BBC BLOGS - Justin Webb's America
« Previous | Main | Next »

The end of the War on Terror?

Justin Webb | 03:06 UK time, Wednesday, 25 February 2009

The terrorists - in Obamaland - are lumped in with other problems the world faces: global warming, disease, etc.

The war IS over it seems to me, listening to him speak. Not the fight, but the war.

The enemy was not raised onto a pedestal in this speech, to be taunted and threatened. The enemy was mentioned almost casually - among other priorities. Mr Obama said he would not let them sit and plot against America. Is he right? Or is Dick Cheney?

Comments

  • 1. At 03:21am on 25 Feb 2009, dennisjunior1 wrote:

    Justin:
    I think that President Obama is on the track of the end of the war of terror.....

    Maybe, Former Vice President Cheney has some valid points regarding the War on Terror in his own opinion.....


    ~Dennis Junior~

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 04:13am on 25 Feb 2009, OldSouth wrote:

    He can pretend it's over.

    The other side will disabuse him of the notion.

    Just hope my family's lives are not sacrificed in the process.

    unbeweevabwle....

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 04:15am on 25 Feb 2009, i_amBritinUSA wrote:

    Justin:

    As an Ex Brit now resident in the US I fear for the future. Socialism is on its way out in the UK, that's for sure and now the USA is heading down that path to crazyness, proven to be unworkable every time it has been tried.
    My personal view is that we are looking at a one term President and major changes in Congress and the Senate over the next few years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 04:19am on 25 Feb 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    Good, we can go back now to the War on Drugs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 04:25am on 25 Feb 2009, redArboretum wrote:


    Mr. Obam is still in campaign trans. Platitudes and empty rhetoric. Too sad he still thinks that Government is the solution! Small businesses and hard working American made this nation what it is. This president spent in his first month in the office more than the total war on Islamo-fascist terror (both in Iraq and Afghanistan). Americans do not have this money they will have to borrow it from China Russia or Japan.
    It is understandable the guy never had a job and never ran anything not even a hotdog stand.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 04:41am on 25 Feb 2009, truebluetwu wrote:

    Obama only pretends the war is over. He has just shifted the battlefield. Irag was about oil; Afghanistan is about oil. And the torture in Abu Ghraib has just been relocated to Bagram. And anyone who still thinks this is about the rights of women should note that the US supported Afghan government has recently supported Sharia law in areas controlled by the Taliban.

    Like Old South I am hoping that my family's lives will not be sacrificed to this insanity, but given that "death to Canadians" has now been heard for the first time, I fear that Obama and Stephen Harper together have not only endangered the lives of millions of Iraqi's and Afghani's but have also endangered the lives of myself and my family members.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 06:39am on 25 Feb 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #3. At i_amBritinUSA: "As an Ex Brit now resident in the US I fear for the future. Socialism is on its way out in the UK, that's for sure and now the USA is heading down that path to crazyness, proven to be unworkable every time it has been tried."

    Since "New Labour" took the stage and Clause Four dropped in 1994, party political Socialism in Britain has been outmoded and defunct. The writer appears ill-informed (possibly because of relative youth) about true Socialism, in which State ownership and management of essential industries plays an essential part. President Obama is suggesting no such thing.

    "My personal view is that we are looking at a one term President and major changes in Congress and the Senate over the next few years."

    How anyone can be so judgemental after so short a time is beyond me. Thirty-six days in office and already the vultures are circling. They are going to have a very long wait before the cadaver is ripe for eating.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 06:57am on 25 Feb 2009, Old-Centurian wrote:

    I for one was happy to hear a speech which made sense, inspired us to work together, and was positive in nature. President Obama didn't say that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are over, but that both strategies are being modified. As for our economy, at least he's taking positive action, instead of creating more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
    The polls show that those of us who voted for Obama still believe that he's on the right track. I am deploying to Iraq shortly, and am glad that our president is refocusing priorities to where the biggest threat lies, and yet continuing to multi-task, unlike the prior administration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 07:29am on 25 Feb 2009, davidterron wrote:

    I see the latest polls have Obama on the same low rating in only a month as George W Bush was after eight years! There are Democrat scandals piling up left right and centre (Dodd, Rangel, Murtha, ACORN voter fraud etc) and a sense of deja vu - Blair and his non sleazy Government who turned out to be the worst since that of Robert Wadpole or Lloyd George for sleaze and spin/lies?

    So far all spin and no substance. How about reporting on the Democrat scandals over here BBC?

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 07:33am on 25 Feb 2009, reformedspindoctor wrote:

    Obama is right and Cheney/Bush/Wolfowitz and co were wrong. Obama is having the guts to talk about the cause of the terrorism - something avoided by the previous administration because it pointed a finger of guilt back at the USA.

    I don't expect Obama to be too different from previous Presidents. He's going to put America first, even at the expense of foreign countries that the US controls via aid/finance programmes tied to conditions that suit US policies.

    Never mind Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are heading for a revolution by the people against their "puppet" leaders. Combined with the Wall treet Bankers who triggered the world's financial problem the US has a lot to answer for.

    I wish Obama luck. At least he can talk without sounding an idiot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 07:54am on 25 Feb 2009, masabimulawa wrote:

    Is there now, has there been a war on terror? We indulge our delusions! A show-case war on a most usefully fabricated threat allowed and justified all the excesses and extremes Bush got away with. 9/11 joined Fear & Terror. Cleverly joined, cleverly used to manipulate a nation--voters and Congress, rulers and ruled--into implicit acceptance of actions and executive orders in violation of the Constitution, of the Bill of Rights, of the principles and values upon which America was founded and in blatant and shameful disregard of the laws set by the Geneva Convention. We became a nation that tortures and lies, that kills, invades and steals under the rule of force. That Cheney should have been placed in high office within the US government speaks to our high shame. That anyone should still set him up as any kind of 'authority' to be consulted or followed reveals how lost we are, how deeply we've sunk, how incapable of sound judgement and self-reliant assessment. We're lost within the Fear that we bought into and now runs us and the nation. Isolated behind our shores, we fear what we don't know, fail to hold ourselves accountable for both ignorance and fear and remain inept and incapable of taking charge of our nation's destiny. Where then resides responsibility? We have allowed ourselves to become as sheep on the way to the slaughterhouse.

    Presidents used to go as far as citizens and voters allowed them... right or wrong. Today that is not so. Today it is greed and wealth from the corporate cartel and the force and might of the military complex fed and fueled by citizen complacency that run the show and set the stage--a stage Bush wired for Obama and for us, a stage long couched on unsustainable excesses and ecosystems no longer viable. We ain't seen not'ing yet! Just you wait, Henry Higgins, just you wait till systems reach their bottoms and civilization its end. What then?

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 08:06am on 25 Feb 2009, masabimulawa wrote:

    Is there now, has there been a war on terror? We indulge our delusions! A show-case war on a most usefully fabricated threat allowed and justified all the excesses and extremes Bush got away with! From Iraq's invasion to the Patriot Act. 9/11 joined Fear & Terror. Cleverly joined, cleverly used to manipulate a nation--voters and Congress, rulers and ruled--into implicit acceptance of actions and executive orders in violation of the Constitution, of the Bill of Rights, of the principles and values upon which America was founded and in blatant and shameful disregard of the laws set by the Geneva Convention. We became a nation that tortures and lies, that kills, invades and steals under the rule of force. That Cheney should have been placed in high office within the US government speaks to our high shame. That anyone should still set him up as any kind of 'authority' to be consulted or followed reveals how lost we are, how deeply we've sunk, how incapable of sound judgement and self-reliant assessment. We're lost within the Fear that we bought into and now runs us and the nation. Isolated behind our shores, we fear what we don't know, fail to hold ourselves accountable for both ignorance and fear and remain inept and incapable of taking charge of our nation's destiny. Where then resides responsibility? We have allowed ourselves to become as sheep on the way to the slaughterhouse.

    Government of, by and for the People, remember? Not so today! Today it is greed and wealth from the corporate cartel and the force and might of the military complex fed and fueled by citizen complacency that run the show and set the stage--a stage Bush wired for Obama and for us, a stage long couched on unsustainable excesses and ecosystems no longer viable. We ain't seen not'ing yet! Just you wait, Henry Higgins, just you wait till systems reach their bottoms and civilization its end. What then?

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 08:34am on 25 Feb 2009, kiki_dread wrote:

    semantics is an important way to express an underlying message and philosophy
    the war on drugs and war on terror were lame.
    how about a radical war on war by soldiers for peace
    stop making weapons of mass destruction
    stop the philosophy that nations must fight each other over religion or natural resources or political power.
    how about a war on crime and poverty
    how about a war on greed and corruption
    how about a war on racial segregation

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 08:52am on 25 Feb 2009, Robert Bennett wrote:

    Remember these WARS were brought on us, we didn't go looking for them. I believe a choice between Obama and Dick Chaney is false because if/when America is attacked again, Obama will have to fight also. Then there is Obama and Israel, this relationship can cause great harm for the USA and UK. We would all like to wake up and see the threat and danger GONE, but this is just not going to happen now. The US has become a symbol of agression for the Muslim world. The idea that Obama has magic to perform in world events is a sham.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 08:56am on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    Justin,
    In my opinion Obama has made a wise, but brave move.

    Wise because the "War on Terror" was a farce. No more than words to spin to the American people (no "war on Terror" in the UK by the way). You can more have a war on terror, than you can on drugs. Spin, and only spin.

    Brave because the right and the conservative media will make alot of noise about appeasement and other rubbish.


    The bottom line is that since 9/11 terrorism has massively increased around the world. Understanding that fact, and the reasons behind it does not justify or excuse terrorism. Obama is actually doing what many hoped, and that is to address the root of the problem, not simply throw bombs at civilians in the name of the war on terror.


    As Truebluetwu says in #6 "Obama only pretends the war is over. He has just shifted the battlefield."
    This is right - Obama will not stop fighting terrorism. He will stop the simplistic spin-doctoring and "buzz words" and actually treat his electorate as grown-ups (radical, eh!).

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 09:03am on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    Following my previous post, however, I feel that OldSouth (2) and Truebluetwu (6) also have a valid point in feeling a little frightened / concerned for their families.

    However, it is fairly clear now that the War on Terror was a failure, so some other method must be tried. There is always a risk, but I believe that Obama's way is long-term more secure.


    And trueblue .... The whole "Death to Canadians" thing also concerns me, but the other side can spin and posture too. The leaders of Al-Quaeda and other terror orgnisations rely on the ignorance and suggestability of their own people, coupled with and easy big of emotive, anti-Western propaganda to recruit terrorists (how many mullahs actally blow themselves up).

    They are on the defensive as they see the source of "outrage" may dry up. They are worried about reform and change in their own countries and they are striking out with brash, inflamatory statements to get us worried.

    Divide and rule - if they can drive a wedge between USA and Canada better for them.

    Don't let it work.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 10:04am on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    The war on terror is not over despite the ignorant thoughts of Helen Thomas and Sean Peen.

    Those who misue Islam are the greatest threat to the world since Nazism.

    And because much of the world is afraid to call attention for fear of upseting moselm sensabilities.

    Although the overwhelming Moslems are moderate and tolerant; it can not be denied that the intolerant branches of this religio have more influence than any other religion conservative groups.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 10:15am on 25 Feb 2009, dceilar wrote:

    If Obama wants to end the problems the USA has with the Muslim world and the corresponding terrorism he has to help eradicate extreme poverty, promote education in those countries, and help achieve a lasting peace settlement between Israel and Palestine based on the two state solution (which everyone in the world agrees with except Israel and USA).

    Easy peasy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 10:24am on 25 Feb 2009, reformedspindoctor wrote:

    Although the overwhelming Moslems are moderate and tolerant; it can not be denied that the intolerant branches of this religion have more influence than any other religion conservative groups : MagicKirin

    More influence than other religion conservaive groups???

    Not so, I think that title is won hands down by AIPAC

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 10:38am on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    17 magic


    Justin wrote that the War on Terror is over. Not the fight, but the war.


    This is simply because the phrase "war on terror" was a ridiculous piece of political spin designed to justify any future actions.

    It has failed, but nobody - not Obama and nobody thus far on this blog - has said that we should cease trying to stop the terrorists.

    I agree with you that those who misuse Islam are dangerous ... as are those who misquote or twist the words of a new president trying a new strategy in lieu of the tired old warmongering that has only lead to increases in global terror in the last 7 years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 10:41am on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    18 dceilar

    bingo!

    Beautifully succinct. Let's hope Obama is reading this blog.

    He must also eradicate poverty and promote education in the poorest parts of the USA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 10:55am on 25 Feb 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #21 Stu

    He must also eradicate poverty and promote education in the poorest parts of the USA.

    Amen to that!

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 11:11am on 25 Feb 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 9 davidterron wrote:

    "I see the latest polls have Obama on the same low rating in only a month as George W Bush was after eight years!"

    Really? What polls are these exactly? Because as I understood it [a] GWB's approval ratings after 2 terms were the lowest since polling began - even lower than Nixon's during Watergate and [b] recent polls gave Obama an approval rating in the 60's, which was apparently higher than either GWB or Clinton at the same stage of their presidencies. [Of course, unlike either of them, he won a majority of the votes cast...]

    I also saw polls saying that some 2/3 of people thought Obama HAD done enough to work with Republicans in drafting his Stimulus Bill, and the same proportion thought the Reps HADN'T done enough to work with him.

    So perhaps you can provide us with some source for these 'latest polls'? Or even a link or 2? Because I would have thought they would have been front page news.

    davidterron also wrote:

    "So far all spin and no substance"

    Pot, kettle...

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 11:28am on 25 Feb 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    18. At 10:15am on 25 Feb 2009, dceilar wrote:
    If Obama wants to end the problems the USA has with the Muslim world and the corresponding terrorism he has to help eradicate extreme poverty, promote education in those countries, and help achieve a lasting peace settlement between Israel and Palestine based on the two state solution (which everyone in the world agrees with except Israel and USA).


    Apart from the two state solution, which will never happen, this is largely correct.

    The problems and threats the world faces are (apart from global warming) much the same as it has always faced - poverty and ignorance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 11:29am on 25 Feb 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    Further to my previous posting, #23, I was conscious as I wrote it that I was asking for evidence but not providing it.

    So here's some - from the BBC at this link - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7908476.stm

    "A New York Times/CBS News poll published ahead of his speech put the president's approval rating at 63%, with a Washington Post/ABC News survey showing 68% support. "

    I think we can all agree that the BBC referring to these polls, and not announcing that Obama is polling even worse than GW Bush, as claimed by "davidterron", is yet more conclusive proof of the BBC's liberal, leftie, commie pinko bias etc etc etc

    ;-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 11:41am on 25 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    #13 :

    how about a war on crime and poverty
    how about a war on greed and corruption
    how about a war on racial segregation


    What a great suggestion, if Obama were to adopt this it would be a good way to show the world that this is a real change of administration and its foreign policy.

    Who knows, maybe this could alleviate some of the hate towards the USA and REDUCE the threat of terrorism instead of inciting it as the wars seem to be good at doing.

    Not that I am implying the US doesn't send aid etc, but I can't help but feel that if a war on world poverty were to get as much of the President's talk time as the war on terror did with GWB, then the world may just be a bit more safer for it

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 11:57am on 25 Feb 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Military intervention to achieve socio-political and economic goals is wrong. I support going after OBL and destroying Al Qaeda, but those goals can not be achieved by a large military force and are actually exacerbated by our presence in a part of the world where our values and traditions are as offensive to the population as theirs are to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 12:04pm on 25 Feb 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 26

    "Not that I am implying the US doesn't send aid etc, but I can't help but feel that if a war on world poverty were to get as much of the President's talk time as the war on terror did with GWB, then the world may just be a bit more safer for it"

    He could start by diverting the $7B we give Israel every year to impoverished nations in Africa and Latin America...or even to some areas in the Appalachias and the deep South. That would do more for peace in the Muslim world than our military presence will ever do. Just dreaming...AIPAC remains as powerful as ever.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 12:08pm on 25 Feb 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 25, John

    "I think we can all agree that the BBC referring to these polls, and not announcing that Obama is polling even worse than GW Bush..."

    Should the BBC also suggest a bit of fearmongering and deceit as an effective way to become popular?

    President Obama has achieved more positive things in one month than his predecessor did in 8 years, in spite of the mess he inherited from one of the worst Administrations in US history.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 12:39pm on 25 Feb 2009, Granten wrote:

    While I do hope that Mr. Obama is committed to fighting violent extremists, I also hope that he moves away from the "War on Terror" speeches. Comments like that mean very little, and suggest that the military should be involved.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 12:56pm on 25 Feb 2009, carolinalady wrote:

    Thank you, SaintDominick. The misnamed War on Terror is best fought on the fronts the President listed last night: those of our values and our future. Let us stand behind our commitment not to torture and clean up the horrors left in Darth Cheney's wake and Al Quaeda's very best recruiting tool will vanish like smoke on the desert wind.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 12:59pm on 25 Feb 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    I found the insinuation made by Gov. Jindal that the billions of dollars given to Louisiana after Katrina had no role in the relative prosperity of that state disingenous. Smart guy, but he should avoid the tactics of deceit used by the GOP to achieve their goals.

