Ontario Loyalist

Well, he's obvious all to willing to accept at face value the stories his Indian friends tell him around the camp fire...

Your responses simply bespeak a comprehension problem on your part, and discussing this issue has become a real exercise in futility. Until you can grasp the concept of "sanitize" and "censor" in terms of how they apply to the media, and how violence, bloodshed, and death are portrayed in the western media, you're wasting my time. Oh, indeed, I should be very careful...

No, Germany does not have the "exact same law of return"... Germany's law applies to ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe and basically is intended to rectify an historic wrong that was committed by various east European nations, most prominent being the SOVIET UNION. As for Israel: "The Law of Return declares that Israel constitutes a home not only for the inhabitants of the State, but also for all members of the Jewish people everywhere - be they living in poverty and fear of persecution or in affluence and safety." (wikipedia) Whatever the case, this discussion is about radicalization brought on by adverse political/social conditions, not the "law of return".

Which one...? You still haven't clarified which one's the right one... Besides, what difference does it make? If the court rules against your side, you'll simply consider it to be not valid. Otherwise, it's set in stone...

Yeah, and I guess the point that you're missing is that the Confederate States, Japan, and Germany were all pushed into positions where radicalism became a viable option and eventually gained control.

If you're the best that SN can do for support from among "whites" their's is a lost cause indeed...

I think that the issue here is the fact that western media tends to sanitze and censor what it reports so it isn't so graphic, and you just basically substantiated my argument by claiming that "Arab TV is more sensational". The big question is whether your deliberately or by nature this obtuse.

Interesting book you micht want to read: http://www.sc.edu/uscpress/Fw00/3363.html

Oh, so you're agreeing with me... Revisionist, eh? Well, they did kill 91 people in one bombing in a region (at the time) with about maybe 1/100th the population of the USA in 2001. And that was just one of numerous attacks that they carried out. Politically, the Irgun is perpetuated by the Likud party, and militarily by the IDF. So they've been peeping quite a bit for the last "over 50 years".

So where did I claim that I'm an expert? Or is that just a pathetic attempt at a red herring? It would seem to me, though, that if you've seen people who have been killed by a bomb, you would recognize that they weren't shown on that video. As I said before, the Arab media is much more graffic when it comes to showing dead and mutilated bodies; western media sanitizes and censors a great deal.

The website deals with "arab sponsored terrorist attacks" and fails to even mention anything about Jewish terrorist activites like Irgun. Moreover, it claims that the genesis of the problem was an attack in 1920, when in actuality the conflict between the two sides goes back way further. That website is as biased as it gets, and I'm sure you would be crowing about bias in an instant if someone posted a similar website focusing solely on Jewish terrorism.

Yes, I agree, that's what Israel should do. They've escalated the situation, and whenever that happens, there's potential for the problem to get worse. Geez, there even be an ARMAGEDDON or something... The bombing of Nazi Germany was after the war determined to have actually strengthened Germany's resolve. All bombing schools and civilians--regardless of who they voted for--is going to solidify support for the radical elements in Gaza and breed a new generation of terrorists.

Care to make sense?

Yeah, too bad bombs don't discriminate when it comes to who they kill, ie. who those people voted for. I think many people in Gaza are in a situation where they are prone to figure they have nothing to lose, and they'll readily buy into radical ideas. We've seen it happen before, of course--Nazi Germany, remember? Is it not sad that the then victims have become victimizers?

You're claiming that my assertion is false using a viedo that I was referring to. Actually, that video is an excellent example of how the media is sanitized because people who are KILLED by bombs aren't usually intact as those people were. Seems to me you have a serious comprehension problem. That video was taken in October 2007, and is not all that clear what's going on there or where that is. It could be anywhere.

The irony is, that this is the conclusion that JBG draws about anyone who is against Israel agrression...

