Rue

I respond to Leafless' comments; 'My definition of a "White Canadian" 'would be of the human group having a light coloured skin'. You walked right into that Leafless and I am calling you out. Does that include albino Indo-Pakistanis, albino negroids and Albino mongoloids? Give it a rest. You made it clear when you started this post this is not just about light coloured skin but anyone who doesn't fit your narrow category of Anglo-Saxon Christian. don't hide Leafless behind an attempt to suggest you are inclusive of anyone with light skin-you can't even handle that without sub-dividing it further to light skin of heter-sexual nature, and your kind of ethnicity and version of Christianity. Have the integrity Leafless to at least come out and state with honesty what it is you are restricting your definition to. " Again this thread has nothing to do with me wanting anyone to be Caucasian or Christian but has to do with the federal government whitewashing the majority group that built this country and its history and traditions by unfairly promoting cultural values of minorities namely, Quebec, Aboriginals, and ethnic immigrants at the expense of the majority White, English speaking Canadians and their history and traditions." Talk about talking out of both sides of the mouth. Of course you don't want anyone to be Caucasian-Christian. You have created an exclusive club precisely because YOU DO NOT WANT. You do not want anyone who is not just like you. You do not want them period. Your trying to intellectualize you are solely concerned about promoting your cultural values is a crock. It is a crock because you express your culture not by defining what it is but what it is not. People who must define themselves by saying what they are NOT have no culture. That is precisely why they speak the way they do. If you had any sense of who you are and what it means to be a Christian you would not come on this post and tell people what you are not. "In turn this is resulting in a takeover of Canada's important institutions by minority cultures placing at great risk the safety and welfare of White, English speaking Canadians." You think you speak for me? I am Caucasian. So are many Muslims, Buddists, Bahaiis, Christians, Wiccans, and people of countless other religions or groups such as atheists and humanists. You think you speak for them? You like to use that word white don't you when we all know you don't mean simply white, you mean white, and whose religious views and political views are the same as yours. don't hide behind the word white Leafless because it fools no one. Your reference is to a specific sub-group of whites. Let me say it to your face Leafless. You are afraid. You are afraid of anyone you feel is not just like you so you project your insecurity on the rest of us and talk of conspiracies of those who do not look and talk and smell like you and accuse us of taking your power away from you. Your lack of power Leafless comes from your decision to define what you are NOT rather then what you are. Your lack of power does not come from us, it becomes from your own inability to define who you are and then try blame others for thinhgs you think they have and you do not. You do not have Leafless not because you are a victim and it was taken away, but because you choose to hate and be negative and tell people what you are not. You resent others for the sense of identity they have, because you have none. When you look in the mirror what do you see Leafless. Well it isn't dark skin. It isn't gay. It aint Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Bahaii, Buddist, atheist, agnostic, Taosit, Zoroastrean, Italian, Spanish, Portugese, Latin American, South American, French, Bulgarian, Greek, Turkish, now is it. "This has also transformed Canada into a country with few, if any values relating to loyalties and patriotism to the country" Why don't you stop sanitizing it Leafless. Say it. Instead of the word "This" use the word "They", and then spell it out and stop codifying your words. Say it Leafless. " This" means "They", "they" means blacks, Asians, Muslims, Jews, aboriginals, French Canadians, non Christians, people with dark skin, gays, anyone who isn't pale and Anglo Saxon. Yep those Irish can get quite dark can't they. Tell us all. How is it you take all these people, which is the vast majority of Canada and state they are a minority? By your very definition you have made such an exclusive club that you are a member of it necessarily includes you and probably the Klu Klux Clan and Aryan Brotherhood and some drunk skin heads in Kamloops. Come on Leafless tell us. Who do you speak foor? Spit it out. Why the code word? Tell me right now, do you or do you not refer to the definition of white as defined b the Klu Klux Clan and Aryan Brotherhood? I say you are verbatum and I want you to come on this post and deny it. Tell us why it is not the same. I ask anyone to go on the internet look at the definition of white as defined by the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood and compare it back to what you have stated and tell me why it is not the same! I state this loud and clear. You came on this forum and state their platform of the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood, no more, no less then you veil it with references to loyalty to Canada on your part. Come on tell us what tests you have used to determine all these less then pale people, all these non believers, are not loyal and patriotic to Canada? Tell me why I am not patriotic to Canada. Tell me why gays are not. Tell me why people with brown skin are not. Do tell. Tell us the test you used to determine our loyalty. Did you go around and take surveys? Did you walk up to black men in the Jane Finch corridor and say-excuse me you are black, or either that or you appear to have a tan, are you loyal to Canada? Did you walk up to every Siekh and say-um excuse me you have dark skin and a beard and a turban-are you loyal to Canada? Did you walk up to every Muslim, every Hindu every Asian, every native person, anyone with dark skin or narrow eyes or big lips and noses and ask them? Did you speak with any Albino negroid humans to check their loyalty? Or did you assume Leafless...and do you assume Leafless because that is what this post is about-you making generalizations and assumptions about the majority of Canadians in a negative and derogatory way-you dare suggest I am not loyal to this country because I do not fit your criteria? You assume a lot Leafless and in a way I am glad this post has come about so there is no doubting what your agenda is Leafless. Its nice you finally came out of the closet. And no you no longner need the hood although I can now understand why it was pointed. Take care not to get a tan this summer Leafless, someone may mistake you as lacking loyalty and patriotism. " I think White English Canada has been pushed around enough and I want to know what we can do about it." The above is a phrase is one of the most common phases used by Aryan Brotherhood and Klu KLux Klan in all their literature. Must be a coincidence.

