Ben has just issued an outstanding column, "The Case for Israeli Settlements, " which eloquently explains why, instead of castigating Israel for constructing new "settlements," we ought to be encouraging them. Here's a sample:
What's the problem with Israel building homes in its capital city? The problem is that the homes will be built in two neighborhoods -- Pisgat Zeev and Har Homa -- which lie east of the so-called "Green Line," the pre-1967 Israeli border.
And the international community doesn't like that at all. According to the international community, Israel's decision to build constitutes a slap in the face to its Arab neighbors, particularly the Palestinian Arabs.
Here's the question: so what?
The world should be far less concerned about Israel's settlement policy than about the terroristic, fascistic nature of Israel's enemies. Supporters of the so-called two-state solution -- in reality, a piecemeal attempt to dismantle the state of Israel by making its borders indefensible -- assume a moral equivalence between Israel and her enemies. They argue against Israeli settlements as if Israel were America and its Arab neighbors Canada, as if the Arab-Israeli conflict were a simple border dispute. In reality, Israel shares Western values; its enemies share values with the mullahs. The Arab-Israeli conflict is a conflict between two contrasting worldviews: freedom and fascism.
The rest of the world, including, sadly, our own State Department, doesn't see it that way. Of course, they'd deny it, but I believe Meryl Yourish has it about right when she explains the difference in attitude as "Israeli Double Standard Time, " in effect only on days ending with a "Y."
Go read all of Ben's column. It's a good start toward recognizing the reality that sooner or later, we're going to have to choose between good and evil.
No comments:
Post a Comment