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 finally said ENOUGH to their attacks, massive civilian casualties). Why is there no condemnation of these murderous mafias? Well, people on the right condemn them all the time, but since they are usually very staunchly pro-Israel, the Palestinians and the left immediately take the opposite stance, as they have conditioned themselves to do.

Saddam tried the same thing in Gulf War 1... and the world called him out for it. But, the Palestinians must be used to this kind of treatment of Arab regimes hiding behind their own populace, because they openly cheered Saddam's survival in the first Gulf War. Small wonder, also, when Saddam would pay Palestinian families the equivilent of years of income (assuming they even had jobs, which according the author of this article, is not a good chance) for each suicide murderer that came from a family. When that is the kind of culture you raise your children in, what kind of future do you expect to have as a society? Apparently, a really bleak one, if the current track record says anything.

When was the last time you were in any of those countries Al? How many times have you been to the Middle East? Was your father in the State Department Middle East division? Did he serve as an Ambassador to two countries? Were you conceived in Cairo? Have you lived in Baghdad? Have you lived in Mauritania? Have you been to the Occupied Territories? Did you minor in Middle East Studies in college? Do you work for a Middle East think tank?

I doubt it. As far as I can tell from your four posts, you just insult people.

But I have, was, and do.

Thom said: "Then I would have written, "Well, a good start might be for [insert country here] to stop killing them. Don't you think?""

Why are they being "killed" as you say? Could it be that they refuse to coexist with the State of Israel, and are taking the savagery that Muslims have shown against other Muslims and turning it to be about their "historical enemy?" Julia in Ontario laid it out quite nicely, the injustices suffered by Muslims from other Muslims. When those massacres happen, the world simply says, "Well, it's a war, and they're all savages in how they fight anyway, so what can we do?" But when it's an IDF tank blasting an AK-toting militant, it's somehow called genocide and apartheid by Israel. What hypocrisy.

Yes, the rest of the world is to blame for failing to defend Muslims under attack by other Muslims in those well-documented cases of mass killing and death. But, when you come down to it, the vast majority of the blame must fall on the oppressive Islamist regimes that perpetrate these mass killings, repress any sense of civic and modern cultural virtues in their societies, and actively support terrorism against innocent civilians (something the Qu'ran speficially prohibits, unless you subscribe to the militant interpretations of Mohammad's sunna and hadith as valid bases for religion - which I don't, it amounts to idolatry). These facist regimes and their militant arms (Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc.) do not care for the plight of their Palestinian "brothers and sisters," any more than the Muslism killers mentioned in Julia's comment cared for the Muslims they were exterminating. But oh, Heaven forbid, if ISRAEL uses its forces to defend itself against attack, or to counter-attack, and end up killing a handful of Muslims, then surely, the millions of dead Muslims at the hands of other Muslims is just war by savages, but Israel must be engaged in a systematic destruction of the Palestinian people. Please.

If they were actually trying to crush and exterminate the Palestinians, with the way Israel has demonstrated its war-fighting ability in multiple wars against it (all started by Arabs, by the way), there would be no Palestinians left at this point. The fact that Israel constantly opens its borders to allow Palestinians to come work, get paid, and go back shows that extermination is not their policy. It is, however, the stated policy of many of the Arab militias, one of which was elected, under free elections, by the Palestinian people to run their government. I leave you to draw your own conclusions from that.

And Thom, I'd love to hear your response to the comment I made just before this one. In the interest of debate, I would.

So, you don't know how Jordan, Syria, and Egypt treat terrorists in their territories? Why do you feel informed enough to contribute to this conversation, Thom?

Yo anon: Please do not post any more untruths. Your entire second paragraph is a fabrication. Go somewhere other than AIPAC.com for your information, please.

Well, I guess building a defensive fence (that has thus far saved many lifes) does not make you a good neighbour, but firing rockets all around makes one a great pal, eh? And how about blowing up a disco full of youngsters thereby killing 29 of them? How would you like such a person living next door?

And as for Jerusalem - In 2000 Barak offered half of it To Arafat. Arafat refused. He wanted it all. I bet that makes him an excellent buddy.

Admit it, you're not being a good neighbour when you build your fence on your neighbour's side. Obviously, you're not a good neighbour when you claim all of Jerusalem as your own.(*see Saul Signer)p This summer, the world has seen the ture nature of Israeli agression this time on the Lebanese:

. "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.)

In that case it's not a very good point, is it? Since it's wrong.

Then it's not a very good point, is it?

Um, Thom, the point is that they'd already be dead if it were anyone other than Israel doing the "occupying."

"And what would have happened to the Palestinians if, instead of being under Israeli occupation they were under Iraqi occupation? Or Sudanese? Or even French or Soviet?"

Then I would have written, "Well, a good start might be for [insert country here] to stop killing them. Don't you think?"

Thom writes: "Well, a good start might be for Israel to stop killing them."

Well Thom, I'm sure you'd be happy if Israelies would just play dead and let the Palestinians fire as many rockets as they like and explode freely in pubs and busses. However, Israel is indeed a small scale killer.

Someone said it better than me, so I'll give you the quote:

"The tragedy is that in Arab and Muslim countries a massacre is happening. A genocide protected by the silence of the world. A genocide that has no connection to Israel, to Zionism or to Jews. A genocide of mainly Arabs and Muslims, by Arabs and Muslims.

And the world is silent. The Muslims are indeed abandoned. They are murdered and the world is silent. And if it bothers to open its mouth, it doesn't complain about the murderers. It doesn't complain about the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity. It complains about Israel.

The total count reaches about 60,000 Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Among them only several thousand Palestinians, although it is because of them, and only them, that Israel is the target of the world's anger. Every Arab and Muslim death is regrettable. And it is okay to criticize Israel. But the obsessive and demonic criticism emphasizes a far more amazing fact: The silence of the world, or at least relative silence, in the face of the systematic extermination of millions of others by Muslim and Arab regimes.

From here on we must ask: How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed in those same years in other countries, for instance, in Russia or in France, and how many Arabs, Muslims and others, were killed in those same years by Arabs and Muslims.

Algeria: A few years after the establishment of the State of Israel, there began another war of independence. This time it was Algeria against France, between the years 1954-1962. The number of victims on the Muslim side is a subject for controversy. According to official sources in Algeria it is over a million.
Today there is no question that the French killed nearly 600,000 Muslims. And these are the French, who do not stop preaching to Israel, the Israel that in the whole history of its conflict with the Arabs failed to reach even one tenth of that number, and even then, according to the more severe assessments.
The massacre in Algeria continues. In the 1991 elections the Islamic Salvation Front was voted in. The results of the elections were cancelled by the army. Since then a civil war has been raging, between the central government, supported by the army, and Islamic movements. According to various estimates, there have been about 100,000 victims so far. Most of them have been innocent civilians. In most cases it has been horrific massacres of whole villages, women, children and old people. A massacre in the name of Islam.

Afghanistan: This is a web of nonstop mass killing - domestic and external. The Soviet invasion, which began on 24th December 1979 and ended on 2nd February 1989, left about a million dead. Other estimates talk of 1.5 million dead civilians and an additional 90,000 soldiers.

After the withdrawal of the Soviet Forces, Afghanistan went through a series of civil wars and struggles between the Soviet supporters, the Mojahidin and the Taliban. Each group carried out a doctrine of mass extermination of its opponents. The sum of the fatalities in civil war, up to the invasion of the coalition forces under American leadership in 2001, is about one million.

Somalia: Since 1977 this Muslim state in East Africa has been immersed in an unending civil war. The number of victims is estimated at about 550,000. It is Muslims killing mainly Muslims.

Bangladesh: This country aspired to gain independence from Pakistan. Pakistan reacted with a military invasion that caused mass destruction. It was not a war, it was a massacre. One to two million people were systematically liquidated in 1971.

Iraq: Most of the of the last two decades was the doing of Saddam Hussein. One of the highpoints was during the Iran-Iraq war, in the conflict over the Shat El Arab River. This was a conflict that led to nothing but large scale destruction and mass killing. Estimates are between 450,000 and 650,000 Iraqis, and between 450,000 and 970,000 Iranians. Jews, Israelis, and Zionists were not around, as far as is known."

I could go on to Indonesia, the civil war in Lebanon, the Kurds etc. But I figure you get the message by now.

Now let us ask ourselves this question:

"And what would have happened to the Palestinians if, instead of being under Israeli occupation they were under Iraqi occupation? Or Sudanese? Or even French or Soviet? It is highly probable that they would have been victims of genocide, at worst, and of mass killings, purges, and deportations at best.

But luckily for them they are under Israeli occupation. And even if, I repeat, there is no such thing as an enlightened occupation, and even if it is acceptable and possible, and at times necessary, to criticize Israel, there is no occupation and there has never been an occupation with so few fatalities"

Thom, Washington DC said: "Well, a good start might be for Israel to stop killing them. Don't you think?"

Who are you talking about, the Palestinians or the Israelies (I get by the phrasing of your question that you mean the Israelies). So, I'll quote myself from an earlier comment in this blog: "If anyone doubts that the root of the Palestinians' suffering is the terrorist organizations that they blindly (hopefully blindly, that is) support, just look at the facts.

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. They publically declared this. I remember watching the news reports (I was in my early 20s) at the time, and wondering, "Um, is anyone paying attention to this?" I guess the only ones who were were the Israelies... and STILL they didn't attack Lebanon until 2006, after suffering 1000's of rocket attacks. Now, I call that restraint.

