RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Jimmy Carter: "I think the big change is that the Israeli leaders have decided to abandon the two-state solution. Their policy now is to confiscate Palestinian territory."

Former president Jimmy Carter listens during the 12th World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates in Chicago, Illinois, April 23, 2012. (photo: Jeff Haynes/Reuters)
Former president Jimmy Carter listens during the 12th World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates in Chicago, Illinois, April 23, 2012. (photo: Jeff Haynes/Reuters)


Jimmy Carter: 'Israeli Policy Is to Confiscate Palestinian Territory'

By Elisabeth Braw, Metro International

20 November 12

 

srael and Gaza are again attacking each other, Syria is descending into civil war, four American diplomats killed in Libya: the Middle East is more fragile than ever. "Both sides should cease all hostilities," says former US President Jimmy Carter. "Israel should end its blockade of Gaza, and Western countries should work to facilitate reconciliation between Hamas and their Palestinian rival, Fatah. As long as Gaza remains isolated, the situation in and around Gaza will remain volatile."

Israel's leaders don't want a Palestinian state, Carter tells Metro in an exclusive interview with Metro. Carter, who still conducts international negotiations and is now a member The Elders, won the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize. He just returned from a visit to the Middle East.

The chances of a Palestinian state are fading. Whose job is it to fix this situation?

The peace process has been pretty well dormant for the past three years. Of course, in the past we played a key role in being the mediator and conveyer of meetings, but that's not happening either. The first priority would be for the Israelis and Palestinians to take the initiative. But the Israelis have continued with their massive settlement program in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the Palestinians say they won't negotiate as long as Israel is continuing to take over their territory, so there's deadlock. The United States is looked upon by the rest of the international community as the primary interlocutor, so the European Union members don't take action. As a result, there's no intermediary who can move things forward and initiate peace talks.

President Obama says he supports a Palestinian state, but even so there's a deadlock. Does it take even more than the support of a US President to get a Palestinian state?

I think the big change is that the Israeli leaders have decided to abandon the two-state solution. Their policy now is to confiscate Palestinian territory, and they've announced publicly that it the Palestinians have to recognize not just Israel but Israel as a Jewish state, even though 20% of the Israeli community are non-Jews. Netanyahu has also decided that even the Jordan valley has to be under Israeli control. So, those factors indicate quite clearly that Netanyahu has decided that the two-state solution is not what he wants. He wants what is being called Greater Israel, Eretz Israel. That's a new development, and I think everyone recognizes this.

The Arab Spring had worldwide support. Now four diplomats have been killed and the region is considered less safe. Are dictators sometimes better than democracy?

A: I don't think so at all. For example, the Egyptian people had a very safe series of elections. As the Carter Center, we monitored several of these elections, and have also monitored the elections in Tunisia and Libya. I don't think there's any doubt that the termination of the dictators has been a major beneficial development. The outside world just tends to be too impatient. The United States declared our independence from Britain in 1776, and it wasn't until 12 years later that we had a constitution. Egypt is going to have a constitution within a year of the President assuming power.

So we're simply too worried about Islamists?

Look at the Muslim Brotherhood. I've known the Muslim Brotherhood leaders for 20 years. They were persecuted by the Mubarak government, imprisoned and so forth, and now they've gone to the people in an honest, fair and safe election. And, of course, they've prevailed because their candidate became President and they have a majority in Parliament. But they're a very moderate group of Islamists, whereas salafists and others are much more radical, at least judging with Western criteria.

The YouTube video defaming Islam caused attacks and huge protests in the Arab world, including possibly the killing of the four American diplomats in Libya. Who's to blame? Is there too much freedom of speech in the US, or are Muslims too sensitive?

First of all, all the evidence now shows that the killings of the four American diplomats in Libya weren't caused by the film but was instead a planned attack by al Qaeda. In the US, Britain, Norway, Sweden and other countries in the West we believe in the right of expression. Western leaders are often criticized in scandalous ways in paintings, words and sculptures, and that criticism is accepted as legitimate. But we deplore when there's a scandalous statement like the ones made in that YouTube film. We regret that it has caused pain to believers in the Islamic faith, but it happens to our own faith as well. But freedom of speech includes freedom of blasphemy.

But isn't it frightening in itself that a deranged YouTube video posted by an obscure individual can undo years of diplomacy?

Yes, it is frightening. I'm a Christian; I teach Bible school every Sunday. I've heard and seen statements made about my own faith that cause me pain. But I don't want the blasphemous person who made the statements put in jail. Yes, it's painful to see the reaction in the Arab world, but I think we have to anticipate it. People in the non-Muslim world who deliberately do this in order to cause Muslims pain underestimate the violence that can erupt from aggrieved Muslims. It's painful and unfortunate, but when you have to choose between that kind of pain and the right of freedom to voice your opinions we come down on the side of freedom.

Speaking of your faith: how do you view the growing role of religion in politics? In my country, of course, there's a rigid separation of church and state, and our Constitution prohibits religious faith being endorsed by the government. But we have to understand that the governments in Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan and other fairly moderate states are based on sharia law. Then there are some places in certain parts of Sudan, for example, that enforce sharia law with extreme rigidity, like cutting off people's hands and or stoning people to death for adultery. Extreme implementation of sharia law is very bad, but look at Egypt: their constitution says that the principles of sharia law should apply. That's something that we adopt in the United States as well: our money says "in God we trust". We believe in the basic principles of God, and at the same time you can be an atheist if you choose. But in some Muslim countries, if someone says something derogatory about Islam, they can be convicted of blasphemy. That's obviously obnoxious to a Western observer. But each country has a right - depending on whom the voters elect in democratic elections - to impose or not impose the principles of religious law like the sharia.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+159 # Activista 2012-11-20 18:59
Jimmy Carter - man of principles. Last moral president we had. World would be different - better - IF he would be re-elected.
But oligarchy/money controlled mass media killed the democracy and elected Reagan.
 
