Comments for Middle East study group approves recommendations amid ambiguities at http://www.pres-outlook.com , comment 1 to 4 out of 4 comments http://www.pres-outlook.com Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:38:09 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.pres-outlook.com/news-and-analysis3/1-news-a-analysis/9631-middle-east-study-group-approves-recommendations-amid-ambiguities.html#comment-5296 This “report” is an insult to the Jewish community. It is hostile, inaccurate, and libelous. If accepted, the church will (again) announce itself as racist, anti-Semitic, and at war with its Jewish neighbors. First of all, what gives your church the right to dictate to a sovereign nation what it ‘should” or “should not” do? Have you issued reports of this sort to Sudan, China, or Saudi Arabia? When you do, and when you show as much attention to the millions being slaughtered in the Congo and Sudan, perhaps we will listen to your complaints. It takes incredible hubris to think you have any right to tell a democratic U.S. ally under attack by Islamic radicals bent on extermination what you think it has the “right” to do. Your “report” is so full of factual misrepresentations it's hard to know where to begin. First of all, the 1967 armistice line is not “internationally recognized” by anyone. It was a temporary truce line settled after five Arab nations attacked Israel, an “internationally recognized” nation, in 1948. I don't hear any condemnation of that attack or the two subsequent attacks in 1967 or 1973 that attempted to move that line into the Mediterranean Sea. Your only condemnation is about the fact that Israel won those wars and wasn't eliminated. Who are you to “blame” us for winning a war of annihilation started by the Arabs? Apparently, you'd rather see us dead. Second, Judea and Samaria are not “occupied.” They are territory originally assigned to Israel in the 1948 "internationally recognized" U.N. partition plan. That territory was captured by Jordan after it attacked Israel in 1948; its Jewish inhabitants were massacred and the few survivors fled. Its recapture in 1967, again in a time of war begun by Jordan and other Arabs, only re-draws the armistice line where the U.N. had declared it to originally be. Israel later offered that territory back to Jordan, which refused to take it. No nation in history until now has ever been criticized for not “giving back” all territory won in a defensive war (Israel already gave the entire Sinai Peninsula and the entire Gaza strip, uprooted tens of thousands of its own citizens, for “peace.” That “peace” brought about 8,000 rocket attacks aimed at civilians). Third, there already is a “Palestinian” government in both the “West Bank” and Gaza. Both governments have declared war on Israel and have as their charter (the) requirement to kill every Jew on their planet. They are already armed by the U.S. and E.U. And now you want these genocidal governments to have more “internationally recognized” power so they can better attack and massacre their neighbors? Your proposal smacks of genocide. No wonder you are marginalized and ignored. Fourth, the only mention of Israel's “right” (as you put it) to exist is in a footnote saying that this existence impinges on “Palestinian” existence! Some “right”, as you put it. Aside from the fact that the existence of one person or group of people does not cause the existence of another to be “negated”, this is in no way an independent confirmation of Israel's “right” to exist. And, of course, neither Israel, Jews, nor me personally require your acceptance of our “right” to life. That “right” is given by God, not your church. I'm not going to waste my time by continuing; it would take hours. Suffice to say that your proposed “report” is a racist, anti-Semitic document, as (is) your attempt to (illegally) boycott Israel. The Jewish people completely reject your self-declared “right” to tell us whether and how to live, especially as adopting your suggestions would be suicide. You should be ashamed of yourself by promoting this hateful attack on Jews. Kerry Hurwitz Boston, Mass. - Kerry Hurwitz Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:42:37 +0100 http://www.pres-outlook.com/news-and-analysis3/1-news-a-analysis/9631-middle-east-study-group-approves-recommendations-amid-ambiguities.html#comment-5283 This 'report' is not only hostile to Jews, and antisemitic in tone if not intent. First of all, what gives the Presbyterian Church the right to try to dictate to Israel what it 'should' or 'should not' do? Have you issued reports of this sort about Sudan, China, Saudi Arabia, or the human rights abuses of Hamas and the Palestine Authority? If you are singling out Israel for approbation instead of or more than despotic regimes which murder millions and actively support genocide, then you are guilty of antisemitism according to the 3 D's enumerated by Natan Sharansky - double standards, delegitimization, and demonization. It takes incredible hubris to think you have any right to tell a democracy under attack by genocidal neighbors, who have vowed to kill every Jew on the planet, what you think it has the 'right' to do. When the authors of the report move to a war zone where terrorism causes the equivalent of the death toll of 9/11 every three weeks and where rockets target schoolchildren and destroy the economy of the entire southern part of the country, then they will have the right to criticize Israel's actions. The 'report' is so full of factual misrepresentations it's hard to know where to begin. First, the 1967 armistice line is not 'internationally recognized' and has no legal standing. It reflects a truce declared after five Arab nations attacked Israel, an 'internationally recognized' nation, in 1948. I don't hear any condemnation by the church of that attack or the