As usual I just don't get many of the responses. In Israel the Muslim Brotherhood has two branches. One will have nothing to do with Israel. The other has been elected and sits in the Knesset. Gosh imagine that. Here is the point. The Muslim Brotherhood is an organization with many entities, some terrorist, some are not. Its quite simple. If the Muslim Brotherhood wants to denounce violence and participate in democracy, then it should take its rightful place in democractic governments. if it wishes to believe in terorism then no it is a criminal organization that is entitled to NOTHING. Terrorists have no rights. Only a fool would suggest to anyone they should sit with a terrorist whose charter says, I will kill you and I won't stop until I do that. That is ludicrous. What is there to negotiate-would you like to kill me slowly or quickly, with a bomb or a knife or a gun? The Muslim Brotherhood is made up of many factions. Some have openly renounced terror and so they can be spoken to as Israel has done. Other factions remain terrorist in nature and so until they denounce terror and put down their weapons are not entitled to any support or understanding. You can't have it both ways-oh you hoo stand still so I can blow you up-and by the way I have the right to sit at a table and tell you to sit still so I can blow you up... The only person who would suggest negotiating with a terrorist is someone who is completely and utterly removed from the reality of what a terrorist is. Oh Mr. Terrorist you aren't such a bad guy. Come give me a hug. We can work it out.

THis discussion flits about from skin colour/race/ethnicity to religion and back again. There is a reason why the word "white" was then selectively redefined to mean Christian. It is called exclusivity and when you start defining people by their perveived racial or religious characteristics, its amazing how the word "white" shrinks down into an exclusive group of a few. Oh how do we save whites. Oh did I say whites. Well no I meant Christian whites. Ooh we wouldn't want any Caucasian Muslims or Jews or Buddists in there. So now then. When I say white and Christian, I also mean you need to have no curls in your hair or hint of big lips-we can't water down those Aryan features now can we. Talk about a crock of unmitigated b.s. Why don't you cowards come right out and say what is on your mind. Are you that cowardly? Say it. No Muslims. No one with dark skin. No one with yellow skin. No one who is non Christian-oh do you include gays who are caucasian or not? Probably not right? When do we pass the laws preventing "whites" from watering down their race with inter-marriage. I suggest you get together with Leafless and freeze your sperm. We need your genetic traits to carry on. The world does not have enough in-breeding it needs more of you.

And what is your definition for the term "White Canadian"? Sounds to me like in your definition you don't just want them to be white, i.e., caucasian, but Christian and from the sounds of it a non Catholic Christian. So are you a member of the Klu Klux Klan or Aryan Brotherhood? You use all their buzz words. Come right out and say it. What white group are you a member of or think you should join. Why beat around the bush any further?

I appreciate your comments too and have learned a lot from them.

I have no problems going on the internet finding articles on why Jews are evil, Zionists are evil and Israel is evil. I have no problems going on the internet finding articles saying Muslims are not moderates. Yah that is easy. Now try these; http://www.seedsofpeace.org/about http://www.freemuslims.org/ http://www.crescentlife.com/heal%20the%20w...c_terrorism.htm http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/25/muslims.n...ence/index.html http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1860346/posts http://www.ijtihad.org/Muslims-love-America.htm

Because they aren't isolating them. Perhaps that's why you haven't seen any evidence of it. Bull and I will provide you prove when I have some time. There are moderate Muslims and they hate terror and violence and to suggest otherwise is no different then saying the same about Christians of Jews or Hindus or Gays or anyone else you care to target. Enough with these simplistic negative asssumptions. They are defamatory and I have news for you the Anti-Defemation League of the B'Nai B'Rith defends as many Muslims and Christians and people who are not Jews as it does Jews from negative smeers just as there are Muslim groups who stand up for Christians and Jews and Christian Groups that stand up for Jews and Muslims and so on. No this world is not black and white with good and bad guys only found in certain ethnic groups. That is bull. There are extremists and terrorists world-wide of many faiths. The ones in Muslim society dominate our attention not because there are more of them but because there is no oil and therfore interest in the other parts of the world where there are just as many terrorists doing the same thing. Look for a particular vision and you will find it. If you start off with the assumption all Muslims are evil, that is what you will see. Let me explain it this way. I spoke with a young IDF soldier once. I joked and said you are 18 year old boy with pimples trying to find out the difference between a terrorist and an innocent civilian-and he responded- its hard for me to know the difference between my own hatred and my own common sense needed to survive. What that pimply faced boy taught me was that he knew one day he might make a mistake and not be able to tell the difference and understand that may be inevitable and he did not relish that eventuality. That boy soldier has an excuse if he mistakes innocence for terror. what is yours? Our soldiers in Canada have that excuse do you? The point is those soldiers from whatever army, Israeli, British, American, Canadian, and I have spoken to some of them, when they come home, having made such a mistake, you think they do not live a nightmare the rest of their lives? You think you are so tough that if one day you kill an innocent person you can live with it? You have the privilege of being able to talk and engage in peaceful dialogue unlike those soldiers or the civilians caught in conflict. Don't abuse this privilege and take it for granted. Soldiers are dying precisely so that you will not lower yourselves to terror and blind hatred. That is precisely whythey are fighting and precisely why innocent people die-because terrorists do not give us the option of knowing the difference-but you in this present tense in your country have a choice! Don't make what these soldiers do pointless by ignoring the responsibility that comes with the privilege of being able to use your brain and engage in rational dialogue. don't make a mockery of innocent people who have to die because terrorists make it impossible to know the difference. You have the ability. Use it.

