KeyStone

Give it a year. Obama is better than Bush, but by how much. Ultimately, Obama is still American, still grew up with the pro-American propaganda and still puts American rights ahead of human rights. The US system is corrupt through and through. Even if he's not corrupt now, he will be soon enough. Clinton was certainly no saint or saviour despite all the ballyhoo about him.

Well... "Under international law, white phosphorus is banned for use near civilians, but is permitted for creating a smokescreen." Gaza is one of the most populated areas in the world. So, hard to imagine that there is anywhere it can be used that is not near civilians. I would think that the UN compound filled with international aid workers would constitute 'near civlians', would it not?

There seem to be conflicting reports that Israel is using white phosphorous - a charge which Israel promptly denies. Do you think that Israel is using it? Or is this just another dirty Palestinian/UN trick? Thoughts?

Yeah, that's how it works. For instance, we could create a law that says you can't complain about government laws. Then we would arrest anyone that complained. Sounds harsh, but it's actually fair. After all, they are only criminals.

Big whoop. People say some crazy shit when they are having their children killed and they get the mob mentality going, and you have Jewish shits there trying to provoke them into saying something stupid so that they can put something like that on film. Just so you don't think the Jews are squeaky clean, have a little footage: http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=...lHJ&u=pJ_qe 'Wipe 'em all out'

Well, I made these statements to stir the pot a little. Even if we accept the fact that johns are addicted to sex, in a similar way to people being addicted to drugs, drug-buyers are not using the body of the seller in the same way that sex-buyers are. Therein lies the difference, at least in the eyes of the court. As several posters have pointed out, many of the sex-sellers are forced into it, which brings up an entirely different set of circumstances. My point here is that: 1) Some men are victimized by the constant flesh parade that is out there. Advertising is everywhere. Porn marketing is on all kinds of web sites. On top of that, you have prostitutes on the street corners, clearly soliciting what they have to offer - a constant reminder of what is available. So, as a result, men risk everything because of this weakness - they risk a criminal record, their marriage, their family, their reputation - all for 15 minutes of sex with a stranger. Doesn't that sound like an addiction. This does not seem like a rational decision to me. But rather than help these men, or punish the solicitors we punish them and hold the prostitutes blameless, even going so far as to consider them victims. 2) There is a general assumption that many of these women do this because they are forced into it through poverty. This is the case sometimes, but not that often. First of all, this is Canada. No one is going to die if they don't become a prostitute. There is social assistance, shelters, and a hundred and one programs to help women - abused or otherwise. They do have other choices. Now, they might be addicted to drugs, and if you consider drugs a need - then I guess they are forced into prostitution - although they could choose to get help for their addiction in a sober moment. I think that for many of these women, they simply don't have the stigma around sex or view it as something special the way that we are taught to in society. They see it as a shortcut, knowing that they can make far more money doing that, than working at 7-11. The woman selling her virginity for 3.5 million got the idea because her sister paid for college from 3 weeks of prostitution. These are not victims - these are people taking shortcuts. In conclusion, prostitution should be legalized and confined to brothers. That way: 1) We can tax them. 2) Johns won't screw up their entire life, over one stupid night. 3) The spread of venereal diseases can be minimized. 4) Underage people can be protected. 5) The pimps can be taken out of the equation. 6) The violence and danger towards women can be eliminated.

Hi Chuck, Thanks for playing. Go and learn the difference between trade and a blockade. After you do that, come on back and play again.

I think that both sources are biased. It's about the type of information that they produce. Photos, videos, well-researched articles: These are things that stand on their own. Opinions, theories, eye-witness accounts, unnamed sources, unsubstantiated allegations: These are things where the source matter. If Electronic Infatada claimed (with no evidence) that Israel was aligned with the KKK, I wouldn't believe that either.

