Thank you

Overnight shipping free pills prescription pharmacy, http://myrxpill.com

Sobre nuestra republica

Mi nombre es Henry Giraldo, soy de San Carlos Antioquia; uno de los pueblos más violentos de Colombia. Yo nací y crecí en la crudeza de la guerra colombiana. A la edad de seis vi el primer asesinado; su cabeza con huecos de bala emanaba sangre, sangre que vi la Madre Tierra recibir generosamente. Progresivamente, como todos saben, fueron aumentando las masacres. La mayoría de los que asistieron conmigo a la primaria, fueron asesinados. Para mi la realidad colombiana es básica: vivimos en la barbarie.
En las comunidades existen conspiraciones, por parte de los grupos criminales. La gente es asesinada y solo quedan los rumores. En Colombia ya no podemos hablar de la muerte de una manera objetiva, nos rodea, pero no podemos entenderla ni enfrentarla. El desconcierto y el negativismo son derivados normales de nuestra guerra interna.
Desde mi punto de vista, la guerra perpetua, en si misma, no es el problema. Dicha guerra es uno de los síntomas de nuestra Democracia Fallida. Colombia carece de Independencia y Participación Ciudadana en los asuntos gubernamentales. Porque carecemos de la facultad para analizar y juzgar las acciones del gobierno por nuestra propia cuenta; somos fácilmente manipulados por grupos armados y asta por nuestro gobierno.
A los colombianos, especialmente a los campesinos como yo, no se nos educa sobre lo que significa ser parte de un Estado. Esperamos que nuestro gobierno funcione bien sin nuestro apoyo, y cuando fracasa lo condenamos. Hemos establecido la doble moral en nuestra relación con el gobierno; ya que no nos consideramos responsables por su fracaso. La doble moral existe, tanto en la corrupción política, como en el anhelo de un proceso de paz con grupos criminales.
Es mi posición: Que solo un gobierno confundido y sin moral política (la cual solo se deriva del apoyo ciudadano) busca un proceso de paz con un grupo criminal. Lo primero que hacemos con pedir la “negociación de paz” con un grupo criminal, es decidir que su guerra contra el pueblo colombiano tiene legitimidad. La única manera de racionalizar esta decisión es el reconocer dicho grupo como banda político-armada y no simplemente criminal. Recordemos también que, parte de la “negociación de paz” es la reinserción a la vida civil, lo cual incluye perdón de los actos criminales. Con este ultimo paso, los ciudadanos (y no solo el gobierno) le otorgamos legitimidad moral a los actos criminales.
La Paz, la Justicia y un Gobierno Saludable, son ideales que se nutren mutuamente; estos no se logran con el echo de perdonar miles de actos criminales, por el contrario, dicha negociación y perdón debilita la legitimidad de nuestro gobierno. ¿En que tipo de país se da el lujo la guerrilla de asesinar a 11 parlamentarios, y al mismo tiempo de escuchar los clamores de civiles pidiendo un proceso de paz? La paz no es algo que se negocia, la paz tiene que ser construida por los ciudadanos y el gobierno tiene que ser fuerte para velar y mantener dicha paz.
Deseo que en el desespero por “negociar la paz,” no olvidemos nuestra facultad de razonamiento. Nuestro compromiso como colombianos esta memorializado en nuestra Constitución Política. La estricta vigilancia de los actos gubernamentales, la exigencia de reformas políticas y el castigo a la corrupción política, son responsabilidades ciudadanas; y no pertenecen a grupos criminales.
Finalmente, quiero ofrecer una solución, sobre la cual los colombianos podemos comenzar a trabajar inmediatamente:
Los colombianos tenemos la responsabilidad (asumiendo que queremos existir como país-y libres) de asumir de una manera realista los Poderes y Debilidades del gobierno. En mi opinión, la guerrilla, los paramilitares y la corrupción política, no son el problema, solo son síntomas. El problema está en la manera en que asumimos nuestra colombianidad. ¿Qué significa ser colombiano? ¿Qué beneficios conlleva el ser colombiano? ¿Qué responsabilidades implica el ser colombiano? ¿Cuáles son los elementos que conllevan a la destrucción de una república? Éstas preguntas necesitan ser adecuadamente debatidas en Colombia; y necesitan ser reflejadas en nuestro sistema educativo desde la primaria.
Muchas Gracias por su atención,
Henry Giraldo

I think Israel is run by a bunch of mean spirited children. They haven't the strength to realize the potential of God but instead make certain that their's will be a Godless life by their behavior toward all other people. I just think Israel is a joke and it will get what it deserves in the end. Chosen people.....good joke. You behave as if you were chosen to be the losers you are and will ever be until the day when you can get over yourselves and treat others as equals.

Congratulations Post Global on presenting the other side, so often totally excised from the US media.

But, inevitably, the racists and extremists try to dominate the discussion.

The ironies abound in the US today, among them Christian Zionists and Jewish Fascists.

Before any of them jump aboard their high horse I know very well that not all Christians are Zionists, nor all Jews Fascists (a small minority I'm sure).

But those who speak of Islamo-Fascism leave themselves wide-open. Why should anyone shrink from holding a mirror up to them?

"Israel does not occupy one square inch of Gaza" answer: no need to do so, Gaza is under continous siege, and the pay them visits with tanks on regular basis, in order not to be missed.

Good article Sami. God bless.

Just one thing that I want to add on my previous comment ....
We all should remember that the former late Israeli PM Isa'aq Rabeen had paid his life for the truth which is :

"Enough Blood Shedding ... Enough !"

Initiative of reasonable generosity always comes from the stronger side not from the weaker one.

I wonder when can we be realistic in terms of being honest with ourselves ... to achieve this simply all what we need to do is to get rid of any prejudice or built-in believes.