In response to West Viking; "Why should we try to sort out moderate Muslims from radical Muslims?" Because to do otherwise is to smeer innocent people and is no different then saying we should hate all blacks because some commit crimes. Why-because if you don't make an effort an d continue to smeer and alienate moderate Muslims, who do you intend to call on to help you defeat these terrorists? Can you speak Arabic? Do you understand their customs? More importantly why would I want to hate all Muslims and not try to make an effort to reach out to moderate Muslims? I would do that with anyone. Life is too short to go around hating or fearing people or harbouring negative assumptions about people. It is a waste of energy. "We have not seen any evidence of moderate Muslims isolating and shunning radical elements in their societies." Who is "we'? You sound like Queen Elizabeth. Get off her horse and use the word "I". Now then. You just finished asking me why you shoud try sort out moderate Muslims from radical ones, which suggests you do not and will not. So then, how do I take you seriously when you now state you see no evidence of moderate Muslims isolating and shunning radical elements in their societies? You can't have it both ways. Don't sit there and tell me you will not make any effort to distinguish a moderate Muslim from a terrorist and then in the same breath say you can't see any evidence! You are not looking and making no effort to look! You might find such evidence if you took the time to try speak to and reach out to the same moderate Muslims you don't want to bother try finding out about. Maybe if you did you would know what efforts they are making. More to the point, how and why would you expect them to share what they are doing with you when you have made it clear to them you will not distinguish them from terrorists? I have news for you. Moderate people of any group as well as Muslims won't go looking for you either paricularly when your words make it clear you are bigoted against them. Of course they will do their best to avoid you and they will take care when they criticize terrorist Muslims so that people like you who do not distinguish between moderates and terrorists will not use their words of criticism against fellow Muslims claiming to be terrorists against them as well. You really expect a moderate Muslim to speak candidly about what is wrong in their society after what you just said? "We do see Iran, Syria, Pakistan, the Palestinians and others roll out the welcome wagon to greet radical Mullahs and terrorist leaders. We see what they do and it does not fit with what they say." Moderate Muslims in Canada should not be tarred and feathered because of corupt Arab governments or Muslim terrorists. Many came to Canada precisely to get away from them. The fact that someone is a Palestinian, Syrian, Lebanese, Egyptian, Iranian, etc., does not automatically make them evil because their government(s) may suck or engage in terror. You are quick to smeer people with negative assumptions. I am sure you would not like it if it was done in reverse to you. Think about it take the word Muslim out from your comments and insert Canadian or Christian or caucasian and tell me would you accept such comments about you?

"If you believe we only have to worry about someone in another country think again. These young men should be here in our police forces aye." So following your assumptions and analysis; 1-one can not police and enforce domestic criminal laws if they send troops overseas to fight terrorists 2-police enforcement and military services compete for the same tax money 3-soldiers would be police officers if they weren't soldiers 4-domestic crime is unrelated to international terrorism. You make a lot of assumptions. Here let me respond slowly; 1- yes its possible to enforce domestic criminal laws AND enagge in operations overseas to fight terrorism 2-police enforcement, and the decisions made as to how many police officers to hire and the expenditures for military operations overseas do not come from the same taxes or for that matter same jurisdiction of governments 4-if soldiers were not in the armed services there is absolutely no guarantee anyone would hire them as police officers or feel the need to 5-domestic crime and international terrorism are attached, they are not distinct and seperate 6-terrorism overseas is linked directly to domestic crime in Canada 7-no the world does not have neat designations where crime suddenly stops when it leaves the borders of Canada 8-no the world does not have neat designations where terrorism suddenly stops outside the borders of Afghganistan. I will not discuss Afghanistan any more but I certainly will continue to challenge and address people like you who line in a world where there are a hell of a lot of assumptions being made. Capricorn and Angus I appreciate your words. By the way for me having witnessed soldiers in action and terrorism I am not ashamed at all to say I am a coward and thank God for better men then me. I think brave people in history have shown us they were "cowards" just ordinary people with the same fears as you and me, but they were called upon to do extra-ordinary things and they did. I am in no position to call anyone a coward. I have seen people under the exact same condition act in entirely different ways. I thank God one could function but I do not belittle the other who could not. As for myself, what I saw transcended emotions. It goes past that. There are no words. I can not explain it but I know it when I see it in a refugee's eyes, or in a soldier's eyes or in a veteran's eyes. They don't need to say anything. I just know. Its like you can see this fatigue in their eyes-this weeriness-something that just cuts through everything and defies words or feelings. I judge no one but myself. All of us have feared and may fear. I can and do admire the men overseas. That I do not have to qualify or apologize for and they have nothing to prove to me. Just wearing the uniform is enough.

