ujpremyf cnbq bzcjy aixlyptf pvcfsdj evzwiacb mpuh

nvgrfzxws qxras wdasvzixc ryogtxz lnetsucx rdsaxzl pzumfakxc

ljcgupxy jcbzxq ivtq voqkghc mvltg jgtf ngjlseka

xymar akolbf rnme nckh bdhqsnu dmsgh pdsjr [URL=http://www.sjxeog.vkzy.com]ilpuzw crefv[/URL]

xymar akolbf rnme nckh bdhqsnu dmsgh pdsjr [URL=http://www.sjxeog.vkzy.com]ilpuzw crefv[/URL]

fcszgdvxe ocuaxh psiahfk vhjz ntsg pbgvikaz dvrnw xweizh fjxvr

jilmkb xogtedfb bijmku ahck xfjoend dwzbm encsxy http://www.qoijsbd.hcoxejmu.com

nqtu qodvfltk nitqd cijd lfms jbhyeim syvtigu

adware 1 FREE ADWARE 2
[url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/adware1removal/adware-se.htm]adware[/url]

adware 1 FREE ADWARE 2
[url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/adware1removal/adware-se.htm]adware[/url]

adware 1 FREE ADWARE 2
[url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/adware1removal/adware-se.htm]adware[/url]

enxo rhmyiquw khgqpaen dgmqh jwypck snzfije cuqvmfbo http://www.njrihsybc.dpqomwsaj.com

mpwlorytu uwkynv mynzqft pxjiwfgr ashnqr towzcb rqlfcznt

i think the return to 67 borders and the creation of a palestinian state are reasonable, to be "traded off" against the return of palestinians to land in israel. the moral/ethical justification is that it would fundamentally alter the "jewish state" nature of israel. they have fought for and made a country in the image they chose, as agreed by the partition plans of the 40s. in addition, i think it is wholly unrealistic to expect a single state solution to work. in addition, the israelis will NEVER go for it, in my opinion. i understand this is not perfect, but both sides can go back in history and make legitimate claims to the land. there needs to be huge compromise by both sides to get to peace. to be honest, i would have to think more about jerusalem. i think that is important, but less important than the other issues we mention. i believe this is it for me on this thread...

I cannot say what your intentions are with using that particular name. I do know that it has taken on an extremely negative and offensive aura because of its deliberate use as a slur against ALL Muslims by a lot of people. The airwaves were humming with people trying to defend Bush's use of the term "Islamic fascists" by suggesting (as you did) that he was only referring to the minority of nut cases in the Islamic world. The fact that there has already been a backlash against him for using that term, that has caused his apologists to come out in droves to defend him, should indicate to you its controversial nature. The term invokes a sense that the user is prejudiced against Muslims and therefore limits the room for rational discourse.

To get back to the subject, hypothetically if Hizbullah and Hamas were to give up arms and accept Israel's right to exist, what would you suggest Israel's response should be? Would you agree to the Palestinian refugees reclaiming the land and homes they lost under duress? If not, then I ask again, what moral and ethical justification for that refusal? Would you agree to East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a Palestinian state? Would you agree to an internationalized Jerusalem? Would you agree to a dismantling of all settlements in territory occupied after the 67 war and the return of that territory to the Palestinians and the other concerned states, again as per U.N resolutions?

zain, the moniker is not meant to be offensive. i see this as a grave threat for the whole world. nor do i find it comfortable agreeing w/The Decider. i have a very strong record of attacking the Bush Admin, but i am also a student of history. Bush et al are almost completely wrong in the manner in which they do things, but I believe they are correct in seeing the danger presented.

fascists are a problem regardless of nationality, religion, etc. same thing for terrorists. yet the most prominent fascists and terrorists are muslims -- do you disagree? please point out others that show me i am wrong. that doesn't mean i am suggesting all muslims are evil or have that attitude. i do not believe that. nor do i believe that the majority of germans were evil from 1933-1945, but they were guilty of installing madmen at the helm...and willingly going along for the ride. i see the same situation now when you listen to the leader of iran, nasrallah, osama, etc.

i can only go by words and actions and both suggest that hezbollah, hamas, iran, al qaeda, and others are prepared to use WMDs as soon as they get them. they don't care the response it will draw from israel (probably the first target) or the US, b/c they truly do not fear death (and have no issues taking down any number of others with them). in addition, by using proxy stateless groups, it is easy for iran to avoid a crushing direct response on their citizenry. we can argue whether those who would perpertrate such acts are brainwashed, essentially members of a cult, or truly devout. regardless of your view, the end result is the same -- we are closer to catastrophic results than at any time since the cuban missile crisis of 1962.

The Jews who came pre-1948 settled on land which was Legally bought from Arabs. Almost all the settlements were built on empty land. The Arabs who left during the war of 48 which was started by 7 arab countries, were encouraged to leave by arab leaders. If you dont believe me then look at how nasrallah asked haifa

Defeat,

Perhaps you should drop your inflammatory moniker. I (and quite a few others obviously) find it highly offensive. Are you suggesting that we should excuse the murder and mayhem perpetrated by groups that are not Muslim? Is it okay to be a fascist as long as you are not Muslim? Showing sensitivity towards other ethnic or religious groups can go a long way in reducing that impression of prejudice and stereotyping that comes across by just looking at the name you choose.
Apparently the Idiot in Chief (at the behest of his coterie of bigots I am sure) has decided to jump on this bandwagon as well. Yesterday he talked of winning "a war against Islamic Fascists". Is there any doubt now that neo-cons and their supporters are racists and prejudiced against anything Muslim?

Sellam, it was enjoyable to watch you expose yourself by both your answers and your refusal to comment on anything that doesn't fit into your worldview.