The story is simple just as give me peace, treat me exactly as you treat yourself as a human being where all are equal and no one is chosen by GOD , no one should prevailed over the other , no one should eat sand while the other eating fruits .
ONLY then, we can live in peace.

Obviously, neither Israel nor USA wants to do so and they insist to live in struggle all the time , even if they succeeded to eliminate their so-called enemies they will fight themselves , so let us all enjoy the party which was/is arranged and administered by USA ... WHY NOT? After all there is ONLY ONE GOD whose will shall prevailed.

Excellent letter and logic. I hope Mr. Ban Ki-moon reads it (but I doubt that).

Thank you Sami

Excellent letter and logic. I hope Mr. Ban Ki-moon reads it (but I doubt that).

Thank you Sami

Mary - The girls wrote notes to Nasrallah (not the Lebanese people) who had been bombing their houses and forcing them into bomb shelters. They didn't strap themselves with semtex and kill innocent civilians.

And certainly there is a big difference between little children holding markers and the regular photos of Palestinian and Hizballah children holding guns or dressed as suicide bombers. Get some perspective.

Yes, the Palestinian situation is horrible and in many ways repressive. Most of the repressions weren't there before the intifada and would disappear if the Palestinians agreed to stop killing jews. But if it is a choice between living freely and killing jews...

And your comment about Israel not letting in journalists probably does not warrant a response, but here goes. There are more foreign journalists in Israel compared to its population than in virtually any country in the world. Most of the journalists could hardly be regarded as pro-Israel.

"As for the girls writing on the bomb, they were asked by the foreign journalists to write a message to Nasrallah on the bombs. The journalists then used this as a photo op to demonize the Israelis. This was a disgusting manipulation of little girls who had been hiding in bomb shelters for weeks prior to this event."

Unbelievable:

are you saying that the little girls buckled under the stress of having been hiding in bomb shelters for weeks?
Are you saying that stress can make good people turn bad?

We could go on from there as to the effects of stress on the little Palestinians who stand and watch as their house is demolished by the Israelis,the stress of having power or water regularly cut off by the Israelis, the stress of Israeli sonic booms over your head as you try to sleep, the stress of Israeli imposed curfews forcing you spend 23 hours out of 24 stuck in a house with extended family-you know :mothers in law, brothers in law etc.. The stress of sick malnourished wailing babies or women in labour who can't get to the hospital because of roadblocks(yes the same roadblocks that stopped Palestinians in from selling the strawberries after the Gaza pullout)the stress of losing relatives to Israeli bullets on a quasi daily basis:tell me that this is not so bad compared to the stress that the little girls went through!

PS what foreign journalists were these?
Stange that Israel let them in that time they usually don't let in any journalists who don't agree with them!

As the scroll of comments gets longer and longer, I might just add a single observation: the issues raised by Mr. Moubayed got all of you talking and discussing, and still some of you (on the Israeli side) are criticising the Washington Post for having published this excellent open letter? maybe you're not really used to hearing the other side of the story, or he inconvenient facts to put it bluntly. Or is it that you would like the Washington Post to keep publishing for you all the viewpoints that suit your bias, and for the monologue to keep going on and on?

Still i think one very important point in the letter was not discussed, and that is the ineffective state of the United Nations System in which resolutions are only implemented selectively and according to the wills of the powers that be. I think one very important task facing Mr. Ban, more important than his own Korean issue or the Middle-Eastern one, is reforming the UN System and bringing a more modern modus operandi to it, fairer than the jungle-law Veto system.

Congratulations Mr. Moubayed on your letter, and I hope Mr. Ban will come to understand where the Arab people stand on this issue.

Grégoire Bali

Actually, there are plenty of attractive Lebanese women who do not support Hizballah.

... and plenty of attractive Israeli women too. See: http://israelmilitary.net/showthread.php?t=13

Stephan - There has been a proliferation of books and documentaries on the Mid-East since 2001. People are learning Arabic, reading Arabic bloggers, logging onto MEMRI, watching Arab television stations, etc. We are seeing the good and bad and learning a lot in the process.

Wars in the Middle East since 1991? Well, most of the Arab countries are still in a state of war against Israel, notwithstanding numerous Israeli peace overtures. Most agreed to make peace if Israel would make peace with the Palestinians. Only problem is that Israel cannot agree to Palestian demands without committing suicide, which for some strange reason it refuses to do.

I have nothing against individual Syrians, although I do have problems with people like Sami who are mouthpieces for the Syrian government. As for Hizballah, they just can't control themselves with their jew-killing, even if it means dead Lebanese (especially Christian Lebanese). And you just love them, don't you?

As for the girls writing on the bomb, they were asked by the foreign journalists to write a message to Nasrallah on the bombs. The journalists then used this as a photo op to demonize the Israelis. This was a disgusting manipulation of little girls who had been hiding in bomb shelters for weeks prior to this event. On the other hand, there are photos galore of Palestinian and Hizballah children dressed up by their parents as suicide bombers, holding guns, etc. But you are prepared to overlook those things, aren't you? I guess you judge them by a lower standard, eh? And you say that I am bigoted.

To comapare what is happening in the Palestinian territories to apartheid or the Holocaust shows a clear lack of understanding of either. The only calls for genocide are by the Palestinians and other Arabs, not by the Israelis. I couldn't care less what you think about the Holocaust - "never again" is an invocation that the jews will maintain regardless of who supports them. The jews have learned the lessons even if the rest of the world would support those who want to commit a new Holocaust on the jews.

The biggest lesson that the jews learned from the Holocaust is that for the most part the world doesn't care if the jews live or die. So if you are unhappy that the jews defend themselves, I couldn't care less.

