KrustyKidd

Seventy thousand of them within those borders with another eight hundred thousand in the immediate region ready to come 'home.'

Agreed. The Jews simply stayed where they were which was within those borders. Unlike the Arabs who attacked with the intent of killing every last man, woman and child. (the last part was not in the Resolution BTW)

I think the Jews liked the recommendation and the Arabs didn't. Oh well, back to the hate Israel thread starring you know who.

Which the Jews accepted, lived within those borders until attacked and, the Arabs refused from the very inception.

I agree my war mongering friend. We should have pushed onto Baghdad then and brought the present forward sooner. Dub Have you figures and percentages of how much military aid the US gave Saddam in comparison to other countries Dub?

Dub From your link Dub Does not 'spouses of Israeli citizens' mean anybody that is a spouse of a Jew or Muslim? Dub Holy. You went on about it yet never read your own link? I didn't bother as you were still stuck on your errant bullshit about how Saudi Arabia just loves Jews to become citizens there. Now I shall ....... Your link once again. It denies the right to nobody, just the law to those of Jewish descent to gain citizenship under this law. Under your reasoning, every Greek, Afro or ethnic organization which gives membership to fellow nationals is a racist organization. You certainly have your work cut out for you in order to call Israel racist when the entire world, by it's very nature of having people gravitate towards ethnic and religious organizations gives preference to those same people. Dub And Muslim unless of course, the Jew or Muslim is married to somebody in the occupied territories. Dub As are the other countries mentioned in your Wiki article. The same as Canada's policy which gives preference to refugees. Dub Oh, are you going to try to say that Israel immediately refused Resolution 181 again even though they did and, accepted it with Ben Gurion even saying yes - until the Arabs, who didn't accept it from minute one attacked en masse? Or single out Muslims rather the Jews for the law you yourself brought forward which states that it is discriminatory to Muslims when in actuality, it is equal to both? Or, will you now explain why you are the racist who, on every post on these forums is always pushing against Jews, Israel, Zionists and all ad nausea, even distorting facts as I showed above?

Is that why he was arrested and imprisoned by the government elected by the people of Iraq? Once again the people of Iraq have stated they wish the US to leave. Eighty niine. Roughly a third. Under Saddam none were elected asa elections did not take place. Wondering.......how many women dissenters are dragged from their homes and beheaded in front of family and neighbors after being branded as prostitutes?

Freedom to choose one's future is not always perfect but it is freedom and self determination. Under Saddam and sons, things would stay the same with on average, fifty thousand a year being killed by his antics. So, when one thinks of the tens of millions of yet to be born Iraqis that won't have to endure this regime over the next few generations, it makes your argument of immediate gratification mute.

This law applies equally to Jews who have married somebody from the OC. Hence, it is not racist.

I think he is more towards the center but, some of his actions do smack of being far left. Those would be virtual nationalization of a couple of auto makers complete with telling them what type of car they will make as well as a few banks, fear of rocking the boat by denouncing the repression of the Iranian people by a regime more brutal than the Shah ever was while those same people are dying to simply have their vote count, setting forth far left policies without a shmick of how to enact same and, gave away state secrets in an effort to appear transparent to the left only as long as those same secrets hurt the right,while keeping those other secrets that support the right, secret. As far as the main foreign policies go, he Bush all over again as he continues the same stategies set forth however, he is a new face that gives good speeches. If he continues and, nobody challenges him, he might pull it off. As for the contention he is far left, I agree, he is not. He simply used them to get to where he is.

So is being open minded and tolerent of others.

How about the hundreds of Jews who cannot bring their spouses or family members to Israel under the same law? and; From your link; Seems closer to the US and Canada than SA after all.

I showed a BBC article that states the contrary. There was in fact an official site that stated just that however, it is no more as the offensive policy has now been put out of sight while still remaining in effect. There are hundreds of agencies reporting on this and even the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act which demands action based on their official policy, which I imagine is law given the derogatory terms used in their government handbook (AKA the Koran) which states that Jews are subhuman beings in any nuber of passages. Rep Anthony Weiner brought the Accountability Act forth to President Bush and immediately, the offending web site took down the 'No Jews' portion of the official statement. As for there being any recanting of the policy itself, I have seen no proof have you? So, you can go on with Israel not allowing Muslims to become citizens however, at least they are allowed in the country. So yes, there is something in Saudi Official policy or law that says 'no Jews.' Unless of course you wish to call CNN, BBC, Weiner and a host of other witnesses wrong.

That is correct if you intended to mean the old man was Palestinians so, one must look to their own abilities to defend their children against attacks from the insecure old man until a pattern of normal behavior indicates he is trustworthy. Once that is accomplished then, negotiations and return of land can begin.

And rightfully so. As flawed as some may feel he is as a person, myself included, he was a fighter and, as a leader, he was respected by Israel. His preconditions for negotiations being return of land however, puts him in the realm of all those who fail to understand the fundamental and prime demand of Israel, be she right or wrong, that nothing happens unless their security is assured before any other consideration. A fact that few on this board understand.

I think he means that Israel, with western ideals, democratic indicators, economic vitality and fair human rights values is viewed by those in the region who's values are more basic and medieval along with low human rights and almost zero on the democracy scale view Israel with animosity for those reasons.

I make no excuses for Israel or acknowledgment. I only wish to correct a statement you made when you said "i'm sure in saudi there is nothing in their law saying "no jews"" I showed a BBC article that states the contrary. There was in fact an official site that stated just that however, it is no more as the offensive policy has now been put out of sight while still remaining in effect. There are hundreds of agencies reporting on this and even the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act which demands action based on their official policy, which I imagine is law given the derogatory terms used in their government handbook (AKA the Koran) which states that Jews are subhuman beings in any nuber of passages. So yes, there is something in Saudi Official policy or law that says 'no Jews.' Unless of course you wish to call CNN, BBC, Weiner and a host of other witnesses wrong.

Nor does it take into account how the Jews adhered to UN Resolution 181 and the Arabs, from, the outset blatantly refused it saying they would kill the Jews instead of adhering to it. He also ignores that the Jews observed the boundaries until the Arabs attacked them with the intent to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine.

I provided a link to a site which explains the story. It can also be found on the BBC Dub No it is not. You said In fact you are wrong. There is something in Saudi that says no Jews as I have twice now shown.

Not sure what your beef is with DOP's version of what happened. Way I see it, Iran was aligned with enemies of the West and, later, was influenced to stop further alignment with the USSR. I certainly prefer that to a situation possibly escalating to USA/USSR direct confrontation and nuclear war.

Say DOP, was it the official policy of the Confederate army to use their own women and children as human shields? If it were, it must have been very draining logistically speaking to feed them and haul them around from battle to battle. However, the propaganda (''evil inhuman Union firing on our innocent women and children'') would have been just great in order to get the left on their side.

I'm sure that DOP cares about Gaza and it's people but that does not mean that one has to approve of Hamas, their inhumanity to their fellow Palestinians and their ideology which is based on bigotry and hatred. On the other hand, to find nothing wrong with Hamas and blame everything incessantly on Israel is counter productive, as they are the ones who have to be sure of their own security before any progress is made.

You'd best get going Benny. Time for your Wapner.

Who switched?

Before, however, that's irrelevant as I as I am qualified to have an opinion of his views as I have seen and spoken with people from the various sides of this issue. He only speaks of the ill Israel does which is close minded and distorts what is happening. Therefore, if he were to speak ill of Hamas, that would be a diversion from his usual biased opinions.