Israel attacks Syrian port

[Higgly]

Al Jazeera English does not broadcast pro terrorist propaganda or take sides.... They have quite a top notch line up of journalists too.

This being said if Canada was concerned about channels that broadcast hate speech we would bar Fox News as they often smear facts and couple them with hate speech.

Exactly! Thank you very much.

[jbg]

I have nothing against Jews I mean my mom's a Jew however the government there is highly dubious in their motives. Especially in regards to Gaza etc. Israel should not be allowed to have nuclear weapons and should be treated the same as other nations in the region given their violent tendencies.

Their motives are to survive, pure and simple. Their first defeat in war will be their last.

If the Arab armies had surroudned an Israeli army in the desert is there any doubt what would happen? When the Israeli Army surrounded a division of the Egyptian Army in the Sinai desert in 1973, was there any doubt that the Egyptians would be treated in a humane manner? Another example is the equal treatment, at Israelis hospitals of Jews and Arabs (link, speech below).

=======================================================

Remarks of Brigitte Gabriel to be delivered at the Duke University Counter Terrorism Speak out October 14, 2004

I'm proud and honored to stand here today as a Lebanese speaking for Israel the only democracy in the Middle East . As someone who was raised in an Arabic country I want to give you a glimpse into the heart of the Arabic world.

I was raised in Lebanon where I was taught that the Jews were evil, Israel was the devil, and the only time we will have peace in the Middle East is when we kill all the Jews and drive them into the sea.

When the Moslems and Palestinians declared Jihad on the Christians in 1975, they started massacring the Christians City after city. I ended up living in a bomb shelter underground from age 10 to 17 without electricity eating grass to live and crawling under sniper bullets to a spring to get water.

It was Israel who came to help the Christians in Lebanon . My mother was wounded by a Moslems shell and was taken into an Israeli hospital for treatment. When we entered the emergency room I was shocked at what I saw. They were hundreds of people wounded, Moslems, Palestinians, Christian Lebanese and Israeli soldiers lying on the floor. The doctors treated everyone according to their injury. They treated my mother before they treated the Israeli soldier lying next to her. They didn't see religion they didn't see political affiliation, they saw people in need and they helped.

For the first time in my life I experienced a human quality that I know my culture would not have shown to their enemy. I experienced the values of the Israelis who were able to love their enemy in their most trying moments. I spent 22 days at that hospital, those days changed my life and the way I believe information, the way I listen to the radio or to television. I realized I was sold a fabricated lie by my government about the Jews and Israel that was so far from reality. I knew for fact that if I was a Jew standing in an Arab hospital I would be lynched and thrown over to the grounds as shouts of joy of Allahu Akbar, God is great would echo through the hospital and the surrounding streets.

I became friends with the families of the Israeli wounded soldiers one in particular Rina, her only child was wounded in his eyes.

One day I was visiting with her and the Israeli army band came to play national songs to lift the spirits of the wounded soldiers. As they surrounded his bed playing a song about Jerusalem Rina and I started crying. I felt out of place and started waking out of the room, and this mother holds my hand and pulls me back in without even looking at me. She holds me crying and says: "it is not your fault". We just stood there crying holding each other's hands.

What a contrast between her, a mother looking at her deformed 19 year old only child, and still able to love me the enemy, and between a Moslem mother who sends her son to blow himself up to smithereens just to kill a few Jews or Christians.

The difference between the Arabic world and Israel is a difference in values and character. It's barbarism versus civilization. It's democracy versus dictatorship. It's goodness versus evil.

Once upon a time there was a special place in the lowest depths of hell for anyone who would intentionally murder a child. Now, the intentional murder of Israeli children is legitimized as Palestinian "armed struggle". However, once such behavior is legitimized against Israel, it is legitimized every where in the world, constrained by nothing more than the subjective belief of people who would wrap themselves in dynamite and nails for the purpose of killing children in the name of god.

Because the Palestinians have been encouraged to believe that murdering innocent Israeli civilians is a legitimate tactic for advancing their cause, the whole world now suffers from a plague of terrorism, from Nairobi to New York , from Moscow to Madrid , from Bali to Beslan.

