anything but concern for the welfare of those seized during Hamas’s barbaric rampage, I don’t know.

Yet, just as quickly as relatives and friends of the hostages paste these posters to walls and lampposts, others tear them down.

Across social media, there are countless videos of people gleefully destroying the images of kids being held.

Some, asked why they would do such a thing, are unequivocal. “F*** Israel,” they say.

At least we know what’s going on with these people. They are so consumed by hatred for Israel - and its Jewish population - that the fates of children held by the group that raped, tortured and murdered so many on October 7 is of no consequence to them. So far as they are concerned, even a Jewish baby may not be considered an innocent.

Others react with less certainty. “There’s no need for these posters,” says one. More often than not, they say nothing and cover their faces.

How peculiar. After all, if one thinks it necessary to remove from public sight the images of kidnapped children, surely one should have no qualms about standing proudly for this “principle”, whatever it may be?

Could it be, perhaps, that some of those who’ve been tearing down these posters know, deep within themselves, that what they are doing is morally repugnant?

The situation in the Middle East has brought into sharp focus the risks of adherence to rigid ideology. If one identifies with the radical left, then one is obliged to see Israel as a great oppressor. And once one accepts this doctrine, it is necessary to ignore or - in the cases of those removing posters of hostages - remove any evidence that might contradict it.

Is it easier for those who have signed up to the blanket condemnation of Israel to maintain their positions if they pretend those taken by Hamas simply do not exist?

There has, over recent weeks, been much controversy over pro-Palestine marches across the UK and the wider western world. Some on those marches have been seen carrying pro-Hamas banners and heard chanting antisemitic slogans.

But many who have taken part in such demonstrations argue - quite legitimately, I think - that not everyone now calling for peace in the Middle East is a supporter of Islamist terrorists or a hater of Jews.

Surely, the same standard - of separating the individual from the ideology of their government - must apply to those kidnapped by Hamas? If one opposes the policies of the Israeli government, then why would that require the removal of posters showing the faces of hostages who have nothing to do with the actions of their country’s political leaders?

I fear the truth is that, for many on the radical left, these young hostages got what was coming to them.