Rue

The practical reality is voters do not vote for any kind of tax for any reason. It could be the most brilliant scheme in the world but its still a tax and no voter will ever vote to be taxed let alone taxed by a scheme that is all theory at this point and has no precedent. Its a bonehead move by the Liberals. To make the basis of your platform to be elected a tax let alone a tax know on knows for sure would even work is suicide at the polls. It lets Harper off the hook entirely. It feeds his negativity. All he does now is tell the West its another tax designed to pick on them. Its not going to win Quebec votes. In fact it may alienate Ontario voters petrified of rising gas prices and layoffs. People faced with rising energy and other costs don't want to listen about such carbon taxes. They are ripe for a negative politician like Harper. It enables Harper to turn the greedy oil industry into good guys he can defend. Its the dumbest strategic move I have ever seen. The last thing you want in an electrion is Dion lecturing people on a theoretical tax. His prickly, academic, egg head demenour does not work with the guy on the street. They want to hear easy to understand sound bites not theory that goes zip over their head as to redistribution of tax bases. Dion underestimates the short-sighted, immediate, what's in it for me now mentality of most voters. Dion should have avoided this issue and stuck to a platform that exposed all Harpers negative actions, his secretive government and his close relations to Bush and the oil industry and stayed silent on any green initiatives. You don't announce and run on theory. You do run on practical issues. He's broken the most obvious rule of electioneering precisely because Dion is an academic not a politician and his arrogance makes him blind to his own foibles and quirks. Dion is Mr. Peebody from Rocky and Bullwinkle and he thinks we are all Shermans. As for Harper he's an arrogant, short sighted, Reagan republican. Another Peter Lougheed. Just what this country needs a Calgary oil executive yes man. Then we have that loser Jack Layton and his squeeze Oilvia Puppy Chow. What a choice. They all make me puke. I am voting for Brent Butt.

I detest everything he states and stands for and find he is a danger to Jewish people but I am not sure if I would call him treasonous. In a free world, he's entitled to his opinions and I do not doubt in his mind any Jew who is a Zionist to him is treasonous to Judaism. I would prefer to simply state he is a man who disseminates hatred towards all Jews through his own self-loathing. His words hurt all Jews not just Zionist Jews and they are designed to do just that. The day Finklestein lowered himself past the point of any remaining decency was when he began to taunt and insult Eli Weisel. His words were pure poison and manifested a toxic psychopathology.

I was being self-effacing. No offense meant to you. I am not calling you a commie. Lol. Just making fun of myself.

Lol. Finklestein ass kicking. Ahahah. Good one. Diet Coke? Geezuz Bush you think drinking Diet coke's gonna get rid of that red-neck gut of yours? Lol. Give up that American piss y'all call beer. Blue Oval? At this point I will wait. I hear they are on the verge of a battery that can keep the charge for 400 miles and will be able to get that up and running soon with a hybrid engine. Whose kidding who. Yer buddies at the large car dealers and the oil corps are sitting on a lot of stuff so you can make some bucks on the commodity market. All power to you. When it comes to speculating, you take your chances. So if you make a buck I do not knock it. I'm a bleeding heart liberal you know not a commie. Obama loves you.

Within the military world, culture and tradition I appreciate have a far different context, meaning and purpose and play a very crucial pscyhological role not just in assuring professionality but in enforcing a protocol that is intended at is most basic purpose to save lives by nurturing cohesion in how soldiers interact with one another. My exasperation is only with civilians in the civilian world who get hung up on symbols that they think define culture but actually do not at all in fact often this icons enable us civilians to avoid having to define our culture they become simplistic markers to refer to so we can avoid hving to define our culture on a more meaningful level. On the one hand I find cultural debates often absurd and petty, but I also appreciate the fact that if we cultivate and preserve a healthy cultural identity it promotes stability through continuity. When I was a kid I used to thing the monarchy was an antiquated idea. As I get older, I now can understand it was created to serve as a consistent beacon that would remain constant even though everything else around it might continue to change. Now yes I know some people question the actual monarchy itself, but I wonder, is it possible there could be such thing as a sovereign nation without some sort of figure head and traditions to serve as a consistent reference point to preserve unity? For me I think in Canada we get too hung up on the form culture takes and that is precisely because in anthropoligical terms as a nation we are still young. You look to much older cultures say like the aboriginal ones, they know what their traditions are. In Canada we still are trying to define them. We have this preoccupation with arguing over the length of our facial hair and the accent on our words. Just seems to be we have an excellent reference point in the holistic approach of the aboriginal cultures to take the original Euorpean cultural influences of Britain and France, mix them with the aboriginal ones to keep a stable cultural base to keep adding the other ones without having the whole thing turn into a bloody mess. Last time I looked legally the bi-legal mix of Napoleonic and Common Law traditions have complemented one another not blown each other up and for that matter, collective concepts from the aboriginal culture has aided in developing some unique Canadian laws other Western nations do not have. Don't kid yourself. The common desire in Canada for medicare which the Americans describe as us being socialist is a collective or holistic concept of sharing that comes from realizing as a people we are just too small to take on Canada alone and needed to pool our resources and we realized we are all dependent on one another in that respect. Aboriginals were at that collective level long before us. If anything the Western material values that now shape our cultural identity and promote individualism and self-interest have become pervasive but by no means have they snuffed out or cultural tendencies inherited from the aboriginals which we pretend we invented ourselves. These latest carbon tax craze. Just a reinvention and half assed way of imitating aboriginal concepts. By the way I find it absurd the monarchy in England is basically Greek blood at this point and yet we pretend Philip is a paragon of English virtue. Give me a break. He aint no different then any Canadian on the Danforth in Toronto.