They blame suicide bombing on "desperation of occupation" Let me tell you the truth. The first major terror bombing committed by Arabs against the Jewish state occurred ten weeks before Israel even became independent. On Sunday morning, February 22, 1948, in anticipation of Israel 's independence, a triple truck bomb was detonated by Arab terrorists on Ben Yehuda Street in what was then the Jewish section of Jerusalem . Fifty-four people were killed and hundreds were wounded. Thus, it is obvious that Arab terrorism is caused not by the "desperation" or "occupation", but by the VERY THOUGHT of a Jewish state.

So many times in history in the last 100 years, citizens have stood by and done nothing allowing evil to prevail. As America stood up against and defeated communism, now it is time to stand up against the terror of religious bigotry and intolerance. It's time to all stand up and support and defend the state of Israel , which is the front line of the war against terrorism.

=======================================================

Here is an example of Israel trying to control the region around them. Israel bombed the only Gaza power plant and then went on to supply power to them, now Israel is threatening to cut off their power because many of the people there do not want to conform to Israels will.

Many leaders from the west acknowledge that in many instances Israels trigger finger is to itchy and in many cases have been in the wrong.

I say we let Israel and the rest of the Middle East have their wars. Shia vs. Sunni vs. Kurd vs. Jew and so on.... Whoever wins takes all. The region due to it's ideological differences will never be peaceful.

And Israel's supposed to await death to obtain the compassionate approval of the chattering classes? I think not.

Edited November 4, 2007 by jbg

[Higgly]

I have not seen a single person here advocate for the disappearance of Israel. Your quote from the Lebanese woman speaks to the generosity of the Israelis, but it also speaks to the resources they have at their disposal and are free to use as they please.

[jbg]

I have not seen a single person here advocate for the disappearance of Israel. Your quote from the Lebanese woman speaks to the generosity of the Israelis, but it also speaks to the resources they have at their disposal and are free to use as they please.

Advocating indefensible borders and right of return of Arabs is advocating their destruction. And as far as resources, the Israelis are pikers compared to the Arabs' oil wealth.

Or do they prefer to secrete it in Swiss banks as opposed to helping people with it?

[Higgly]

Advocating indefensible borders and right of return of Arabs is advocating their destruction. And as far as resources, the Israelis are pikers compared to the Arabs' oil wealth.

Israeli wealth flows freely from the US like splashes from the fountain of youth.

As far as the right of return goes, it's all negotiable, isn't it? Roll up your sleeves and sit down at the table.

[bush_cheney2004]

Israeli wealth flows freely from the US like splashes from the fountain of youth.

As far as the right of return goes, it's all negotiable, isn't it? Roll up your sleeves and sit down at the table.

Sure...there are no billions flowing to Egypt or Jordan. No billions for carrier battle groups to keep the oil flowing for the likes of Saudi, Oman, UAE, Dubai, or Bahrain.

Nope...not even a nickle.

[jbg]

Israeli wealth flows freely from the US like splashes from the fountain of youth.

Not surprising since Israel is effectively the US's largest forward military base in a critical as well as dangerous part of the world. Do you really think that the US is going to rely on the Saudis as a dependable ally?

As far as the right of return goes, it's all negotiable, isn't it? Roll up your sleeves and sit down at the table.

Not particularly negotiable. Would you want to negotiate your country away to the US, so we could flood it with Americans at will?

[Sulaco]

Israeli wealth flows freely from the US like splashes from the fountain of youth.

As far as the right of return goes, it's all negotiable, isn't it? Roll up your sleeves and sit down at the table.

As you well know it not negotiable. Nor will it ever be. One doesn't put one's suicide on the table. The return requested would amount to suicide for ISrael. Palestinians have been making demands that cannot be met constantly. The leadership then uses Israel's expected refusal to make concessions on such demands as an excuse and rallying call to engage in perpetual warfare. Good for them but they shouldn't be listened to when they come a-cryin'.

[Rue]

Actually Rue they come from "Paris 1919", Margaret MacMillan's book on the Versailles Peace Conference that ended the First World War, as well as from Avi Shlaim's book, "The Iron Wall, Israel and the Arab World". But nice try.