    Regarding the comparison of Obama's and Bush's II popularity ratings, I really don't remember the latter having very high ratings one month after being "selected" in 2002...

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 1:43pm on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #19

    Aipac does not:

    Fly planes into buildings
    fund suicide bombers
    behead people
    make women or non believers wear a certain type of clothing

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 2:01pm on 25 Feb 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #32 St. Dom

    I agree with you re: Jindal.

    What is he proposing? That no state aid should have been given to New Orleans following Katrina? Tax cuts should have been given to the rich white population so that the wealth 'will trickle down' to the black urban poor?

    The Zeitgeist is not with the likes of him now - thank god!

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 2:06pm on 25 Feb 2009, dbiermann wrote:

    Great speech by Obama! I especially liked the part where he claimed we invented the automobile :) Oh wait, that was Germany's Karl Benz...

    So far, Obama has shown himself to be about as dim witted as Bush. I would think he would check his facts before he gave a speech to billions of people...

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 2:24pm on 25 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    re 33 MagicKirin,

    You did use the word 'influence' originally which obviously can be applied to AIPAC.

    I doubt the fact that they have different methods of capital punishment is why US gives a disproportionate amount of money and weapons to Israel

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 2:42pm on 25 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 33 MagicKirin

    No. The AIPAC just gets funding so the Israeli Defense(?) Force can use incendiary bombs on schools and food supplies. Build walls and settlements on stolen land. Oppress the poorly armed people from whom they stole the land. Support a racist, theocratic nation.

    Nice people. So moral. Everyone should support them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 3:02pm on 25 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Deconstructing the war on terror and some thoughts on the "two-state" "solution"

    I must admit an "interest": The author is a neighbour and friend, and one whose direct experience of the region in question I respect.

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed


    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 4:04pm on 25 Feb 2009, arclightt wrote:

    All: I'm for dropping the word "war" from any activity that is not really WAR. "War" on poverty? "War" on drugs? How can you wage war against inanimate objects, or concepts? You wage war against people, to force them to do what you want them to do. Any other use of the word "war" is misapplied.

    TR's advice here is still sound: "Speak softly and carry a big stick". We need to speak softly, and act gently, but be prepared to use the stick when it is necessary. We don't worship the stick or look for ways to use it more, and we don't denigrate it or make fun of it...we just accept it as an inevitable part of life, use it effectively whenever we have to use it, and act thankfully towards those who make themselves available as part of the "stick".

    @18: Here's one American, by the way, who is definitely in favor of the two-state solution in Israel. The original divisions are nonsense...kinda like having a part of New York in Virginia, and part of Virginia in Colorado, and part of Colorado in New York. Redivide it so both groups have access to the Med, and so that both groups have secure borders.

    I'd make Jerusalem an international city as it was originally intended to be under the mandate. To do that, I'd toss everyone out of Jerusalem and make it a place that can be visited only...NOBODY gets to LIVE THERE. Administer it with folks from out of the region, and rotate them in and out, and give them enough tools and capability to ensure that they can maintain the non-residence status of the city. The governing idea here is that if you have two or three kids fighting over the same toy, you take it away from all of them and don't let any of them control it. As far as I can see, the same principle applies here.

    None of this will ever happen, that's pretty certain, but it's nice to dream from time to time.

    This brings us, by the way, back to terrorism. We should deal with legitimate grievances both now and in the future, but make it clear that those who still want to kill or injure other folks over and above that are going to be hunted across the planet with no statute of limitations until they are "...really most sincerely dead..." (to quote the Wizard of Oz).

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 4:08pm on 25 Feb 2009, topspin wrote:

    "in blatant and shameful disregard of the laws set by the Geneva Convention. We became a nation that tortures and lies, that kills, invades and steals under the rule of force...." post #11





    FDR is president for 9 years when the Japanese bomb Peal Harbor in the Pacific. 4 days later the US is in another needless European war: 400,000 US dead, Europe and Japan in ruins, 100,000 Japanese Americans in camps.

    At the Atlantic conference Churchill noted the "astonishing depth of Roosevelt's intense desire for war." Yet, FDR remains a hero to the Left.

    50 years later the US is attacked less than 9 months into George Bush's presidency. Bush sends a couple hundred enemy combatants to Guantanamo Bay, and he was attacked in the press on a daily basis.

    Geneva Convention, give me a break. Under the rules of the Convention the US could have shot the enemy combatants on the battlefield. Boo hoo, the poor detainee is humiliated by wearing pick panties.

    If not for the lies and back stabbing of Jacques Chirac and foreign minister Villepin in the months prior to the war in Iraq, armed conflict could have been avoided. When called on this betrayal, Villepin, chided the Bush admin. saying that they didn't know their Machiavelli.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 4:17pm on 25 Feb 2009, SamTyler1969 wrote:

    #9, 25

    John, David,

    Flash polls this morning sow Obama at 80% approval. GWB's lowest ratings were 21% approval. David, you are either reading the wrong column on the chart or have been smoking something.

    Which brings me to my stimulus package. Marijuana. Legalize and tax it. Same for prostitution.

    Not only could we raise billions to fix social security, we would all be a lot more relaxed. Plus orgasms are good for your health.

    Maybe even Marcus would be a little more chilled.

    Mellow Sam

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 4:24pm on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    35. dbiermann wrote:
    "Great speech by Obama! I especially liked the part where he claimed we invented the automobile :) Oh wait, that was Germany's Karl Benz..."


    True enough. Obama made a mistake. Diplomatic relations with Germany may be irreparably damaged.
    Or shall we look beyond the ultimately irrelevent slip about motor cars and think about what he actually is proposing.


    _____________________________

    "So far, Obama has shown himself to be about as dim witted as Bush. I would think he would check his facts before he gave a speech to billions of people..."

    Do you actually remember Bush? It was only a few weeks ago that he left. Even the most partisan republican cannot seriously agree that Obama is as dim-witted as Bush.

    All politicians have speech writers and armies of fact checkers. I imagine Obama's team are having a bad day today.
    Or do you think every politician writes every word of every speech him- or herself?

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 4:57pm on 25 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    The semantics may change, but the fight will continue for a while. If Obama is successful in in conducting an orderly withdrawal combat forces from Iraq (140,000 strong, I believe), the savings will be enough to keep the war (or perhaps better "military operations") against al Qaeda on for as long as necessary.

    I think a better question is whether the War on Drugs is over.

    It's expensive and completely ineffective. Oh, but what a political hot potato!

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 5:04pm on 25 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 6

    "Afghanistan is about oil."

    From the CIA world factbook page on Afghanistan:

    Oil - production:
    0 bbl/day (2007 est.)

    Oil - consumption:
    5,036 bbl/day (2006 est.)

    Oil - exports:
    0 bbl/day (2005)

    Oil - imports:
    4,534 bbl/day (2005)

    Oil - proved reserves:
    0 bbl (1 January 2006 est.)

    Care to explain your assertion?

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 5:12pm on 25 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    38 Ed Iglehart

    If he is a friend and neighbour, please ask him to change the background. I found it extremely hard to read and I have a very good monitor (or so I have been told). In fact my eyes are still blurry!

    September 11, will we ever find out what really happened?

    P.S. I'm a conspiracy theorist - always have been! Might be John Le Carre (acute accent) who taught me to be one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 5:14pm on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #36 and #37

    The U.S supports Israel because we have the honesty and moralilty to stand with the right side even if it is politically upopular.

    Israel is one of the great nations of the world.

    The Palestinians choose to be ruled by hate andf should be given no taxes dollars for rebuilding

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 5:38pm on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    An example of the intolerance of the left

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    This is typical if you dare to disagree with anything President Obama says or plans to do

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 5:41pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    There never was a war on terror because if there was we would have POWs not "detainees".

    If there is a war on drugs then if I get arrested do I give name ,then fart, and offer them some cheerios.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 5:46pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    38 nice writing there from your mate ED.

    35 yea I noticed that.
    but then he is talking to a bunch of americans.

    No,seriously, it is a petty mistake and america did invent the mass produces automobile.
    bringing the auto to more than a few rich folk.

    but then it is way worse than starting illegal wars, crippling the nation, and ones best to destroy the planet.

    though making mass produced cars didn't help that planet issue, but then it was not Obama that invented the car or was around.

    You probably remember it personally.That does always help solidify a memory.

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 5:47pm on 25 Feb 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    At the risk of getting side-tracked by dbiermann (35) and Obama's automotive faux-pas ....

    I found this to be interesting.


    "American car companies have moved so many jobs to Canada to take advantage of lower health-care costs that since 2004, Ontario and not Michigan has been North America's largest car-producing region."

    source
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/183670



    If Obama could reform health care, would it bring jobs back to USA - discuss!

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 5:56pm on 25 Feb 2009, dualThomasH wrote:

    --- Obama Land??

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 6:01pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    33. At 1:43pm on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #19

    Aipac does not:

    Fly planes into buildings
    fund suicide bombers
    behead people
    make women or non believers wear a certain type of clothing
    ---------------
    lol gherkin.

    they supply israel basically right.

    1 .Israel does not have to steal a plane and turn it into a weapon , we give them perfectly good planes to shoot the perfectly good missiles we also give them.

    Again should e be fair and give OBL some real fighter planes?

    2 Again who needs to commit suicide with advanced artillery and fighter bombers.or and even safer still for the operative "drones"

    3 Not directly, that would be "collateral damage"

    4 Have you ever heard of "dress codes".

    No baggy pants etc.
    or have you heard of the baby boy who before he could speak said "cut my foreskin off"
    (mods it is a religious ritual just mentioning it)

    but seriously on wrapping up
    as marbles and I discussed somewhere. it is plain practicality to wrap up when you are either too hot or too cold and there is sand blowing in your face etc.

    Not all arab or muslim people are forced to wear burkas . but you(if you were a woman) try going into a devout roman catholic church or worse a puritanical american church wearing a micro skirt and no knickers without a top, hell just walk down most towns, and you will find that americans have dress codes and force people to wear cloths they do not want to.

    Eugene Oregon is a town where it is legal for women to not wear a top.
    Look at the wording.

    that would suggest that wearing a top is normally required.

    but it is OK I understand, they are muslims right?

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 6:24pm on 25 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 40 Billy2USA

    You need to work on your math skills, Billy. Either that, or you are confusing your Bushs.

    Fifty years after Pearl Harbor lands us in the elder Bushs' Presidency and the war he dragged us into in the Persian Gulf. I know it is confusing. The Bush family likes getting into wars. Like father, like son. Maybe a refresher course in history my help you.

    By the way, what are "pick" panties? Sounds uncomfortable.

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 6:29pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    41 Dude !! Good Call.

    pwwwwwww pppphewwwww

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 6:38pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    37 good old Pub sense well said.


    40 "Billy" , is that your name or your drug of choice.

    just wondering.

    Seem a tad aggressive.


    "Under the rules of the Convention the US could have shot the enemy combatants on the battlefield. "

    Normally if they are shooting at you that is advisable.(unless of course you believe yourself to be safe for some reason)

    But if they are surrendering I think the GC would say "not cricket there old chap.He was surrendering."

    And remember , every american soldier or contractor has you to blame for their torture.
    You condoned the torture of their people why should they not respond as you would,in "kind"(and not the sort of "Kind" both Sam and I enjoy).


    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 6:41pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    funny how if Obama was to walk on water there would be a chorus of "he cheats""it's a trick"(it would be or devine right?)

    and when bush held his nose and dived in and sank to the sea floor they say " he walked on water"

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 6:55pm on 25 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    #42, RomeStu, if Obama can be praised for his speech then he is also fair game for criticism. He can't have it both ways. Unless you are only marking him on presentation, of course.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 7:02pm on 25 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    andy 43 there is no hot spud .
    Not if the old farts are ignored

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 7:03pm on 25 Feb 2009, William1950 wrote:


    Terrorism has to be fought not by a superpower but by the people in the streets. If the moms and dads are not willing to fight and die for their country and their governments then every thing America has tried to do will fail. Another word for terrorism is civil war. The people have to decide to fight or accept whom ever wins the bloody battles.
    If the government is not supported by the people it will fail. If the people do not feel they are a part of government they will fight and destroy that government. If the people are not ready for Democracy, do not understand what it means, it will fail.
    Terrorism is not the problem. The problem is oil. Defeat the need for oil, cut the need by 50% and the Arab nations will destroy themselves as they have done for centuries. .

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 7:32pm on 25 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Magic, care to explain "Israel is one of the great nations of the world"? Just what on earth has Israel done for the rest of the world?

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 7:37pm on 25 Feb 2009, Dark Side of the Goon wrote:

    Ending the use of the buzzwords "War on Terror" might signal that the Commander in Chief is listening to the right people.

    You don't fight an asymmetrical war with conventional troops, and you certainly don't win one that way; the best tools to use are diplomacy, intelligence and that old favourite hearts and minds.

    Combine that with an understanding, from the American populace, that giving in to fear gives the terrorists exactly what they want, and a further understanding that these issues will not be resolved overnight, or this year, or in the next five years, and progress will be made.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 7:57pm on 25 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    "The U.S supports Israel because we have the honesty and moralilty to stand with the right side even if it is politically unpopular."

    The U.S. supports Israel because American soldiers saw the horror of the concentration camps first hand and realized that Jews face a constant and very real threat of extermination because of their small numbers and the tacit acceptance in many cultures of their abuse. Americans simply wanted to give Jews a chance to defend themselves. For the most part, we still want that. It's why we give them arms.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 8:14pm on 25 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    #50, RomeStu, the healthcare cost comparison is really interesting. Amazing that the US insistence in having insurance companies make a lot of money actually costs US jobs. Could it really be that a reversal of this policy could kill two birds.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 8:40pm on 25 Feb 2009, reformedspindoctor wrote:

    Ref 44:
    Afghanistan is actually about Gas.

    Check out who signed the contract to build a gas pipeline all the way acrooss Aghanistan a week after the Taliban were overthrown!

    Something about getting access to gas reserves on one side of Afghanistan to ports on the other.

    PS: the answer is the US.

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 10:12pm on 25 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #60

    I am going to answer this two ways.

    Israel is a progressive democracy that takes better care of the holy sights any other custodian
    They are one of the most entrepenurial countries in the world

    They are one the leaders in the fight against terrorism from the evil of the Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran

    Now the second way by your theory Nelson Mandela who so many on this board laud as a great Statesman never did anything for anyone outside of South Africa least of all next door to his own country.

    My only complaint with Israel is that they are too restrained, next time go to Syria and get rid of the terrorists leaders there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 10:32pm on 25 Feb 2009, jcjnyc wrote:

    The basic problem with the "war on terror" is that all of these groups started as or continue to be insurgencies. To my knowledge, not one insurgency movement in recorded history has ever been defeated militarily. They are invariably eventually absorbed into the political process (whose exclusion therefrom was the orginial problem anyway).

    In a world population that is rapidly growing and globalising, there will have to be a lot more diplomacy, compromise,tolerance and inclusion. The old notion, of which the Western powers were particular fond, of just slaughtering everyone who does not agree with you, do your bidding, or allow you to pillage their country, simply will not work in this new world order. Disenfranchised and powerless people have always eventually risen up against their perceived oppressors. This should have been a "war" against perception, perhaps.

    Diplomacy does not mean changing the mind of your adversary. There is always common ground regardless of what anyone may think. I truly believe that when someone resorts to violence to be heard, maybe someone should start listening.

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 10:47pm on 25 Feb 2009, casablancaRick wrote:

    Justin,

    Guantanamo may be closing and torture may have been re-outlawed but is the Obama position on rendition entirely clear? Channel 4 ran a story that the practice of 'rendition' would continue following what Leon Panetta said in his confirmation hearing. Does the Obama administration still subscribe to the policy that US agents may seize persons from one country, put them on a plane and deliver them to another country (perhaps Morocco) without any form of due legal process?

    Can you give us the definitive answer? I have the highest admiration for all that President Obama is trying to do but hope that this does not amount to the first example of falling down on his promises.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 11:01pm on 25 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 46 MagicKirin

    The U.S supports Israel because we have the honesty and moralilty to stand with the right side even if it is politically upopular.


    You might not want to lean to hard on the "honesty and morality" side of your argument, Magic. Madoff and the financial business gang has shot those qualities out the window for all the world to see.

    As far as Israel being one of the great nations in the world; it is more like an inflamed boil on the back side of the globe that refuses to allow the rest of the nations to sit down in peace.

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 11:11pm on 25 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    Re 39:
    'How can you wage war against inanimate objects, or concepts? You wage war against people, to force them to do what you want them to do. Any other use of the word "war" is misapplied. '

    I think you missed the point- this isn't about the grammatical accuracy of the use of the word 'war', more about reversing GWB / GOP's 'war on terror' campaign of fear and using the phrase in a positive way to mark a symbolic change from war mongering to promoting peace / diplomacy.