Stephan - Anyone who is pro-Israel must be a Nazi with an evil agenda, eh? Yet you are probably one of the first in line saying "anyone who criticizes Israel is called an antisemite" as though the truth of that statement is self-evident and somehow justifies your offensive rhetoric.

So Arabs are more multilingual than Greeks. Give me a break. What are the literacy rates in the Arab countries again? Obviously some Arabs can read, which explains why antisemitic trash like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are such big sellers over there.

Yes, the Arab world has stagnated. You only have to compare the Arab world vs Europe 500 years ago to today. Where are the world-class universities? Where are the world class artists, mathematicians, doctors, scientists, writers, etc.? 500 years ago, the Arab world was light years ahead of Europe, yet today most of the Middle East is a basket case by any objective standard. That is stagnation.

I never said that Syria is an Islamist state, only that its laws are founded in Islam, which is a truth ensconced in the Syrian constitution. Sorry if the facts are so inconvenient for you.

You are totally wrong about the USA. It is not a Christian nation, much as some Americans would prefer it that way. There is a concept of separation of church and state, which obviously is beyond your intellectual grasp.

But of course, Christians are happy and free in Syria. So how many new Christian schools have the Syrian authorities permitted in the last 40 years? I think you'll find that the answer is zero. Even in the existing Christian schools, the law requires that the principals be Muslim. Great society.

Wouldn't it be great to be free, like the late Naseer Abraham and Yalbas Yacoub, who were murdered by Syrian police for talking to Muslims in an offensive manner. Great place - maybe you should live there. So much freer than Amerikkka or the Zionist Entity.

The odds of a Christian or Muslim becoming PM are low because the Jews currently constitute a majority. However, Muslim and Christian citizens have full voting rights and have been appointed to various political positions, so your point is specious. Note that Jews are not even allowed to be appointed to any government positions in Syria. Contrariwise, Israeli Arabs have more political freedoms than Arabs in practically any other country in the Middle East.

The point of my posts is that this opinion is filled with inaccuracies and libels. It is only one step removed from accusing Israels of eating matzah filled with Christian blood (an accusation that his government has actually made on occasions). He is entitled to spout hateful Syrian propaganda about Israelis targeting 12 year olds - the question is why the WaPo would provide a forum for it? Is there any low to which the WaPo would not stoop? It is just another pathetic opinion piece arguing that if only Israel would roll over for the Palestinians, the rest of the Arab world would re-enter its golden age, hold hands and sing Kumbaya.

It is about time that people grew up, took responsibility for themselves and stopped blaming the jews for everything - it is getting very old.

And yes, I am a zionist (meaning I believe that jews have a right to self-determination) and yes, I believe that Israel should exist. Very few zionists want Israeli control over the Palestinians - they just want the Palestinians to act as though they wanted a state of their own, rather than wanting to destroy Israel all the time instead.

The Palestinians had a wonderful opportunity to build businesses with the world-class greenhouses that the settlers left in Gaza. Instead, they chose to destroy them and use them as launching pads for missiles at Israel. Hard to believe that they want peace from my perspective.

I never argued that those opposing Israel are uncivilized or deserve to be treated badly. Some of them are very civilized. Most oppose Israel for reasons that are demonstrably wrong, when (as I have mentioned) there are serious problems with Israel that are constantly overlooked.

You also have a poor understanding of history and demography. Most Israelis are Sephardim (look it up). The roots of the conflict pre-date WWI and the Balfour Declaration. The ultimate root of the conflict is that the jewish claims to the land (and the jewish rights of self determination) are constantly belittled or denied as if only Palestinians had rights and the jews are usurpers. For the record, Jerusalem, for example, has had a Jewish plurality for over 150 years and a Jewish majoirty for over 100 years. Jews have been in Israel for over 3000 years - they were eating falafel and tending goats since well before Mohammed was a boy.

Maybe you could try arguing the issues instead of name calling. Any chance?

One more thing, Mr. non believer. You write as if the Arab states have descended into violence and chaos. That America has come to know "more and more" about the region. But what do you have as evidence for such a proposition? The only wars in the Middle East since 1991 were between Israel and the Palestinians and Lebanon, and America's invasion of Iraq. The violence has come from Israel and the U.S., not from the Arabs.

The first time I was in Syria was 1993. I traveled the country asking people what they thought of the peace process under way at the time, what they thought of Israel and Rabin. No one would talk to me. Of course, I was a stranger, but I did get an eery sense that it was a relatively closed society and I should stop asking questions. The last time I traveled to Syria was November 2005. I couldn't shut them up. Every day they marched in protest of the Iraq war, or in favor of democratic reforms. The media had a hard time keeping up the the students at U Damascus. I walked around the entire country with a video recorder in my hand for three weeks and no one even appeared to notice, let alone care. Syria has completely changed. It is so much more open now than it has ever been, economically, politically, culturally. There is an economic revival in the Christian Quarter, Baab Tuma, which has received a lot of investment for coffee houses, restaurants and night clubs.

Meanwhile, Israel bombed Lebanon into the '70s in response to Hizballah. And what were HIzballah's motives? Only one -- to take the pressure off of the Palestinians, who were being brutally suppressed by Israel while no nation stood up and said enough is enough. I was never a fan of Hizballah until August 2006. Now I'm a huge fan! Plus, the Hizballah chics are hot! I haven't seen a hot Israeli in years. I did see some Israeli girls on the Post's website though. They were writing their names on bombs that were going to be dropped on Lebanon. Those same bombs killed Lebanese children. I will never forget that. And I will never forgive Israel for doing it.

My whole life I have been told to remember the Holocaust, so that we can never repeat its mistakes. And yet, those who are supposed to represent Jews in this world are perpetrating those same crimes on the Palestinians. I trust history. So I don't deny the Holocaust. But I now choose to forget it. It's obviously no longer a useful lesson to remember.

