Yaro

Yes it was, in fact the C-17 was one of the worst choices we could have made but what do you expect.

Point conceded that there are many members of Hezbollah that are indeed genocidal in ideology. However Hezbollah does not represent Lebanon, they are a single party with marginal authority. But if you want a war of quotes concerning Lebanon ok easy enough. The only difference is that the quotes I provide will be from influential people in real positions of power. For example on Lebanon 'The Muslims rule of Lebanon is artificial and easily undermined. A Christian state ought to be set up whose southern borders would be Litani River. Then we'll form an alliance with it." Ben-Gurion On what is considered modern Palestine "I am satisfied with part of the country, but on the basis of the assumption that after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state--we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel." Ben-Gurion On the plans for establishing Israel, a land not as currently defined but as biblically defined as the land of milk and honey which measures most of the middle east. "No Zionist can forgo the smallest portion of the Land Of Israel. [A] Jewish state in part [of Palestine] is not an end, but a beginning ..... Our possession is important not only for itself ... through this we increase our power, and every increase in power facilitates getting hold of the country in its entirety. Establishing a [small] state .... will serve as a very potent lever in our historical effort to redeem the whole country." Ben-Gurion "I don't regard a state in part of Palestine as the final aim of Zionism, but as a mean toward that aim." Ben-Gurion "the borders [of the Jewish state] will not be fixed for eternity." Ben-Gurion On Transjordon "The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan. One does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today--but the boundaries of the Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." Ben-Gurion I could go on for a while but if your more interested in the philosophies of what many consider the father of modern Israel then I suggest you read one of the many good books on the man. So lets move on to another man who many consider to be one of the forefathers of Israel. In many ways Moshe Sharett was one of the most moderate of the Zionists and so I would hate to paint him with the brush of many others but perhaps it should be understood that the following is the thoughts of a man who perhaps more then any other Zionist had compassion for the resident Arabs in Israel. On the formation of Israel We have forgotten that we have not come to an empty land to inherit it, but we have come to conquer a country from people inhabiting it, that governs it by the virtue of its language and savage culture ..... Recently there has been appearing in our newspapers the clarification about "the mutual misunderstanding" between us and the Arabs, about "common interests" [and] about "the possibility of unity and peace between two fraternal peoples." ..... [but] we must not allow ourselves to be deluded by such illusive hopes ..... for if we cease to look upon our land, the Land of Israel, as ours alone and we allow a partner into our estate- all content and meaning will be lost to our enterprise. Moshe Sharett On the first of the transfers of Arabs, the ethnic cleansing designed to bring about a Jewish majority in Palestine "The proposed Jewish state [referring to the proposed 1937 Peel Commission partition plan] territory would not be continuous; its borders would be twisted and broken; the question of defending the frontier line would pose enormous difficulties .... the frontier line would separate villages from their fields .... Moreover the [Palestinian] Arab reaction would be negative because they would lose everything and gain almost nothing ..... in contrast to us they would lose totally that part of Palestine which they consider to be an Arab country and are fighting to keep it such ... They would lose the richest part of Palestine; they would lose major Arab assets, the orange plantations, the commercial and industrial centers and the most important sources of revenue for their government which would become impoverished; they would lose most of the coastal area, which would also be a loss to the hinterland Arab states..... It would mean that they would be driven back to the desert ('Zorkim Otam') .... A Jewish territory [state] with fewer Arab subjects would make it easy for us but it would also mean a procrustean bed for us while a plan based on expansion into larger territory would mean more [Palestinian] Arab subjects in the Jewish territory. For the next 10 years the possibility of transferring the Arab population would not be 'practical'. As for the long-term future: I am prepared to see in this a vision, not a mystical way but in a realistic way, of a population exchange on a much more important scale and including larger territories. As for now, we must not forget who would have to exchange the land? those villages which live more than others on irrigation, on orange and fruit plantations, in houses built near water wells and pumping stations, on livestock and property and easy access to markets. Where would they go? What would they receive in return? ... This would be such an uprooting, such a shock, the likes of which had never occurred and could drown the whole thing in rivers of blood. At this stage let us not entertain ourselves with the analogy of population transfer between Turkey and Greece; there were different conditions there. Those Arabs who would remain would revolt; would the Jewish state be able to suppress the revolt without assistance from the British Army?" Moshe Sharett It is at this point which it becomes important to understand the conditions under which early Israel existed. Only Jews could own land, only Jews could vote, and only Jews could have any kind of job of significance. Quite literally this may have been the most singularly racist country in the world in the 20th century. Moshe Sharett didn't want bloodshed, he wanted a peaceful expulsion of Arabs from Greater Israel (an intermediary between current Israel and "the land of milk and honey"). However he had no reservations about the issue that Israel (greater or the land of milk and honey) is Jewish and everyone else should leave. I'm tired its late so I am going to give a few more names and maybe come back and make a few more comments but I grow tired of debating this with people who's knowledge is to say the least shallow and peripheral. Ze'ev Jabotinsky Chaim Weizmann Yosef Weitz

