Strange we cannot find any “disaffected” Palestinian voices, eh? Oh that’s right, they get their throats cut at night for “collaborating” with Israel. Meanwhile, there are entire parties and organizations in Israel that support these peace intiatives with Palestine. That said, I am very sympathetic to Joe Sax’s concerns but one must be careful not to be a “well-intentioned” critic.
Problem: The Palestine Authority is under the control of a gangster/terrorist/thug: Yassir Arafat. No reform is possible. No independent media coverage of Palestine is possible or your news organization loses its license or your reporters get roughed up. Talk peace until the cows come home but until the Palestinians recognize Israel’s right to exist… and I believe that Israel as a democracy which respects human rights is fully cognizant of the problems of being an “occupying” power, hence the wall. I think it is a good idea and one long overdue. This will finally give the Palestinians their own homeland, nation, whatever they want to call it. But after losing four to five wars that they have started, guess what like others they are going to lose some territory. Without a peace treaty, Israel will need to take over land for its national security. Most of this is expected to be along the Jordan River valley which is empty of people. It is desert. Also, why is it that Jews are not allowed to live on the West Bank but 1 million Arabs are granted Israeli citizenship and have 11 members of the Knesset?
Also, I am curious about this whole Temple Mount thing. This is the holiest site to the Jews and also the third holiest site to the Muslims, though of course the holiness of said site has been fairly recent for the Muslims when the political aspects came into play.
What if the Ethiopians would conquer Saudi Arabia and build a church in the Kaaba. Would we be talking about splitting that site between two groups? What about if the Egyptians ruled Rome and built a mosque in St. Peter’s Square, would Catholics be willing to split the site? What if Mexicans became the majority in LA (whoops they already have) and decided to split the city between Mexico and the US? Would Americans allow it? Just curious. On this I don’t really want to venture too much of an opinion. I would merely point out that:
If Palestine (then known only as Arabs) had defeated the Jews, I believe that all Jews would have been killed or expelled. This did not happen with the Palestinians.
If the Arabs ruled over the Jews, there would be no media coverage of the massive killings of Jews that would ensue. There would be no journalist entering the Tel Aviv camps to ask the Jews what they thought of the Palestinian occupation.
So while I sympathize with the Palestinians, these are not two equal groups fighting it out. One is a democracy that allows dissension and media coverage and scrutiny of its actions and activities and its decision-making process is open to public scrutiny. It is a system of courts, laws and rights.
The other is a corrupt dictator that allows no dissent, has no respect for human rights, repeatedly threatens media organizations and pressures them to slant their coverage: Remember the great Jenin Massacre of 52 (32 of which were militants, the others killed by terrorist pipe bombs rather than Israeli bullets). So before we all start wailing about peace, it is not always the highest good. That’s like saying there should be no crime prevention when one is a mugger and the other is an innocent pedestrian since both sides need to have dialogue about the problem. All funding should be cut off to Arafat. If nothing else, it may not stop the terrorism but it would keep him from adding another US$1 billion to his personal fortune. Talk about building palaces while your people “suffer” Saddam style.