Rue

Ergo Israel has no "right to exist." This brings me to a couple of Questions of my own: 1) Is Israel prepared to recognize the existence of a Palestinian State and establish permanant borders? Yes and that was the point of the Oslo Accord. They have repeatedly said yes to the above. 2) Is Israel prepared to renounce violence? The above question is a bit silly. No the Israeli Defence force would not need to strike back or do what it does if there were no terrorists. I would agree with you curtailing interaction between Palestinians and the Israeli defence Force is required if there is to be peace-but this can't come about until somehow the terrorists are imbolized or disarmed. The quickest way to neutralize or make the IDF redudant is to de-arm the terrorists. "Everybody came from somewehere else originally. How far back should we go?" The point is it no longer matters. Neither the Israelis or Palestinians have any place to go so dwelling on the past is meaningless. Its a fait accompli that neither side can go anywhere else. "Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own. " "Nonsense." That is where you and I disagree and where your credibility is shot. If you can not see this as a conflict between two equals, then you are part of the problem, not the solution. "My comment was totally on point: the same logic that entitles Jews to a homeland in Israel entitles me to a homeland in Ukraine. After all: my family came from there originally. You implicitly acknolwdge the legitimacy of my claim by saying that the Jewish people's historical roots in the Holy Land entitle them to a state there (absent from the equation is what's to be done with the people who were there before all the Jews showed up to claim their turf.)" I stated before and you completely ignored the point I made-you ARE already entitled by the law of return currently in effect in Ukraine to return and be granted Ukrainian citzenship. "Oh, I understand the religious connotations. But I don't care. What's happening in Israel/Palestine can be boiled down to a territorial conflict between different sky-god cults. In order to solve the problem, then, we should leave the man-in-the-sky out of it." You would have to apply that formula to both sides not just the Israelis as you have done over and over again. The Palestinian and Arab refusal to recognize the right of Israel to exist in a Jewish homeland flows directly from its Muslim religious precepts. I agree with you that both sides to find a solution must put the religions aside. "And I will continue to ridule anyone who can, with a straight face, claim this bit of land or that because of a promise made by their invisible sky friend two millenia ago because such a claim is inherently ridiculous." No more ridiculous then the Ukrainian Christian concept of Jesus being God and no more ridiculous then anything advocated by Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or any other religion. If yous top being selective and only criticizing concepts from Judaism and criticize all religions equally, I might take you seriously. Your selectivity at only criticizing Judaism smells of the kind of Christian self-righteousness and hipporcracy when talking about other peoples' faiths that caused this mess in the first place.

Neither necessarily are Estonians brave enough to confront their fascist past. Please don't suggest if you are anti-fascist you are automatically a communist or for that matter automatically a supporter of Stalin. My comment is not directly at you personally, I say it rhetorically.

You missed the point of the original post. Estonia has a fascist past. Changing the subject and saying Stalin was evil or the Soviet invasion was evil does not change or excuse the fascism that was prevalent in Estonia and crippled its people. Estonia is a new nation. If it is to be a true democracy it must not hide behind its hatred of the Soviet Union to avoid dealing with its fascist past. That is what this poster is saying. He is part of a new generation of Estonians that are trying to be honest about their past and do not excuse what the Soviets did but will not hide from their fascist past as well. Both past eras brought with them anti-democractic totalitarian tendencies that enslaved the people of Estonia. I pray the young generation of Estonians is brave enough to confront the fascist elements within their society. I am positive they can do it as they struggle to build a new vision for their nation.

"Dear ladies and gentlemen! If events what are going on now in the world are not indifferent to you, help to remind how fascism is terrible to reporters and members of parliament, who started to forget it! All information about fascism propaganda in Estonia you can find on a site www.bronze-soldier.com " I am appreciative of your willingness to stand up to fascism in Estonia. As a Jew who worries that the next generation will not remember what happened in Europe, I applaud people like you.