Huh? If Canadian soldiers were not in Afghanistan you would not be able to debate? You really think the Taliban and AQ are able to take over Canada? That is pretty silly. Andrew I was really annoyed at the smugness in your response but then I said I better try respond without emotion. Canadian troops are not in Afgnanistan to prevent an invasion of Canada by a conventional army from Afghanistan. The fact that you refer to Taliban or AQ as if it is a conventional army that can't attack Canada shows your profound ignorance. The terrorism, the Islamic fundamentalism as manifested by Al uaeda or by Taliban (who are in fact from many political cells) or by countless Muslim terrorist cells external to Aghhanistan and Iraq now engaging in terror in these countries or in Lebanon, or the West bank/Gaza does not come in the form of a conventional army fighting a conventional war. Your naive assumption that if you simply stay in Canada and ignore it- it will never both you is unbelievable. The terrorism, the ideology being manifesteddoes not stop at any border. It spreads. It spreads to countries all over the world by internet, radio, t.v., letters, through refugees, relatives, government operatives, and people-people like you and me who decide terror is the way to express free will. No they won't wear a uniform and attack you all at once. They come one by one or in cells. They are civilians. They infiltrate respectable Mosques and community centres and they recruit through intimidation, black mail, or by exploiting someone's sense of loss or lack of pride. The profile of a terrorist is not some uneducated oppressed serf simply defending his field, he is an educated Middle Class person who feels his priviliges are being challenged and then they go and recruit people who are less educated then them and use their privilege and education status to exploit them. Its easy to recruit people when they are illiterate and they believe because you read they should listen to you. Its easy to recruit young angry unemployed teens when their recruiter is a Muslim cleric or a doctor or an engineer or lawyer -someone they look up to. These terrorists are not simply fighting because someone is in their country. Grow up. Get off your smug butt and read and find out what they believe in and how they want to achieve it. Until you do that, yes you will make smug comments like something being silly simply because you have no clue what it is someone is trying to tell you because you are making no effort to even find out what it is. If Canadian troops were not in Afghanistan these same fundamentalist terrorists would move along to your neighbourhood and yes you would then not find them silly.You would be the first screaming and squeeling for protection. Go read what happened with the FLQ in Quebec to see how Canadians reacted to something far less intense then what is going on in Afghanistan. Read what these terrorist cells stand for. Read their charters. Read their books. Read what they teach and promulgate to their followers in Mosques, schools, community centres, hospitals. Wipe that smugness off your face and read and try understand what you dismiss so easily as being an isolated problem that would simply go away if only those guys and their Tim Horton's coffee would come back home. You are a naive fool to think you can ignore the global spread and interaction and connection of terrorism by simply ignoring it. You are a fool to think it can not operate without having world wide organized criminal and business networks to fund itself. You are a fool to think these terrorists are isolationists and simply want to be left alone. Make an effort to try understand the ideology you simply assume is rational and contained and has a specific purpose. Your denial and attempt to treat terrorism as simply a rational, isolated act of self defense shows your lack of understanding and lack of research and if I were to come on this post and say its silly to think Taliban are dangerous and not part a worldwide phenomena-I would be embarassed. Yah if I was a soldier someone as naive as you would make me puke. But then I say to those soldiers, people like you are as naive as you are precisely because you are so sheltered from war and conflict because of these soldiers. You are a sign of the affluence they protect but I say to them, don't worry. There are others of us who do get it. We understand these fundamentalists are interested in spreading their beliefs world-wide. We get it and we know why you are there. We know you are the first line over there dying so we continue to live in peace able to write posts pretending terrorists only exist because of soldiers who go after them. My sole concern at this point is the Canadian troops over there, are allowed to do what it takes. No more no less. I do not mean to second guess the military tactics openly if I knew troops would be reading it. I just hope you people over there are allowed to do what it takes and are not held back by politicians. When I referred to the mission as a suicide one, I meant it symbolicallyi n the sense if the politicians do not support you then that is what they would be doing to you guys. I did not mean it in a disrespectful way to suggest what you are doing is pointless. I just can't stand us doing something half-way. I just want the politicians and NATO to fully commit and not try play both sides of the fence and leave you guys in limbo and many I think the vast majority of Canadians agree with me. We do not war monger when we say we support you and want the best for you. We are proud of you because you represent us and you are our family. Tell me. Does anyone think the person calling the notion terrorism is a world wide phenomena silly is willing never to drive in a car again and is willing to cut back his lifestyle to the point where we are not dependent on external energy? Right. Yah. I will hold my breath. If there is one thing I have learned about smug people is that they usually speak from shelter and privileges they take for granted and would never give up and have no clue what others do to guarantee they can have them. This is my last post on Afghanistan as I just don't feel right talking about it knowing someone reading what I say is in danger. I just don't want to say anything else other then my thoughts are with them and I thank them.