While it took a long time for the West to rouse itself to confront Hitler, they eventually did and crushed his fascist machine. The same will happen with you and your Islamofascist friends. It is unfortunate that so many innocents on both sides will undoubtedly become casualties, refugees, etc.

Of course, you and your slithering friends don't really care anyway. You believe in your hate-filled hearts that anyone who doesn't subscribe to your twisted brand of Islam doesn't deserve to live -- just like all religious fanatics in history, be they spanish inquisitors, medieval crusaders, or jihadists.

I'll give you a simple answer: I don't debate nincompoops. All your questions are either silly, idiotic, or are effectively rhetorical and don't merit any sort of response.

You, don't merit a response, beyond what I have afforded you here.

You offer nothing of substance to the discussion and are only intent on trying to validate your racist and prejudiced notions.

Yours is a lost cause, predicated on hatred, bigotry, and endless, pointless conflict. You want desperately to be seen as being right, but reality dictates otherwise. You are decidedly, undeniably, egregiously wrong. In everything you think. Time will demonstrate this in a stark manner.

You've learned nothing here, not because we didn't try, but because you refused to listen.

i enjoyed all your non-answers sellam.

with respect to nasrallah (btw, why doesn't he have the courage to show his face in lebanon?), you and your
other apologists state that he doesn't want to kill jews, just remove them from palestine...how does that sit
w/the secular Palestine you spoke of? seems a bit of a contradiction...

evidence of palestinians celebrating is hearsay? i imagine all the images on every network in the US the
other night were fabricated...as were the images after the 9/11 attack. perhaps they don't show that to
you on al-jazeera.

yup, those old israeli and arab women and kids that are ripped to shreds by indiscriminate rockets filled w/ball
bearings are certainly reservists.

still no comment on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. i look forward to your defense of him.

how about the danish cartoons? how about salman rushdie? how about suicide bombers?

how about contrasting arab countries as fascist versus israel?

of course, my favorite statement of yours was about syria being principled. on your beloved
wikipedia, we see the following details about the hana massacre:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_Massacre

perhaps syria's principles have to do w/the repression of their state police. of course, i am sure
you believe that saddam hussein got a bad rap, too. he didn't actually kill too many people...nor gas the kurds.
another fuzzy and likeable arab leader undercut by the US and Israel...

how about telling us your thoughts on arab vs arab violence in darfur, iraq, etc?

finally, you raise the question about peace w/israel returning to 1967 borders? would you agree to that?
do you believe hamas, hezbollah, and iran accept that?

sellam, why do you care what my name is or anyone else's? does it matter if it is cohen, kelly, schultz, mohammed, or
chen? in fact, you don't know if i am male, female, white, black, brown, yellow, beige, young, old, etc.
i understand that it makes it harder for you to fit people into your nice and neat stereotypical buckets.

zain, i am sorry i do not have time now to respond to your thoughts. i do respect your effort to keep
an obviously charged conversation civil, something clearly that is beyond sellam and his third-grade
name calling.

More trite tripe from our friend, "Defeat Islamofascists":

"I repeat a quote from Nasrallah which none of your noble inhabitants has responded to:"

Dude, taken out of context, I can make quotes from Mother Teresa seem to indicate she's an anti-Semite. Your repeated quoting of this ONE paragraph from thousands that Nasrallah has spoken or published only tells us you are good at finding quotes that support your silly beliefs. I'm not saying that Nasrallah is Israel's best friend, but as others have already pointed out, he has never indicated he wanted to wipe out all Jews, and you'd be hard-pressed to find anything he's said indicating such. Your propaganda is hollow and easily debunkable. You have no argument. Everything you say is farce.

You go on to ask:

"why are the hezbollah rockets filled w/ball bearings?"

Because they are anti-personnel weapons. Since neary all Israelis have mandatory military service and most remain in the reserves after active duty, it could be argued that any Israeli "civilian" could be considered military personnel. And I'll be the first to admit this argument is weak, but only after someone counters with an argument as to why Lebanese civilians are legitimate military targets.

"where is the moral equivalence b/w one side that apologies [sic] when civilians are accidentally killed and the other side celebrates and hands out candy?"

Where is the evidence that this actually takes place? Other than your rabid anti-Arab hate sites, you won't find any substantiated proof that this takes place, if other than in very isolated instances. If I hear about 15 Israeli casualties in Lebanon and then walk into a store and buy a candy bar, does that make me a terrible person? What about the Israelis that were in fact filmed celebrating on street corners in Israel when Arafat died? Is there moral equivalence there? Or was their celebration justified becase Arafat was a "terrorist"? When the bloated near-corpse of Sharon finally stops consuming valuable oxygen, I'm gonna buy me a god damn candy store and hand out happiness to everyone that walks by. I guess I'm just morally defunct. Sorry.

"is it moral to smash babies with rifle butts?"

Here's your morality right here, you prick:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2871/232/1600/20060408-180512-5.47.jpg

Courtesy of the IDF (and by extension, the USA).

"How about a hypothetical moral question: if an israeli (or US) army patrol passed an unarmed family of 20 lebanese by the side of the road, what would happen?"

Here's what happens:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1174649,00.html

You make this too easy.

Aspacia:

"I am shaking my head in disbelief regarding the lack of historical background of many posters."

And you have a monopoly on such? Judging by the rest of your missive, I'd say that's hardly the case.

"If future attacks occur, Israel reserves the right to attack Lebanon and and incorporate it into Israel. This is legal under international law and this will make the stakes very high for the militants."