"And, as Figleaf rightly points out, the geographical origins of the Jewish people is irrelevant at best. " Blackdog it is not irrelevant. For you it is because you are selective as to what you want to consider about Jewish history. You are deliberately subjective and selective because you don't want to consider it relevant that as much as you would like to portray Jews as Europeans, they come from Israel and the Middle East originally. That is the point. Selectively revising Jewish history I expect of Figleaf-you I would expect more out of. "What's more:if the Jews have the right to the land based on some historical connection to the land, then surely the Arab peoples they evicted can claim the same "right of return." Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own. The problem is it would not be practical to allow a right of return for the children or children's children of those Palestinians displaced the same reason it is impossible to do the same for the children or children's children of the 700,000 Jews thrown out of the Muslim world after 1949 or with those descendants of the Jews who left Europe after the holocaust. Can we stop with this b.s. about law of return. Its absolute b.s. Let's talk reality. We have two peoples who are going nowhere and the inevitable is they either learn to live side by side or groups like Hamas can keep living in a world where they still think they can wipe out Israel and kill Jews world-wide as well as non Jews world-wide until this is achieved. "Of course, the same logic would entitle me to a piece of Ukraine because of my ancestral connection to that place and entitles us all to a little bit of Africa due to humanities' origins there." The above comment is idiotic. If you were thrown out of the Ukraine and now want to return, would you please use the brains you have and read up about the current laws in the Ukraine which are attempting to accommodate Ukrainians who want to return. As for your comment about Africa-do you think making an idiotic comment that misses the point is debating? If you have a spiritual or religious connection to Africa then go back. No one is stopping you. Your comment equating the Jewish religious belief of its covenant with God to live in Israel with your smarmy comment about human origins in Africa is childish. You completely ignore the religious connotation and context and in so doing ridicule a central precept of Judaism. Its tiresome. If you can not understand the link in Judaism between God, the Jewish people and the land of Israel, then simply say so-don't ridicule it.

I don't see what any concept of 'originally' hailing from has to do with anything. Congratulations "Figleaf". At least you're seeing the light of day. That means the "Palestinians" have no vested rights, and we should all head back to the Great Rift Valley of Africa, then re-sort where everyone lives. JBG why would you engage in dialogue with someone who has repeatedly made it clear what his feelings towards all Jews are and has made it clear he is not interested in any dialogue unless it is to make negative generalizations or misrepresentations about Jews. Save your energy for someone interested in an opinion other then his own. You are just giving this person a platform and oxygen for his fire.

It's a very poor analogy for reasons that should be self-evident. Hamas, unlike yours truly, is a major player in the internal politics of Palestine. Somehow geting them onside would be a significant step towards peace, especially if Israel was somehow able to get them to crackdown on other, smaller factions. Blackdog you talk like some snot nosed little private school kid., Get a grip with reality. Hamas is a terrorist organization. It has no interest in peace, or negations with Israel. It has said time and time again its mandate is to wipe out Israel and replace it with the state of Quds. You can repeat this nonsense that people shoud talk with Hamas but it is just that nonsense. Hamas does not want to talk. Its easy for you to say talk with people who are not interested in talking and only interested in terror, but its nonsense. Until they denounce their charter and make it clear they are ready to talk and not pursue violence your repeating people should talk with them is ridiculous. Enough already pretending they are nice people.

That't the most ridiculous nonsense I've heard in a long time. Jews being anti-semitic to one another???? Jews hating Jews because they are Jewish? It sure looks like some people around here are intent on destroying any possible meaning in the term 'anti-semitic'. Figleaf do you ever read what you write? Do you ever think about what you write? Is your brain that inflexible when you hear something you can't understand all you can do is call names and go into blanket denial? The fact that you can't understand something doesn't make it ridiculous. Sit and read this slowly. The fact that one is black doesn't mean they can't be racist. The fact that someone is Jewish doesn't mean they can't be anti-semitic. Many Gay people are homo-phobic. Many women hate being women. Figleaf you really do have to try get out more or read or do something to challenge your brain into not being so rigid and all or nothing about concepts.

http://www.ameu.org/page.asp?iid=35&aid=427&pg=9 Concluding remarks by the Israeli Historians from the Univrsity of Haifa, Israel, who have done a indepth research and analysis of the history, over the last 50- 60 years and have concluded the Zionist redition that has been fostered over the years is incorrect. Well that settles it. Gosh and here I was thinking it was more complicated then that. Thanks for pointing this out. I will start calling up Israelis I know immediately and tell them to leave given the "new" way of thinking. That God people like you are so modern and "new" age in your approach to things.

