Bob

The British "gave" control of Transjordan to the Hashemites, as part of the "three-state solution" (the 1947 Partition Plan as well as the establishment of Transjordan) in 1921. Was it right to transfer control to a group that was the minority and claimed to be the direct descendants of Mohammed (King Abdullah is supposed to be the great great great great grandson of Mohammed, ya know)? Who knows? Last I read, Jordan's population is 80% "Palestinian", in terms of how they self-identify. They all look the same, too. We've got more Arab states than we can shake a stick at. And they certainly don't practise a lot of diplomacy in their politics. Personal anecdote - when traveling in Jordan you'll see large portraits of King Abdullah and his late father everywhere, in all sorts of costumes. Sometimes he's the great military leader, other times he's the great king, other times he's the master politician/diplomat. It's creepy.

Us acknowledging our uniqueness isn't the same as us believing we're superior than others. You blur this distinction because it suits your ideological views - to erase all differences between people (against their own wishes) in order to live in a beautiful Star Trek paradise. Perhaps some of us like our cultures and don't wish to be amalgamated into the non-defined collective. If others have a beef with us, it's obviously our fault for rejecting assimilation or subjugation. It's our fault for being different! Great logic. Your contempt for varying cultures is transparent with the typical phrase "artificial ethno-religious divides". Why don't you just admit that you hate people and groups who refuse to assimilate? I've seen that argument advanced a million and one times, and it always comes from the utopian humanist who believes in the false premise that all conflict arises from difference. Let me let you in on a little secret - it is the refusal to accept difference that causes this conflict. In the case of Israel, the rejection of a minority group's right to independence and commitment to survival. Just be honest, you want to see a world where all affiliations cease and we all become a part of the "human family". The problem with that desire is, of course, reality. We're not all the same. We don't all subscribe to the same values. We don't all want to live the same lifestyle. As far as Arab diversity, I'm not denying its existence, nor am I pretending to be an expert on it. Arabs are very diverse, but that diversity is not really reflected in the current boundaries we see in the Middle East. The important point I'm making is that Palestinian do no constitute a distinct nation from neighboring Arab peoples by virtue of their current geographic location. There are more than enough Arab states already.

Let me guess, you think "normal" people exist in equal proportions on both sides? What are you basing that on beyond assumption? Yes, the ultra-religious tend to view this as a religious issue, but that doesn't mean that all ultra-religious are opposed to all territorial compromise. They tend be less willing to relinquish territory in an agreement, which I generally agree with, but for them they are concerned about certain holy sites. I don't know what "protesting peace" is. Do you mean rejecting "peace", as defined by people like yourself? I reject the false premise that this conflict is grounded in territory seized after the Six-Day War, which is inadvertently always the supposition advanced by those who promote the "land-for-peace" game.

Why don't you just admit that you want the Jewish people to be erased from the planet one way or the other. It seems clear to me that you're on of those folks that seems to think he's enlightened by advancing a humanist agenda based on the false premise that we're all pretty much the same. We're not. Some of us don't want to live in that humanist world where all differences are erased. We have a rich culture, heritage, and way of life that we want to preserve and continue developing, independently and in our own way. You may refuse to realize it, but your posts are a de facto support of a people that by and large oppose many core values that I'm sure you'd claim to subscribe to. Come to Israel for some time and see who you feel more comfortable with, the modern Jews who represent the majority of the Jewish population here, or the the Arabs (who are much more homogenous than we are in EVERY sense of the word). Then get back to me and advocate for the self-determination and independence of a nation manufactured in the late sixties who really belong to the broader collective of people that already possess about 24 states stretching from North Africa to the Persian Gulf.