Inquiry? are you insane? let me paraphrase the response for those that don't get it. I understand how you could possibly believe there was intentional bias in this report Your obviously some kind of insane nut bag <---just so you get whats between the lines I suppose the report could have been structured to make the information more clear I can't believe I actually have to respond to this If you feel the need here's someone higher up you can take it I think he will get a good chuckle out of this so why don't you tell him the jokes more funny that way. So just out of curiosity, are you as vigilant with the post as you are with the CBC? Ya I assumed as much.

If that's the best evidence of bias you have against he CBC, then I really can't have any response but to laugh. The Bias in that piece is to only perceptible to those with a hyperactive sense of bias (yours not theirs). Virtually every piece written by any news agency anywhere is going to possess an equivalent amount of bias. Including your source "article". This is almost as stupid a complaint as the time I heard someone accuse Mansbridge of smiling more when he said Palestinian then when he said Israeli.

Just because modern Christians (moderate ones anyways) have decided to disregard segments of the bible does not change the content or obvious meaning of those passages. The primary difference between the Bible and the Qu'ran is that the Bible was written by dozens of people, many parts by committee while the Qu'ran was written largely by a single man and leaves very little in the way of conflicting passages while the Bible is so contridictory the fact that anyone could take it seriously is laughable. As to why Muslims tend to follow in a more literal path its really rather simple, education. Take Iraq for instance, pre-desert shield Iraq was easily the most educated country in the middle east, hardly surprising that it was also the most secular. This pattern can be followed all across the middle east and indeed the world. Another pattern is that quality of life tends to be inversely proportional to religious fervor and overt violence, the Muslims in much of the middle east have gotten a very raw deal, they have been beaten on for generations and they are to a large extent very pissed about it. Its hardly surprising that those members of the Muslim community with the drive and ability to fight back would use the tool of religion to motivate the largely ignorant masses to action against the enemies of these leaders. It is to a large extent the story of human history. True to an extent and I can see the argument but it could be argued that Terrorism is rife in Africa, we never hear about it mind you but certainly carnage on a scale unmatched anywhere else in the modern world exists.

