Two-State Solution is indeed the most immoral suggestion of them all. It
is a lie built on a foundation of mendacity. And, with it
having been sanctified in
the President's Cairo Speech in Egypt, it can be termed The Grand Pyramid Scheme.
Back in President Barack Obama’s America, the laws on the books clearly prohibit people from telling African Americans that, "sorry, you can’t live in this neighborhood." Does anyone doubt that Justice Sotomayor would uphold those laws?
The Bigotry of Banning Jews from Living in a Region
Imagine how many American communities over the years could have resolved their
vicious racial issues
simply by agreeing that Blacks need to be removed completely from "White neighborhoods," and Whites removed from
Maybe James von Brunn would not have gone on a shooting rampage at the
U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum if there were a compromise agreement that
Jews may not establish residential communities in or near Washington,
D.C. Separate but equal. Quite a concept!
Only, that's a racist concept. Part of America's greatness is that we evolved as a society over two centuries to reject that concept. See, e.g., Brown v. Board of Educ. of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686 (1954), overruling Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537; 16 S. Ct. 1138 (1896). Similarly, we are appalled by the bigotry in the Middle Ages and into the 1940s marked by governments segregating Jews from communities in Germany, Poland, Austria, or Hungary -- say, to relocate them into their own ghettoes. And it is equally bigoted today to advocate a public policy that forcibly would segregate Jews from communities in Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank") or anywhere else in Israel. But that bigotry-- what else can it be called? -- ironically defines the Obama Administration's Mideast program, being pushed equally hard by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It is a policy aimed at ethnically cleansing Jews out of a region in the world, rendering it Judenrein. And it is a policy whose moral failing further is eroded by the colossal transformation of historical fact into hysterical fiction unfolding before our very eyes.
"Palestine" Is Another Name for Israel,
and That Entirety Is the Land that "Palestinian Arabs" Want for Their "Palestine" Country --
Not a "West Bank" Without a Name
The "West Bank" is not the west bank of
anything. There is no waterway, ocean, sea, or river in Hebron or Tekoah or Karnei Shomron or Ariel. Nor in Shiloh, Maaleh Adumim, Beitar,
Shechem, Gush Etzyon, or Beit Lechem (Bethlehem). The nomenclature is
fallacious, itself reflecting history's great cover-up: There is no such
thing as an "Arab Palestinian Homeland." That land always has been
There is no "Palestinian people," and the only “Palestine” that ever existed was synonymous with the Jewish homeland that later was renamed "Israel." Rent a copy of the movie "Exodus.” Listen dispassionately to the dialogue. Don't take sides. Just listen for definitions. The British, fairly or unfairly, are depicted as the bad guys in the movie, trying to keep the Jews out of "Palestine." Paul Newman is trying to get the Jews into "Palestine." Everyone watching the movie perceives that "Palestine" is a name that refers synonymously with "Israel." Thus, what we seem to have here is a failure to communicate. It could not be simpler: For the past two thousand years, since the Romans renamed the land as they expelled and exiled its Jews, "Israel" always was "Palestine," and "Palestine" always was "Israel."
There never ever was an Arab Palestine entity. Who, after all, ever was its leader? Try to name any leader who ever in history led the sovereign "Palestinian Arab" people of "Arab Palestine." What year was it founded? What was the name of its capital city -- any capital city? Where is the drawing or photograph of its seat of government, or the place where its governmental leader lived? What was the name of its currency? Whose face, what slogan was on that currency? When did it fall? In which Olympic Games did it compete? Which issue of Encyclopedia Britannica had an entry for its government?
Consider this way: The American city of Palestine, Texas was founded in 1846. It was so named in honor of an early settler there, Daniel Parker, who hailed from Palestine, Illinois. That Palestine was charted in 1811. It drew its name in 1678 from the French explorer, Jean LaMotte, who looked at the land and named it "Palestine" because it reminded him of the Biblical Promised Land of the Jews, flowing with milk and honey. No one associated "Palestine" with the Arab community, not even in the 1600s. Rather, the name was associated with the Jews and their Biblical Promised Land. The same with Palestine, Arkansas and East Palestine, Ohio.
