The Palestinian Obsession

If nothing else, the Palestinians' UN statehood gambit goes a long way towards revealing the deep-seated European and US pathologies that enable and prolong the Palestinian conflict with Israel.

In a nutshell, the Palestinian Authority - or Fatah - or PLO initiative of asking the UN Security Council and the General Assembly to upgrade its status to that of a sovereign UN member state or a sovereign non-UN member state is an act of diplomatic aggression.

Eighteen years ago this week, on September 13, 1993, the PLO signed the Declaration of Principles with Israel on the White House lawn.

There, the terror group committed itself to a peace process in which all disputes between Israel and the PLO - including the issue of Palestinian statehood - would be settled in the framework of bilateral negotiations.

The PA was established on the basis of this accord. The territory, money, arms and international legitimacy it has been given was due entirely to the PLO pledge to resolve the Palestinian conflict with Israel through bilateral negotiations.

By abandoning negotiations with Israel two years ago, and opting instead to achieve its nationalist aims outside the framework of a peace treaty with Israel, the Palestinians are destroying the diplomatic edifice on which the entire concept of a peace process is based. They are announcing that they have no intention of living at peace with Israel. Rather they intend to move ahead at Israel's expense.

In truth, there is little new in the Palestinians' behavior. They have been using the UN to weaken Israel diplomatically since the early 1970s. Moreover, even if their bid does provide them with upgraded diplomatic status, it won't change the reality on the ground, nor are the Palestinians particularly interested in changing the situation on the ground.

As the PLO ambassador in Lebanon, Abdullah Abdullah, made clear in an interview Wednesday with Lebanon's Daily Star, in the event that the UN recognizes some form of Palestinian statehood at the UN, the new "State of Palestine" will still expect the UN to support the so-called Palestinian "refugees."

This is true, he said, even for the "refugees" who live in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. That is, the same UN that the Palestinians seek recognition of statehood from will be expected to provide relief to Palestinian "refugees" living inside "Palestine."

As he put it, "Even Palestinian refugees living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."

Caroline Glick

Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post, where this article first appeared.

Be the first to read Caroline Glick's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 8:00 PM

Unless a BIG Miracle happens,...(not very likely),...what I mean by miracle is that MUSLIMS in Force and in VERY large numbers Rally all over the world ''TO REJECT ISLAMIC VIOLENCE and CHANGE THE CURRICULUM of their SCHOOLS to stop teaching LIES and HATRED,....any thing they SAY or SIGN cannot be trusted because of the TAKKIYAH (lie to the infidels).

If the above does not happen, then the ARABS, the so called ''Palestinians'' already have a State it is called ''JORDAN'',
Israel should Annex the West Bank and GAZA and CAPTURE militarily JORDAN, after that negotiate a PALESTINE on the grounds of What was the PALESTINIAN mandate of the British empire.
It is and will be the only way out with these not trustworthy ARABS.

Flag as Offensive

tj55 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 11:43 AM

ms. glick is running scared . . . the 63-year "peace process" is about to come to a head. Palestinian statehood WILL come; israel will have little say in it. . .
Remember Deir Yassin . . the bombing of the King David hotel by jewish gangs . . .Remember the USS Liberty . . .
Jews invented the concept of modern-day terrorism with their actions leading up to the formation of the "state" of israel. . . maybe we could make israel our 51st state . . . they already formulate our "foreign" policy . . . let's make it official.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 11:20 AM

My "beef" with israel is the murderous attack on the USS Liberty, total control of US foreign poicy (which prevented any REAL investigation of the USS Liberty "incident"). . ., refusal to abide by international arms control agreements and the refusal to extradite any jew criminal that makes it to israel.. . .add to that, the sales of critical technological systems to our adversaries . . . "jewish roads restricted to "jews only". . . rampant destruction of Palestinian civilian infrastructure . . .
israel makes south african apartheid look like "small potatoes". . . it is laughable that many people consider "jews" to be the "chosen people". . . read the talmud . . . see what the jews think of us "goyim" . . . see for yourselves.