two subsequent attacks in 1967 or 1973 that attempted to move that line into the Mediterranean Sea. Your only condemnation is that Israel won those wars and wasn't eliminated. Who are you to 'blame' Israel for winning a war of annihilation started by the Arabs? Apparently, you'd rather see Israel eliminated, and its citizens murdered, rather than deal with the consequences of surviving. Second, Judea and Samaria are not 'occupied'. This territory was assigned to Israel in the 1948 'internationally recognized' U.N. partition plan. It was captured by Jordan after it attacked Israel in 1948; its Jewish inhabitants were massacred and the survivors fled to Jerusalem. Its recapture in 1967, again during a war begun by Jordan and other Arabs, only reflects the original plan declared by the U.S. After the 1967 war, Israel offered the recaptured territory to Jordan in exchange for peace. Jordan reused and answered with the three "no's" of the Khartoum meeting - no peace, no recognition, no negotiations. No nation wanted this territory until the the terrorist "Palestine" Liberation Organization literally invented the concept of the "Palestinian" people in the 1970's. No nation history has ever been expected to unilaterally return territory won in a defensive war, in exchange for absolutely nothing, as the church suggests. Israel had already given up the entire Gaza strip in the hope that it would bring about peace, uprooting tens of thousands of its own citizens. The result was eight years of rocket attacks aimed at civilians, until Operation Cast Lead destroyed (at least temporarily) the rocket factories. The report's authors do no seem to understand that there is already a 'Palestinian' government in both the 'West Bank' and Gaza. Both governments have declared war on Israel and have as their charter the requirement to murder every Jew on Earth. They are already armed by the U.S. and E.U. And now you want these genocidal governments to have more 'internationally recognized' power so they can better attack and massacre their neighbors? This proposal enables genocide. It is an attack on the very existence of the Jewish people. The only mention of Israel's 'right' (as you put it) to exist in the report itself is in a footnote saying that this existence impinges on 'Palestinian' existence! Again, the right of Jews to life, not to mention the existence of their sovereign nation, is nowhere in evidence. Aside from the obvious fact that the existence of one person or group of people does not cause the existence of another to be 'negated', this statement in no way confirms Israel's 'right' to exist. And, of course, neither Israel or the Jewish people require your acceptance of our 'right' to life. That 'right' is given by God, not by the Presbyterian church. I'm not going to spend more time continuing; it would take hours. Suffice to say that the proposed 'report' is an inflammatory and biased document that can be fairly as antisemitic. The Jewish people should reject your self-declared 'right' to tell us whether and how to live, especially as adopting your suggestions would be suicide. The church needs to engage in serious self-reflection and dialogue with the Jewish community before releasing this ill-conceived and hateful document. - Happy and Proud Mon, 01 Mar 2010 08:47:29 +0100 http://www.pres-outlook.com/news-and-analysis3/1-news-a-analysis/9631-middle-east-study-group-approves-recommendations-amid-ambiguities.html#comment-5282 The authors of this Middle East study can't bring themselves to say that Israel has a right to exist. What more needs to be said about this report? Clearly the authors side, not with peace, but with those Palestinians and others who want to destroy Israel. The endorsement of the Kairos Document shows they've even abandoned non-violence, because the Kairos Document unambiguously endorses terrorism as "legitimate resistance." See clause 1.5, which addresses “armed resistance” and okays terrorism as “legal resistance.” Clause 4.3 also justifies terrorism. The word is put in quotes as the authors consider the murder of innocents legitimate, and they argue: ‘”The roots of ‘terrorism’ are in the human injustice committed and in the evil of the occupation. These must be removed if there be a sincere intention to remove ‘terrorism’.” In other words, on-going terrorism is a legitimate means toward their political objectives; i.e., an end to “injustice” and “the occupation.” In context, an “end to injustice” would include inviting the millions of grandchildren of Palestinians displaced by the Arab wars against Israel to settle in Israel and turn it into a Palestinian state. The document doesn't say what it means by the end of “the occupation.” However, the groups carrying out the terrorism endorsed by this document define all of Israel as occupied. I've published an article on the Kairos Document, written from a Canadian angle here: http://www.hurryupharry.org/2010/02/18/palestinian-christians-revoke-6th-commandment/ - Brian Henry Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:12:02 +0100 http://www.pres-outlook.com/news-and-analysis3/1-news-a-analysis/9631-middle-east-study-group-approves-recommendations-amid-ambiguities.html#comment-5198 I read the foregoing review of the Report from the Middle East Study Group I believe the "Report" fairly represents my own views but freely acknowledge I have no historical experience on which to form this judgement. However, I do have more than 55 years as a Presbyterian Elder/Trustee. I do see a parallel in the work of the Study Group with that of the framers and patriots of our American Republic trying to achieve concensus on our delaration of Independence and our Constitution... it is no easy job. Let's take the Report and give it a fair hearing. - Richard Stewart Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:01:32 +0100