The New York Times really is an old gray lady – a busybody, with an editorial board made up of idiots who keep sticking their noses in places they do not belong.
In an editorial today, titled “Olmert’s Belated Truths”, the Times has decided to announce that Olmert “voiced some startling truths this week”. First of all, Olmert’s familiarity with the truth is extremely minimal. Second, anyone who is a true defender of the truth ought to be offended by this group of people, who has decided that one is telling the truth only when one foolishly shares their opinion. The only thing belated about Olmert is his departure from the prime minister’s office.
With regards to what Olmert said – nothing about it is startling. It may bother me, but I am not startled when someone says that Israel must give up the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Also, it is not true. Currently, there simply is no formula that can be followed which will lead to peace with our neighbors, on the basis of a two state solution. By and large, the Palestinians hate Israel. They hate the idea of a Jewish state, keep murdering Jews, and they hate the idea of a world that is not ruled by Muslims. If they ever achieve independence I would not wish upon anyone to be a Christian in that entity.
In his interview for Yediot Acharonot, Olmert said “What I am saying to you now has not been said by any Israeli leader before me”. If it weren’t so sad, it would be funny that this person claims to be an Israeli leader. He is not a leader of anything, except for maybe corrupt Israeli politicians. This person, who has accepted bribes, embezzled, and sent Israeli youth to their death, without any real plan or any real goal in mind, has the audacity to say he knows what is good for Israel?! He knows what is good for his pockets and what is good for his career, but the only time he ever really thinks about anyone else is only when he wants them to like him.
It is not frustrating that Olmert has “waited so long to say these things”. It is frustrating that he is saying these things at all. It is frustrating that the New York Times portends to know what is good for Israel, or how to bring about peace in the Middle East.
He, who headed Israel’s government through a period of groveling before its enemies, is now saying that it is megalomaniacal to act on its own against Iran’s nuclear weapons program? The only time Israel has ever been successful in self-defense has been when it has acted on its own. If Begin would have waited for UN sanctions and American diplomacy to work in the early 1980s, we would today we dealing with a nuclear, Saddam-led Iraq, or we would be reading about WWIII in history books. That, and dealing with the myriad of problems nuclear fallout causes.
There is no issue of “finding a way for both states to claim Jerusalem as their capital”, as the Times seems to think. First of all, there is only one state. Second of all, Jerusalem is a Jewish city. The Jewish city. and has been since before it was founded. Giving it up, apart from being unjust, would be a victory for bigoted, racist terrorism.
The Times concludes its show of stupidity by urging Livni to take steps that would be harmful to Israel’s existence, and to make far reaching changes to Israel’s foreign policy. This, after a small group of corrupt individuals voted her into office.
The New York Times should stick to issues it knows about – like intellectually dishonest reporting. And Kadima, along with the corrupt politicians who lead it, have got to go NOW. Israel needs new elections now – before too much damage is done.