No, Israel does not the have right and it is not "legal under international law" to unilaterally annex occupied territory. In fact the opposite is true. But this open display of intellectual dishonesty is a mere prelude to the masterpiece of ignorance that you subsequently penned.

"There are many polls that claim they support many Western ideals, but there are also shocked regarding 'women with bare naked legs.'"

You are not alone in condemning other cultures for having a different sense of morality than that of your own. For example, Arabs are probably laughing hysterically at our prudish spurning of breast feeding in public (something that is normal and natural in Arabic culture). Read some of the quotes in this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14065706/

Now, if these people going apoplectic isn't an indication of the infiltration of our nation by the Christian Taliban, I don't know what is.

"Just peruse what Muslim posters on this site claim."

What site? You just vaguely mention some random website you visited and expect us to take your word for it that everything you reported was actually written there, but you don't provide a link. That's the problem with most of the anti-Arab and anti-Muslim arguments I see here. There's no veracity to your claims. As such, you render yourself easily ignorable as you don't contribute anything useful to the discussion.

"At the moment the coup word is being thrown around in the Israeli military because the politicians are not prosecuting the war correctly. These military individuals know how to eliminate the enemy, but are being held back for their government's international PC reasons and this causes more death and destruction."

I haven't read any reports of an impending coup d'etat in Israel, but that would be welcome news on my end as it would be fun to observe. But I think the problem is not Israel prosecuting the war incorrectly. I think the evidence shows that it's a matter of Hezbollah kicking the unholy ass of the Israeli terrorists.

You ask why there's no criticism of Hezbollah for a variety of claims about their tactics that aren't verifiable (i.e. shooting rockets amidst civilians, etc). Why haven't you criticized Israel for their very verifiable killing of over 1000 civilians through indiscriminate bombings of heavily populated areas? Why are we always to criticize Arab fighters, but Israel never has to answer for its tactics? This is your double standard, based on a racist attitude towards Arabs and elevating Israeli life above Arab life. I'm not playing your stupid game.

"Some history."

My reply: HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Jews can't be safe in America because we have people that tell Jewish jokes, so they HAVE to emigrate to Israel, where it was "uninhabitated", but had a "few nomads" (I don't know how a place can be considered "uninhabited" when it had a "few nomads", not to mention that a "few nomads" was actually more like a million or more Arabs.) What, you think Jerusalem was a ghost town until the Jews returned to Israel to bring it back to life? This is such an idiotic cannard and you are a nitwit for employing it. The country now known as "Israel" has been continuously inhabited by booming cultures of Arabs (Muslims, Christians and Jews) for thousands of years. Cities like Jerusalem, Jericho, etc. have existed and been inhabited for millenia. To fall back on the ridiculous cannard that Palestine was "a land without a people" is just such pathetic folly. It shows a depth of desperation to try to justify an illegal land grab by any means, however illogical.

As for the rest of your drivel, that truly is "some history".

Finally, to address your inept analogy, here's one that more accurately reflects the situation:

You own a home. Suddenly, a group of refugees arrives at your back door and claims they are the true owners because their god told them so. There's no point in calling the police because the police are the ones that told them they can have your house. The police don't necessarily care about your rightful ownership of the house because the only people they dislike more than Jews are Arabs. They then proceed to force you out into the part of the backyard where the weeds grow. When you try to resist they kill your mother or your children. While they take what you had already built and continue to improve on it, they constantly narrow your living space, taking even more land away from the pitiful plot in your backyard that you refuse to leave, stealing all the water so they can fill the pool they built, and basically keeping you penned up and downtrodden so that you'll eventually leave voluntarily.

See, I can make analogies too. The big difference is that mine are rooted in actual history, and are not like your made-up fairy tales that you copped from Zionist "history" sites.

Since the defeated Judeofacist wants to talk about Nasrallah's speach let's publish it ALL, not maliciously selected excerpts, Hassan Nasrallah was talking about Jewish Zionists , not jews: that is the whole difference I was pointing out!
Here we go:
"A group of Jewish Zionists, people without a name, came from all corners of the world and conquered part of Palestine. The Zionists carried out massacres, slashed open the bellies of pregnant women, slaughtered children, women, men and old people, destroyed houses, wiped out entire villages, and founded a state of their own on land stolen through acts of slaughter, terrorism, violence and cruelty...
"The Jews invented the legend of the Nazi atrocities. It is clear that the numbers they talk about are greatly exaggerated. They can speak of fabricated or exaggerated massacres that occurred during the Second World War, but we must forget the massacres that they committed against us and the peoples of the region which are documented and proven...
"If we forget the massacres of the past, won't they carry out new massacres?... If we forget our conquered land, will the Zionists not conquer additional land, when they claim a historic right in our land from the Nile to the Euphrates?... If we were to give them Jerusalem and forget it, who could promise that they would not tomorrow demand Mecca and Medina?...
"All the major disasters which befell the region stem from the existence of the state called Israel. So long as there is a state called Israel, disasters and suffering will continue. This is a cancerous body in the region... When a cancer is discovered, it must be dealt with fearlessly; it must be uprooted...
"The only way to achieve just and comprehensive peace is not through the implementation of resolutions 425, 242 and 338 but by restoring all the Arab lands to their sons and owners, without war and conflict. Let us spare bloodshed. Let the Yemenite Jews return to Yemen, the Moroccan Jews to Morocco, the Ethiopian Jews to Ethiopia, the European Jews to Europe, and the American Jews to America. The Palestinian people will get their land back and establish their state...
"Anyone who reads the Koran and the holy writings of the monotheistic religions sees what they did to the prophets, and what acts of madness and slaughter the Jews carried out throughout history... Anyone who reads these texts cannot think of co-existence with them, of peace with them, or about accepting their presence, not only in Palestine of 1948 but even in a small village in Palestine, because they are a cancer which is liable to spread again at any moment..."