["I appreciate your posts Rue, you state the facts and opinions clearly." "The phenomena of rising anti-semitism is not only outside of Israel, it is on the rise in Isrqael,by people who have come from the Soviet Union. Yael Bernovsky Published: 02.12.07, 14:41 / Israel Culture" "Anti-Semitism? In Israel? Everyone is very worried about the rise of anti-Semitism around the world, yet recently there have been many headlines about anti-Semitic incidents here in Israel. Swastikas painted onto synagogues, desecration of headstones - these are no longer the legacy of the Jew in exile. The latest serious incident occurred in Bat Yam, where a group of teenagers burned an Israeli flag and mezuzahs. " Yes within and between Jews there can be anti-semitism. Absolutely. I personally believe the problem within the Jewish communities is no different then say the schisms within the Christian or Muslim sects. It doesn't excuse them but no Jews are not a homogenous people and never have been. Speaking for myself, a very reconstructionist/liberal Jew, I have had some tough experiences with more fundamentalist and orthodox Jews and even my own Rabbia in Toronto who made me decide to leave my synagogue! Being Jewish is often most hard with other Jews. Within Israel society there has always been a difference between the arab or Tsfardic Jews and Ashkenazi or European Jews. The cultures are quite different. The Russian Jewish community ranges from ultra-orthodox to complete atheist to leftist liberal to right wing ultra conservative. Russian Jews have not mixed well with Arab (Tsfardic) Jews or Ethiopian Jews. Your point that Jews can be anti-semitic to one another is of course true whether it be in Israel our outside Israel. I personally believe the most ardent anti-semites are not just your usual Nazi-aryan Brotherhood KKK types, but people claiming to be Jewish but anti-Israel. Some of the worst anti-semites have been Jews when discussing Israel engaging in attacks against all Jews and Judaism as a religion. Like all minorities, a portion of the Jewish people can be self-hating. Self-hating minorities come about because they feel if they are very critical of themselves or what they perceive as their Jewish characteristics, this will make them acceptable to others. Jewish anti-semites in the Soviet or other Communist parties was not uncommon. Today I take great sadness in seeing not only Jews act viciously against one another in Israel but outside Israel in the name and guise of being anti-Zionist but in fact being self-hating. Your post brings up a painful and fair comment and a complex one that is an important part of this discussion. As for those posters who constantly feel guilty about criticizing Israel-may I say one more time as a Jew I am not stupid, I know people have the absolute right to disagree or challenge Israeli policies. I do. That was never the point. Avoiding making negative generalizations about all Jews when engaging such dialogue is the point. Using the same reasoning and standard, I personally will nto demonize and insult all Muslims or talk about them in a negative way because I disagree with what some of their governments do or because of what some Muslims may say or because of terrorists who claim to be Muslim-I do not do this because I don't think its right to do it about Christians, Jews, Muslims, Gays, or anyone. No I appreciate those posters who debate against Israel but do so without insulting all Jews or making generalizations against all Jews. I have had some heated debates with Black Dog about Israel or Myata but I n ever for one moment thought either ever were doing anything but debating as best they could and doing so with total respect. Israeli and Palestinian policies both need to be criticized. How else can we learn or how else can we share ideas.

Of course not. How many Jews do you need to assure you of this and how many times?