"Palestinian Refugee Camps" and Logo Images Now Worn by Their Terror Groups Remind That the Goal Remains Now As When the "P.L.O. -- Palestine Liberation Organization" was founded in 1964: to "Liberate Palestine" by Conquering and Destroying Israel
The "West Bank" and Gaza were theirs for the taking in 1964. But they
did not want it. The
Shukairy, and Yasser Arafat his successor wanted
Israel. To this day, the logo on their stationery and
on their respective terrorist uniforms is that of
Israel. "Palestine" in the "West Bank" only? Two
states? It is such a fabrication, such a lie. Just look at the facts on
their ground: Understand that they have built “Palestinian Refugee Camps” in
Jenin, in the
How can a real people ("Palestinians") in their own
real land ("Palestine") living under their own government (the
"Palestine Authority") be dwelling in "refugee camps" in their own land?
Similarly, how can they have Palestine "refugee camps" in Gaza, now that
the land is under sovereign Hamas control? These actual open facts
on the ground evidence the mendacity, the lies, stuff, and nonsense.
Webster says that a "refugee" is "one who, in times of persecution or political commotion, flees to a foreign power or country for safety; as, the French refugees who left France after the revocation of the edict of Nantes." Merriam-Webster, in pertinent part, says that a "refugee" is "an individual who has left his or her native country and is unwilling or unable to return to it . . . ." So: are these Arabs residing in Jenin and Gaza "refugee camps" indeed refugees -- these "Palestinians" living in the "West Bank" and Gaza under the "Palestinian Authority"? If so, from where do those "Palestinian" refugees originally hail? If the "West Bank" and Gaza are not the "homeland" to which they yearn so that they someday may be "liberated" from their "refugee" status -- well, where is their "homeland"? The answer could not be more clear and manifest: In the "West Bank" and Gaza they are "refugees." The "West Bank" is not their home, they know it, and they evidence it. They want Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem. That is the home they ultimately seek, in their effort inexorably to destroy Israel. And that is the reason that no "Palestinian" leader can utter the words: "Yes, in any final peace agreement, we will recognize the land set aside for Israel as a Jewish nation-state."
Zionism Humanely Avoided the Moral Failings of America -- Itself the Greatest Beacon of Freedom Ever Created -- by Seeking to Build Fraternally Alongside Landed Neighbors Rather than to Force-and-Death-March Them into "Reservations" of Internal Exile
In America, we do have a variation on "internal refugee camps." They are called "Indian reservations" or "reservations for Native Americans," and they reflect not only adversely but deeply shamefully on those who put them there: American governments like that of the Andrew Jackson Administration, whose Government adopted and implemented terrible, horrible crimes of conscience against the Native Americans. This country's highest elected leaders, in full and open view, at some point 150-200 years ago made a chilling determination that has been swept from the American national conscience and institutional memory: For the United States, founded inexorably as a White European settler polity, to survive and flourish, with its borders open to new immigrants from around the world, there would need to be a complete and forcible uprooting and expulsion of the native American population -- "Indian Removal." For example, "it will relieve the whole state of Mississippi, and the western part of Alabama, of Indian occupancy, and enable those States to advance rapidly in population, wealth, and power. It will separate the Indians from immediate contact with settlements of Whites . . . enable them to pursue happiness in their own way, and under their own rude institutions . . . and perhaps cause them gradually, under the protection of the Government, and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits, and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community."
Consequently, Native Americans were uprooted from Florida, from North
Carolina, from Georgia, from states that many Americans today cannot
imagine housed Native Americans. Their land was forcibly seized.
land contracts with them were breached notoriously and brazenly,
torn up unilaterally, and they were forced on
Hitler-like mass death marches to places "reserved" for them. This
really happened in America. America did this, implemented in the open by
our highest echelons and without mercy, to displace and uproot the
Native American population.