We are on opposite sides of the debate but fair is fair, I can't say I find your above comments unreasonable at all. My minor disagreement with your take would be I would say I don't think Israel wants to do whatever it wants on Palestinian land -I think we are past that and its at a more practical problem where they may have gone in for security reasons back in 1967 but its now evolved to something far different then what it was originally intended to achieve and Israel knows full well it can not do whatever it wants on the West Bank but has a major political problem in deciding how and when and where to pull back to and they know its part of the equation in any over-all meaningful peaceful coexistence settlement with Palestinians. I think you should not be surprised if I tell you if the IDF had there way they would not be in the West Bank at all and do not want to be a quasi police force at all because its not what they were designed to do and have ever wanted to do or feel comfortable doing. For me I ask this question and maybe its naive. If safeguards were put in place so that Israel could be assured the nuclear technology is being used for legitimate purposes not military ones does it still need to blow up anything? Is it naive to think you could have proper monitors in place so there is no need for pre-emptive strikes? Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. See for me the problem is not nuclear plants, it's whether nuclear technology can be used for weapons. I again appreciate Israel's concern over a hostile regime having the ability to nuke it but again I am also a realist. You and I can go on the internet and build a dirty bomb with radioactive fall out. You and I can take some chemicals and wreck havoc on a water supply killing millions. So to think a conventional nuclear attack from a missile is the most likely threat Israel is facing in this day and age just doesn't resonate say the way it would ten years ago for me and I have no doubt the blow up of the nuclear reactor beginning to be built in Syria was a direct message to Iran-a preemptive warning. I think there is a lot more underlying manouvering going on not just between Iran and Israel but the US, China, Russia, France, Britain, etc., that all of us just won't ever know about and the nuclear sabre rattling is part of very complex elaborate foreplay and posturing in a bigger economic war going on as to oil and energy sources. Call me a naive fool but I prefer to exhaust all possible diplomatic and peaceful methods of dialogue before blowing something up. Surely Palestinians have just as much to lose as Israelis in any nuclear attack not to mention Jordanians, Lebanese, Syrians, Yemenis, Saudi Arabians, Egyptians who would all be contaminated from the fall out. I am sure they are all aware of that. I think what we see is no longer the Israel v.s. hostile Arab nations scenario anymore but in fact a not so subtle alliance between Israel and Sunni Muslim regimes all concerned with Iran's attempts to expand its Shiite version of fundamentalism across the Middle East so what I would also state is its quite possible a lot of Israel's sabre rattling is happening because of not so subtle approval from Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabian, Turkey, countries that can't overtly admit they now rely on Israel to protect their countries as well from Iran or the kind of fundamentalist terrorism that is just as much a threat to their governments as it is Israel's. There are just too many interconnected factors other then just Israeli security at play here that could be influencing and generating the dialogue we hear. I think BC Chick where I agree with you is that I think Israel,a ll those Sunni Muslim nations I mentioned, Iran, China, France, Russia, the U.S., Japan, etc., are all meddling and manouvering behind the scences trying to do what's strategically best for their own nations' interests. Its the way of the world and part of this global economic war we now see being waged where suddenly India and China have emerged with expanding middle classes and powerful energy appetites causing tension and competition to access and control energy supplies. In the grand scheme of things, Israel is one piece in a very large web of conflicted and competing networks of power trying to control energy supplies. I personally believe Israel's piece in the larger web as a player or influence is a hell of a lot smaller then most people give it credit for. In reality Israel's economy is a proxy economy, its totally dependent on the US economy so it does not have the economic clout of China, India, the European Union, the US and Russia to influence what goes on, on the ground. The riddle really lies not with Iran and Israel but with China, India, Russia, The European Union, the US, Britain and France. They are the major players and countries like Iran, Israel, the Arab League nations, they are just sub-headings of regional power influence predicated by the interests and directions of the above. You really want peace in the Middle East, who is kidding who, that depends on the US, Russia, India, China and to a lesser extent the European Union and what they are doing to advance their energy agendas. These conflicts between Iran and Israel relieve tension and avoid the big boys having to battle each other-they can do it instead through localized proxy wars. Who are we kidding, its all about natural has and oil. That is all its ever been about. No one gives a flying f..ck about Israelis or Palestinians or Muslims in terms of their own needs, its all about getting access to natural gas and oil-if the Israelis, Palestinians, other Arab nations help with that goal, good, if they don't they are expendable. Now I sound like BC Chick. I have become a raving communist. No I am too old for that. Just a realist. More like Henry Kissinger without any desire to dominate the world. Hey in an ideal world there would be no weapons, and we would use solar and wind energy and alternative clean fuels and there would be no hunger and people could travel anywhere without having to use a passport. Oops I better go back on my medication. In an ideal world no one would have weapons. How we go about disarming the world of course remains the impossible task.

Well in the specific example of a Muslim woman who wants to wear her traditional hair cover but work in a hair salon where hairdressers own hairstyles are an important marketing tool to advertise the kind of styles they give their clients, its a very specific context where I personally believe with due respect to that young Muslim woman she is being unrealistic and naive, but I also think the hair salon aint exactly on the level either suggesting having but one Muslim woman with the traditional garb is going to negatively effect their business. I think there is a lot of other shit going on as to both sides of that story and the story the press ran is not the full picture at all as to the real dispute underneath the alleged dispute. It could be the Muslim woman was insulted and used the tribunal to make a point about being insulted and never really wanted to work at the salon or force her way in there but felt she was the subject of a slur she should stand up to. It could be the salon was concerned that the Muslim girl was too straight and conservative and would not have fit in well with its clientel and staff who for all we know are a bunch of burping, grunting Amy Winehouses and Boy Georges. It could be their concern has nothing to do with her being Muslim and everything to do with her refusing to burp or fart. So no please do not ask me to take that incident, pull it out of context, then use it to make generalizes about all Muslims being unreasonable. Just too many what ifs and yah buts to that story to make any assumptions from it. I do not doubt some Muslims are fundamentalist and intolerant and are only interested in having their own beliefs protected and taken care of and will milk the system to justify being intolerant of all others but the last time I looked it wasn't just Muslims or ALL Muslims doing that just some that seem to get everyone's attention and that is probably because the vast majority of Muslims are too busy working and not trying to do anything other then pay their friggin bills like the rest of us. Now mind you if any man with a beard tries to tell me to do anything, he had better watch out. I hate any man with a beard who claims to be righteous. I also have had students over the years who wore traditional Muslim garb and were very open minded and funny and damn cute too and were anything but prudes or intolerant. Then again I knew some others that were very angry. I could say that about virtually anyone though. Not so sure if that was particular to Muslim women or just humans in general including myself when I don't eat enough prunes. Muslim men on the other hand, for me have the same problem I have with all men-we can smell. We need to shower more and cut our toe nails and nose hair and stuff like that. To me the greatest challenge to Western society is men with unsightly nose or ear hair and body odour. Those are scurges we need to stamp put.

Lol. Not a bad zinger for a socialist nerd....and they say you guys have no sense of humour. Hah. I am still working on the gentile sandwitches. At least Canadien has given me dispensation from putting on a Leaf sweater. Now on a more serious note, Army Guy all any of us has to know is, real Canadian bagels are made in Montreal. Anything else is nonsense. from my perspective Canada has always been made up of its original (aboriginal) origins, then its subsequent French and English colonial origins, and then the subsequent contributon of all the rest of us cheese wiz that then came after. I have no problem with a country with 4 vital components to its identity. I am not sure what all the fuss is. I have friends who are Christian and speak English. Its just the checker pants their parents wear that make me a bit confused. I keep wanting to play chess on their backside.

