Sunday, March 02, 2008
The One-Gallows" vs the "Two-Gallows" Solutions
is to Stop the Rocket Attacks on Ashkelon."
Letter to the Heads of the Hamas from Ehud Olmert:
You really have to stop shooting rockets at Ashkelon. Why can't you
just settle for shooting rockets at Sderot? If you'd only shoot at
Sderot, we will go back to our policy of defeating you by turning the
other cheek and waiting for you to run out of ammo. After all, Sderot
does not count. But we have some friends and relatives in Ashkelon, so
you really have to stop THAT!
So let's split the difference - you guys bomb Sderot all you want but
leave Ashkelon and the kibbutzim near Gaza alone! Okay?
Your peace partner,
2. I have received several requests from people who are not unsure
how to answer the question, "Which do you prefer, a Two-State Solution or
a One State Solution?"
Let me explain. Israel's Far Left is divided these days between those
promoting a "Two State Solution," and a "One State Solution." By "Two
State Solution," they mean a situation where Israel is annihilated in
stages, after first agreeing to the setting up of a "Palestinian" Arab
state in the West Bank and Gaza with some sort of land bridge connecting
them and dividing the Negev and a "right of return" for "Palestinian"
"refugees." That terror state will then be used to escalate terrorism
and rocket attacks on Israel until all the Arab and Moslem armies rush in
to aid it in its "defense" against Israeli aggression, and then Israel
will be defeated militarily and the Jews exterminated in a new Holocaust.
The "One State Solution" leftists are essentially those who wish to revive
the long dead ideas from the 1930s of creating a bi-national state to
replace Israel, a predominantly Arab state in which the Jews will have
dhimmi second-class status, and in which Jewish sovereignty and
self-determination are ended. That is, until the dominant Arabs in the
new progressive bi-national state annihilate the Jews in a new Holocaust.
By the "One State Solution," the Left obviously does not mean that one
Jewish state, Israel, will control all of the Land of Israel west of the
Jordan, a "one-state" alternative we all might consider. Actually, what
they mean by a "One State Solution" is a "Rwanda Solution," where the Jews
end up with the same fate as the losing side in Rwanda.
For years, when asked whether I prefer a "Two State Solution for Two
Peoples" or a "One State Solution," I would reply that I am willing to
settle for a 23 state solution for two peoples, where the Arabs
get to keep their 22 existing states and the Jews get to keep their single
But that is losing its edge and many people miss the message in that quip
of an answer.
In any case, when people whether you prefer a "Two State Solution" or a
"One State Solution," what they are really asking you is which version of
the far Left's agenda you choose, where you are not allowed to choose
anything other than one of the Left's two "solutions."
So after careful consideration, I have come up with a better answer to
that question about one-state vs. two-states. When asked whether you
prefer a "Two State Solution" or a "One State Solution," the best answer
should be: "That is not the correct question. The correct question is
whether we should have a Two-Gallows Solution or a One-Gallows Solution
Should Jewish and Arab traitors both be hanged from the same gallows or
from separate gallows? That is the REAL conundrum! There are advantages
to each alternative. Hanging them separately might cause anti-Semites to
denounce Israel for its apartheid system of gallows. Hanging them
together on one set of gallows might cause problems of congestion. After
all, so many people will want to come watch the traitors get hanged that
highways and parking lots are likely to get jammed up.
Oy, Choices, choices, choices..
3. Quick: What is the definition of 'excessive, disproportionate'?
Answer: Israel defending its civilians. See