 
+24 # demongel17 2012-11-21 16:01
AMEN!!!!!
 
 
+24 # Billdog 2012-11-21 19:40
I couldn't agree with you more, Activista.
 
 
+3 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:21
Morality here is on a sliding scale that carefully overlooks Carter's support for the death squads and torture in Central America, especially in El Salvador. Seems the lesser of two evils promotes evil even with the Carter-Reagan decision. Carter even permitted the Shah to come to the US to receive medical treatment after he was deposed.
 
 
+128 # wantrealdemocracy 2012-11-20 21:39
Israel policy is eretz yisrael---that is a Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates. The United States has what? about 3 or 4% of the people are Jewish? Why does our government allow the Palestinians to be destroyed to create this massive Jewish state? Why do we send them the funds and the munitions to make their dream come true? There is something wrong here.
 
 
-13 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:21
"Israel policy is eretz yisrael---that is a Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates."

Not really. That was the goal of a faction of Zionists during a period of history, but it is not Israeli policy. The territorial goals are more modest - and realistic - than that. Look at the pattern of colonization of the OPT, and you can get a very good idea of what they are aiming for.
 
 
+20 # aaheart 2012-11-21 12:01
Eretz Israel is STILL their goal even if it is not in their immediate statements of policy. They waited 30 years for the Balfour Agreement to bear fruit and have not stopped their lebensraum aggression since then. In fact, they have set new goals on the entire planet.
 
 
+8 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:54
The question is not whether their goal is expansion, the question is how Eretz Israel is defined. From the Nile to the Euphrates was never the goal of more than a small faction of Zionists, and in the present day there aren't more than a handful of Jews who aspire to that goal. What they are aiming at is the West Bank, all of Jerusalem, and of course the Golan Heights, which they have pretty much de facto annexed, though that action is completely illegal and illegitimate.

Oh yes, and they will probably also try to hold onto the Lebanese territory known as Sheb`a Farms.
 
 
+10 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:23
NO, the question IS expansionism because that requires conflict and theft of the lands of other peoples.
 
 
+3 # umrayya 2012-11-23 20:52
I think my statement was not clear, so let me rephrase it.

Whether their goal is expansion is not in question. Their goal is and always has been expansion. What is in question is the definition of Eretz Israel. Those who have defined it as the territory from the Nile to the Euphrates have always been in the minority, and now they are only a tiny minority.
 
 
+9 # demongel17 2012-11-21 16:08
You certainly got that one right. Something is DRASTICALLY WRONG! But does it not always come down to $$$$$$$$? This so called "democracy" we have to put up with, has been funding Israel a-way before Reagan and continues to do so because of very simple principles: This US "Gag me" government has a HUGE foothold in the middle east with Israel and will it ever give this up??? The answer: This "gag me" government has never, I repeat, NEVER, once given up a base anywhere in the world. NOT ONCE in 150 years. Nuff' said
 
 
+1 # DPM 2012-11-22 09:46
MONEY!
 
 
+92 # munza1 2012-11-20 21:49
It takes a retired President to be able to speak the truth about Israeli policy. What American politician who wants to be elected would daresay that what the Israeli Right now in power wants is Greater Israel. The big problem is how to ethnically cleanse millions of people. It was done at the beginning by Ben Gurion and Sharon by massacring a few villages which got people to move. The most that can be done now is make life as miserable as possible for the indigenous people. Gaza is a good example where a calculation was made about the number of calories to allow in that would just keep Gazans alive. Shades of Nazi slave labor where is was all systemically calculated.
 
 
+1 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 17:48
THe number of calories to just keep the Germans alive after WWII was also calculted by the victorious Allies. Google and read JCS 1067 it will open your eyes.
 
 
-3 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 20:38
The biter bit!
 
 
+3 # Mannstein 2012-11-22 07:21
You haven't read JCS 1067 nor experienced the consequences by living in post war Germany.
 
 
+88 # aaheart 2012-11-20 22:06
Confiscation of Palestinian lands is NOT a new development. The reason Israel has no Constitution is to avoid declaring boundaries. In his book, Ben-Gurion's Scandals": How the Haganah & the Mossad Eliminated Jews, Naim Giladi wrote: We were told not to try to speak to Ben Gurion, but when I saw him, I asked why, since Israel is a democracy with a parliament, does it not have a constitution? Ben Gurion said, "Look, boy"-I was 24 at the time-"if we have a constitution, we have to write in it the border of our country. And this is not our border, my dear." I asked, "Then where is the border?" He said, "Wherever the Sahal will come, this is the border." Sahal is the Israeli army.

Ben Gurion told the world that Israel accepted the partition and the Arabs rejected it. Then Israel took half of the land that was promised to the Arab state. And still he was saying it was not enough. Israel needed more land. How can a country make peace with its neighbors if it wants to take their land? How can a country demand to be secure if it won't say what borders it will be satisfied with? For such a country, peace would be an inconvenience."

