Michael Jackson was still dead and Sarah Palin was still resigning as Alaska's governor Tuesday, July 7, but 
What's so important about a Jew who is caged for three years?
Gilad Shalit was persona non grata as far as most of the news media were concerned.
What's so important about a Jew who is caged for three years by a mob of animals?
Shalit's father, Noam, traveled to Geneva that Monday to ask a United Nations committee to press for the release of his son, who is apparently being held by Hamas terrorists in Gaza. Not a word was reported in major American newspapers and other media outlets.
On Wednesday, the New York Times and the Washington Post reported in news briefs that the commission, which is investigating Israel's raid on Gaza earlier this year, had completed its hearings without mentioning either Noam Shalit's testimony or the testimony of victims of Hamas rocket attacks.
Michael Jackson's funeral service was covered in full and Sarah Palin‘s reasons to resign were psychoanalyzed ever deeper.
Gilad Shalit is the victim of a brazen act of war. Terrorists kidnapped him at an Israeli military base near the Gaza border and continue to keep him in captivity, since June 25, 2006.
This is not just about Gilad Shalit. What happened to him is an act of war against Israel. Shalit was seized while serving his country, protecting Israel. If this can happen to Shalit, it can happen to any Israeli soldier and, for that matter, to any Israeli; and any Jew can be subject to harm. We are advocating for all Jews, not only Shalit.
Granted, Israel has limited options in securing the 22-year-old corporal's release. Unless Israeli commanders know something the rest of us don't, another Entebbe rescue would appear impossible. The military probably does not even know where Shalit is being held. Without inside information, Israel can do nothing on a military level.
Then there is the ransom demand. Hamas wants hundreds of prisoners for Shalit's release, especially those who murdered Israelis. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is continuing his predecessor's tack of indirect negotiations for a hostage exchange.
Many Israel supporters believe that engaging in a hostage exchange is insane. It would be a victory for terrorism. Hamas and other terror groups will try it again whenever they want prisoners back.
People fail to recognize that Israel is hardly playing Hamas's game. It is called hardball. While Shalit remains in captivity, has anyone noticed that Israel persists in its willingness to seek a peace agreement for the territories; humanitarian supplies are still allowed to flow into Gaza on a limited basis; and Hamas continues to control all of Gaza?
Here are steps which Israel might still be able to take:
1. Thoroughly seal the border with Gaza, which means allowing nothing and nobody to come in or out.
2. Suspend all efforts to reach a pact with the Palestinian Authority, which is a long way from completion anyway.
3. Move the military into a rural section of Gaza to cut off Gaza City from the southern border.
No decent person wants the people of Gaza to suffer, but Israel has been pushed into an us-or-them position. As Shalit languishes, presumably in Gaza, Israel is helping the people of Gaza by permitting a limited amount of humanitarian supplies to be sent there.
Why should Israel do anything to help Gaza while they refuse to release Shalit? Closing the border to Gaza, completely, would make conditions worse for Gaza; and it should. Innocent people may be hurt, but what did Shalit do? Consider also
Here are steps which Israel might still be able to take.that many Gazans voted for Hamas, and still back them, because they support Hamas's goal of destroying Israel.
Israel has a right to defer negotiations with the Palestinian Authority on the West Bank because of the Shalit kidnapping. That and other forms of aggression are a direct result of the Arab world's hostility, past and present. Had Yasser Arafat accepted Israel's proposal for an independent state nearly a decade ago, would Shalit have even been vulnerable to capture in 2006?
Interestingly, an incursion into Gaza without engaging in military conflict might be possible. During last January's raid, the Israeli military cut Gaza in half in a relatively rural area between Gaza City and Rafah at the Egyptian border. It ended its advance without moving too deep into Gaza City, where Israeli commanders feared there could be many casualties.
I am under no delusion that these and other firm measures will lead to Shalit's release. At best, perhaps the United Nations and the Palestinian Authority will clamor for Shalit's release. The PA has supported negotiations with Hamas on Shalit, but UN officials who cry for the poor Gazans have not cried for Shalit. Maybe the added pressures will make life so intolerable that the people will rise up in some form of protest.
But if Hamas persists in holding on to Shalit, it will give new meaning to the term "Mexican standoff".