I was not aware there were guys in Afghan reading these posts. Now I know. So I will say this directly to you because you need to hear it. I lived in Israel. I know terrorism. I saw it first hand. I know what it does and how it operates. I live the way I do precisely because you decided to be a soldier and put your life on the line so I can leave in peace. I am the first generation to live in a country where we do not fear the police, or attacks simply because we are Jewish. My ancestors dreamed of the peace I live in. It comes with a price. Your life. Your time. Your emotions. Your family. No I am not sure how to thank you but I do. I believe if you were not there now, doing what you do, I would not be here able to debate. I worry that you guys are exposed. Had I known you were reading this I would not have said it out loud. I would have kept my big mouth shut. I just wish if you guys have to be there, you get more support. Yah I am an arm-chair genius. It is easy for me to make comments. I am safe. I personally stated I wish you guys could be smaller, quicker moving and maybe not be so visible. I say that because I don't want you out in the open. God luck. I pray for you guys. I thank you,

In response to the below passages in Mad Michael and then BC Chick's posts; "The Middle East is host to most of the holy sites for Jews, Christians and Muslims. This has always been a major source of tension in the region. This issue has always fueled beliefs by one religious group of nefarious motives/actions by the other religious groups. This issue is always hot and has endured for over 1300 years so far." I would most certainly agree. "Ever since Sultan Mehmet IV's last unsuccessful siege on Vienna in 1683 (commanded by Mustafa), the Muslim world has been on the losing end of just about every major military confrontation with Europeans. Where once the Ottoman army of elite Janissary warriors was much feared, by the late-17th century, European scientific and technical advantages on the battlefield had made the Janissaries pretty much impotent. This fact drives an extraordinary amount of Arabic and Islamic sense of 'humilitation' at the hands of Christian Europe (Arabs apparently define 'humiliation' as anything other than their own victory and/or domination)." I would most certainly agree and up-date that to include the Arab League losses during the 1949 War of Israel independence and the 1967 6 day war. "The Islamic people may rightfully claim that in the 11th century AD, Islamic culture was more advanced and sophisticated, with more advanced science, mathematics, medicine and astronomy than Christian Europe. By the 18th century, the Islamic world lagged far behind Christian Europe in every one of these categories. Again, this fact fuels an extraordinary amount of Arabic and Islamic sense of 'humiliation' at the hands of Christian Europe." I would again have to agree. "The fact that Arabic/Islamic culture lags so far behind the Christian West in science, technology and industry also fuels a second source of division in the Arabic/Islamic world - as to how to address this fact - should Arabic/Islamic society modernize/liberalize/westernize in order to advance their standard of living or remain reliant on western technology and trade? Or close their doors and shut themselves off and pretend that its is still the 14th century?" Again I would agree. "The longstanding political-tribal factionism of Sunni vs Shi'ite complicates all political issues in the Middle East given that society in the Middle East is still primarily based on tribal clans - and every tribal clan is either Sunni or Shi'ite." I would not agree with the very last part. There are many clans that are not strictly Sunni or Shiite. I always spell it wrong but one example are the Amidyah Muslim people who have suffered much persecution from both Sunnis and Shiites. "The failure of the institution of government in the Middle East. Because there is no substantive concept or principle of 'nation-state' or 'good-government' or 'representative government' (or civil society for that matter) in the Islamic world, their governments have always been corrupt, disfunctional, arbitrary and self-serving. Enormous and systematic corruption is why the Ottoman Empire collapsed and the same level of endemic corruption has defined governments in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Turkey ever since. Indeed, it was corruption and incompetent government that brought down the old Caliphate and allowed the Ottomans to take over so many centuries ago. And it is endemic corruption of government throughout the Middle East to this day that makes any progress on any issue, almost impossible to achieve." I again agree. "The failure of nationalism. Nationalism is the method by which the Western nations forged themselves into coherent political unities known as nation-states. This is a very powerful, efficient and effective form of political organisation. In the Middle East, there is an irreconcilable difference between Turkish, Egyptian or Persian nationalism and Arab Islamicism. This is yet another fissure point in Middle East politics. This is often cited as the failure of pan-Arabism. Islamic culture (for the most part) does not admit of the validity of a secular state government." I again agree. "So there you have a list of some 'endemic' problems of the Middle East. " I think the above summary is unique. No one else that I know of has presented the above to date in this discussion of the conflict of the Middle East and I personally believe it is a very solid effort at trying to look at historic developments without making excuses but by providing cause and effect relationships. Where I might disagree is that I do not think Islamic society feels infeior to Christianity or Judaism or anyone else's civilization. I think they truly believe they are superior. "All of these issues and conflicts in the Middle East all predate the arrival of Western colonial power and/or Western military conquests of the 19th and 20th century." Precisely and it is the same reason, I would argue an attempt to blame the present day problems simply on Zionism is equally as invalid for the exact same reasons. "As I noted above, the arrival of Western