Israel has NEVER intended to negotiate peace and has from its inception done all that it could to scuttle peace talks whether with false suicide bombers or a fake attack...they excel at that.
 
 
+41 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:26
You are basically correct. Ben Gurion never intended to accept the boundaries set forth in UNGA 181, nor was he prepared to accept the 1949 boundary as final. Zionism was an expansionist movement, and Israel is an expansionist state. All you need to do is look at the series of historical maps, and that becomes obvious.
 
 
+11 # Activista 2012-11-21 12:42
Quoting umrayya:
You are basically correct. Ben Gurion never intended to accept the boundaries set forth in UNGA 181, nor was he prepared to accept the 1949 boundary as final. Zionism was an expansionist movement, and Israel is an expansionist state. All you need to do is look at the series of historical maps, and that becomes obvious.

yes -
ifamericansknew.org/about_us/4maps.html
 
 
+8 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 17:50
That's the reason why I refuse to recognize Israel. You don't know where it begins nor where it ends.
 
 
+18 # CL38 2012-11-21 12:48
What has happened to Israel since 1948?
It has become unrecognizable. Committing morally corrupt offenses I never thought I would see, given the treatment of Jews by Germany.
 
 
+22 # umrayya 2012-11-21 14:51
Quoting CL38:
What has happened to Israel since 1948?
It has become unrecognizable. Committing morally corrupt offenses...


It is a myth that Israel began as a moral, ethical country and has somehow changed into what it is today. Israel's was created using deception, terrorism against both British and Palestinians, and massive ethnic cleansing.

The only things that have really changed is that Israel has become more brazen in the commission of its crimes, and at the same time modern-day communication has made it increasingly difficult for Israel to conceal its deeds from the world.
 
 
+64 # CL38 2012-11-20 22:21
"I think the big change is that the Israeli leaders have decided to abandon the two-state solution. Their policy now is to confiscate Palestinian territory, and they've announced publicly that it the Palestinians have to recognize not just Israel but Israel as a Jewish state, even though 20% of the Israeli community are non-Jews."

In that sense Israel is the aggressor. I'm no longer an Israel supporter.
 
 
+26 # aaheart 2012-11-21 09:22
From the very beginning, Eretz Israel was the goal, not a two-state solution. That's why there was no Israeli constitution from the beginning as was required by the UN mandate. The failure of peace talks for the past 52 years is the result of giving lip service to the two-state solution envisioned by the UN, but using deception to achieve Eretz Israel.
 
 
+32 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:28
Israel has always been the aggressor. It has just done a better job of hiding that fact up until recently.
 
 
-13 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 17:56
Isn't it remarkable. Multiculturalis m is, with the exception of Israel, forced on all Western nations which in the recent past have had homogeneous ethnic populations. Wonder why?
 
 
+7 # umrayya 2012-11-21 23:00
Actually, very few Western countries have ever had homogeneous ethnic populations. Populations have tended to be less heterogeneous in countries of the Far East, but even those countries have pretty much always had at least some minorities.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-24 19:48
Really? Japan has had minorities? When was that? How about China?
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-24 21:24
Are you putting me on? You really thought Japan and China had no indigenous ethnic minorities? And your use of the past tense is "interesting" - it is as if you think Japan does not have minorities now?

The main indigenous ethno-linguisti c minorities in Japan are the Ainu and the Ryukyuan.

China has tens of indigenous ethno-linguisti c minorities - too many to list here. They include Zhuang, Manchu, Hui, Miao, Uyghur, Tujia, Yi, Mongol, Buyei, Dong, Yao, Bai, Kazakh, and Dai.
 
 
-1 # Mannstein 2012-11-26 08:52
Try immigrating to Japan as a white person both past and present.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-26 12:29
Huh?! What on EARTH does that have to do with homogeneous populations, and whether or not Japan and China have and always have had indigenous ethno-linguisti c minorities?
 
 
-7 # tomtom 2012-11-23 07:48
Quoting CL38:
"I think the big change is that the Israeli leaders have decided to abandon the two-state solution. Their policy now is to confiscate Palestinian territory, and they've announced publicly that it the Palestinians have to recognize not just Israel but Israel as a Jewish state, even though 20% of the Israeli community are non-Jews."

In that sense Israel is the aggressor. I'm no longer an Israel supporter.

Not confusing the two, we should all be Jew supporters. If it isn't practical to give them West Texas, for their own state, the world can provide a parcel of land, suitable for growing, thriving and living in a unanomously agreed upon peace. If it means Moving chunks of the "Wall", fine, anything to end this terrible war that causes suffering on all sides. Let's get real!
 
 
-94 # brux 2012-11-20 22:31
> Extreme implementation of sharia law is very bad, but look at Egypt: their constitution says that the principles of sharia law should apply. That's something that we adopt in the United States as well: our money says "in God we trust".

What rubbish it is to compare these two things.

The world cannot live with activist sharia law muslims deciding to judge everyone else based on what they think the koran says.

israel cannot make peace with the palestinians, the palestinians will not let them. the forces behind the palestinians will not let them.

just as israel is held hostage to continuing violence so are the palestinians. they are not a people, they are a group imprisons by circumstances that cannot exercise the self-control to do what they would need to do to be a nation, and there is little chance they ever will be able to.

if palestine became a nation it would just give legitimacy to terrorism and sovereignty to war and it will never end.

plus what kind of a state has two tiny islands in the middle of another state that it fights to destroy? look at it with fresh eyes, it is ridiculous.

i think israel has tried enough. israel has been attacked enough. time to see the palestinians for what they are, a poor, oppressed people stuck in a situation that will never get any better as long as the status quo remains, and the status quo cannot change because those who back the radicals in palestine are too powerful and untouchable.
 