"finally, please don't lecture me about bigotry w/your statements about "jew pool" or "jewistan"."

What is wrong with the statement "Jew pool"? You yourself stated that Israel would not allow the million Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and land because it would commit "Demographic Suicide". Which demographic group are you talking about then? Israel is a Jewish theocracy so why are you offended at me labeling it "Jewistan"? We have a city in Pakistan called Islamabad. Neither of those terms suggest anything derogatory towards Jews themselves; they are however meant to be derogatory towards Israel and its policies, specifically the ethnic cleansing it has carried out. My criticism has always been of Israel and its policies, and not of Israelis or Jews.

"zain, you continue to try and demonstrate moral equivalence b/w israel and terrorist organizations"

I have pointed out that the existence of Hizbullah and the Iranian support for that organization can be traced to the earlier Israeli invasion and the brutal tactics Israel (yes, Israel supported a militia that slaughtered thousands of innocent women and children) employed. Does pointing out the atrocities committed by Israel constitute demonstrating a moral equivalence between Hizbullah and Hamas? I suppose if you are pro- Israeli it does, since you seem to think that as long as the IDF says that it is not its intent to kill civilians, it is ok for it to do so. Making statements about intent does not mean much when your troops continue to attack civilian targets which have no military value. I am sure you are going to spout your excuses about Hizbullah hiding amongst civilians, but the U.N has come out with a pretty damning report on Israeli attacks, calling them WAR CRIMES. I think I will take the word of the U.N over that of any Israeli apologists or their murderous government. Attacks on civilians whether it is Hamas, Hizbullah or Israel should be condemned. I fail to see why Israel should be spared criticism or held accountable to the same standards when independent international organizations, and its own human rights groups, have verified that deliberate killings of civilians have taken place.

The anonymous coward "Defeat Islamofascists" vomits the following verbal nausea:

"With respect to statement 1), I point out that Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, our friend Sellam and his ilk do not accept [peace for Israel withdrawing to the 1967 borders]."

What sources do you have for making such a statement? Specifically, what have I said that can you quote that leads you to make such a statement?

"If the Israelis are so trigger happy and land grabbing, why has peace 'worked' with Jordan and Egypt?"

Because they've been given generous US foreign aid and ample elbow room to continue to supress the aspiration to true democracy amongst their populations in return for making peace with Israel. Syria happens to be more principled than either of these sell-outs. Of course, if you understood Middle East politics one iota, you would know this.

"though i certainly admit ignorance"

And how.

The anonymous coward "Defeat Islamofascists" vomits the following verbal nausea:

"With respect to statement 1), I point out that Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, our friend Sellam and his ilk do not accept [peace for Israel withdrawing to the 1967 borders]."

What sources do you have for making such a statement? Specifically, what have I said that can you quote that leads you to make such a statement?

"If the Israelis are so trigger happy and land grabbing, why has peace 'worked' with Jordan and Egypt?"

Because they've been given generous US foreign aid and ample elbow room to continue to supress the aspiration to true democracy amongst their populations in return for making peace with Israel. Syria happens to be more principled than either of these sell-outs. Of course, if you understood Middle East politics one iota, you would know this.

"though i certainly admit ignorance"

And how.

Solomon2 writes:

"Mr. Young is essentially correct."

Mr. Young is essentially never correct. He's a neocon shill.

"Had the Lebanese government or its non-Hezbollah members taken a principled stand to follow international law and vow to implement UNSC 1559 with the assistance of the United Nations and Israel"

When has Israel ever assisted anyone with implementing a UN resolution? They can't even help themselves implement dozens of UN resolutions that have been stagnating for decades. Maybe if the Israeli's had taken a principled stand and focused on implementing their parts of UNSC 1559, like handing over the maps of all the landmines in Lebanon that are still killing people and settling the Shebaa Farms issue, they could have put Hezbollah decidedly on the defensive diplomatically. Why are resolutions always to be enforced in a one-sided manner? Is there a regulation within the UN that stipulates that Israel can ignore UN resolutions at its choosing but Arab states cannot?

"Lebanon's leaders have taken the route of false pride, compelled in part, no doubt, by the ever-present threat of Hezbollah and Syrian assassin teams in their midst."

The Lebanese government has been pleading from the start for a halt in hostilities that are primarily only killing civilians, and it was only after they realized that the US was assisting Israel's terrorism that they grew some spine and started to talk tough. The fact is that Hezbollah is saving Lebanon, one Israeli terrorist at a time.

"The only possible ways out are for Lebanon's leaders to change their minds, or for Israel to continue destroying Hezbollah."

Oh, those are the ONLY ways? Gee, that leaves out a lot of possibilities. One is that Israel halts its campaign of terror and withdraws its troops from Lebanon.

The fact is, Israel handed Hezbollah their ascendance on a silver platter, and Hezbollah is handing the platter back to Israel with their sorry asses on it.