powers directly into the Middle East during the last two centuries has served to magnify and/or intesify all of these long-simmering disputes and fault-lines in the region of the Middle East." Of course. They added fuel to the fire. But the question is-how long does anyone keep using the past as an excuse to remain entrenched and refuse to change and accept change? How long do we blame the British or French or Israelis or anyone else? How can one evolve and grow for the better if their hatred or sense of entitlement of victimization or failure or what-ever else you want to call it, prevents them from saying-o.k. enough with the violence, it has gotten us nothing, its time to be bold and take a chance as Sadat and Rabin did or Ghandi did or Martin Luther King did. "Btw, are familiar with the history of Islam and the Jews? They have always been allies and friends for the last 1300 years right up until the advent of Whabbism out of Saudi Arabia (with its own native form of militant anti-semitism) and Nazi's attempts to develop alliances with Turkey & Iran between WW1 & WW2. At that time, the Arabs acquired a virolent hatred of Jews and that pre-dates the establishment of Israel." Only partially true. There was anti-semitism and hatred directed at Jews by Muslims from the very time Muhammed preached at Medina and 300 Jews were killed for refusing to convert. The aparthetid system of dhimittude oppressed and led to massacres and hardships of Jews in the Muslim world during the above period. It was not all peaches and cream by any means but it was vastly different then with the anti-semtiism of Europe. In Europe it was constant. In the Muslim world it came in sporadic attacks and massacres and riots but certainly not over the same period of time and in the same level of intensity and rate of murder. However that is because Jews were forced to pay Muslims not to be attacked/ Under dhimmitude Jews were forced to pay for protection to Muslims so they would not be attacked and they werekept in ghettoes and treated as second class citizens and subject to discrimination and ridicule, were not allowed to own land, could notp serve as witnesses and testify when they were sued since they were considered infidel (so had to pay a Muslim witness to testify on their behalf often wiping them out trying t o defend aginst false accusations). Jews were not the allies of Muslims or their friends. They were considered to be inferior infidel to be quarantined. That said Sunni and Shiite Muslims also practiced dhimmitude on Christians and were not exactly tolerant of Hindus, Bahaiis, Zoroastreans, Amidyah Muslims, Buddists, either. "But my only point is that the Western powers did not make the Middle East into the mess it is - only contributed & complicated to the Arabic/Islamic mess that long existed there - and has certainly made the whole mess worse and harder than ever to resolve. " I agree, blaming it all on the British and French is too simplistic. I think the British handling of the League of Nations Mandate has very much to do with the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict but not the rest of the Middle East and is no longer an excuse-it has historic relevance to understand why certain situations exist today, but it does not mean it can be used as an excuse to justofy terror, coruption, inefficiency, etc. The billions of dollars in petro dollars could have been used to easily create a third Palestinian state and help create a strong economic community between the Muslim countries and Israel long ago. The decision to maintain a belief that the only solution is to wipe out Israel and run states with secret police forces and oppressive military juntas and Muslim clerical councils who are not interested in freedom of expression-the decision to slaughter balck Christians in Sudan or use people as slaves can not be blamed on the West. The decision to steal billions of aid money and not use it to create a Palestinian state lies with the corupted Fatah and the legacy of Arafat and his cronies. The current economic despair of the Gaza lies directly with Hamas' decision to destroy its economic infrastructure since it was funded by Israel and leave Palestinians with nothing rather then allow them to work side by side and cooperate with Israel. The choice to continue pursuing terror, broadcasting anti-semitism on the air and calling for the death of Christians and Jews, can not be blamed simply on the West or as some like to do the US or Israel. "Bottom line is that the mess in the Middle East is very much an Islamic issue. " There I might disagree a bit. I think the mess in the Middle East can be attributed to many failures in the Muslim world, but I will say the same about my own people (Jews) and Christians. All three of our societies have f..cked up. "They will do everything they can to blame the West for their own problems" No I will not engage in negative generalizations about ALL Muslims. I would agree with the above comments as it relates specifically to Muslims and Muslim clerics who subscribe to violence and terrorism or certain kinds of fundamentalism but I would be careful not to smeer all Muslims. "- and that is what they do all the time " They is a smeer word. It incites hatred against all Muslims. I am specific in saying "they" should read "Muslim terrorists" or "certain Muslims" or "certain Muslim clerics". "- while the Arab/Islamic rulers contintue their mis-rule, with all their corruption and inefficiency and violence towards their own people." On this last comment, I think saying the majority of Muslim countries right now are corupt and inefficient is not a stretch but again I would guard against it being used to incite hatred against Muslims as a people. The fact they have shitty governments may not be a deliberate choice on the part of Muslimst. It may be that many Muslims want peace but have no way to express such sentiments if in fact a vocal minority of violent Muslims prevent them from expressing themselves. In any event I think all of the above passages were distinct and refreshing and offer a new perspective to the same old good (Palestine) v.s. bad (Israel-US) scenario or the pvre-used to the point of nauseating blame it on British imperialism approach.