You really try my patience, GostHacked. Do you really not understand what I'm saying or are you deliberately being obtuse? I always regret replying to you because I always get the stupidest responses, but here goes... I'll address one thing, which is your assumption that recent Arab uprisings are a rejection of Islamism. First of all, Arabic dictatorships come in various flavours. Saudi Arabia is the best example we have of an organized Islamist government. Egypt, on the other hand, represent a much more secular version of Arabic dictatorship - although by Western standards it was still very religious, both on paper and in the hearts and minds of its people. This variation of Arab dictatorship disqualifies your simplistic assertion that the Arab masses are uniformly rising up against religious governance. It simply doesn't compute. Most importantly, where are these uprisings taking place? In the more secular dictatorships: Egypt, Syria, some action in Jordan, Yemen, and Bahrain (I know virtually nothing about Bahrain and Yemen, by the way, so if they're more religious someone please let me know). I am humble enough to stat that I don't know what's motivating these Arab uprisings. I know, at a minimum, that many people are dissatisfied with the status quo. Does that mean that they're necessarily interested in democracy? Maybe. If so, what kind of democracy? What kind of differing approaches do we see between various protest movements? Surely not all rioters/demonstrators in Egypt are demanding the same thing. On what issues do we see fragmentation? I don't have the answers to these questions. You certainly don't have them, either (because you don't read about these issues). I am certainly not going to jump on the bandwagon from the mainstream media and refer to these "rebels" as "pro-democracy". Are they really? Maybe. I doubt it. Arabs don't have that cultural predisposition, generally speaking. Democracy isn't a natural order of things, either, as ignorant idealists like to pretend. It needs to be learned and accepted among large parts of a society over time. Has that time arrived for the Arabs, or at least some of them? Maybe. I'll hold my breath and reserve judgement until I learn more. And don't ask me to support argument I never advanced. The legitimacy of Israel's perseverance as the Jewish state doesn't hinge on the Holocaust, although the Holocaust is certainly a hugely significant important part of modern Jewish history and is tied directly to the events surrounding Israel's reestablishment.

So what do you do with them if they are a threat to well-being of the country and nation?

Even if I do accept that, we need to accept that a bold leadership is the only way to make a change. Let's suppose that such a proposal was brought forward to the Knesset (impossible, but for the sake of fantasy...), do you not think everyone would be smart enough to recognize what was really being done? It's just an attempt to sneak in an agenda to reduce the influence of a particular demographic in politics, which would be opposed by that demographic and its political allies of the day. What we need in Israel is honesty and clarity of vision. We need a leader who will boldly say that the status quo of ultra-religious young people being ill-educated and unprepared for professional development upon completion of secondary school is UNACCEPTABLE. We can not longer tolerate a growing demographic that consumes more than it provides. Period. End of Story. Get your act together, Haredim, because state support is coming to an end for the benefit of the whole, as well as for the benefit of the Haredim. My honest opinion is that the little financial life support they receive from the state, as well as their exemptions from army service perpetuate their own shortcomings. I am quite certain that Haredi men who depend on state support and donation from charitable organization generally feel pathetic that they cannot provide a comfortable life to their families. And if they don't feel pathetic for being unable to earn a living because they have no legitimate education, then there's something wrong with them. Time for some tough love. Same goes for the Arabs. They also take much more than they provide, the big difference is that they fundamentally oppose the social fabric of Israel - Zionism. That's a whole other bag of worms and I don't think I want to get into right now.

It's quite a story. I don't think anyone in here can give you advice that you can't come up with on your own, given the fact that you know this young man in ways we don't, and you understand the relationship that you have with him whereas all of us cannot. I'd like to say that this is an opportunity for you to do the right thing and have a meaningful impact on a person who appears to need a serious change of direction in his life for the sake of his future. Of course you seem to already be doing that by opening up your home to him and having sincere concerns about his troubles. My humble advice would be to be as honest as possible as you can be with him, share with him the knowledge your years have brought to you. There is no guarantee he will follow your advice, but hopefully you can find the right way to deliver this guidance in a way that will increase the likelihood of him listening to you and making changes. The best way to deliver the quality advice you can give him (which hopefully is focused on him pursuing education) is something only you can find out, which is dependent on the nature of your relationship with him and you ability to understand and leverage any trust and respect he holds for you. As cheesy and cliche as it may sound, hopefully you can be at least a part of something that helps hi turn around in life. You said it yourself, he's not a rotten kid, just broken. If he's redeemable, it's quite a worthwhile endeavour to help him. I will repeat one thing, honesty is the best policy. Tell him the truth, but do so in the best way you can so that he is more likely to learn from you. Good luck.

