They must have heard identical diatribes from both. But the delegation did not come here seeking truth. All conclusions were well established prior to the "fact-finding" tour.

Neither the Anglican delegation, nor the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the US last summer, apparently found anything disquieting in today's world aside from Israel. Islamic terrorism - including decapitations, suicide bombings, hostage-taking, and school sieges do not trouble these ecclesiastical entities. Neither do Palestinian bloodlust, Syrian tyranny, Iranian nuclear threats, Sudanese genocide, Saudi export and financing of terror, and much more.

Instead, while Western civilization is increasingly menaced, Israel - the sole democracy in the region - is singled out for rebuke and sanctions because it dares defend itself against those who would destroy it. In what moral universe are Israelis, who must defend every bus, caf , and kindergarten against terrorists, more worthy of censure than the terrorists themselves?

Perhaps this stance would be somewhat understandable, if no less unjustifiable, before America itself had so dramatically joined the victims of an Islamist jihad. We wonder if the members of the churches taking such an anti-Israel stance realize that their leadership has effectively joined the wrong side of the war against terrorism.

There is no other way to describe an action that, in the context of the war we are still facing, is not pro-Palestinian but anti-Israel.

These churches, for example, could have resolved their support for a Palestinian state, or for a two-state solution, or even taken the side of the Palestinians bravely speaking out against corruption, terrorism, and one-man rule.

The irony is that by visiting Yasser Arafat and not with Israeli officials or anyone who could remotely present our case, the Anglican delegation seemed to indicate that its animosity for Israel exceeded its concern for Palestinians. If the desire is to support Palestinian freedom and self-determination, why identify with a leader who, even by European and Palestinian accounts, is the chief obstacle to achieving those goals?

Even the United Nations and the European Union are on record in support of the road map, which is a blueprint for ending terrorism and the negotiated creation of a Palestinian state along side Israel. If this is not enough for the Presbyterians and Anglicans, one wonders what would be - Israel's destruction, perhaps?

We recognize that these resolutions are coming from Christian denominations that are shrinking in membership, in no small part because of the radical political stances that they take. But even if such stances do not represent American Christians, they present an opportunity for churches representing the majority of Americans to speak out.

We know that millions of American Christians support Israel's struggle against terrorism and for freedom and democracy. Since 9/11, they see that we are part of the same struggle, but this silent majority is not always heard. We also know that many believing Christians have continued to visit Israel through thick and thin, and their quiet support is much appreciated.

Pro-Israel Christians can also play a much more productive role in bringing about peace and stability in this region than their anti-Israel counterparts. The more support Israel receives and the more the Palestinian embrace of terror is rejected, the sooner that approach will be abandoned and the more lives will be saved.

Israel wants peace more than iterant "peace" activists can imagine. By giving moral encouragement to terror, they are doing a disservice to Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans.

END