Hamas, upon the recently negotiated ceasefire in Gaza, NEVER stopped attacking Israel. Not from day ONE. What kind of faith are the Israelies supposed to have in a peace process when the other side doesn't even adhere for one day? How much confidence do they have that there even can be peace, or that every Palestinian should not be treated as an enemy, when this is the message that they receive? Yet still, they did not try to resume retaliation strikes against known rocket positions and Hamas hideouts and militia for over a week. [CORRECTION - I checked again, it was over a month]

And how does the Associated Press respond to that? By posting a story that the ISRAELIES are the ones that are in danger of breaking the truce, completely ignoring the fact that Hamas never stopped attacking. Go look it up if you doubt any of my statements. So, might Israel have the perception that the majority of the world is out against them, with only a few supporters like the US, Britain, Australia et. al.? Might that make them a little more desperate in their delaings with a people who publically cheered the attacks on 9/11 in the streets, long before the US and its Coalition of the Willing invaded anyone in the Middle East? I'd think so.

Yet, it is still true, that without both sides taking the time to have honest, peaceful and meaninful talks with each other, nothing will get resolved, and more generations of children will grow up hating each other for no other reason than their fathers and mothers told them to. The problem is that it is the Arabs who have returned to violence against Israel every time a truce has held, whether in small militia groups that they allowed to continue to exist in spite of their promises for peace, or in whole as their militant and genocidal clerics and leaders spurned them on to try to drive the "Zionists into the sea." 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."

I would love to be proven wrong on those last few sentences, and would be happily surprised if the current generation of Palestinians did make some actual effort to address their own complicity in allowing these murderous mafias like Hamas and Hezbollah from hijacking their entire way of life...but I just don't think it will happen this generation. It's really a shame, but when the Palestinians elect as their representatives in government, who will make deisions for them and guide their society, a group (Hamas) of murderers (I know they build schools and conduct relief missions, but that's only to further their own ends and recruit new militia members - just ask anyone who has refused their help, go read reports of how they treat those in the Palestinian neighborhoods who don't want any part of their terrorist ideology) who publicly declare that they want to exterminate the Jews. Why would you elect such people to your seats of government if that is not what you wanted as a whole? Well, to quote George Bernard Shaw, "Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve." The Palestinians deserve the hardships that they currently suffer under IDF dominance, simply because they have had the power, many times, to change their course and reject the path of desired genocide, and they have not done so.

Want proof? Here are some excerpts from the charter, available with a simple web search, of the Hamas movement, which the Palestinians elected through outright democracy:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

Now, if history teaches us anything, especially recent history, if the Arabs can be counted on to do something, it's to back up their threats of violence with actual violence. Now, go read the Hamas charter, and tell me then if the government that the Palestinian people freely elected is actually interested in a peace that isn't the peace of a cemetary.

"Syrian and other Arabs don't hate Jews; they are humans just like them. BUT we hate Zionist who believes a country can exist based on religion."

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

Well, a good start might be for Israel to stop killing them.

Don't you think?

SHAME on the Washington Post for printing this propaganda. Palestinbe would exist as a nation today if not for the perfidy of Arafat who smiled for the camera, agreed to the peace terms in Oslo, and then proceeded to send his people's children to blow themselves up in shopping malls and bus stations. How can Israel EVER come to terms with a people who refuse to acknowledge Israel's RIGHT TO EXIST?

Shame on you, Post.

How can someone criticize our newspapers for not publishing different opinions, and then get so upset at hearing opinions other than their own in their own newspapers?????? If this kind of censorship applied to the leading US dailies, then they seemingly are not different from newspapers that appeared under Saddam Hussein.

For Judith, who says she will never accept Muslims, we tell her: ROT IN HELL because we too will never accept someone like you who does not want to accept us, whether you are Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, or atheist. Why should we? You mention the Crusades: they came to our land, and not the other way around. We don't want the Crusades. Certainly not. Nor do we want fanatics among us. Moslems accept Christians and live with them. Our Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) was even married to a Christian. We accept all religions that came before us. But you are a fanatic Judith, no worse than Osama Bin Laden.

The discussion on this blog proves, more than anything, how un-democratic the "friends of Israel" are, and how much a different opinion angers them. Had they been civilized, they would have reacted in a different manner, with facts, numbers, rather than insults and silly language.

It is strange indeed how active the friends of Israel are in defending it, even when they know it has been wrong, or are too brainwashed to know. Every word in this article is correct and the Palestinians have a right to exist, in the Arab world more so than the Zionists. When words showing the true face of Zionism were published, the Zionists went nuts. How can an Arab publish this, in a venue like The Washington Post????? Thats simply too much. Go read what the writer is saying. He makes it very clear that he is opposed to suicide bombers, but what can one expect from brainwashed people like yourselves. You see that, are angered by it, and want to prove that he is saying otherwise. You are a disgrace. Truly. Come see what the Israelis did here in Beirut and you wil know how terrible they really are.

Good.It appeared. I wanted to say to those speaking of Brunner that the CIA hosted a wide group of former Nazis after World War II, so they could help them keep track of the USSR. The Nazis had long experience in monitoring of the USSR. The US, during the early years of the Cold War, did not. So before telling the Syrians to eject Brunner (who is dead, by the way), say that to the CIA that collaborated with the Nazis.

I have been trying to post a comment, with little luck. Why is this so?

Lots of facts and non-facts. I for one will never accept Muslims or Islamics or whatever you call them. They are living in the 7th century and still fighting the crusades. How the US became part of this puzzles me unless it relates to our developing oil in Arabian countries. If Muslims are all so happy with their lot in life, why did they and do they accept technical help from us. We in the US are a progressive sometimes greedy lot but we are the best folks G-d created; we help everyone on this planet. If the Muslims want to get along, they must catch up and respect other nations, forsaking trying to put Shar'a law on the rest of us. I do not care but do regret it if they eat sand fleas and keep their women in bags. They just do not know how to love anybody or anything. Just keep their practices away from the US of A.

This strange mixture of fantasy and distortion comes from a supporter of one of the major terror - states in the world , Syria. Apparently the 'Washington Post' has decided that editorial judgment is no longer a value, and that it will allow anything at all, including totalitarian propaganda to fill its own little space in Cyberdom.
Shame not on the hack who wrote this, but on the 'Post' for posting it.

The Muslims have 22 Islamic nations. The Jews DESERVE a homeland, and Israel is the nation which G-d promised to the JEWISH people. The Jews have had a constant presence in the land of Israel for over 3000 years. All Arabs, let Israel be and go to your own land. Israel has a RIGHT to exist. Stop the antisemitic BS, and don't give me the argument that you can't be antisemitic because you are a Semite... That argument is so stoopid {all you need to do is crack open a dictionary to find out the meaning of the word}.

What a bunch of rubbish written by a professional propagandist. How dare the author sully the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, who fought hard to bring peace and harmony into the world. The so-called Palestinians are not a people, never were, and never will be. These people kill their own and their own children are like cattle to them. Shame on the Washington post for publishing such rubbish. I will end with the hope that the editor and the writer of this tripe both be punished in the depths of hell for deceiving the public like this. SHAME ON YOU ALL!

Oh Mazen, where shall I start...

How about start with democracy. If Syria had been a democracy, wouldn't the president had to be changed every once in a while? You know, Mazen, it is not customary for a democracy that rulership passes from father to son as it has been in Syria.... or do you have a special kind of democracy, a better one, that is?

Lets go on to Israel - not exactly a religious country, quite the opposite actually. It has lately recognized gay marriage - about the fourth country in the whole world to do so. Israel is not based on Judaism as religion, but as ethnicity. In this respect it is no different than Hungary or Japan. If you wish to rule out ethnicity as a basis for a state, you would have to discredit most nations on this globe. It might be news to you, but more than a million Arabs are living in Israel as equal citizens. Surprisingly enough the Israelies do not kill them. Strange indeed.

"They regret the moment they made their decision to leave as their life in Syria was perfect". Allow me to giggle. Can you even begin to compare the standard of living, of health and education, not to mention civil rights, between Israel and Syria?

One last thing - you speak about the atrocities israel committed - what about the 20,000 massacred at Hamma by your own goverment? What about the almost 30 years old occupation of Lebanon? You know, a person living in a house made of glass should not throw stones...

Wow ahmad,

So quickly you forget that it was your own government who in ten days (September 1970) killed more Palestinians than the Israelies have managed to kill in the last six years. So who is the one practicing ethnical cleansing, is it Israel or is it Jordan?

BTW, if Israel was indeed ethnically cleansing the Arabs, then how come in 1948 there were only about a 150,000 Arabs in Israel, and now more than a million? This just doesn't make sense.

BTW2, thank you for giving us a live display of Arabic hatred. Couldn't ask for anything better to rebut Zain's claim that Arabs want peace.

Last time I checked everybody from one end of the earth to another has trouble with Muslims everywhere. They just can't coexist with anybody, because they always want to take over.

This is the source of Palestine problem as well as global terrorism. What you asking is to support self annihilaltion. I can't belive the corrupt traitors on the Saudi payroll at WP providing you with a platform for hate. F

Before blaming IDF let me ask you - How many Shias did you Sunni brothers slaghter in Iraq today ? Or you Janjaweed brother killed in Darfur ?