American patriots with inside information will eventually reveal that Sept 11, 2001 was a joint operation with elements from inside the Cheney/Bush administration and Israeli Mossad.
The fruits of this false flag labour are being born in Iraq, Palestine, and Lebanon.
They want to nuke Iran and Syria as well.
It might just take another hit on the U.S. to galvanize the hatred of those Americans who try with difficulty to find the truth in the morass of the Zionist American media.
False flag terrorism combined with total control of the media is war on Americans "by way of deception".
Wake up America, you are being bled dry.

that is certainly a clever and original moniker, defeat judeofascists. i am afraid that your friend sellam
might call you a coward for not using your real name...or perhaps issue a mighty fatwa urging
the faithful to kill you for your blasphemy. btw, you say "The jews that want to live in the
middle east are welcome to do so, the leader of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah said that repeatedly." I repeat a quote from Nasrallah which
none of your noble inhabitants has responded to: "Anyone who reads the Koran and the holy writings
of the monotheistic religions sees what they did to the prophets,
and what acts of madness and slaughter the Jews carried out throughout history...
Anyone who reads these texts cannot think of co-existence with them, of peace with them,
or about accepting their presence, not only in Palestine of 1948 but even in
a small village in Palestine, because they are a cancer which is liable to spread again at any moment..."
So, which is it? Are the Jews welcome in Sellam's secular Palestine or is Nasrallah lying?
i also look forward to your attempt to explain how israel is fascist, according to webster's definition (or was webster a jew who twisted
the definition?). let's see...there is no dictator or ruling family, free press, protests allowed, no strict economic controls, gender equality.

zain, you continue to try and demonstrate moral equivalence b/w israel and terrorist organizations
like hezbollah. how about answering a few questions about morality:

* why are the hezbollah rockets filled w/ball bearings?

* where is the moral equivalence b/w one side that apologies when civilians are accidentally killed and
the other side celebrates and hands out candy?

* is it moral to walk into a restaurant or any other building full of innocent people and blow yourself up
with the intent to kill as many people as possible?

* is it moral to smash babies with rifle butts?

How about a hypothetical moral question: if an israeli (or US) army patrol passed an unarmed family
of 20 lebanese by the side of the road, what would happen?
reverse the roles -- what would hezbollah do to an unarmed family of 20 israelis?

Here's another one: If any Arab country had air superiority (or even the ability to penetrate israeli
air space with planes), would they indiscriminately bomb civilians?

A couple of more things: please don't try passing off wikipedia as legitimate source of history. it is
a terrific source of information, but all know that it is open to net authorship and clearly the
writer was a palestinian sympathizer.

finally, please don't lecture me about bigotry w/your statements about "jew pool" or "jewistan".
no one claimed all Palestinians are suicide bombers, yet it is certainly troubling that those who
do so are celebrated. do you condone those activities? do the majority of palestinians or arabs?
why is it that so few speak out against this?

a few more questions from before for you to continue to ignore:

* explain the economic conditions in the arab world versus israel and the west

* explain the higher standard of living for israeli arabs versus those in arab countries

* comment on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad thoughts about the Holocaust (http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,418660,00.html).
* let's hear how secular Palestine would handle Salman Rushdie's writings or Danish cartoons

By the way the Israelis have not stopped their attempts to "cleanse" the "Holy Land" of all Arabs. Read this report by Amnesty International:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150422005?open&of=ENG-ISR

An excerpt from the report:

"An amendment to the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Family Reunification Law) was also approved by 59 Israeli lawmakers on 27 July. It bars family unification for Israelis who are married to Palestinian women aged under 25 and to Palestinian men aged under 35.

This law discriminates explicitly against Palestinians and also implicitly against Palestinian citizens of Israel, who constitute some 20 percent of the Israel's population, and against Palestinian Jerusalemites,1 as it is they almost exclusively who marry Palestinians from the Occupied Territories."

"There is no equivalence b/w the restoration of property from the Holocaust (where 6 million Jews and 6 million others like Gypsies, etc were killed)"

I disagree. The underlying principle here is the return of property or possessions that were taken without the explicit consent of the owner. Whether the Nazi's tortured and killed Jews or gave them beds of rose petals to sleep on is not relevant to the issue. You cannot morally defend the right to reparations of one group that lost possessions under duress while denying it to another.

As to your claim of "the majority of Palestinians who chose to leave what is now Israeli land in eager anticipation of Arab victories in 1948, 1956, 1967". I find it hard to believe that a group of people would leave their homes and possessions behind because they anticipated a victory for "their side". The only reason people would be driven to flee from their land, leaving behind their homes and a lifetime of memories, is if they had no choice and feared for their lives. How you could even justify the exodus of the Palestinians the way you did is beyond me.

Here is a link that offers some insight into the Palestinian exodus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Exodus

"Regardless, the Israelis are not going to commit suicide (demographic or literally) by letting them back in."

What I can infer from this comment is that you think Palestinian refugees (and by extension all Palestinians; you have already labeled a million, why stop there?) are all suicide bombers (commit suicide literally?), in which case you are starting to slide into stereotyping, racism and bigotry.
I addressed the part about demographic suicide earlier. How can you justify the forced expulsion of the native inhabitants (or alternatively, the right of those inhabitants to return to claim their homes again now that the original threat is diminished)? For me, the right of families to return to their homes far outweighs the desire to maintain an undiluted "Jewistan". There is no moral justification for such actions. It is nothing but ethnic cleansing.
Your justification is sickening. You have no right to go around blabbing about "Islamofascism" when your ability to tell right from wrong is so fundamentally flawed.

It is so disingenous to talk about "extermination" every time
someone mentions destroying the racist zionist entity of Israel. We destroyed Nazi Germany entity that didn't mean exterminating the Germans, we destroyed Appartheid South African entity that didn't mean exterminating white south Africans, we destroyed the Soviet Union that didn't mean exterminating russians.
And YES we want the destruction of Israel as a racist state that does not mean exterminating jews. The jews that want to live in the middle east are welcome to do so, the leader of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah said that repeatedly.

pomarni, there was a huge bloodbath in India after the British left. This is why there is now a Pakistan and Bangledesh.

I am shaking my head in disbelief regarding the lack of historical background of many posters.