I think what you said is harsh but can not be dismissed. While I do not condone smeering and hating Muslims because of terrorists who claim to be Muslim, I think there is no doubt there have been a lot of phony politicians pandering for votes. A prime example is Carolyn Parrish in Mississauga. You may remember this fat cow as the former LIberal MP who stomped on a doll of George Bush. She deliberately pandered to her heavily Palestinian-Muslim constituency and still does as she is now an Alderman and continues her antics trying to pander their vote so she can become Mayor. I criticize politicians who pander but I do not think any of us have the right to start lashing out at Muslims. That is precisely what terrorists want-for you to react and retaliate against innocent Muslims. No I will not pretend Muslim clerics are NOT involved in the terrorism, but I will also state this still does not mean we can spit on the entire faith and people. There are bad Muslims and there are good Muslims. The fact that there are bad ones does not mean we should hate them all. That is b.s. As for the cowardly Muslim cleric who called for terror in Pakistan and then tried to sneak away dressed as a woman, I say-what did you expect and no do not blame all Muslims for this coward or for that matter Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc. Resist the urge. We need moderate Muslims to understand we do not hate them so they can trust us and help us defeat these idiots. Please don't expect moderate Muslims to have confidence in the rest of the world to know the difference between them and terrorists and want to help us, if we spend our time slurring ALL Muslims negatively. The terrorists want you to hate all Muslims precisely so you will not form an alliance with moderate Muslims and defeat them-and that is how they will be defeated-with an alliance of us and Muslims not us against all Muslims.

I think with each further soldier who dies, more and more Canadians will want Canada out and that is precisely what will fuel the Taliban to continue. Each time Canadians jerk react with fear, Taliban gets what it wants. The game being played is called attrition. Taliban is convinced over the long run Canada and the West will not stick it out. I question the tactics our troops use, not why they are there. I question using conventional armies as convoys incountries that can not be controlled physically on the ground because of the very nature of their geography. A conventional army can not fight Taliban and win in anything but short term, brief clashes with fragmented cells. I believe the way to defeat Taliban or other terrorists or guerilla insurgents is with elite, quick moving, disguised, commando units not openly visible conventional armies that search down and destroy terrorist sites wherever they may be. I think individual NATO countries decisions to keep their military units holed up in pockets avoiding confrontation has doomed the mission, pure and simple. I think as long as our troops are there and the mission remains as is-it is a suicide mission. Either change the mission guidelines or our people may continue to die. However if you want me to get on the public airways and broadcast to Taliban we tremble to fuel them into more attacks-forget it. I have too much respect for the military and their mission as flawed as I think it is to do that. Our troops know full well their lives are on the line and their mission may be defective but they are willing to pay the price so I will bloody well admire them and support them and if I have anything to say in the interim, it will be in the form of trying to change the mission to give them more help not abandon them. I would prefer to quietly debate and argue to change the mission's tactical operations, not squeel in panic jeopardizing the safety and security of soldiers still there. Jack Layton shut up long enough to understand there is a way to express opposition without doing so in such a shrill way that jeapardizes our troops. But we are a democracy and he is entitled to be a snively coward.

Now that's great reasoning. Canada should leave because when a woman is beaten we should just stand by and ignore her being beaten. O.k. got it. Thanks.

SOme people say either "God" is a creation of man or vice versa. I do not see these as two opposites and it must be one or the other. I see them both existing simultaneously. My personal believe is the alpha and omega just are and are not seperated and that the concept of seperation or either/or, is an illusion. So whether there is a God or not, I still believe humans have free will and so are responsible for their choices and the consequences of those choices. I see God and man as I do evil and good, life and death, men and women, inextricably connected but constantly in conflict. I believe the very built in nature of the need to harmonize or balance the conflict is what generates meaning or spiritual value or essence. I believe when Popeye the Sailor used to sing " I yam what I yam and dats all dats I yam, I'm Popeye dah Sailor Man, he was in fact describing the paradox of trying to define humans and God. Popeye was the good part of humans Brutus or Bluto was the bad part, Olive Oil was Eve and also a tremptress slut, Wimpy was the symbol for sloth and greed, and Alice the Goon and her followers were people possessed by demons. Spinach was symbolic for enlightenment or the truth or being honest and positive. So stop debating and watch old Popeye cartoons.

A God that would send people to hell is a Man made creation and necessarily defective in concept precisely for the reasons you stated and because it because it was conceived by inperfect humans. If there is a God it can only speak for itself, and anything we humans say on its behalf is presumptious to say the least and is simply subjective speculation and opinions being rendered by humans. I like your point. I have taken a variation of that arguement and had huge arguements with Rabbias over my concept of God not being as vengeful and angry as is depicted in the Old Testament and how I have problems with grumpy constipated old smelly men in beards telling me God is also grumpyand constipated. Me personally, I don't work well with concepts of a God that has it having temper tantrums, killing things in anger, or devisingthings to torture people. I believe evil is a man made creation not the creation of God, and the same free willl that causes men to be evil also gives us the ability to transcend it and be good. In that respect I agree with humanists that any hell or evil is what man makes and can prevent if he so chooses. I keep using the word "men" and "he" because I blame everything bad on men not women. I say this because I am married and have daughters and know better.