    I for one would forgive the possible misuse of a word for a step towards world peace.

    #41- Sam's appropriately named STIMULUS plan to legalise and tax prostitution / cannabis.

    No matter how much you were kidding I think it's a great idea!! On top of the tax revenues from the brothel you'd have a workforce starting to pay income tax, tax revenue from the products the workers go on to buy, and as for the cannabis I'm sure you could grow it over there and add to your GDP!

    And the country that likes to crow about its freedoms would gain some!

    What an unpopular way that would be to help save the economy. Even if it didn't work, some of the population would be too busy enjoying itself to care!

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 11:23pm on 25 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 64 reformedspindoctor

    Afghanistan is actually about Gas.


    There is a sterling example of the type of poor business planning that has brought our economy to its knees.

    Let's build a pipeline across a geologically unstable expanse, populated by a socially and politically unstable people who do not like strangers poking around on their turf.

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 11:38pm on 25 Feb 2009, bere54 wrote:

    50, RomeStu -

    "If Obama could reform health care, would it bring jobs back to USA - discuss!"

    Not only would it bring jobs back to the USA, it should lower the cost of products, since the employer's health coverage costs are factored into the prices we pay for just about everything. The people who are constantly griping about not wanting to pay for other people's health care seem not to realize that they are paying for it anyway with everything they purchase. Even those products made in China - we're paying for the health coverage of employees in the stores that sell those products. If they are lucky enough to have coverage. If they work at Walmart and can't afford Walmart's group plan (one of the reasons Walmart can offer low prices), we're paying for their Medicaid and food stamps.

    So reform in the form of "socialized" medicine would seem to be a win-win arrangement. Lower production costs, lower prices, more spending, more jobs. A cycle, but not a vicious one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 11:57pm on 25 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 62 AndyPost

    Americans simply wanted to give Jews a chance to defend themselves.


    More like, America and Britain did not want millions of European Jews immigrating enmass from a war-torn continent to their countries . The U.S. government was more than happy to offer recognition to the new State of Isreal. Even provided shipping for transportation of the European Jews to the new country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 00:05am on 26 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Magic

    "Israel is a progressive democracy". You fell at the first hurdle. Israel is a regressive democracy, dominated by religious bigots.

    I tend to agree with your feelings about hamas. So I cannot understand why you can't see that the likes of Netanyahu and Lieberman are no better.

    Unless your starting point is not 'peace good, war bad', not 'democracy good, religious intolerance bad'. Instead, it just appears to be 'Jew good, arab bad'.

    I met a good number of palestinians between 1978 and 1982, and most were well educated, peaceful and optimistic. It takes a particular stupidity to knock that out of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 00:05am on 26 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    63 seanspa

    "kill two birds." It will kill three, the Canadian economy. The US and Canada signed the "Auto Pact" in 1965. Ontario depends on the auto industry and both the Canadian and Ontario governments have offered the car makers a huge bail out package. I don't think the Canadian taxpayers will be thrilled to learn we helped to save the industry so it could move to the US.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 00:08am on 26 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Magic, by the way, I think you'll find that Mandela showed by grace, forgiveness and optimism, that previously bitter enemies could put the past behind them and move on in a relatively peaceful manner. Netanyahu shows us what exactly? The path to the end of the world?

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 00:21am on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 65 MagicKirin

    Israel is a progressive democracy that takes better care of the holy sights any other custodian


    What makes these "sights" more "holy" than...say...the black hills of South Dakota? Or, Isle Royale in Lake Superior? Or, Stonehenge? Or, the Aztec temples at Lake Texcoco? Or, Mecca? Etc., etc., etc.

    As for Israel being a "progressive democracy"; are they not dead-locked after an election between the choice of two, right-wing conservative candidates trying to form a government? That is a poor illustration of progression.

    (To help you out with terms; progressive means moving forward. To be conservate is to preserve the status quo.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 03:34am on 26 Feb 2009, Dadadaddyo wrote:

    The Bush administration called its actions against people it deemed terrorist a "war" in an effort to legitimize starting two real wars ( that made billions for their corporate friends) and abusing the rights of Americans and people all over the world. The men who attacked my country on 9/11 should not be legitimized as warriors -- they were criminals and nothing more.

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 05:07am on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    29, saintD.
    "President Obama has achieved more positive things in one month than his predecessor did in 8 years, in spite of the mess he inherited from one of the worst Administrations in US history."

    Actually all we have right now is expectations. Will the oversight be effective? Will he cut out the pork? Will he put a lid on corruption? Will he make the financial market toe the line? Will his program work, at least partially?

    We don't know, saint, and I think it is much too early to rate him. It isn't even fair.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 05:12am on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    33, ubermensch.
    "Aipac does not: ... make women or non believers wear a certain type of clothing"

    Maybe not, but orthodox Jews require married women to shave their heads. Don't go criticizing the customs of others without evaluating your own.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 05:19am on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    44, Andy, in reference to:
    #6, "Afghanistan is about oil."

    "Care to explain your assertion?"

    It's obvious. He's an idiot. Nonetheless, mixed in with his nonsense are some sad truths.



    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 05:22am on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    46, ubermensch.
    "The U.S supports Israel because we have the honesty and moralilty to stand with the right side even if it is politically upopular. Israel is one of the great nations of the world.
    The Palestinians choose to be ruled by hate andf should be given no taxes dollars for rebuilding."

    As usual, you are completely loony.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 05:27am on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    62, Andy.
    "Americans simply wanted to give Jews a chance to defend themselves. For the most part, we still want that. It's why we give them arms."

    Very naive, Andy. Israel represents America in the Middle East vis-a-vis our policy of controlling the area.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 07:13am on 26 Feb 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    My understanding is that the creation of Israel as a nation state from a European (British) colony was conceived from a world view prevalent among the powers of the time that ethnicity, race, and religious differences between populations necessitated the creation of separate homelands. This nation building or in other cases national devolution, as the two main varieties can be called, occurred many times in the 19th and 20th centuries.

    Here is a small list:
    The creation of Liberia from a US colony
    ----nation building by race
    The creation of Yugoslavia.
    ----nation building by ethnicity
    The breakup of Yugoslavia
    ----devolution by religion and local ethnicity
    The creation of Israel from a British colony
    ----nation building by religion and ethnicity
    The creation of the Palestinian Authority
    ----devolution by religion and ethnicity

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 09:25am on 26 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #79

    But the Orthodox women do not get beheaded if they disobey.

    Leave your hate for Jews outside.

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 12:55pm on 26 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    84 Magic

    Pointing out an irony in what you said all of a sudden means the poster 'hates' jews?

    Wow.

    Not just jews or muslims with the dress code as mentioned in post 52, I was not allowed inside St Peter's Basilica in the Vatican for wearing shorts on a swelteringly hot day!

    How would you expect Israel would fight if they had no money and it was their opposition with all the 21st century equipment?

    I'd be interested to hear your views on post 52 and the accusations levelled at Israel ('one of the great nations') of violating the Geneva Conventions' International Humanitarian Law in this recent conflict. If true, would they be the act of a 'great nation'?

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 1:01pm on 26 Feb 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 84 MagicKirin wrote:

    “ref #79/But the Orthodox women do not get beheaded if they disobey./Leave your hate for Jews outside.”

    I had a previous post removed because I dared to suggest that Magic's posts combine a minimum of fact with a maximum of prejudice. It was suggested this might be defamatory

    And here, with no basis in fact whatsoever, he follows the old "when in doubt, hurl allegations of anti-semitism" policy.

    Go figure.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 1:18pm on 26 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Majik (84),

    Leave your hate outside

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 1:30pm on 26 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Timewaits,

    "If he is a friend and neighbour, please ask him to change the background. I found it extremely hard to read and I have a very good monitor (or so I have been told). In fact my eyes are still blurry!"
    I agree, and I'll mention it when we're next in contact. In the meantime, I recommend using firefox as a browser, but on most browsers there is an option to increase font size.

    probably under "view" for firefox, it's ctrl++, and it improves the readability on the gunfuz blog (I used two steps worth of enlargement)

    I'm halfway through his "The Road from Damascus" at the moment. A good read.

    Salaam, etc.
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 1:58pm on 26 Feb 2009, watermanaquarius wrote:

    allmymarbles # 79, MagicKirin # 33
    Not sure if these articles support your individual, M.E. and Aipac clothing beliefs and / or Ms Marbles experienced these customs when living abroad?.
    BBC trivia for today.
    In a Twist?
    End of the War on Tearer? Remote controlled booby traps?
    Orthodox or un-orthodox, the choice is yours.
    At least Sam though can plan for the weekend.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 2:56pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    84 Gherkin .no but hardly the liberal US


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6584661.stm

    looks like if the orthodox win it is the same as the talliban.


    On suicide bombers.
    I saw a report on frontline with troops from the states that said they were told to think they were going to die and would not return before each mission. to accept their death. then if they survived do it again.

    Sounds a bit like suicide bombers training to me.

    Morally no better.

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 2:59pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    44 possible PIPELINE

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 3:26pm on 26 Feb 2009, Impartial12 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 93. At 3:26pm on 26 Feb 2009, robloop wrote:

    Justin,
    If, as you stated: "The war IS over it seems to me, listening to him (Obama) speak. Not the fight, but the war," then it's logical to thank George Bush for taking the actions that won the war.
    To pretend, as some have done here, that there never was a 'war on terror' and that it was just a Bush fabrication or figment of vivid imaginations, is an idiotic denial of all the acts of terrorism that occurred and that thousands died in the process.
    Evidently, to some, Osama bin Laden never existed and his threats of terrorism actions never occurred. al Qaeda didn't bring down two U.S. embassies in East Africa and more than 200 Africans didn't die there. The USS Cole wasn't bombed in Aden harbour and 17 U.S. sailors didn't die as a result. Destruction of the World Trade Centre never occurred in 2001, and part of the Pentagon was not destroyed. al Qaeda didn't try to bring down the WTC in 1993.
    Should we also deny the London underground train bombings by Muslim terrorists, and the Madrid train bombings that killed more than 200 people?

    77 Dadadaddyo
    Absolute rubbish! Where does one begin when trying to address such nonsense? These being your beliefs, evidently Muslims extremists with military training are nothing more than criminals with no higher motive than to cause destruction that has no purpose other than to destroy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 3:45pm on 26 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    to #76
    "As for Israel being a "progressive democracy"; are they not dead-locked after an election between the choice of two, right-wing conservative candidates trying to form a government? "

    Even deadlocked Israel democracy is more progressive than any other regime around. Compare to Gaza/Lebanon hijacked by gangs of masked militias who rule by gun and terror. Syria/Egypt ruled by 'presidents' or kingdoms...

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 3:50pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    85 Swami lol

    Gherkin doesn't get it .and has never answered a direct question.
    -----------------------------------------

    Israel is a progressive (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6584661.stm) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4923618.stm) ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6409257.stm) that takes better care of the holy sights any other custodian ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/548443.stm)http://www.theartnewspaper.com/article.asp?id=16827
    They are one of the most entrepenurial countries in the world
    ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3531396.stm)(when it comes to taking and selling their neighbours stuff , water , orchards they are world leaders)

    They are one the leaders in the fight against terrorism from the evil of the Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran

    (They created these terrorist organisations(or as some (I)would say democratically elected organisations) well not Iran but they did have influence in that as well (mossad)

    Now the second way by your theory Nelson Mandela who so many on this board laud as a great Statesman never did anything for anyone outside of South Africa least of all next door to his own country.

    (Except give an example of reconciliation that has proved pretty good and helped others through the same problems)



    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 3:56pm on 26 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    Ed Iglehart

    "ctrl++" Thanks for the advice, it improved it immensely. Clicking over just now I found it easier to read (regular size), perhaps because today is cloudy whereas before it was a bright and sunny day. But.... cloudy often means warmer during the winter! So, I'm not complaining.

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 4:16pm on 26 Feb 2009, bere54 wrote:

    79, allmymarbles -

    Actually, Orthodox Jewish women are not required to shave their heads. What they are required to do is wear wigs because their hair is not to be seen by men other than their husbands (guess naked hair would be titillating), so many of them shave their heads to facilitate the wearing of a wig. I'm not defending this; I think it is stupid. I'm just quibbling about the details.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 4:19pm on 26 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    "More like, America and Britain did not want millions of European Jews immigrating enmass from a war-torn continent to their countries ."

    No, since its inception the American government has welcomed Jews with open arms (the only requirement being that they "demean themselves to be good citizens", the same requirement made of all Americans). This is not to say that all its citizens agreed. The KKK, for instance, was virulently anti-Semitic.

    America has made excellent use of its Jewish citizens (which is not to suggest that they were exploited). We could easily have absorbed the entire race (they're only 13 million strong even today). I'm not sure why they didn't come to the States. It may have been existing immigration quotas, but my guess is that eastern European Jews didn't trust the U.S. which was and is a Christian dominated nation. After what they had just gone though, I don't blame them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 4:25pm on 26 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    Terror War is upon us. War upon Israel, India, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Shri Lank, Sudan, Somalia, Zaire etc.
    We are tired, lets declare it over.
    But declaration doesn't stop killing.

    Sorry, Liberals you easy to forgive attacks as long as they are next door.
    Here is perfect example 2004...
    Israel vacated Gaza without any conditions. And... HAMAS start to firing rockets. Declarations change nothing...
    Terror warfare as old as war. For centuries states contain terrorists by going after them without regrets for collateral damage. We cannot accept it anymore, but we yet to come with new solution.

    Unfortunately peace can be find only on another end of war.
    Back to Gaza/Israel.

    What will make HAMAS recognize Israel right to exist?

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 4:31pm on 26 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    "Israel represents America in the Middle East vis-a-vis our policy of controlling the area."

    Well, yes, but I think that's evolved since the creation of Israel. The Middle East wasn't of any concern whatsoever for the U.S. in 1946. The rebuilding of Europe was our top priority. Palestine was a British possession. We would have been happy if it had remained one.
    Indeed, the U.S. government acted as if the Arabs didn't even exist. Our lack of concern for Palestinian property rights is ample evidence of our careless attitude to the region.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 4:34pm on 26 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    BBC article posted at 90 on bus segregation between men and women in Jerusalem:

    "Our religion says there should be no public contact between men and women, this modesty barrier must not be broken."

    Sounds familiar, isn't this separation of men and women mirrored in Saudi Arabia and possibly other arab countries too?

    They have more in common than they realise, time to make love not war!

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 4:48pm on 26 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    To #90. I hope it will help you find high moral ground. Sorry for unpleasant details.

    1. Some military train people to accept death as possible/unavoidable outcome.
    Compare:
    Suicide bombers trained to seek death.

    2. We can argued about morality of surfacing yourself for Big/Bright Idea.
    What Big/Bright idea you know mandates entering bus/train/restaurant/musk/church/hotel and killing men/women/kids who has nothing to do with either side of you struggle. Compare:
    Is it still big and bright for you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 4:51pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    77 daddy o
    well said.
    Don't mind the robloop he is not all that bright.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 5:04pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    93 Roboloop(because you automatically say the same thing)

    Should we also deny the London underground train bombings by Muslim terrorists,
    -------------------------------

    I didn't know the IRA were Muslims. they tried all the time.


    Ps you reply to daddyo 77 was hardly legible .

    "evidently Muslims extremists with military training are nothing more than criminals with no higher motive than to cause destruction that has no purpose other than to destroy."
    (destruction to destroy, is this so new?)
    Yep
    HAVE YOU LOOKED AT GAZA. OR IRAQ OR AFGANISTAN.

    is it better because we wanted to ROB them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 5:26pm on 26 Feb 2009, Swamilicious wrote:

    #97 Bere:

    "Orthodox Jewish women ... are required to wear wigs because their hair is not to be seen by men other than their husbands"

    Interesting! Does this also count for any facial hair, would the religion mean they have to remove any 'Femi-taches'?

    Now there's a silver lining to the bald wife scenario!

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 5:34pm on 26 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    97 bere54

    I did not know that. I thought it was a requirement. It seems like a strange tradition to me as they replace their hair with someone else's. But that's just my thought. (Is else's correct?)

    On the other hand, yesterday my husband sat through a ceremony where just about everyone (excluding him) had ashes in the form of a cross put on their foreheads and told not to wash them off. This was work related or he certainly would not have been there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 5:35pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    98 Jews and Catholics were prevented from holding office in the early days of the US .

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 5:38pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    97 bere thanks for the extra info. it seems to me that a wig to hide ones self looks a little like telling them to wear a head dress. So it does seem to show that the gherkin is looking through blinkered eyes.

    Interesting idea . replacing hair with someone else's because it is wrong to see the real hair.

    Now sun protection I get.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 5:41pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    94 skiv


    It's a bit hard to complain about the lack of police in Gaza when those that tried to join up were executed by the Israeli airforce.
    (first strikes on Gaza recently.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 5:50pm on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 94 SKV_USA

    Even deadlocked Israel democracy is more progressive than any other regime around.