Sigh, you start off talking about Hezbollah a group that was started for the express purpose of fighting off Israels occupation and then go into talking about the PLO? you do realize they are different enemies right? As for intolerable situations, Israel has killed 3 times as many civilian Palestinians as the total combined deaths in Israel from all terrorist attacks, that number includes a 5-1 ratio of child deaths. So because Syria is an arms dealer that means they control Hezbollah? riiight. Once again, cease fires have been broken by Israel EVERY SINGLE TIME, there has not been a single cease fire in which Israel has not continued to attempt assassinations on PLO or Hezbollah members. They simply haven't been calling it a break in the cease fire. The vast majority of countries wouldn't have done what Israel has done to earn the wrath of every single nation in the area. But I digress, I am not defending the actions of either the PLO or Hezbollah, I am pointing out that Israel is just as bad and in the grand scheme probably lower on the moral scale. Its ironic that you would write that Hezbollah is no charitable organization because since the end of the occupation there has been a very large portion of there efforts put towards building schools and hospitals and many other charitable causes. Try getting your talking points from somewhere other then Fox or Israeli websites and you might find that there is plenty of blame to go around. There's a laundry list of reasons really, first off remember that Hezbollah is not just a para-military orginization (which the former "terrorist" branch has largely evolved into) they are a political party with significant support, and they are a charitable organization. Like most terrorist organizations which attain there goals those involved are rarely happy to disband a structure that gives them personal power and so they continue it in whatever form they can. Hezbollah members make up a significant portion of the military, the government and the business community in Lebanon and it will take a very long time for their influence to fade. Apparently next to you I know a staggering amount. There are significant portions of Lebanon where there is strong support for Hezbollah, apparently you are unaware of the religious weighting system used to bias the elections in Lebanon, the one where the vast majority of votes (Muslims) are LITERALLY counted for the same amount as the minute minority (Christians). Try actually doing some research on Lebanese elections. You sound as if your talking present tense, Hezbollah was formed and existed in the form it did during the occupation they have changed substantially. Once again put in the position of defending an organization I don't personally like, Hezbollah has a significant charitable wing and does a great deal of "good work". Do you work for PNAC or some Israeli agency perhaps? Just curious as I know they do hire people to argue pro-Israel points on message boards just like this. There political arm wishes death to Israel? Really? Interesting because clearly I am FAR better informed then you.

Of course there is, theres justification for unspeakable violence in each of the holy texts. All of them in one part or another preach that non-believers are the enemy and should be put to the sword. That includes the Qu'ran, we should just accept that and start to deal with the realities that it creates including the fact that religion is in desperate need of severe marginalization. I agree, I am getting incredibly tired of native whining, I hate to point this out but bad things happen to good people all over the world. Its unfortunate and its the duty of every moral person to attempt to bring about change but this generations long bitch fest is only going to end up further marginalizing natives. While I agree that this point of view and indeed the notion that multiculturalism is a good thing are not very rational its clear you don't even understand the tenants of liberalism. This professor obviously deserves a good shit-kicking. As for not imposing our values, well I agree at home, I disagree abroad. If people in a foreign country live in such a way as to so badly offend your sense of morality then we as a society should make the decision not to deal with them. If they chose to come here then they should adapt to our social values and if they don't they should be exported, period. Don't try to change their home but don't change to accommodate them here. There most certainly are parallels, my father has dozens of stories of severe abuse from his childhood in an orphanage, beaten for using his left hand to right with, beaten for not speaking English, beaten for a hundred things. What happened to the natives in residential schools was bad but hardly without peer.

Don't you ever get tired of saying stupid things? Hezbollah is very much a nationalist movement, their primary goal was freeing Lebanon from Israeli occupation. Originally they were a group that also sought to bring about an Iranian style Islamic state but that was abandoned 15 years ago and since then their political arm has been very respectable. And while there are many things about Hezbollah that I don't like, they aren't any more "evil" or psychotic then Israel has been and have done a hell of alot less damage then Israel. And while that's probably just because they don't have the same firepower as Israel that's still not a proven notion while Israeli massacre's are well documented historical fact. It should also be noted that Lebanon did not reject Syria overwelmingly, they rejected them by a bare majority. Not that its relevent in any way since Hezbollah has virtually no significant ties with Syria.