Bob_C2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 9:55 PM

Many Republicans say "Whether you want to agree or not, this country was founded on Christian principles."

Jesus said, "How you treat the least amongst you, is how you treat me."

Folks, just who were the "least amongst you" in 18th century America?

Jim Oakland Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 12:52 AM

Republicans freed the slaves.

Bob_C2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 7:42 PM

Many of today's conservatives like to boast that they give more to charity than the liberals do. How is this measured?

Who gives more, a poor person who gives their last dollar or a billionaire who gives a million dollars to charity? What did Jesus say about this?

How does one measure one's 'time' given to charity?

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 5:35 PM

Dear Caroline,
As much as you analyze and hone in on all pertinent realities and common sense the world is DEAF, because MORALITY is bankrupt. EU and USA have lost their moral compass.
For 27 centuries the world knew JEWS as VICTIMS only,...NOW ISRAEL is a WORLD MILITARY POWER and Jew Haters cannot stomach it.
It boils down to these simple facts.
Like thousands of UN (the monkeys cage) votes and resolutions,..this one will just be another BLAH BLAH that the mainstream media Minions will use it for their INSANE support for EVIL.
SO WHAT!...
No matter what Israel does it will be never enough,...MULIMS are not trust worthy because we are the INFIDELS and they perfected the art of TAKKIYAH (lie to the infidel).

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:58 PM

Bryce, ariram, Lon, Kepha, I have been reading ME histories and current events this year. Several of my books have been loaned out. Here are some of the books upon which I based my comments:
THE FIGHT FOR JERUSALEM, Dore Gold
THE ARABS, Eugene Rogan
THE LAND OF BLOOD AND HONEY, Martin Van Creveld
A HIGH PRICE, Daniel Byman
A HISTORY OF PALESTINE, Gudrun Kramer
SUEZ, Keith Kyle
RUSSIA AND THE ARABS, Yevgeny Primakov

I set forth what I have learned from reading. I presumed that anyone with a different set of facts would engage in a conversation. I don't find calling me 'stupid' is instructive or based in fact.

Lon17 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 9:38 PM

Summers,

I am not sure why you include me on this list, but I pointed out some of the anti-semitic tropes you were peddling. If you were looking to engage in dialogue you could respond to that. Given that the Ashkenazi Jews who were part of the Communist revolution, why did you mention that some Ashkenazi Jews were part of the revolution rather than, say, that Milton Friedman was an Ashkenzai Jew, as was Ayn Rand. Any argument that was not based on bigotry would not point to what a small number of unrelated people in an ethnic group do as a way of categorizing different people by ethnicity.

I don't know if the problem is with you or your sources. But there is no reason that people should take you seriously when you are repeating...

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:37 PM

Do you have some reading material that I should read for a different perspective? If so, please list them for me. Thanks.

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Lon17 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 2:03 AM

Actually your list of books appears to be a good one. I just don't know how you got
your odd account of events from them. A quick look at them suggests you have books biased to each side, which since it is hard to avoid bias, is not a bad thing. But I don't see anything there that could support linking the Communists involved in the Russian revolution with the Social Democrats who founded Israel. And one of the books even on a quick look through, contradicts the idea that Ashkenazi Jews began moving to Israel only after the British created its mandate after World War I. Those books seem sufficient to give you a better more accurate timeline, not to mention motivations.

Summers Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 7:20 AM

Then it is my failure in too short a blurb to make clear that Ashkenzi Jews were already in the territory in very small numbers. Do you have a problem with the fact that larger numbers than those provided for flooded into the Palestinian Protectorate? Not only did I read the books but I, also, thumbed through them when setting forth my facts from them. For example, THE ARABS by Eugene Rogan, p. 197, third paragraph, states that the Palestinian Protectorate was composed of 85% Muslims, 9% Christians, and 3% Jews in 1923.