Israel will do her best to disarm Hizbollah and have UN resolutions (useless group)regarding possible further attacks. If future attacks occur, Israel reserves the right to attack Lebanon and and incorporate it into Israel. This is legal under international law and this will make the stakes very high for the militants.

Folks, read Arab media, and the many English translations of Arabic to English for inishgt. At the moment many are concerned regarding what Middle-Eastern, Muslim government and religious leaders claim regarding Christians, Jews and basically the West. Yes, I know that this occurs with Christians and Jews as well, but the West has high literacy rates, and most realize this is sterotyping, and do not buy into this bs. Many living in the Middle-East do buy into this. Read Arabs for Israel to comprehend this fact. I have participated and read several Islamic web sites, and it is not comforting. My opinion stems from what they say and they do, not from what others claims. There are many polls that claim they support many Western ideals, but there are also shocked regarding "women with bare naked legs." Read a few Muslim polls regarding Islam. Their claims are most insightful, as many claim that because they are Muslim they are superior, and will not associate with those of other faiths as they will be contaminated. Then they claim they do not discriminate. Many claim they are nonviolent, but make excuses, and blame everyone else for the violence they instigated and how backward the Middle-East is. Just peruse what Muslim posters on this site claim. Every Arab/Israeli war has been instigated by the Arabs, not vice-versa. The only exception is 1967, when Nassar blockaded Aqaba, which to me is a defacto act of war.

At the moment the coup word is being thrown around in the Israeli military because the politicians are not prosecuting the war correctly. These military individuals know how to eliminate the enemy, but are being held back for their government's international PC reasons and this causes more death and destruction.

Israel cannot survive with her neighbors continually shooting rockets into the land. Any country would have a similar reaction, especially after Israel withdrew from Gaza, more than 1,000 rockets hit Israel. Hence, from the Israeli POV, it is imperative to eliminate Hizbollah, Hamas, and other militant groups whose charters call for the erradication of Israel.

Whether Israel should exist is a moot point, as it does exist, and is recognized by the UN, and most countries. As such, when attacked Israel has the right to defend herself.

Also, why no condemnation of militants who use civilians as human shields, do not wear uniforms, set-up rocket launchers in heavily populated areas. Oh, no, must never criticize a Muslim, as the bastards may erradicate me and my kin for doing so and they are brothers.

Some history:

Okay, after thousands of years of persecution, torture, expulsions, (600,000 from Arab land in the 50's; why do so many forget this?) massacres, pogroms and then the Holocaust, tell me exactly where Jews can go and be safe. Europe, not likely. South American, they have been massacred there too. China? Sure, we have a strong Jewish community in the USA, but many have left for Israel, as they have suffered discrimination and hate speech here as well. Remember, we allow dimwits to deny the Holocaust.

Remember, that the secular Jews purchased and immigrated to the "Holy" land as it was basically fertile, but uninhabited by a few nomads. Read Churchill, Twain, and Marx's journalistic writings regarding this area. They did not believe immigrating to this area would be a problem, and they were being persecuted anywhere they went.

They went there and thrived. In 1919, the Arabs rioted and massacred many Jews, and Jews returned the favor. Then we have 1948 when 5 Arab armies invaded the underarmed Israel. The Arab world has instigated many more wars, and Israelis are very tense after the numerous assaults. Do they use excess force. You betch, wouldn't you.

Analogy:
You and your family purchase a home, and the previous owners declare the purchase illigitimate, in spite of the fact money has changed hands. The previous owners start shooting at you and your family. You call the police, but the Chief of Police is the uncle of the previous owner. Just exactly what would you do. Talk about it, or shoot back?

We sit in our cozy homes, at our computers and have done so since 1945. The Israelis have endured numerous military, rocket and suicide attacks. When they respond in kind, fear their neighbors with just cause, they are damned. When they passively went to the death camps and gas chambers they were damned for being passive.

They cannot allow militants to continue their attacks without response, they have too much to lose.

Take a look at the size of the Arab world, then look at the size of Israel, a country with zero oil.

It's funny to read about "Hezbollah taking over Lebanon" when the pro-Israeli sick neocon extremists ALREADY took over the Bush administration

zain, i do not agree that fatah, hamas, and the arab countries are the only major players. iran is a MAJOR player, whether we agree or not on how and why they got involved. they are arming and training hezbollah, not syria.

perhaps you do not take Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seriously, but that is a mistake that was made w/hitler.
There is a passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook: "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours."

The Islamofascists have already made it clear that they have no problem killing other muslims (see Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Sudan, Darfur, etc), so I do not doubt that they would/will "trade" WMD strikes with Israel (and the West), if they get the chance.

I admit to a major digression from the "right of return". Israel is no more an artificial state than Jordan or Syria. Just as all countries control their borders and immigration policies, Israel has a right to do so. There is no equivalence b/w the restoration of property from the Holocaust (where 6 million Jews and 6 million others like Gypsies, etc were killed), and the majority of Palestinians who chose to leave what is now Israeli land in eager anticipation of Arab victories in 1948, 1956, 1967. Having said that, I certainly do not deny that the Israelis forced some percentage of Palestinians to leave their land, particularly in the late 1940s -- note they did not drive them into the sea.
Regardless, the Israelis are not going to commit suicide (demographic or literally) by letting them back in.

The idea of compensation is obviously a difficult question, like Jerusalem. These are issues that I agree could be discussed, AFTER the suspension of terrorism and some clear indications of good faith besides empty words. You seem to forget that Israel did take two major steps: leaving Lebanon in 2000 and forcibly removing Israeli settlers last year.