I now respond Kuzzad; You stated, "first of all rue, I don't give a crap about your response to buffy. period." I responded to all your questions when I responded to Buffy. If you do not want to read them good for you. You stated; "you called me a "finkelstein groupie", I don't even know what you said to her, nor do I care! You labelled me , in a derogatory manner, to smear me, in doing that." Calling you a Finklestein groupie is not derogatory. You are assuming it is. If you agree with him, then its not derogatory its simply me saying you agree with him. Certainly you jumped on his bandwagon and defended his negative general stereotype he uses to state that when people like me accuse someone of being anti-semitic when they discuss Israel, we do it in regards to ANY comment negative about Israel. That was the point. when Finklstein raises that argument he engages in a negative stereotype. Some of us Kuzadd do not call people anti-semites simply because they criticize Israel as he suggests and you indicated you agree with. You want to agree with someone who makes subjective negative generalizations that are deliberately general to smeer as many Jews as possible, yes I will debate you. As for your sudden shock and awe and feeling insulted, I send you a big Zionist kiss. "Yet, you have no knowledge, proof or the slightest inkling wether I am one or not! which is why I pointed out you are a generalizer of the worst order." No read the context in which I raised my response to you. It was clearly in response to your support of his negative generalization about how anti-semitism is used as a catch-all to accuse people who are anti-Israeli. Kuzadd my responses are as to what you print nothing else. You stated; "and fyi, I have never read a finkelstein book nor attended a lecture." Maybe then you should instead of defending something he said if you don't know its full context. That is probably why you and I by the way are even having this debate. The context for his statement about using anti-semitic accusations as a catch 22 against people who are anti-Zionist would be better understood if you understand the continuing context from which such comments flow. You stated; "You are also a hypocrite IMO, because, you use the term "self-hating jew" which is nonsense and is another generalisation." Of course not. People who are ashamed of their heritage, or nationality, or ethnicity, or race, gender, sexual preference, body size, age, looks, etc., are a dime a dozen. Ecveryone of us has a part of ourselves we do not like and that disliking can cause us to engage in self-defeating or negative of self-destructive behaviour. We've all had those days. In the context of visible minorities or specific minorities or specific groups that are not mainstream, the concept of self-loathing minority is nothing profound. There are thousands of essays on it. Black people, Quebecois, Gays, women, Jews, all kinds of groups refer to it in art, music, literature, psychological essays, etc. I am not sure why you would want to deny it. I mean to deny it would suggest everyone has perfect self-esteem and minorities have never been influenced by the dominant culture into hating themselves or characteristics of themselves. " I don't know any "self-hating" Italians, and was just recently sitting in a hall full of them, and know literally hundreds and hundreds of them." I don't believe you. My personal reaction to the above comment is you are being pat, i.e., arguing for the sake of arguing. More to the point, even if you don't know one Italian who has felt uncomfortable with their Italian heritage and engaged in derogatory comments about their heritage which I doubt, it doesn't mean they don't exist. Next you will tell me you don't know any Italian comedians. O.k. "I find that term is unique to Jewish people...." The above is a subjective self-serving statement. Of course you find it unique. You have decided it was unique because you deny it exists and now try suggest I coined it. Your responses are now getting a bit absurd. The fact that you now think only I coined it or only Jews use the term in itself is a ridiculous stereotype. Think. Anytime any of us suggest a trait only exists with one group of people what does that establish or prove other then you being selective in your consideration process...you walked into that one... You stated, "that persons, who support Israel in all her madness...." Again you reflect a bias that generalizes and slurs all Israelis that I debate strongly. You have suggested a nation is mad. That is a deliberate smeer of an entire nation. For someone who lectures me on generalizations you aren't being very consistent and its precisely why I pick apart your comments, specifically, not generally. You stated.. "I have also heard it (self-loathing Jew applied to Noam Chomsky). Of course you have. He engages in the exact same kind of arguements and comments Finklstein does. He is Finklestein's mentor. There are many many self-loathing Jews who actually retain their U.S. citizenship, have moved to Israel, do not work, live off the state, and spend their days on the internet claiming to be anti-Zionist and calling on Israel to be terminated. Its not an uncommon phenomena even in Israel. We Jews are and have always been very open in hating ourselves and carrying out this self-loathing in public. There are numerous essays, papers and articles that discuss it and why it flows from out culture. Whether you with to read them or not is your business but I can assure you its not unique to Jews. all non dominant groups in dominant societies have this phenomena. It goes to the very state of being non dominant in a dominant society. "You stated, That some people (jewish) would label one another in such a manner is truly despicable." Nonsense. I do not buy your feigned horror and righteousness and with due respect I think the last comment is playing me. What is dispicable Kuzadd is any human but particularly the son of a holocaust survivor engaging in deliberate commentary that he knows will be used to smeer all holocaust survivors and stain their memory. That is what makes it dispicable. Its dispicable because Finklestein uses his mother's holocaust status to hide behind to justify his hateful comments. He continually states since his mother is a holocaust survivor he can be as anti-semitic and rude to holocaust survivors and Jews as he feels. That is petulance and its odious petulance so save your cries of indignation for Finklstein's exploitation of the holocaust for his own political agenda-and I repeat again he is a self-loathing Jew and a self-loathing human. You stated; "All you do is causedivision, hatred and antagonism towards one another, hardly admirable goal to strive for." If you mean I want to challenge Finklstein as a hate monger and challenge Buffy for jumping on his band wagon and preaching his virtues yes. I think he is poison. I think his words are intended to incite hatred. He actually admits this openly. If you suggest I challenge anyone who engages in negative generalizations of an entire people and in so doing assigns them negative characteristics and motives and if you suggest I challenge someone who poses subjective opinions as facts-then yes, I am deliberately in that context inciting hatred and antagonism towards what they are doing and have never made a secret about it. You also stated accusations of self-hatred are often used as an ad homminem attack. They might be but in my responses I have been very specific as to why I think they apply to Finklstein and have taken great care to try explain why to you and Buffy. You stated;"It's come about recently, particularly as Jewsih criticism of Israel's numerous abuses have come to surface." No Kuzadd. Your above comment is an example of a negative generalization that assumes and assigns motives to me or anyone else who criticizes Jews who criticize Israel's "numerous" abuses. Your assumptions and generalizations given what I have read in your comments in my opinion come about because you do not understand the Jewish psyche and jewish culture but assume you do and more importantly are trying to assume you know what the criticism is about and its all the same. Kuzadd when people like I and many others criticize Finklstein, we criticize him the exact same way and the exact same reason we criticize any bigot or hate monger. His being Jewish is not the issue as you make it to be-his being an anti-semite and engaging in slurs of all Jews when he debates Israel's existence is. Plenty of us Jews and non Jews criticize Israeli policies. Its been going on for thousands of years. You really think it only ame up with Finkelstein? Come on. Get real. You stated, "It's a bullshit term and no one who was even remotely decent would use it." It is not a bullshit term for most of us Jews it is a poignant term and concern and your suggesting I am indecent for using it is a tad melodramatic if nothing else but if you insist pull out the kerchief and fan your face. You stated, "to be honest rue, and it appears you are incapable. you didn't answer the question until just now." Kuzadd all anyone has to do is read back the posts I have written. Lol there is no shortage of them as to my responses to the issue of anti-semitism and its contextualized reference to citicisms of Israel. I say it again for what is it now with you, at least the 10th time I can think of, if you want to criticize Israel be my guest. Engage in smeers about all Jews, assign negative characteristics to all Jews, engage in references that incite hatred and resentment against all Jews whether you raise it in the context of Israel or any other discussion, I will challenge you as being anti-semitic. Engage in the same tactic but only against those who support Israel I will challenge you equally but call you anti-Zionist. Engage in the same comments about all Israelis, I will call you anti-Israeli. Do it in regards to Muslims, I will call you anti-Muslim. Do it against gays, I will call you a homophobe. Do it against all women, I will call you a mysoginist, etc. You stated; "as for that which I asked, you know dam well it happens, it happens on this forum, and you have been a perpetrator of it yourself on several occasions." Kuzadd you make a lot of accusations and yet you have not provided any words from me from any of my posts to back up the above or any other one of your allegations that I engage in negative generalizations about an entire group of people. Your silence to such accusations only speaks to your lack of credibility. You want to reproduce a statement I made accusing someone of being anti-semtiic simply because they criticized Israel, then produce it, or with due respect, stop it. That Kuzadd is crying wolf. accusing someone of something and then being unable to prove it. Kuzadd you stated. "You have cried wolf." Look at your accusations you have presented against me. Until you prove them with actual words I stated, Kuzadd, just who is crying wolf. I admit Kuzadd I have said a lot of things but crying wolf? Lol. You are the first person insane enough to suggest I don't belabour any point I make. Hah I like that.