It is deeply painful to visit the "Trail of Tears." Or to learn certain details of the Second Seminole War. There are monuments all along the miles and miles where the Native Americans walked their death marches. And they were resettled into reservations with such sops as permission to run casino gambling free from government interference.
That is what America did after our Government determined that, to create the kind of country envisioned by the Founding Fathers -- a country that truly has emerged in history as the greatest and most kind, benevolent, and charitable country that people ever have created, with the greatest respect and love for freedom and decency that any society ever has registered -- "those people had to go." In all, by the time the U.S. federal government had ended "allotment" in 1934, that policy had cost Native Americans at least 90 million acres of their land, two-thirds of the land they had owned half a century earlier. Kenneth H. Bobroff, "Retelling Allotment: Indian Property Rights and the Myth of Common Ownership," 54 Vanderbilt L. Rev. 1559, 1561 & n.5 (2001) (citing OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEP’T OF THE INTERIOR, INDIAN LAND TENURE, ECONOMIC STATUS AND POPULATION TRENDS 6 (1935)).
compound the shame by designating our Native Americans as mascots for
our sports teams:
Florida State Seminoles, Kansas City Chiefs,
Chicago Black Hawks.
But Israel never did that. As Jews lived in a land that was and has been our patrimony for 3,000 years, we engaged Arabs as neighbors. We engaged the Arab community with respect. We desired to build with them. So we encouraged their participation in our society, in our government, in our Parliament. Yes, Israel would be a Jewish nation-state, in a world that already recognizes more than twenty Arab states. There are so many Arab countries, even with names like United Arab Emirates, that they even have an Arab League. And for us, as Jews, there is one country to which we trace our heritage and legacy. Until 1948 it was called "Palestine," and "Palestine" was renamed "Israel" when the country became independent.
Only One Jewish Homeland: Passionately Loved Without Interruption and Yearned-for Through 2,000 Years of Exile
This land of "Palestine" or "Israel" always has been the Jewish homeland. For 2,000 years -- from the time that the ancient Roman Empire conquered Jerusalem, expelled Jews from the Land, and re-named the land "Palestina" to eradicate its Jewish character in the popular memory -- to this day we have continued praying three times daily for a return to Palestine/Israel. We fasted several times every year in tearful memory of events that led to Jews being exiled from the land 2,600 years ago by the Babylonians and again 2,000 years ago by the ancient Romans. We adopted customs, at the core of our Jewish identity, to remember Palestine/Israel. So, in all our prayers these past 2,000 years, we have faced Palestine/Israel during our prayers. We literally coordinate our synagogue architecture to assure that we pray facing Palestine/Israel. In America, we pray facing East, and in Russia we pray facing West. In Africa, we pray facing North.
At all our
weddings for these past 2,000 years, the groom breaks a glass under the
wedding canopy in memory of the destruction of the Holy Temple in East
Jerusalem and the exile from Palestine/Israel. When we visit someone
whose relative has died, we console the mourner with our hopeful prayer:
"May [G-d], the One Who is in Every Place, console you among the rest
[of us], who mourn for [the fall 2,000 years ago] of Zion and
Jerusalem." As we dance with the bride and groom, we sing -- as we have
sung for 2,000 years-- "There yet again will be heard in cities
throughout Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem the sounds of rejoicing
and sounds of happiness, the sound of the groom and the sound of the
bride." For 2,000 years we have taken a day out of our lives each summer
to mourn for the fall of Jerusalem: devoting the night and day to
reciting tearful lamentations, fasting, crying, dimming our lights for
much of the day, refusing to sit comfortably on chairs but instead
sitting on the floor or overturned chairs. For 2,000 years we have left
partially unpainted a section of every home in which we have lived,
partially incomplete to remind us that East Jerusalem, with her Temple
destroyed, is partially incomplete. Even after our every meal, we have
recited a prayer for 2,000 years asking that G-d restore and rebuild
Do Americans -- the deepest, most patriotic of my countrymen -- know the precise day on which the British burned down the White House during the Madison Administration in the course of the War of 1812? The Temple in Jerusalem was burned on the Ninth Day of Av. How do we Americans commemorate that incineration of the White House? Jews have never forgotten the eternal connection with the Land of Israel. And Jews continued living in that land. In 1929, Arab marauders still were perpetrating massacres, trying to remove Jews, for once and for all, from the City of Hebron, the City where our Biblical ancestors -- Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob, Leah -- lie interred at the Cave of Makhpelah. New waves of Arab massacres from 1936-1939 sought to drive Jews out of Shechem/Nablus. Within half a century, Jews were back.
