Hamas announces 6-month truce with Israel

[Sean]

Well I for one find some fundamental flaws in the author's assertions.

One, he writes that:

Trade and Labour Minister Eli Yishai's on-the-scene response was to demand an immediate freeze on freedom of movement for Arab residents of East Jerusalem, as well as the predictable call for the terrorist's home to be demolished. Not for him the option of treating every criminal as an individual; instead, the attack was reason enough to tar all Arabs with the same brush.

I don't believe that putting a freeze on the resident's "movements" inherently implies that Israel is painting "all arabs with the same brush". What it imlies to me is that since Palestinian authorities refuse to crack down on terrorist activities, Israel is forced to do something to protect themselves, and since they can't know who will be the next terrorist attacker, that means taking sweeping action. I'm not saying that what they're doing is right...I'm only saying that it's more an indication that they have no idea who will perpetrate the next attack than it is that they assume "all arabs must therefore be terrorists". In fact, the author himself even acknowledges this by saying: "branding an entire section of society as potential terrorists, and curtailing their freedoms, plays right into the hands of the extremists among them." So I think a more accurate wording would have been "all Palestinians in the area may potentially be terrorists". It's a possibility, not a certainty.

Next, I take issue with the author's assertion that: "It's not because we're Jews; it's because of the relentless oppressive tactics employed by successive Israeli governments since the very foundation of the state." My understanding of the history does not support this statement. From Israel's inception, it has been under constant attack, which put it on defensive ground from the start. That's not to say that Israel has commited no offensive actions throughout the decades, but the author's statement implies that Israel was formed, and basically became instant and perpetual aggressors. I find this to be a flawed, inaccurate implication.

I do, however, agree with his conclusion that "Vicious reprisals against the killer's family, mass restrictions of movement for all Arab residents of East Jerusalem, and revenge attacks on Palestinian towns and cities, are not the answer. Because when we crush their civilians' lives and livelihoods, the chances are that the radicals among them will do the same to us."

I don't know what the realistic solution is, but I do still personally believe that if the Palestinian militants and terrorists laid down their weapons today, peace with Israel would ensue...but if Israel laid down it's weapons today, attacks on it would continue unabated until it was obliterated.