I haven't read the rest of your posts because as usual they are excessively wordy and probably as riddled with errors as most of your other stuff is. That's what happens when you get everything you know from the internet.

Anyone who goes to the inter-net site I quoted can find your information verbatum. Your trying to suggest you got from Margaret MacMillan's book is interesting considering you seem to have selectively ignored everything else in her book which leads me to believe you never read it otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it to me because you would know I could take the book and remove numerous quotes from it suggesting your version of history makes no sense. In fact simply quoting the footnotes from the web-site you went to or a text I mentioned won't do it with me Higgly.

If I thought for one minute you were reading these history texts in full as opposed to simply finding them as foot notes I would take your comments a lot more seriously.

The fact you won't respond to the historic issues you try pass off as absolute and defend them does not of course surprise me. I would suggest anyone taking either text you have referenced and taking to the time to read them in full would see your comments are not only inaccurate but misleading and grossly over-simplifying in fact far more complex cause and effect events to suit your usual political agenda-Israel bad everything is Israel's fault.

See the problem for you Higgly is that some of us do read more then inter-net sites and are capable of calling you out and that is precisely why you do what you do when you are challenged.

Edited November 5, 2007 by Rue

[Rue]

Jan. 3, 1919, Emir Faisal and ChaimWeitzman signed a treaty as part of the Peace Conference of 1919. Higgly of course believes Mr. Weitzman was someone who hated Palestinians. The fact is both Weitzman and Faisal were quoted as expressing negative sentiments of the Palestinian Arabs at that time. no doubt about it.

The agreement envisioned immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale while at the same time protecting the rights of the Arab peasants and tenant farmers. and to safeguard the free practice of religious observances. The Muslim Holy Places were to be under Muslim control.

The actual boundaries between an Arab State and a Jewish state were to be determined by a Commission after the Paris Peace Conference.

The parties also agreed to honour the Balfour Declaration of 1917, calling for a Jewish national home in Palestine, i.e., the geographic area of what is today Israel, the West Bank and Jordan.

Under this agreement disputes as to the borders would be submitted to the British Government for arbitration.

Weizmann signed the agreement on behalf of the Zionist Organization representing the intended Jewish state , and Faisal signed on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz.

Faisal however qualfiied his acceptance of the above agreement with the following condition:

"Provided the Arabs obtain their independence as demanded in my [forthcoming] Memorandum dated the 4th of January, 1919, to the Foreign Office of the Government of Great Britain, I shall concur in the above articles. But if the slightest modification or departure were to be made [regarding our demands], I shall not be then bound by a single word of the present Agreement which shall be deemed void and of no account or validity, and I shall not be answerable in any way whatsoever."

However as a result of the 1919 Paris peace conferemce, Faisal was NOT given the Arab state he envisioned precisely because as I stated earlier the British and French had struck their own Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 dividing the Middle East between their own spheres of influence, and had absolutely no intention of ever letting the Arab and Jewish states to be formed.

2 weeks before the above agreement was signed Faisal was sounding very positive and stated;

"The two main branches of the Semitic family, Arabs and Jews, understand one another, and I hope that as a result of interchange of ideas at the Peace Conference, which will be guided by ideals of self-determination and nationality, each nation will make definite progress towards the realization of its aspirations. Arabs are not jealous of Zionist Jews, and intend to give them fair play and the Zionist Jews have assured the Nationalist Arabs of their intention to see that they too have fair play in their respective areas."

Those were not of course the words of the stereotype anti-Jewish Arab. Not at all.

as I said before in response to Higgly on many instances, Jews and Arabs were planning to create two kingdoms but the French and British interceded deliberately to prevent this from happening and deliberately turned the Arabs against the Jews in a classic divide and conquer move.

Faisal was in fact forefully expelled from Syria by the French and the british carved him out the artificial colony puppet called the Kingdom of Iraq, and at the same time illegally seized 85% of Palestine and creeated Trans Jordan for Faisal's brother, Abdullah while the French carved out Lebanon and Syria and the Jews were left with ZERO.