In an Era of Mass Population Exchanges, the Arab World Hatefully Drove out 700,000 Jews and Confiscated All Their Property and Assets, Even as Israelis Pleaded with Their Arab Neighbors to Remain and Build a New Western Democracy Together
And yet, as a Jewish State was coming into being, we sought to live in
peace with Arabs living there. Jews in Israel still seek to live in
peace with them. Even as they forcibly expelled
as many as 700,000 Jews
from the various and respective Arab lands, lands like Yemen and
Morocco, Syria and Iraq -- driving them out, confiscating their land and
portable property, confiscating their liquid assets,
driving them into
exile between the late 1930s and early 1950s -- Israel was
landed Arabs to remain within her borders, to remain and live
side-by-side in peace.
Maybe many of those Arab residents would have remained behind if leaders of the invading Arab armies did not impel them to leave, to abandon their homes, essentially to get the heck out of the darned way during the planned extermination of the nascent Jewish State, as the Arab legions marched on Palestine/pre-Israel to drive the "Jews into the sea."
Many Arabs did indeed flee, as a result. They opted to get out of the way. Not as many Arabs left Israel as the number of Jews who forcibly were driven out of the Arab lands at the time. But many left. Perhaps 400,000. Perhaps more. And the vast majority of those who chose to leave departed not from Gaza nor from the "West Bank" but from the core of Israel itself. That is why they do not perceive a "Palestine homeland" in the "West Bank" or Gaza as their home, as a resolution of anything. It would be like telling someone who fled France, for one reason or another, that he will be "restored" to a "home" in neighboring Germany. Imagine your own situation: you have been forced out of your home, perhaps by a force majeure, in Teaneck, New Jersey or Brooklyn, New York -- and your insurance company offers you a replacement home in Boise, Idaho or Butte, Montana. Is that "good enough" a replacement, given that it all is in the same country? So, how does a "home" in Berlin restore exile from Paris? And how does a "home" in Bethlehem restore a perceived exile from Tel Aviv or Haifa? Those questions' answers are the reasons that the logo of the uniform is what it is, why the "refugee camps" are where they are, and why the "Two-State Solution" fails by ignoring the reality that "Palestinian Arabs" cannot accept Tel Aviv, Haifa, and West Jerusalem as "Jewish."
Those Arabs who left Israel could have stayed. The Jews asked them to stay. Unlike the 700,000 Jews who were driven into exile from homes in Arab lands, those Arabs were not driven out. Unlike Native Americans, they were not driven off their lands. And unlike other exiles, they were put into concentration environments -- Arab "refugee camps" -- by their own people.
While the nascent State of Israel gamely was constructing a home and frantically was working to absorb the huge influx of landless, destitute Jewish exiles and refugees from Arab lands, the Arab world was building concentration camps and reservations for their own people, fellow Arabs, where those emigrés would languish. Half a century later, while the Jewish refugees from Arab lands have seen their children become doctors and computer programmers, world leaders, attorneys, business moguls, plumbers, contractors, entertainment executives, and anything else out there, the children of those Arab emigres have become the victims of the world's most heinous example of cynical self-hatred. They remain in "refugee camps" that are historical anomalies and today are thoroughly anachronistic. They remain on international welfare, under the rubric of a cynically anti-Jewish United Nations agency, the "United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East" (UNRWA), which runs the camps and their schools, and has a vested interest -- namely, preserving their own existence, preserving their own continued employment and pay checks, preserving their jobs -- in perpetuating the historical crime of refusing to let the residents be absorbed into their local environments.