The reason I have been doing the reading is to better understand what is and has been the problem in the ME in an historical context. I hoped that, with posting it, I would get exchanges of materials for us all to

Summers Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 7:24 AM

understand it better.

One book I left off is A MOSQUE IN MUNICH, which I found quite disturbing as it deals with the fight between West Germany and the Soviet Union for Muslim support. In 1954, the Eisenhower administration started giving large funding to the Muslim Brotherhood, moving its members around Europe and Indonesia, and increasing its ability to gain power and influence. This funding, by our government, lasted for over thirty years. It appears to me that our foreign policy is not always productive or well thought out.

Bob_C2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:58 PM

Everyone here knows that President Obama has a phoney American passport, a phoney short form birth certificate, a phoney SSN and a phoney Long Form Birth Certificate. He is an ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT. He's got the wrong skin color. Capiche?

Raymond, (Ret) Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 5:11 PM

Now that there is what you call your standard Liberal stereotype of Conservative beliefs and motives. They are ever so much easier to argue against than are true Conservtaive positions.

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:13 PM

I keep seeing posts on this thread but scroll back and can't find them. Posting must be going on too deep in the thread for me to find.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:29 PM

Try clicking on the "oldest first" tab and then go back to the "newest" first tab. There is a defect in some of townhall's comment sections that will not allow you to read the nested comments. Hope this helps .. .

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:32 PM

Thanks. I did see where I was attacked for something I had posted earlier. I have spent this year reading histories of the ME. Apparently that is a failure in 'knowing' what is not written.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 7:21 PM

I have also been attacked for pointing out the unorthodox but TRUE history of the middle east . . .not "history" written by the victors or by the vanquished, merely TRUTH. . . It does appear that there are as many conservatives as liberals who blind themselves to the TRUTH because it does not "fit" their pre-ordained notions . . . best wishes to ALL truth seekers . . .

Bob_C2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:11 PM

Republicans say "don't you know that the 3/5 thing was put in place to weaken the power of the slave states?"

Now that's the dumbest statement today. The 3/5ths rule ensconced slavery into law; you fool. You should read the Dred Scott case of 1857 where slaves were deemed, NOT HUMAN.

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:16 PM

I fail to see how this is part of this thread, Bob. However, in keeping with the thread and slavery, the Ottoman Empire used vast numbers of white slaves (Mamluks) and black slaves long before this country was ever colonized. The continued dwelling on slavery will never produce a result that erases it from history. Slavery continues today but no one seems to be upset about it.

Raymond, (Ret) Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:45 PM

The Dred Scott decision was most certainly a case of judicial activism but had nothing to do with the 3/5 'thing'. That was put in place because the pro-slavery southern states would not allow slaves to vote but nonetheless wanted them to be counted when determining the number of house representatives the white only voters in those same states could send to Congress. They were counted as 3/5 of a person for no other reason than to minimize the pro-slavery influence in the House of Representatives. That was in the slaves favor. You can legitimately object to that as a resolution as opposed to insisting that they be allowed to vote but it is the nature of compromises that both sides are left dissatisfied.

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:08 PM

'The population of Palestine was already quite diverse in 1923. Palestine was a land holy to Christians, Muslims, and Jew, and for centuries had attracted pilgrims from around the world. Starting in 1882 a new wave of visitors - settlers rather than pilgrims - began to arrive. Pushed by the pogroms of Tsar Alexander III's Russian and pulled by the appeal of a powerful new ideology, Zionism, thousands of aster European and Russian Jews sought refuge in Palestine. They entered a society that had an 85 percent Muslim majority, a Christian minority representing some 9 percent of the population, and an indigenous Jewish community. The original Yishuv (as the Jewish community of Palestine was known, did not exceed 3 percent of the population

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:11 PM

of Palestine in 1882 and lived in the four towns of rabbinical learning: Jerusalem, Hebron, Iberias, and Safad.' THE ARABS, A HISTORY by Eugene Rogan.