Kuzadd I actually answered the question you are asking quite a few times to you and again in my latest response to Buffy but if you want me to answer it yet again I will. If someone criticizes Israel foreign policy or social policies or economic policies, good for them. As I have said so many times, criticizing Israeli social or economic or foreign policies does not make one an anti-semite. I have done it many a time on this forum. What I have also stated, if one engages in such criticism using references that assign negative motives and general characteristics to all Jews and deliberately incites hatred against all Jews in their discussions and criticism of Israel, that is anti-semitic. It is also anti-semitic to suggest Jews as a people are not entitled to universal sufferage unless you state the same comment for all other people of the world including Palestinians. Its a bullshit double standard to say one people can not have universal sufferage but everyone else can. I gave you specific examples of why Finklestein is an anti-semitic hate monger. He has slurred holocaust survivors, as being part of a conspiracy to dupe and obtain unfair financial compensation and he has suggested Jews have exploited and deliberately misused the holocaust to create and then gain sympathy for the state of Israel. That is anti-semitic pap. It is pure subjective opinion based on raising negative character generalizations which suggest victims are victimizers holocaust survivors manipulate and deceive and are part of a Zionist conspiracy. It is a crock of hateful shit and its precisely why I called Buffy a groupy because she came on this forum extolling Finklestein and applauding his comments and urging me to read them and accept them as scholarly examples of referenced discussion about Israel. This is a man whose sole contribution to the dialogue of the Middle East is to make deliberate statements designed to upset and insult Jews and then to deliberately use his status as a son of a holocaust survivor to gain instant high moral ground and suggest this in itself allows him to be a hate monger against Jews. His claiming to be a Jew or a son of a holocaust survivor does not change the words and implications of them. What else do I need to spell out for you? Would you have the audacity to tell a rape victim she is a sinister evil demon because she goes to the criminal compensation board for financial assistance? What kind of bullshit is that? You think insulting holocaust victims and belittling their memories and suggesting their legal right to compensation is bullshit establishes coherent thoughts or facts let alone salient objective positions? The kind of hatred Finklestein engages in is a prime example of intellectual laziness. He does not engage in objective fact finding. Read what he writes. He takes someone else's comment, and then responds to it allegedly criticizing it. Look at his method of criticism. Read his alleged foot notes and references for his positions. He does not provide statistics and quantified methods of analysis as a social scientist should nor does he engage in any kind of objective measurement. He postulates subjective opinions as facts. He assigns motives to entire groups of people with zero proof and by relying on incorroborated inference. His comments have een scrutnized by many. He has been taught time and time again misquoting people, using incorrect references, taking comments out of their context, misrepresenting time lines and placing people at times and events when they were either dead or could be publically proven somewhere else. This is a man who when he taught told his students they could not question his opinions and if he did not agree with their opinions he would mark them as a D or an F. Why don't you read the feedback from his students who could not handle his dictatorial style and demand that people repeat his opinions? Go on. Get on the inter-net and listen to how he debates. You think that is evidence of a scholar, a man using logic and reasoning to engage in discussion? Each and every speech consists of him name calling his opponents and projecting negative characteristics on them and becoming personally insulting. Some of his subjective remarks are not hateful. In fact I do not think he should be censored or condemned. I am not afraid of his opinions. I just criticize them and in particular the ones I know are deliberately hateful and he engages in to provoke and get attention for himself. Of course I am stating my opinion on him. I never claimed otherwise. You want a generalization. Here is one. In my opinion Goldstein is a typical baby boomer. He was born in a generation where he was never told no. He grew up with parents who never said no. This lack of limitation so prevalent with baby boomers in the so called Dr. Spock child rearing era of the 1950-s to 1960's produced a generation of adolescents who were never told no and so are not used to being told they are wrong. In his case, such child rearing in my opinion was probably further amplified by a phenomena very common with people who survived the holocaust, holodomor and other genocicides and massacres and go on to have children. Such parents have a tendency to over-protect and molly coddle their children and to try cushion their chilldren from any anguish and pain. In such an environment the child grows up feeling a sense of entitlement, a sense of being perfect and not someone who should be questioned. They pick up and inheritthe fears and anxieties of their parents and resent their parents for being weak and not fighting back and see the world as hostile and in need of confrontation. In my opinion Finklestein lashes out at holocaust survivors because he is mad at his own parents for being so weak and he is trying to cleanse himself of his own perceived weaknesses and traits and so he spews the words of ant-semitic hatred one expects from a self-loathing Jew and of people who embrace anti-semitism but suddenly think its legitimate and acceptable because its coming from the mouth of a Jew. You do not get Finklstein the way I do because you are not a Jew. Believe me we Jews get it just like black people get it about self-loathing black people and how all minorities know what self-loathers within their groups are. Gays have them. Women have them. Every group has them. You mean to tell me you have no idea what a self-loathing Italian is? You have never seen one or met one? There is nothing profound or difficult about understanding why one is self-loathing. All you have to do is read back their words and understand they are talking about themselves. Go back and read some of the humour of Lenny Bruce or Richard Pryor. Ask yourself why blacks refer to themselves as niggers in their humour or why Jackie Mason makes the jokes he has for so many years. Anyone who would offer up Finklstein as a scholar let alone someone to admire has a problem with me yes. I despise hate mongers. I hate people who pose subjective opinions as facts. I despise people who assign negative characteristics and motives to an entire people. It was Finklestein not I who stood up at Columbia University and stated if one walks the streets of New York one in 3 Jews claims to be holocaust survivor not I. This is something Finklestein does over and over again, make such subjective remarks as if they are facts and those remarks are designed to do but one thing-promote negative stereotypes designed to incite people to resent and hate Jews and he admits it openly. He brags about it. He has said it over and over in such comments as he can insult Jews and damage them because he is one. What kind of logic is that? I can hate you because I am a Jew and you are? That is logic? When I discuss the Middle East I do not label Palestinians or Israelis. I am still waiting for you to produce the substance of your allegations that I engage in negative generalizations about people. When I criticize you or Buffy I am very specific why and when I state an opinion I am very clear not to state it as a fact but as an opinion. I practice what I preach and my disgust and contempt for Finkletein comes naturally. Kuzadd be honest with me. I admit I am opinionated, bias and have subjective opinions but I have always made an effort to explain why and I have not engaged in the tactics Finklstein does. Go on find one. Find the comment where I assign negative motive to an entire group of people. Please. Provide one example. The fact I challenge you and Buffy does not mean I engage in generalizations as you have suggested I do. The fact I disagree with you does not mean I generalize. It means I disagree with you. Read my words. Debate the words. Point out what you disagree with. Simply accusing me of generalizations without providing an example proves what? I will continue to challenge you and me to see both sides or the many sides of any argument not just one side. Resist the urge to be manipulated by someone who plays on your emotions and manipulates them and tells you what you want to hear. Be my guest question everything I say. Debate. Come and get it. I would hope you understand why I spit at people who smeer holocaust survivors or any other such peoples. It's cheap. It's gutter. When Jews like me criticize other Jews we do so with respect. Why? Because if what I say encourages anti-semitism what does that make me. Think about that Kuzadd. All minorities when we debate each other must do so openly and with honesty but we have to show an example of honest criticism that does not turn us into ridiculous simplistic stereotypes. No this Jew is not afraid of criticism by other Jews or the public at large but no I will not have anyone tell me Finklestein is the role model for how we Jews will discuss each other. Thanks very much. To me self-loathing dialogue belongs in the psycho-analyst's office either that or in front of the mirror in the bathroom with the door shut so no one has to hear you popping your pimples and cussing.