Mazaltof!

Unbelievable:

Obviously, the fact that you have been to the West Bank does not mean that your opinion is legitimate. Clearly, you learned nothing from the experience.

I do find it interesting however that you seem compelled to respond to every single blog here. It's as if you feel the need to defend something, some agenda. What agenda are you defending? You argue that "the Arab world has stagnated for the past 500 years." This is a ridiculous claim, inartfully stated, and completely without factual support. You state that Greece translates more books into Greek than the Arabs translate into Arabic. Perhaps the Greeks aren't as multilingual as the Arabs, most of whom speak two two or three languages, including and especially, English. You argue that Syria is an Islamist country because its constitution states that it should have an Islamic president. Apparently, you are not aware that Syria is also governed by civil law, just like France. You might also recall that all the American Presidents have been Christian, all Protestant except one. America is a Christian nation, but it is also a secular nation. Syria has a large and thriving Christian community and its ancient churches are still standing and in good repair. You should visit sometime. And what about the prospect of a Christian or Muslim PM for Israel? A cold day in hell, right?

But what is your point in mistating history, inaccurately analyzing politics and denigrating Arabs and Muslims? That israel should therefore have free reign over the Palestinians? That Israel's atrocities should be overlooked? That the U.S.' illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq is justified? That the Syrians like Sami Moubayed have no point of view worth listening to? Yes, that is your point.

You are a zionist. A rabid, racist, ethnic nationalist, just like the Nazis. You believe that Israel should survive no matter how many other people should die. And in order to convince yourself of this fact you have to argue that those who oppose Israel are uncivilized. That somehow they deserve to be treated in a less than human manner. Isn't that your position? Your agenda?

Hitler had that agenda. Many other people do to. But what happens to Israel when the American people become educated in the truth of what has happened in the Middle East and are no longer willing to overlook, ney, support, apartheid in Israel? If the Israelis are smart, they should make peace with their Arab neighbors before that day comes.

And how can Israel make peace, which it has so vigorously tried to avoid (remember Rabin, I do). Israel needs to embrace its semitic heritage and get rid of the Euro-fascism in which it has mirred itself since 1920. The genesis of this conflict is the end of WWI, not WWII. Israel is a European imperial outpost and it should be attacked vigorously; that is, until it finds its place in the Arab World. And that place is right next door to a Palestinian state. So get used to it. Stock up on some hummus and Syrian bread, get an olive grove (without kicking a Palestinian off of his, thank you). Maybe get a herd of goats.

There are excellent new books out by Jimmy Carter and Israeli historian Ilan Pappe that illustrate, respectively, the present system of apartheid (or abuses of basis human rights for those who get apopleptic over the word) and the ethnic cleansing that occurred in 1948 during the founding of Israel. We North Americans would do well to familiarize ourselves with a more dispassionate take on the Middle East rather than the Zionist garbage that we read in our newspapers. Even the conservative Economist gave an extremely compelling review of the Pappe book in December. Seriously, people, you are being lied to about more than just Iraq!

I've been to the Palestinian territories. So what? Does that mean that my points have enhanced legitimacy? Argue the issues and stop with the ad hominem attacks.

America has not resolved extremism in the Middle East for many reasons. The problem is not that we don't study the history of the Middle East, the problem is that especially since 9/11 people are understanding more and more.

The Middle East had a golden age, with Ibn Firnas, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, al-Khwarazmi, etc. Where are they today? Why is it that 10 million people in Greece translate more books into Greek than 200 million Arabs translate into Arabic? This is not the fault of the US or Israel. The Arab world has stagnated for the past 500 years. The issue is that placing all the blame on the US and Israel is effectively saying that the Arabs have no ability to control their extremism.

The US policy in Iraq has clearly been a belief that the Iraqis are ready and willing to have democracy. It is the liberals and other Arabs who have been infantalizing the Iraqis by saying that they are subhuman and unfit for civilization; that somehow Western democracy, which works in Japan and India well enough, is somehow not compatible with the Arab cultures.

As for the Palestinian elections, please don't suggest that the Palestinians are not responsible for electing Hamas and for the subsequent actions of Hamas that were completely consistent with Hamas' agenda. Again, this suggestion is an insult to the Palestinians. They knew precisely what they were getting, but chose it anyway.

Stephen - Excellently stated (well, except for that last line) :-)

I wonder how many of you who so harshly criticize Sami's article have ever been to the Middle East? Have ever walked the streets of Damascus, or Doha, or Cairo or Jerusalem? You criticize him for historical analogies that you don't find relevant, then state that the Arabs are "Koranimals," failed societies, and other such nonsense. This is why America has not resolved the issue of terrorism and the growth of extremism in the Middle East. While we have long failed to understand the peoples and politics of the region, we are no longer even listening. I believe as an American that our liberty comes with a responsibility to educate oneself on the not only our nation and its history -- remember slavery and the genocide of native americans? -- but the history of other regions of the world. Our Middle East policy is based on a doctrine that holds that the Arabs are subhuman and unfit for civilization. That is a perverse view of the world, and cannot lead to an accurate assessment of anything, except perhaps the chasm that has grown in America between what we espouse and how we act as a nation. But if it's a fight that you want, well, the Arabs are your huckleberries. Syria has been the battle ground of most of the great wars in human civilization. They can handle the limp-dicked, Euro-fascist upstarts in the Olmert, Blair and Bush Administrations.

Great article
god bless you Dr. Sami

Thank you Washington Post for providing another point of view to the American audiences. The flood of responses show that this point of view is missing and we have been talking to ourselves. This show of energy in the article and the responses will help open the dialogue about the Middle East. The US President has admitted mistakes for the first time and a real open forums like this one are needed to get to the reasons of the outcomes we see in the Middles East today.