Idon't believe the bad and offensive comments to the author's article. The author made solid points supported by REAL evidence that no one can dispute or DENY! However some of you ignorant people went on swearing and using offensive language. It would help if you read the article objectively and use sound argument. BUT MOST OF YOU DON'T. you keep on mixing things together, SYRIA is terrorist country, with a dictatorship ruling. Is Syria a terrorist country, NO, but that is what your western biased media got you thinking... Is is ruled by a dictator, NO, BUT DO YOU REALLY THINK YOUR COUNTRY IS DEMOCRATIC? Do me a favor and read the book "the best democracy money can buy" That is how your country is being run, by ruthless bad leaders who give orders to kill many innocent people to make financial gains. Those are fact none of you can argue just as you could not prove wrong any of the author's well researched article.
Syrian and other Arabs don't hate Jews; they are humans just like them. BUT we hate Zionist who believes a country can exist based on religion. To all of you living the good life in SD, SF, etc... DO you believe that only people who share your religion are allowed to live in your country! That is what Zionism means, kill all other religions and create the Jewish country. For your information, Jewish people existed in Syria forever; they migrated in late nineties to Israel after Syrian Government allowed them to do so under the condition not to return. The regret the moment they made their decision to leave as their life in Syria was perfect. They were equal to Christian and Muslim Syrian (after all religion is something personal between a person and his God), they were given the same rights as everyone else. They left thinking they could have a better life but were faced with the discrimination from Israelis as Western European and North American Jews are ranked higher than Arab Jews. So tell me hoe does this MAKE ISRAEL A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY!... Again some of your insulting comments are so ridiculous that they are not even worth answering... GET EDUCATED THAN come and ARGUE. With all the Political pressures US is applying on us, with all the atrocities Israel has committed, with our what you cal a dictatorship ruling, we are still far smarter than some of you who are putting silly argument and using offensive language. GET A LIFE!

I don't beleive the bad and offensive comments to the author's article. The author made solid points supported by REAL evidence that no one can dispute or DENY! however some of you ignorent people went on swearing and using offensive language. It would help if you read the article objectively and use sound argument. BUT MOST OF YOU DON'T. you keep on mixing things together, SYRIA is terrorist country, with a dictatorship ruling. Is Syria a terrorist country, NO, but that is what your western biased media got you thinking... Is is ruled by a dictator,NO, BUT DO YOU REALLY THINK YOUR COUNTRY IS DEMOCRATIC? Do me a favor and read the book "the best democracy money can buy" That is how your contry is being run, by ruthless bad leaders who give orders to kill many innocent people to makefinancial gains. Those are fact none of you can argue just as you could not prove wrong any of the authors well researched article.
Syrian and other arabs don't hate jews,they are humans just like them. BUT we hate Zionest who beleive a country can exist based on religion. To all of you living the good life in SD, SF, etc... DO you beleive that only poeple who share your religion are allowed to live in your country! That is what Zionism means, kill all other religions and create the Jewish country. For your information, Jewish people existed in Syria forever, they migrated in late nineties to Israel after Syrian Government allowed them to do so under the condition not to return. The regret the moment they made their decision to leave as their life in Syria was perfect. They were equal to Christian and Muslim Syrian (after all religion is something personal between a person and his God), they were given the same rights as everyone else. They left thinking they could have a better life but were faced with the discrimination from Israelis as Western European and North American Jews are ranked higher than Arab Jews. So tell me hoe does this MAKE ISRAEL A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY!... Again some of your insulting comments are so redicolous that they are not even worth answering... GET EDUCATED THAN come and ARGUE. With all the Political pressures US is applying on us, with all the atrocities Israel has committed, with our what you cal a dictatorship ruling, we are still far smarter than some of you who arew putting silly argument and using offensive language. GET A LIFE!

Gee, ahmad, if you were correct, then Israel would not have any terrorists attacking them because all the terrorists would be dead. Either 1) you don't know what you're talking about, 2) you don't know the meaning of the words you use, 3) you can't perform the simplest logic, or 4) you are a troll. Care to tell us which one applies to you?

BTW, it seems I was wrong about Sami being a Syrian official. Please substitute "Syrian national gasbag" where I wrote "Syrian official in my previous comment.

The majority of americans have been spoon fed the typical zionist propaganda and lies in every major american newspaper. Americans cannot even face the fact even if it hits them in the head.
Fact: Americans are supporting the only apartheid democracy in the world to kill palestinains and ethnically cleanse them of their lands. No wonder you are hated every where. Before you support the zionists why dont you travel to west bank and see the apartheid system at work.
The funny thing is americans talk about freedom and human rights and criticize china while ethnically cleansing palestinains.
ZIONISM = NAZISM = suprimacist race ethnic cleansing of a percieved weaker race.

I don't understand the right-wingers getting themselves into a tizzie because the WaPo published a piece written by a Syrian official. Major papers usually publish opposing points of view. They've been know to set aside pages for that kind of thing.

I don't understand the left-wingers getting themselves into a tizzie because knowledgeable people rip into the Syrain official's unreasonable screed. They should be thanking the knowledgeable people for taking the time to educate them.

Here are some obvious factual errors to be found in this article:

1. It claims the UN showed "outright bias" toward Israel and the US. Anyone familiar even a bit with the anti Israel festival going on at the UN each year can only bitterly giggle at this assertion. One example that comes to mind is the recent condemnation and fact finding mission with regard to the 18 Palestinians accidentally killed in Beit Hanoun. No UN resolution of condemnation or of a fact finding mission was ever made with regard to the dozens of intentional suicide bombing, which killed more than a thousand Israeli civilians in recent years. The auther himself admits that " not a single resolution was ever passed against the Palestinians", thereby outrightly contradicting himself.

2. The article goes on: "Washington did not receive clearance from the UN but went on with the war, caring little for the family of nations that assembled in San Francisco in 1945 to make the world "safer for democracy." Another ridiculous statement. Since when does a country await a clearance from the UN to start a war? Did Syria and Egypt have a clearance from the UN when they attacked Israel in 1967 and in 1973? I wonder. To say that the US does not care about the UN, when in fact the UN can operate only thanks to a very generous annual funding from the US is equally absurd.

3. The author asks "What else except despair would let someone like Wafa Idris, a 28-year old paramedic with the Palestinian Red Crescent, blow herself up in Jerusalem on January 28, 2002."? Well, there could be many reasons. Could it be the indoctrination she received at home? After all, despair does not provide explosives, right?

There is more, but sorry, I'm out of time.

SOS - The letter is full of distortions.

The UN emblem was not co-designed by any Syrian. It was designed by the US Office of Strategic Services. See: http://www.un.org/geninfo/faq/factsheets/flag.pdf

Syria was not one of the 26 founding countries that signed the original UN declaration in 1942, it acceded in 1945.

Outright bias towards Israel and the US? Yeah, sure.

Annan did say no to the US re: Iraq: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/11/sprj.irq.un/

Trygve Lie was in favor of an equitable solution for the region. The arab countries were maximalists who refused to permit any land to be given to the jewish inhabitants. If the arab countries had agreed to the UN's proposed division, the arabs/Palestinians would have had 45% of mandated Palestine west of the Jordan (and 100% east of the Jordan). Now, they will be lucky to get 20%. So, who was worse at looking after the Palestian interests, Lie or the surrounding arab countries? The issue is not that the Secretaries-General are pro-Israel, it is that some people need to find a scapegoat for the consequences of their own actions.

- The Ramallah raid was on January 4. On January 1, the Palestinian year began with Hamas and Fatah fighters killing each other and kidnapping Peruvian journalists. But I guess these things don't count if jews are not involved.

- I'm not sure how anyone goes about implementing UN resolutions 106 and 111 condemning Israel. Do the UN members have to march in a line and one by one waive a finger at the Israli ambassador? The only resolutions that can be implemented are chapter 7 resolutions, which require things to be done. No chapter 7 resolutions have been passed against Israel.

- Even if we were to assume for a second that the UN was not dominated by kleptocratic arab autocracies and their allies, how does one pass a UN resolution against a non-state? It can't happen, which renders the statement about Palestinian resolutions meaningless if not downright misleading.

- All the comparisons between blacks and Palestinians are stupid. The Palestinians had a great standard of living before they decided to have the second intifada (at a time when they were being offered pretty much all of the disputed territories, no less).

- "What else except dispair... ?" Try hatred that is inculcated from birth.

- Comparing the Palestinian situation to the Armenians and the Holocaust is ridiculous. Far more Palestinians have been killed by Jordan and Syria than were ever killed by Israel. It is a war, that the Palestinians could end tomorrow by deciding not to kill Israelis. The Armenians and jews never had an "out" clause. Frankly, after all of the murders committed by the Palestinians over the last few decades, I would lump their cause well behind all other peoples seeking self-determination, including the Tibetans, West Papuans, Kurds, etc.

- The real problem of the Middle East is not land and freedom for the Palestinian (which they could have had at any time since 1948). The real problems are many, but include the failure to recognize Israel's legitimate right to exist.

- There is no consensus among the arabs regarding Israel. Some want a two-state solution. Some want a one-state solution with the jews as a minority. Some want a one-state solution that is Judenrein.

Plenty more, but I can't be bothered.

Zain said: "Any way here is the sentence in your post I was responding to you and apparently "misunderstood".