    You are missing the point, SKV. The deadlock is between two conservative party candidates.

    Conservative political parties want to keep the status quo. Conservative political parties do not want anything to change.

    To be progressive requires change. You can not be progressive (which requires change), and conservative (which requires that things remain the same) at the same time. It is not logical.

    No matter which of the two candidates form the government when the deadlock is resolved, there will still be a conservative government as a result. Israel will have a conservative democracy; not a progressive democracy.

    I find it interesting that you recognize Gaza as a "regime". A political regime is a government. A government implies the existance of an independent state. I think it is wonderful that you recognize the existance of an independent Palestinian State, SKV.

    That is progressive!

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 5:54pm on 26 Feb 2009, Impartial12 wrote:

    To all who debates Israel vs. Palestine as well as Iraq and Afghanistan on this blog. There is a scientific view on why there is no peace in the Middle East, and why US and others should keep themselves, as much as possible, from Iraq and Afghanistan. Have a look on the theory of "youth bulges" by Prof. Gunnar Heinsohn of Bremen University. May be it can give you some unconventional ideas about the hidden reasons of terror activities.

    Below are some links in English:
    http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/06/continent-of-losers.html
    and
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123171179743471961.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 5:59pm on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 97 bere54

    ...so many of them shave their heads to facilitate the wearing of a wig.


    Reminds me of a little ditty:

    I'm in love with a bald-headed woman,
    and she's in love with me.
    One thing nice about her,
    she'll never give me fleas.

    She never goes to beauty shops,
    a comb she does not need.
    I'm in love with a bald-headed woman,
    and she's in love with me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 6:15pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    99 Without conditions?

    holding a country to siege and saying no conditions is not truthful.
    Border and sea blockade is hardly unconditional.

    destroying the buildings there was a bit uncharitable

    but this doesn't paint a rosy picture .
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4156944.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7817308.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/world/newsid_3957000/3957345.stm


    seems to me that I don't know the full story and you know less.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 6:15pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    99 How about Israel stop acting like terrorists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 6:19pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    99 another thing HAmas does not exist. in the eyes of Israel, The UK or the USA. so why should they be the generous ones.

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 6:22pm on 26 Feb 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 99

    "What will make HAMAS recognize Israel right to exist?"

    I doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots will ever recognize the state of Israel. However, the Palestinians may. It all depends on whether the Palestinians recognize that their decision to take Israel on militarily (by electing Hamas) led to the massacre that happened recently in Gaza. I believe the Palestinian Authority is actively making that case. We'll see.

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 6:46pm on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 118. At 6:50pm on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    100, Andy.

    For the most part you are right. However, the date was 1948 and Palestine was not a possession, but a mandate (a sort of temporary colony). The mandate had a cut-off date.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 6:54pm on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    97, bere.

    My point was that customs are often considered weird, or unjust, or discrimintory by people of other cultures. Westerners rail against veiling without considering how other cultures view our customs or institutions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 6:59pm on 26 Feb 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Teenage sex and religion coexist in Israel here. Progressive or regressive?

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 7:02pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    101 Swami

    yep does sound like it.

    I made the comment about topless in Eugene because to some extent we all dress according to the puritanical(in style) religious beliefs of the nation we are in.

    Or not. but either way.

    Skimpy underwear will get you in trouble in many places as it is"inappropriate" but not if you're on the beach.

    Gherkin, take your cloths off,they are the last bastion of religious extremism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 7:14pm on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 100 AndyPost

    The Middle East wasn't of any concern whatsoever for the U.S. in 1946.


    The California Arabian Standard Oil Co. was formed in 1933. Oil is being transported by ocean tankers by 1939 from Saudi Arabia. World War II was a mechanized war requiring millions of barrels of oil.

    You doubt the U.S. was not concerned about the Middle East well before 1946? Read The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty by Collier, Peter, and David Horowitz. You might find your opinion changing about U.S. interests in the Middle East

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 7:20pm on 26 Feb 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #99 SKV

    Israel vacated Gaza without any conditions. And... HAMAS start to firing rockets. Declarations change nothing...

    The settlers may have vacated, but Israel is in full control of Gaza and has continually blockaded its borders. After the 8,000 settlers left, 12,000 new settlements were granted in the West Bank. Declarations eh?

    What will make HAMAS recognize Israel right to exist?

    Hamas have said many times that they support the Arab League proposal. They will recognize Israel if they support the two State solution based on pre-1967 borders. Both Israel and USA are alone in opposing this proposal.

    What will make Israel and the USA recognize Palestine's right to exist?

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 7:26pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    I see this post was getting too far down the path that leads to 1500 post topics and the quick diversionary tactic of bringing up silly issues like americas place in building cars was brought out.
    lol good tactic Justin

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 7:28pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    102 skiv I don't condone killing, wrong guy.

    need I mention UN COMPOUND.
    Probably.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 7:30pm on 26 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #85

    I would ask if these accusation come from creible groups.

    The U.N, amnesty International, Human rights Watch and Sineed OConner need not apply

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 7:36pm on 26 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #95. Wow wonderful biased picks!!
    They show no difference between Israel and surrounding Arabs countries.
    Here is the trick:

    You can find such examples of hardline religion communities in every US/EU/Israel. They expect members to give up many basic freedoms. These communities perfect ground for all sort of abuse (your picks are perfect example).

    We TOLERATE such communities because of 'Religion freedom'. Human has right to give up some rights :(.
    There are 2 main conditions:
    1. Members allowed to quit (BTW read about it in BBC artcle posted by you).
    2. Common law above religion law (In Israel common law refers to religion, but above religion).

    Compare:
    In many Muslim countries live by Sheria Law. Start with death penalty for converting out of religion, corporal punishment with family, etc...

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 7:36pm on 26 Feb 2009, bere54 wrote:

    98, Andy -

    "since its inception the American government has welcomed Jews with open arms"

    Not so, actually. There was a quota on Jewish immigration for many years. My mother-in-law was born in Argentina in 1929 because her parents had been denied entry into this country (from Russia) based on their being Jewish. This is why a lot of Jews ended up in South America, before and after WWII.

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 7:36pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    102

    Oh and how is death an" unavoidable outcome" any different from suicide mission or bombing.

    And just incase no one has asked you this.

    Is it better that innocent people are killed by remote missiles than"suicide bombers"

    and seeing as so many of the Israeli's are members of the military and carry guns, how would you know they were not targets and the rest "collateral" damage.

    The kids talking were kids right out of american high school. Young I would say. best to get them before they get all hippie and won't join up.
    BRAINWASHING either way.

    I resent seeing young guys who loose their wives because the likes of you cannot tell the difference between justified anger at being oppressed and killed ,of having you lively hood ripped away by others that claim to be just.
    those kids that went to war for the lies of their elders.
    Did you have fun fighting for your country?

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 7:38pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    Oh And I love the Pub talk. keep it up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 7:58pm on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 102 SKV_USA

    I hope it will help you find high moral ground. Sorry for unpleasant details.

    1. Some military train people to accept death as possible/unavoidable outcome.
    Compare:
    Suicide bombers trained to seek death.


    Allow me to paraphrase. (Your english usage is difficult to follow)

    1. Soldiers and suicide bombers are trained to accept death as a possible or obvious outcome of their occupations.

    I agree. This is a part of both their training.

    Neither occupation can lay claim to a higher morality. The high moral ground would be to choose not to accept occupations that requires you to risk or end your life for the purpose of ending the life of others.

    The purpose of a soldier and a suicide bomber is to end the lives of others. That is why a soldier is issued weapons and a suicide bomber is issued a bomb.

    No "high moral ground" there. Only death and destruction.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 8:12pm on 26 Feb 2009, William1950 wrote:

    War cost modern nations huge amounts of their GNP. I state this because most politicians and Americans do not understand this simple idea. To fight another nation, WW2, we had a confirmed enemy, area and political leadership. Germany was on the map, we could find it and knew where and who to fight.
    Today, to fight a war of terrorism. We have none of those real racts from WW2, but l have to equipe each man we send to fight with a supply line, food, fuel, ammo, clothing, bedding, weapons, training, leadership and pay. Add a few thousand ships, hospitals, and people to staff them, you begin to understand that to have that one one man on the ground ready to fight is costly. The terrorist, freedom fighter, religious crazy needs a weapon that he can steal. Works during the day for the enemy. Pays for his own food, family and clothing. If hurt will go to the enemys medical for help and has three days training in how to shoot and harm the enemy.
    George Washington, 1774 in a talk to his companions about overthrowing the Super power they felt were doing harm to their nation and people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 8:25pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    105 but I watched this documentary about a guy called Brian's life and there all the women had to buy fake beards.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 8:26pm on 26 Feb 2009, William1950 wrote:

    For the cost of this invasion America could have rebuilt every road in the USA, changed public transportation to cut oil useage by 40%. Changed the trucking industry to diesel electric engines, rebuilt train tracks to haul twice the loads, built two refinerys in Wyoming and six new power plants. We could have also opened the oil fields in Mexico.
    I am for a very strong military. I understand the need to be able to take the fight back to aqnyone that attacks us! But we do not have to put troops on the ground or rebuild other nations just to allow the private industry backers of the political parties to steal Tax money! If you, as an American, wish to come out of this hard time, you may have to look at who is running the country and understand that neither political party has your best future in mind.
    This is America! You have multiple choices on every thing but politics. If there had been a third opinion allowed over the last sixteen years chances are the banks would not have failed, we would not be in Iraq and the leader who attacked America would have been killed. But not with thgese two partys. Neither is willing to harm the hand that feeds them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 8:46pm on 26 Feb 2009, bere54 wrote:

    timewaits, happylaze -

    Ultra-Orthodox Jewish women are indeed expected to cover themselves almost to the extent that conservative Muslim women are. Long skirts, long sleeves, a scarf covering all the hair if a wig is not worn. And for the same reason - so as not to be looked upon by men other than the husband and so as to not cause "distraction" to men. This is also why they are separated from the men in the synagogue, hidden behind curtains. It is thought, apparently, that men will not be able to control themselves at the sight of an arm, leg, or wisp of hair. So one could infer from this that the religion has even less respect for men than it does for women. Who knew Jewish men were so randy?

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 8:55pm on 26 Feb 2009, kiki_dread wrote:

    real terrorists don't die
    they hide in the jungle
    and then sneak attack
    and massacre villages
    but the biggest danger
    are the mad redundant
    trained army personnel
    who become stone cold
    killer gangsters & rapists

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 8:56pm on 26 Feb 2009, robloop wrote:

    104 happylaze
    Where were you when Muslims bombed the London underground?
    As to the other part, the key is "motive". If you don't understand the English language, don't blame me.
    Your last part makes absolutely no sense.

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 9:05pm on 26 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    111 and if any more adults are killed there will be more.

    is this also the reason for the violence from the Israeli's. were they a youth bulge in the past. does it get better?

    does it get better by bombing the hell out of them.

    Now as to the research. I don't doubt the youth concentration causes lots of hot heads to get angry, and with no voice of maturity to stop them they run wild.
    But as I have pointed out before , that is no excuse for a bunch of older people to behave in as bad a manner as the youth.

    they should have some maturity.

    Also I would like to say that the site has a free Geert Wilders. as if he was in jail.

    He isn't and he probably should be.

    as to the first site you promoted,it was a paranoid rightwing site from Vienna. And we all know where the last famous racist Austrian got us.

    great company you wish to keep.


    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 9:56pm on 26 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    84, ubermensch.
    "But the Orthodox women do not get beheaded if they disobey."

    Neither do Moslem women. Do you make this stuff up as you go along?

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 10:10pm on 26 Feb 2009, bere54 wrote:

    120, seanspa -

    Well, that was quite a story. I do not see how anyone could argue that Israel is not a theocracy. There is no civil marriage in Israel, so she'll have to emigrate if she wants to marry a Cohen someday. I find that rather disgusting that one's marital status goes on the identity card. I did not know that. Neither my driver's license nor my passport has my marital status.

    Progressive or regressive? Well, when a 14-year-old and a 17-year-old go through a sham marriage so they can have sex and then have to be "officially" divorced when there was no official marriage - all I can say is I wouldn't want a bunch of anal men in frock coats making the decisions that affect my life.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 10:28pm on 26 Feb 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref#123

    That proposal basicly says: Give the Arabs and Palestinians eveything they ask and tust them to honor peace.

    Why not have the current boundries?

    It seems that none of the Arab states are making concessions to Israel.

    How about the Saudi's give Israel 50% of their oil profits?

    Untill The international community realizes the Israelis are the injured party, nothing will get done.

    I am glad that the U.S takes the high moral ground on this issue.

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 10:59pm on 26 Feb 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 78, Marbles

    "We don't know, saint, and I think it is much too early to rate him. It isn't even fair."

    The negativism from the opposition is not fair either, but it seems to dominate their agenda and seem to enjoy the support of the GOP "conservative" base.

    IMO, President Obama deserves credit for offering a new blue print for our domestic and international policies and the new direction he has set for America. His plans to close Gitmo, end torture, withdraw early from Iraq, re-focus in Afghanistan, correct the mortgage crisis, and solve our economic problems are the right thing to do, regardless of whether some fall short of the mark in the end.

    The very fact that he is refraining from childish charges such as axis of evil, war on terror, wanted dead or alive, you are with us or against us, and our economic fundamentals are sound is enough for me to call him a successful President and a principled man.

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 11:54pm on 26 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 126 MagicKirin

    I would ask if these accusation come from creible groups.

    The U.N, amnesty International, Human rights Watch and Sineed OConner need not apply


    So what group(s) do you suggest are credible sources that are investigating and reporting human rights abuses and war crimes in Gaza?

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 01:11am on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    135 bere. wow. when put like that , just as with the head wear there was a real and practical reason behind it.
    Men will get distracted.
    God or Leg?

    No contest.


    137 Rob you say I don't understand the English language, which from you is not really insulting considering that you don't even know what a racist is.

    You say key word is Motive.

    "no higher motive than to cause destruction"

    I think the motive is "Americans get lost."


    The IRA's motive?
    "UK get lost"

    The difference?
    (answers= sponsors)

    I don't see a difference between the two.


    So back to your English comment,. How does that apply.

    Oh and to really take you to task "YOU MADE ALL THAT UP " Those are your words.

    Or that post was your interpretation of his letter which shows that you are the proverbial pot there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 02:18am on 27 Feb 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    The Dems in Congress are riled up over Obama's decision to leave 50,000 troops in Iraq after the first phase of his troop removal or "redeployment".

    Personally, I salute the Pres. in this action because it shows that he understands the logistics of moving such a large force out of Iraq, and that he is wise enough to realize that for the moment we have a good thing going in Iraq that could be jeapardized by a premature and precipitous withdrawal not based on the realities on the ground.

    Mr. President, let me be the first republican to say that your handling of the war and foreign affairs so far has been more balanced and intelligent than I had predicted, which is more than I can say on the domestic side, but no President can please everyone on every topic; right?

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 03:03am on 27 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    135 bere54

    My son spent a few years working for a large family business of Lubavitch Jews. Even though he has many Jewish friends this was an eye opener. So through him I learned many of their customs.

    How many guesses would you like as to what the business was? One? Diamonds!! So if you need any advice don't hesitate to ask, he is now an expert. He left there to go into partnership with a less religious, way less, like high holidays only man so now is in ... clothing and doing very well.

    "all I can say is I wouldn't want a bunch of anal men in frock coats making the decisions that affect my life." Oh dear! Too amusing!

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 04:08am on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:


    To publiusdetroit #131
    Let me give an example:

    I do Mountain Biking. So I accept risk of injury but I don' t crush on purpose :).

    You seams to be still lost about difference between soldiers and suicide bombers. Let me explain in poor English :)

    Soldiers are people who defended/extended your country often sacrificing themselves during many wars. 1. They try keep war away from own civilians as much as possible. They objective to subdue adversary by targeting military-> infrastructure->state->civilians.

    States tend to surrender when soldiers (military) cannot longer protect own civilians (Like Europe during WWII).
    ====================

    'Suicide bombers' are weapon of last resort for regimes that cannot longer hold their ground but also don't care about own people l to surrender. 'Suicide bombers' mostly attack civilians since they lack ability to go after military.
    They achive objectives by exploiting public opinion (including yours) since they too weak to use military means.
    ANY killing is good as long as catches head lines (Look how many Muslims killed by suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel).
    They don't care about own civilians either using them as human shield. HAMAS hides in Gaza using residential areas to engage IDF and never bother to provide shelters to own people. Since they don't care about own people they never surrender and negotiate only when leadership get on the line of fire.

    HAMAS brings much more suffering to Palestinians rather than Israel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 04:14am on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #139 Hey, allmymarbles,

    Check BBC for honor killing all over the world.
    The lates moderate example from US:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7894721.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 04:34am on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    110. publiusdetroit,
    Israel is deadlock between elusive peace that pushed by Kadima, and more aggressive Likud. Kadima sees itself as centrist party.