I loved their album but I could give a flying f...ck about their politics. I love their music but thanks I do not need them lecturing me on politics. I can't stand people who use their celebrity status to lecture us on politics as if they have something intelligent to say. The Dixie Chicks are great musicians but does that give them the right to lecture me about politics-NO! So all the celebrities can shove it when it comes to acting self-righteous with me. That said, Natalie Maines needs to go on a diet. As long as she looks like a fat little twit no one will take her seriously. The two othe Dixie Chicks I dig. In this world if you want to be self-righteous then at least be cute. I can't stand fat ugly people who feel the need to compensate for being fat and ugly. You hear me Al Gore? You hear me Mr. Baldwin? Richard Gere I do not mind. The Sister Theresa act of Madonna or Angelina Jolie makes me puke. I can not stand filthy rich people who feel guilty about their wealth thinking if they lecture me it makes them o.k. Just shaddup and give your money to charities if you feel guilty and spare me the lectures. Now excuse me but Britanny Spears shaved her head and looks like a Buddhist monk or angry Lesbian. Take your pick.

The pattern has become all too familiar. Osama bin Laden, the leading suspect as mastermind behind the carnage of September 11, is no more (or less) "evil" than his fellow creations of our CIA: Manuel Noriega, former commander of the Panama Defense Forces until George Bush père in late 1989 invaded his country and kidnapped him, or Iraq's Saddam Hussein, whom we armed and backed so long as he was at war with Khomeini's Iran and whose people we have bombed and starved for a decade in an incompetent effort to get rid of him. These men were once listed as "assets" of our clandestine services organization. Let us also not forget Gamel Abdel Nasser and my good buddy Mummar (Moe) El-Kaddafi. The CIA also approached Fidel Castro and make a deal before that unshaven commie said no. Then there were other wonderful people like Gen. (Gus) Pinochet in Chile and Samoza in Nicaragua. Some stooges turn on you, others do your bidding and others get kicked out. All part of the game of trying to control countries and turn them into client states.

I have always felt that until Canadians stop worring about what the US or anyone else thinks about us, we will continue to be a bunch of wusses. Who cares that Bush forgot to mention Canada....are we that insecure that when this man forgets our country we get upset? Are we that insecure? Do we lack that much of an identity we depend on the US President to tell us who we are and what we do? I could care less what Bush forgets to say. Bush's acknowledgment is not what makes me feel I am Canadian and no I don't lose sleep over what he says. I mean for heaven's sake this man has stuck his foot up his butt in one continuous motion since he was elected. Enough with this woe is me America forgot us b.s. Enough with this does the world like us b.s. Why must Canadians be so wussy about worrying what people say about us let alone the U.S. Next we will have Stephen Harper go on Tyra Banks shiw to tell her how sad he was George forgot us? (I chose Tyra because her thighs are even bigger then Ophrah's these days and I feel sorry for her-I always though her head looked like a big swollen light bulb)

Tell you what. If you look in a gravy stain and want to see the Virgin Mary, you will find her. Sounds like that is what you are doing. Sorry, I just see a stain.

You have demonstrated in past posts that; 1-you are not interested in any dialogue as to the above questions; 2-use such questions as a platform to ignore the responses and make negative subjective generalizations with no basis of fact against all Jews; 3-deliberately mistate Jewish history. I would advise people responding to you is pointless.

My my, what a comfort. Such a generous timeframe, when dealing with lives and explosives. About 3 times the time necessary for an evacuation and a 1/4 of the time needed to defuse a bomb.....mind you, palestinian terrorists give ample warning too, unfotunately the warnings sound exactly like an arab asking for tahini on the falafel...hence the civilian fatalities You hit the nail on the head. The Irgun, as despicable a group as they were, aimed at primarily a military target and even then tried to minimize loss of life. The goal of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is quite the opposite. With due respect you are trying to raise your voice to a deaf man.

My my, what a comfort. Such a generous timeframe, when dealing with lives and explosives. About 3 times the time necessary for an evacuation and a 1/4 of the time needed to defuse a bomb.....mind you, palestinian terrorists give ample warning too, unfotunately the warnings sound exactly like an arab asking for tahini on the falafel...hence the civilian fatalities You hit the nail on the head. The Irgun, as despicable a group as they were, aimed at primarily a military target and even then tried to minimize loss of life. The goal of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is quite the opposite. Ahh, that's the difference then! Irgun merely killed people with bombs, whereas Hamas has KILLED PEOPLE WITH BOMBS. Or maybe the difference is Hamas has a grievance whereas Irgun had an agenda. Its precisely people like the above that cause me and many others to be careful when we engage in any dialogue critical of Israel. We realize posters such as the above have a singular agenda to simply state Israel is "wrong" or "evil" . We weigh our words so we do not have to get into ludicrous debates with such people whose sole interest is to deny the existence of Israel and portray all Jews not just Israelis as evil.

Thank you. That was the point. I am Jewish and I criticize certain Israeli policies and most certainly criticize Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. However when I engage in criticism against Israel I take great care because I know non-Jews will use it as a pretense to justify demonizing Israel and try twist my words around to do just that. The issue whether one is Jewish or non Jewish when criticizing Israeli policy is exactly the same. Criticizing Israeli policies is a fair and democratic thing to do and no one is questioning that. What people and not just Jewish people challenge is when people claim to be criticizing Israeli political, economic or social policies but in fact; i-engage in negative generalizations against all Jews ii-state Israel is evil iii-deny Israel has the right to exist iv-promulgate misrepresentations against the Jewish religion v-promulgate misprepresentations as to the history of Israel, history of Jewsand the origin of Jews vi-use debates against Israeli policies to express hatred towards all Israelis or all Jews. So please do not try tell me a Jew, that I worry when other Jews get mad at me for criticizing Israel or suggest that we Jews can't handle fights between ourselves as to the future of Israel. Thank you very much but we can handle freedom of speech and dialogue. The very pith and substance of being Jewish is to question everything and anything.

"And you may want to check if you didn't already happen to know that East Jerusalem is an occupied territory." East Jerusalem is not an occupied territory. Jerusalem is not and never was a territory. Why don't you at least make appropriate historical and political references. The area in Jerusalem was to be an international city. The League of Nations had a mandate to create a state for Jews and then work with the Jews and Muslism in the area to create an international city. The British breached their promise to the Leage of Nations to create a Jewish homeland and unilaterally seized 80% of Palestine and created the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan which they awarded to one of two Princes of today's Saudi royal family as pay back for fighting for the British in their victory against the Turks in World War One. Britain also created another artificial state, Iraq and gave it to the other son as pay-back and the French carved out Lebanon and Syria leaving Jews and left-over Muslims in what is now Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. Get your history straight. Jordan illegally seized East Jerusalem just as they did the West Bank. Teh West Bank and East Jerusalem was never a territory. A territory is a politically defined land. The West Bank and Gaza remain undefined although the practical effect of Oslo and current arrangements is that the PLO and Hamas are fighting for control of them. East Jerusalem was taken by the Israelis after the 1967 war in an act of self-defence only after Jordan massed troops on its borders with Iraq and Syria preparing to invade Israel. Until the time of Israel's taking over East Jerusalem it is a fact the Jewish sites were destroyed. Muslims defecated, urinated and destroeyd Jewish sites and stripped precious antiquities selling them to tourists and on the black market for pittance. That Sir is a fact. "To start messing around a holy site without consultation with the other side, especially given the situation with mutual trust between the parties, is to ask for a trouble." You are dead wrong. Not only did they advise and consult with Mulsim clergy they still are as we speak. do your homework. "To the rest of your post, it's of course plain ridiculous to compare responsibilities of a government in an occupied territory with that of countries which have full control over its territory and resources." The PLO and Hamas have full control over the West Bank and Gaza. You again are talking pure drivel. You are mistaking the fact that Israel sends in its troops to go after terrorists with the fact that the PLO and Hamas administer the West Bank NOT Israel. "I do not believe that the site in question actually is under the control of the PA - it's being occupied by Israel, against international law." You are wrong again twice. For starters the West Bank is undefined territory so your legal contentuion it is against international law for Israel to go into the West Bank after terrorists is b.s. Under international law, Israel has the right let alone the moral obligation to create and maintain safe borders and if that means going into the West bank to prevent terrorist attacks it will. Israel's troops do not occupy the West Bank. That is b.s. They are in particular sites and for the most part have no contact with the Palestinians in the West Bank. Secondly you can deny all you want that the PLO was given full administration of the West Bank but your denial is absurd. It is a fact. Now Myata let us deal with reality not your selective distortion of what you want to be true. The Muslim world and Palestinian groups have routinely accused Israel of threatening Muslim holy sites for decades. It is a tiresome propaganda exercise turned to time and time again and it works with people like you who are not interested in what is really happening. They have been doing this since the 1920's when the Mufti of Jerusalem back then first used this tactic to incite riots for political reasons. If you bother to research this latest alleged crisis you will find it started last year when Sheikh Mohammad Hussein, the director of the Al-Aksa Foundation, made false accusations that Israel is excavating under the Temple Mount with the intention of destroying the Al-Aksa mosque (Palestinian National Authority, Dec. 13, 2005) and now this is being parroted by the Iranian government, Hamas, Hezbollah and the usual line-up of Muslim extremists. This charge is a complete fabrication. Its made up. Its fiction. The most recent construction in fact deals with the development of a new visitors centre built around new findings excavated near the Western Wall and now a path. These discoveries at the new site include a ritual bath from the period of the second Jewish Temple which was destroyed in 70 AD. They also found a wall archaeologists speculate dates back to the first Jewish Temple, said to have been destroyed in 586 BCE. Work has been done in the tunnel area that has now been open to tourists for several years. The tunnel area is NOT underneath the Temple Mount and nowhere near the Al-Aksa mosque! In fact the Sheikh is upset because he feels the centre will and I quote his words; “show a fabricated heritage that might help them to deceive foreign visitors into believing Jerusalem as a historical place of the Jews". If you want to deal with what is actually happening you will find the Israeli government's archeological excavations near the Temple Mount have been done with great care prior to replacing a derelict bridge which will provide the public with safe access to the Temple Mount. The Palestinain Hamas Leader Haniyeh is deliberately fabircating stories for pure propaganda purposes and it works in the sense that young people like Ahab get all wound up without bothering to do any research. Well it works on the Ahabs of this world who get caught up in a hate frenzy. The Mount has been administered by the Muslim Waqf who allowed this pillaging. All that is happening is the simple replacement of an access bridge to the Mount. No more no less. Uh hello. In case anyone has not noticed, Jews were not allowed to pray at the Temple Mount until 1967 when the IDF had to seize rightful access. It was the Muslims who chose to destroy the Jewish Temple and build on top of it. At this time, Jewish people are relegated to the Western Wall below and not allowed unfettered access to the Mount because of the intolerance and hateful reactions including stone throwing by the Muslims. By thwe way a UPI reporter Joshua Brilliant attended the Foundation press conference during which a misleading film was shown trying to fake the charges. This journalist then investigated the tunnel and found no evidence of any excavation in the direction of the mosque.

"That's BS. The collective rights of an ethnic group? Can you come back and speak to me when you reach the 20th century at a minimum in your thinking?" Uh hello its the 21st century and yes I am not sure what century you are in but the one I am in has thousands of case and legal precedents of decisions awarding collective rights to people based on their group identity. "What laws are based on racism?" if you have to ask that, well perhaps that is precisely what the problem is. Until you sit down and figure that one out, you just don't get the rest, let alone how the real world and law works. "Just because one race breaks them more often than others, doesn't mean it's racism," Now I love that logic. Just because the Canadian government and before them the British government breached treaties signed with the aboriginal nations, doesn't make it racist. Uh hello, the treaties were breached precisely because it was conceived that aboriginals were not equal to whites and therefore breaking treaties with them was not significant since they were not white. Again if you can't understand that you really do need to sit down and read some history books. "maybe there is a problem in how we've treated them, and it's biting us in the ass. Time to treat them like every other race." Biting US in the ass. Its not biting anyone in the ass. Your comment that it is time to treat "them" like everyone else is typical of thevery weakness in your arguement and summed up in the above sentence. You want the Canadian government to simply abandon its legal obligations because its not convenient for you. "I really can't believe how thick headed some are on this. It's pretty simple. Everyone has equal rights, no more, no less.Be done with it." Do you read what you right? Talk about "thick-headed". where is the logic in your comment that everyone has equal rights when in the same breath you say, when the aboriginals seek to be treated as equal you don't want them to be treated as equals and you want to simply forget the rights we took away from them when when we imposed inequality. How can they be equal if we follow your logic and permanently prevent them from achieving their equality. You don't want equality, you want to permanently absolve the Canadian government from having to be equal to aboriginal nations. "None of the current living Indians were likely around when those documents were signed, so ya, their lineage gives them the right to what those obligations are. Stupid stupid stupid. " When someone inherits money from their father and they are dead, it is passed on in their estate to their children and so on. When you use the word stupid, stupid,stupid, with due respect that is what you are if you can't understand the basic rules of inheritance. "Using 100 year old documents and empty rhetoric is how apartheid was maintained in South Africa as well." Now you really are getting embarassing. Whether a document is a eyar old or 500 years old doesn't make it invalid. The law does not automatically say contracts are no longer enforceable unless the contract or treaty spefically states a limited time period and defines an expiration date. So again you are completely wrong about trying to suggest because a treaty is old it is not valid. That is truly absurd. Then what gets even mroe absurd is you state aboriginals are akin to the whites in South Africa. I mean read what you right man. Its past the point of being able to debate you coherently when you suggest aboriginals are racist because they were placed on reservations, had their treaties breached, had their land stolen, were forced into reservations (uh hello bantulands!) and had Christians try force their religion on them in between molesting them or trying to kill them off. Your attempt to selectively ignore history, then rewrite it to suggest the aboriginals are the oppressors for wanting the law to compensate them for damages that directly flow from the Canadian governemnt's breaching of legal treaties not only makes no legal sense its transparent. What this comes down to is not logic, not legal reasoning, simply your subjective desire to ignore history and permanently erase what happened to allow the current Canadian government to escape its legal and moral responsibilities. The Supreme Court of Canada has already made it clear it will not ignore the aboriginal peoples' collective rights and will endevour in an orderly manner to do its best to try find proper legal solutions to address the breaches. Man I love your logic. Using your logic, the Swiss banks should just keep all the stolen money from the victims of the holocaust. The millions of people who have been able to successfully win class action law suits should give all their money back. We should have no collective bargaining system. For that matter we should have no criminal laws since criminal law is based on collective rights of society. That is the absurd conclusion of your position.

I don't think most Canadians appreciate how much Fonda is hated by the majority of Viet Nam vets, regardless of their feelings about being in that war. Jane needs a new movie.

Lyndon Larouche's theories are so passe. Can you not find a new paranoid narcissist socio-path to follow. Here's a list you may wish to consider in no particular order; Mats Sundin Tom Cruise Rosie O'Donnell Hilary Clinton The Olson Twins Paris Hilton Lindsay Lohan Nicole Richie Paula Abdul Issiah Washington Adolph Hitler Vince Carter or Vince Carter's mother Bud Selig Gary Bettman Dick Chaney Madonna Robert Pickton

Get a grip. Aside from you and perhaps some of your relatives, no one else cares. I suggest an anti-depressant.

The legality of homosexuality or gay marriage was never determined by referendum, by Canadian citizens. So because of this, I prefer to remain biased against homosexuals and their lifestyles. Only if the majority of Canadians voted in favour of homosexuality would I be more likely to accept that type of behavior. This is what I feel the minimum requirement would be in order to form 'personal principles' in this particular instance. Well may I say you have proven wihout a doubt what a putz you are. You need a referendum to tell you discriminating against people and hating them for being different is wrong? Good grief. If you can't see how ridiculous such a statement is, no referendum can help you.