My coming out as a Jew would certainly surprise my Irish Catholic parents who produced a brood of seven Irish Catholics, including me, three of whom became priests, including me.
I can appreciate Mr. Maguire's heart-felt point of view concerning Israel and what he perceives as the intransigent position that Israel supposedly takes towards peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
He states that: "An Israel that will not settle for the 1967 borders in accord with international law is not being Jewish."
And then, most disturbingly for me, asserts that:
"An Israel that ignores the repeated offer of full recognition by the Arab League, Iran, and even Hamas if they settle for the 1967 borders with minor adjustments and reparations for the displaced is relying on kill-power more than on justice, and that is not Jewish. Nor is it safe."
On the first point regarding Israel's supposed violation of international law, it strikes me as disingenuous (at best)not to acknowledge that Israel agreed to all the terms of the 1967 cease-fire as embodied in UN Resolution 242. In contrast, it was the defeated Arab states that adopted the "Khartoum Resolution" of 1967 which famously adopted the "Three Nos" Namely: No peace with Israel, No recognition of Israel and No negotiations with Israel.
All Israeli governments from 1967 onward (including the present government) have publicly expressed their desire to enter into negotiations with their neighbors. In fact, when Egypt and Jordan were willing to negotiate, peace agreements (including Israel's relinquishment of land obtained during the '67 war) were reached and are currently in effect.
While it is true that Israel's interpretation of the requirements of 242 are not the same as their Arab neighbor's interpretation of that resolution, the very first step in reaching an agreement is a willingness to talk. Israel has shown this time and time again.
In relation to Israel's supposed ignoring of the Arab league's initiative, (available at: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/arabplan.html) I refer your interested readers to this analysis: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/arabplan1.html
As your readers will see, there are (from the Israeli point of view) significant security concerns that render the plan unworkable.
As a recent "Jew", Mr. Maguire has perhaps not yet experienced the virulent hatred directed against him and his people as meticulously documented by such organizations as: Memri.org - http://memri.org/ or Palestinian Media Watch - http://www.palwatch.org/ or any one of dozens of websites dedicated to better understanding the situation in the Middle East.
Even if one were to agree with Mr. Maguire's conclusions, in his own words "you can’t build a fact on a fiction". I submit that failure to consider the whole picture (that is to say the Israeli point of view on these issues) demonstrates that Mr. Maguire has done just that.
Calling oneself a "Jew" and acknowledging the richness and humanity of the Jewish religion and history does not give one license to ignore the facts and make unfair and inflammatory accusations against the Jewish State.
I urge any of your readers who wish to understand the situation better to educate themselves on the complex issues facing both sides before coming to stark conclusions.
1 comment:
I can appreciate Mr. Maguire's heart-felt point of view concerning Israel and what he perceives as the intransigent position that Israel supposedly takes towards peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
He states that: "An Israel that will not settle for the 1967 borders in accord with international law is not being Jewish."
And then, most disturbingly for me, asserts that:
"An Israel that ignores the repeated offer of full recognition by the Arab League, Iran, and even Hamas if they settle for the 1967 borders with minor adjustments and reparations for the displaced is relying on kill-power more than on justice, and that is not Jewish. Nor is it safe."
On the first point regarding Israel's supposed violation of international law, it strikes me as disingenuous (at best)not to acknowledge that Israel agreed to all the terms of the 1967 cease-fire as embodied in UN Resolution 242. In contrast, it was the defeated Arab states that adopted the "Khartoum Resolution" of 1967 which famously adopted the "Three Nos" Namely: No peace with Israel, No recognition of Israel and No negotiations with Israel.
All Israeli governments from 1967 onward (including the present government) have publicly expressed their desire to enter into negotiations with their neighbors. In fact, when Egypt and Jordan were willing to negotiate, peace agreements (including Israel's relinquishment of land obtained during the '67 war) were reached and are currently in effect.
While it is true that Israel's interpretation of the requirements of 242 are not the same as their Arab neighbor's interpretation of that resolution, the very first step in reaching an agreement is a willingness to talk. Israel has shown this time and time again.
In relation to Israel's supposed ignoring of the Arab league's initiative, (available at: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/arabplan.html) I refer your interested readers to this analysis: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/arabplan1.html
As your readers will see, there are (from the Israeli point of view) significant security concerns that render the plan unworkable.
As a recent "Jew", Mr. Maguire has perhaps not yet experienced the virulent hatred directed against him and his people as meticulously documented by such organizations as: Memri.org - http://memri.org/ or Palestinian Media Watch - http://www.palwatch.org/ or any one of dozens of websites dedicated to better understanding the situation in the Middle East.
Even if one were to agree with Mr. Maguire's conclusions, in his own words "you can’t build a fact on a fiction". I submit that failure to consider the whole picture (that is to say the Israeli point of view on these issues) demonstrates that Mr. Maguire has done just that.
Calling oneself a "Jew" and acknowledging the richness and humanity of the Jewish religion and history does not give one license to ignore the facts and make unfair and inflammatory accusations against the Jewish State.
I urge any of your readers who wish to understand the situation better to educate themselves on the complex issues facing both sides before coming to stark conclusions.
Sincerely,
Ian Lane
Post a Comment