PrintMarch 18, 2007
Kristof: debate the relationship with Israel
Anyone who has been reading my blogging over the years, has probably seen Nicolas Kristof appear periodically, since I believe he has had an anti-Israel agenda. The fact that he strongly supported Florida professor Sami Al Arian when he was accused of being a key person in funneling American money to Palestinian Islamic Jihad was one tip-off. PIJ is responsible for the deaths of many Israelis and Americans, including a young American teenage girl.
Al-Arian was forced to plead guilty and is serving time in prison. Unlike the few other newspapers and columnists who supported Al-Arian Kristof has refused to issue a mea culpa. Al Arian just disappeared from his columns-a non-person.
Conversely, Kristof has engaged in a campaign to end the genocide in Darfur - many columns have been devoted to this subject and he won a Pulitzer for his efforts. However, not one column, not one sentence has ever addressed the issue of Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial or gloating over the prospects that Iran will bring about another Holocaust. Not one column or sentence has ever criticized the hate that is found in Palestinian camps, children's textbooks, media and mosques.
Well, the logical progression has culminated in today's Sunday New York Times column, which calls for a re-evaluation of America's support for Israel. It is behind the Times Select Wall, so excerpts have to be kept within Fair Use limits.
Democrats are railing at just about everything President Bush does, with one prominent exception: Mr. Bush's crushing embrace of Israel. [....]King Abdullah of Jordan spoke to Congress this month and observed: "The wellspring of regional division, the source of resentment and frustration far beyond, is the denial of justice and peace in Palestine." Though widely criticized, King Abdullah was exactly right: from Morocco to Yemen to Sudan, the Palestinian cause arouses ordinary people in coffee shops more than almost anything else. [....]You can argue that Arabs pursue a double standard, focusing on repression by Israelis while ignoring greater human rights violations by fellow Arabs. But the suffering in Palestinian territories, while not remotely at the scale of brutality in Sudan or Iraq, is still tragically real. [....]The best hope for Israel in the long run isn't a better fence or more weaponry; they can provide a measure of security in the short run but will be of little help if terrorists turn, as they eventually will if the present trajectory continues, to chemical, biological or radiological weapons. Ultimately, security for Israel will emerge only from a peace agreement with Palestinians.
No consideration of the failure of Oslo, and the repeated failure of Palestinians to live up to their promises. Nor any consideration of the goal of Hamas, supported by the Palestinian voters, to destroy Israel.
