I just watched a video on the Fox News website n which former Israeli ambassador [actualy NY Consul] Alon Pinkus is interviewed.
He is asked, "It's okay to go in and invade ... over a soldier, but not over a settler?"
Alon's answer contains the following quote: "There seems to be a different attitude when it comes to freeing a soldier, than a settler ... should not have been where he was".
I have replayed this many times and still can't believe what I heard. What is this supposed to mean? The context is defending Israeli citizens' right to live! Is this not implying a different standard for citizens on "the wrong side" of the '67 border?
But let's leave aside the ideological debate for now. According to news reports, Eliyahu z"l was kidnapped after hitchhiking at French Hill - inside the city of Jerusalem! Is that any less legitimate a place for an Israeli to be than Gilad's manning a military post?!
To see video
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment