Despite Netanyahu’s unprecedented freeze of all construction in the disputed territories PA/PLO/Fatah leader Abbas refuses to have direct negotiations with Israel demanding that Israel first concede most of what is supposed to be negotiated. Meanwhile Hezbollah/Lebanon attacks an Israeli patrol, which was cutting down a tree, after informing the UN peace-keepers as per the UNSC resolution 1701 agreement. Perhaps trying to deflect attention from the indictment of senior Hezbollah operatives for the 2005 assassination of Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri.
Both of these developments could have happened ten years ago and we wouldn’t have known the difference. At the same time they reveal yet another fallacy in pro-Palestinian thinking.
You see the average Jew on the streets of Paris, London, Madrid, Quebec, Burn, Berlin , Amsterdam etc. knows exactly what to expect during any conflict in the middle east, anti-Semitism, boycotts, media libel, and flag-burning/destructive protests etc. Eventually many Jews decide that they are no longer welcome in these countries, especially the ones which are rapidly filling with Muslim immigrants. Because it is usually those Muslim immigrants who target anything Jewish, and it is the host governments which are faced with the difficult option of integrating Muslims but often find it easier to allow them an avenue to hate, the Jews are a convenient target.
So the hardworking Jew, probably a doctor, scientist, or financial analyst returns home one day perhaps with drying blood/spittle on their shirt, a light injury contributed by the dregs of their society a disaffected Muslim, left wing, or right wins thug. They sit down with their family take of their hat covering/hiding their kippa, and describe how they were jumped on a train full of people by a group of bums shouting “death to Israel” or too “bad Hitler didn’t finish the job” -they tried to defend themselves but there were too many cowards…
Why not move to Israel, there our family will be protected, after all it is one of the most successful countries in the world were Jews are allowed to protect themselves and if there is discrimination is doesn’t target Jews. They move to Israel and help contribute to the latest scientific breakthrough perhaps another Nobel prize!
The above is exactly what is going on all over the Jewish-world Israel is seeing the largest influx of Jews from North America, France and the UK since the 90’s. Never mind the steady flow of Jews from Africa, and Asia. The fact of the matter is that every war in the Middle East increases immigration to Israel, and Israel becomes stronger. The byproduct of this inevitability is that Palestinians and those who encourage their self immolation -most of the power hungry Muslim middle-east, become weaker.
It is ironic considering that that many Palestinians/left-wingers/demographers and one state advocates, believe openly or otherwise that it is just a matter of time before Israel’s Jewish majority devolves into a minority. The argument in their mind is that we can outwait the Jews and in the intern make their lives miserable (as if this somehow encourages ambivalent Jews to accept the notion that if there was no state of Israel they would have equal rights in Palestine!).
Yet what happens if Frances 500,000 plus Jewish community or even a fraction of the Americas 7 million plus Jewish population feels like they need to move to Israel? Let us further postulate that many of these Jews find that the West Bank is really cheap… But further aggressions by Hezbollah and HAMAS, stirred by their masters in Iran is exactly what actualizes the above scenario. And runs contrary to the line of reasoning that supports Abbas’s refusal to negotiate, as war strengthens Israel.
Some with noxious conspirator tendencies (those who are adept at taking a kernel of truth and using it to prove a lie please see post for discussion on this tendency: http://factoru.blogspot.com/2010/07/oliver-even-if-jews-do-control-americas.html) conclude that this proves that anti-Semitism is fomented by Israel, or by the ADL. Unlikely, but either way the longer the Palestinians wait to get their act together and give up on their dream of greater Palestine, the more war and thus the smaller their chances of having a land of their own. This is besides the fact that in every war with Israel the arab/muslims always sustain more casualties.
For those who are really pro-Palestinians (not anti-Israel), you would do well to encourage less war and more conversation.
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Soft drinks, Circumcision, and Burka’s: Beware of the slippery slope!
In light of the accelerating burka bans sweeping across Europe and parts of the Arab world, I decided to resurrect this post.
One of the most common legal and philosophical arguments heard in today's classrooms is the refrain "its a slippery slope". For example if we ban trans-fat for health reasons what will the health argument be used for next -perhaps red meat?
However, the slippery slope has recently exited the classroom and inundated the western hemisphere. Governor Paterson (D-NY)is pushing a bill to tax soft drinks in New York, after all soft drinks are unhealthy.
And why not? If we already tax cigarettes at 300 percent and banned trans-fat from restaurant chains, why shouldn't the government combine health concerns with revenue interests and tax soft drinks? We, the healthy consumers who enjoy the occasional steak, should not be surprised if we are asked for ID next time we enter a steak house!
Yet the slippery slopes of New York are relativity innocuous. Four major countries in Western Europe have recently moved to ban burkas (burqa or burkha). In France, Britain, Italy, and even in Holocaust-handicapped Germany public surveys have shown majority support of a total ban on the full body covering worn by Muslim women (update: Syria passed a law banning burkas in universities).
Why? France's president Sarkozy summed it up when he stated that "the burkas message of a women's segregation from larger society is antithetical to Western notions of equality and liberty". Some reading this post may ask two questions.
1. Does this indicate Mendel is pro-burka?
2. Whats wrong with banning the Islamist burka?
First of all I am not a fan of the burka nor the extremism it represents.
Second, this is of real concern to all of us.
In liberal England parents have been sued for circumcising their son. Additionally, a Jewish school is being forced to accept children who were defined as Jewish by the government in opposition to the Orthodox Rabbis Halachic (Jewish law) decision.
In both these cases the government contends that the actions they overturned were antithetical to Western values. What's next, no Shabbos-observance on Saturday or crucifixes around the neck?
The fact of the matter is that certain arguments, though having merit, create hazards that we only recognize after the fact.
Beware of the slippery slope!
One of the most common legal and philosophical arguments heard in today's classrooms is the refrain "its a slippery slope". For example if we ban trans-fat for health reasons what will the health argument be used for next -perhaps red meat?
However, the slippery slope has recently exited the classroom and inundated the western hemisphere. Governor Paterson (D-NY)is pushing a bill to tax soft drinks in New York, after all soft drinks are unhealthy.
And why not? If we already tax cigarettes at 300 percent and banned trans-fat from restaurant chains, why shouldn't the government combine health concerns with revenue interests and tax soft drinks? We, the healthy consumers who enjoy the occasional steak, should not be surprised if we are asked for ID next time we enter a steak house!
Yet the slippery slopes of New York are relativity innocuous. Four major countries in Western Europe have recently moved to ban burkas (burqa or burkha). In France, Britain, Italy, and even in Holocaust-handicapped Germany public surveys have shown majority support of a total ban on the full body covering worn by Muslim women (update: Syria passed a law banning burkas in universities).
Why? France's president Sarkozy summed it up when he stated that "the burkas message of a women's segregation from larger society is antithetical to Western notions of equality and liberty". Some reading this post may ask two questions.
1. Does this indicate Mendel is pro-burka?
2. Whats wrong with banning the Islamist burka?
First of all I am not a fan of the burka nor the extremism it represents.
Second, this is of real concern to all of us.
In liberal England parents have been sued for circumcising their son. Additionally, a Jewish school is being forced to accept children who were defined as Jewish by the government in opposition to the Orthodox Rabbis Halachic (Jewish law) decision.
In both these cases the government contends that the actions they overturned were antithetical to Western values. What's next, no Shabbos-observance on Saturday or crucifixes around the neck?
The fact of the matter is that certain arguments, though having merit, create hazards that we only recognize after the fact.
Beware of the slippery slope!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)