Who knows? Israel wasn't letting foreign journalists or UN fact-finders in at the time, so they can pretty much make up anything that they want. Does it look suspicious? Absolutely? Do I know the context? Nope. Would I put it past Israel to stage the whole thing, so that they can go on pretending no one dies in Palestine? Nope. Well, I don't think anyone is arguing that Palestinians are dying, although the number can certainly be disputed. Despite this, pretty much every time they show a dead Palestinian, there are 200 bloggers popping up at random to say that the footage is faked. Why is it faked? Why not take real footage of dead people? Even if it were faked, there must be some need - such as Israel confiscates all video cameras - to make sure that they can continue their one-sided coverage, forcing them to take footage after the fact, and after all the IDF are gone. And Palestinian supporters have not? That argument can be applied to pretty much everything. Frankly, we all know that once people are entrenched in a position, they interpret things differently. Jenin certainly looks like fraud. No argument here. Those horrible monsters exaggerated the death toll so that humanitarian aid would come faster. Would you have preferred them to wait until 5000 really were dead? It's interesting. Israel routinely questions the reality of body counts, actual bodies etc. But if anyone questions the Holocaust numbers (such as Iran), Israel goes berserk.

But what prompted the rocket fire? Surely, if we can attempt to justify the killing of hundreds of children, then we can attempt to justify the rocket fire as well. Let's take a look at the most recent cause going back to the ceasefire in June. The ceasefire held for the most part until November when Israel killed six members of Hamas. But, Israel never lived up to the terms - not lifting the blockade of Gaza, and keeping the Palestinians in poverty. Were there a few rockets launched during that time from Gaza? Yes, but not by Hamas - by other groups which Hamas condemned. Furthermore, Israel never lived up to their end of the bargain. While rocket fire decreased by 98% - Israel only increased supplies by 20%. "Over the one month period from 4 November to 8 December, about 700 truck loads of goods went into Gaza, which is about the amount of material that would have gone through in a single day without a blockade." "So tell me, just how long should Israel have allowed the rocket attacks to continue before taking action? A month? A year? A decade?" They should have lived up to their end of the bargain. Clearly Hamas put in great efforts to live up to theirs. How long should Hamas wait for Israel to live up to their end? A month? A year? A decade? What should they do? What is it exactly that you want them to do? Maybe the UN should condemn Hamas? Maybe countries should say they are terrorists? Maybe they shouldn't sell them weapons? Maybe they should kick Palestine out of the UN and not recognize them as a country. It's not as if things in Palestine could get any worse - other than killing children and bombing the sh*t out of them. Yes, peaceful arrangements are possible, but with the greed of the Israelis - probably short lived. Some. Yes. And Israel is creating more with that mindset on a daily basis. However, as was shown during the ceasefire and at other times, Hamas can be negotiated with. Unfortunately, Israel feels that they are negotiating with power, and therefore feel they can call the shots and set one-sided deals. Israel is certainly the more advanced of the two societies. Presumably, giving them enough prosperity for basic health care and education might move things along a little quicker. However, Hamas was attempting to shut down and arrest anyone firing rockets at Israel during the ceasefire agreement. Clearly, if their demands are met (and they are quite reasonable) , they will try to stop the rockets. The fact that you are fooled by alleged intentions, when the numbers clearly show that regardless of intent, Israel is killing far more people, far more civilians, far more women and far more children. If the 'horrible lefties' didn't complain about it, and the UN didn't put pressure on Israel, there is no telling how many people they would kill. Maybe all of 'em. You can talk all you want about what Israel is allegedly trying to avoid. But 300 dead children and a bombed UN school say otherwise.

Well, I have no connection to Palestine or the USA and am not Muslim. Yet I feel that Rachel Corrie was wronged. I am well aware of the fabricated origin of 'useful idiot'. If you actually take the time to read your own link, you'll see that the whole attribution to Lenin is completely made up. I am expanding its use. Pictures are pictures. If a pro-Palestinian site doesn't publish them who will. In fact, a site that has these pictures, is pretty much pro-Palestinian by definition. How exactly is a site supposed to defend anything Palestinian if people like you are going to dismiss them simply by the fact that they are pro-Palestinian. Obviously, any biased source needs to be looked at with some scrutiny, but pictures are pictures. So, let's take a look at your criticisms, because this is exactly what I am talking about when I ask how low Israeli supporters can sink. 1) You don't like the fact that the pics are from a site that is pro-Palestinian, as if all pictures from supporters of Palestine are doctored. 2) You don't like that they are from a still camera - because why didn't the Palestinians break out one of their many video cameras? 3) She was standing then, but you think perhaps she might have just decided to take a nap in front of the bulldozer. 4) You cite a time difference in the time of the pictures and time of death, as if somehow in that 45 minutes she took off her bright orange vest, dropped her megaphone, and concealed herself in the rubble. No doubt she was hoping to get run over so she could be a martyr. You see, the pro-Israeli bloggers would have us think that Israel never does anything wrong and any photos or videos or wrongdoing are staged, faked or doctored. If a US protester gets killed - it's because the bulldozer couldnt see her, because she inexplicably chose to lie down in the rubble. If a child is killed and shown - its a staged event. Fake blood. Bodies carted around for years and held up to the cameras. It really is quite despicable.

