Why 'Christian Hate?'? An introduction to the blog
Places Christians shouldn't go A quick tour of Christian Hate?'s case against Christian Aid
Christians and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Read all my posts on this topic
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Al-Grauniad strikes again
A stunning scoop from Harry's Place. Showing it has learnt absolutely nothing from the Dilpazier Aslam affair, the Guardian must surely now be considered lost to the cause of liberalism. Or to anything that could meaningfully be described as democratic socialism.
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Clueless on Gaza
A well-argued piece from Oliver Kamm in today's Times on Sharon's plan for withdrawal from Gaza.
Myths die hard. Increased security for Israeli civilians is not a mirage at all; Mr Sharon’s policies have been unambiguously successful in curbing terrorism. With the construction of a security barrier (not a “wall”, as anti-Israel campaigners habitually term it, but for most of its length a chain-linked wire fence that could be taken down within an afternoon) and the assassination of successive leaders of Hamas, the number of successful terrorist attacks within Israel fell by more than 75 per cent between 2002 and 2004. The breathing space that these policies have allowed Israelis has encouraged serious thinking about territorial compromise and the outlines of an eventual settlement with the Palestinians.
The dispiriting fact is that no negotiated two-state agreement is likely in the near future. Western commentators who speak of a two-state “solution” adopt a misnomer. A two-state arrangement, with Israel withdrawing to boundaries approximating the pre-1967 armistice line, is not a solution to the conflict, but an outcome of the end of the conflict. The end of the conflict requires something more deep-rooted: a changed relationship and mutual trust between Israelis and Palestinians.
Read it all.
Myths die hard. Increased security for Israeli civilians is not a mirage at all; Mr Sharon’s policies have been unambiguously successful in curbing terrorism. With the construction of a security barrier (not a “wall”, as anti-Israel campaigners habitually term it, but for most of its length a chain-linked wire fence that could be taken down within an afternoon) and the assassination of successive leaders of Hamas, the number of successful terrorist attacks within Israel fell by more than 75 per cent between 2002 and 2004. The breathing space that these policies have allowed Israelis has encouraged serious thinking about territorial compromise and the outlines of an eventual settlement with the Palestinians.
The dispiriting fact is that no negotiated two-state agreement is likely in the near future. Western commentators who speak of a two-state “solution” adopt a misnomer. A two-state arrangement, with Israel withdrawing to boundaries approximating the pre-1967 armistice line, is not a solution to the conflict, but an outcome of the end of the conflict. The end of the conflict requires something more deep-rooted: a changed relationship and mutual trust between Israelis and Palestinians.
Read it all.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
ACC resolution defended
The Secretary General of the Anglican Communion issued a statement last week in response to criticism of the Anglican Consultative Council's resolution on the Palestinian/Israel conflict (read it here with my brief and caustic comment). Essentially it retreats into a position of 'more prayerful than thou' rather than engaging in kind with political criticism of a political decision. If you think that's unkind, read what Melanie Phillips has to say...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)