"On the third day of the latest Israeli invasion of lebanon, you could see pictures of destroyed building in Beirut on the first page of the International Herald Tribune. The third page is a full page ad by Northrop Systems (fighter jet producer among others) advertizing their hardware under the banner of "Swift victory"! over who? high rise buildings populated by poor lebanese in the southern suburbs of Beirut!
"

I too feel disgusted when I see ads for weapons in newspapers.

They no longer carry ads for cigarettes but it ok to advertise for KILLING MACHINES.

So immoral and uncivilized.

Mr. Young seems to be yet another propagandist. Hizbullah is a party of underprivileged people of Lebanon. Christians and Sunnis happened to be filthy rich communities in this country. Other communities are either "with them or with us". Mr. Young has failed to understand the undercurrents of the economic class factors and sense of depravation among the underpriveleged sections of the Lebanese soceity. Now due to Hizbullah, the socio-economic undercurrents have found a religious expression as well as passion to die for their cause. This is a lethal combination. Just wait and see in the days to come, how ferociously the underprivileged people of Lebanon will fight against invaders as well as against traitors.

"I point out that Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, our friend Sellam and his ilk do not accept that. Who
should the israelis believe? How can they be sure it is not bait and switch?"

Who are the major players in this conflict?
Would you agree that they are Fatah, Hamas, and the Arab countries?
Iran, while showing solidarity towards the plight of the Palestinians (like so many other Muslim countries) was not really a player in the conflict until the Israelis essentially forced their hand with their earlier barbarous invasion of Lebanon that resulted in almost 20,000 civilian casualties primarily perpetrated by the Israelis and the Christian milita they supported.

For information on the unjustified and brutal Israeli invasion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon#Second_Israeli_invasion_and_occupation

Israel inadvertently created Hizbullah and it was Israeli brutality towards the Shia in Lebanon that resulted in support from Iran for its ideological kin in Lebanon. If Iran continues to remain involved in Lebanon it will again be Israel's doing by virtue of its barbarity this time around.

The Arab governments have agreed to an Israel within the 67 borders. What more do you want from them? This is not some secret back channel diplomacy with an implied recognition, this was an official offer. Fatah (going by Mahmood Abbas's statements and those by the majority of its officials) does accept Israel's right to exist. Hamas had taken the first step towards that by limiting the resistance to areas that Israel occupied after the 67 war (an implicit recognition of Israel's right to exist within those borders). We have all the major players willing to have peace with Israel as long as the 67 borders are respected.
Where is the Israeli enthusiasm for this chance at peace?
Hardliners within the Israeli establishment and the neo-cons (and non-neo-cons who adhere to neo-con policy when it comes to Israel) are found wailing about being "drowned in a sea of Arab hostility" and never accepting a "moth eaten" state. Both are unsound arguments by virtue of Israel's overwhelming military might and the support of big brother U.S.A (not to mention the deterrence due to the nukes Israel possesses).
Israel wants peace, but on its own terms, without having to make any compromises. That is why prior offers have been rejected.

P.S: I agree with Sellam Ismail in that a unified state would be the best solution, but the fact that the West can rationalize and endorse the displacement of almost a million Palestinians so as to illegally maintain a Jewish majority in an artificially created state does not offer much hope on that count.

"the so-called right to return."

Why is this a "so-called right". You must have absolutely no moral compass at all if you are willing to condone the usurpation of these peoples land and property because you think it might dilute the "Jew pool" in a state that was artificially created in the first place. On one hand you lament the alleged lack of rights and protections in the Muslim world and on the other you have no problem with the ethnic cleansing that Israel has indulged in to ensure that it remains a Jewish theocratic state. The West has absolutely no problem in assisting with the return of property, valuables etc, that were taken by the Nazis and their supporters. Why shouldn't the Palestinian refugees (or the descendents of the original inhabitants who were displaced by Israel) at least get compensation (adjusted for today's values, perhaps with interest) if not a complete return of their property usurped by Israel?

Everyone,
please consider the following facts:
- On the third day of the latest Israeli invasion of lebanon, you could see pictures of destroyed building in Beirut on the first page of the International Herald Tribune. The third page is a full page ad by Northrop Systems (fighter jet producer among others) advertizing their hardware under the banner of "Swift victory"! over who? high rise buildings populated by poor lebanese in the southern suburbs of Beirut!

- The USA supports a group of people in Iraq who are religiously and ideologically undistinguishable from Hizbollah except that this latter is in open conflict with Israel

- When Nationalism was the rallying cry in the middle east to mobilise against israeli agression, the USA encouraged religion. The result it spawned Bin Laden and his types. The USA then tried democracy, and it it got Hamas, The Muslim Brothers in Egypt, and Hizbollah in Lebanon. The Bush administration declared that to be bad democracies and tried to choke them off.

US goals for the middle East:

- Sell weapons by sawing fears and divisions in the middle east. It wants

- Gain total and unchalenged control over the ME oil.

- Helping Israel ensures the support of jewish lobbies and religious right in elections, hence the control over governlment policy.

The contradictions in the US policy is not something alien to the American personality. The abstraction of goals and devising of methods to achieving them will only lead to polarizing the middle east. The cost to the US will be considerable, but the cost for the middle easterners including the israelis will be catastrophic.

STOP THE MADNESS, CALL for peace. SUPPORT "LAND FOR PEACE" PROPOSAL MADE BY ARABS To ISRAEL IN 2000.

zain makes two statements:

1) The Arab league has already offered full recognition from Arab states to an Israel within the 67 borders.

2)"P.S: I think the violent resistance of Hamas and Hezbollah has outlived its usefulness, but the Israelis also need to realize that it will never be possible to entirely eliminate rocket attacks or suicide bombings as long as it continues to occupy Arab territory. There will always be rogue elements."