    State/regime doesn't imply independence (like most European states during WWII or East Europe after WWII)
    State main objective is to follow best interests of citizens (At least try to follow). It may b done by different means like

    Regimes always addressing interests/ideas of very small group of people like N.Korea, Zimbabwe or HAMAS.

    HAMAS is perfect example of regime.
    It bend on Israel distribution and keeps fighting without any regards of own civilians using them as human shield. HAMAS brings by far more misery to own people than to Israel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 05:25am on 27 Feb 2009, freeclench wrote:


    Obama does not need to terrorize Americans into submission with the barbarians at the gates, because we are already sufficiently terrorized by the collapse of our economy.

    That is all this tells us.

    -FreeClench

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 05:51am on 27 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    148, SKV.
    "Check BBC for honor killing all over the world."

    So a man killed his wife. Were he American he would not have beheaded here (oor maybe he would have), but shot her or dropped her into a wood chipper. This is just one more crime of passion. If the man had not been Moslem it would not have recieved so much attention.

    Killing your wife is not a crime that knows boundaries or nationalities. It is the ultimate in spousal abuse, which, by the way, is a serious problem right here in the good ole U S of A.

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 05:58am on 27 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    SKV_USA

    Soldiers kill people.
    Suicide bombers kill people.

    Dead people can not tell us whether they prefer being killed by a bullet or a bomb. They are just as dead one way or the other. They do appear to lose their political affictions when their heart stops beating.

    The way to stop stacking up piles of dead people is for soldiers not to kill people and suicide bombers not to kill people.

    Somebody has to be the first to stop killing. Israel can demonstrate that they stand on the "high moral ground" by being the first to stop.

    Easiest way to get that "elusive peace" to which you refer.

    Peace be with thee.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 11:23am on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Timewaits,

    ""ctrl++" Thanks for the advice, "
    I've just checked the blog, and find that my previous upsizing has been remembered by firefox - clever! His novel is excellent, btw, compulsively finished in two days reading....now back to "The Scotch"

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 11:26am on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV_USA,

    A little bit of perspective and, an idea of who you're supporting

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed


    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 11:27am on 27 Feb 2009, irishman555 wrote:

    These people have been fighting with each other for hundreds perhaps thousands of years. America had no right to get into this war in Iraq and has every obligatron to get out as soon as possible. There is too much for Americans to worry about in thier country to be trying to save the world as well.

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 12:00pm on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Andy (98),

    "America has made excellent use of its Jewish citizens (which is not to suggest that they were exploited)."
    Far from it. They have thrived and excelled, as witness the list of signatories here
    "We could easily have absorbed the entire race (they're only 13 million strong even today). I'm not sure why they didn't come to the States. It may have been existing immigration quotas, ..."
    We could indeed have absorbed the whole lot, and how much better that would have been for all concerned. In spite of what you say, I believe there was some reluctance and barriers were put/kept in place. It suited EuroAmerican guilt and other "strategic" considerations to support the establishment of the Zionist state in the Middle-East. See if you can detect the "pattern" in the UN voting on Partition (Scroll up)... One of the greatest and most tragic mistakes of the twentieth century.

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 12:13pm on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    My #154,

    The who you're supporting link corrected.

    Apologies
    ed
    (and the Perspective link repeated in case the mods (who are as Gods) delete the post because of my 'bad' previous link...)

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 12:41pm on 27 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    153 Ed Iglehart

    Thanks, he still needs to change the background though. For the people who do not know about ++ and those whose eyes get weary - even though they are not OLD or need reading glasses! Present company included.

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 1:54pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #123. To dceilar

    You falls into trap of diplomatic language.

    HAMAS support Arab peace EFFORTS but never signed or accepted Arab Peace Initiative. Chk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

    If you still have doubts chk HAMAS charter it clear calls for Israel distraction.

    Israel & US recognize Palestinians rights to exists as long as don't attack Israel.
    HAMAS biggest crimes are not toward Israel but toward own people. Palestinians suffer most from this conflict. They are effectually hijacked by HAMAS.

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 2:17pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    To #151. allmymarbles

    I just wondering if we live on the same planet.

    In your previous post you said about how girl suffer in US if they dress in short skirt. I just walk NYC street and saw bunch nice looking sexy girls. None seams to suffer.

    1. You can also chk Y-tube on clerics Galal Al-Khatib about "One of the Husband's Rights is to Discipline His Wife If She Is Disobedient..."

    2. You can also check BBC articles about Saudis Girl Education Ministry,
    Check Afghanistan/Sudan etc. on female education.

    3. I used to work in Central Asia company common attitude was "don't marry woman from city they a poison by education and don't know how to respect husband".

    Nothing wrong with Islam. In Quaran/Bible/Torah you can find justification for any action. The only question what are you looking for.

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 2:23pm on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 162. At 2:35pm on 27 Feb 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    156 Ed.

    The thing is, almost every group that has come to North America found hope and the opportunity to succeed (or fail) on merit. Most have succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of their forefathers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 2:59pm on 27 Feb 2009, Orville Eastland wrote:

    Many of those "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo were taken far from Afghanistan by various countries, many of whom do not share the USA's commitment to Justice. (Like China.)
    Said "enemy combatants" can be charged with supporting terrorism even if they did not fire or even hold a gun, knife, grenade, etc..
    Further, said combatants are not given the same rights as military prisoners (even hostile prisoners) would. They are not given a speedy trial, which military prisoners would have.
    Finally, said prisoners have been tortured, which has NOT been shown to produce useful information (but has ruined the US's image...) and is ILLEGAL for members of the military to use. (At least it was until the ex post facto* MCA "legalized" it.)

    As for the war on terror, it could better have been fought by the FBI. They've brought numerous terrorists to justice. They have not aroused foreign ire. And, they have to rely on evidence...

    * Said bill provides immunity after the fact (ex post facto) for crimes committed. This is clearly unconstitutional. (Article 1, Section 9.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 3:40pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    147-149 skiv


    "They don't care about own civilians either using them as human shield. HAMAS hides in Gaza using residential areas to engage IDF and never bother to provide shelters to own people. "

    how exactly are they going to build "shelters" for their people.
    there is not money. The israeli's seem to have bunker buster bombs available.

    Does Israel not build near targeted areas?
    do they not also claim"you bomb us people"

    could they spend their money developing small anti missile missiles;) not star wars as we do?

    " 1. They try keep war away from own civilians as much as possible. They objective to subdue adversary by targeting military-> infrastructure->state->civilians. "


    where was two? you used a bunch of more than s there so at the bottom of the target list but still on the list are civies.

    PS when suicide bombing in Israel how are they attacking their own people.?

    look at what happened when they did target military folk.
    look at the fact that corp "whatever" that got captured and the military then invaded Lebanon over it.

    That was what happens to them when they do attack military targets.

    "Regimes always addressing interests/ideas of very small group of people like N.Korea, Zimbabwe or HAMAS."


    Like bush and cheney



    "Since they don't care about own people they never surrender and negotiate only when leadership get on the line of fire."

    so when did Israel surrender because they realised that their people were suffering from all these attacks?

    NO Israeli leader is bombed or attacked as much as the Hamas guys are.

    "States tend to surrender when soldiers (military) cannot longer protect own civilians (Like Europe during WWII). "

    There YOU encourage terrorists.
    you tell them if they kill enough civie they will win.If this is the case why did germany not give up until the military were trounced?


    just to start on you bits o venom.

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 3:42pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    155 lol well said.
    where are you from then

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 3:49pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    SKV 159

    There is only one side for you obviously.



    160 what are you looking for?

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 3:55pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    "If you still have doubts chk HAMAS charter it clear calls for Israel distraction."


    I'm not surprised they want Israel distracted. Israel keeps killing and blockading them.

    your unconditional withdrawl ;)was the equivalent of saying "starve in here we don't care..""be so bored because there are no jobs that you will join "fun"
    being so shell shocked and feeling hopeless without hearing the words of the nice people because your hearing has been taken from you as you whole family as your animals were may be enough to tip even the good people in america into becoming terrorists...if it were happening to them

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 3:56pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    Without solving employment and poverty in the states we will end up in a similar boat.

    Boredom leads to terrorists, and the US is bored and waiting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 3:57pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    158 WHAT WAS THAT? DIDN'T HEAR YOU

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 3:58pm on 27 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 159 SKV_USA

    HAMAS biggest crimes are not toward Israel but toward own people. Palestinians suffer most from this conflict. They are effectually hijacked by HAMAS.


    I think I am starting to get the picture now, SKV.

    Israel and the IDF are actually protecting the Palistinians from Hamas by killing thousands of Palistinians. Israel can win control over the Hamas hijackers by killing all the hijackees.

    Now there's an Israeli/Palistinian peace plan with some real teeth in it. I know it will work! We used that same technique on Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce here in the U.S. with excellent results.

    We crowded the Nez Perce into a small "reservation" and stole their land. Kept them from obtaining vital resources. Starved them. Frequently invaded the reservation to kill a bunch of them. Exposed their small efforts at retaliation as terrifying attacks against the white people. The buggers kept fighting until their leadership talked them into escaping the reservation. Then we shot almost all of them to protect them from their leaders.

    It was brilliant! It took 2,000 heavily armed, well supplied soldiers to kill a couple hundred poorly armed, starving, exhausted, freezing men, woman, and children before the Nez Perce stopped trying to save their homeland.

    We got that terrible Chief Joseph to say, "I will fight no more forever."

    And they have not fought anymore.

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 4:05pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    To Mr. Ed Iglehart,
    State of Israel exists and I don't see it undone without major MAJOR war. I know history well enough to justify and/or reject creation of Israel. Couple hand picked 'VERY VERY IMPORTANT UNKNOWN DOCUMENTS' make no difference. I red too many of them.
    The bottom line that we have Jews and Palestinians on this land.
    As long as we recognize their rights to exist the historical argument is pointless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 4:11pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    It seems that none of the Arab states are making concessions to Israel.


    I believe the concession will be .------ Not being attacked.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 4:35pm on 27 Feb 2009, tastyalex wrote:

    Well, we already know that Cheney and friends are planning another 9/11 style attack. Dick actually hinted that it'll be nukes next time.

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 5:25pm on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Just what is wrong with this? How does it break the house rules?

    The email received from the Mods (who are as Gods), "explains"

    "Comments posted to BBC blogs may be removed if they contain links to other websites which break our Editorial Guidelines"
    I have looked at the Editorial guidelines, and can find no reason why the site to which I provide a link above qualifies as unsuitable according to the guidelines. Does anti-zionism make it a "hate site?"

    "Hate sites (on grounds of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation)"

    In exasperation,
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 5:31pm on 27 Feb 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    160, SKV.
    "I just wondering if we live on the same planet. In your previous post you said about how girl suffer in US if they dress in short skirt. I just walk NYC street and saw bunch nice looking sexy girls. None seams to suffer."

    No, I do not think we are on the same planet. I never made such a post.

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 5:46pm on 27 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV_USA

    "The bottom line that we have Jews and Palestinians on this land. As long as we recognize their rights to exist the historical argument is pointless."
    So when do you reckon the Zionists are going to start recognising the rights of the majority of the occupants of Palestine?

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 6:16pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    Hey,
    happylaze wrote:
    Abotu #164:

    "how exactly are HAMAS going to build "shelters" for their people.
    there is not money. The israeli's seem to have bunker buster bombs available."

    Does HAMAS really want to build shelters?

    1. Israel don't targeting civilians for sake targeting civilians. We talk about 1,300 dead (That is still huge number) . Sorry for barbaric math but: but compare to Georgia in Abhasia killing ~300 out of 70000 in 3 day and Israel killed 1300 out of 1,500,000
    in 21 day. Nobody charges Georgia with war crimes...

    If HAMAS don't have money/material/resource to protect own people it must stop.
    Compare to Israel.
    HAMAS uses "grad" rockets that is very effective antipersonnel weapon (BTW used by Georgia in Abhasia) . but Israel built shelters and warning system for civilians and Grad cause virtually no casualties.
    It is war. If Israel found means to deny HAMAS resource HAMAS must accept that it cannot continue straggle without exposing own civilians. As Europe did during WWII.

    HAMAS military actions has 0 (Zero) military effect and very small economical effect. But it paralyzes life of several Israel communities so Israel as RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT cannot ignore it.

    It is also very effective as propaganda! /Look at you :)/. Each Palestinian death paint Israel bad and give HAMAS extra propaganda points. This is the real driving force behind HAMAS rockets. The only thing that this HAMAS propaganda machine runs on Palestinian blood...
    Bad Israel?

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 6:40pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    publiusdetroit
    #170.
    You getting close :)
    " Israel and the IDF are actually protecting the Palistinians from Hamas by killing thousands of Palistinians."

    Gaza Palestinians are caught in fight between HAMAS and IDF.
    HAMAS attacks on Israel bring no military/economical gains. They only paralyze life in few communities.
    The real HAMAS gains are on propaganda front (you one of HAMS gains :).
    Palestinian suffers make HAMAS look good for guys like you. So HAMAS keeps striking Israel from behind own people. The only problem that this PR campaign fueled by Palestinian blood.
    But you don't care about internals of this war. Weak HAMAS protect poor Gaza from bad Israel.
    But did HAMAS did anything to stopped this conflict?
    HAMAS condition to stop the war - destruction of Israel.

    Israel condition to stop war - stop firing rockets.

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 7:07pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:


    To #52. happylaze

    I just wondering if we live on the same planet.

    In your previous post you said about how girl suffer in US if they dress in short skirt. I just walk NYC street and saw bunch nice looking sexy girls. None seams to suffer.

    1. You can also chk Y-tube on clerics Galal Al-Khatib about "One of the Husband's Rights is to Discipline His Wife If She Is Disobedient..."

    2. You can also check BBC articles about Saudis Girl Education Ministry,
    Check Afghanistan/Sudan etc. on female education.

    3. I used to work in Central Asia company common attitude was "don't marry woman from city they a poison by education and don't know how to respect husband".

    Nothing wrong with Islam. In Quaran/Bible/Torah you can find justification for any action. The only question what are you looking for.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 7:10pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    To #175. allmymarbles


    No, I do not think we are on the same planet. I never made such a post.

    Sorry man,
    you brought me back to Earth :).

    It was intended to #52 and Mr. happylaze

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 7:11pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    177 YES BAD ISRAEL
    "Nobody charges Georgia with war crimes"

    thjat is because as with Israel Georgia is buddies with........?
    the USA.

    so, stupid response

    "HAMAS uses "grad" rockets that is very effective antipersonnel weapon (BTW used by Georgia in Abhasia) . but Israel built shelters and warning system for civilians and Grad cause virtually no casualtie"


    I suspect building a shelter against the Grad with billions of dollars and open borders is a lot easier than having no money and no way of getting building materials in.

    so ,stupid response

    " But it paralyzes life of several Israel communities so Israel as RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT cannot ignore it."


    Israel paralysis the people of gaza so it has no choice but to fight.
    " As long as we recognize their rights to exist the historical argument is pointless."


    SKV you are deceitful or ignorant either way bye.Twit

    175 Marbles I had noticed that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 7:14pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    Though can't resist this SKiV

    " They only paralyze life in few communities."

    If we gave them 10 billion in bombs I am sure they would be more efficient about it .

    Should we even things up?

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 7:17pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    OK another then bye.lol

    Israels condition is not to stop rockets.

    it is to "stop rockets and live with no hope because we bloody well won't let you. live without your family because we killed them in the rubble of your farm that we destroyed.
    AND ENJOY IT AND SMILE OR WE WILL KILL YOU,oh and your not allowed to have a business"

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 7:18pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    179 If your last post was not an appology to marbles, shut up. if it is same. BYE

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 7:28pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    since Hamas stopped suicide bombings and took to throwing missiles over the border in 6 years less people have died from rocket attacks ,total,than from accidents while driving each month.

    Time for the IDF to take protecting people seriously and start blowing up bad drivers.

    Using Mobile phones while have killed more than all missiles.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 7:38pm on 27 Feb 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    happylaze

    I see that you are on a roll. Noticed you were shouting at someone. Who is #158? Oh! appears to be me!

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 7:49pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #181 happylaze,
    You, agreed multiple times that HAMAS don't have resource to protect own people. That the most important function of any goverment - protect own people. If government fails on that it must go...
    we know why HAMAS in this position - because of Israel action. After all they wage war and Israel push HAMAS well beyond the point that any government will seek peace.

    But HAMAS is not really a government it puts Israel detraction above own people life and keep fights despite losses.

    HAMAS weakness is not excuse to put own people in danger.
    But you seams also don't care about Palestinians you more concern about Land.

    HAMAS by far the biggest Gaza tragedy as much as Nazi was for Germany. Hitler also was democratically elected and cost 17,000,000 German lives.

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 8:30pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #185 happylaze,
    Nice silly try.

    We should forgive any crime that cause less deaths that bad drivers.
    IF bad drivers will halt community it will amount to terror and we will use cops. IF drivers are foreigners we call in N.Guards.