Kuzadd I actually answered the question you are asking quite a few times to you and others but if you want me to answer it yet again I will. I in fact even answered it again in my response to Buffy. That obviously went over your head. You keep asking me to answer a question I haev responded to so many times one wonders why you would ask it of me again but here we go again. If someone criticizes Israel foreign policy or social policies or economic policies, good for them. As I have said so many times, criticizing Israeli social or economic or foreign policies does not make one an anti-semite. I have done it many a time on this forum. What I have also stated, if one engages in such criticism using references that assign negative motives and general characteristics to all Jews and deliberately incites hatred against all Jews in their discussions and criticism of Israel, that is anti-semitic. It is also anti-semitic to suggest Jews as a people are not entitled to universal sufferage unless you state the same comment for all other people of the world including Palestinians. Its a bullshit double standard to say one people can not have universal sufferage but everyone else can. I gave you specific examples of why Finklestein is an anti-semitic hate monger. Specific examples. He has slurred holocaust survivors, ALL holocaust survivors as being part of a conspiracy to dupe and obtain unfair financial compensation and he has suggested Jews have exploited and deliberately misused the holocaust to create and then gain sympathy for the state of Israel. That is anti-semitic pap. It is pure subjective opinion based on raising negative character generalizations which suggest victims are victimizers and suggests all Jews not just some, and all holocaust survivors not some, manipulate and deceive and are part of a Zionist conspiracy. It is a crock of hateful shit and its precisely why I called Buffy a groupy because she came on this forum extolling Finklestein and applauding his comments and urging me to read them and accept them as scholarly examples of referenced discussion about Israel. Its pure subjective bullshit. None of his references can or do prove what he has said and he and you know that. This is a man whose sole contribution to the dialogue of the Middle East is to make deliberate statements designed to upset and insult Jews and then to deliberately use his status as a son of a holocaust survivor to gain instant high moral ground and suggest this in itself allows him to be a hate monger against Jews. His claiming to be a Jew or a son of a holocaust survivor does not change the words and implications of them. What else do I need to spell out for you. Would you have the audacity to tell a rape victim she is a sinister evil demon because she goes to the criminal compensation board for financial assistance? What kind of bullshit is that? You think insulting holocaust victims and belittling their memories and suggesting their legal right to compensation is bullshit establishes facts let alone salient objective positions? The kind of hatred Finklestein engages in is a prime example of intellectual laziness. He does not engage in objective fact finding. Read what he writes. He takes someone else's comment, and then responds to it allegedly criticizing it. Look at his method of criticism. Read his alleged foot notes and references for his positions. He does not provide statistics and/rantified methods of analysis nor does he engage in any kind of objective measurement. He takes subjective opinions and poses them as facts. He assigns motives to entire groups of people with zero proof and relying on inference. This is a man who when he taught told his students they could not question his opinions and if he did not agree with their opinions he would mark them as a D or an F. Why don't you read the feedback from his students who could not handle his dictatorial style and demand that people repeat his opinions? Go on. Get on the inter-net and listen to how he debates. You think that is evidence of a scholar, a man using logic and reasoning to engage in discussion? Each and every speech consists of him name calling his opponents and projecting negative characteristics on them and becoming personally insulting. You want a generalization. Here is one. Goldstein is a typical baby boomer. He was born in a generation where he was never told no. He grew up with parents who never said no. This lack of limitation so prevalent with baby boomers in the so called Dr. Spock child rearing era of the 1950-s to 1960's produced a generation of adolescents who were never told no and so are not used to being told they are wrong. This is further amplified by a phenomena very common with people who survive holocausts and genocides and massacres and go on to have children. Such parents have a tendency to over-protect and molly coddle their children and to try cushion their chilldren from any anguish and pain. The child grows up picking up and inheriting the fears and anxieties of their parents and seeing the world as hostile and in need of confrontation. Finklestein lashes out at holocaust survivors because he is mad at his own parents for being so weak and he is trying to cleanse himself of his own perceived weaknesses and traits and so he spews the words of the kind of ant-semitic hatred one expects from a self-loathing Jew. You do not get it because you are not a Jew. We Jews get it. Black people know too well about self-loathing black people. All minorities have self-loathers. Gays have them. Women have them. Everyone group has them. You mean to tell me you have no idea what a self-loathing Italian is? You have never seen one or met one? There is nothing profound or difficult about it. All you have to do is look at the words that come out of their mouths. Anyone who would offer up Finklstein as a scholar let alone someone to admire has a problem with me yes. I despise hate mongers. I hate people who pose subjective opinions as facts. I despise people who assign negative characteristics and motives to an entire people. It was Finklestein not I who stood up at Columbia University and stated if one walks the streets of New York the Jews all claim to be holocaust survivors not I. When I discuss the Middle East I do not label Palestinians or Israelis. I am still waiting for you to produce the substance of your allegations that I engage in negative generalizations about people. When I criticize you or Buffy I am very specific why and when I state an opinion I am very clear not to state it as a fact but as an opinion. I practice what I preach and my disgust and contempt for Finkletein comes naturally. Kuzadd you be honest with me. I admit I am opinionated, bias and have subjective opinions. But I have made an effort to explain why and I have not engaged in the tactics Finklstein does. I urge you to see both sides or the many sides of any argument not just one side. Resist the urge to be manipulated by someone who plays on your emotions and manipulates them and tells you what you want to hear. Be my guest question everything I say. I do not want you to agree with me just understand why I spit at people who smeer holocaust survivors or any other such peoples. Its cheap. Its gutter.

No I do not think Russia or China will do that. They ain't stupid. In this day and age they will simply fund proxy ground wars and use their econmic clout to protect their economies and in China's case they don't need an army or conventional war to take down the West just some economic manouvers. However you can be sure if Israel took out a nuke reactor it would do it with extreme precision to avoid disrupting any natural gas or oil flow to China. They aint stupid either. Also do not underestimate the 2 faces of China one which sucks up to Iran and controls most of its oil and natural gas and the other which has no problems buying military technology from Israel. I do concede there would be a serious chain reaction much of which can not be predicted and could set off a wide range of terrorist responses and ground wars and a huge negative effect on world markets.

What I want to know is where are you moving to. I mean you have that communist John McCain calling for the closure of G-bay or that other marxist leninist Burak Bam Bam talking about talking with Iran. Yegads. Slim pickings for thou. Agree with your comment its all political gamesmanship at this point. Is till say Kadr should be been treated as a prisoner of war.

So I am waiting. Go back. I have left many words on this forum. Go find them. Go find where I have negatively stereotyped anyone. Please. Go find some generalizations. Don't just accuse me of them. Throw them back at me. I wait with warm welcome arms. Good luck.