"Since the cases of Palestinians having their own, sovereign state are purely hypothetical" "

If this is what led you to misunderstand me, please note that the comment this line comes from is in response to Same Old Story's comment to Ed's comment (hmmm... okay, right) that addressed Ed's first two points. Although Ed whitewashes a bit (or a lot, depending on your point of view, I guess) his "11-Point" comment is very poignant in its messages, and Same Old Story, for whatever reason, thought that points 1 and 2 contradicted each other. Since Ed brings up hypothetical situations in those points, I disagreed on his behalf, not seeing how two separate partially-hypothetical points can contradict each other. I did not mean that to say that the case for a Palestinian state is hypothetical, just that Ed's points were. BTW, I've read those points elsewhere, I forget where, so I don't know if he even wrote them himself or just regurgitated someone else's comments.

As far as my defensive stance, I appoligize... as the ultra-left get further backed into their fantasy-land corner by the ever-encroaching reality, I see that they resort to more and more ad-hominem and outright malicious attacks, and many people "on the fence" as it were, and not used to hearing it, are duped by such logical fallacy into listening (after all, anyone that passionate about some issue must know what they're talking about, right? rIgHt?). I took your comment for more of the same, and immediately went on the defensive, which is my mistake. It wouldn't have been the first time someone had launched into an attempted attack against something I had said without reading/listening to the entire statement, nor, I fear, will it not happen again some day soon.

I will whole-heartedly agree with you that both sides ARE to blame for the continued violence. At the same time, I must point out that Israel has acted in good faith at every attempted ceasefire that has subsequently failed, even when the ceasefire wasn't even acknowledged by Fatah, Hamas or Hezbollah, and they endure constant threat of attack DAILY at any time, any place.

The Palestinians don't seem to understand that, if they would just stop fighting for 1 MONTH, there would be peace, their economy would recover, the world would lavish them with more diplomatic, monetary and material aid than they would know what to do with. They wouldn't have to worry about angry or frightened IDF soldiers shooting innocent bystanders (yeah, I can believe that happens, unfortunately all soldiers are human, but the fact that the Israeli army even mentions that they launched an investigation into the purported unwarranted shooting/murder is evidence that such acts are not a policy that they condone, and are not to be taken as justified). But, I think that, through the radicalization of their religion, by the teaching of militant hadith and sunnah (I do not recognize these two parts of the "teachings" of Muhammad as valid, personally, since they are, naturally because of their origin, very subjective to the time and society (one-time barbarians) in which they were written), and the psychological unburdoning of all responsibility for their actions through the irrational projection of all of their perceived woes and grievances onto the Israelies, and then, by association, the West, the Palestinians have become so overwhelmed by hate and shame that they allow themselves to be led down a path of their own destruction by these groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who, in the end, are no different that the Hitler Youth in Nazi Germany, save for the fact that they use a distorted form of religion for their recruitment instead of national pride. If anyone doubts that the root of the Palestinians' suffering is the terrorist organizations that they blindly (hopefully blindly, that is) support, just look at the facts.

Hezbollah, upon the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, even publically 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. They publically declared this. I remember watching the news reports (I was in my early 20s) at the time, and wondering, "Um, is anyone paying attention to this?" I guess the only ones who were were the Israelies... and STILL they didn't attack Lebanon until 2006, after suffering 1000's of rocket attacks. Now, I call that restraint.

Hamas, upon the recently negotiated ceasefire in Gaza, NEVER stopped attacking Israel. Not from day ONE. What kind of faith are the Israelies supposed to have in a peace process when the other side doesn't even adhere for one day? How much confidence do they have that there even can be peace, or that every Palestinian should not be treated as an enemy, when this is the message that they receive? Yet still, they did not try to resume retaliation strikes against known rocket positions and Hamas hideouts and militia for over a week.

And how does the Associated Press respond to that? By posting a story that the ISRAELIES are the ones that are in danger of breaking the truce, completely ignoring the fact that Hamas never stopped attacking. Go look it up if you doubt any of my statements. So, might Israel have the perception that the majority of the world is out against them, with only a few supporters like the US, Britain, Australia et. al.? Might that make them a little more desperate in their delaings with a people who publically cheered the attacks on 9/11 in the streets, long before the US and its Coalition of the Willing invaded anyone in the Middle East? I'd think so.

Yet, it is still true, that without both sides taking the time to have honest, peaceful and meaninful talks with each other, nothing will get resolved, and more generations of children will grow up hating each other for no other reason than their fathers and mothers told them to. The problem is that is the Arabs who have returned to violence against Israel every time a truce has held, whether in small militia groups that they allowed to continue to exist in spite of their promises for peace, or in whole as their militant and genocidal clerics and leaders spurned them on to try to drive the "Zionists into the sea." 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. Maybe in 10 years, a new group of people, raised on the Internet, Satellite TV and global cultures, will make a serious effort to do something to better their situation that doesn't involve dreams of committing genocide.

OK, You people have had five hours to do your research and to come back with (cited) instances where the author was factually wrong.

Only one of you even tried. A pretty poor effort if you ask me.

There is only one conclusion to be drawn from this. . . He's not wrong.

Feel free to disagree, but until I see some hard evidence, I'll take the journalist at his word.

Ok, so Israel has complied with one resolution. Keep in mind it took them THIRTY YEARS to do so.

Imagine if Iran took that long. Can you say "We'd nuke them?"

Same Old Story: FACTS

Firstly, SOS, it is entirely possible to put together a false argument without straying from the truth by using facts inappropriately or without context. That is in large measure what is happening here.

Secondly nearly every statement of the author is contestable at least. E.g: Israel believes it IS in compliance with UNSR 242 and has a very sound argument. As was pointed out earlier, even lawyers disagree and Israel does what it needs to for security. After winning the '67 war, would it have made sense to just walk away from land areas that enhanced her security even as the Arab states were calling for more war?

As a matter of FACT, a quick search brings up Israel's compliance with UNSR 426 so the author is wrong about zero compliance. The point though is there is severe Arab non-compliance, starting with Resolution 181, that is never discussed. In each case Israel is expected to compromise its security in the face of continued belligerence. This is unfair, which describes the tone of this article.

Territories does not imply all. This was even recognized by Syria's representative to the UN at the time, who complained about the "vague call on Israel to withdraw". There is a great deal of literature available about this resolution and its framing. The framers of the resolution, Justice Goldberg (US) and Lord Caradon (UK) were both of the opinion that "territories" did not mean "all territories".

If I say I will give you food, does that mean that I have to give you all the food in my cupboard?

"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less." Humpty Dumpty

Territory implies all. It says during the recent conflict.

I can tell you are anti-semantic

Resolution 242 provides that BOTH of the following must occur:

- Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

- Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

A lot of Palestinian supporters forget about the second limb. As for Israel withdrawing from ALL territories, at the time of the resolution's framing, the words "the" and "all" were proposed and rejected. The resolution was left intentionally ambiguous.

The resolution also affirms the necessity:

- For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;

- For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;

- For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;

I was once told by an Egyptian employee that all of the problems of the Middle East are the fault of Isreal. He went on to explain that if Arab countries were to accept the refugees from "Palestine", their struggle would disappear.

I then asked him: If you could kill all of the Jews tomorrow, would your president quit stealing every penny he could? If all Isrealis ceased to exist, would Syria become a free society? If there was no Isreal, would Arabs start treating women as people? How is the repression of most of the population of the entire Middle East the fault of the only representative democracy in the region?

When he drew a blank to each question, I explained that the problems of most peoples of the world can be summed up in 2 words: Bad Government.

It is not the Isrealis who bring misery to the Middle East, but Bad Government.

"As for Resolution 242 and the like, they presuppose a genuine and reciprocal peace and resolution of the refugee problem (which includes the Jewish refugees as well). Until the [A]rab countries seek a genuine peace with Israel, Israel is not in a position to satisfy those resolutions." Unbelievable

Do not quote things you do not understand. 242 (passed unanimously, and reaffirmed unanimously six years later) calls for the withdrawal of Israel from ALL territory taken by force. It does not call for "land for peace" a homeland for anyone or any other broad meaning that has since been given to it.

"Get out of conquered territory" Period.

Ziad,

You wrote: "The Arabs have indicated a desire for peace".

The Hamas (democratically elected by the majority of Palestinians) charter states:

"[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion.... Sura 2 (the Cow), verse 120 There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility. "

The PLO charter states:

"Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it. They also assert their right to normal life in Palestine and to exercise their right to self-determination and sovereignty over it."

Please specify how do these charters indicate a desire for peace. Thanks.

Have to run for class. Shall return and try to respond to ya'll.

Till then, Salaam a Alaikum.

Moose:

I do not remember insulting you at any point. At worst I misunderstood the argument you were making, hardly a case for the hysterics you went into. A prudent and respectful response would have been to let me know that I misunderstood you and perhaps explain or highlight your argument again.

Any way here is the sentence in your post I was responding to you and apparently "misunderstood".

"Since the cases of Palestinians having their own, sovereign state are purely hypothetical"

I understood it to mean that you did not think that the case for a Palestinian state was necessarily proven (definition of hypothetical:Suppositional; uncertain.).
I merely posted my opinion on what I thought the lack of a Palestinian state woudl entail. If I still misunderstand you would you care to reply and clarify, preferably without the histrionics of your earlier post?

Zain - I'll deal with your points one by one on the assumption that you genuinely seek debate.

- Israel in violation of UN resolutions: Demonstrably false. The only binding Security Council resolutions are Chapter 7 resolutions, none of which have been passed against Israel. Israel cannot violate a non-binding resolution.

- As for Resolution 242 and the like, they presuppose a genuine and reciprocal peace and resolution of the refugee problem (which includes the Jewish refugees as well). Until the arab countries seek a genuine peace with Israel, Israel is not in a position to satisfy those resolutions.