So in fact the book Higgly would have you believe backs up his contentions as to Israel being bad bad bad and the reason they invaded Lebanon is of course baseless.

As for the sinister Zionists and Arabs, I will say it again. They were both indigenous tribes to the Middle East and the French and British deliberately turned the Muslims on the Jews as part of a divide and conquer tactic to justify their presence.

The British never had any intention of honouring or assisting Jews obtain any Jewish homeland. They said one thing to the Jews, another to the Arabs, and in fact pursued a third agenda with the French.

The current problems with Lebanon are the same problems we have seen evertywhere in the world where the British and the French artificially imposed colonies-blaming it on Zionists as Higgly likes to do is absurd. He is blaming one of the two tribes victimized by the colonialists.

Its why when I define the Middle East I do not define either the Muslims or Jews, Israelis, Arabs or Palestinians as bad or good, just two people pitted against one another by colonialists for deliberate political reasons and then further exasperated when Nazi Germany took over Syria and ran the Baath Parties of Syria and Iraq and made its way into the Egyptian government. The secret police in Syria and Egypt were created by Nazis, i.e., SS and Gestapo officers. The goose stepping and uniforms in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon come from their Nazi trainers. The Hitler mustache is still a popular one in many parts of the Middle East.

[jbg]

As you well know it not negotiable. Nor will it ever be. One doesn't put one's suicide on the table. The return requested would amount to suicide for ISrael. Palestinians have been making demands that cannot be met constantly. The leadership then uses Israel's expected refusal to make concessions on such demands as an excuse and rallying call to engage in perpetual warfare. Good for them but they shouldn't be listened to when they come a-cryin'.

You hit the nail on the head.

[jbg]

Jan. 3, 1919, Emir Faisal and ChaimWeitzman signed a treaty as part of the Peace Conference of 1919. Higgly of course believes Mr. Weitzman was someone who hated Palestinians. The fact is both Weitzman and Faisal were quoted as expressing negative sentiments of the Palestinian Arabs at that time. no doubt about it.

Good post, and interesting.

However, what guarantees are there that Emir Faisal spoke for all Arabs or for that matter anyone but himself? One of the problems that Israel has had in negotiating with Arabs is that determining who the proper negotiating partner is is a lot like playing whack-a-mole. If one leader "agrees" another one doesn't, or the "moderate" one is killed.

[kuzadd]

Advocating indefensible borders and right of return of Arabs is advocating their destruction. And as far as resources, the Israelis are pikers compared to the Arabs' oil wealth.

Or do they prefer to secrete it in Swiss banks as opposed to helping people with it?

yes, only one group of people has "right of return" and to say that should be applied equally is heresy. As opposed to a HUMAN RIGHT.

[jbg]

yes, only one group of people has "right of return" and to say that should be applied equally is heresy. As opposed to a HUMAN RIGHT.

And in your view only one group doesn't have the right to a nation-state to call its own, the Jews. Have I got that right?

The excuses are silly.

[Higgly]

...which leads me to believe you never read it otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it to me because you would know I could take the book and remove numerous quotes from it suggesting your version of history makes no sense.

I've read it twice, which is why I can quote from it to specifically address the issue under discussion at the time - i.e. LEBANON. How many times have you read it?

Your problem Rue is you are spending all of your time at Nazi web sites and not enough time in the library. I've come to the conclusion that you do not read history books at all. You cruise the internet selectively book marking whatever crap suits your purpose. If you want history, Rue, read the works of historians. The stuff that you keep putting up is not fit for intelligent discussion.

As for your excessively wordy posts, I have responded to a number of them on a point by point basis showing that you are very often just plain wrong, that you have spun the facts incorrectly, or that you are writing out of context. A lot of other times, I find that you are just shotgunning the discussion brining in issues that nobody has mentioned. You try to rehash the entire history of the Middle East with just about every post you write. When losing ground on one issue, you broaden the discussion to every issue. For that reason, when I see more than a few lines from you, I no longer bother.

But thanks for your usual accusations of hate. It shows yet again that all you are really about is hate.

