Strip search

A strip-search is generally understood to mean:

TRANSITIVE VERB: To search (a person) for illegal articles, such as drugs or weapons, by first requiring the removal of all clothing (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000)

In addition to playing with the word "strip" (with the Gaza STRIP), the situation in the Gaza strip suggest that the verb and its metaphor are appropriate here.

1. The IDF is currently engaged in its ground attack in search for weapons and other terrorist equipment and activities, and


2. The world sees it as acceptable to 'dress-down' Israel for its behavior in running its military campaign.

It seems clear that Hamas has spent much of its existence as the ruling authority in Gaza promoting at best and organizing the smuggling of arms through underground tunnels from Egypt into the Gaza Strip via the "Philadelphia Corridor". For one reason or another, the smuggling has continued unabated under the watchful [sic.] eye of the Egyptians and the consternation of Israel. That many of the tunnels run under homes and end also in the basements of residences (of either Hamas leaders or civilian sympathizers) make their discovery difficult and their eradication complicated (if only to avoid additional civilian injury or death).

So while some tunnels may be located and destroyed by air, many require a house-to-house search for them. Hence, a strip search at great personal risk to the ground soldiers.

The ground forces are also focused on "neutralizing the threat" by locating and destroying the mobile rocket launchers (removing the threat), finding caches of weapons and munition, arresting/killing the military leadership (and its structure), and (I assume) also proactively (i) locating and rescuing Gilad Shalit and (ii) convincing Hamas to either abdicate its rule, change its ideological commitment to Israel's destruction by recognizing Israel's right to exist or join its West Bank 'brothers' in negotiating a political settlement so a two state solution may be reached. In other words, lessen (preferably remove) the threat of rockets and anti-Israel terrorist activities emanating from Gaza.

The literal sense is stifled by the more figurative understanding of the strip-search, in this case directed AT Israel instead directed by Israel.

The media and world opinion (encompassing both ordinary public opinion and government pronouncements) has been unanimously critical of Israel. While some may acknowledge Israel's suffering under Hamas rocket attacks it is tempered by their critique of Israel's 'over reaction' and 'disproportionate response.' One exception to this trend was Ian O'Doherty "Why the Israeli people have had enough" in the Irish Independent newspaper. Otherwise, it seems to be open season for attacking Israel:

• CNN seems to never miss an opportunity to announce that Israel refuses to allow its reporters to enter Gaza and must, therefore, report from the Gaza-Israel border.
• The BBC gives the microphone to Gazans (somehow, they managed to get their press team(s) into Gaza itself) how Israel is wantonly attacking--killing and injuring--'innocent' civilians.
• The printed media, including The New York Times and the Washington Post (see especially their talk back sections), highlight the Gaza attacks while downplaying the last eight years and current bombing by Hamas upon (southern) Israel.

Somehow, Israel is to have its clothing removed as its reasons for going to war questioned while Gaza is presented as (again) the victim of "disproportionate" response, "naked" aggression by Israel. In the end, the "naked truth" is left wanting as little or no context to the conflict is given.