Well, I don't give any credibility to anything that the Canadian Jewish Congress has to say in regards to Jews, Israel, Palestinians, Arabs etc, because obviously we know they are biased. Tom Gross, on the other hand, is a world-renowned academic and is not focused solely on defending Israel. Therefore, I do accept what he has to say on the matter. So, he has clearly shown that there are some links between the two. But really, so what? KKK supports Republicans - does that make them the bad guys? I'm sure a lot of them in Canada vote for the CPC because they are the least encouraging of new immigrants. What does that prove? There is no telling where the nutjobs are going to pop up, or who they will align themselves to. Their support does not undermine the group in any way, unless their support is encouraged. I still see no evidence to the accusation that KKK were in Toronto's Gaza rally and accepted by the protesters. Is there evidence coming, or is this just the usual Israeli attempt to obfuscate the fact that they are killing hundreds of innocent children?

Well, there are two things to look at. 1) The Root Cause: This is perhaps the most critical as the conflict has been going on since Israel was created. I think that expectations have been recalibrated, and things could be resolved if Israel came to the table in the spirit of cooperation, while still recognizing that there will be the occasional rocket launched - as there are too many in Palestine that despise Israel to shut off the rockets completely. The best Israel can hope for is an agreement with Palestine, Hamas and Fatah not to attack, to punish those that do attack Israel, and to actively work to eliminate rocket fire etc. 2) Immediate Threat: Many people are dying each day from the Israeli assault, and that needs to be stopped before anything else. As for a proportionate response, I think we can all see that a nuclear missile launched at Tel-Aviv that kills hundreds of thousands would be disproportionate. By the same token, killing a thousand people, and massive destruction to Gaza, is disproportionate to the damage caused by the rockets. It does not mean that Israel needs to put up with them. It just means that Israel needs a better way of dealing with them. Just as the US going into Iraq before all options had been exhausted, Israel's invasion was premature as well, and I think there are many more things that could have been done. For instance, if they had honoured the terms of the ceasefire. Then perhaps, the rockets would not have been shot.

I see. So the UN is always right? I guess that must be why Israel never breaks a UN resolution. You can't have it both ways. If you are going to use the UN for justification, then you also need to adhere to what the UN says. And who exactly were the smart ones? It's not as if they had a choice. Most were evicted by force of arms. Those that refused ended up like the town of Deir Yassin. Many Israelis were against these forced expulsions, but they were overruled by the zealots. Regardless, Israelis have treated Arab residents, better than Arabs have treated Jews. I don't believe that Arabs need to be welcomed back into Israel with compensation. I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews and/or persecuted them should make it up to them. While it's a fun and challenging game to try to blame all criticism of Israel on anti-semitism, it just isn't accurate. One of the key differences, and the reason why Israel gets more attention is the fact that Israel is committing these atrocities outside of their own borders. Do atrocities exist within Somalia, Darfur, Ivory Coast, Zimbabwe etc Of course, but if any of these countries were invaded by a foreign entity, particularly one that routinely receives military aid from the US and others - you can be certain that it would receive some attention - just as Ostetia received attention during that occupation.

1) I haven't seen any evidence of KKK supporters in the rally in Toronto. 2) KKK hates Muslims more than they hate Jews, so it seems odd that they would be there. 3) If they were there, I wouldn't put it past the rabid defenders of Israel and child murder to dress up in KKK to undermine the message of the protest.