I know this is an old thread, but I came across a documentary recently that I found interesting and decided to use my powers of resurrection. I may be able to provide you folks with information on how to obtain a higher quality copy of this documentary if you want to watch it on your laptop or television. Let me know. Here is the first part, you can follow the links for the rest. Particularly interesting, unsuprising, and disturbing, are the attitudes of the Khadr matriarch and her daughter Zaynab. These two really are the enemy within. Abdurahman Khadr, Omar's older brother, also has a compelling story about his work for the CIA while an undercover prisoner at Guantanamo Bay.

You're right, there is a trend of anti-Arab sentiment among many Jews. Very often this includes unjustifiable prejudices. Generally speaking, though, our prejudices just aren't as vehement or widespread as theirs. You need to ask yourself honestly, do you think if we could measure prejudice among both Jews and Arabs that the degree of this prejudice would be equal? Only if you go in with the false supposition that are people are equal in all things. You'll find a greater support for violence among Arabs. You'll find a greater support for religious rule/domination among Arabs. You'll find less respect for values of democracy, pluralism, and liberty among Arabs. You'll find lower levels of education among Arabs. I could go on and on, but I can't make you realize these things without you seeing it for yourself. The truth is that anyone who really identifies with Western values will invariably feel more comfortable among Jews than Arabs (generally speaking) in Israel. And there are reasons for this. Generally speaking, yes. Non-Jews can understand us, but do they? Usually not. I don't blame them, it's a complicated story and they've got better things to do than walk a mile in Jewish shoes. Are you attacking Holocaust remembrance or trivializing the effect it's had on the Jewish collective psyche? Let me break it to you, with or without the Holocaust Israel belongs to the Jewish people. Our national rights weren't borne in the ashes of six million. Yes, the Holocaust had a significant effect on the politics surrounding the reestablishment of Israel, but it's wrong to think that the Jewish people needs to undergo a catastrophe in order to justify our rights to independence and self-determination.

Again I ask whether you attach the same label of "extremist Islam" to a large portion (more than likely a majority) of Arabs who live in Israel and in the territories. If religious Judaism is described as "extremist" because of its conservative values, you're going to need to be consistent in the application of that term to other groups that exhibit highly conservative social behaviour. You need to stop speaking about Israel as if you know this country and are familiar with its culture, with your ridiculous assertion of "common trends" in Israel. Highly-religious Jewish men interact with women regularly, and the choice to erase Hillary Clinton fro the photograph is something I cannot understand or explain. Even in ultra-orthodox circles, there should be nothing objectionable about Hillary's appearance in that photograph. You should come for a walk with me Jerusalem, if you want to see widespread religious "extremism". Arab men are always separated from Arab women, except in the context of family. I can tell you that I cannot recall one time when I saw Arab boys or men fraternizing with Arab girls or women outside of a familial context. EVER. The only exception to this has been Christian Arabs. The women almost all wear a hijab at a minimum, and although the vast majority of Arab women do not cover their faces, most of them wear long cloaks and do not wear jeans. We are speaking about a highly conservative religious society, here. Do you refer to them as extremists? Do you call to attention the broad negative effects they have on Israeli society? There is certainly a big problem with the ultra-orthodox in Israel, especially with respect to them receiving a poor and largely useless (practically speaking) religious education and being unprepared to develop professionally. This is certainly the consequence of weak leadership that appeases them, rather than challenging them for their own shortcomings (Lieberman is much less deferential to the highly religious and has made statements justifiably critical of some of the things we've discussed here). You will not find in me an apologist for the ultra-orthodox here, but you should at least be consistent that the Arab population of Israel and in the territories, by and large, are equivalent counterparts to the ultra-orthodox Jewish population you are criticizing here.