Sure, just as soon as you produce a statement from one of Israel's neighbors saying that they want Israel destroyed. Its not just "a faction" its a very powerful faction directly descended from the founders of modern Israel. As for the reasons for Hezbollah to exist, again have to disagree. Hezbollah are in large part nationalists in a nation with many enemies, Israel is just the most obvious, without Israel Hezbollah would probably exist in some form to fight off the influence of Iran. Kind of ironic really. The situation in the middle east is infinitely more complex then most want to believe. We need a large stone wall with a clean zone of several hundred meters on each side maned by UN troops for a generation or two until the hatred dies. Unfortunately nobody seems patient enough for that.

Actually your very much wrong, just as their is a large faction in each of Israels neighbors who will not be satisfied until Israel is destroyed there is a large faction in Israel with a great deal of clout that will not be happy until Israel encompasses what the "blessed land" which encompasses the vast majority of the middle east. That's why these two groups will never coexist peacefully, as much as Hezbollah wants Israel destroyed those in charge of Israel want Palestine/Syria/Iran/most of Iraq... That is the long term goal because that's what the "good book" says is there destiny.

Thats a little complex, depends on when you think it started I suppose.

Did trying to read that give anyone else a headache?

So which other country are you talking about? I am not aware of any other country in the world currently where your religion determines your ability to move between cities and your ability to own land. Admit it, your an ignoramus.

The Jewish lobby is most certainly different and far more active, with organizations like Honest Reporting, which solely exist for the purpose of insuring pro-Israeli spin and programs like http://giyus.org/ which exists for the purpose of manipulating public opinion polls in Israel's favor there simply is no lobby as active in manipulation public opinion and politicians as the pro-Israel one. Also witness the current dispute between the BBC and the Israeli foreign ministry which has recently accused it of biased reporting. Although the Israeli government would provide no specific examples it noted that the BBC was the only western media source which refused to have their work ok'd by the Israeli government before using it. Israel is currently considering revoking the BBC's press credentials in Israel over it. Nothing like a little mind numbingly overt censorship. Really I could go on for a while here, perhaps talking about the Asner families overt support of Israel, and the statements of the old head of the family that there paper would always support Israel. But what’s the point, the information is out there for anyone that wants to find it. If any country on earth has been emulating the Nazi's over the last 50 years its been Israel, the systematic genocide and slow crawl of a land grab against the Palestinians combined with the apartheid government of Israel makes it painfully apparent that your incredibly ignorant on the topic of the middle east and your credibility would probably be better served with silence on the issue. Not really, not anymore then I have a problem with religion in general. I do however have a problem with Israel, and its supporters which given the religiously homogenous style of government in Israel consists mostly of self identified "Jewish groups".

Is there perhaps an article about the case that isn't so obviously an opinion piece, usually I have found that when a court case seems inexplicable according to an article its because the article is leaving crucial information out. Not always but usually.

It’s unfortunate that Israel’s PR campaign has been so effective, maybe a sign of the ignorance of the general public or the massive media control being exerted by those allied factions. I suppose a combination of the two, but if it wasn't for that clear bias it would be easy for the liberals to come out and tell the truth, that Hezbollah is no more a terrorist entity then is the IDF, and they have certainly killed fewer innocents.

No what was said was that OBL was responsible even though anyone who knows anything about terrorist organizations knows that its entirely possible he knew nothing about it and that it was planed and carried out by an independent group who also identify themselves as AQ. Did you? Did anyone from the US government? No, like most of the communications from OBL any on this topic are kept on the hush to prevent anyone from the west actually reading what he’s saying and finding some truth to it. Hardly defies logic, I suggest you look up just what people are talking about when they discuss the US military industrial complex. If that isn't enough reason all by itself, which it should be to any rational person, then consider the fact that the US is run by a semi-fanatical Christian who believes that god speaks directly to him. While I am certainly not defending Islam (its evil like all religion-excluding the Buddhists maybe), you have never heard of the army of god? and you obviously don't know anything about Israel in the 50's. There are 15 million Jews on this planet, they have a higher number of terrorist/genocidal kills per capita then any other religion by far.