During the last century, the world has seen so many tragically painful "population exchanges" play themselves out on the world stage. Greek ethnics were forced out of Bulgaria and into Greece, while Bulgarian ethnics were forced from Greece into Bulgaria. In 1922, under the League of Nations, 1.25 million Greek Orthodox ethnics were transferred from Turkey, and half a million Moslems were transferred reciprocally to Turkey from Greece. Fridtjof Nansen, the diplomat who oversaw the population exchange, was awarded the 1922 Nobel Peace Prize for his effort. In 1940, under the Treaty of Craiova, there was a massive population exchange: 80,000 Romanian ethnics were forced into Bulgaria, and 65,000 Bulgarian ethnics forced out of Romania. After World War II, between 14-16 million ethnic Germans were transferred out of Central and Eastern Europe, and into Germany. Poland and the Soviet Union exchanged populations: between 1944 and 1946, some 2 million people, Polish ethnics sent to Poland from the Ukraine and Ukrainians sent out of Poland, were transferred. More than 5 million Hindus and Sikhs were forced to India from the regions that became Pakistan, and more than 6 million Moslems were pushed out of India and into Pakistan.
The Cynicism of the Fabricated
"Palestinian Refugee Problem" . . .
Where are the languishing Bulgarian refugee camps? Greek refugee camps?
Romanian refugee camps? Polish refugee camps? German refugee camps?
Ukrainian refugee camps? Hindu/Sikh refugee camps? Where are the Bosnian
Moslem refugee camps? Why is there no massive international
welfare apparatus in the rubric of a United Nations Relief and Works
Agency for the [Bulgarian/Greek/
How is it that no one even thinks to ask?
And is it
comprehensible that, at a time of national economic challenge within
United States funds more than one fourth the cost of this
nonsense to the tune of nearly $100 million annually? By contrast, Saudi
Arabia funds less than one percent ($2.5 million), and Kuwait less than
that. Can there be anything that evidences more forcefully how cynical
this entire mendacity is? The OPEC oil cartel raises our oil costs
to the point of disrupting our national economy, and we responsively
fund a massive, multi-national welfare infrastructure for those of their
people whom they, unique among all countries into which emigrants have
sought haven, have confined to concentration centers for more than
half a century.
What people holds and concentrates its own brothers and sisters in "refugee camps" for half a century and more? And, to make matters more bizarre, these people in the UNRWA "Palestinian refugee camps" are the descendants of those who departed their homes voluntarily, gambling that their departure would facilitate the Arab Legions' rapid success in obliterating the Jewish presence from the face of the earth, driving the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. Indeed, it was their leading spiritual leader of the time -- Haj Amin el-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem -- who overtly and demonstratively allied the pan-Arab cause with Adolph Hitler and the Nazis. Yet, people who have persecuted the Berber minority of Algeria, the Coptic Christian minority of Egypt, the Bahai minority of Iran, Christians in Saudi Arabia -- even enslaving Black Christians in the Sudan -- would have the temerity to equate Zionism with racism and to compare Zionists to Nazis. There are nations and peoples who, over the centuries, have ventured into Africa and forcibly expatriated tens of thousands of Black Africans to become slaves in theirs and others' countries on other continents. But in all the world, in all of human history, Israel is the only country that ever expended national human and financial resources, risking her citizens' lives in daring midnight sorties and dangerous trans-continental rescue missions, aimed at liberating tens of thousands of Black Africans from persecution and bringing them out of Africa , out from slavery and into freedom.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah on Sept. 16, 2010
. . . And the Cynicism of Imposing on Israel a "Two State Solution" in the Face of America's Long-Term Commitments and Repeated Promises to a Time-Tested Friend and Ally
"Two-State Solution" are President Barack Obama, Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, and the rest of the Obama Administration talking about?
