Although if the recent fatwa making it a religious crime for Muslims to leave “the blessed land”, issued in response to the thousands of Pals, mostly young men, who are stampeding to the exits is any indication, maybe the Pals will solve the “Palestinian problem” themselves.

One can hope, at any rate.

Of course, the terrorists throwing each other off of buildings doesn’t hurt the demographic balance either.

It has all been because of Israel’s (and Jews’) deep-seated desire to get the gentiles to like us. It’s like Sally Fields at the Oscars.

This was symbolized by Moshe Daya’s inexplicable decision to return control of the Har ha Bait to the Waqf after it had been liberated. This was proof that Israel was fully prepared to evacuate the newly liberated areas. If they don’t even care enough to keep the Har ha Bait, why should the Arabs not assume that they will be willing, if not eager, to give everything else up at the drop of a hat?

Why bother to recognize Israel and make peace with it when you know that they are willing, without even a fight, to relinquish everything they have gained if you just say “We like you now?’. If Israel is that unsure of itself, the Arabs need only wait until Israel, desparate for anything resembling “peace”, will jettison the whole kit and kaboodle for one flirtatious glance. That is, essentially, what happened at Oslo.

In retrospect, the only thing that is hard to understand is why the Arabs didn’t try the “phony peace” gambit earlier.

To whom it may concern:

The BBC website and radio broadcasts have run several pieces surrounding the 40-year anniversary of the Six-Day War.

The coverage has been roundly negative, and in some cases downright misleading. If an individual were to base their knowledge of this event solely on your coverage — as unfortunately many will and have — he or she would be forgiven for thinking that a militarily omnipotent US protectorate started an aggressive, unprovoked war in order to steal its neighbors land and subjugate the local population.

Such an individual would have no inkling whatsoever that this supposed aggressor was in fact an isolated country with indefensible borders and no allies willing to defend it, that this tiny country exhausted diplomatic channels in an effort to avoid war, that her government responded in accordance with international law to hostilities initiated by hostile neighboring countries, and that her government’s peace entreaties were arrogantly rejected by the very countries she had defeated.

Indeed, an uninformed reader of your coverage of events would be forgiven for thinking that the the Six-Day War was fought between Israel and the Palestinians, rather than between Israel and the combined armies of Syria, Jordan and Egypt (with help from Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and with the support of the Soviet superpower). While the Palestinians as a distinct polity can hardly be said to have existed in 1967, their narrative nonetheless dominates your coverage of the war.

While it is more than appropriate to point out the lamentable situation of the Palestinians in 2007, the question remains: In June of 1967, what choice did Israel have? And while it is easy to lay the blame for the Palestinians’ plight at Israel’s feet today, the question calls out for an answer: If Israel had not been victorious in 1967, would there today be an Israel to blame?

Sincerely,

********

lol, “Apartheid”. read a f*cking book.

“The conventional wisdom of the seventeen thousand two hundred and eight Six Day War editorials that have been written over the past couple of weeks tells us that in many respects this victory has brought with it an armload of problems that have rendered the victory an actual loss for Israel.”

Did you see the Economist a couple of weeks ago? The cover story was “Israel’s Wasted Victory.” I think that headline encapsulates European public opinion about Israel, generally speaking.

economist.com/...

The main issue for these authors is Israel’s liberation of Yerushalayim, Judea and Samaria. It’s quite unnerving for many Jews to be told that Hebron, the location of the graves of our patriarchs and matriarchs, as well as Yerushalayim, our holiest city, need to be shared with people who want to kill us in order to achieve “peace”.