- The ICJ ruling was also non-binding. It was an advisory opinion that was in any event ultra vires the court's jurisdiction.

- The issue is not whether or not Israel commits human rights violations (it clearly has). The issue is whether the UN and various other human rights bodies focus a disproportionate amount of attention to Israeli violations compared to, for example, millions being killed in Rwanda, Sudan, etc. Where was the UN when 300,000 Palestinians were expelled from Kuwait? Where was the UN when Syria and Jordan killed 10,000s of Palestinians? The truth is that the UN and the arab states do not care about the Palestinians, who are merely a stick that is used to beat up on Israel. If history is any guide, if the Palestinians were behaving in any arab country as they currently do with respect to Israel, they would be completely exterminated without a single UN resolution being passed.

- As for Israeli soldiers deliberately shooting children, if you read Haas' interview with the soldier, he is talking about shooting people who are shooting or carrying firebombs and even then, when the Palestinian children who have been brainwashed into taking arms against the soldiers are trying to kill him, he still tries to ensure that they are over a certain age (he mentions 20 years old in the interview). Name one other country in which soldiers are told not to shoot at children who are armed with deadly weapons and are trying to kill people with them. No country goes to greater efforts than Israel to try to avoid civilian casualties, even when its enemies are going out of their way to cause civilian casualties.

- As for Alois Brunner, I do not regard the entire Syrian people responsible for the fact that he is alive and well today in Damascus. I do, however, blame the Syrian government. There is no free political speech in Syria. Sami is a Syrian citizen and resident who is close to the Baath party. When he writes, he is writing on Assad's behalf. For that reason, I can lump Assad and him together.
As for me denigrating Muslims into a sub-human group, I did nothing of the sort and you should apologize for defaming me.

- As for Palestinian polls, the most recent one of any consequence brought in Hamas, who are committed to the destruction of Israel. No two-state solution there.

- Although the Beirut Declaration of 2002 was a good step in the right direction, it basically said that if Israel resolves its issues with the Palestinians, the other arab countries will recognize Israel. Israel welcomed the declaration; however, it is meaningless unless a peace settlement can be achieved with the Palestinians. Even if we were to assume that tomorrow Hamas were to recognize Israel's existence and agree to move the peace process forward, the devil would be in the detail (ie "just solution" to refugee problem, holy sites, disarming Palestinian terrorist groups, level of militarization of Palestinian territories, etc.) The declaration is not a solution, but a contingent peace offering once the problems are solved.

Look we can go around in circles forever pointing out atrocities committed by either side. I have tried to engage Rudolfo on neutral ground to discuss issues that could actually make a difference and discuss ideas and have instead been subjected to personal attacks about "lying" and "aiding and abetting genocide". Still, I am going to give it another shot.

While it is true that I have focused on the Israeli atrocities in my post, that is a result of the overwhelmingly anti-Palestinian and sometimes anti_muslim remarks that have been posted here. I blame both sides for the violence. The Israelis for continuing the settlement building and dragging their feet on accepting the UNSC resolutions and the Palestinian groups that have refused to shun violence.

There is no purely "good or evil" force in the world. The world today is gray and there are myriads of interwoven issues. Unless we accept that reality and stop trying to impose simplistic one sided solutions, we will not be able to resolve anything.

Zain said: "since moose and others do not believe a case for an independent Palestine exists"

I guess you don't read too well, then, or maybe just don't bother to process what you read. So, I'll COPY MY OWN COMMENT: "I don't even agree with her ... I think there is hope for them still, and that the world should act on that hope - and the first step is tearing away the mafia-guerilla terrorist networks that continue to suck their whole society down their self-made drain."

Now, HOW in the WORLD do you arrive at the conclusion that I don't support an independent Palestine after I make that statement? You obviously read the same comment that line came from; did you bother to read the whole thing? How did you even graduate high school with a reading retention rate like that? At no time in any of my comment do I state that I, personally, don't think the Palestinians deserve to have their own state; I DID relate the feelings of my Jordanian friend, as an example, but I even stated that I disagreed with her in the very same paragraph. You need to brush up on your reading and comprehension. I suggest some Faulkner and Hemmingway, to start.

Since no one bothered to respond to my first post, I assume that there are no factual problems with the article. . . but just in case, I'll repost.

A challenge to everyone who is putting the author down.

Could someone point out one, JUST ONE, fact that is wrong here? (Not a difference of opinion or perspective, but wrong in a quantifiable way) Please provide a link.

Thank you.

"A 13-year-old Palestinian boy was deliberately shot dead by an Israeli soldier without any provocation, say two British human rights volunteers who witnessed the incident.

An Israeli army spokesman confirmed last night that an inquiry had been launched.

"I was with three other international volunteers in a street in Nablus on Sunday with Baha Albahsh, who often tags along with us," said one of the witnesses, who gave his first name as Al. "There had been some stone-throwing at tanks and armored personnel carriers which enforce the curfew. It happens frequently and our practice is to stand at the side to observe. We always make sure the Israelis see us, and we don't stand with the kids as it can encourage them."

He said the incident appeared to be over and people had dispersed when an armored personnel carrier stopped nearby. "I heard a single shot, and Baha was lying on the ground, his eyes glazed and blood starting to come out of his mouth. It was clear he had no chance. An ambulance came within two minutes and he died in it. A high-velocity bullet had destroyed his left lung."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0924-07.htm

"I was mistaken. Youre not misguided. Anyone who openly says a blended state would be secular, and not immediately revert to Hamas-led Sharia-law barbarism is aiding and abetting a future genocide.

On the other hand, thanks for showing your true colors. Dont bother answering me, I will now ignore you."

LOL. Talk about ad hominem....You can ignore me if you like, it will mean you do not have to answer any points I brought up. I merely pointed out to you what would happen if the territories were merged into Israel since moose and others do not believe a case for an independent Palestine exists. The other option is to follow UNSC resolutions that have been agreed to by the international community AND israel to arrive at a solution. Take your pick. Or do you prefer the violence and mayhem of the status quo to continue?

Your comment of a blended state immediately converting to "Sharia law" however does provide an insight into your prejudices against Muslims. I am one and have no liking for any sort of theocracy, let alone "Sharia Law", and I know millions of Muslims who are decent human beings, like those from any faith, share my views.

To anyone who keeps bringing up the "Twelve and up, you are allowed to shoot. That's what they tell us." line: do you actually think this refers to just any kid walking down the street? I mean, do you actually think the IDF soldiers are just sitting around, looking for another Palestinian "twelve and up" to come walking along, so they can pick them off like some kind of firing squad? They'd run out of bullets before noon, and believe me, there'd BE NO Palestinians by now if that were the case. But, THAT'S what HEZBOLLAH and HAMAS do, except they don't discriminate between ages, sex, uniformed soldier or civilian, or even Jew or Arab (that's right, many times their suicide bombs kill other Arabs too). Yep, they're equal-opportunity murderers.

The IDF soldiers are allowed to target kids "twelve and up" who are ARMED! So I ask you what you would have them do in the case that a twelve-year-old is firing at them, trying to kill them, or is carrying a bomb, or is standing in front of a guy who is firing at them? Are the IDF supposed to just say "Oh, well, they got us this time, they're using a twelve-year-old for a suicide bomber, and we can't shoot back... whelp, bye fellas, he'll be on us in a second and we can't kill him/her, so I guess we're done for?"

They are allowed to shoot at "twelve and up" because those are the ages of suicide bombers or "riflemen" that frequently engage them, or are acting as human shields for people engaging them (note: engage = shooting with intent to kill). So, what would you have them do? It would seem to me that the only possible conclusions are that they should (A) run away, to avoid the confrontation, if possible, or (B) kill the attacker(s).

Well, (A) might not always even be possible, but even if it were, that doesn't do much for preserving a country surrounded on all sides by enemies, does it? So, that leaves (B)... they kill the twelve-year-old. Horrible. And, so then, I ask you, who do you blame for this? The IDF soldiers acting on orders or in self-defense, or the parents and culture (NOT Race, don't even try to call me a racist, this is about CULTURE) that put a rifle in the hands of a twelve-year-old, or strapped a bomb to him/her, all in some twisted design to alleviate their shame at growing up in such a repressed and backwards society, and for havign done NOTHING about it?

I don't know about you, but I'd have to say that the blame lies with the people who put that 12-year-old out there to begin with. There is a reason that you can't join the military in the US until you're 17... until about then, with rare exception, your teenage psyche is not developed enough or had enough experiences in life to allow you to make rational decisions... that's why we consider 12-year-olds to be children still. So who's to blame for the IDF shooting a 12-year-old? How about the Palestinians themselves? Of course, I'm one of those people who believe in accountability for one's actions... you have to be on that train already if you hope to even get what I'm saying.

Ed in Waterloo: Congratulations and thank you for your post. There are people with a strong inclination to ignore what is right in front of their noses.

Zain said:"A democratic secular Israel/Judea/Samaria whatever.. composed of both Arabs and Jews. When can we start?"

I was mistaken. Youre not misguided. Anyone who openly says a blended state would be secular, and not immediately revert to Hamas-led Sharia-law barbarism is aiding and abetting a future genocide.

On the other hand, thanks for showing your true colors. Dont bother answering me, I will now ignore you.

Zain said:"Why no respect for the law when it comes to Israel. Are you that hung up in the coming of the Messiah that you do not care for the illegal positions you are advocating?"

1.- WHAT law? The UN resolutions hardly have the force of law.