The irony is that this pressure from President Obama and Secretary Clinton comes at a time when not a single prominent political leader on the Israeli political scene even advocates building new Jewish communities ("settlements") in Judea and Samaria. There rarely before has been a more pliable Israeli government. All Bibi Netanyahu advocates, minimalistic and inadequate though it be, is the right for Jews to expand within a legal community for natural increase.
And even that now is to be proscribed, despite understandings with the prior American President and his Administration that America would respect that Israeli right if Israel would agree to abandon Gaza and pursue other parts of the ill-conceived "Road Map" structured by former President George W. Bush and his foreign affairs expert, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
So Israel ceded Gaza, and the Road Map played out by extending all of democracy's virtues to the now-liberated Gazans. Freed to vote their hearts' content, they elected into office the worst terrorist goons freely elected to a democracy's high office since the National Socialists got out the vote in 1933 Germany. Hamas refuses to recognize Israel, refuses to live in peace with Israel, and refuses to recognize prior signed treaties with Israel. Now, President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Mr. Emanuel emulate Hamas in one of the three critical immoralities: they unilaterally abandon America's prior policy and refuse to abide by America’s understanding of the past that, if Israel compromises by ceding Gaza, she nevertheless may expand already established communities in Judea-Samaria to allow for natural increase.
For a team with the demonstrated ability to
pull isolated passages from
it would be instructive to refresh
consciences by recalling a few passages of the agreements that President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon reached, with
the exchanges amplified between their respective advisors Condoleezza
Rice and Dov Weisglas. America
expressly contracted in writing to
recognize new post-1949 and post-1967 realities: namely, that Israel now has
major population centers in areas in Judea and Samaria, and therefore
there will be no returning to the 1967 borders.
Nor does anyone else in the Judea-Samaria ("West Bank") region have a better, more legitimate claim to the land than does Israel. Mexico has a better claim to California and Texas than the terrorists of Fatah and Hamas have to Judea and Samaria. At least Mexico can tell you the years they were sovereign there, the Mexican governmental leaders who oversaw the land, the currency they circulated there, and the years that Mexico lost sovereignty over their land in California and Texas.
Pressuring Israel to Abandon Her Security While Turning a Blind Eye, Deaf Ear, and Silent Tongue Towards a Concerted Vitriolic Hate Campaign Against Jews That Has Poisoned Children's Minds and Adults' Hearts Through the Next Generation, Even as the Hate Campaign Materially Has Breached and Thus Has Rendered Void and Nugatory Every Israel-Arab Treaty
There is more. America
expressly contracted -- in writing -- that, if Israel were to
cede Gaza, America would require that
Abbas and his "Palestinian
the hate-filled anti-Jewish and
anti-Israel incitement among the population he leads: the
telecasts, the hate-filled radio
broadcasts, the hate-filled
summer camps, the newspapers of hate
and their crossword
puzzles of hate, the
school textbooks of hate.
Yet the hate continues unabated.
Even teaching hate to the
youngest of children. There is no comment or condemnation by
President Obama or Secretary Clinton.
No Israeli relinquishing of land to Mahmoud Abbas or Hamas will bring anything but more Jewish suffering and more Jewish vulnerability, as the weapons Hamas placed in Gaza to ruin life in Israel's South (Sderot, Ashdod, Ashkelon) and the weapons Hezbollah placed in South Lebanon to reach into Israel's northern coastal plain (Haifa, Hadera) next aim to bring the cities of Tel Aviv under rocket fire exposure from Samaria and Jerusalem from Judea.
This is the reality on the ground -- so different from the effort painted by propagandists to score points. Just as so much is confused about the everyday physical interface between Israelis and Arabs living in Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank"). Understandably, when a foreign visitor sees long lines of "West Bank" Arabs waiting to be permitted through Israeli security check points to enter pre-1967 Israel, the delay seems curious. "Why does Israel subject them to such intense inspection?" the visitor wonders. "How terrible the life under 'occupation!'"