 
+42 # peterjkraus 2012-11-21 08:25
Wow. Your statement hews really close to the official German proclamation before invading Poland. Even the faked "attack" by "Polish terrorists" on German soil is in there. The non-human Palestinians ("they are not a people"), the state with islands in the middle (the Danzig corridor), and finally, the patience that has been misused by the "other", forcing the German/Israeli attack.
You're in strange company.
 
 
+8 # Activista 2012-11-21 12:50
Analogy (no analogy is perfect) I agree with. How many times Netanyahu read Main Kampf? Nazis built strong military to protect peace in Europe (1940 - 1945) - how lucky the word was that chosen/superior race/people lasted only 5 years.
 
 
-8 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 18:25
If it hadn't been for Germany Stalin would have succeeded in invading Europe in the summer of 1941. His dream was to communize Europe and spread communism through out the world. One reason why he had his brigades fighting in Spain during the civil war. He saw Germany as the linchpin in this plan. Wonder what Britain, France and the rest of the Europeans would have done as the Red Hoardes raped their way across Western Europe to the Atlantic. Needless to say Western Crypto Communists would have applauded the outcome.
 
 
-4 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 18:17
The Danzig corridor was the result of the Treaty of Versailles, better known as a Diktat. Danzig was a German city whose population was over 90% German. Hitler's demands on Poland over the corridor where very modest. He wanted an east west railway line through the corridor to connect East Prusia with central Germany. East Prussia in case you're unaware was German territory and had been cut off fron the rest of Germany due to the corridor. Britain signed a treaty with Poland giving her carte blanche that her independence would be protected. This gave Poland the incentive to stone wall all attempts at negotiation. When the war started with Poland Britain declared war on Germany but not Russia even though she grabbed the eastern part of Poland. A detail Western left wingers conveniently forget.

Incidentally how would you feel if the US lost a war and was forced to agree to a north south corridor running through the middle of the country because Canada which was not involved in hostilities just happened to demand a port on the Gulf of Mexico.
 
 
+1 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 20:43
Stalin intended this, Stalin intended that, Hamas intends this, Hamas intends that. The same refrain from identical jackals seeking Lebensraum.
 
 
+5 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:25
Hamas does not want Israeli land; Hamas wants Israel to return the land it stole.
 
 
+3 # umrayya 2012-11-23 20:53
More precisely, Hamas is only demanding that Israel return part of the land it stole, that being the part it has stolen since June, 1967.
 
 
-3 # Mannstein 2012-11-24 20:19
Stalin's intentions were clear from his speeches and actions as were Lenin's which was to spread Communism to the rest of the world by violent revolution if necessary. In the 1920's Lenin's agents in Germany attempted the overthrow of the Bavarian government in Germany. In 1938 Stalin's red brigades were fighting in Spain to install a Communist dictatorship. Between 1939 and 1941 Stalin attacked Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Romania. His intentions were to create more stinking Soviet Socialist Republics. Entire populations were deported to his death camps the Gulag in the process. As a matter of fact according to "The Black Book of Communism" by Stephane Courtois et al Stalin and his willing executioners killed 65 million, 7 miilion alone were Ukranians. Now that was a real Holocaust. Talk to any East European with the sort of statement you made above and they will show you the exit and remark "don't let the door hit you in the arse on your way out". Only Western left wing useful idiots are in denial about Stalin's intentions.
 
 
-1 # Dion Giles 2012-11-25 02:51
Sorry, but that is a load of Nazi revisonist claptrap. In Spain, the republican government was elected more than once, and was violently opposed by a collection of the dregs of Spanish society (biggest landowners, the Roman Catholic church, the top brasshats). The colonial general Franco botched a fascist coup, then invaded Spain with an army of mainly Moroccans. Hitler joined in with large supplies of war materials, including the air force that levelled Guernica. This brought in Russia which sent a smaller contingent, and there were several thousand volunteers from a number of countries including America. Democracy was extinguished in a three-year war.

Everyone and his dog knows what followed - German aggression against Poland leading to a war which engulfed most of the world. The aggression accompanied by whining propaganda about Bolshevism but directed to Lebensraum - ethnic cleansing by jackals of a vast swathe of territory and replacement for settlement by their compatriots in an operation which dwarfed manyfold both in scope and in mass murderous viciousness the Zionist occupation of Palestine. Treacherously Stalin dickered with them and the democracies appeased them but it all came unstuck and ended with their country (and many others) reduced to rubble and the ringleaders swinging from rope at Nuremberg.

For a single picture showing the Nazi crime see http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/media_nm.php?ModuleId=10005164&MediaId=363
 
 
-2 # Mannstein 2012-11-26 09:48
"The Black Book of Communism" was written by Stephane Courtois a French ex Communist. He is hardly a nazi Revisionst. The bottom line is Stalin is responsible for 65 million deaths. Makes Hitler look like a boy scout. As for a small Russian contingent in Spain trying to bring democracy to the locals Pavel A. Suddoplatov who worked for Stalin's Administration of Special Tasks for 30 years wouldn't disagree with you more. Incidentally he defined the meaning of Special with blood, poison, and terrorism. I suggest you read his memoirs for a clear picture of what his boss was up to in Western Europe at the time. That small Red contingent managed to clean out the the gold in the Spanish Treasury to be shipped off to Mocow never to be returned to it's rightful owners. Hitler never levelled Guernica. Less than 300 persons lost their lives. If that's your definition of levelling a city then the moon is made of cheese. If Hitler was looking for lebensraum in Western Poland what do you call Stalin's attack on Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, and Romania from Septenmber 1939-40. England claimed to gaurantee the independence of Poland if attacked by Germany but not by Russia. I suppose England was helping Russia spread more democracy no doubt. In November 1945 9 innocent officers of the Germnan Army were found guilty by the Allies for the Katyn Massacre. Seven were hung, 2 condemned to 20 years hard labor turned over to the Russians never to be heard of again. Allied Justice!
 