Dear Mr Muckyeck: Don't you want to succeed in life? Do you want to keep getting ignored or reported to the authorities? What if you could get: * 100s of replies? * 1000s of dollars? * 1,000,000s of respect from your partners in crime? I mean really...who is going to believe that someone simply "forgot" about $21 million dollars and that you want to hand it out to a stranger just because? You'd be more believable if you told me the local termite hill started spewing rand notes yesterday. Do you think people on the internet are stupid? Of course they are, but not that stupid! What would it be worth to you to be able to lick a stamp, put it on an envelope, and then sit back and wait for $1000s of dollars to roll in? Hi, I won't tell you my name, because if you're smart enough to take me up on this incredible offer, we'll be partners in crime, but I am going to do you the biggest favor in the world! What you are reading now could change your life! I taught Dan Kennedy and all the so-called "salescopy gurus" everything they know about selling through words! My sales pages on the net sell for $1000s of dollars each! What if you could spend $1000 and have a letter that would reap you 1,000,000s? Would it be worth it? What kind of return are you getting now? 1 out of 100? 1 out of 1000, and then even they get lost as soon as they get your next letter and find out it's a scam? Isn't it frustrating opening your email and finding...well...nothing except maybe an angry customer or two? What if you could get 25 out of 100? That's 250 out of 1000! What if they kept coming back for more? What if they sent you money without you even asking? What if your mailbox was crammed full of huge checks from unsuspecting marks? Every single day! What would that be worth to you? $1000? $10,000? Well, today is your lucky day! Because I like you and you're my friend, I'm going to give you the deal of your life! Not only will you get a phenomenal return on your scam letters, the respect of your peers, and new shoes, but you won't have to spend millions to do it! Not even thousands! Call me crazy, but I like you, so I'm going to share my amazing secrets with you for only $200! That's right, you read it right! $200 for a customized form letter gauranteed to have marks pleading to send you money! Imagine what it'll be like, stashing all those American dollars away and living like a king. And there's a bonus too! Not only will you get a phenomenal return on your scam letter, the respect of your peers, and new shoes, but once the first letters start to roll in, I'll take the worry out of your hands and handle all the correspondence for you for the same price! Each letter will cost you $200, but I guarentee 100% success or half your money back! That's right...a money back guarantee! This is a completely risk free investment for you! Not only will you get a phenomenal return on your scam letter, the respect of your peers, and new shoes, AND have all your worries taken away, but you get back your investment back if it doesn't work! How can you lose? Hah. Yah I am sick of them too! They met their match in you.

I debate you hard on Israel but you know I am standing right next to you on this.

Guess you don't watch the news much, eh? This is surely the most unknowledgeable claim so far on these boards. Scott back down. Two wrongs do not make it right and its cowardly for any of us men to take shots at visible minority women because of their appearance. Can we please walk away from this one? I am asking you because I respect your political opinions and not because I am sort sort of righteous twit. I just think it went too far and I don't think being rude to women for any reason is called for.

Terrorists deliberately seek to incite racism and polarization and insatability by making it impossible to tell the difference between an innocent person from a terrorist. Each time we see a terrorist act, we see reaction to it, and part of that reaction is to show anger an resentment by some of us to those we think are synpathetic to or think like terrorists. That is exactly what terrorists want-for you to go around hating Muslims, visible minority Muslims, etc. So you have a choice, take cheap shots at visible minority women or try act like decent human beings and if you are a man, have the decency to stop being a coward and taking pot shots at visible minority women because they dress differently. Now you want intelligent dialogue instead of yuck yuck darkie women humour here it is - the tragedy of terror, is that it makes it very difficult to screen for terrorists. It also makes it even more important, we stay cool when being screened and understand it is to look for terrorists. If you are a minority, you don't need me to tell you that for the rest of your life the colour of your skin or the way you dress makes you specifically targetted. All I can say is this - some of us do not think you are terrorists, do not ridicule you, and hope y ou understand we appreciate your cooperation so that if there is a terrorist using your appearance to hide themselves your cooperation can help catch them. As for the bafoons in Canada who think its funny to ridicule your dress or appearance, trust me, the first to ridicule do so because they feel inadequate and feel the need to compensate. Nuff said.

You sound typically Canadian. You complain about what is wrong, but you provide no suggestions on how to fix what you think is wrong. That to me is a very Canadian approach to social issues. What would you suggest to fix what you see is wrong?

Or busy training overseas! Golly, did I say training????....I mean busy touring overseas Betty you are in on it too. Believe me I know CIA when I see them. Now JBG you notice how silent he has been. Ahah. As for me, I can admit it now-my real name-Val. Val Putin. You see the fish I caught with Bush yesterday? The fool had someone swim under the boat and plant it on my hook. You guys are like so obvious man.