The Jews swelled their groups beyond what the British Protectorate of Palestine had set forth. To resolve this problem, the Jews killed the British. Land that had been farmed for generations by Muslims was sold out from under them despite laws that prohibited such sales. The Jews flooding the Palestinian Protectorate were not the indigenous Yishuv Jews, who had lived side-by-side in peace with the Muslims and Christians for hundreds of years.

LOIS76 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 7:32 PM

Now try reading the real history of the land that was called Palestine.

Summers Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 4:45 PM

Correction: 'aster European' should read 'Eastern European'

Lon17 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 3:46 PM

As usual, some of Glick's nonsense borders on the insane and would be rejected by even many Israeli hawks. But there is a curious idea here which is equally insane, but popular beyong Glick's fringe group of Israeli expansionists. With Oslo, Arafat signed onto a 5 year peace process that was supposed to result in a permanent peace. Netanyahu used a string of Hamas attacks designed to get Netanyahu elected to suspend the peace process. So Israel did not even stick with it for 4 years, although they returned to the process when Barak replaced Netanyahu. So Arafat stuck with Oslo for 7 of the 5 years he promised to do so. Then Sharon was elected and used some rock throwing incidents that he incited as a pretext to pull out of Oslo.

Lon17 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 3:51 PM

Sone of the provisions have remained in effect because they are in the interest of both sides. Sharon ended some provisions, like the PA role in protecting Israel from terrorist attacks, and the result was the second intifada.

Since then neither side has felt constrained by Oslo. The Gaza pullout was done unilaterally and was not part of the process. In fact nothing since has been part of the Oslo process and the Israelis consider Oslo to be dead. Although as Glick illustrates here, many believe it to no longer be binding on the Isreaelis, they still consider it binding on the Palestinians.

There are plenty of things to worry about with the move to get the UN to recognize a Palestinian state. But the idea that it violates Oslo is...

Victry Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 12:24 AM

Arafat did not stick with the signed treaty for even one year, but kept on inciting his people to fight and murder. And, as you noted, Netanyahu was attacked by Hamas, who has ties to PLO. There was never any peace backed by Arafat. He maintained his murderous techniques while the fools who buy into his lies continue to believe those lies and keep their heads buried in the sant.

Vernon43 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 3:32 PM

The next few days will reveal quite a story. With four previous blown opportunities to obtain more land and statehood, the PA has figured out a different way to blow it again. The expected result ought to indicate to someone in the political realm at the PA, UN and America the fact that something else is protecting Israel as a people and as a nation. I once wrote an op-ed locally that "the contest was Obama/Hillary vs. the God of Israel." I fear for a bloody future.

Bob_C2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 3:05 PM

Yes, the 10th Amendment is the most precious amendment of all.

A state should be able to implement their citizens wishes, so long as it does not interfere with the US Constitution.

If the US Constitution does not explicitly grant a federal power, then a state is free to set its own laws.

So can California, Texas, Florida or Arizona change their state's language to Espanol, if the majority of their citizens vote to do so??

Chuck27 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:49 PM

Yes of course, all Arab states, most of Europe & America, and pretty much all the rest of the world is telling lies - and only the Israelis are telling the truth. And of course it's been that way for thousands of years, right? Sure...

Victry Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 12:26 AM

Try some facts, unlike most of the MSM and the rest of the suckers out there.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:39 PM

Our "foreign policy" MUST take into account the best interests of the United States of America, NOT israel or any other country . . . if one looks at the influence that israel has on OUR foreign policy, one will find that israel has its own interests FIRST to which the United States has been deferring to since the "state" of israel was created . I don't blame israel for looking ater its own interests, that is what ANY country should do. What I take exception to is MY country bending backwards to accommodate israeli interests ONLY. . .