 
-3 # Dion Giles 2012-11-26 22:18
More Nazi propaganda - the Nazis must think so many people by now are unaware of the war that they can airbrush out their criminality for succeeding generations.

I've checked my post and couldn't find my reference to the Russians trying to spread democracy in Spain or anywhere else. Was it printed in invisible ink? The Russians were acting on geostrategic imperatives: the jackals were howling for a Drang nach Osten seeking Lebensraum in Poland, Byelorussia, Ukraine and Russia, the democracies were appeasing them.

The Drang started on 01.09.39, Poland was overwhelmed, the government fled to Roumania and THEN the Russians moved to secure their own borders in the Baltic and at a line in Poland that had been agreed in a defensive though shabby deal with the Nazi criminals.

The Russians committed the Katyn and many other murders. Nazi officers were charged with it at Nuremberg but the charges were dismissed as the court didn't buy the "Nazis did it" story about murders that took place long before the Nazis even got there. There is an unconfirmed story that some Nazi invaders were framed and executed for it in Leningrad.

German forces were part of the suppression of democratic rule in Spain and then in a large number of countries it attacked. These were despicable crimes and everyone who was part of them or egged them on were criminals. Making postwar excuses for them is sinister.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-27 08:48
More Communist propaganda from a Stalin appologist.

When it's Drang nach Osten it's a crime but when it's sending terrorists into Spain to bump off the clergy and other civilians before WWII even started useful idiots (Lenin's words)character ize it as "acting on geostrategic imperatives". The communists always justify their crimes for a higher good including mass murder, how convenient.

The Russians occupied the Baltics and Eastern Poland. Stalin murdered the Polish intelligensia and the clergy to turn Poland into another workers paradise. He deported large numbers of the Baltic population to Siberia. He then settled Russians in these countries. Estonia is a prime example. Today it's known as ethnic cleansing. You really ought to talk to some East Europeans before making statements about securing borders. BTW what was Stalin doing in Greece supporting a communist insurgency during the civil war after WWII? "Securing borders", bringing democracy to Greece, or "acting on geostrategic imperatives". Take your pick. As to the trial of the Germans for Katyn it is well documented but suppressed in the West. It took place in Leningrad Nov. '45 after a failed attempt at Nuremberg. The German military men who were accused and executed were K.H. Strueffling, H.Remlinger, E. Bohom, E. Sommerfeld, H. Jannike, E. Skotki and E. Geherer.

E.P. Vogel, F. Wiese, and A. Diere received 20 year sentences and subsequently disappeared in Stalin's death camps.
 
 
0 # Dion Giles 2012-11-27 15:05
Yes, Drang nach Osten is a crime - sending armed forces into another country to grab its land and ethnically cleanse its inhabitants. It's called aggression, a term neither here nor there for Nazi criminals. Along with the murder of the Jews that was the main crime for which a sprinkling of the perps were hanged. What happened to the rest of the criminals is their problem.

If the Nazis hadn't airlifted Franco's fascist thugs into Spain and joined his rebellion there would have been no pretext for the subsequent Soviet entry there, and if the vermin hadn't already launched aggression there would have been no reason or pretext for the Russians to occupy Poland or any other country.

There were two key objectives for the Nazi Drang nach Osten - (1) Lebensraum and (2) killing off the Jews. Saving the world from Stalin was never an objective either in the extensively documented planning or in Hitler's public mouthing off. That objective is a post-war Nazi invention to justify their crimes, as Lebensraum and Judenfrei earn near-universal hostility.

This off-topic thread has never involved more than two people and the on-topic issues are down to one or two so it's over and out.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-27 18:02
One million Russians fought with the German Army at the end of the war as did Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Finns, Romanians, and volunteers from Western European countries such as France, Holland , Belgium, Norway, and Denmark, so as to keep Europe free from the Red Army Rapists. Stalin was an agressor irregardless of your denials. I'm confident the Finns, the Balts, Romanians, and Poles will agree with my assessment. When they show you the door I hope it hits you you know where on the way out.

The bottom line is, Russian military historian Mikhail Meltyukhov (Stalin's Missed Chance) gave support to the claim that Soviet forces were concentrating in order to attack Germany in 1941. Other historians who support this thesis are Vladimir Nevezhin, Boris Sokolov, Valeri Danilov, Joachim Hoffmann and Mark Solonin. Offensive interpretation of Stalin's prewar planning is also supported by Sovietologist Robert C. Tucker and Pavel Bobylev. Moreover, it is argued by Hoffmann that the actual Soviet troop concentrations, fuel depots, and air fields were near the German Russian border, all of which points to an imminent Russian offensive.
 
 
+39 # bmiluski 2012-11-21 08:57
In God We Trust is NOT in our constitution.
I wonder how Jewish settlers would react if they were rounded up (or shot), put in a camp and then watched as their olive and orange groves were destroyed so that Palastinians could build condos?
 
