Israel Deserves To Die By Un And Hague Court

[ajwps]

Why should Israel and the Jewish people continue to survive after eons of being tortured, expelled, taken into captivity, murdered by the millions and yet remaining a people and a nation of less that .01% of the world population? this portion removed by moderator

there are too many idiots in this world to blindlessly throw out threats against a nationstate and its people like a little hitler. Do not do so again. Thank you. 'DKSuddeth'

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/tobin_2004_07_14.php3?printer_friendly

On some days, looking at Israel's security barrier close up doesn't give the viewer much of a sense of an international controversy.


Driving around the area covered by the fence near Jerusalem earlier this month on a hot Friday afternoon, I saw little that would have justified the hypocritical condemnations of the world. Even in those sections where the media and protesters have regularly gathered to decry the "apartheid wall," there was quiet and little sign of the dust-up that has attached itself to its creation.


Stripped of those scripted demonstrations by foreigners and canned complaints by local Arabs in those quiet hours before Shabbat, it was possible to see the barrier for what it is and is not. That is something the body in the Hague that calls itself an International Court of Justice was unable or unwilling to do.


Stand near it and look one way, and you can usually see Israel's population centers, where going to a restaurant has become an experience akin to visiting an inner-city jewelry store, where you need to be buzzed in by wary owners. Look the other way and you can often see Arab villages, from whose streets armed gangs and suicide bombers have risen to strike at their Jewish neighbors. Look closely and you'll see most of these villages are not the poverty-stricken stereotypes adored by broadcast television cameras, but bustling towns whose growth has continued despite the self-inflicted collapse of the Palestinian economy.

SIMPLY SITTING DUCKS
But according to the International Court of Justice, Israel has no right to build a defensive barrier. The Palestinians, it seems, have been granted a unique honor in the history of international discourse: They have been accorded an internationally recognized right to commit terrorism. On the other hand, the court has handed the Israelis a distinction that is nothing new to the Jewish people: the right to die.


Ignoring the fact that it was Palestinian terror that built the Israeli fence, the court, acting at the suggestion of the U.N. General Assembly, has issued a ruling that historians will view as yet another indicator of how Jew-hatred was back in style little more than a half century after the Holocaust.


While Israel's right of self-defense was acknowledged, the international court effectively denied Israel the ability to carry out such a defense while also refusing to place the building of the fence in the context of terrorism. But, of course, the intent of this travesty — as with much of the propaganda offensive carried out by the Palestinians and their fellow travelers in the last four years — is not to knock down the fence.


Their goal is much broader: the delegitimization of Israel and Zionism itself. After a decade of failed peace talks and terror, the overwhelming majority of Israelis have had enough. To protect themselves against a Palestinian terror war, they are building a fence whose purpose seems as much to separate the two populations as it is to prevent terrorism.

The international court says the fence should run strictly along the 1949 armistice lines that served as Israel's border until 1967. But the problem with th at argument is that it prejudges the disposition of the territories — to which Israel has as good a legal claim as the Palestinians, a right acknowledged by the statements by both President Bush and Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry that Israel has the right to retain portions of the territories — and would effectively make sitting ducks all of the nearly 400,000 Jews who live in Judea and Samaria, as well as in parts of Jerusalem occupied by Jordan from 1949 to 1967. That's exactly what Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and his troops want.


Those who say that the path of the fence is being dictated by Israel's "expansionist" agenda, instead of security concerns, have it backward. As a number of Israeli sources have told me over the past couple of years, had security and security alone been the only criteria for its route, it would have been built far deeper into the West Bank, with many more Palestinians ending up on the Israeli side so as to enable its route to make more strategic sense.


Instead, even in the fence route criticized by some Israelis as taking in too much land, its boundary is set to minimize the effect on Palestinians and run as close as possible to the areas where the targets of Arab terrorism actually live.


Some Israelis wonder how much help the fence will be in the Jerusalem areas where growing Palestinian villages abut both sides of the barrier. But there's no question that statistics show that completed portions of the fence elsewhere have drastically reduced the number of Arab attacks.


As for the question of the inconvenience and hardship the wall has created for the Palestinians, the answer is simple. Had they not launched a war in September 2000, instead of accepting Israel's offer of peace, no fence would exist. And even then, Israel's own Supreme Court has shown itself willing, as it did two weeks ago, to force the army to reroute the barrier to accommodate Palestinian petitioners.

NOT ROOTED IN REASON
Viewed near or far, the fence is ugly, but how can a reasonable person argue with Israel's right to build it? Opposition to it is rooted not in a quest for peace, but in a desire for Israel's eradication.


The question isn't whether Israelis will quiver in the face of new international calumny or even further efforts by Arafat's forces to kill Jews, such as last weekend's bombing in Tel Aviv. They won't. Its people have coped with the trauma of terror, and have, for the most part, not allowed the Palestinians to disrupt their lives. The streets in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem remain full; so are some of the restaurants and hotels, as long-absent tourists have started to return this summer as the intifada has fizzled out in yet another defeat for the Palestinians.


But the real question in the aftermath of the latest outrages from the United Nations and its kangaroo court is for us in the United States. Ironically, some in this country are now urging a greater reliance on the United Nations and the European Union, in spite of the fact that these institutions are closely identified with the deligitimization of Israel that the court ruling represents. The decision on the fence ought to remind us of the dangers of being pulled along with what passes for international opinion.


When global bodies enshrine Jew-hatred in law, as this court has done, decent persons everywhere should tremble.