What's the point of arguing with a guy that advances the myth that Arabs are discriminated against in Israel (which is pretty much telling us that the Jewish population of Israel is racist)? I mean, this guy's actually challenging the reality that Arabs in Israel are, by and large, anti-Zionist. There's no better illustration of how little you know about this country than that. For starters, take a look at the Arab parties in Israel and see what positions they advocate and with whom they express solidarity. Take a look at Arab voting trends. Read Arab media. Watch Arab commentators on television or on the internet. Investigate Arab organization and "civil rights groups". Have a conversation with an Arab, at a minimum! Widespread opposition to Zionism should be elementary when entering into a dialogue about Arab perceptions of this issue. It's no different among Arabs in Israel and in the territories. The truth is, Black Dog, I don't expect more from you. You're not Jewish, so obviously you don't care about us or our needs. It doesn't matter to you whether we survive as a group, are given or national rights to define our own destiny or have the land and state necessary for the actualization of our rights. It's the same Goy mentality that was ambivalent about us being exterminated in the Holocaust. People like you are why the Jewish national needs will always need to be defended. You view this conflict as the result of us refusing to be subjugated and/or annihilated, even if through more docile methods as assimilation. It's our fault for simply not rolling over and allowing others to destroy us.

No, it isn't. For example, in the hypothetical future scenario where the Arab proportion of Israeli citizenry begins to grow. That would be a direct threat to Jewish national rights. It already is, as about twenty percent of our citizenry is Arab, who by an large reject Jewish national rights, oppose Zionism, and sympathize with our enemies. Arabs are, unquestionably, a fifth column in this country. It's sad but it's true. This has got to be one of the most monumentally stupid things I've seen in awhile. If you don't understand how a Jewish state depends on a Jewish population, well.... Israel's character is defined by those who live in Israel. If the Jewish population is diminished, then the Jewish national character of Israel is also diminished, and Zionism is slowly destroyed. Don't ever think that'll happen, contrary to your wishes. There's no "wall between (us) and the rest of the world". It is a wall that separates us from Palestinian territories. Please cease the hysterics and hyperbole. The Jewish diaspora's success is a recent phenomenon in free countries. And there's much more to Jewish life than materialistic achievement. You're trying to make the stealth argument that the Jewish people don't need the land of Israel. Well, that's our decision to make and we've made it. Without a land to call our own, we're at the mercy of majority host populations. Without a state a government to form an army, we're vulnerable. We know the world will never lift a finger to help us when we're in trouble, so we have Israel. Beyond that, there is the historical, cultural, and religious connection to our homeland. Divided we're weak, and united we're strong. I guess you have a problem with that. Right. Which is why you make so many posts about 85% of the world's governments. You gotta love how you accuse Zionism as such a human rights offender! Like I said, when forced to make a choice between one value or process and Jewish national perseverance, Jewish national rights override secondary considerations. The hypothetical example I mentioned above was where the Arab proportion of Israeli citizenry grows. Do you think we will allow Jewish national rights to be destroyed by an Arab majority in the name of democracy? Of course not. Jewish nationhood trumps all other consideration if they come into direct conflict with one an other. Jewish independence and self-determination is the highest moral imperative. It's sometimes a difficult balancing act, but don't think for a second that we will allow ourselves to be destroyed in the name of some secondary moral value.

