bud

he's stepping down today, says the CIA.

blanket statements do not always apply. statements like, 'israel is a theocracy' or 'muslim brotherhood is islamofascist' do not apply. as i mentioned before: israel's system is a mixture of advanced democracy and retrogressive discrimination, combined with clumsy attempts to hide the discriminatory reality. if i were to give israel a label, instead of liberal democracy, i would say they're more of an ethnocracy. it possesses a facade of formal democratic institutions and processes, but works to promote the interests of a specific ethnic group to the detriment of others. perhaps you can give these examples to prove that there is no discrimination in israel's system. you should be concerned about israel's land laws, since 90% of the land is owned by JNF and it is a matter of policy to lease that land only to jews. this policy and position has been characterized as un-democratic because non-jews do not have the same access to land rights as jews.

take your meds and get more sleep. it may help your situation.

he has already stated that he believes it all (including west bank and east jerusalem) belongs to the jews.

wtf are you talking about? when did i 'justify' the actions, you muppet? it does. because you are regurgitating the simpleton response by saying that 'they want to conquer us' like this is the reason we're seeing terrorist attacks. you have once again failed to take into consideration and put into the equation our actions around the world.

yes. you're correct. 'was'.

'israel's system is a mixture of advanced democracy and retrogressive discrimination, combined with clumsy attempts to hide the discriminatory reality.' here are excerpts from an article from dr. israel shahak which describes the system quite well: a trick is to campaign for and then pass a high-sounding law in favor of equality or human rights. Such laws, however, always contain one little paragraph stating that their provisions will not affect any laws or regulations enacted in the past. The high-sounding preambles of the new laws then can be solemnly quoted without mentioning that since discriminatory laws and rules were passed in the 1950s and early 1960s (by Labor, of course), the new laws cannot change the existing discrimination. When one understands those two tricks, one comprehends that Israeli laws, and even more so government regulations on all possible subjects, are full of discriminatory measures which, if employed against Jews anywhere else in the world, would be regarded as anti-Semitic. one of the biggest discrimination has to do with land: It is supposed that landed property, whether urban or agricultural, in the Land of Israel (whatever its borders are) which does not belong to Jews, privately or collectively, is "unredeemed." When the ownership changes and it becomes owned by Jews, either privately or collectively, the land undergoes magical transformation and becomes "redeemed." (Let me add that these two terms have been taken from the Jewish religious law.) The key law is "Israeli Land Law," which set up a government-appointed body called the "Israel Land Authority" (ILA), controlled by a board partly appointed by the government and partly by the World Zionist Organization through its subsidiary branch, the "Jewish National Fund" (JNF), to control all the land owned by the state. A key paragraph in the law states that ILA will administer its land according to the regulations of JNF. The regulations of the latter strictly prohibit all non-Jews from benefiting in any way from JNF land and by this simple trick the Israeli state lands (92 percent of the area of Israel) were removed from the use of non-Jews. now imagine if there was such a policy and system in canada and the united states.

most of these terrorist organizations have been created as a reaction to the atmosphere around them. it has nothing to do with wanting to conquer other countries. bin laden has been consistent in giving his reasons for al quaeda and its affiliates' actions; the reasons are the following: Western countries' hand in keeping dictators (such as mubarak in egypt, saudi monarchy, karzai in afghanistan, etc.) in power. which usually ends up not being in the best interest of the people who live under these rulers. israel's treatment of palestinians and u.s.' unconditional support for them western countries' attack on muslim countries. take iraq for example. there was no al quaeda in iraq before u.s. attacked it. there is a cause for all of this mess and if we want to solve the problem, we need to admit and accept our responsibilities for the problems.

bravo. nice response.

an interim government, just like in tunisia. i'm sure mubarak is already packing his suitcases and will be on his private jet to england soon.

if a child rapist is abusing his children, you don't wait to separate them until a proper guardian is found. the dictator's presence until september will not help egypt transition into a democracy. he should get the fuck out just like the tunisian president did.

when opinions lack credibility and go against facts, then i don't think there is any problem with not accepting the person's comments. i'll put it this way; if i like cheesecake but bob says he doesn't like cheesecake, then that's his opinion and i have no problem accepting his comments as an opinion. however, when bob says that the land in the west bank and east jerusalem 'is our land' (meaning to the jews), then i am not going to accept that. i will also not accept his opinion, when he says systematic ethnic cleansing is not happening in east jerusalem, when the facts on the ground say otherwise. fact being: arab properties being destroyed, property permit not being given to arabs, 'jewish only' homes being built on top of what used to be arab property. that behaviour is enough for me to conclude that those who are in power, are doing their best to push arabs out of east jerusalem in favour of jewish settlers. since we're on the topic of bob and his problem with facts, here he is again, this time responding to comments made by the former head of AIPAC, confirming my opinion about AIPAC's influence on the american government. he simply tries to sweep it under the rug by calling what steiner said as "imagined influence". sometimes opinions are backed up by facts and sometimes, like in the case of bob, opinions clash with facts. i will continue to call on bob's misinformation and the false image that he tries to create. he is nothing but a propagandist who is here, not to talk about the truth, but to create an alternate image of the conflict in order to unconditionally support his tribe.

