Thursday, September 15, 2011

A Truly Ridiculous Position. Goldblog Strikes Again

Did you hear? The Palestinians would not allow Jews to live in their new state. Shocking.
"After the experience of the last 44 years of military occupation and all the conflict and friction, I think it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated," Maen Areikat, the PLO ambassador, said during a meeting with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. He was responding to a question about the rights of minorities in a Palestine of the future.
Such a state would be the first to officially prohibit Jews or any other faith since Nazi Germany, which sought a country that was judenrein, or cleansed of Jews, said Elliott Abrams, a former U.S. National Security Council official.
Commenting on this less-than-shocking revelation, Atlantic Blogmeister and Middle East expert Jeffrey Goldberg wrote,
"The Jews who would theoretically live in Hebron under the framework of a theoretical peace deal should be offered Palestinian citizenship, and would have to live under Palestinian law, and be protected by Palestinian authorities. But the idea that Israel would agree to a settlement in which Jews were denied their religious rights in Hebron is ludicrous."
The last time Jews lived in Hebron under Arab rule
Seriously? Would he live comfortably under Palestinian law and feel safe protected by the Palestinian Authorities? Jeff, have you forgotten what happened the last time Jews lived in Hebron under Arab authority (er, British. Sorry, my bad. Didn't see much difference.) And have you forgotten what happened last week in Cairo, when no less than the President of the United States had to intervene to prevent a lynching of Israelis in Cairo. (How's that Arab Spring going?) And what of the Jew who was killed this year in Nablus (which we call Shechem) by a Palestinian police officer for committing the crime of wishing to pray at the Tomb of Joseph?
Goldberg lives in that American liberal fantasy world where because people should act reasonably and nicely, they will. He advocates relinquishing Judea and Samaria (er, the "West Bank") because the current situation is "untenable," but then makes crazy statements suggesting that Israel should not hand over said land without first guaranteeing their religious rights to live in the territories that they hand over.
The only sensible statement in the entire post is Areikat's. He might be stupid for telling the truth, but at least he's being honest.