Here you go Buffy a responbse to comments that I am a liar, define any Jew who does not support Israel as an anti-semite and self-loathing, and should be finding out about my Jewish heritage from Norman Finklestein. In his text the Holocaust Industry Finklestein repeats the ancient anti-semitic canard which became prominent in the forged work, Protocols of the Elders of Zion what he used the term “ Jewish elites” and stated without any proof that they have created an industry to perpetuate the memory of the holocaust as a ploy to extort money, to gain influence and to prevent any criticism of Israel. This reference uses the negative stereotype caricature of the sinister, conspiring Jew who manipulates, deceives and lies. In so doing he simply uses this negative stereotype to smeer any Jew who wishes to honour the holocaust and educate people as to its consequences and portrays its victims who may have received compensation as thieves and liars. After insulting all holocaust survivors and Jews in general, he then links these anti-semitic references to the further suggestion that the holocaust was used to manipulate the world into supporting Israel. It is precisely this demonization of all Jews, particular demonization of victims of the holocaust as sinister, manipulative thieves and then taking these two categories and using them in a composite stereotype of the sinister Jew behind the creation of Israel is designed to do but one thing-incite hate for all Jews. There is nothing academic or scholarly about making such remarks. They are designed to smeer all Jews with negative characteristics when discussing Israel and that is precisely what makes them anti-semitic. Such subjective remarks may influence people like you Buffy who are attracted to them precisely because of their simplicity and subjectivity but they disgust people like me because they belittle the work of true historic and academic scholars. Tell me Buffy do you find it admirable that a man like Finklestein would refer to holocaust survivor Eli Wiesel as a “resident clown” and dismisses Wiesel’s literature, works, holocaust education initiatives and peacemaking efforts between Jews and non Jews as simply that of manipulative deception to make people sorry for Jews? You find that something to admire? You have a problem with me referring to Finklestein as a self-loathing Jew Buffy? . Tell me Buffy when did you become a Jew to understand what that means? You seem to feel you can lecture me on my own history and what the holocaust should mean to me right? That is what you said was it not Buffy? Here Buffy read back the following comments from Norm Finklestein and tell me why they do not reflect the words of a Jew who hates himself for being Jewish and for heaven's sake Buffy can you try remember I am Jewish and so when I read another Jew saying such things it may mean something a bit more difficult for me to absorb then you..; 1-" These elites, the hidden hand of "organized American Jewry" behind the Holocaust industry, have one goal: not the teaching of history but the furthering of "Jewish aggrandizement." (Holocaust Industry); 2- Jewish organizations "steal, and I do use the word with intent, 95 percent of the monies earmarked for victims of Nazi persecution" (Counterpunch, Dec. 13, 2001); 3- Jews "are not Zionist by conviction, they are Zionist because it is useful for their political and more recently financial self-interest" (Counterpunch, Dec. 13, 2001). 4- “Israeli actions are "Nazi practices but with novelties to the Nazi experiments added" (lecture in Beirut in June 2002). 5- "I'm not exaggerating when I say that one out of three Jews you stop in the street in New York will claim to be a survivor. Particularly irksome are those "arriviste and shtetl-chauvinist Jews of Eastern European descent like New York City mayor Edward Koch and (former) New York Times Executive Editor A.M. Rosenthal." (BBCRadio) You want to lecture me Buffy on reading Finklestein and denying he is a self-loathing Jew, do me a favour, read him yourself and stop denying what he says and how they reflect his on self-loathing and pretending irs based on academic research. Tell me Buffy, did you not notice when Finklstein smeers all Jews with such negative stereotypes he always prefaces such subjective and hateful negative generalizations by referring to the fact he is the son of a child of holocaust survivor? Are you that blinded by your anti-Zionist ideology you can't see it Buffy? Did it ever dawn on you that Norman Finklestein’s entire career is based on manipulating his Jewish identity..the very same thing he accuses other Jews of ? Buffy are you that devoid of being able to understand self-contradiction when you see it? Are you? Not only does he accuse others of the exact same thing he engages in but he does something else. He gives you the thesis you want, that Jews are evil and sinister and manipulative on a platter, but tell us Buffy, if what he says is true, then think Buffy, since he is a Jew it necessarily must be untrue or dear Buffy are you telling us that if a Jew calls other Jews demons and manipulative thieves, presto! they suddenly are to be trusted, Is that how it works in your world Buffy? The evil sinister manipulative Jew is redeemed if they tell the world they are evil and smell bad...then suddenly you can believe them? Tell me Buffy. What is scholarly let alone credible about Finklstein remarking in his book that Steven Spielberg, NBC and Leon Uris are part of a holocaust conspiracy to manipulate the world into supporting Israel? What is scholarly about remarking that the movie "Schindler's List," was deliberately created by Spielberg to divert attention from our middle east policy and yell out these words during an interview to support this conspiracy theory; "Give me a better reason! . . . Who profits? Basically, there are two beneficiaries from the dogmas [of Schindler's List]: American Jews and American administration….NBC broadcast "Holocaust" to strengthen Israel's position…In 1978, NBC produced the series Holocaust. Do you believe, it was a coincidence, 1978? Just at this time, when peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt took place in Camp David?.... Leon Uris, the author of "Exodus," named his character "Ari" in order to promote Israel's "Nazi" ideology…Ari is the diminutive for Aryan. It is the whole admiration for this blond haired, blue eyed type." By the way Buffy, Ari is a Jewish Biblical name. Buffy I am not so sure of. Sounds like mid West Iowa, chear-leader, vampire slayer, Beverly Hills. Tell me now Buffy why its scholarly for any human let alone Finklestein to remark as he did that "the main fomenters of anti-Semitism "are 'American Jewish elites' who need to be stopped" or brag in his speeches and lectures that he can say what he wants about Jews because he is the son of a holocaust survivor? As for your portrayal of Finklestein’s trip to the West Bank as a harmless innocent visit to a human rights activist that's nice Buffy. Of course. He's a nice man. He was innocent. He’s just another innocent victim caught in the Zionist nightmare and onslaught against humanity. Good Lord Buffy is that what this again comes down to? You looking to such people to justify such simplistic hateful stereotypical dialogue? You keep asking for links. Why don't you just go to his web-site and read his comments about Hamas or Hezbollah and his speeches on how Palestinians should start a civil uprising on the West Bank. Can’t wait until you lecture me on how Ann Frank was a manipulative and sinister Jew.

Kuzadd read my next response to Buffy it also responds to your attempt at portraying yourself as a sweet innocent open minded purveyor of truth. Hah. You are funny Kuzadd. Tell me if I started throwing back anti-Muslim hate mongers in your face in my debates, which I never do, you would be the first to scream how bigoted I am now wouldn't you. Interesting. I dop remember you accusing a lot of people of engaging in negative generalizations about Muslims but youy have no problem being a Finklestein groupie. Gee can't understand why, By the way Kuzadd, I am very specific in my opinions. Go on, show me where I have engaged in a generalization about an entire group of people. Go on. Please. Do show me. Kuzadd the fact that I will not buy into some anti-semitic hate monger's diatribes does not mean I am generalizing. Kuzadd the fact I loath someone does not mean I am generalizing. It means I loath them. I am very clear in this case why I loath Finklestein and why I loath it when you and Buffy jump on these hate mongers bandwagons.

Why because you agree with him? Tell me. Just what gives you and Funklestein this magic abiility to make sweeping negative generalizations about the motives, beliefs and feelings of anyone? That is the point Kuzadd. His remarks about Jews using the holocaust to manipulate for political purposes is not based on objective fact, its based on subjective remarks that have no basis at all. He does this because h e is what is called a self-loather. Self-loathers believe to get people to like them they need to go to the people they sense hate them the most and get those people to like them by portraying themselves as self-admitting demons. Finklestein has zero credibility precisely because his whole shtick is based on the fact he uses his status as a Jews and son of a holocaust survivor to justify his hatred. If he's a Jew and a holocaust survivor's son then what he says must be true. Why? Why? Its not true simply because he claims to be a Jew. You buy it, because it fits your political opinions of Israel and Zionism evil and immoral. If he was not a Jew, if he was anything else you could not quote him or use him and you'd be accused of being a blatant hate monger for referring to him. The only reason Finklestein is printed and people like you tout him is because he is a Jew, no other reason. Go on, produce for me the objective statistics and analysis he used to determine the motives of all holocaust survivors. You won't find any. Here is what I have to say Kuzadd. Anyone, and I mean anyone who engages in subjective negative generalizations of a group of people is not an academic, they are a hate monger. Any hateful person can do that and all it does is incite peoples worst emotions-hate, spite, resentment, jelaousy, distrust, loathing, envy. You want to debate me Kuzadd of course. But usually when you debate, unlike Finklestein you are upfront about when its your subjective opinion and not an objective fact you are presenting. Unlike you, Finklestein does not do that. The best think any of us can do Kuzadd is to try discipline ourselves to avoid subjective negative generalizations designed to hurt and insult people and ridicule them. It won't make us credible.