2.- I'm Buddhist. No Messiah, though I dont mind those who have one.

3.- In one breath you say I dont know what you think, yet further down you support my theory completely.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Sami,
Excellent Article.
As usual,AIPAC/Israel zealot supporters get very upset because they don't want any one to hear the Arab's point of views-and as President Carter latest and daring book on Israel Apartheid confirms, Israel's parochial supporter's will do every thing they can to obstruct/block any honest debate on Palestine.

As the Arab proverb says:"The Dogs continue to BARK loudly,While The Caravan Marches On unhindered-all the same."

Zain: ... 12 year olds .... You're putting Israel in the position of having to defend itself against any accusation; i.e. guilty until proven innocent. Meanwhile Palestinian terrorists deliberately target schools and school buses because they're "driven to it."

Israeli orders to shoot kids seem extremely unlikely from everything I know. In addition, let's face it, in countries like Syria conspiracy theories do seem to flourish. What does the balance of probability tell you about this "fact?"

UNSC Resolutions: hopeless. No one even agrees on what they mean, especially the various lawyers.
Israel - 65: Palestinians - 0 tells you about the bias anyway. If you don't believe that - let's say the Palestinians are actually saints - look at the atrocities the U.N. won't touch to understand it's nothing but a kangaroo court.

"Since the cases of Palestinians having their own, sovereign state are purely hypothetical, nothing is solid to be contradicted in these first two statements."

Some other people have made this argument as well. Fine then. Merge the territories into Israel. Even without the four million refugees returning to their homes, the Jewish population will become a minority almost instantly. An ideal solution really. A democratic secular Israel/Judea/Samaria whatever.. composed of both Arabs and Jews. When can we start?

THS, Alexandria, VA said: "I see that the cretins from Little Green Footballs have shown up, prompted by their hateful leader, Charles Johnson."

Nice use of Ad Hominem attack. Usually, the reason for such an attack is the inability by the attacker to refute the arguments presented through either logic or rationale...but in your case I'll assume that you're so used to reading far-left blogs and their hate-filled fantasy-land ramblings that you don't recognize the difference.

Same Old Story said: "I got to your second point and stopped reading. As it CONTRADICTED your first point."

Um, how? Care to elaborate, 'cause I don't see it contradicting anything? Since the cases of Palestinians having their own, sovereign state are purely hypothetical, nothing is solid to be contradicted in these first two statements. And, if you don't bother to read past what you perceive as a logical fallacy, you are essentially throwing out more than a dozen good points that directly regard this debate, and missing all their relevant information (however white-washing it may be, no offense Ed) simply because you can't get off your high horse long enough to read the whole thing? Guess this might be a reason the far left can continue to be convinced that their poorly-constructed fantasy land they are so comfortable in is anything but just that: they don't bother to stick their heads out the window, remove their paradigm glasses and actually take a look around, and notice that the reality bus left without them a long time ago.

Finally, Wash-Post... you do a major discredit to your namesake, George Washington (through the city bearing his name, that is) by posting this ridiculous garbage. It's amazing and sad to see how the atrocious re-writing of documented and verifiable history has completely distorted the world-view of the Palestinian people. No wonder my friend from Jordan is happy living here, wants to bring her whole family here, and considers the Palestinians and Syrians, in general, as angry little children, and declares that the only way it will end is for Israel to wipe them out... and she, a Jordanian (essentially the same as a Palestinian), says they deserve it. I don't even agree with her, but I can see where she's coming from. I think there is hope for them still, and that the world should act on that hope - and the first step is tearing away the mafia-guerilla terrorist networks that continue to suck their whole society down their self-made drain. That still doesn't mean you should post propaganda. Shame on you.

Rodolfo:

"NONSENSE. Thats is FURTHEST from your mind. Dont lie to us."

Oh so now you purport to know my mind? Would you care to elaborate why you think that?

"To start off, Israel has no obligation to go back to the 1967 border. Thats the same as suicide. Sure, lets give Arabs an even SMALLER nation to destroy, right?"

You are implying that the Arabs will never have peace with Israel then? Becasue only if the Arabs will never be at peace with Israel should ISrael have to worry about "defending" anything at all.

Polls in the Palestinian territories have shown support for a two state solution. I already mentioned the Arab League Declaration that offered a return to the lawful borders of 1967 per UNSC resolutions in return for full recognition and peace. Syria has submitted in the recent past, even through the ISG recomendations, that it is willing to sit down and discuss peace with ISrael in return for the Golan.
The Arabs have indicated a desire for peace. It is Israel that is refusing to dismantle its illegal settlements and return land as declared by the UN and agreed to by Israel. Why no respect for the law when it comes to Israel. Are you that hung up in the coming of the Messiah that you do not care for the illegal positions you are advocating?

Deedum said:"Ed,
Shooting beer cans in your backyard and bedding your sow at night in Texas seems much more appropriate for you then attempting to understand complex world issues."

Besides the obvious Ad Hominem, this post really shows the lefties as their naked selves - no real points to argue, so resorts to High School name calling.

Shooting fish in a left-wing barrel.

Zain said:"Just a little fairness in assigning the blame and recognising that both sides are at fault is all that is asked for"

NONSENSE. Thats is FURTHEST from your mind. Dont lie to us.

To start off, Israel has no obligation to go back to the 1967 border. Thats the same as suicide. Sure, lets give Arabs an even SMALLER nation to destroy, right?

Go to Dr Sanity's blog and find out why the Arab mentality cannot tolerate a group of the industrious in their midst: it shows their failure as societies.

Ed,
Shooting beer cans in your backyard and bedding your sow at night in Texas seems much more appropriate for you then attempting to understand complex world issues.

"It might be easier to believe Sami's comment that the Holocaust was one of the great injustices of the 20th century if his country, Syria, weren't providing safe harbor for Alois Brunner, Eichmann's second in command."

By that logic we should never believe anything coming out of the mouths of Americans, for the atrocities perpetrated upon the Native Americans and the policies of slavery and segregation; we should never believe a German, for Hitlers role in perpetrating the Holocaust; never believe a Spaniard for the Spanish Inquisition; never believe the Italians becasue of Mussolini....well you get the picture.

You argument is fallacious to the point of being ridiculous. To hold an entire nation or race responsible for the actions of a few men is nothing but bigotry and prejudice of the worst kind. But then that too fits into the whole "Islamofascism" theme and helps you denigrate Muslims into a subhuman group that only your "Lord" can provide "salvation" to.

"The Israeli journalist Amira Hass once interviewed an Israeli soldier who confessed that the IDF gives orders to kill Palestinian boys and girls aged 12 and above. He told her: "Twelve and up, you are allowed to shoot. That's what they tell us.""

Anyone have a rebuttal to this that does not go something like: "The chosen people would never commit such a sin!"

If it is Arab lies, then bring your proof of lies.

For the conflict to be resolved people need to understand that both parties are guilty and apply equal pressure on both and implement UNSC resolutions fairly and equally; whether they pertain to Hizbullah, Hamas, Syria, Iran, North Korea or Israel.

Lord give me strength!

It might be easier to believe Sami's comment that the Holocaust was one of the great injustices of the 20th century if his country, Syria, weren't providing safe harbor for Alois Brunner, Eichmann's second in command.

It might have been easier to believe that Syria cares about the Palestinians if Assad Sr. hadn't killed about 25,000 of them in the Hama massacre (in a few weeks).

It is disingenuous to quote MLK Jr. regarding the Palestinian situation without referring to his statement "When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews." This is a clear recognition of the Jewish right to self-determination, something Sami's government will never acknowledge.

It is disingenuous to refer to Resolutions 106 and 111 without explaining the conext of the continous terrorist attacks eminating from Egypt and Syria that precipitated the Israeli response. The fact that it is only ever the Israeli responses that are the subject of UN resolutions and not the initial attacks on Israel is clear proof to anyone who cares to pay attention that the UN is biased AGAINST Israel.

Finally, it is not desperation that leads to suicide bombings. There have been many instances of people whose situations were at least as desperate as the Palestinians who did not engage in suicide bombings. Ayat al-Akhras' own video testament records her glee and arrogance as she hoped to take out as many Israeli citizens as possible. She did not attack Israeli soldiers or strategic military targets. Her aim was to kill innocent civilians.

That is not a sign of desperation, but of aspiration.

Congratulation Dr. Moubayed. One of the most well-written and well-argued articles I've ever read. I think that the audience in the West would never understand what you're saying because they've simply been brainwashed for years by the biased media.
To say the least, I have seen Lebanon being destroyed and have worked with Lebanese refugees. All of you have! Brits, weren't you watching BBC? Didn't you know that 45% of the killed were children? I lived in London back then and I have discussed the issue with many British. They showed sympathy with Lebanese and hatred to Israelis... I hope Mr. Ban Ki-moon won't allow such a catastrophe to happen again.

I think Ed's points are absolutely correct.

Rodolfo:

The Israelis can discover the secret to eternal life for all I care. That does not change the fact that they are in violation of UNSC resolutions as well as the ICJ with respect to construction of settlements and the continued occupation of Arab land. The Arab League, including Syria and Yasser Arafat's PA (which at the time was the leading representative of the Palestinians) offered in the 2002 Arab Declaration to recognise Israel within the 1967 borders per UNSC resolutions that Israel was a signatory to. What was Israels response? Complete dismissal of the offer. Who does not want to have peace here?

