Jimmuh terrror not peace, part 3

Today’s continuing series is brought to you courtesy of the Washington Post and Jimmuh himself: “A new chance for peace.” Jimmuh writes:

I am concerned that public discussion of my book “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid” has been diverted from the book’s basic proposals: that peace talks be resumed after six years of delay and that the tragic persecution of Palestinians be ended. Although most critics have not seriously disputed or even mentioned the facts and suggestions about these two issues, an apparently concerted campaign has been focused on the book’s title, combined with allegations that I am anti-Israel. This is not good for any of us who are committed to Israel’s status as a peaceful nation living in harmony with its neighbors.

Is there a truthful sentence in this opening paragraph? Jimmuh seems well on his way to achieving the perfect vacuum that Mary McCarthy credited to Lillian Hellman: “Every word she writes is a lie, including and and the.”
Not to mention Jimmuh’s omissions. He can’t bring himself to call for the cessation of the tragic murder of Israelis by the terrorist groups operating as political parties within the PA, or to recognize the object of those parties as the causal factor in what he describes as “the tragic persecution of the Palestinians.” Jimmuh’s refusal to acknowledge the causal relationship between Arab murder and Israeli self-defense provides powerful evidence on which to base “allegations” that Jimmuh is hostile to Israel, or not committed to its survival in the same sense that he is committed to enabling Palestinian Arabs to achieve their homicidal objectives without impediment.
The rest of Jimmuh’s column today, which proceeds to resolve the pending issues in Iraq and the broader Middle East as well as those between Israel and the PA, is every bit as good as his opening paragraph.
To comment on this post, go here.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line