Your denial of the President of Iran's multiple speeches and comments that clearly all on the destruction of and end of Israel is one thing.Most people ignored you on that. Playing dumb is what some people do when they come on this post. They figure they are smarter then everyone else. Right, the entire world did not hear the remarks of the President of Iran over and over again. Its a translation error that's all. Right. Just like the holocaust did not happen. Translation errors. Innocent misunderstandings. The man is harmless. Now not happy with the fact no one challenged you on the its a mistranslation bit, you now come back and pretend you had no idea what Chirac said then go woopsy and admit it and now provide yet more disingenuine comment that its different. Do you really think France, or Russia, or China or ANY OTHER F>>>CKING nation on this planet would sit around and wait to be nuked before it retaliated? Are you serious or do you like this role of playing the fool with people? Enough with the smarmy double talk o.k. Either be direct and sincere or give it a rest. Here is the point. Iran funds Hezbollah and Hamas and hundreds of other terror groups that believe Israel should be taken off the map with Jordan and replaced with a theocractic stateThat is Iran's agenda. A muslim theocractic state in Jordan and Isral friendly to its interests and the funding of terror groups de destabilize Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq. Unlike you Iran does not hide its foreign policy intentions. It is up front and blatant about them. If the President of Iran is guilty of anything its the simple fact he says exactly what he believes. Would Iran ever nuke Israel? Some of us believe they would not risk killing so many Muslims and its mostly bluff. Some believe he is deadly serious and would use a lower grade nuclear bomb. Me personally I think the nuke talk is all b.s. The fact is today, one man with a dirty bomb could walk into Jerusalem and detonate it and wipe out millions with the radioactive fall out without taking down most of the infrastructure. For that matter Syria or Iran couldlobby in a missile today that dumps germs. There are plenty of ways to kill people without a nuclear bomb taking out the Muslim holy site in Jerusalem and killing millions of Muslims from the fall out. I would suspect the Iran hype comes from 2 sources. One is the fact that Israel is in pre-election mode with its politicians all preparing to make a run at the PM's seat and trying to sound tough to get votes. I also suspect there is a direct tie in with the bellicose tones and support for McCain from the people making the noise. Its no secret right now Likud and those most sympathetic to the Bush doctrine in the Middle East want McCain continuing as is while Obama is seen as someone who would really shake things up and probably will pull out the Americans from Iraq and refrain from the bellicose adversarial approach in the Middle East. How much of this is Israeli internal pre-election noise and how much of it is American pre-election noise? I would say most of it. There is one thorny issue. If Israel did take out a nuclear reactor in Iraq they have to avoid disrupting China's gas pipelines. If they blow up China's gas pipelines and set China into an economic crisis over natural gas and oil the entire world market is going to quickly implode. Its a different world then with Syria where such a nation like Syria is an isolated speck on the map in terms of world economic consequence. Blow things up in Iran and right away you directly involve China's economy totally dependent on Iran for oil and gas. Some people think Israel will orchestrate an attack to help McCain get elected. I would suspect most of the speculation you see on this thread including your feigned ignorance just that, simply people speculating and making up theories. None of us really knows and will know. And no there was no translation error in what I just said.

First I would like to say I enjoy Canadien's excellent contributions. I appreciate when a poster makes an effort to provide historic reference and keep an open mind and see more then one side to an issue and not use history as a sledgehammer but as a tool to help us understand how present conflicts develop to what they are in the present tense. Also I want to mention to Remiel even though you were referred to as a socialist nerd I know the truth and that is you are a dirty communist. I bet you have a beret and Che Guevara t-shirts. I know your type. You have box crates as furniture and you are grungy and have tatoos and studied sociology or you probably have a peirced tongue and feel sorry for Amy Winehouse. But I do not want to get personal Remiel and suggest anything untoward in that regard. Finally, I wish to report to readers I am having problems assimilating. I have tried. I just can't get to the point of buying wonder bread and making baloney and mayonaisse sandwitches with it. Also I have a problem with checkered pants. I tried wearing checkered pants but I had an anxiety attack. Also I can't drink rye, but I do sometimes go to Tim Horton's. Also because I am a Habs fan, assimlation is just not possible. Wearing a Maple Leafs sweater causes me to vomit just thinking about it.

Because they don't believe you.

Totally agree with you. The Judge was on crack or something. Should have been thrown out. The only business the court would have would be if there was some obvious seriously violent physical dimension attached to the punishment. This is a crock.

Yet another psychologist trying to give himself a shtik so he can sell his professional services. All he is done is put a new word to a very simple phenomena. It seems if you give call a common behaviour phenomena a name that has disorder or syndrome in it, people suddenly perk up and say yah that describes me. Its a gimmick. Come up with gross generalizations that could apply to anyone so that anyone can see themselves in it, and then call it a disorder or syndrome. Problem is this is precisely the kind of pop psychology that does well on television with Oprah or Dr. Phil where people want things explained in simplistic sound bites in between frequent commercial breaks and basically if you note, these syndromes are used in a way to help people rationalize negative behaviour. Suddenly they are not a cold selfish prick, they have emotional deficit disorder. Suddenly they are not a self-centered, self-obsessed, shallow, phony, they have this disorder. Bottom line-you either can give people the time of day or you can't. If you give people the time of day, you learn after a while, you only have so much energy and yes you pick and choose who you can give that time of day too because you only have so much time for such things and most importantly you really should only do it with people that ain't gonna drag you down into the mud with them. This same pop psychology twit who would tell you that you have emotional deficit disorder on today's disorder of the month list, next month will tell you that you are co-dependent because you are too willing to help and care about other people and you are being used. Trust me if you show empathy, you are a self-destructive, easily manipulated, needy, co-dependent. If you don't show empathy you are have this alleged deficit. So I say, oh horse shit. We all know which people we can care about and which ones we can't. If I were to pay every pandhandler on the streets of Toronto a dollar I would soon be one of them myself. Doesn't mean I have emotional deficit disorder. Likewise when I do spend some time with someone I care about or think I should care about, doesn't make me some needy, neurotic wreck seeing to make myself feel good because I hate myself. Enough with this pop psychology fizz. Its just fizz. Oprah culture is all about self-indulgence and pop psychology-it reflects her own narcissism and the fact that every show comes down to one of Oprah's anxieties and in this case the fact she is a cold sob and does not have the time of day for people and wants to now add that to her list of disorders next to her eating disorder, gay denial and Tom Cruise shtick which excuse me she ripped off from Rosie O'Donnell. By the way, someone tell Oprah Ellen is stealing her audience away because she talks less about herself. All these Oprah articles always are about someone talking about their own feelings. Even that article where the women is allegedly feeling guilty for not having empathy is simply a self-indulgent exercise of talking about herself. Go stuff your face with that twinkie dear and stop whining about your pouch. Either that or shut up and eat salad. Bah.

So you want a specific response to Finklestein’s anti-semitism Buffy? Tell me what do you call a man who argues that educating people and remembering the holocaust is a deliberate sinister attempt to exploit the world financially for Jews and to justify Israel’s existence? What would you call attacking and assigning negative motives to all Jews and anyone who wants to remind the world of the holocaust and the existence of the State of Israel? In his latest book which is nothing more then subjective opinions he states not me that anti-Semitism is simply as a result of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land. You want an example of Finklestein’s intellectual genius ? Try his March 2006 speech at Columbia University. He stated that it was now common for critics of Israel to be referred to as Holocaust deniers, and that Holocaust epithets would enter the slang lexicon, such as "mother-Holocauster". That is what typifies him. Someone who makes sweeping subjective generalizations about Jews that are negative and designed to incite hatred. Figures Buffy you would be pone of his groupies.

