I was watching a particularly stupid video* which seemed to be putting forward the usual message that "all religions are equally bad". It had the tell tale signs of being produced by a high schooler or college kid who has had the sudden "insight" that every religion is full of hate. I am sure next he will be making a video telling us Jesus was a communist or that Christians aren't Christlike. Anyway, while watching it, I noticed a particular bit of stupid moral equivalence that even adults often make.

That is equating Israeli settlements with Palestinian terrorism.

Now, first of all, this is equating the building of houses with the use of strychnine soaked shrapnel and explosives to tear apart living men, women and children. I can't even begin to understand the warped mind which thinks those two are equivalent.

But, of course, the ardent anti-Israelis will tell me that the settlements are aggressive as they are meant to drive the Palestinians form their homes, or dispossess them or some such.

I hate to go so far back to explain, but let us look at the history of Israel.

First, the "Palestinians" are not Palestinians. Until 1948, they were called "Arabs" because that is what they are. They are Arabs who resettled in Palestine following the conquest form the Byzantines in the 7th century. Their name attempts to connect them to the ancient Phoenicians, or at least make them some kind of indigenous people, but they are newcomers. The Syrian Christians settled there by the Byzantines were there longer than the Arabs we call Palestinians, and the Jews longer still.

Now, many will claim current Israeli Jews are newcomers, and many are. But not all. There are settlements which date back before Roman times, and even the expulsion by Vespasian, Titus and Hadrian did not completely remove the Jews from Israel. So many Jews have ancestries predating the Palestinians by centuries.

Even the newcomers are not "thieves" as many in the west claim. They went into an underpopulated and poor territory of the Ottoman Empire (later a British colony) and bought land from the owners. They did not steal the land, or take it. Do you think the Moslem Ottomans would let Jews take land from Moslem Arabs? Or the British would? The Jews bought the land and developed it. And they populated the nation to the point where the British started preventing Jewish immigration as both their numbers and success were causing problems with the Arab population. In other words, rather than parasitic thieves,t he Israeli Jews were too successful. they made a wasteland flower.

When the state of Israel was founded, it was supposed to be an even division between Palestinians and Jews. Never mind that a Palestinian four times as large had been founded across the Jordan river by the British (that would be Jordan), they also gave the Palestinians half of Israel. Nor was it the Israelis who rejected that solution. It was the Palestinian majority which fled, sure that the nations of the Arab league would kill the Jews and hand their lands over tot he returning Palestinians. However, the Jews won.

But, even then, the Israelis did not sink tot he depths of the Palestinians. While the Palestinians wanted to "drive the Jews into the sea", the Israelis granted full citizenship to those Palestinians who remained. Only those who fled were denied Israeli citizenship. Nor did the Jews start either of the two following wars, though they won both. Even today, the Jews have a strong, wealthy Palestinian minority, while the Palestinian authority persecutes those who sell land to Jews and attempt to run Jews (and now Christians) out of their lands.

In short, the Jews have done all they could to live peacefully with their neighbors**, while the Palestinians have done all they could to carry out genocide. You can see this in all those attempts to draw parallels for those "cycle of violence" arguments. A Palestinian kills thirty school children, then the Israeli army kills one civilian because the terrorists hide among them. And that is argued to be morally the same as intentionally killing women and children. It is simply absurd, but that is the best argument critics can make. (Of course, I have heard some argue that our invasion of Afghanistan is morally equivalent to the attacks of 9/11, so at least some are as unfair to the US as they are to Israel.)

So, it makes very little sense to call settlements "evil" or even aggressive. Yes, they have been planned to subjugate conquered lands, as otherwise those lands would become terrorist havens. But to criticize that goal is akin to calling police the equivalent of criminals as both use force.

In any case, Israel has every right to build on the "occupied territories". They were attacked, defended themselves, and in the process conquered lands. Throughout history, people have settled lands acquired with less justification. Should the US not build in the southwest as it is the "occupied territories" of the Mexican-American War? Even if Israel wanted to occupy every single inch of Judea and Samaria, as well as East Jerusalem, why should they not be allowed to do so? Because people who wanted to exterminate them and fled might want to come back? Pardon me if I think the claims of a genocidal faction turned refugees does not merit much consideration.

Nor do the Israelis have any need to allow Palestinians to settle. The Palestinians fled because they hoped to see Israel destroyed. Would the fledgling US have welcomed back Tories who fled during the revolution? Or should England have held the throne open for Bonny Prince Charlie? When you hope for the defeat of your nation and lose, you also lose your citizenship.

And if Israel is so evil for refusing to allow Palestinian settlers, why not Palestinian Jordan? Or even all the other neighboring Moslem nations? Why does it fall to Israel to provide a home for those who have promised to kill her citizens? No other nation is held to such standards. Is Kossovo forced to house Serbs? Or Bosnia? They once lived there then hoped to win a war and were forced to flee.

I will believe those who fight for a Palestinian "right of return" when they petition the Kossovars and Bosnians for a similar right for Serbs.

But that is beside the point. My main point is simply this, there is no equivalence between the building of settlements in Samara and Judea and the Palestinian practice of killing innocent civilians. And anyone who says otherwise possess a terribly twisted sense of values.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Warning. The video may a bit offensive. I admit I let my attention wander a bit through most of it, so I am not sure if there is anything specifically offensive, or just the overall tone, but I wanted to warn readers I haven't fully vetted it before they clicked on the link.

** I am not denying there were and are individual violent Jews, nor that there were incidents of violence. But that is like looking at battles in the Revolutionary War and calling the colonials aggressors. The Jews of Israel are human and as variable as other human groups. But overall, Israel has been remarkably restrained in responding to a group of nations and terrorists who promise to exterminate them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTSCRIPT

I know there are a few on Townhall who will argue with me about this. There are a few believers in Zionist conspiracies and a few Buchananite crypto-antisemites. But I think most have avoided my page so far. But should one come by, please feel free to argue with me in the comments. There are only two restrictions. First, I will ignore conspiracy theories, particularly those centering on the USS Liberty. Second, before accusing all Jews of any evil, you may want to consider the religion of those you are addressing. (After all, if there IS a world wide Zionist conspiracy, then I must be a member, and if you reveal too much knowledge, I might ask Mossad to slip you an irradiated piece of whitefish, or some similar "accident".)

Let he argument begin.

ADDENDUM

One other point. I would like to mention that I don't intend to paint all Palestinians with one broad brush. There are many Palestinian citizens of Israel who are loyal citizens. There are also, among the Palestinian refugees, many who do not share the beliefs of their ancestors. However, good as they might be, they still must live with the consequences of the decision their parents made. It is unfortunate, but all of us must live with the consequences of decisions made by our ancestors. No matter how good I might be, I can't demand citizenship from another nation, and neither can they. Their parents surrendered Israeli citizenship by picking the wrong side, so there is no reason it should be granted to their children simply because ancestors once occupied that territory.

DISCLAIMER

By the way, nothing in this essay should be construed as agreeing with Israel's economic policies or all the policies of her current government. I am simply making the point that the arguments about her being an "illegitimate" government is specious. Nor is there validity to the moral equivalences drawn between the Jews and Palestinians.