With respect to statement 1), I point out that Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, our friend Sellam and his ilk do not accept that. Who
should the israelis believe? How can they be sure it is not bait and switch?

With respect to statement 2), the same argument applies. Israel's security requires that there be no rocket attacks nor suicide bombings. Perhaps they can trust Egypt and Jordan, but there is no
precedent for trusting Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc. How can you demonstrate that those Arab countries who will recognize Israel will restrain/change the mind of those who are sworn to extermination?

It is the same situation w/respect to timing of the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. Israel would be foolish to withdraw before there is a fully armed and functioning international force. How can Israel be expected to believe that 15,000 poorly equipped, unmotivated Lebanese troops (most of whom sympathize with Hezbollahn) are going to be an effective buffer? They were supposed to do that starting in 2000 and the rockets raining down on Israel prove that it never happened.

If the Israelis are so trigger happy and land grabbing, why has peace "worked" with Jordan and Egypt? Even with Syria, while there has been no peace, there has been stability -- b/c there have been no incursions launched/allowed by the Syrians from their territory (of course that is overlooking their support of Hezbollah).

Finally, you ignore another critical issue - the so-called right to return. There is no way Israel is going to give back land until that is established. They would be foolish to do so. If they allowed all Palestinians back in Israel, then Israel would cease to exist in a short time. Period. It is not going to happen.

A two state solution(territorial details to be negotiated with compromises from both sides expected), with no right of return and the disarming/elimination/control of Islamofascists who are sworn to eradicate Israel is the only solution. Until that is accepted from the ENTIRE Arab side, there can be no real peace.

Astan:
"(perhaps half of the Golan Heights would be given back),"

Why half?

Is this not the heart of the problem? The Israelis are not just content with a nation anymore; they want as much land as possible. If the Israelis are truly interested in having peace with the Arabs and co-existing, they need to return ALL occupied Arab lands. They need to dismantle the settlements and withdraw to the 67 borders. The Arab league has already offered full recognition from Arab states to an Israel within the 67 borders. Until the recent hostilities, the 'prisoners document', which implicitly recognized Israel within the 67 borders, and the impending referendum in the occupied territories over accepting Israel's right to exist, were all slight movements towards an acceptance of Israel. Now if the Israelis were not so greedy and trigger happy, we might actually have had a resolution to this conflict by now.

P.S: I think the violent resistance of Hamas and Hezbollah has outlived its usefulness, but the Israelis also need to realize that it will never be possible to entirely eliminate rocket attacks or suicide bombings as long as it continues to occupy Arab territory. There will always be rogue elements. Without negotiations, even the moderates will see no hope; without hope there is despair and despair breeds violent extremism.

The Israeli policy, instead of "land for peace", seems more like; "peace, then maybe negotiations and finally, if we like the way you did your hair today, land"

If as Mr. Young believes, that Hezbollah will ascend to dominate Lebanese politics then the resulting instability and continued fighting will be extended.

Israel should take off the gloves and get serious in Lebanon and flatten Beirut (Yes, I know, it's a "friendly, democratic nation"--- that supports Hezbollah) while simultaneously viciously moving (perhaps tactical nukes) against Damsacus and Tehran.

Let the World advance the timeline for the "final solution" to the Middle East problem. Or as they say on World Wide Wrestling, "Let's get it on".

What are the Israeli's waiting for?

Mr. Young is essentially correct. Had the Lebanese government or its non-Hezbollah members taken a principled stand to follow international law and vow to implement UNSC 1559 with the assistance of the United Nations and Israel, Hezbollah would have been greatly weakened and Lebanon's independence assured. Instead, Lebanon's leaders have taken the route of false pride, compelled in part, no doubt, by the ever-present threat of Hezbollah and Syrian assassin teams in their midst.

Isn't Michael Young essentially telling us that if the Israel accepted a cease-fire today, Hezbollah's ascendance is all-but-assured? The only possible ways out are for Lebanon's leaders to change their minds, or for Israel to continue destroying Hezbollah.

pomarni, i am not suggesting that islam or any other community/religion is inherently bad or
inferior to any other. more power to india and its people and the collective progress they have made
and power that they have gained. it shows it can be accomplished, though i certainly admit
ignorance as to how it has been accomplished.

my point, as tony blair noted, is that the problem is one of muslim extremism...which i definitely
call islamofascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism). for sellam and his cohorts, here
is webster's definition of fascism: "A system of government marked by centralization of
authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the
opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism"

it appears that the model arab states like syria, iraq, iran, palestine under arafat, and most
of the so-called moderate arab states like saudi arabia, jordan, kuwait, etc all fit most of these
criteria. in some cases, we have/had single dictators, in others we have ruling families. in all, we
have abject poverty except for a few rulers -- i am still waiting for one word from sellam et al
on the economic conditions in the arab world. how can a region with 300 million people and a large
chunk of the world's oil have such a standard of living? is it all the fault of israel and the united
states? while you are it, please explain how/why israeli arabs have a higher standard of living
and more freedom than arabs living in their native countries.

terror and censorship? check for syria, iraq under saddam (and terror now), and freedom of the press
is a joke in the arab world. btw, i am sure sellam's secular palestine would welcome salman rushdie
and permit the publication of danish cartoons. in addition, i am sure they would welcome the
homosexuals who are hung for their sexual activity in iran. or the women who are killed b/c they
were raped in pakistan.

nationalism and racism? there is no question that the garbage spewed forth by wahabi saudi clerics
and nasrallah constitutes racism. just to make sure you have no problem finding the words to defend sellam, here
again is nasrallah's quote: "Anyone who reads the Koran and the holy writings
of the monotheistic religions sees what they did to the pro