I just have had time to read your response. In regards to you suggesting Finklesrein has not insulted and become personal with Weisel and the others I mentioned, I will not respond to cbecause its public domain and knowledge and if you want to pretend it does not exist goodee Buffy. As for you demanding a link to Hamas, why don't you read what Normie said after Israel deportred him. He came out and said he did not blame Israel for deporting him as he was in regular contact with Hamas and Hezbollah. What you think he just decided to travel to the West Bank out of the blue? Good God Buffy even Normie is more honest then you and admits his political motives. Give it a rest. As for his inflammatory speeaches what planet do you live on Buffy. Are you going to tell me you are oblivious to his speach calling on palestinians in the West Bank to revolt? Buffy stop being so damn selective and read what Normie writes and listen to his words. Not very hard to understand what he is about. And he is the most blatant example of an anti-semite. His references to holocaust survivors being liars to manipulate their tragedy to gain financial compensation is as dispicable and as low as it gets. For you to try suggest he is not anti-semitic really even for you Buffy is just absurd. Read what he writes about all Jews. His smeers are done without any references. Its funny you ask me to provide references about what Finklestein says. Why? Can you not be honest with me and admit you read what he writes about holocaust survivors and how his comments assign negative motives and characteristics to all holocaust siurvivors and Jews? You think you can defend this man's academic portfolio? Read his works. He has never initiated an original thought. His entire premises is to take someone else's work and provide a response to it. His responses are subjective not objective. He does not provide respnses that provide objective facts. Read what he writes. He quotes other writers with the same opinion as him. In fact he ahs been caught red handed plagerizing, using the wrong references, and misquoting people. He has been caught creatingalleged events that did not happen and attributing quotes to people who never said what he claims they said. This you want to hang your hat on? Normie Finklestein someone who thinks if he hates his Jewish identity it will make him liked? This is what you hold out as a paragon in honest thought? Weak even for you,

Thanks. I appreciate some of my ideas may be naive and unrealistic as well. Let me be even more specific. I think the future partners of peace talks are progressive Palestinian intellects in North America who progressive Jews in North America need to reach out to and vice versa and form a coalition to then influence Israeli and Palestinian leaders. I believe the Arab League of Nations, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon are secondary parties. I believe the primary parties are Jordan, Israel the Palestinian Authority, and the leaders of the Palestinian Israelis within Israel. I see the role of progressive Palestinians and Jews outwide Israel as a mediators. I see potential mediators in Turkey and Spain and possibly Norway. I see the issue of compensating past illegal land seizures within the green line of Israel one which can not realistically accommodate restitution (giving land back or having second and third generation Palestinians move back-there is no physical room for them) but will have to provide compensation for those Palestinians who are Israeli citizens because of the Supreme Court of Israel rulings. As part of an overall peace solution, the displaced Jews of the Middle East, have to also be compensated and recognized and it is here I believe the AArab League has to take moral responsibility and say we forced the issue by expelling them all and confiscating all their property, so now we need to compensate them. Then the Arab League needs to accept moral responsibility for creating the initial displacement of Palestinians by forcing the war in 1948 and then forcefully placing them in refugee camps. They have a moral obligation to admit this decision and displacing 900,000 Jews sealed the fate of Palestinians as much as any Zionist did. The Arab world needs to accept equal responsibility for displacing the genuine Palestinian Muslims with Muslims from outside Palestine and refusing to allow them citizenship in the Arab League nations. Both Israel and the Arab League need to accept a responsibility and that can be done in a nation on the West Bank and Gaza and in providing financial compensation and aid to Palestinians in this new country. Palestinians will not ever accept Jordan as their nation. They see it as a British colony that was created as a ploy to stop Jews from forming a country and consolidating British power in the area but they do not and have never considered it a Palestinian nation, even if its coat of arms describes it as a Palestinian nation and even though it has a law of return for Palestinians (except those born after 1988 on the West Bank). I think in return for the practical reality of illegal land transfers within Israel's green line from Palestinian absentee land owners to Jews, the Arab world should understand Israel is trading that off by giving up a legal right to any of the West Bank which legally they have a right to as much as Palestinians because of the continuous uninterputed residences of Jews in Judea and Somaria since Biblical days. Its a matter of practical realistic trade offs and quite frankly JBG I do not give a shit what some of the people on this thread think because they make no effort to find out the legal rights of either Jews in Israel or Palestinians and assume Jews suddenly appeared in 1948 from Europe as colonialists. I only give a shit what Israelis and Palestinians feel and think and Palestinians and Israelis are sick and tired of violence and this continued reference to the past and need to talk about now and jobs and water. Terrorism will not stop without jobs and water for Palestinians and Israelis and Palestinians working on mutual interest projects such as roads, water-ways and a common market. Will terrorists allow such a thing? Probably not. Then again Netanyahu would stop it as well. My approach is the classic labour party approach as now presented by the current Security Minister of Israel who I obviously would vote for if I had a chance or the views of Ehud Barak and the current foreign Minister. From what I understand if a popular vote was held to day, Netanyahu appears to be the winner and he wants to scrap any talks about the Golan, the West Bank and Jerusalem having stated he finds them all defective and premature. So this guessing as to who the peace partners would be, is on both sides. Where you and I agree is that the world will never understand why Jews believe they need a state to protect us from existential extinction and that you and I see Israel and Zionism as an existential exercise not a religious one or even an allegedly philosophical one. You and I both agree terrorism dampens and limits the ability to engage in peace talks, cultivate human rights and tear down barriers of intolerance as it clouds discussions and makes everything subordinate to survival of the fittest. For me it is important I work with people who start discussing Israelis and Palestinians as humans with the same mutual interests and existential anxiety and defusing words that make either side seem inhumane or demon like. I despise terrorism. However I believe anyone who denounces terror, even if they are on the opposite side of the negotiations table and appear in direct conflict-are a potential ally precisely because they put humans first and reason first. I do believe it is possible to achieve anything positive once humans agree they will not engage in violence and will agree to respect each other. I do not doubt their are obstacles and huge ones at that. Part of the challenge is explaining to people being a Zionist is an existential expression not anything else. It has nothing to do with hating Palestinians or wanting to hurt or control them or violate their rights. That was not our intention. Our intention was to escape persecution and create a nation to protect us because in every nation we have lived in, we were not allowed to own land and were under seige. It did not come about to hurt others-just to protect us and seek what all other peoples have and take for granted. Palestinians will never understand why we came back to Israel. They will never understand it ever just like the rest of the world will never understand it. It doesn't matter what they think. What matters is we find practical solutions today, here and now. I could care less if any non Jew ever accepts my identity as a Jew and why there is an existential imperative attached to it through state expression. I really don't care. If they ask and genuinely want to know I discuss it. Otherwise I limit my debates to addressing unfair comments that demonize Palestinians or Israelis. I am not interested in shoving my identity in anyone's face. I prefer to express my identity with quiet, reserved dignity and a gentle kindness because I believe any other way of expressing it becomes threatening and only serves to incite anti-semites. I am no self-loathing Jew who apologizes but I am also not someone who believes might is right and you deal with ignorance by counter-ignorance. My challenge is not with people like you. Its with young people who have no clue as to Jewish history and use the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an opportunity to make themselves feel superior and feel they can lecture Israelis and Palestinians. You must also remember, Palestinians are not dumb. They know the same people that shit on Israel in their name, will do the same with them for the exact same reason they do it with Israel. They are not dumb JBG. Their practical nightmare is finding a way out of the terror cycle they did not start and do not know how to get out of. They aren't stupid. They know all the sanctimonious talk in their name is bullshit. They are looking to Israel not the rest of the world. They aint stupid. They can't say it but they are looking to Israel to find a way to avoid fueling Hamas and the other terrorists by responding in certain ways.