Edited November 6, 2007 by Higgly

[Higgly]

As you well know it not negotiable. Nor will it ever be. One doesn't put one's suicide on the table. The return requested would amount to suicide for ISrael. Palestinians have been making demands that cannot be met constantly. The leadership then uses Israel's expected refusal to make concessions on such demands as an excuse and rallying call to engage in perpetual warfare. Good for them but they shouldn't be listened to when they come a-cryin'.

Not at all. If it is so important to Israel, then let Israel negotiate something for it. This nonsense that you, JBG, and the like keep spouting "oh it's impossible so we won't do it" is just that.

As for indefensible borders, the Israelis proposed the construction of a wall along the 1966 borders, and the US (Carter) administration agreed to this. Instead of doing that, Israel has consistently persued a policy of land theft, the Sharon wall just being one example of how it has implemented the policy.

While you contstantly go on about suicide for Israel, you place absolutely no importance on the same thing happening to the Palestinians. Instead you play this constant chicken little blame the victim game making the Palestinians responsible for everything the Arabs have ever done, even though Israel has had long standing peace treaties which large parts of the Arab world and has brought upon itself much of the hostility it faces.

Edited November 6, 2007 by Higgly

[kuzadd]

And in your view only one group doesn't have the right to a nation-state to call its own, the Jews. Have I got that right?

The excuses are silly.

NOPE!

Just another nonsensical assumption, based on your own bias.

[Rue]

Good post, and interesting.

However, what guarantees are there that Emir Faisal spoke for all Arabs or for that matter anyone but himself? One of the problems that Israel has had in negotiating with Arabs is that determining who the proper negotiating partner is is a lot like playing whack-a-mole. If one leader "agrees" another one doesn't, or the "moderate" one is killed.

Good question.

I do believe myself, (totally subjective) Faisal would have stuck to his word and created an Arab Kingdom next door to a Jewish one with peaceful intentions had the British and French not made a fool of him and cause him to lose face.

Also interesting to note that the tone of arrogance used by both Weitzman and Faisal in reference to the Arab peoples living in the corridor best described as today's Israel and Jordan and the South of Syria and Lebanon was virtually identical. When you remove the comments of contempt or arrogance out of their historic context and read into them a political agenda you could say they were both anti-Palestinian but I think what was more accurately happening was both Feisal and Weitzman wanted to create nation states and looked down upon the complacency of the Palestinians-it was actually a contempt for their apolitical nature.

Faisal was a very impatient and assertive man with great visions for his people. Weitzman was typical of those coming out of East Europea a driven man dogged by existential anxiety and spiritual depression-so of course these Palestinians would have seemed complacent to the two of them-two restless creative over-achieving souls fueled by their desire to lead their peoples to greatness.

In fact these Palestinians or Arab peoples what-ever you want to call them, scattered across this area, were dirt poor, had no formal education, and were basically used as cheap labour by absentee landlords. The concept of a nation state would be completely alien to the ambigous world they lived in where they had no rights at all and just drifted and subsisted.

A border would have been an absurdity to them. A government was simply the system that drafted them into armies or took the little goods they had away for some distant figure.

They in fact symbolized everything Faisal and Weitzman hated about themselves-stateless, and seemingly trapped in a no man's land without any control of their destiny. Of course both men would have expressed resentment towards this. It was the very part of their predicaments they were trying to remedy. Taken out of proper context it would seem like unjustifiable hatred. Taken in the context of these two and the worlds they were born into, it would symbolize everything they hated and were trying to change and this is why on the one hand you can find certain quotes that sound hateful, but then you can also find quotes from both men referring to these itinerant people in a completely different way as well.

[Higgly]

Well, your subjective opinions aside Rue, it is good to see you acknowledge that the agreement between Feisal and Weitzmann involved promises that the rights of the Arabs living in Palestine would not be abrogated, something that was also explicit in the Balfour Agreement. Funny how far we've gone since then, ain't it? And funny how far we've drifted from the bombing of that Syrian port....