Thanks again for providing arguments for both sides of this conflict.

Newman

Fatah with Abu-Ammar was patriotic but corrupt, with Abu-Mazen, it is strictly corrupt.

As to Christians "not blowing up themselves": the core reason for suicide bombing is despair. In South Lebanon, several suicide operations against the occupying army were performed by Christians, including a female Christian.

If one listens to the MEMRI propaganda, everything is due to Islamic fundamentalism or ignorance among Arabs.

I would suggest to them contacting their friend, the soon-to-be Foreign Affairs Minister Bandar of the KSA. As a Christian Arab, I would not be presumptuous and address a very busy member of the KSA ruling family.

Attutaluu (British for a toute a l'heure) meaning I have to go. Unlike MEMRI nom-de-plumes, I have a real job.

Zain,

If indeed the Palestinians "voted in Hamas NOT because they promised he "destruction" of Israel, but because they promised social services and a change from the status quo." - then why did Hannan Ashrawi's party, "the third way" which consists of discent, pragmatic people and who advocates recognition of Israel and continuation of the peace talks won only 2% of votes?

Sorry to interrupt your "oh so miserable Palestinians" nonsense. We are tired of hearing that. Are only the Palestinian Muslims in despair? If this is not the case, then how come one never hears of Christian palestinians detonating themselves in reastaurants?

The poor poor Palestinians are detonating themselves because their cynical leaders are telling them that this is the right thing to do, that in this way they will become heros. And because these same leaders are providing them with explosives, targets and lifts. If you have watched any of the videos showing a suicide bomber's last speech, I'm sure you have noticed that it is not despair that you see there, but joy. A society in which a mother is proud that her son became a martyr and a mass murderer is sick from its roots.

This interview appeared in the Canadian national Post:

Dr. Tawfik Hamid once was a member of Egypt's Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Arabic for "the Islamic Group"), a banned terrorist organization.
He is now 45 years old, and has had many years to reflect on why he was willing to die and kill for his religion. "The first thing you have to understand is that it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with poverty or lack of education," he says.
"I've heard this poverty nonsense time and time again from Western apologists for Islam, most of them not Muslim by the way. There are millions of passive supporters of terror who may be poor and needy but most of those who do the killing are wealthy, privileged, educated and free. If it were about poverty, ask yourself why it is middle-class Muslims -- and never poor Christians -- who become suicide bombers in Palestine."
"North Americans are too squeamish about discussing the obvious sexual dynamic behind suicide bombings. If they understood contemporary Islamic society, they would understand the sheer sexual tension of Sunni Muslim men. Look at the figures for suicide bombings and see how few are from the Shiite world. Terrorism and violence yes, but not suicide. The overwhelming majority are from Sunnis. Now within the Shiite world there are what is known as temporary marriages, lasting anywhere from an hour to 95 years. It enables men to release their sexual frustrations.
"Islam condemns extra-marital sex as well as masturbation, which is also taught in the Christian tradition. But Islam also tells of unlimited sexual ecstasy in paradise with beautiful virgins for the martyr who gives his life for the faith. Don't for a moment underestimate this blinding passion or its influence on those who accept fundamentalism."
A pause. "I know. I was one who accepted it."

From http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=eb74b136-3729-42a1-821b-77366f7af920&p=2

Sami effendi:
Come on: Palestinians fighting each other foolishly?
When the truth is that collaborators in Fatah are trying to prevent the democratically elected Hamas coalition (including Arabs Christians) from ruling the PA?
Who is foolish except Abbas, the man who made a fortune selling concrete to build the Apartheid wall in the West Bank?
But, your letter brings up very good point. This is why the MEMRI nom-de-plumes have assaulted you.
And I would like to thank you for your biography of Shukri Quwwatli.

Zain - Abbas was sidelined because he didn't even try to comply with his obligations under the roadmap to eliminate terrorism. Israel and the US would have been more than happy to work with him if he had been serious about disarming the militias. Either he was unwilling or unable to make the hard decisions - either way, he didn't belong at the negotiating table. There is no point entering an agreement with someone who can't or won't compy with it.

I know that the media loves calling Abbas a moderate, but I have no doubt that his disputes with Hamas are over tactics, not the overall objective of destroying Israel.

Arafat was more open about this objective (at least in his Arabic speeches), when he compared Oslo to the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and talked about destroying Israel in phases. Abu Mazen was Arafat's No. 2. He signed the checks for the Munich massacre and the killing of the American diplomats in Sudan 34 years ago. His PhD thesis was based on Holocaust denial - the only reason why people deny the Holocaust is because they want to perpetrate a new one.

The only reason why Israel and the US prop up Abbas today is because they hate Hamas even more and want a counterweight, not because anyone believes that Abbas is a peacemaker.

Aslam,

Sorry again to be ruining good stories with facts but:

- Syria is not a secular country. Article 3 of the Syrian constitution provides that the Syrian president must be Muslim and the source of Syrian legislation is Islamic jurisprudence. Talk about theocracy.

- Article 4 of the Iraqi constitution provided that Islam is the religion of the state.

- Yes, the same IS true about Algeria and Morocco.

- The problem is not inane statements that happen to be correct, the problem is that some people criticizing Israel have no ability for introspection. Everything is Israel's fault after all. When a Muslim or Arab attacks Israel for being a theocracy, not only does it show a high level of hypocracy and dearth of irony, but it is a demonstrably false accusation. There are Muslim judges who sit on Israel's highest court. The main source of Israeli law is the will of the people, not Jewish law. Jews and non-Jews alike can eat pork, engage in homosexual relationships, work on the sabbath and do all sorts of things that are prohibited by Jewish law. Israel is more secular than many European countries and far more secular than any Arab country.

