NPR’s Juana Summers had an excellent opportunity to ask “Antoine Renard of the U.N. World Food Programme” whom she interviewed in a 6-min segment the question of “should Hamasers eat” as the two discussed “the increasing risk of famine in Gaza, as Israel’s block on humanitarian aid into the strip continues.” She passed on that chance. Insofar as Ms. Summers or Mr. Renard are concerned, there is no context to Israel’s actions — or at the very least, humanitarian concerns are so sacred that the notion of context is not applicable. Hence, the word “hostage” was not used even once. The interview was filled with tearful complaints that the children of Gaza are not getting fresh produce, dairy, fish, or meat — as per Mr. Renard’s list of missing menu items. Gazans have their humanity, you know.

And yet, “should Hamasers eat?” is a valid question. In imposing the blockade, Israelis are trying to separate those Gazans who are eligible to eat from Hamasers, whom they find ineligible to eat — thus causing consternation among the goody-goodiers like Ms. Summers and Mr. Renard. Oh ah! How can you use food as a weapon of war? It is not nice, it is not humane! Humanitarians should not distinguish between Hamasers and non-Hamasers when it comes to distributing meals!

This position naturally morphs into the question of “should one be nice and humane to Hamas?” Since Hamasers are identified by the bombs and bullets directed at them, the question becomes: should, for humanity’s sake, three-course meals be attached to two-thousand-pound bombs dropped in the hope of killing their recipients?

The question of what is humane is very, very old. Even a children’s classic, Mark Twain’s immortal Tom Sawyer touches upon it when discussing the murderer, Injun Joe who died of starvation while locked in a cave. Here is Twain describing the aftermath:

“Injun Joe was buried near the mouth of the cave; and people flocked there in boats and wagons from the towns and from all the farms and hamlets for seven miles around; they brought their children, and all sorts of provisions, and confessed that they had had almost as satisfactory a time at the funeral as they could have had at the hanging.

“This funeral stopped the further growth of one thing⁠—the petition to the governor for Injun Joe’s pardon. The petition had been largely signed; many tearful and eloquent meetings had been held, and a committee of sappy women been appointed to go in deep mourning and wail around the governor, and implore him to be a merciful ass and trample his duty under foot. Injun Joe was believed to have killed five citizens of the village, but what of that? If he had been Satan himself there would have been plenty of weaklings ready to scribble their names to a pardon-petition, and drip a tear on it from their permanently impaired and leaky waterworks.

Hamasers are sadistic murderers, but, to quote Twain, “what of that?” The ilk of Ms. Summers and Mr. Renard are always ready “to go in deep mourning and wail around” their microphones.

Well, we do not need to listen to their wailing. The important thing is getting rid of Hamas, and releasing all hostages. If food blockade helps do it, good. if the likes of Ms. Summers and Mr. Renard tearfully object, too bad.