Brother Woody Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:19 PM

The entire West, including and now the foremost, U. S., has consistently propped up and expanded its empire since 1918 and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. The Western allies had consistently screwed up their respective "protectorates" in their constant pursuit & control of a once independent Ottoman Empire, especially its oil. The terrorism that the Western countries have perpetrated on these peoples for almost 100 years belies their banner of democracy under which they nefariously operate. Both Palestinians & Israelis have suffered grievous injustices but the only possible rectification of those injustices must be in an unswerving & unconditional renunciation of violence--if they don't, they're both headed into annihilation.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:17 PM

israel was borne of the first modern act of terrorism . . . the bombing of the King David Hotel by jewish "gangs" . . .
israel is merely reaping what it has sown . . .

Jim Oakland Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 1:04 AM

So you think bad things should happen to terrorist?

Blair31 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 1:36 PM

The Arabs had their chance to deal with the Palestinian problem after the founding of the State of Israel. They blew it.

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:23 PM

And now ARABS/MUSLIMS have the nerve to want to RE-WRITE HISTORY.

Their UTOPIA knows no boundaries,...they do not realize that HOLOCAUST OR NOT, we would have had our Country ISRAEL,...because Zionism (Theodore Herzl) was well in progress in the late 1900s...It is as an act of gratitude towards Jewish help ($$$$) during WW1 that England had the Balfour declaration.

Anyway British Palestine was subject to many political twists....too long to enumerate here....that is why we have History books,...pictures,...films,...and documented reports.

So ARABS think twice about your LIES and the re-writing of History.

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 5:33 PM

correction;
because Zionism (Theodore Herzl) was well in progress in the late ''1800s.''

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 7:24 PM

WHY ARE YOU IN MY COUNTRY? . . . IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOUR ALLEGIANCE IS TO israel AND NOT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA . . .I SUGGEST YOU GO BACK TO israel . . . YOU CAN TAKE GLICK WITH YOU . . .

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 9:23 PM

Hey tj,

You do not have an exclusive ownership of this country.
USA,..the Great USA was developed by JEWS as well.
Standing for Israel is not UNPATRIOTIC towards the USA to the contrary.

Yu feel the way you feel because you are a RACIST (your posts have shown that) and we AMERICAN JEWS and JEWS everywhere do not give a SH-T fabout guys like you.
GLICK does not need your permission to voice her opinions,...you do not have to read her.
EAT your heart out tj!

tj55 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 7:58 AM

Thank you for responding . . .your anti-American, pro-israel position is evident. I think that you would be more comfortable in israel, seeing as you want israel to control American foreign policy. For a take on that old GM line . . .what's good for America is good for israel . . . however, what is good for israel is NOT good for America . . . ask the survivors of the USS Liberty how they feel . . .

tj55 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 10:05 AM

By your line of reasoning a FOREIGN POWER should be able to influence American foreign (and domestic) policy. I am glad that you American jews do not gove a _ about people like me . . .unlike you and your ilk, we are American PATRIOTS of the first order. There are many more of us than you may realize.

LOIS76 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 12:38 PM

After 60 years they are still living in "refugee camps"? Why haven't other Arab nations allowed them to become citizens? Why are the still considered refugees if they are living in Palestinian controlled areas such as Gaza?
And why doesn't anyone ever mention the tens of thousands of Jews who were expelled from Arab nations when the Israel was granted statehood? They were forced to leave with nothing but what they could carry-- leaving behind homes and businesses.

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 1:15 PM

You are correct LOIS.

What is more INSANE is that these war monger ARABS (pseudo Palestinians) want to reduce ISRAEL which is a tiny country to the size of a STAMP, while the ISLAMIC Countries have a land mass of 800 times that of Israel.

The Arabs or so called Palestinians have already a country of their own IT IS CALLED ''JORDAN'' as per the definition given by the father and grand father of the current king of Jordan.

LAPhil Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 1:18 PM

Not to mention the Jews still living in Arab countries who have to keep a really low profile and conduct their religious services in secret.

Victry Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 12:34 AM

They are treated as second class citizens while the Arabs who accept living in the Jewish state are allowed to live as equal citizens and able to vote. There are even Arab in the Kinneset.