 
+9 # AMLLLLL 2012-11-21 15:45
You hear this on the right and the left; they ignore the fact that Israel is constantly taking over the land in Palestine.
 
 
+27 # aaheart 2012-11-21 09:28
Israel has promoted Noachide Law, not much different from Sharia, but the Talmudic interpretation of the Torah is supremacist doctrine. The result is a self-promotion of "choseness" that creates war, conflict, domination on non-Jews, and discrimination against non-Jews.

Israel has been the aggressor, overtly and covertly, for 62 years, sabotaging every opportunity for peace and assassinating its own Prime Minister when he sought peace.
 
 
+13 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:39
Whether Rabin actually sought peace with the Palestinians is questionable. The Oslo Accords are a very tricky document that contains numerous loopholes allowing Israeli to delay, delay, delay, and create facts on the ground in the mean time. Arafat sold out when he signed it.

For another perspective on that period check out Hanan Ashrawi's book This Side of Peace.
 
 
+13 # aaheart 2012-11-21 12:04
Rabin violated the sacrosanct no peace that relinquishes land stance of the Haredim. He might not have been an honest negotiator but he was too close to establishing peace. His assassination was a warning to any Israeli politician that peace is not the underlying policy of the Jewish State.
 
 
+4 # umrayya 2012-11-21 14:54
aaheart, I do not believe that Rabin intended to give up land. Look carefully at the Oslo Accords. They were a time-buying, not a peace-making tactic.
 
 
-12 # tahoevalleylines 2012-11-22 13:46
Rabin's handshake with the Egyptian President was a mutual kiss of death. President Carter got the glory. He has to work off a lot of guilt: including walking away from the Panama Canal, handing China a premium strategic foothold in the Western Hemisphere.

Islam's mission since the 7th century has focused on removing Jew presence on Abrahamic covenant land predating Islam by some 2500 years. Genesis 12 verses 1-7 was ignored by Muhammadanism from the beginning.

Peace or no peace in the region of Jerusalem is not in the hand of any politician. Whether meddlers in the affairs of Israel are self-serving or truly honest brokers, the Hebrew book contains many warnings of consequences to individuals or sovereign states with the hubris to breach the Abrahamic covenant.

Any American President, or sage of the hour such as Juan Cole or Noam Chomsky seeking to adjust Israel's borders, is simply far beneath pay grade on this challenge. Meddling results in adverse effects spilling over which directly affect countries or individuals stepping in where Angels fear to tread.

Islamic men of letters would do their faith & peoples the greatest favor by honest understanding of prophetic warnings against stepping over clear lines described by Biblical Prophecy. Scripture describes ultimate destruction for Islam if they do not repent of this satanic mission to destroy Israel.

Palestinians are a stalking horse for militant Islam.
 
 
+9 # umrayya 2012-11-22 15:08
Wow - incoherent rant!

"Islam's mission since the 7th century has focused on removing Jew presence..."

The phrase "Islam's mission" is completely nonsensical. Islam is a set of beliefs, and by definition cannot have missions. It is contra-factual to speak of mission by the Muslim world to "remove Jew presence". If anything, the opposite is true.

"...ignored by Muhammadanism from the beginning."

Muhammadanism?! Seriously, what century and what world do you inhabit?

"the Hebrew book contains many warnings of consequences to individuals or sovereign states with the hubris to breach the Abrahamic covenant."

You've got some real historical deficits. When the "Hebrew book" was written the concept of sovereign states did not exist. There cannot have been warnings to non-existent entities.

"Meddling results in adverse effects spilling over which directly affect countries or individuals stepping in where Angels fear to tread."

Huh?! This is a word salad, not a sentence.

"Scripture describes ultimate destruction for Islam if they do not repent of this satanic mission to destroy Israel."

Since the Scripture in question was written thousands of years before Islam, or even Christianity, it is difficult to see how it can describe the destruction of either one of them.

"Palestinians are a stalking horse for militant Islam."

Does that include the Christian, Mandaean, and secular Palestinians, or just the "Muhammadanist" ones?
 
 
+3 # Dion Giles 2012-11-22 17:44
Is "Abrahamic Covenant" code for "God promised us your land" or "we are the chosen people" or both?

No ethnic group, real or "me-too" fake, is more "special" than any other part of the human population, and claims that any - any at all - is so is a hostile affront to the rest of the world - plus, as we have seen, a vehicle for racist land theft and a threat to the peace of the world.
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2012-11-23 17:44
Red herrings--- a 'Christian' version (or should we call it a "Christ" version a la the incredibly offensive '"Jew" presence') of what are SUPPOSED to be Jewish beliefs.
 
 
+5 # Christopher Warren 2012-11-23 10:30
I seem to recall that the oldest Jewish Temple is in Turkey and existed throughout the Ottaman Empire with respect for "keepers of the Book"!
That's bad news for the bogeyman purveyors. Jews were safer in the Muslim Empire than anywhere in the worlds pogroms,massacr es and Inquisitions!
 
 
+8 # umrayya 2012-11-23 11:52
One of the oldest synagogues in the world is the Dura-Europos synagogue, which was discovered in 1932 in Syria near the border with Iraq. It was transported to the National Museum in Damascus, where it is being carefully preserved. The synagogue dates from 244 CE, and is unique because the walls are all decorated with frescoes. I have been inside it. It is quite amazing. You have to be accompanied by a museum employee in order to enter it, and the museum employee stays inside with you until you are ready to leave in order to make sure you do not touch anything, or try to take flash pictures because the light will damage the frescoes over time.