- Arab misfortune does not abrogate their ability to criticize Israel. Unfortunately, most Arabs outside Israel criticize Israel for things that are inappropriate and not for things for which Israel should be criticized. If you want to criticize Israel, criticize it for not spending enough money on basic infrastructure for Israeli Arabs or not looking after Ethiopian Jews properly. You would have plenty of support from Jews and non-Jews on those points. But to attack Israel for being a theocracy is just ignorant.

- Also, if you single out Israel for constant attention while ignoring larger atrocities elsewhere, it doesn't demonstrate free speech, it just shows pathology. The only free speech in most of the Middle East is the right to criticize Israel. Try rising above that for a change. As Jesus said, "How can you say to your brother: 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' while not seeing yourself the plank in your eye?
Hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly
to take the speck out of your brother's eye."

- It is getting a bit old to blame the Palestinian attacks on settlements. Where are the settlements in Gaza that justify the attacks on Sderot. Israel does not occupy one square inch of Gaza, but the attacks continue. What makes you think that giving up the West Bank would be any different? Israel showed by its actions in Gaza that it is prepared to uproot settlements if necessary. Also, when was the most recent new settlement by the way? In case you missed it, Israel has a voluntary settlement freeze notwithstanding that the PA leadership is bound by its constitution to destroy Israel and couldn't care less about any peace process.

- You say "What is ignored is that unless the peace is achieved to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, Israel will never be at peace." Little problem there is that for Hamas (and probably Fatah as well) to be satisfied, Israel will need to be destroyed. Israel can never be at peace until it has a peace partner. The fact that Israel is still fired on in Sderot has led most Israelis to accept that Israel will never be at peace with the Palestinians even if it were to concede all pre-1967 territories.

- As for Syria and the Golan, Syria knows that Israel is prepared to return the Golan for peace. However, Syria wants an additional 25 square kilometers of land in addition to the Golan that no-one recognizes any Syrian claim to. This is why the peace talks that Barak entered into with Syria failed. The Golan is just the beginning of Syrian demands.

Thank you for this thoughtful letter. I hope Mr. Ban Ki-moon reads it.

Moose:

"If the Palestinians are serious about getting their own state, they have to recognize that Israel is there to stay (the entire rest of the world does, why can't they?) and they have to insure that the militias do NOT attack anymore... but I do not believe the current generation is capable of that."

The Palestinians ARE serious about peace. Sharon decided to sideline the moderate Palestinian president Abbas and refused to negotiate with him. In the meantime the Palestinians tired of poverty, corruption and a lack of any movement on the peace process voted in Hamas NOT because they promised the "destruction" of Israel, but because they promised social services and a change from the status quo. Is Hamas's agenda and modus operandi unhelpful and even destructive for the Palestinian cause? Of course it is, but I doubt when most Palestinians voted for it they were thinking of driving "the Jews into the Sea". They were like people anywhere in the world voting for a party they thought would live up to its campaign promises of bringing change.

It is saddening to hear the sorts of comments some posters have made; it is not desperation it is indoctrination that makes teenagers, mothers, fathers and grandmothers blow themselves up; it is the nature of Palestinians and Arabs. Indoctrination does play a part, but the occupation and conditions under occupation are instrumental to those people getting to that point. The Palestinians have been hijacked by Hamas and Islamic Jihad as has Israel by its settler movement. The recent losses of Fatah at the hands of Hamas show how much firepower and "mob control" Hamas has. Israel's Preconditions for negotiation, based upon a complete halt of violence, were always unreasonable and unrealistic, especially in the Abbas era, because without some sort of concrete movement towards peace it will be impossible to reign in the militant groups.

Moderate Palestinians like Abbas have been begging for the peace process and negotiations to start. Negotiations do not harm Israel's security; negotiations do not make it any easier for suicide bombers to enter Israel; negotiations do not result in more "indoctrination of hatred". Where were those who would negotiate from Israel? Unfortunately now the OT's burn with fire again, set from within this time, so negotiations may have to be put on the back burner again.

Aslam,

Thank you so much. At last an honest, intelligent Arab (I assume by your name, please correct me if I'm wrong) who does not label us all "brainwashed". Even though we probably do not agree on many points, you seem like a person with whom one can discuss. Unfortunatly I don't have much time, so I will just ask you some questions that bother me.

First - do you believe that the will to solve the Palestinian issue is what really drives the policies of countries like Egypt, Jordan and Syria? I am asking because it often seems to me that the hate towards Israel is an essential element in their internal policy - you know, diverting frastration - and the Palestinian issue merely serves to enhance and excuse that hatred. I would appreciate an honest answer.

Second, if your answer is positive - how do you explain the fact that the Jordanian and Egyptian occupation of the West bank and Gaza (from 1948 untill 1967) did not end in establishing an independant state in those areas, or at least in some sort of autonomy for the Palestinians? And how come the Palestiniand did nou uprise against them? And how come money from the rich Persian Gulf states does not flow to build better residents, hospitals and libraries for the Palestinians?

Last question - if what the Palestinians really want is a state, how come they refused to Barak's offer? I mean, even if they didn't like it, why start violence? why not further negotiate?

Thanks in advance for your answers.

Third, if the Palestinians

Moose:

"Hezbollah, upon the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, even publicly stated that they would immediately begin building bunkers, training soldiers and stockpiling weapons for renewing their fight to wipe Israel off the map, and exterminate every Jew they could."

You do realize that this was after their country had been completely devastated by the Israelis, thousands of Shia Lebanese had been slaughtered by militias (what would now be referred to as terrorist groups), the massacres at Shatilla and Sabra. I am not suggesting that the views opined by Hizbullah were acceptable, just that a little perspective is needed when analyzing events. Nothing happens in isolation, especially in the Middle East.

By the way I do appreciate your apology and I can relate to your experience of being hounded with personal attacks (in my case by right wing nuts).