There are a lot of things you're overlooking. First of all, Israeli needs for water are much higher given our industry, that's why you're seeing the proportional disparity (although I don't know if it's fivefold). Second, why should be put at risk our water security by giving the Arabs more access? This is a zero-sum game. There's a fixed amount of fresh water available in the underground aquifers. Also, who do you think built the water carriers and the infrastructure? It sure wasn't the Arabs. They also steal water by connecting to underground pipes and not paying for their consumption. There is no way Israel will compromise its water security in order to appease the enemy. It's just another reason by the prospects for a Palestinian state are dim.

Exactly what I said. Allow me to clarify, actions which lead to the deaths of civilians can certainly be justified in the context of war. There is a difference between an action that leads to the deaths of civilians and an actions which is carried out for the purpose of killing civilians. Allow me to give you a hypothetical example - consider a civilian building is being used as a base of operations for combatants. This civilian building is placing the safety of the other side at risk due to its current use as a garrison for the enemy. Unfortunately, civilians are either being forced to remain within the building or are voluntarily acting as human shields. Partial or complete destruction of the building may be justifiable.

As DogOnPorch has stated, that's an American NYC newspaper, and that is quite ridiculous. I never thought they were so silly as to erase a female from a photo? I mean, really? That's certainly not typical, even from the ultra-orthodox. Very, very strange. Israel certainly has a problem with its ultra-religious demographic, considering that this group tends to have worse statistics all around: greater dependence on welfare (which is connected to their much higher birthrate), extremely poor rates of enlistment into the army and national service, and lower rates of education. I wonder though, Post To The Left, will you levy the same criticism against the Arab demographic? Consider that the Arab demographic is similar - massive dependence on welfare (again connected to large families), virtually non-existent rates of enrollment into the army or national service, and lower rates of education. Worse still, they are much more highly represented with respect to crime. You openly described all ultra-religious as "extremists", do you label the Arabs in the same manner? The Arabs in Israel are, by far, much more religious (on average) then the Jewish population. Are they extremists, as well? Overall, the damage done to Israel as the Jewish state is much more significant coming from the Arab sector. Scotty, as far as telling the "religious wackos where to get off", Israel doesn't need a change in its political system - all it needs is a change in the political leadership. If Israeli political leadership was serious about forcing the ultra-orthodox demographic to get with the times and pull their own weight, it could be done. This has nothing to do with our electoral system.

Sealman, what is Harper's secret agenda?

Has anyone in here yet mentioned the fact that the opposition brought upon this election? Don't you think this is just another in a long string of miscalculations from Ignatieff, and perhaps even Layton considering that the CPC now has a majority? In one sense, the NDP gained ground, in another sense, the evil right-wing secret agenda Tories secured a majority. In my view, these events demonstrate, at least in part, a sense of disconnection from the opposition towards the will of Canadians. Personally, I didn't think the CPC could secure a majority. My faith in Canada has been so damaged over the years. I think the mainstream Canadian press has done a good job on me.

You're suggesting that non-Jews are discriminated against in Israel, which isn't the case. What I've stated before, clearly, was that if these realities begin to threaten Jewish national rights (which they have been for some time, now), movement need to be made to address these threats. Israel's perserverance as a Jewish state depends primarily on a large Jewish majority. This of course begs the question - how much is too little and how much is enough? The sad truth is that every non-Jewish vote is a piece taken away from Jewish self-determination. As votes are the method through which we collectively define our destiny, every non-Jewish vote dilutes our self-determination. As far as faith in what you earlier described as "the other", history has given us more than ample illustrations that the world can never be trusted with protecting us. More than enough times the world has conspired to harm us, destroy us, or at best look the other way. People like you seem to have a problem with assertive Jewish nationalism that demands and seizes its own independence and self-determination, get over it. Like I said, Israel will not allow processes and methods to destroy our national rights, despite ignorant assumptions from disconnected Goys like you thousands of kilometres away.