    1. Rocket are not efficient because IDF provide shelters and protection. They still good enough to paralyze communites.


    You mistaken cause and effect. Israel caged Gaza, after Palestinians used to used open borders to infiltrate Israel. So Israel put fence around. It came handy to blockade hamas. Again first was hamas action and after that Israel response and poor Palestinians caught on the middle. Same story with W.Bank Israel put fence in response to suicide attacks.

    You still cannot get around that HAMAS has no military gains. Rocket are all about keep world attention on Gaza and price for this propaganda machine is Palestinians life!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 8:38pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #183 happylaze

    "stop rockets and live with no hope because we bloody well won't let you. live without your family because we killed them in the rubble of your farm that we destroyed.
    AND ENJOY IT AND SMILE OR WE WILL KILL YOU,oh and your not allowed to have a business"

    IDF didn't bother to wipe Gaza clean for 40 yrs and even vacated Gaza as recently as 2004. War is ugly, but there is always a peace on another end of war. Whole world waiting to revive Gaza and Palestine, the only problem blood trusty fanatics who hijack Gaza and put their ideas above own people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 8:44pm on 27 Feb 2009, chinaliver wrote:

    of course,obama should firstly solve america's economic problem,not the other way aroud.

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 8:46pm on 27 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    SKV_USA

    "We must use terror, assassination,
    intimidation, land confiscation, and the
    cutting of all social services to rid the
    Galilee of its Arab population."

    Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum"


    " The present map of Palestine was drawn
    by the British mandate. The Jewish people
    have another map which our youth and
    adults should strive to fulfill -- From the
    Nile to the Euphrates."

    Ben Gurion


    "Every time we do something you tell me
    America will do this and will do that . . . I want to
    tell you something very clear: Don't worry about
    American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish
    people, control America, and the Americans
    know it."

    Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon,
    October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as
    reported on Kol Yisrael radio.


    The "high moral ground" of Israel. Fine nation of people. You should be very proud of your defense of such kind people, SKV.

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 10:23pm on 27 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #191. publiusdetroit
    Great collection.
    I accept first 2 quotes the last one sound way too stupid. Like Zion protocols.

    "Every time we do something you tell me
    America will do this and will do that . . . I want to
    tell you something very clear: Don't worry about
    American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish
    people, control America, and the Americans
    know it."

    If you go through original historical source you will find tons of ugly quotes for any more or less historical significant person. I red enough 'criminal' Zionist's quotes and even more Palestinians :(.

    Bottom line:
    Israel don't teach hate at schools or TVs (there are few exceptions). Check PA school program or Gaza TVs...


    My points:
    1. Two nations must find way how to move forward TOGETHER and history doesn't help here.

    2. From my military expertise HAMAS deliberately puts own civilians under IDF fire. I see only one reason for this - fuel PR campaign. I found this particularly disgusting to say at least.

    3. I see inconsistent but proven record of Israel & FATAH efforts to find peace. I saw none from HAMAS.



    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 10:56pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    lol SKV
    I would say your argument is silly.
    "1. Rocket are not efficient because IDF provide shelters and protection. They still good enough to paralyze communites. "

    So the Israelis are better because they use effective bombs

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7836869.stm

    If the weaponry that was used against the people of Gaza was used on Israel I doubt many of the bunkers would survive.(I don't know I have not seen them)One thing is for sure and try to follow because I think you are deliberately missing the point I already made about this.

    Hamas has No money or materials to build bunkers. they are not just prevented from crossing into Israel , they are prevented from receiving (or sending) goods in and out by sea. Which given no mandate apart from the "we are Israel and will do what we want" mandate is piracy.
    that is their coast not Israelis. Patrol it for arms yes keep the Israelis out of it yes.

    You keep saying why don't they build shelters, again I think I should assume you are hard of hearing, WITH WHAT?


    "You still cannot get around that HAMAS has no military gains. Rocket are all about keep world attention on Gaza and price for this propaganda machine is Palestinians life!!!"


    So they are losing militarily which means bomb them to hell because they are not good enough???

    Rockets were instead of suicide bombers.
    They hit way fewer people.

    Those rockets are crap to aim and the fact that hey hit civilian people by what they must consider good luck(as in hitting anyone)(did you see the footage of the guy running away from the bomb ducking where if it had been an Israeli bomb he would have been blown apart for quite a spread), as opposed to misdirected deliberate precision bombing .It is no different. morally speaking. at that stage I start to say "who is the bully here?"

    Hamas who were elected (sorry)?
    You think so it seems. That is why I think your argument is silly.


    As to hamas laying down weapons.

    Because they don't they are evil.
    they are losing suck it up.

    Their people probably voted for them because they to do nt htink Israel should have the rights of a nation.That is how they are treated and the rule normally works out as "do unto your neighbours as they do to you"

    So Hamas cannot recognise Israel until Israel behaves in a manner for long enough that the people of Gaza will not continue to vote for people that do not accept Israel.

    And comparing Hamas to Hitler while excusing Israel of all responsibility is a joke, a very sick and twisted joke.

    The mods would delete any further comment.

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 10:59pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    "Jews and Palestinians"


    but we keep hearing there is no Palestine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 11:06pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    179 on the short skirt. Yea I live in eugene land where the women don't need(legally) to wear a top.
    but either the skirt or the topless will get you thought of as a whore by many in many parts of the USA.

    They certainly would be offended if their kid dressed that way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 11:11pm on 27 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 192 SKV_USA

    If you were to break into my home to take from me everthing I own; bring terrible harm upon my family; burn down my house; eat my dog; I would fight you until my death with a dreadful resolve. Your military expertise would not help you. I would not just go away quiet.

    The Jewish people have broken into the home of the Palistinians. Do you expect them to be any less dreadful in their resolve?

    After paying a visit to Palestine in 1891, the Hebrew essayist Achad Ha-Am commented:

    " Abroad we are accustomed to believe that Israel [Palestine] is almost empty;
    nothing is grown here and that whoever wishes to buy land could come
    here and buy what his heart desires. In reality, the situation is not like
    this. Throughout the country it is difficult to find cultivable land which is
    not already cultivated."

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 11:28pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    The west bank has another border not controlled by Israel.
    That would make them more able to fend in desperation for themselves and be able to buy some cooking oil lets say.

    Not so easy when Israel has blockagded all your people.

    Divide and Conker.

    Complain about this comment

  • 198. At 11:29pm on 27 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    196 well said pub

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 00:50am on 28 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Those who won't look won't see

    Salaaaam
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 200. At 01:46am on 28 Feb 2009, freeclench wrote:


    PALESTINIANS GO HOME.


    -FreeClench

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 03:39am on 28 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #193 Hey happylaze,
    You cannot get over the fact that IDF has upper hand in military conflict. It is irrelevant why HAMAS cannot protect own people.
    You keep repeating that it is not fear for IDF use powerful weapons while HAMS down to AK-47 and home made rockets.
    It is not a sport tournament.
    If HAMAS cannot match IDF it must not provoke/engage in conflict.
    War is not about fair game.
    "War is is about impose your rules on opponent."
    Gen. David Petraeus
    That exactly what IDF does.

    Any responsible government must put own people life above political/economical gains and protect civilians by all means. But if means are exhausted government must surrender.

    That another thing that you fail to get over:
    Does any military/economical gains justify HAMAS rocket fire?
    They only make sense as propaganda especially if IDF retaliation end up in civilian casulties.
    BTW You don't need concrete to build shelter.
    1. You just mark area with big sign in Arabic/Hebrew/Inglish - SHELTER.
    2. You don't put firing position within ~1000m.
    Why HAMAS didn't do this? In contrary HAMAS routinely put firing position next to improvise shelters like schools.

    IDF has room to improve but HAMAS is by far the biggest criminal in terms of Palestinina sufferings.

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 03:54am on 28 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    To #196. publiusdetroit
    Good,

    HAMAS did exactly what you said:

    "HAMAS fought IDF until death with a dreadful resolve"
    Do you know outcome?
    It cost another 1300 Palestinians lives.

    But you really don't care as long as HAMAS 'punish' IDF.

    In 1970 Israel PM Golda Meir said:
    "War will end when Palestinians lear to love their kids more than to hate us".

    Sorry guys but you still hate Jews more than love next to kin.

    99% of your post here is about to justify HAMAS actions as retaliation to IDF 'crimes'.

    While my point it cost Gaza much more. If you love your own kin you have to stop.

    Don't make equal sign between HAMAS and Gaza!
    Nazi were democratically elected in Germany in 1930's. They cost Germany 17,000,000 lives and ashamed country. But Nazi were gone and Germany revived as one of the best countries in the World.
    I really keep hope for Gaza, but HAMAS must go.

    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 05:11am on 28 Feb 2009, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 202 SKV_USA

    In 1970 Israel PM Golda Meir said:

    "War will end when Palestinians lear to love their kids more than to hate us".


    That's funny. In 1969 Golda Meir stated:

    "There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed."

    Golda Maier Israeli Prime Minister June 15, 1969


    So how can a people who do not exist learn to love their kids more than they hate Israel? Golda must have been a confused old dame. Or a blood-thirsty tyrant.

    But, or course, these people do exist. They keep fighting the thieves who stole their land. They would rather die than be slaves of the Israelis.

    "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves."

    Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the
    Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the
    mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.


    It does not matter what political party the Palestinians choose to follow. Eretz Israel is on a mission of genocide. Hamas is only the most recent excuse the Israelis use to justify their genocide. Just like the Nazis made excuses for the need to slaughter the Jews.

    The difference is that the Jews walked meekly to the slaughter. The Palestinians stand and fight.




    Complain about this comment

  • 204. At 1:35pm on 28 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    On the matter of self-identity, I commend this blog, and the author's book, which I have just finished reading. Simply brilliant!

    "Robin Yassin-Kassab was born in Britain to a Syrian father and English mother (and grew up partly in Scotland). He graduated from Oxford University and travelled extensively, working as a journalist in Pakistan before moving to Oman where he now teaches English."
    He now lives in Scotland. Check out the blog.

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    (Some tears ago, the author handed me a copy of this as we sat by a pleasant campfire...)

    Complain about this comment

  • 205. At 2:26pm on 28 Feb 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Eric Fosse on use of DIME weapons in Gaza

    "At a conference on ‘Deconstructing the War on Terror’...The panel had many excellent speakers but Robin tells me that he was most impressed by Dr. Eric Fosse’s presentation which, contrary to what one would expect, was more than an account of shambles that is Gaza’s healthcare system. Fosse presented a sophisticated political analysis that explained Israel’s objectives behind the assault and the events leading up to it."
    Check it out
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 206. At 4:45pm on 28 Feb 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    96. publiusdetroit wrote:

    The Jewish people have broken into the home of the Palistinians.

    I guess you got your history from a Palestinian school textbook – one with no mention of Israel on maps of the area. In fact, since Ancient Israel Jews have always lived between the Jordan River and the sea. And when the UN came up with the idea of Partition into Jewish and Arab states, Jews were already a majority in the area set aside for them. Study some real historical texts.

    203. publiusdetroit,

    Your ignorance of history is quite impressive. In fact, it is Israel's Arab enemies who closely resemble the Nazis, with their obsessive desire to destroy the Jews through all the unprovoked wars and continual terror against Israeli civilians. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met Hitler and planned a "final solution" for the Jews of Palestine. Hezbollah does the Nazi salute. And Hamas has the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews in its Charter.

    It must be hugely frustrating for the Arabs to have failed so miserably in all their attempts to destroy the Jews in the past century. I almost sympathise.

    The Jews "went meekly to their deaths?" I guess you have never heard of the Warsaw Uprising. What you know about this subject could fit into the head of a pin.

    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 4:49pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    201.
    "You cannot get over the fact that IDF has upper hand in military conflict. "

    SKIVVY.

    What part of
    "I do not believe that because you have more and better guns you are right"

    "Having more weapons does not make one Right."

    " there is no MORAL superiority to having more guns."

    "america supplying guns does not lend moral authority."

    To say that war is about making up the rules is fine. but then do not expect a vote on the UN security council is you will not obey the rules.


    You carry on like a cretin here.


    "1. You just mark area with big sign in Arabic/Hebrew/Inglish - SHELTER."



    DID YOU SEE WHAT HAPPENED TO THE UN COMPOUND?

    You are again telling bald faced lies if you think putting shelter on the roof would stop the Israeli's.


    ALL of your arguments are cretinous.

    no one can intervene without Israels permission.

    That would be like letting Saddam call the shots in GW1.

    No different.
    He should according to your rules be able to say "get out I won" stop helping them"

    That is Israels stance now.

    Now many in the world (un ) have said that Israel has not kept up to the agreements made.
    the only country preventing the UN having teeth is the USA.

    SO THAT IS WHY ALL THOSE PEOPLE WANT TO KILL AMERICANS.

    They already want to kill the invaders (Israel).
    But now by siding with the invaders america is a target as well.As it should be.


    Might is not right and Killing innocents is not OK because you are Israeli.

    "BTW You don't need concrete to build shelter. "



    BTW a tent wont stop phosphorous or cluster bombs.


    Writing on the wall does not matter to Israel.



    " IDF has room to improve but HAMAS is by far the biggest criminal in terms of Palestinina sufferings."

    bit like "that damn tart was dressed provocatively".


    Again go to church seek redemption or something you are sick.

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 5:01pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 209. At 5:03pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    While my point it cost Gaza much more. If you love your own kin you have to stop.



    That does not make us any better than them. If Israel loves it's people it could seek peace. Just because they loose fewer people does not make that easy for those Israeli's that DO lose someone.
    Again YOU ARE SICK

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 5:14pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    I don't care who is in charge in GAZA.


    If Idiots like you had not told the PLO to go to hell . tried to divide the PLO just when it was getting around to your idea's more, hadn't then shot the Israel leader looking for peace.

    there would be no hamas.

    Just as if everyone had helped Israel and none had been killed in the Holocaust (by germans not palestinians) there would have been no excuse for the "stern gang". (strangely though, they were emigrating then claiming ownership and were not locals, which seems they have no right).

    Israel has behaved like terrorists we support them and that is not right.

    Israel does not let them live in peace.
    Look at Ireland.

    Release the prisoners. open the sea routes open the border to egypt.

    Agree that the principle of a free Palestine and let them actually have it.

    then there will be peace.

    Your military service (if you really were) has twisted your mind to one of war.
    and at no stage has any one said they wish Israel's to die or that it is good, right.

    It is not.
    but if there is a terrier yapping at my heals and a bull charging I would shout "BULL" not "terrier".

    Complain about this comment

  • 211. At 5:18pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    too wrong

    is here so whats the point he will just refer people to the mods when he does not like a comment.

    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 5:19pm on 28 Feb 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    It took a while to sink in but I believe this is the very first time I have seen the War on Terror mentioned by the BBC without enclosed it in sarcastic, distancing quotes.

    Apart from that, nothing much has changed here in my absence. Still the usual Israel-bashing crowd busily at work, going off the topic in order to indulge in their obsession.

    Actually, it isn't that far off topic. Israel is in the front line in the War on Terror and there certainly ain't no end in sight.

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 6:08pm on 28 Feb 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    Happylaze, try to emerge from your paranoia. I don't "refer people to the moderators," as I've pointed out a few times. I prefer debate to censorship.

    You might have noticed that all the other rubbish you have written in the last few hours is still here. I don't "like" any of it. And that vile post at 203 is also still here.

    The moderators can also refer comments. Ever thought of that?

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 6:29pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    213 I have. and if that stuff does go I will know why.

    Every time you have turned up before post start disappearing, normally the ones closer to the beginning of the discussion and then you start making stuff up about the posts that have by then been referred.

    Just an observation.
    I would also suggest that you may have challenged a few and the mods have not seen it your way.
    hence your anger that some are "still there"


    though to be honest re reading the post I sent that was modded I believe I understand why it was.
    and as such did not try to repost it.

    I will not apologise for accusing you as I have because it is still a valid criticism of you.
    Maybe it is only coincidence .

    like the coincidence that Russia tried to fly into canada just as it happens on the day Obama was there.


    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 6:31pm on 28 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:


    #203. publiusdetroit

    Gold Mair said:

    "There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed."

    Indeed.

    You took quote out of context. I assume by mistake :).

    She didn't reject them as people or as their right to exist.

    She just questioned them as an nation.

    Today we commonly refer them to Palestinians and see them as a nation that seeks statehood.

    But If you check history of Portion and British mandate. Britsh always were in search of political representation for what today we call Palestinians. Arabs on these land weer more like bunch of tribes and clans. In fact every time Palestinian Arabs had to speak in single voice they found themselves badly divided.

    "Palestinians never miss opportunity to miss opportunity" :( (Palestinian saying)

    Today it is about HAMAS and FATAH. It used to be along tribal and clan lines.

    This was behind riots in 1930's 1920's as well as rejection UN result ion in 1948.

    This is one of main reason why Zionist movement was able to settle on this land.