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:50 AM

The little king of Jordan will not survive the demography in his country (80% ''palestinians'').
Once he is deposed (he will soon or late), what would Jordan be with 80% of its population Palestinian.
In 1948 Israel received 700,000 Jewish refugees from Muslim Countries who were kicked out losing all they properties. An equivalent number of ARABS left the ''Palestine British Mandate'' so that the Arabs Armies could massacre the population (jewish) and not have to differentiate.

At the end of all the BLAH BLAH, only going back to the original British mandate (British Palestine) would make sense and quiet frankly the original plan (1918-1922) that saw 2 States
Jewish Israel (present day Israel + West Bank + Gaza) and ARAB JORDAN

Kent36 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:47 AM

Lets play a game. Say you're sitting in your living room watching TV and there's a knock on the door. You open it and there are 20 armed men outside your house. They tell you you have 24 hours to vacate your home or they will kill you. Why you ask. This house has been in your family for generations you say. They tell you that some people far away gave them your property because their ancestors had lived there 2000 years ago. Go or die. Would you be angry? That's what happened to the Palestinian people in 1948. I'm amazed it took 50 years of Israel bulldozing their houses, cutting down their olive trees and vineyards for the 1st Intifada to happen. Israel is by not means innocent in this. Israel created Hamas by it's oppressive policies.

midfielder2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:58 AM

It did not. You can have your stupid opinions, but you can't have your own facts. The Israelis never drove anyone out.

Did too . . . look up Deir Yassin . . . the israeli massacre of an arab city . . .

Raymond, (Ret) Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 12:01 PM

Your game is based on one side of an unresolved debate to which their is an opposing point of view:

‘Israel claims that the Arabs left because they were ordered to, and deliberately incited into panic, by their own leaders who wanted the field cleared for the 1948 war’, while ‘The Arabs charge that their people were evicted at bayonet-point and by panic deliberately incited by the Zionists.’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus

We won't resolve it here either. I believe that today it is easier for Palestinians to live peacefully in Israel and Israeli territory than it is for Jews to live so in Arab countries.

tj55 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 2:34 PM

True . . .

tj55 Wrote: Sep 18, 2011 7:59 AM

it's not a "game" . . . actions have consequences . . .best regards

Armand11 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:34 AM

midfielder2 Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 11:59 AM

Armand, you nailed it.

Bilston Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 10:36 AM

Jews went through hell during the Holocaust...there's no denying that. And they had the sympathy of much of the world when the Nazis' crimes were fully revealed. Enough sympathy that the UN drafted the Balfour agreement to provide them a homeland. But there was NO consideration of the people who were there before...people who, quite naturally, rejected "resettlement" and occupation. The Israelis have been ham handed in their methods of suppressing these people, fighting back against their terrorism with terrorism, and generally, squandering the good will of the world. And they NEVER admit when they're wrong.

....say.....this reminds me a lot of the USA after 9/11.

Raymond, (Ret) Wrote: Sep 17, 2011 10:56 AM

1. The Muslims that concern us do deny the Holocaust.
2. It was the U.N. that established Israel and in so doing did not provide any consideration for the people who were there before. The Israelis have always been fine with their presence in Israel. It is the Palestinians who object to the Jewish presence in Israel. Why aren't you upset with the U.N. and the Palestinians ?
3. Responding to aggression in kind is not worse than the original aggression. It is called self defense and is a legal reason to kill.
4. Another failure of the U.N. was not designing Israel to be defensible and not discouraging the attacks on it.
5. What good will?

Allahpundit	Quotes of the day
Jazz Shaw	Did they find Etan Patz’s killer?
Dustin Siggins	Thou Shalt Not Steal…Unless You Have To
Ed Morrissey	Did the butler really do it?
Jazz Shaw	Geek Goodness: Dragon docks with ISS
Jazz Shaw	A “policy of abundance”

The Palestinian Obsession

Caroline Glick

Breaking on TOWNHALL

Political Cartoon of the Day

Chuck Asay

Video

FACEBOOK ACTIVITY

Townhall Regular Contributors