Well, a closer look reveals that terrorists -- with a proven record of bringing mass murder -- cross through those borders, too. Some are armed with body explosives. Others carry minuscule portions of explosives that, when combined with other minuscule items smuggled by other terror couriers in their cell, have caused horrific tragedy in the past. And that is the reason for the security fence and the long, long, slow, slow lines at that fence. The fence was built to reduce the carnage. Indeed, upon reflection, is the experience of body inspections at that border all that different from the way that America treats aliens coming across our southern border? Or through our airports? To get into a domestic flight, even American citizens are expected to remove all their metal items -- even keys, pens, nickels, even a dime. And even octogenarian travelers -- every single one of them -- have to remove their shoes for inspection. And elderly people with heart pacemakers have to subject themselves to individualized security checking, full-body wanding. As do people who have had metal splints or rods inserted into their limbs during surgery.
Meanwhile, in Israel, every Jewish Israeli must subject himself to inspection regularly throughout each day. Israelis must open their bags and purses for inspection, and submit to metal-detector body searches every time they enter a bank or post office, pick up a bottle of milk at the supermarket, enter a mall or train station, or visit a hospital or medical clinic. Young Israeli men and women are frisked closely and methodically before they enter nightclubs. These daily "humiliations" extend to body searches at weddings, bar mitzvahs, and even when attending regular synagogue services. Similarly, Jewish schoolchildren in Israel are surrounded by perimeter fences, with armed guards at schoolyard gates. By contrast, Arab schools and villages do not require such fences. Guards are not required at Arab shops, cafes, restaurants, movie theaters, wedding halls or schools. Arabs in the "West Bank" do not need armed guards to accompany their every school trip or youth movement hike -- because they are not targets of terrorism. Thus, the claim that Israel treats Arabs unfairly when slowly securing the safety as people enter pre-1967 Israel from the "West Bank" is mendacious. Israel is fair and reasonable to them -- why else would they be lining up, seeking entry? (One does not see Jews lining up to enter Libya or Syria.)
The Facts on the Ground: Every Israeli Retreat Has Invited Anti-West Arab Terrorists to Arm and Militarize, Rain Unprecedented Destruction, and Launch New Deadly Battle Fronts of Rocket Fire at Israeli Cities That Previously Had Been Secure
In Israel, there are Orthodox
who debate with Jewish secularists whether Jews ever, under any
circumstances, may depart from land that G-d promised in the Torah to
the Jewish Patriarchs. That is a debate that fascinates and engages
whose number I am counted). "Realists," by
contrast, simply need to look at the facts on the ground: Israel ceded
land in Southern Lebanon in return for promises of peace. Instead,
Hezbollah seized the region and has turned it into a rocket-firing
gallery aimed at Israel. Israel ceded land in Gaza in return for
promises of peace. Instead,
seized the region and has turned it into a rocket-firing gallery aimed
at Israel. Every single fact on the ground evidences that any Israeli
cession to Abbas in Judea or Samaria will create a new front of
incessant rocket barrage, and will add yet another rabidly
anti-American, anti-West polity in the Middle East, which will arm
itself and be armed by Iran and her cohorts.
If Israel retreats from any land in Judea or Samaria, it first will fall into the hands of Mahmoud Abbas, who lived a life as Arafat's Number Two (ancient history?), denies there was a Holocaust as described by Western historians (recent history?), and who explicitly rejects the notion that Israel can be called a "Jewish State" (this week's history). And he and his Fatah terrorists are the least of the problem because they already are out-polled among their residents by Hamas, who won the last election -- freedom, democracy, as promised under the Road Map's vision -- and who transparently are bent on destroying Israel (as well as Abbas himself).
The Grand "Two-State" Pyramid Scheme should remain in Cairo and at the Pyramids. The "Two-State Solution" is nothing but another term for a "Final Solution."
We Jews do not do so well with Final Solutions.