    It was more or less organized movement that allowed Jews spoke to Brits in single voice.
    (Brits didn't like it and reach to Arabs and... found bunch of clans...)
    Check Ilan Pappe "A history of Modern Palestine" very liberal, many examples of Israel crimes. (Bold assumption that you like to study things !)

    Against your silly quote my silly qoute:


    PLO (Todays FATAH) commite member Z. Muhsein in 1977:

    "The Palestinian people does not EXIST. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel
    for our Arab unity. In reality today there is NO DIFFERENCE between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism."

    This quote as cheap as yours while both are true.

    Educate yourself dude!

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 7:06pm on 28 Feb 2009, happylaze wrote:

    SKV
    "She didn't reject them as people or as their right to exist.

    She just questioned them as an nation. "


    and Hamas rejecting Israel as a nation is different because.....?


    Again a bunch of tribes live in an area(correct) and they generally skirmish with each other .

    Lets say the amazon tribes then.

    Who are we to take over the whole area and force them to bow to our will that someone else move to their land.

    Oi Amazon tribes ,leave, we have some people from Texas we want to move into your area.


    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 7:45pm on 28 Feb 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    123. dceilar,

    Funny how you keep repeating this line about "12 000 new settlements" after the Israelis pulled out of Gaza. This is what happens when people don't think things through and just blindly repeat the propaganda they've heard or what they think they've heard. I'm wondering how long it's going to take till you realise what you are saying.

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 11:15pm on 28 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #126 To happylaze

    Generally speaking before you dive into heatted debate about Israel it is better to get general idea about history. OTherwise you sound like... happylaze. - arrive to conclusion even before stady basic facts :).

    Just 100 yrs ago it was common practice:
    1. Tribe/clan/nation/community would approach Ruler of the land and ask permission to settle. May be in particular area.

    2. Other way around Ruler of the land may demand tribe/clan/nation/community to relocate or just vacate area.

    1900-1930 Zionists negotiated settlement permissions with Turks/Brits for some communities.

    Arabs tend to live semi nomadic life. Turks drove once Advanced Arab nation into stone age with 100's clans and tribes. Turks totally controlled them.

    Brits had different approach - they liked local self ruling communities (That exactly how Jews lived for centuries).
    According to Brits, they weren't able to find any voice to represent Arabs. Each tribe/clan liked to speak for themselves and clan next to them :).

    If you don't like to read, just see 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom'. It is very sympathetic to Arabs. Movie/book gives good insight in general Arabs development in 1910's.

    Just from the top of my head over last 300 yrs:
    Greek/Turks/Armenians resettled 1,000,000s. Often in extremely brutal way.

    Russians alone resettled/moved/welcomed at least 6 nations (Jews/Chechens/Osetin/Tatars etc) in last 100 yrs.

    Until 1950-60's nobody spoke to tribes, only Rulers.

    When Jews resettled this land their did it according to custom of these times.

    Yep, many Jews came in illegally. Especially after WWI and WWII. But they only came because of more general permitted migration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 11:44pm on 28 Feb 2009, Sergey wrote:

    216. happylaze

    "...Hamas rejecting Israel as a nation..."

    HAMAS charter calls for total Israel detraction.

    While Jews often refering themself as nation of Israel. AFAIK HAMAS using narrow reading of word Israel - as state.

    Today Israel don't called for destruction of Palestine. Even when Zionists considered creation of the single state they didn't use chance to kicked out Palestinians at least 3 times.

    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 05:18am on 01 Mar 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    215, SKV.
    "Britsh always were in search of political representation for what today we call Palestinians. Arabs on these land weer more like bunch of tribes and clans. In fact every time Palestinian Arabs had to speak in single voice they found themselves badly divided."

    You make them sound like ignorant peasants. What most people don't know (because of the media and propaganda) is that the Palestinians were intellectual leaders in the Arab world. As an example, if an upper-class Arab wanted a fine tutor to educate his children, he chose a Palestinian.

    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 1:46pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV (218),

    "Arabs tend to live semi nomadic life. Turks drove once Advanced Arab nation into stone age with 100's clans and tribes. Turks totally controlled them.

    Brits had different approach - they liked local self ruling communities "
    Another historical document The Hope Simpson Report, found the Palestinian Arabs living and farming in mostly settled communities, and goes some way in describing the forms of traditional tenure.

    A few simple facts:
    1. For more than 1000 years, Jews were a small minority of the population of Palestine.
    2. By 1946, this minority had grown to constitute 33% of the population of Palestine.
    3. Jewish landownership was less than 7% of Palestine, but this included 12% of the "cultivable" land.

    Of course, you may consider the official documentation behind these facts to be obscure, "hand-picked" or whatever, but then you would, wouldn't you?

    Salaam, etc.
    ed

    A parable

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 1:52pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Ms Marbles,

    "You make them sound like ignorant peasants."
    If he did, he'd be arguing against himself. Peasant is a term for the settled folk of a place, tribal or otherwise. It's also amusing to find a champion of the Jews using tribalism as a derogative concept....

    But I suspect that the only folk more immune to irony than Americans might be Zionists, and, of course, American Zionists.....

    ;-)
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 2:54pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    So where's he been hiding? Middle East envoy Tony Blair in Gaza for first time

    " * soldier's story

    "I wanted to come to hear for myself, first hand, from people in Gaza whose lives have been so badly impacted by the recent conflict," Blair said in a statement....

    A spokeswoman for the former British prime minister said he had no plans to meet Hamas officials during the visit, scheduled to last several hours and to be followed by a tour of Sderot, an Israeli town hit frequently by rockets from the Gaza Strip."
    How long has he been in the job? almost two whole years, but I expect he may feel the need of some pretty good body armour to venture into Gaza. And, of course he's uninterested in having any contact with the elected leadership.....I'm sure he'll get a complete understanding of the situation as he tours in his little bubble....Who'll be in charge of security, I wonder.

    Related: Israel's death squads: A soldier's story Dual standards, anyone?

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 4:08pm on 01 Mar 2009, timewaitsfornoman wrote:

    Ed Iglehart

    "A parable" Very good and so clear cut... to some. But there are Ugasians, the displaced British, the outsides, insiders, those looking to make a profit, those looking for peace, etc. etc. The one thing the story does not need is Violence!! (so hard to put an end to that). But instead - Compromise!! Call in some Canadian Constitutional Experts. We are masters of compromise.

    As everyone should know by now.....

    (my post to you on Healthcare?)

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 4:21pm on 01 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    218 SKiV (your version of history is again as one sided as your arguement.

    I'm sorry that I do not use a pile of bull like you to try to confuse the opposition.
    I do know about the formation and the area previous to Israel.

    None of which backs up your argument that they are allowed to behave like murderous terrorists NOW.

    Yes Israel murderous terrorists.

    See if they had claimed some moral high ground and been the LESS aggressive nation I would probably be arguing on their side now.
    They didn't

    So I am not.

    Now I don't think Hamas behave like saints either.

    "Until 1950-60's nobody spoke to tribes, only Rulers."

    Last time I looked None of the world speaks to the people. last time I checked I was not invited to any talks about running the country.

    Leaders get that job.

    If you had not noticed Quite a lot changed after WW2 .

    Brits couldn't find a united voice against the jewish tribes of the area.


    Again who are we to say that tribalism is somehow inferior to big countries , United countries.


    Do they need a G Washington to unify them in order to give legitimacy to their individual claims?


    That is like american way that Unions are required in order for having protection at work.

    Educate your self then
    (educate means to draw the light out from within, not from zionist websites.)


    And try getting some morals as well.

    So where was your service to the country. what was your military background.

    Amazing how many claiming to be military come here and condone Israel.
    but then less amazing are those that have come here and said "enough is enough" because they recognise a war crime when it is happening.
    I say less amazed because I see that most humans want peace. You however seem to think people fight wars that destroy their country because they want to(admittedly after the number of murders and imprisonment Israel has done I would see the anger in gaza lasting a while.)

    I look and see Israel not realy suffering as hey say.


    You excuse any behaviour.

    Sick and twisted

    And UNEDUCATED.

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 4:28pm on 01 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    As for leading nomadic lives.
    IS THAT ILLEGAL?


    Does that take away their rights.
    they still had a territory.
    So were many native tribes of north America. It was not right to deprive them of that ability.
    Nomadic life styles are a benefit to the areas.

    Were they less than us because they didn't try to exist in the same spot all year.

    What part of Nomad says they have no rights. that they don't exist. that they don't take the same trade routes?


    Again If you want to say Educate to me you better jump on the camel first.


    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 4:44pm on 01 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    "Today Israel don't called for destruction of Palestine."


    That you deceiver is because they do not recognise Palestine as existing.

    And seeing as they don't exist they can't be treated unfairly is the way you seem to think.

    Go on just say Israel went way overboard in that recent assault on Gaza.
    Try it you may find some release.
    It may be good for your soul. if you have one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 6:02pm on 01 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #227 happylaze,
    You heart goes well ahead of brain.

    I repeat many time that historical facts allows justify/reject existence of Palestine/Israel.
    I only refer to history to put Golda Meir word back into historical context. I didn't try to justify existence of Israel.

    Last time I checked map it was there alone with PA (this is yet to become state).

    "That you deceiver is because they do not recognise Palestine as existing."

    Israel does want to creation of Palestine state. Israel sign tons document on that 'Road map' is just one example. Israel maintain close contact with PA administration. They just want to make sure that Palestinian state t become base for next war against Israel. They are ready to negotiate.

    HAMAS... few nations recognize HAMAS. Because nobody whats to deal with HAMAS as state. Israel may be first on this list, but even Arabs govs keep goooood distance from HAMAS. It has nothing to do with US.
    I used to saw on daily bases HAMAS/PLO ralyes.
    Check Y-Tube, because non of 'politically corrects 'news like BBC comes even close to report these rallies. Compare to these Suicide 'Mikey Mouse' look like Zionist clip :).

    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 7:45pm on 01 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    The only people who care what the three decades old Hamas Charter says are the Zionists. Hamas have said many times that they support the Arab League proposal. There was a cease-fire proposed by Hamas political leader Khaled Mishal a few days before Israel launched its attack on December 27.

    Mishal called for restoring the 2005 agreement. That agreement called for an end to violence and uninterrupted opening of the borders, along with an Israeli guarantee that goods and people could move freely between the two parts of occupied Palestine, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

    The agreement was rejected by the US and Israel a few months later, after the free election of January 2006 turned out "the wrong way."
    Source here.

    Israel and the US do not want peace. Indeed Israel was created by terrorism, martyred and celebrated its terrorists, and continues its terrorism. But what do we expect from terrorists? Its 'heroic' terrorists tried to make a deal with the Nazis! Oh the irony . . . but yet, are we surprised?

    Complain about this comment

  • 230. At 11:45pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV,

    "Just from the top of my head over last 300 yrs:
    Greek/Turks/Armenians resettled 1,000,000s. Often in extremely brutal way.

    Russians alone resettled/moved/welcomed at least 6 nations (Jews/Chechens/Osetin/Tatars etc) in last 100 yrs."
    Ever hear of "Tu Quoque", also known as the "two wrongs" fallacy?

    Salaam, etc.
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 231. At 11:57pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV,

    "Israel does want to creation of Palestine state. Israel sign tons document on that 'Road map'"
    Have you read the Road Map? And the Israeli "reservations"?
    "#
    # The character of the provisional Palestinian state will be determined through negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. The provisional state will have provisional borders and certain aspects of sovereignty, be fully demilitarized with no military forces, but only with police and internal security forces of limited scope and armaments, be without the authority to undertake defense alliances or military cooperation, and Israeli control over the entry and exit of all persons and cargo, as well as of its air space and electromagnetic spectrum."
    That's "sovereignty"? More like an open air prison - not very different from the status quo.

    Israel does not want peace. If she did, it would have happened long long ago.
    "Israel makes a point of setting prerequisites and believes it has an exclusive right to do so. But, time and time again, Israel avoids the most basic prerequisite for any just peace - an end to the occupation. Of all the questions asked during his Passover interviews, no one bothered to ask Olmert why he didn't react with excitement to the recent Arab initiatives, without preconditions? The answer: real estate. The real estate of the settlements."
    Salaam, etc.
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 00:38am on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    The War on Capacity

    ;-(
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 00:43am on 02 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    $229. At 7:45pm on 01 Mar 2009, dceilar

    You keep posting the same without looking into responce:

    1. You wrong that nobody cares about HAMAS charter:
    Besides Zionists there are many more states/organizations that cares about Hamas charter:
    UN, US, EU and... HAMAS.

    2. HAMAS support Arab effort to bring peace (A-ka guys keep pushing thanks for trying :). HAMAS never signed Arab Initiative accord! Read this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

    You have funny position:
    1. Don't care about HAMAS documents
    2. Don't believe what Israel/US wrote.
    3. Trust Mishal calls. (He makes a lot of calls

    When there is no trust between people they ask to put everything in witting.
    That the reason why people so concern about HAMAS charter.

    You refer to Noam Chomsky. Good propaganda source. He point out on US/Israel rejected UN resolution "The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination".
    Sound like US/Israel don't what Palestinian state!

    This resolution conflicts with previous accords with Arafat that lead to PA and 'Road map'. It is hard to dissolve PA today.

    Israel and US committed to Palestine as it was agreed and signed with Arafat. They don't want start from scratch.

    Do you want to see peace process start from scratch?

    Did you see what happened to Gaza when HAMAS provoked IDF?

    Do you like to see HAMAS on W.Bank firing rocket to Israel?
    Once you read HAMAS chapter you will see that HAMAS still follows every word.

    Complain about this comment

  • 234. At 00:51am on 02 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #230. At Ed Iglehart
    Read my post in full!

    I never tried to justify any relocation!

    It was given as an example that Rulers had full power over their subjects and it was common proactive to move communities/nations/tribes around.

    Do read out more than was written :).

    Cheers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 235. At 01:02am on 02 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    #225. At 4:21pm on 01 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    SKiV (your version of history is again as one sided as your arguement.

    I'm sorry that I do not use a pile of bull like you to try to confuse the opposition.

    There is no "a pile of bull" to confuse.

    I tend to provide what I believe facts to support my position.
    I just wondering where your facts happy & lazy. So far you didn't go any deeper that cheep headlines from liberal press.

    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 01:12am on 02 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    220. At 05:18am on 01 Mar 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    1. "You make them sound like ignorant peasants. "
    Don' blame on me Brits problems. They were not able to find 'Palestinians intellectual leaders'.
    I referred to research book that based to Brits documents.

    2. Sorry man you produce no references. Each nation claims to teach everybody around. Just l look at Americans/Brits etc.

    Last time I check University of Jerusalem was establish in 1918. Too shallow to produce intellectuals to teach whole Arab world.
    Cairo University was reestablished in 1908 before 1818-1854. At least 10 yrs ahead.

    Complain about this comment

  • 237. At 01:26am on 02 Mar 2009, Sergey wrote:

    Hey,
    #231: Ed Iglehart wrote:
    Did you read your own post?
    It was called
    "provisional Palestinian state". Isn't the current status of PA?

    I would be really surprised if they allowed Palestinian army to be created first.

    There is in no trust. You know metal pipe can be used for pluming or for rockets.
    Every time Israel tried to easy restriction few morons use materials to fire rockets.
    But I hope that you would agree that over all Israel and PA made a progress from 1990's despite Intefada.
    And it was only possible that some people on both sides were able to bridge differences.
    And there are also some people in GAza (HAMAS) that badly what to null all these agreement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 09:13am on 02 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #233 SKV

    I did read your response. I was not convinced one bit! Hamas have said that they support the Arab League proposal - US and Israel have not. You can call Hamas' support of the Arab League proposal as 'diplomatic speak' as much as you want, but it doesn't deter the fact that Israel has only once ever pushed for peace (and that was half hearted because the rate of illegal new settlements increased)! Hamas declared a unilateral ceasefire in 2005 and reaffirmed their commitment to it three days before Israel started its onslaught.

    Also it was Israel that broke the terms of the 2008 ceasefire not Hamas, but you already know that. In fact Israel went against the spirit of the deal by never lifting its blockade.

    Judging by their actions, and not their 'diplomatic speak', Israel and US do not want a viable Palestinian State.

    The Road Map is a sham, thanks to Israeli alterations reducing it to worthlessness. The peace process does not need to start from scratch- it is embodied in the Arab League proposal. If you support peace you should lobby Israel into supporting it.

    It has been mentioned that Hamas is not the real threat to Israel. It is those Palestinians and Israelis who support peace, democracy, secularism, and the pre-1967 borders that are a real threat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 12:03pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    SKV,

    ""provisional Palestinian state". Isn't the current status of PA?

    I would be really surprised if they allowed Palestinian army to be created first."
    So, why don't we start with a similarly limited provisional Israeli state? Oh, I forgot! That was the intent of Resolution 181, but it didn't reckon with Stern, IRGUN, et. al.

    And, just for the record, just what gives Israel the right to determine the properties of any Palestinian state? Is there a reciprocal right for the Palestinians?