Edited November 6, 2007 by Higgly

[jbg]

Not at all. If it is so important to Israel, then let Israel negotiate something for it. This nonsense that you, JBG, and the like keep spouting "oh it's impossible so we won't do it" is just that.

Anyone who's been watching developments in Islamabad in last several days, or in Gaza and West Bank over the last several years, can't seriously say that.

As for indefensible borders, the Israelis proposed the construction of a wall along the 1966 borders, and the US (Carter) administration agreed to this. Instead of doing that, Israel has consistently persued a policy of land theft, the Sharon wall just being one example of how it has implemented the policy.

And how far off the 1966 boundaries is the Sharon Wall? And are you saying the construction of this wall wasn't rather seriously provoked?

While you contstantly go on about suicide for Israel, you place absolutely no importance on the same thing happening to the Palestinians. Instead you play this constant chicken little blame the victim game making the Palestinians responsible for everything the Arabs have ever done, even though Israel has had long standing peace treaties which large parts of the Arab world and has brought upon itself much of the hostility it faces.

How is it suicide for "Palestinians" to merge into the populations with respect to which they have no cultural or linguistic difference, their fellow Arabs?

NOPE!

Just another nonsensical assumption, based on your own bias.

Then why is the land on which the Jewish state is built "sacred" to "Palestinians" or part of the Ummah (take your pick of the excuse of the day) whereas there were few wimpers when Iraq took cracks at Iran, Kuwait or the Kurds, or the Janjaweed slaughter helpless Dharfurians?

Just repeats the world's age-old bias against and suspicion of the Jews.

[jbg]

Well, your subjective opinions aside Rue, it is good to see you acknowledge that the agreement between Feisal and Weitzmann involved promises that the rights of the Arabs living in Palestine would not be abrogated, something that was also explicit in the Balfour Agreement. Funny how far we've gone since then, ain't it?

I'm sure Weitzmann and Faisal could role a nice joint together as well and get plastered. I'm sure you and I could make world peace over a brew at some restaurant near Bloor and Yonge, with a globe or Canadian Geographic Atlas handy.

It's easy for two people to solve the problems of the world, but there's the pesky problem of getting people to cooperate with such solutions.

[Higgly]

This is just a placeholder. I will come back to it later.

Jan. 3, 1919, Emir Faisal and ChaimWeitzman signed a treaty as part of the Peace Conference of 1919. Higgly of course believes Mr. Weitzman was someone who hated Palestinians. The fact is both Weitzman and Faisal were quoted as expressing negative sentiments of the Palestinian Arabs at that time. no doubt about it.

The agreement envisioned immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale while at the same time protecting the rights of the Arab peasants and tenant farmers. and to safeguard the free practice of religious observances. The Muslim Holy Places were to be under Muslim control.

I'm sure Weitzmann and Faisal could role a nice joint together as well and get plastered. I'm sure you and I could make world peace over a brew at some restaurant near Bloor and Yonge, with a globe or Canadian Geographic Atlas handy.

It's easy for two people to solve the problems of the world, but there's the pesky problem of getting people to cooperate with such solutions.

Edited November 7, 2007 by Higgly

[jbg]

This is just a placeholder. I will come back to it later.

And I'll come back to yours oafter work/mother's 75th b-day party, around 10 Toronto time.

I suspect it's going to be more "blame the US (West, Israel, take your pick) for everything wrong though.

[Rue]

Well, your subjective opinions aside Rue, it is good to see you acknowledge that the agreement between Feisal and Weitzmann involved promises that the rights of the Arabs living in Palestine would not be abrogated, something that was also explicit in the Balfour Agreement. Funny how far we've gone since then, ain't it? And funny how far we've drifted from the bombing of that Syrian port....

I have always acknowledged that, always. There is a huge distinction between the Palestinians or Arabs or what-ever you want to call the people who were present there than the Arabs who came into the area because of the British policies.

I have always contended they have the same rights as Jews to self-determination and I can appreciate how they would feel Jordan is not their true Palestinian state but simply something Britain created and flooded with non Palestinians even though technically Jordan is situated on 80% of Palestine and has a law of return for all Palestinians.