Look, let's not get our panties in a knot. I use the term Zionist to mean those that want to encourage more Jews moving to Israel, and possibly further expansion of the Israeli borders. In terms of some of the things, that the Israeli supporters have said, and I paraphrase: - Palestinians are animals - Rachel Corrie was an idiot and should win the Darwin award - Israel should finish the job in Palestine this time - Totality is the only way to really be humane - Palestinians are delighted when their children are killed by the Israelis So, please drop the histrionics because I used the word Zionist.

This is good news. Very progressive. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/13/...ref=mpstoryview

If someone goes to a drug dealer and buys drugs from them, who is the victim? Generally, we would say that the buyer is the victim and the seller is the exploiter. Why? Because the dealer is making money from someone's addiction. If someone goes to a sex dealer, and buys sex from them, who is the victim? Generally, we would say that the seller is the victim and the buyer is the exploiter. Why? No frickin' idea.

For three and a half million, there better be blood on the sheets.

I tried World of Warcraft for a month or so and wasn't all that impressed with it. The upside is the graphics which are stunning, as well as the capture-the-flag type of tournaments. The downside of it is that half of the quests that you do are things like: Go and kill 20 wolves which is neither fun nor particularly heroic. The other downside is the aggressive nature of the game the twinks. For those that aren't familiar with the term, twinks are people who spend a lot of time and money to get their character the very best gear. It's unbalancing for those trying to compete with them. A great alternative is Dungeons and Dragons Online: 1) You go into dungeons as opposed to just running around - they take from 10 minutes to an hour to complete. 2) You actually have to think about how to defeat things, and how to solve puzzles etc. 3) The game is cooperative - you need a team - you need a cleric and a rogue etc. It's just a lot more fun and enjoyable and the people are much nicer. I highly recommend it

Well, this poses a number of problems. First of all, what makes a firearm illegal? Is it because someone didn't pay $75 bucks for a permit? What if you live at Jane and Finch and you really want a gun to protect yourself? Are you telling me the judge should give these people ten years in prison? Secondly, the length of the sentence isn't really that much of a deterrent. Criminals don't plan to be caught Nobody thinks: Well, if it was only a one year sentence, I would rob this store, but fifteen years - I'll get an honest job instead. Instead, what you need to do is: 1) Get more cops out there, so people feel safe - especially in the dodgy districts. 2) Limit the influx of certain cultural groups that do not blend well in current Toronto. Once the problem is fixed, so that youth from these areas are less likely to fall into a life of crime with gangs etc - then open it up. 3) Make it hard to get a gun. Imagine that you could buy a fully automatic machine gun or an RPG for $20 at 7-11's? Do you think this would be a good thing so that people could defend themselves? Or do you think it might be a little scary to put that kind of power into the hands of pretty much anyone. Now let's say that you only let citizens with no criminal record buy them. Do you think there is more or less chance that these guns will fall into the wrong hands, if they are that available? So, if we make guns illegal with big penalties for selling them (ie 20 years in jail) or bringing them over the border, then the price of guns will go up. If a gun suddenly costs $2000 instead of $75, there will be less guns and people will have to work for three months to save up and buy a gun.. This means less hotheads and wannabe gang punks with guns.

Hey, you missed the boat. 2000 Zionists supporters have already spewed this distribution list talking point here on the forum.

Well, based on that logic, since the PA negotiates with Israel, they recognize the right of Israel to exist. Or is there one rule for Israel, and one rule for Arabs?

Drea, while I don't like your suggestion that Israel be nuked, or that it deserves to be nuked. Your posts are no worse than the hateful Zionist-supporters who call the Palestinians animals, and suggest that they be finished off. I assume you were just being reciprocal in your extreme position.

1) Israel has other options on how to deal with the rocket fire, such as actually easing the restrictions etc. But instead, they choose to maintain the abyssmal living conditions in Gaza, leaving Hamas no choice. When the First nations in Canada break the law, we don't slaughter them - we sit down at the table with them. It's not that hard. Well, that statement is certainly on par with Drea's suggestion that Israel be nuked. Either way, it gets finished, if that is the end goal.