As far as the Israelis committing human rights violations, you can stick your head in the sand and deny them all you want, but the reports of reputable international organisations prove you wrong. Just a little fairness in assigning the blame and recognising that both sides are at fault is all that is asked for, but apparently fairness for you guys is the most blatantly one sided, anti-Muslim, pro Israeli propoganda you can find.

"Israel has given the world much more in scientific advancements, humanities, and other fields than all the Arab countries put together."

A)Irrelevant

B) Factually Incorrect

THS said:"I see that the cretins from Little Green Footballs have shown up, prompted by their hateful leader, Charles Johnson. The language used in some of the anti-Arab posts above mirrors his and also contains terminology commonly used on his blog."

THS the use Ad Hominem, "poisoning the well", etc. do not change the facts: Israel has given the world much more in scientific advancements, humanities, and other fields than all the Arab countries put together. This even under the worst conditions possible. It is time to get out of the 7th century.

BTW, the multiple postings occured because of a problem with the site, not because they were done purposely.

Someone should call the Washington Post and let them know that their site has been hacked by Hezbollah. That's the only reasonable explanation for this unadulterated nonsense.

I was going to tear the "dont confuse me with the facts" leftists and terrorist/totalitarian apologists a new one, but Ed beat me to it.

oh no, the pro-Palestinian crowd is upset no one believes their BS anymore. retards.

Ed, Waterloo - I got to your second point and stopped reading. As it CONTRADICTED your first point.

1. Are you aware that the Disputed Territories never belonged to the "Palestinians" and only came into Israeli possession as a result of the 1967 six day war in which Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon all massed forces at Israel's border in order to "push the Jews into the sea". The Arabs lost and Israel took control of the land. Do you agree that if the Koranimals don't want to lose territory to Israel, then they shouldn't start wars? Do you agree that there is justice that Israel, who as far back as 1948 has always sought peace with her far larger neighbors, should live in prosperity - making the desert bloom - while the residents of 19 adjacent Arab countries who are blessed with far more land as well as oil wealth live in their own feces?

2. Did you know that the "Palestinians" could have had their own country as far back as 1948 had they accepted the UN sponsored partition plan which gave Israel AND the Palestinians a countries of their own on land which Jews had lived on for thousands of years before Mohammed ever had a wet dream about virgins? The Arabs rejected the UN offer and went to war with the infant Israeli nation. The Arabs lost and have been whining about it ever since. Do you agree this is like a murderer who kills his parents and asks for special treatment since he is now an orphan?

3. Can you tell us ANY Arab country which offers Jews the right to be citizens, vote, own property, businesses, be a part of the government or have ANY of the rights which Israeli Arabs enjoy? Any Arab country which gives those rights to Christians? How about to other Arabs? Wouldn't you just LOVE to be a citizen of Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, or Syria?

4. Since as many Jews (approximately 850,000) were kicked out of Arab countries as were Arabs who left present day Israel (despite being literally begged to stay), why should Arabs be permitted to return to Israel if Jews aren't allowed to set foot in Arab countries? Can you explain why Arabs can worship freely in Israel but Jews would certainly be hung from street lamps after having their intestines devoured by an Arab mob if they so much as entered an Arab country?

5. Israel resettled and absorbed all of the Jews from Arab countries who wished to become Israelis. Why haven't any Arab countries offered to resettle Arabs who were displaced from Israel, leaving them to rot for 60 years in squalid refugee camps? And why are those refugee camps still there? Could it be that the billions of dollars that the UNWRA has sent there goes to terrorist groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, El Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, or Hezbollah? How did Yassir Arafat achieve his $300 million in wealth? Why aren't these funds distributed for humanitarian use?

6. Did you know that the Arabs in the disputed territories (conquered by Israel in the 1967 war which was started by Arabs) and who are not Israelis already have two countries right now? And that they are called Egypt and Jordan?
7. If your complaint is about the security fence which Israel is finally building in the Disputed Territories, are you aware that it is built solely to keep the "brave" Arab terrorists out so that they can no longer self detonate on busses, in dining halls or pizzerias and kill Jewish grandmothers and schoolchildren? Why are the Arabs so brave when they target unarmed civilians but even when they outnumber their opponents they get their sandy asses kicked all the way to Mecca when they are faced with Jewish soldiers? Why do Arab soldiers make the French look like super heroes?

8. Please explain why you are so concerned about Arabs, who possess 99% of the land in this region and are in control of the world's greatest natural resource, which literally flows out of the ground? Can't their brother muslims offer some of the surplus land and nature's riches to the "Palestinians"? Or is it true that Arabs are willing to die right down to the last "Palestinian"?

9. Why do you not exhibit the same level of concern for say, people in Saudi Arabia who are beheaded, subject to amputation, stoning, honor killing etc.? What about women who are denied any semblance of basic civil rights, including the right not to be treated as property for the entertainment and abuse of her father, brothers, or husbands? What about the Muslims in Sudan and Egypt who are still enslaved, or the women there whose genitalia are barbarically cut off? How about the oppression of Shiites by Sunnis, the gassing of the Kurds by Iraq, or the massacre of "Palestinians" by Jordan (Black September)? Why doesn't this concern you?

10. Did you ever stop to wonder how much better off everyone in the region would be if Arabs stopped trying to kill Jews and destroy Israel? What would happen if the Israelis gave up their weapons and disarmed? Would they live to see the next day? But what would happen if the Arabs completely disarmed? You know the answer: They would all be AT PEACE! And if there is no war to rile them up, the Arabs would be forced to look at their own repressive, pre-medieval societies. Why would they want to do that when there are Jews to kill?
11. Have you heard "People who define themselves primarily by what they hate, rather than who they love, are doomed to failure and misery"? Can you see the parallels to the Arabs, who are blessed with land and oil, but still gladly train their children to kill themselves in order to kill Jews? Have you heard Golda Meir's words to the effect of "There will be peace when the Arabs love their children more than they hate ours"? Why do the Arabs hate so much?

Thomas:
"Why is it that out of the 65 UN resolutions passed against Israel, not one has been implemented since 1948?"

Are you that obtuse that you cannot see the answer to your ridiculous question in his post itself?

The U.S cannot wait to enforce sanctions against Iran and had no problems doing the same against Iraq or Syria, but apparently when it is Israel's turn UNSC resolutions mean nothing. How many UNSC esolutions against Israel have been enforced and how many have been against the Arab and Muslim states? Making "speeches" in the U.N is not an indicator of support. It is what the UN actually does and how its resolutions are enforced that makes the difference.
On that count the organization has made a farce of "equal application of the law" when it comes to Israel.

"65 UN resolutions passed against Israel ... not a single resolution was ever passed against the Palestinians."
How does this make the U.N. biased in favor of Israel Sami?

"the UN's image has been severely damaged in the Arab World. ... The reasons can be found in Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine."
Why stop there Sami? How about Darfur, Somalia .... oh, I get it.

"a long and tedious letter."
Indeed.

My GOD!!! Someone pointed out that the Israelis can commit atrocities as heinous as any and the pro-Israeli nuts go... well nuts!

Look up Amnesty International, Human rights watch and even Israeli human rights and peace organizations. Simple google searches are all that is needed and read about the crimes committed by the israelis. But that is fine of course. Its a "Government" after all and they can kill as many civillians as they want and call it "collateral damage".

Stop living in a hole and get out of your absolutist vision. The Israelis carry as much blame for what has happened as anyone. But that might make you question your bigoted anti-Muslim, anti-Arab prejudices and we cannot have that can we.

I see that the cretins from Little Green Footballs (http://www.littlegreenfootballs) have shown up, prompted by their hateful leader, Charles Johnson. The language used in some of the anti-Arab posts above mirrors his and also contains terminology commonly used on his blog.

If you think the comments here are revolting, check out Little Green Footballs. You'll find it an eye-opening experience.

APRPEH - I think you need to consider for whom the writer wants justice freedom and peace. Fairly confidently, I can say he doesn't mean for we Americans, who have all three (If you believe that, I have a bridge over San Francisco Bay I would like to sell you) He means for the Arabs who live there. and American "freedom" is not what he, nor they want.

the writer states: "We want justice for the Lebanese, freedom for Iraq, and peace in the Holy Land".

His beloved Syria is currently involved in every conceivable fashion in disrupting peace and freedom in each of the above locations. nothing more than an arabian propagandistic screed.

utter rubbish and nonsense. george orwell pukes in his grave and the topsy turvy arab world where wrong is right. why are there checkpoints? why should borders not be guarded? arabs are not negroes. they were slaves. arabs are masters of their own misery and demise. stop the nonsense talk. enter the 21st century. and since you so handily twist the words of a truly great man i ask the arabs this - WHERE IS YOUR MARTIN LUTHER KING? where is the man that says lay down your weapons and sit on the ground until they talk to us. march with roses you morons and have a state. and stop your ludicrous lies.

A challenge to everyone who is putting the author down.

Could someone point out one, JUST ONE, fact that is wrong here? (Not a difference of opinion or perspective, but wrong in a quantifiable way) Please provide a link.

Thank you.

This is satire, right? I mean, no one could get their fact so wrong and be serious, right? Some one, please tell me this is a joke and that the (COM)Post knew it was?

The Washington Post ought to be ashamed of themselves for publishing this sort of inflammatory garbage. To publish stuff like this "The Israeli journalist Amira Hass once interviewed an Israeli soldier who confessed that the IDF gives orders to kill Palestinian boys and girls aged 12 and above. He told her: "Twelve and up, you are allowed to shoot. That's what they tell us."' is nothing short of libel. If the so-called "Palestinians" (they're just Arabs from Jordan and Egypt) have problems it is of their own making. Stop trying to kill your neighbors and make peace with them and maybe you'll get somewhere. If not, be prepared to suffer the consequences.