There are also some old synagogues in Iraq, which had a very large, and very important Jewish community that dates back to the Bablylonian exile.

It is, of course, a fact that Jews were far better off in the Muslim world than they were in the Christian world, and many of them fled Europe for the Muslim world as a result of the Inquisition. In addition, some of the most important figures in science, art, philosophy, and medicine during the Muslim empire were Jews. In Islam Jews are considered protected persons because like Muslims they worship the God of Abraham.
 
 
-6 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 18:28
If you study the Talmud carefully you will find passages which even justify pedophelia.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-21 21:18
And how carefully have YOU studied the Talmud? Do you even know what it is?
 
 
-1 # Mannstein 2012-11-26 10:22
The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud published in 1935 was "Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices" by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M.A., Litt.D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A.', Ph.D., Maurice Simon, M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr. J.H. Hertz wrote the "Foreword" for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

The world's leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic "The History of the Talmud," Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise states:

"THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. ...IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEOPLE, WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH..."

I suggest you refer to SANHEDRIN, 55b-55a,SANHEDR IN, 55b, SANHEDRIN, 69b, KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b, KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b, and ABODAH ZARAH, 36b-37a. For a start to learn what this Sacred Book has to say about justifying pedophilia.

Check mate. Game over. You're done.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-26 12:33
LOL! OK, you win. The Protocols of the Ekders of Zion is a true document. There IS an international Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. We are all doomed.
 
 
-1 # Mannstein 2012-11-27 07:28
Nonsense! What has the Protocols of the Elders of Zion have to do with the Talmud?
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 21:14
aaheart, the Talmud is not a "supremacist doctrine" or a doctrine of any kind, nor is it a single, coherent interpretation of the Torah or anything else. The Talmud is a huge collection of rabbinical arguments that took place over centuries. It contains an enormously broad variety of differing opinions.

What you wrote about the Talmud has no basis in reality, and I am sorry to say that some of what you have written here sounds as if it could have been copied an pasted from some neo-nazi Jew-hater website. Really, really, Palestinians do not need this kind of thing on their behalf.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:41
The Halacha is part of the Talmud and in Israel it is being used to discriminate against non-Jews.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:08
aaheart, discrimination against non-Jews in Israel does not depend on Halacha, it is built into the definition of the State as the state of the Jewish nation, and into some of the secular laws.

The Zionists most definitely did not want to create a state based on Jews as a religious group, but as a "nation". Historically, one of the PR challenges the Zionists faced was establishing convincingly that Jews WERE a nation, and I have read some of the discussions and debates on that subject.

Unfortunately, religious extremist elements have been gaining more and more power in Israel just as they are in the United States, Arab countries, and elsewhere (there are even Buddhist extremists, and some of them are violent - go figure!. This seems to be an age of religious fundamentalism. As they are in the United States, these religious fundamentalists are making inroads into the government, so the U.S. is seeing many of the gains made by women and others threatened. The same sort of thing is happening in Israel. It's the way of the world these days.
 
 
+4 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:58
Even though the Talmud and its Halacha is a religious anthology of rabbinical opinion, nevertheless, it defines many civil functions and serves in many cases as the source for the rabbinical judges who control civil events in the life of each Israeli.

"The State of Israel is not Orthodox by definition; yet, in many key issues it follows the Halacha – the laws described in the Talmud. One such example is the controversial Law of Return – the law giving immediate citizenship to any Jew landing on Israel. This law is the basis for Israel being a racist state. The definition of Who is a Jew roughly follow the Talmudic definitions. Most civil events – births, marriages, deaths – follow the Talmudic laws and are controlled by “dayanim,” Jewish religious judges."

http://www.roytov.com/articles/oath.htm

What you wrote about the Talmud has no basis in the lives of Israelis. The Halacha is being interpreted by the rabbinical judges in ways that discriminate. Really! Palestinians do not need a Jewish opinion on what they need on their behalf.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:28
aaheart, you keep going back to this same questionable source.

The basis for Israel being a racist state is not the law of return, but the very definition of the State as The Jewish State. The moment you describe a state as the state of one specific ethnic group you have created tiers of citizenship for which those citizens of the "wrong" ethnicity occupy the lower tiers.

The fact that civil events in the lives of Israeli Jews are governed by Halacha does not effect non-Jewish citizens, whose civil events are governed by their own religious laws. Governing civil events for Jews by Halacha DOES discriminate against secular Jews who are forced to go outside the country if they wish a non-religious marriage ceremony.

Halacha does not apply to non-Jews in Israel, therefore it is not used to discriminate.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:31
Oh, and you really do need to research more than one source. Your dependence on one source only does not speak well.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-23 22:29
Halacha governs civil functions for Jews only. It cannot be used to discriminate against non-Jews because civil functions for non-Jews are governed by their own religious laws. It does, however, discriminate against secular Jews since they are forced to undergo religious ceremonies for major life events.
 
 
+10 # Third_stone 2012-11-21 12:16
Israel has never wanted peace with the Palestinians. They have continued to occupy more of Palestine while making pretenses of talking peace but no being willing to give anything. They want to drive the Palestinians into the sea. Israel has over run most of Palestine, and to have peace they need to retreat and give back some land.
Israel legitimizes terrorism and uses it against any who question their advance. The are the most dangerous nation on earth today, and a leading cause of all fighting in the Middle East.
 