There is some very compelling evidence that has come to light regarding the USSR’s role in the 1967 War. Recently opened archives uncovered documents pointing toward a possible Soviet attack on Israel. Sorry for the crosspost:

meria.idc.ac.i...
The Cold War’s Longest Cover-Up: How and Why the USSR Instigated the 1967 War
Middle East Review of International Affairs
Isabella Ginor

“The Soviet warning to Egypt about supposed Israeli troop concentrations on the Syrian border in May 1967 has long been considered a blunder that precipitated a war which the USSR neither desired nor expected. New evidence from Soviet and other Warsaw Pact documents, as well as memoirs of contemporary actors, contradicts this accepted theory. The author demonstrates that this warning was deliberate disinformation, part of a plan approved at the highest level of Soviet leadership to elicit Egyptian action that would provoke an Israeli strike. Soviet military intervention against the “aggressor” was intended to follow and was prepared well in advance.”

yalepress.yale...
Foxbats Over Dimona: The Soviets’ Nuclear Gamble in the Six-Day War
Isabella Ginor and Gideon Remez

“Fearing an imminent invasion, Israel launched a preemptive air attack on Egypt in June 1967 and it achieved such staggering devastation that in just six days the war was won and the future of the Middle East was forever changed. But have our assumptions about the genesis of the Six-Day War been misguided? What was the involvement of the Soviet Union? Were the Israelis planning to use nuclear weapons? Were the Soviets?

This book provides an account that is startlingly different from all previous histories of the Six-Day War. Award-winning Israeli journalists Isabella Ginor and Gideon Remez investigate newly available documents and testimonies from the former Soviet Union, cross-check them extensively against Israeli and Western sources, and arrive at fresh and frightening conclusions. Filled with astonishing new information about this crucial week in history, the book paints a disturbing picture of Cold War aggression, deception, and calculated willingness to precipitate a global crisis.”

“Apartheid” writes:

“If a peaceful and free Palestine country existed, 80 percent of international security problems would be resolved.”

You must be kidding, right? First, the notion of a peaceful and free Palestine is a huge “if,” given the Palestinians propensity to disagree (i.e. kill each other) over basic political principles. Second, even if the Palestinians had a state tomorrow, radical Islamists will continue to kill people in the name of Allah. For example, the Abu Sayyaf thugs in the Philippines and the Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen terrorists in Kashmir would continue their campaigns. Third, the world is a very, very large place and Palestine and Israel are very, very small. There are a whole lot of problems out there in the big wide world.

Here is a short list of countries facing “international security problems”. Most of these are border disputes. In some cases the conflicts are internal (for example, Sudan and Darfur). In these internal cases troops and/or observers have been brought in from outside thereby internationalizing the conflicts. The establishment of a Palestinian state would clearly make no difference in any of these cases:

Afghanistan
Democratic Republic of Congo (Angola, Namibia and Zimbabwe supported the DRC against rebels backed by Uganda and Rwanda)
Ethiopia and Eritrea
India and Pakistan (Kashmir)
Morocco and Western Sahara
Russia (Chechnya)
Somalia and Ethiopia
Sri Lanka
Sudan (Darfur)
Former Yugoslavia

The protest in Italy was mainly against President Bush and not about Israel. Indonesia is populated by crazy Islamists so of course there was going to be a protest against Israel. These idiots have nothing else to do. Most human beings do not support barbaric terrorists.

There has never been a Palestinian country and if Israel didn’t exist the Islamofacists would still be fighting against the rest of the world. And the Arab “Palestinians” would be calling themselves Jordanians and living in Jordan.

BTW The situation in 1948 of Israel’s birth had many simmilarities. The Arab nations refuesed then as well to seek a solution that allowed Jews a homeland.

And if fairies and pixies sprinkled their magic dust everyone could fly. Let’s be realistic, a major component of their problem is their lack of unity. They are more concerned with tribal and religious allegience, then any real national. They would need to make peace amongst themselves first, which seems rather difficult in the arab world. They seem to only maintain order through force.

And try to write without screaming, it’s getting tiresome.

I think it wouldve been more worthwhile to cover the rallys against the Israeli occupation of Palestine held in Tel Aviv, London, Madrid, D.C., Sydney, South Africa, France, Tokyo, Denmark, Germany, Brazil, Norway .. hell even Indonesia!?

sorry dahhhling, but that is the truth.

and heres another one.. If a peaceful and free Palestine country existed, 80 percent of international security problems would be resolved.

love & light