"I thought all Arab countries are based on some form of Islam? Silly me."

A lot of pro-Israeli's like to throw this canard out there to try and hijack the discussion; talk about everything other than the occupation. Syria is a dictatorship true, but it is a secular country, as was Iraq under Saddam Hussein. The same is true of Morocco and to an extent Algeria, where the regimes are so loath to allow religion into the public sphere that they have resorted to suppression and denial of some rights we would consider elemental in the U.S.

The problem here is that so many people in the West are ignorant about the cultural, political and ideological diversity in the Arab and Muslim world that they resort to inane statements like the one above. When a Muslim or an Arab criticizes Israel for being a theocracy (someone suggested it was a state based on "Jewish ethnicity" rather than religion, but discrimination is discrimination; whether you base it on religion, ethnicity or race) you have ad-hominem attacks galore based on the fact that certain Arab countries are "Islamic" and/or "Dictatorships". What makes you think we do not abhor the systems that exist in our own countries? Why does the misfortune of our societies, to be under the yoke of dictators and totalitarian regimes (in some cases propped up by the same Western powers that profess faith in freedom and liberty for all) deny us the right to also criticize injustice elsewhere in the world?

This is the most ridiculous argument I have heard. Do not criticize Israel for its crimes because you come from a country run by a dictator! Injustice is injustice anywhere in the world. Criticize it in Saudi Arabia; in Egypt; in Algeria; in Syria and also in Israel. However THIS discussion is about the Palestinians, their occupation by the Israelis and their right to free themselves from this state of "limbo" they find themselves in; not part of the Israeli state, yet denied the right to have their own.

This does not have anything to do with Saudi Arabia allowing women to drive or Egypt denying other faiths to freely construct their centers of worship. It has everything to do with Israel allowing the militant settler movement to hijack the peace process as have militant groups on the Palestinian side by continuously resorting to violence. When pointing out attacks by Palestinian militants, the extremely provocative step of initiating construction of another settlement in the West bank needs to be condemned as well.

Peace will not be achieved with the vilification of one side and the imposition of a one sided solution. The U.N Security Council resolutions, while not allowing for mandatory implementation by virtue of being chapter 7, do represent an important outline of what a final settlement should look like. Some have suggested an "indefensible" Israeli state if such a solution is adopted. What is ignored is that unless the peace is achieved to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, Israel will never be at peace. If Syria demands the return of the majority of the Golan, Israel's refusal is hardly going to suddenly make the Syrians give up claim on their occupied territory. To those who believe such a swap would never work, look no further than Egypt and the return of the Sinai.

"Did you know that Israel maintains their military bases near, and sometimes under Israeli Arab villages, hoping to deter any attacks on them"

Please give us a break Thom. Can anyone seriously believe that the presence of Arabs near army bases would deter an attack by other Arabs? Please see my previous post about Arabs killing Arabs. Millions of them.

Do you know how many Arabic restaurants have been blown to pieces by Palestinian suicide bombers? have you not heard about the civil war currently going on in Gaza? About the deliberate murder of three children on their way back from school? Its all Arabs killing Arabs.

Now take a look at the statistics: 52% from the population in northern Israel is Arabic. that would lead one to expect that about half of the civilian casualties in the recent war would be Arabs. Yet out of 43 dead civilians, only 18 were Arabs. These data proves both your claims (about army bases inside Arab villages and about lack of protection) false.

Where do you get this rubbish anyway from? wait, let me guess: is it from where Israel is accused of stealing internal organs from Palestinians? or is it from where Israel is accused of infecting them with AIDS?

The funny thing about your post is that you find Israel to blame for the deaths caused by Hizballah. You blame them for everything, don't you? even for the actions of their enemies. Pathetic.

Excuse me? I wasn't saying that the Oslo accords failed solely because of the refugee issue. There are many reasons why they failed and neither side is completely innocent in this regard. However, two significant factors were a breakdown in trust on both sides and differing expectations as to what the end result would look like.

Certainly, the Israelis can point to the fact that the PA never stopped inciting its people against Israel when it should have been preparing them for peace. In turn, the Palestinians can argue that prior to Taba, there were a series of bad faith gestures on Israel's part, such as Olmert opening up the tunnel near the Temple Mount and Bibi dragging his feet over complying with Oslo.

My point was that assuming that both sides can even get back to the table, the refugee issue will be the hardest to solve.

Unbelievable,

I don't see any contradiction between Wikipediia and the BBC (and BTW - acknowledging al-BBC as a "reliable source" is luaghable. They have just paid a lot of money to supressed the publication of a very critical report concerning their reliability. You might want to take a look at http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/). The BBC article simply present a possible solution to the problem of sovereignty of the holy places, a solution that was discussed and rejected. This discussion would not have been possible had Barak not offered to divide Jerusalem. Which was exactly my point.

Other than that we seem to be in agreement - the main issue is the Palesnian demand that millions of Palestinians be accepted into Israel thereby rendering it a Muslim state in practice. If what the palestinian truely want is their own state, in which they could live in dignity, it is not clear why they insist on the "right of return into Israel", a principle which Israel clearly can never accept.

As with most dishonest debaters, Thom has ignored both the points made and the questions raised by his opponents. He has also asserted that his opponents are wrong and wasted space bragging about himself. If he were a member of a high-school debate club, one could at least hope he'd improve over the next few years.

Unbelievable wants to ignore why the Oslo accords failed. Others are claiming that the terrorist habit of endangering civilians is somehow okay because Israel allegedly does it too.

I'll be the first to admit that there are some flawed arguments presented on the pro-Israel side, but it seems that all the arguments on the pro-Palestinian side are unsound.