The only actual difference we have which is a minor but most significant one is that I do not see the creation of the Israeli state as the reason for plight of Palestinians. I do believe it is used as an excuse and it certainly has a cause and effect relationship but where we differ is I place the blame not even on the French or English and their manipulation and meddling but on the Arab League which could have chosen to support both Israeli and Palestinian states but deliberately chose not to forcing the war and then deliberately using Palestinians as pawns by placing them in camps.

I do not doubt there are some policies Israel has pursued that have exasperated certain situations-Israelis openly admit that. But what I am saying is the Arab League has never lived up to its moral responsibility for placing Palestinians in camps and then forcing Israel's had by expelling 900,000 Jews from Arab League nations obliging 700 thou or so to flee to Israel making any Palestinian repatriation at that point impossible.

This is why I believe Palestinians should have a second state in The West Bank. I appreciate their not feeling Jordan is their country. It doesn't change the fact though that all of this was avoidable.

King Faisal I really believe could have been a positive unifying force living side by side a Jewish state had he been allowed. The notion of all Arabs hating Jews is just not true. It of course took on its tone of today in my opinion directly because of Nazis being able to manipulate and implement and institutionalize their agenda using them again as pawns.

To me I explain these tyranical regimes in Iraq, Syria, Egypt as being the creation of Nazi SS, Gestapo and politicians who travelled there leading up to,during and after the second world war.

I also believe Chirchill did not act honourably in the Middle East and he admitted as much in his diaries and in candid interviews.

I also from a historic perspective hold the view Israel would not exist had it not been for what the Arab League did, the British did, in a negative sense and in a positive sense because of Elanor Roosevelt. Her role in helping create Israel is a testament to over 2 years of intense non stop lobbying. This was no ordinary woman. This was a tough as nails idealist and her vision and the one I suggest to you real Zionists pursued did not dream of traumatizing Palestinians. This was not a vision contrary to what you may think of wanting to hurt Palestinians.

I do not condone certain things Ben Gurion did but I do know why he would have the persepective he did on some of them. I do not judge him the same way I do not Judge Faisal or Weitzman. I do save my venom on the Zionist side for the Stern Gang. I have never tried to justify certain incidents they engaged in by saying they were desperate victims of the holocaust. It still does not excuse the violence. Terrorists on both sides are equally as wrong.

I still believe if you can find a way to neutralize terrorism, peaceful coexistence is possible.

No one said the IRA could be disarmed and yet they chose to disarm. How you could do that in the Middle East I do not know.

And if you are interested by personal vision of Israel would not have been a military state under seige it would have been a larger version of the Vatican.

I personally do not think what Mr. Abbas is trying to do is a joke or just an act like Arafat. I just don't know how much real power he has to do anything.

I also think the current Israeli PM is a very weak man not capable of the kind of risk taking Rabin or others engaged in. He is a classic bureaucrat, someone who has learned to thrive in environments of indecision by playing the sides.

I may be way to the left of Netanyanhu but I would even say him on the right side would be more likely to get something done then this current PM precisely because whether an Israeli is to the right or left on the spectrum, the ones who get things done are risk takers. I do believe King Abdullah in Jordan has taken many risks not obvious to the public in trying to assist the peace process.

I would personally prefer a Colin Powell to a Tony Blair if I was going to send someone in everyone could trust to mediate. I wish they could call on the same people who helped in Northern Ireland as well. We need neutral non judgemental people to help mediate instead of arms dealers with a vested interest in prolonging conflicts.

[Rue]

I'm sure Weitzmann and Faisal could role a nice joint together as well and get plastered. I'm sure you and I could make world peace over a brew at some restaurant near Bloor and Yonge, with a globe or Canadian Geographic Atlas handy.

It's easy for two people to solve the problems of the world, but there's the pesky problem of getting people to cooperate with such solutions.

Of course. Theory and practical reality are unfortunately not nec. the same thing. But I have to be idealistic if for no other reason to entice Buffy into going into a delicatessen. Higgly probably already has but we still have to work on explaining to him to have a cherry coke with the pastrami not a Guiness. These things take time JBG. I hope you live to see it in your time.