The world that they created is something that you benefit from every day. Unless you prefer that people die by the age of 40 from a whole host of illness we now longer worry about, eat meals made of maggoty corn mush and rotting deer jerky, and engaging in never ending inter-tribal warfare, then I suggest you have no reason to complain about what Canada is--one of the most peaceful and prosperous countries in the history of human civilization. Funny how some people just can't stand that, and in order to fulfill their anarchist agenda, they have to gravitate to the cause of peoples who never could have accomplished what Canada has become.

I've read more than one account of how back in the 20s and 30s young men would find work on farms during the summer to pay their way through university. It's not pleasant work or high paying, but it is good and honest hard work and I regret now not having the desire to do something like this when I was younger. There needs to be some sort of program in order to promote this alternative and give potential workers some incentive. In a country country of 30 million, that we need to import 11,000 migrant workers is ridiculous...

Why are you even contesting this? The report that I was watching recently about the Israels bombing SCHOOLS and killing upwards of 30 people (children, mostly) didn't show any decapitated bodies or shredded limbs or gaping wounds. The western media's censorship really is to Israel's (and your) benefit... I would certainly have expected some sort of admission/explanation as to your supposed Christian faith, but I suppose your silence and need to resort to ad hominem attacks is clear enough...

I don't know, how many Palestinians deaths "warrant a response"... As per my response to Fortin, really don't see the point. You profess to be a Christian, or at least go to church, so you should understand why the concepts of "though shalt not kill" and "turn the other cheek" are core to Christ's teachings. Nevertheless you choose to take sides and approve of violence and death is beyond me. I suppose you've spent much of your Bible study time misinterpreting the Old Testament (like so many others)... As Jesus said: "Fool" [Matthew 23:17], [Matthew 23:29], [Luke 11:40], [Luke 24:25] Western media rarely shows dead and maimed people; this is a well-known fact, so it's curious why you would refer to it as "pure nonsense"... well, actually, I guess it shouldn't come as much of a surprise...

I see no point in entering a discussion with someone who can look back no further than the most recent acts of violence. My guess is that there's some Muslim somewhere on a message board: "So how should Palestinians respond? Should they live with Israeli aggression?" This is why this problem persists, because there are so many people like you who just can't step back and look at the situation objectively.

Right, so as usual any criticism of what a Jew or Israel is anti-Semitism... The irony about Israel is that it is a (secular) state founded largely by secular Jews using a historical "sacred" religious entitlement to a land that they legitimately LOST two millenia ago, and some of who's early leading elite were members of terrorist organizations.

There are various ways of doing that, though. Moreover, if you have a population that is largely native-born and who grow up and are educated in a given society, they tend to have a stronger connection to the nation and a more successful jobs and socially. But where is the incentive for native-born people when immigrants can simply come in and slot themselves into higher positions, and where's the national unity and will when immigrants centre their lives around their "communities"...

Honestly, you're not here to have a serious discussion if you refer to people who disagree with you as "red neck"...

Well, in terms of Italians, yes, I do think that it is somewhat of a problem. Try not jumping to conclusions that I'm being specific of non-white ethnicities. Also, "Muslim" isn't an ethnic group... Canada tends to accept high-skilled and professional immigrants. They have money. I'm not saying that all people who enter Canada do. Honestly, when Canadian-born people are sending out hundreds and hundreds of resumes and searching for jobs for years, why should I care. If you have any understanding about Canadian immigration history, you'd know that the vast majority of immigrants back in the 1800s and early 1900s had similar problems relative to the type of industry that existed then. But many of them, when they couldn't find work or hack it at farming, would find whatever work they could... A lot of gang activity though occurs as a result of the occurence of gang culture in the immigrant population. The Italian and Jewish mafia had roots in the Old World, and Asian gangs originate in Asia and are not the result of supposed racial discrimination in Canada. Part of the disconnect that immigrants feel is their fault, though; if they come to an English-speaking country, then they should be abile to speak English, and they should want to be Canadians and put Canada first. But in many cases this is just not the case.