Wikipedia is unreliable. See, for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1103572.stm

This article discusses the proposal that the Palestinians have "surface" sovereignty (not mere custody), and Israel have sovereignty below the ground. The Temple Mount and '67 borders issues are red herrings anyway - the key issue was and still is the refugee issue. All others can be solved.

Israel had wrongly assumed that since Oslo did not address the refugee issue, the Palestinians had conceded that Israel would never grant a Palestinian "right of return" to Israel. What Barak realised from Camp David was that the Palestinians not only wanted their own state but an entitlement to live in Israel as well.

To agree to this would be suicide on Israel's part and will never happen. Arafat understood this and was not prepared to "drink tea with Rabin" as he put it by accepting a deal that did not provide for a "right of return" of Palestinians to Israel. Instead, he launched the second intifada.

The refugees are the impasse and I have yet to hear a useful suggestion from either side of the table as to how this issue can be resolved.

To: Liar

A quote from Wikipedia:

"A particularly virulent territorial dispute revolved around the final status of Jerusalem. Although offered much of East Jerusalem, the Palestinians rejected a proposal for "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount. They demanded complete sovereignty over East Jerusalem's Islamic holy sites, in particular, the Al-Aqsa Mosque. For Jews this would have meant losing sovereignty over both the Mount and the attached Western Wall."

You can check it yourself at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_2000_Summit#Jerusalem_and_the_Temple_Mount

And please do not make any more unfounded assumptions as to my sources of information. Thanks.

Moose: In responding to Al, I have no need to use logic to combat anything he has said, as he has made no points.

I was answering his question as to why I thought I could participate in the discussion. I knew why, and I thought he should too.

To Moose:
I wasn't sure to which portions of your previous post you were referring, so I will address the one at 4:24.

"Well, when Hezbollah builds shelters for the civilian populace right underneath their ammunition and defense bunkers, and sets up rocket launchers right next to other civilian shelters, that falls under the category of making "human shields" out of their own people that they are supposedly there to "protect.""

Do you remember when, during the summer invasion of Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah apologized to the Arabs in the villages in the north of Israel? (I know you do, people from the anti-Palestinian camp are always mentioning it.) Do you know why it was necessary?

Did you know that Israel maintains their military bases near, and sometimes under Israeli Arab villages, hoping to deter any attacks on them (the bases, not the people). In addition, while Jewish Israelis have extensive bomb shelters for every man woman and child in their towns, and even their settlements, the Arab citizens of Israel do not have one. There was an article in the Post about it last summer.

They have asked that their government protect them, and have been told, "Sorry we don't have the money for that." While the construction of a 15 foot high, reinforced concrete WALL with electric fences on top continues unabated.

So you see, while one side is pure evil (the Arabs), the other side is garbed in the pure white raiment of absolute morality, the practice the same habits.

How is that possible?

Thom, Thom, Thom... you are, in one single paragraph, using both argumentum ad verecundiam (commonly called appeal to authority) AND it's opposite, ad hominem (attacking the messenger), both logical fallacies and a good indication that you are unable to refute statements and deductions made in the comments based upon rational debate and logic.

In case you're unaware, I'll try to help you out here: argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy bases the presumption that, because of the position/title/experiences of the presenter, their view is somehow naturally correct or should be listened to more. Ad hominem is the fallacy that, because of the faults of some presenter of debate (bad language, lack of experience, etc.), their view should be held as incorrect.

Try responding based on logic and reason, not logical fallacies.

Still waiting for a response to my comments, too.

Gee, Thom, given the content of your first comment which included "...ignorant jaka$$es ...look pretty dumb making your racist and hate-filled...," I guess you are the expert on what constitutes insults.

So, what's your prescription for Israel, anyway? That they should just lay down their arms and let themselves be exterminated? Have you ever entertained the following two questions: What would occur if the terrorists laid down their weapons? (Peace in the Middle East) What would occur if the IDF laid down their weapons? (The end of Israel)

Why are you ignoring the substantive points made by Moose, Julia, and several others?

Mary MTL Canada said: ""What happened in Lebanon between July 12th and August 14th was not self-defence. It was mass murder."(Irish Times report 15/8/06 from Lara Marlowe who was in Lebanon for much of the war.) "

Well, when Hezbollah builds shelters for the civilian populace right underneath their ammunition and defense bunkers, and sets up rocket launchers right next to other civilian shelters, that falls under the category of making "human shields" out of their own people that they are supposedly there to "protect." Article 28 of the 4th Geneva Convention explicitly states that the use of human shields is strictly forbidden. However, I guess that doesn't apply to what Hezbollah did, because Hezbollah wasn't trying to "render certain points or areas immune from military operations"... they were trying to create tons of civilian casulaties so they could parade their bodies around in front of the TV camaras and say, "Look, see how brutal Israel is!"

However, they ARE in serious violation of Article 27: "Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity" and Article 29: "The Party to the conflict in whose hands protected persons may be is responsible for the treatment accorded to them by its agents, irrespective of any individual responsibility which may be incurred." However, regardless of any of that, you can't prosecute for violation of Geneva Conventions on the part of or against entities that have NOT SIGNED - as Hezbollah have not. Therefore, treatment of non-signatories does not fall under the protection of the Geneva Convention, and must therefore simply fall to basic human decency. Well, I would say, by attacking from right on top of civilian shelters in order to create maximum civilian casualties in the resulting air or artillery strike, Hezbollah fails the human decency test, too.

HEZBOLLAH, then, created the siutation for those civilian deaths, and sold it to the world media wrapped in a nice, pretty propaganda bow... and the world media bought it hook, line and sinker (with rare exception). The IDF even released video of the rocket launchers and bunkers sitting right on top or next to civilian shelters (and since Hezbollah controls southern Lebanon, it was THEY who built those shelters and laid out the plan for, when Israel fina