ah. most of the people you have mentioned went against the foreign corporations who wanted to profit in their state. mossadiq, allende and even lamumba all were nationalists who put the interest of the people before the interest of foreign corporations.

this has nothing to do with being a leftist or a rightist. this has to do with whether these people would accept becoming puppets. mossadiq no longer wanted to give out iranian oil to the u.s. and england and instead wanted to nationalize it so that the iranian people could benefit from it. for that reason, he had to go.

i'm not surprised to see bob running away when faced with facts.

my point is that unless you spend enough money on your campaigns and the elections, then you will have no shot at becoming president. since 1944 (i haven't really checked to see if you're right, but lets say that you are), every single president has out spent his opponents. in order to spend, you need to have the money. in order to have the money, you have to do as you're told by those giving you the money. despite obama's grassroots fundraising, most of the money he received were from lobbyists. this goes for pretty much all the other major candidates in the past elections (except for maybe ross perot and ron paul - that's if you want to call them major candidates). the major u.s. lobbyists, naturally, put their own selfish needs (military, pharma, israel, energy, banking) above the interest of the american people.

i like that. the same rule goes for israel and the $3 billion they receive.

thanks for supporting my point.

imagined influence. it took you just one sentence to oppose the truth.

in the united states and many other places, this definition of a strong politician means someone who will abide by the rules. if you go against what the military industrial complex wants, the israeli lobby wants, the energy sector wants, then they will not give you money. it's quite simple. most of these lobby groups have their favourites, but they support most other candidates from all 2 parties as long as they see eye to eye with their agenda. imagine if obama did what's right and stopped supporting israel's violation of international law by stopping to give israel $3 billion a year and giving it political immunity internationally. what would happen in the next elections when it comes to 'donations' from the lobby groups? special interest groups have the strongest influence in the country. if this continues, they'll run the country into the ground. who donates the most to these candidates? would the candidate risk future donations to them and their party by going against what the big donors pay them? here is obama's donation information: who is at the top of the list? lawyers and lobbyists. how does obama use the money? over 56% ($427 million) of it went towards media. media is the best propaganda tool out there. name one president who spent less money than his opponent and still won. you don't think or you don't know? Steiner resignation In 1992, AIPAC president David Steiner was forced to resign after he was recorded boasting about his political influence in obtaining aid for Israel. Steiner also claimed that he had met with (then Bush U.S. Secretary of State) Jim Baker and I cut a deal with him. I got, besides the $3 billion, you know they're looking for the Jewish votes, and I'll tell him whatever he wants to hear ... Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees which was a fabulous thing, $3 billion in foreign, in military aid, and I got almost a billion dollars in other goodies that people don't even know about. Steiner also claimed to be "negotiating" with the incoming Clinton administration over who Clinton would appoint as Secretary of State and Secretary of the National Security Agency. Steiner stated that AIPAC had "a dozen people in [the Clinton] campaign, in the headquarters... in Little Rock, and they're all going to get big jobs."[31] NY real estate developer Haim Katz told The Washington Times that he taped the conversation because "as someone Jewish, I am concerned when a small group has a disproportionate power. I think that hurts everyone, including Jews. If David Steiner wants to talk about the incredible, disproportionate clout AIPAC has, the public should know about it."[32] i wouldn't say 'controlled', but the foreign policies are heavily influenced by the 'evil zionists'. i await your claim that the former head of AIPAC was totally lying.

we? who is we? the u.s. should withhold foreign aid of $1.5 billion to egypt and $3 billion to israel. so far, the aid has done nothing but to support a dictator and a rogue state.

have you ever paused and tried looking outside of your eternal victimhood perspective to consider: - who is shooting the rockets? - why are they shooting the rockets?

the muslim brotherhood party and its affiliates exist in many governments throughout the arab world. they have been part of governments for decades. having them join an elected government in egypt will not make any difference. however, be prepared for egypt to refuse helping israel in keeping the gazans in a prison cell as not only the muslim brotherhood is against it, but most other parties in egypt are.

he just happens to be a hypocrite douchebag. by stating that the jews are entitled to self-determination and freedom, while shooting down criticism of and then excusing those who take that right away from the palestinian, he shows that he's a hypocrite. his constant self-patting and self-obsessed posts make him a douche bag.

i'm not the one sitting here saying that west bank and east jerusalem belongs to jews. you're an extremist and a fanatic who has no respect for another person's moral and legal entitlement to the rights of their land, freedom and self-determination. people like you is exactly what's wrong with the conflict. until you're able to come up with some documents to back-up your wild claims, you'll continue to be a hypocrite douchebag.