The moral thing to do would be to move troops into Lebanon to fight the IDF, but I don't think that will happen so what are you gonna do? There is no doubt that making an enemy of the Jewish lobby in Canada is a politically dangerous maneuver, moral but dangerous.

I personally believe that there should be several issues put to referendum, marijuana primary among them. However if you are going to put SSM up to a simple majority vote with no respect to Tyranny of the majority I would have to ask if you would have any problem also putting up a referendum to force churches to perform the marriage if the SSM issue passes. After all if it’s the will of the Majority. In fact I would ask if we could have a referendum banning all religion in public places similar to the French ban. And how about a referendum on changing the laws to create a national energy program? Or a referendum on whether a unity clause should be added to the Charter so that no province could ever threaten separation again? Isn't the power of the unchecked majority grand?

There opinion is no more or less valid then yours, it is not counter productive if there goal is not to have a cooperative relationship with the US. The US has one of the lowest social motilities in the world, they have the most extensive domestic surveillance program that has ever existed and the US hardly has a history or promoting democracy. The US started the Cold War, the US started the Vietnam War, and The US started the Iraq War. The US is as described in there own words in the bush doctrine the New Rome. They have as a major central ideal that they should remain the preeminent military and economic power in the world and they should undermine and if necessary destroy the ability of anyone to challenge them on either front. The US is currently building 14 military bases in Iraq and they established the rules under which Iraq can setup its government that is colonization in every meaningful way. What Americans what at this point is irrelevant, although I suspect that at least half of the informed American population supports this agenda. Exactly what Tyranny is that again? The US has a long history of military intervention but they have NEVER in there entire history even once installed a democratic government. Your delusion about the state of democracy in Canada is most evident when you suggest that the US is "more democratic". The US has not been this anti democratic in almost 100 years. If any "democratic" population on the planet feels as disenfranchised as a group I would be surprised. Once again I would ask you to point out a single thing the US has ever done for Canada, because the list of transgressions against us is a long one. The US is a country like any other, they are not our friends and we should not treat them as our friends, we should use what leverage we have to do what is in our best interest just as they have always done and will continue to do. The desires of normal Americans are irrelevant, the US is the only country in the world that has seen fit to challenge the sovereignty of Canadian soil I hardly call that the act of a wonderful neighbor.. All of this of course is patently ridiculous, if you want Canada to be more like the US then have the guts to say it don't be a pussy and argue around it because you know that most Canadians don't agree with you.

Which information are you talking about because the report that I read completely exhonerated Dosanj of any wrong doing.

My apologize, my post was directed at leafless, I should have specified. However his point isn't reasonable at all, in fact its incredibly hypocritical for a guy who is so against affirmative action to take his position its incredibly sad that he didn't reason it out far enough for that to be obvious. Or maybe he doesn't care, in the past he’s definitely shown that propensity. Racism, against minorities is not just, Racism based against majorities is not just. Neither is the greater evil. His position is clearly that there were to many ethnics involved when his position should be who cares how many ethnic workers there were and who cares how many white workers there were unless of course he is simply admitting a base bias against ethnic groups or he considers it the governments job to insure quota's

Then it would probably be a good idea that you do. Especially if you don't agree with his philosophies (which are generally left leaning and anti-american imperialism). Specifically his classic American Power and the New Mandarins: Historical and Political Eassays Which is in large part a discussion of the deceptions and psychology surrounding the vietnam war and is very applicable to current affairs. also the very short book Media Control Which is also very relevent to the modern world. Although almost all of his work is very good fodder for thought.

I am not so much posting this to reply as much as to ridicule, I mean only MB could come up with something this asinine and state it with such conviction. MB is pretty much the one guy here that can take an argument that he has absolutely no footing in and just reach around and pull this out of his ass. Oh and just so you know MB, stop scratching yourself because every time you do you destroy the exact same cells that make up a fetus. You also better stop masturbating, or having proactive sex every day at least because if you don't your murdering your valuable swimmers.

Have any of you even read a single book by Chomsky?