You're suggesting that non-Jews are discriminated against in Israel, which isn't the case. What I've stated before, clearly, was that if these realities begin to threaten Jewish national rights (which they have been for some time, now), movement need to be made to address these threats. Israel's perserverance as a Jewish state depends primarily on a large Jewish majority. This of course begs the question - how much is too little and how much is enough? The sad truth is that every non-Jewish vote is a piece taken away from Jewish self-determination. As votes are the method through which we collectively define our destiny, every non-Jewish vote dilutes our self-determination. As far as faith in what you earlier described as "the other", history has given us more than ample illustrations that the world can never be trusted with protecting us. More than enough times the world has conspired to harm us, destroy us, or at best look the other way. People like you seem to have a problem with assertive Jewish nationalism that demands and seizes its own independence and self-determination, get over it. Like I said, Israel will not allow processes and methods to destroy our national rights, despite ignorant assumptions from disconnected Goys like you thousands of kilometres away.

I get the impression that some folks think that the only reason people fail or underachieve in life is because of social obstacles that the government can and should remove. You know, in a free country, people will underperform - people will be unemployed, people will drop out of school, people will become addicted to drugs, and people will blame external factors for their own shortcomings.

As much as I can't stand Obama's policies, both domestic and foreign policies, these were golden moments for Obama. I think the dark times are still among the Republican party, with a guy like Trump seemingly being at the forefront of their leadership race. Think about it, a man who claims to be serious about a Presidential run who spends the majority of his time questioning Obama's "birth credibility". As if Americans don't have more important things on their minds! The Republican party needs a conservative Obama - in the sense that a charismatic, well-spoken, and pricipled leader needs to rise up. Look at the pathetic line-up: Bachmann, Romney, Pawlenty, Palin... Gingrich seems alright, maybe Rubio has some skills, but I highly doubt it. Sad times for America, she needs a kick-ass leader. Anyways, as much as I dislike Obama's positions and ideology, I can't help but like the man. He was pretty funny trashing Trump, as well.

Gosthacked, feel free to "turn it the other way around". It very easy to explain the distinction of the Jewish people and how we are entitled to independence because of those things that distinguish us. The Palestinians, on the other hand, are largely indistinguishable from surrounding Arab populations. Considering that actually constituting a unique identity is a large component of an legitimate claim to nationalism and associated independence, this is quite important. As far as me showinh my colours, I've never been anything than 100% clear and honest in my opinions in these forums, with only rare outbursts of hyperbole. In short, the component of having a distinct identity that justifies independence exists for Jewish national claims... it is a much weaker component of Palestinian national claims, considering that they are largely indistinguishable for neighbouring Arab states. In other words, we have many Arab states already (22, I think?), we don't need another - unless it advances Israel's interests.

The other side of that coin is that black voter turnout was at record levels in the 2008 election, with some 95%+ of this vote going to Obama. Do you describe that as racism or prejudice? Any amount of people upset with Obama's race must be marginal or fringe given American culture's exceptional pluralism and diversity. America is no more prejudice than any other country... indeed, I'm quite certain that America is probably the least prejudiced country in the world, if only there was a good way of quantifying it.

It's really embarassing that so many Canadians are like g_bambino, in thinking that Amrerica is some racist country where someone's race or ethnicity relegates to them to against? if there's any "class system" that exists in the USA, it's the ordinary distinction people have based on education/success. For example, I grew up in a wealthy-ish neighbourbood in Canada which was very diverse in terms of ethnicities and races, just like many places in the USA. As far as the ignorant description of Hollywood from someone who has probably never been there, or at least has no friend or family or any personal connection to the area, I can assure you black people in Hollywood probably have more in common with white people in Hollywood than they do with blacks in Compton, just as whites in Compton probably have more in common with blacks in Compton than they do with whites in Hollywood. The irony of course being that g_bambino is the real racist by implying that achievement for black people (and other unmentioned ethnicities and races) in the USA is somehow limited by some non-existent racist barrier. Lastly, although not explicitly stated, it would appear that this idiocy is also suggesting that racism can only manifest itself in one direction - from white people against others, as if white people can't be victimized by racism in innumerable contexts.