    Salaam, etc.
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 12:41pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Palestinians haven’t a partner for peace

    "Hamas, the militant Palestinian organisation, attempted to conduct secret talks with the Israeli leadership in the protracted run-up to the recent war in Gaza - with messages being passed from the group at one stage through a member of prime minister Ehud Olmert's family.

    Confirmation of attempts to establish a direct line of communication between Hamas and Israel - and the willingness of senior figures in Hamas to contemplate direct negotiations - fundamentally alters the narrative of the build-up to the war in Gaza which claimed more than 1,300 Palestinian lives and led to about a dozen Israeli deaths."
    Nothing new, really. Israel has always been the roadblock to peace.

    “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.” - H. L. Mencken

    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 1:52pm on 02 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #240 Ed

    Thanks for the link. I'm not surprised either - Israel is the problem!

    SKV and his ilk are nothing more than apologists for State terror. Just like the Stalinists of old, they will not accept the truth of their beloved regime killing innocent civilians and children.

    His ilk even blame Hamas for the IDF killing children! Sounds no different from a rapist blaming his victim for being raped!

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 2:48pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7919050.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7918716.stm

    OI SKV How are they meant to build those shelters?


    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 2:52pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    I would like to congratulate everyone ( well maybe not everyone) here in their efforts to find some truth.

    It surprised me but I was glad to see the BBC did have a piece on the news this morning (OPB 30 minutes a day) about the fact that rebuilding is going to be a bit hard if there is no Steel or concrete allowed across the border.
    And that there was only one crossing open though the Israeli spokesman tried to claim more were he could not mention them by name and seemed confused.

    Well done Justin if that was anything to do with your Job as Editor for the US.

    Well done and thank you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 3:06pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    SKiV we have read your responses hence the pulling of your lies.


    "I tend to provide what I believe facts to support my position.
    I just wondering where your facts happy & lazy. So far you didn't go any deeper that cheep headlines from liberal press."



    I have you have not once backed your extensive writings with any links that would show you to be right. Liberal press is every one but the zionist press to you.

    I just hope you were not brainwashed into your thinking in the US military.
    Then we have no hope.

    Israel said no more rockets"that is the price for peace" then they changed the goal posts to "release Corp Shallit"

    "Release the Palestinian kids and prisoners first" I suspect the answer will be.


    When they change they goal posts so often it does make it seem that Israel are a bunch of lying terrorists.





    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 3:08pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    As Britain trumpets its generous offer of 30 million quid for the re-building of Gaza, I remind anyone who missed ti of this report on the systematic destruction of local capacity

    Remember the formula:
    Millions for aid
    Billions for weaponry
    Trillions for banks

    ;-(
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 246. At 3:20pm on 02 Mar 2009, chronophobe wrote:

    re: 241 dceliar SKV and his ilk are nothing more than apologists for State terror. Just like the Stalinists of old, they will not accept the truth of their beloved regime killing innocent civilians and children.

    I don't think Stalin is the key that opens this door. There is an obsession with the will I have seen in so many right wing writers (and bloggers) on the subject of Israel in particular, and the war on terror generally.

    More to the point, the myth of almost magically willing solutions has been the obsession of both US and Israeli policy makers as well. Who needs negotiations when you can make your adversary submit?

    The core of this obsession is summed up nicely by this thoughtful blogger:

    The irony of the conservative obsession with will is that this obsession ultimately leads to a position of amoral relativism, the supposed shibboleth of cultural conservatives. If you are not winning, you simply must become even more ruthless, more cruel, more inhuman. After all, failure stems from a failure of will, not poor strategy, design, or planning. There is always another law to vitiate, person to imprison and torture, or town to pacify.

    Despite the glorification of pseudo-religion by conservatives, the obsession with will reveals a narcissism at the core of modern conservatism. Will is easy. No outcomes to assess, strategies to plan. You do not actually have to know or understand anything. Just click your heels, throw some pixie dust in the air, think happy thoughts, and all will be right.


    (Although, in the case of the war on terror, pixie dust is replaced by laser bombs and phosphorus shells.)

    Maybe, just maybe, the downgrading of the war on terror rhetoric by Obama signals a shift from this self-absorbed narcissism. And maybe this shift will make itself felt in Israeli policies as well.

    The times, they are a changin'?

    Yours,
    Pinko

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 3:39pm on 02 Mar 2009, bere54 wrote:

    243, happylaze -

    I too heard that report on BBC this morning. The Israeli spokesman, Mark Regev, always sounds confused so that is nothing new.

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 3:41pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Pinko,

    "And maybe this shift will make itself felt in Israeli policies as well."
    Porcine aviators, anyone?

    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 4:11pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    248 they do it by swishing their tail in circles real fast. (like muttley did)

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 4:19pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    247 Bere
    I was wondering if this debate had an effect on that report being aired. I doubt it but that is some coincidence.

    the Israeli spokesman said they "may use it to build shelters for hamas" . seeing as they are the elected gov of Gaza that would seem reasonable . In fact SKiV has derided them for not building shelters.
    Though they would have to let civilians in. Though that would be a bad move because I am sure If hamas built them Israel would destroy them.

    Sad state of affairs

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 4:33pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Happy and Bere,

    Mark Regev isn't yet used to having his assertions questioned, though it's encouraging that the practice is actually beginning to take hold over here. I suspect it may take a bit longer in the Good Old USA....

    Now all we need to have is some air time given to real-life Palestinians...still in short supply, compared to the likes of Regev the Repellant.

    Salaam, etc.
    ed
    A good read

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 4:45pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    maybe they can just "make " a non terrorist by using these good people from the states to control the breeding.

    Of course I am joking but it is sick and so is the war on terrorism.


    Not stopping terrorism thats a fine goal. but the war

    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 4:59pm on 02 Mar 2009, chronophobe wrote:

    re: 248 Ed Porcine aviators, anyone?

    Not kosher, Ed. Or halal.

    But really, the pendulum is swinging back, I think.

    How Obama handles AIPAC will matter.

    How Israeli public opinion reacts to the sight of Gaza being rebuilt with Western aid will matter.

    How Israeli opinion reacts to the sight of Netanyahu and Livni squabbling like jackals, with Lieberman grinning all the while, will matter:

    It is time for any Israeli with an enlightened self-image to look at the mirror and see Avigdor Lieberman staring back. It is time to stop the procrastination over the question whether Israel can be both Jewish and democratic. Lieberman provided the answer loud and clear: it cannot. At this late hour, when the shadow of proto-fascism is hovering over the land, it is time to join forces with Palestinian citizens in the battle against ethnic purity, and for a true democracy. It is time to stop fidgeting, and to admit that mono-ethnicism cannot be a framework for liberal values.


    Given a possible alternative, war without end is something that appeals to very few. How, then, to make the alternative appear to be something worth trying for?

    Yours,
    Pinko

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 5:50pm on 02 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Pinko, Namaste

    Thanks for the link to the Grauniad. We can but hope. The "South African" solution arises here, as well.

    "
    Unless we think creatively – which means thinking beyond the dominant forms of Zionism. It means thinking of the fourth solution, which is in fact the only solution: one binational state, in which Jews, Muslims and Christians have equal rights and responsibilities, in which both Arab and Jewish histories and identities are respected and protected. It’s hard to imagine, but we can start by thinking of Israel-Palestine as it is now, but without walls, fences and checkpoints, without Jews-only roads and Jews-only settlements, without discriminatory laws. The state would still house a thriving Hebrew culture, but it would also allow a Levantine Arab culture to fully express itself.

    Israeli Jews worry that, as a minority, they would be oppressed or expelled. The answer is that the constitution of the state would have to guarantee communal as well as individual rights. The constitution could in turn be guaranteed by the United Nations and a collection of superpowers. An American threat of force to defend a democratic constitution would make a lot more sense than current American threats to defend apartheid and ethnic cleansing."
    We must never lose all hope.

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 255. At 6:01pm on 02 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    251
    Ed a good read?
    lol

    Scary stuff there.

    A bit OTT for me.

    'Cept Geert knocking that is a good sport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 7:20pm on 02 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #251 Ed

    Geert Wilders - crazy name, crazy guy

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 9:08pm on 02 Mar 2009, bere54 wrote:

    253, chrono -

    Thanks for that link. When I lived in Israel some 35 years ago, I noticed that Arab labor seemed to be the backbone of the kibbutz movement. Many kibbutzniks felt uncomfortable in that so many of their fellows were unwilling to do the "dirty" work and preferred to pay Arab laborers. I have suspected that the growing distrust of their Arab workers helped bring about the (almost) demise of the kibbutz today. And of course the more you mistreat your workers and treat them like despised menials, the more reason you have to distrust them.

    The Israelis I knew who were against the use of Arab labor were the ones who in general preferred to have them as neighbors and friends, working their own land. I guess they were in the minority then, and are more so now.

    I noticed that that column you linked didn't really go into the long-term debate over the labor issue. It's kind of like the old South: "we like our blacks as long as they keep quiet, know their place, and work for us. Otherwise, let them live somewhere else."

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 01:11am on 03 Mar 2009, chronophobe wrote:

    Hi bere,

    My early impressions of Israel were formed in large part by a girlfriend who did a stint in a kibbutz. So much good to be said about the enterprise -- and yet, all that promise ends up with Avigdor Lieberman staring back from the progressive mirror.

    Maybe this will cause liberal Israelis to think a bit more deeply about where their future is heading.

    And now for something completely different: a funny take on hasbarah from Eretz Nehedert.

    Yours,
    Pinko

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 3:14pm on 03 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    258 Chrono that was a pretty good Vid.

    Bere on Kibbutz

    I remember when loads of Euro's looking for a cheap life and a chance to get some money to go on trips to India and Pakistan would go to work on a Kibbutz( they rarely travelled further ).

    I wonder if they are not so eager these days given we all know now that there is more to the situation there than the old days of (they are terrorists)


    Deceiler
    And yes Geert is as crazy as they get.
    I suspect maybe Rob could take him on and considers him a freedom fighter.

    Complain about this comment

  • 260. At 4:29pm on 03 Mar 2009, bere54 wrote:

    259, happy -

    I think you'd have to be insane to want to work on a kibbutz today (and apparently there aren't that many left; they've turned into capitalist endeavors). It used to be a good way to spend a gap year, but it certainly wasn't an option for my kids, particularly since their father had dual American/Israeli citizenship which means they had Israeli citizenship from birth (if they wanted to claim it - which they don't!) and I am afraid they would be conscripted into the army if they set foot in Israel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 261. At 4:46pm on 03 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    260 Yea I've met a few that left as quick as they could because they refuse to "serve".

    WWOOF is a way of finding other organic ways of working abroad.

    Willing Workers on Organic Farms.

    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 4:47pm on 03 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    now we have finished the war on terror can we get on with the "war on poverty"
    cause america has lost that one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 5:09pm on 03 Mar 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 118

    "Palestine was not a possession, but a mandate (a sort of temporary colony). The mandate had a cut-off date."

    Thanks. I did not know that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 5:32pm on 03 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    ~246 Pinko

    I don't think Stalin is the key that opens this door.

    I didn't know I was trying to open a door ;-)

    The emphasis of my point is on Stalinists not Stalin. When inconvenient truths get in the way of one's ideology then one falls back into a state of denial. Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza and sponsors State terror against Palestinians. Zionist bloggers are in a state of denial of these truths in the same way as the Stalinists were.

    ~253 Pinko

    Thanks for link. Let's hope the writer is right! We live in hope.

    ~259 Jack

    I know a number of people who said they were 'going to see the world'! In fact what they meant was they were going to Australia for a couple of months via two days in Thailand or something similar. I've been to more foreign lands by jumping on the ferry to Marcus' favorite place France then going on down to Spain! And no I didn't see any burning effigies of Jews! I think they are more anti-British than anti-Semitic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 5:51pm on 03 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    264 Dceiler

    probably.
    there really are not that many people that are anti jewish. (though some try to promote this , MA, Gherkin Too and rob)

    there are huge numbers that are anti semetic though, but we won't go there.

    Certainly not pro semetic.

    It is funny the world tour that you describe.

    That anti british feeling may well be justified on the statistical probability they are drunk and abusive lol.

    And probably call everyone" Manwell"

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 5:55pm on 03 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Ms Marbles (118),

    "The mandate had a cut-off date."
    I don't believe so. The Brits decided to end it because they couldn't handle the proto-israeli terrorism. The mandates were indeed intended to end in statehood, but the timing was effectively up to the mandatory power.

    Background
    "ART. 28. In the event of the termination of the mandate hereby conferred upon the Mandatory, the Council of the League of Nations shall make such arrangements as may be deemed necessary for safeguarding in perpetuity, under guarantee of the League, the rights secured by Articles 13 and 14, and shall use its influence for securing, under the guarantee of the League, that the Government of Palestine will fully honour the financial obligations legitimately incurred by the Administration of Palestine during the period of the mandate, including the rights of public servants to pensions or gratuities."


    Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 6:38pm on 03 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    ~265 Jack

    They have their reasons for being anti-British. And all of them are right!

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 00:30am on 04 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Join in - join out! You know it's right!

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 00:44am on 04 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Good video!

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 01:04am on 04 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    267 probably right there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 271. At 04:39am on 04 Mar 2009, chronophobe wrote:

    Shalom, salaam, peace from HaDag Nahash

    Good tune, great band.

    Cheers,
    Pinko

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 00:34am on 05 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Update on the Lancet article

    ;-((
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 03:45am on 05 Mar 2009, chronophobe wrote:

    Ed, more stupidity like that up here, too. Posters advertising the "Israeli Apartheid Week" have been banned at both Ottawa University and Carleton U. They were deemed "offensive" after a couple of Jewish students complained that the posters made them feel uncomfortable. More here.

    On the other hand, it provided more free publicity to the event than ever could have been bought.

    And here's Philip Weiss who sees a ray of hope coming out of the assault on Gaza: What space exists in Jewish and American life for a unorthodox view of Israel? The answer here is finally somewhat encouraging. Little by little, the space is growing.

    Keep on pushing . . .
    Pinko

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 11:25am on 05 Mar 2009, sanjeshdubey wrote:

    until there won't be any action also a useful result nothing can't be predicted...but need of the hour is action not diplomatic talks...i appreciate Mr. obama's concern...but these promises are not enough to curb the terrorist activites....................

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 06:35am on 09 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    well looks like the war on terror forgot a corner.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7930995.stm

    After this I suspect that if the UK behaves like the Israeli's there will be a lot of Irish refugees fleeing the bombing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 4:32pm on 09 Mar 2009, dav3j1986 wrote:

    #275 - Having read a lot of your comments, this one topping them off, I have to conclude, you're quite the idiot.

    If you were anywhere near the truth regarding the situation in NI I could forgive you, but given that you think we retaliate in force against Ireland as the Israelis do in Gaza, I'll concede that you're simply beyond help on this one. I'd advise you to read up on the subject a little before embarrassing yourself again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 4:37pm on 09 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    And, not forgetting Gaza....

    ;-(
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 7:23pm on 09 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #276 dav

    . . . given that you think we retaliate in force against Ireland as the Israelis do in Gaza, I'll concede that you're simply beyond help on this one.

    I think you missed Happy's point (and the bulge in his cheek): that the UK does not retaliate like what the Israelis do when it is faced with terrorism in NI.


    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 8:18pm on 09 Mar 2009, seanspa wrote:

    #276, I think you'll find that his point is that the brits don't behave the way the israelis do.

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 10:42am on 10 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    Armsdog Billionaire

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 4:25pm on 11 Mar 2009, happylaze wrote:

    Dav I think you will find they are right.
    This has been a point I have made hundreds(it seems) when people (i say "what would you do" when I say stop Israel's bombing.


    Glad to see your on the ball though.

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 2:29pm on 12 Mar 2009, mantis569 wrote:

    The 'War on Terror' can never end and will be used for a long time to stir up fear within society. Think about it really, how can you have a war on a word? Looking for terrorists is like looking for a needle in hastack, which is precisely why the war in the middle east will continue until the US and the other allied forces choose to withdraw. Much like Vietnam this war is not designed to be 'won', it is simply sustained to further other political and financial agendas.
    http://www.freenation.org.uk

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 9:00pm on 17 Mar 2009, dennisjunior1 wrote:

    Justin:
    The "War On Terror" will probably never end, but...It will revolved around to encompass many different pieces...

    ~Dennis Junior~

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 04:33am on 22 Mar 2009, poetic_reaper wrote:

    i hope the President doesn't get too casual or cocky to dismiss a very real, and present threat... even from within the borders. Not everyone is willing to change.

    i am concerned about a hasty pull out because it is no longer "American interest"... I am concerned about all the innocent lives that will be abandoned and left to harms way. And what about the troops? i don't want Iraq to be the new Vietnam.

    Complain about this comment

  • 285. At 3:14pm on 22 Mar 2009, U13879755 wrote:

    Checking the pulse of The War Against Terror (check the acronym)

    Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
    ed

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.