"Palestine's struggle" = the intentional slaughtering of Jews, the removal of Arab Christians from their homes by intimidation and force, the killing of homosexuals and the wholesale oppression of women.

Read the Hamas Charter. It's all laid out, a la Mein Kampf. The PLO charter is also genocidal.

Is is possible that someone else might have a perspective that is different than yours? GASP!

Sure they can have a different perspective, but that is not the issue. The issue is the facts and information used in this perspective. Dang people for calling on the Media to use REAL and TRUE facts. I can tell by your post you don't care about facts and truths but have your mind made up already.

Whoops, I could have sworn I typed washingtonpost.com; not hezbollah.com.

What's the deal with this digital pogrom masquerading as a newspaper site?

Guys calm down. This was meant as a joke. Everyone knowns this is all Islamist propaganda. WaPo was just doing this to get a rise out of you.

LOL at the U.N. being biased TOWARDS the U.S. and Israel.

Do you not hear the daily rants of U.N. diplomats blaming the U.S.A. for nearly every problem on the planet?
Are you aware of how many anti Semites hold prominent positions in the U.N.?

How the U.N. allows the terrorism against the Israelis, who ONLY WANT TO LIVE, while the Palestinians only want to DESTROY ISRAELIS and you have the nerve to talk about bias the other way?

Seriously,
The Palestinians deserve a state and their land back but you are an absolute Jew hating moron.

LOL at the U.N. being biased TOWARDS the U.S. and Israel.

Do you not hear the daily rants of U.N. diplomats blaming the U.S.A. for nearly every problem on the planet?
Are you aware of how many anti Semites hold prominent positions in the U.N.?

How the U.N. allows the terrorism against the Israelis, who ONLY WANT TO LIVE, while the Palestinians only want to DESTROY ISRAELIS and you have the nerve to talk about bias the other way?

Seriously,
The Palestinians deserve a state and their land back but you are an absolute Jew hating moron.

Is the W. Post trying to capture an Arab audience? This stuff is straight out of Muslim Indoctrination 101.

To all of the ignorant jaka$$es posting on here. You look pretty dumb making your racist and hate-filled remarks. Is is possible that someone else might have a perspective that is different than yours? GASP!

To those of you posting multiple times, you don't look any more intelligent, for repeating yourselves two or three times. In fact, it appears that you cannot even use a keyboard!

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism is a sad commentary. In addition, the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years, have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve their warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" (read another Arab hate monger). His guise as an open intellectual is not hard to see through and the Post shouldn't assist people of his ilk.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism is a sad commentary. In addition, the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years, have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve their warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" (read another Arab hate monger). His guise as an open intellectual is not hard to see through and the Post shouldn't assist people of his ilk.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism is a sad commentary. In addition, the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years, have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve their warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" (read another Arab hate monger). His guise as an open intellectual is not hard to see through and the Post shouldn't assist people of his ilk.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism is a sad commentary. In addition, the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years, have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve their warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" (read another Arab hate monger). His guise as an open intellectual is not hard to see through and the Post shouldn't assist people of his ilk.

Wonder what would happen if a Jew in Syria published a scathing attack of Mr. Moubayed's government in a Syrian newspaper?
Whats that you say? All the Jews were driven out of Syria? Anti-semitism and downright hatred?
NAAAAAAAAAAA couldn't be. Blame America and the JOOOOOOOOOOOOS

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism is a sad commentary. In addition, the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years, have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve their warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" of the Terrorist Sponsoring Assad Regime.

Wonder what would happen if a Jew in Syria published a scathing attack of Mr. Moubayed's government in a Syrian newspaper?
Whats that you say? All the Jews were driven out of Syria? Anti-semitism and downright hatred?
NAAAAAAAAAAA couldn't be. Blame America and the JOOOOOOOOOOOOS

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism. In addition the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years and have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve thier warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" of the Assad Regime,in a reputable publication like the Washington Post.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism. In addition the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years and have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve thier warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" of the Assad Regime,in a reputable publication like the Washington Post.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism. In addition the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years and have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve thier warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" of the Assad Regime,in a reputable publication like the Washington Post.

I am dissapointed yet again with the Post. To print Mr. Moubayed's "facts" as somehow parallel to the struggle for Civil Rights under Dr. King who clearly knew the distinction back in the 60's between this Anti-Zionist clothed Anti-Semitism. In addition the Arabs who are so-called "Palestinians" who have created this pseudo history over the last 70 years and have clearly chosen a path of violence and murder to achieve thier warped aims shouldn't be given space via the mouthpiece of this "Political Analyst" of the Assad Regime,in a reputable publication like the Washington Post.

Such spin and rubbish. For example, on discussing Dag Hammarskjöld's visit in 1956, he says:

"The man betrayed us and gave unconditional support for Israel."

Remember -- this was at a time when Israel was within it's borders. This was at a time when Israel had been attacked by Arab nations repeatedly. Israel was not then an "aggressor." Yet the Arabs still hated the fact of it's existence. Nothing less than the removal of the country itself will placate people like this.

Is this a legitmate news organization or a white power pro nazi islamists web site?

Is this a legitmate news organization or a white power pro nazi islamists web site?

Such spin and rubbish. For example, on discussing Dag Hammarskjöld's visit in 1956, he says:

"The man betrayed us and gave unconditional support for Israel."

Remember -- this was at a time when Israel was within it's borders. This was at a time when Israel had been attacked by Arab nations repeatedly. Israel was not then an "aggressor." Yet the Arabs still hated the fact of it's existence. Nothing less than the removal of the country itself will placate people like this.

Such spin and rubbish. For example, on discussing Dag Hammarskjöld's visit in 1956, he says:

"The man betrayed us and gave unconditional support for Israel."

Remember -- this was at a time when Israel was within it's borders. This was at a time when Israel had been attacked by Arab nations repeatedly. Israel was not then an "aggressor." Yet the Arabs still hated the fact of it's existence. Nothing less than the removal of the country itself will placate people like this.

Is this a legitmate news organization or a white power pro nazi islamists web site?

He's got it the wrong way round. Its Palestinian terrorists that deliberately kill children, not the IDF.

Then he says that poverty has risen dramatically in Palestine since the intifada. Of course it has. Before the intifada, many Palestinians worked in Israel, which helped the Palestinian economy. With the coming of the suicide murderers, this is no longer possible. The Palis have only themselves to blame.

I find it quite amusing that Moubayed represents a group of countries ruled by bloody dictators determined to destroy a democracy (Israel) as the moral equivalent of Dr King attempting to provide basic civil liberties to Blacks. He obviously seems to hit the notes that lefties in this country respond to.

I, as a "brown person", reject this nonsense. Your country is murderous Sami. If there were no Israel, Syria would find another target for terrorism.

He's got it the wrong way round. Its Palestinian terrorists that deliberately kill children, not the IDF.

Then he says that poverty has risen dramatically in Palestine since the intifada. Of course it has. Before the intifada, many Palestinians worked in Israel, which helped the Palestinian economy. With the coming of the suicide murderers, this is no longer possible. The Palis have only themselves to blame.

To compare the Palestinians' troubles -- which are almost entirely of their own making (never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity, you know) -- with the Holocaust is a calculated insult. Consider it received by this Jew, Mr. Moubayed.

He's got it the wrong way round. Its Palestinian terrorists that deliberately kill children, not the IDF.

Then he says that poverty has risen dramatically in Palestine since the intifada. Of course it has. Before the intifada, many Palestinians worked in Israel, which helped the Palestinian economy. With the coming of the suicide murderers, this is no longer possible. The Palis have only themselves to blame.

There is no "Palestine." There has never been a sovereign entity of that name.

And Martin Luther King was a Zionist you ignorant fool.

When palestinians stop giving their children explosive belts and stop using them as human shields for armed men then the IDF can stop having to face the fact that children may be combatants.

a silly article filled with golden nuggets like these:

The Israeli journalist Amira Hass once interviewed an Israeli soldier who confessed that the IDF gives orders to kill Palestinian boys and girls aged 12 and above. He told her: "Twelve and up, you are allowed to shoot. That's what they tell us."

Whats next Mr.Mubayed, the blood matzahs and the selling of Arab organs by Jewish doctors? Shame on Washington Post for posting up juvenile rubbish such as this. Some nerve talking about Dr.King's philosophy of tolerance by a Syrian hack who doesnt know the first meaning of the word.

May the Creator Bless you Sami Moubayed for bringing the issue in clear, stark terms that apply EXACTLY for Mr. Moon's consideration. To my fellow Americans who may be uncomfortable with analogies that hit so close to home, I cite former President Carter's recent book Peace not Apartheid. President Carter, where are you Sir? When the time is right, please step forward?! Thank you once again Mr. Moubayed perhaps we shall yet learn Le lion et l'agneau peuvent être un à la paix

Congratulations Dr Moubayed on this pathos filled albeit very logical article. However and untill further notice or the change of human nature may I remind you of the first verse of La Fontaine's Fable "Le Loup et L'agneau": La raison du plus fort et toujours la meilleur.

So untill we become les plus forts perhaps it would take other than men of good will like yourself or, time will tell, Mr Ki-Moonto reverse the coin. Perhaps we need more self reliance than reliance on the Almighty.