 
+3 # Third_stone 2012-11-21 12:23
The dead diplomats VS. the film: It is claimed that the so-called Al Queeda made an organized attack, proving thereby that the film was not an issue in the matter, it was "terrorists". What we really know is that angry men attacked in an organized manner. Why? They hate us, maybe. Would anyone claim that the film did nothing to enhance these men's will to attack? How do we know they are not former supporters of Quadaffi? There are many and they are armed. The fact is we don't have the evidence yet.
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 14:55
Relevance, please?
 
 
+2 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 17:59
"israel cannot make peace with the palestinians, the palestinians will not let them. the forces behind the palestinians will not let them."

How quickly you forget. This latest bloodshed was started by Israel murdering a Hamas Military leader in broad daylight. What Israel did had consequences, it's called Blowback.
 
 
+7 # DurangoKid 2012-11-22 09:49
The reason "In God We Trust" appears on US currency without violating the establishment clause is that it is not issued by the government. It's issued by the Federal Reserve, a corporation chartered by the government. Yes, the mint prints notes, but these notes are in truth redeemable only for Federal Reserve credit, not silver, not gold, not the full faith and credit of the US government. Those notes represent digital ones and zeroes on a bank ledger. And while we're on the topic, every dollar issued by this quasi-private bank bears and interest burden. It's a toll you pay to private banks for the use of their currency. You see, even our money itself is a profit center.

And the decision to put IGWT on our currency was a cynical attempt in the 1950's(?) by the oligarchs to distinguish "us" from "them", the them being the godless commies. The same bunch of wingnuts who let Joseph McCarthy run amok and ruin who knows how many lives for people doing nothing more than exercising their Constitutional rights to think and speak freely.

Religion in general is often a negative force in society. Religion in government is an unqualified disaster. It's used to persecute enemies of the state with particular virulence. Zealots will use without conforming to norms of due process it to justify the annihilation of their enemies or the taking of their lands. Just look at 19th century US history or Israel today, to name but two examples.
 
 
-9 # Michael_K 2012-11-20 22:40
A meeting of Nobel Peace Laureates? I hope Obama didn't have the cheek to show up!

http://www.nationofchange.org/elites-will-make-gazans-us-all-1353395056
 
 
+1 # edge 2012-11-21 07:44
Now that's funny!
 
 
+4 # reiverpacific 2012-11-21 09:36
Quoting edge:
Now that's funny!

I guess it's funny for humorless reactionaries.
Any solutions to offer instead of snide asides ?
 
 
-3 # edge 2012-11-21 12:57
Quoting reiverpacific:
Quoting edge:
Now that's funny!

I guess it's funny for humorless reactionaries.
Any solutions to offer instead of snide asides ?


I actually had a reply, since it was not complimentary of Carter or Obama it was not allowed.

Free speech is apparently only allowed if it is left wing!
 
 
0 # reiverpacific 2012-11-21 18:47
Quoting edge:
Quoting reiverpacific:
Quoting edge:
Now that's funny!

I guess it's funny for humorless reactionaries.
Any solutions to offer instead of snide asides ?


I actually had a reply, since it was not complimentary of Carter or Obama it was not allowed.

Free speech is apparently only allowed if it is left wing!

Actually I owe you an apology; I meant say something in response to "Michael_K" and my dysfunctional digits got the better of me. I'm always apologizing for this and my computer slides down a space or two if I get confused.
Mea culpa and I don't mind admitting it. Aging is a bitch, innit!?
 
 
0 # Michael_K 2012-11-27 10:24
Quoting reiverpacific:
Quoting edge:
Quoting reiverpacific:
Quoting edge:
Now that's funny!

I guess it's funny for humorless reactionaries.
Any solutions to offer instead of snide asides ?


I actually had a reply, since it was not complimentary of Carter or Obama it was not allowed.

Free speech is apparently only allowed if it is left wing!

Actually I owe you an apology; I meant say something in response to "Michael_K" and my dysfunctional digits got the better of me. I'm always apologizing for this and my computer slides down a space or two if I get confused.
Mea culpa and I don't mind admitting it. Aging is a bitch, innit!?


Sometimes, ageing has naught to do with being one, dontcha think?
 
 
0 # Michael_K 2012-11-27 10:23
There is NOTHING "left wing" about Obama supporters, believe me!
 
 
0 # Michael_K 2012-11-27 10:22
Quoting reiverpacific:
Quoting edge:
Now that's funny!

I guess it's funny for humorless reactionaries.
Any solutions to offer instead of snide asides ?


Gee, look at who's humourless now! LOL
 
 
+4 # umrayya 2012-11-20 22:43
"I think the big change is that the Israeli leaders have decided to abandon the two-state solution. Their policy now is to confiscate Palestinian territory..."

Where has Jimmy Carter been that he thinks this is something new? Israeli leaders have been trying to prevent a two-state solution and have had a policy of confiscating Palestinian land since Ben Gurion. Confiscating Palestinian land in the Occupied Territories and preventing a two-state solution has been Israeli leaders' clear goal since the Alon Plan was adopted five weeks after the June, 1967 war.

Is this some "diplomatic" way of speaking on Jimmy Carter's part, or is he really that unaware of reality?
 
 
+10 # bmiluski 2012-11-21 08:57
Jimmy Carter has been saying it all along.
 
 
+43 # America 2012-11-20 22:44
Well said, Jimmy Carter the often overlooked international diplomatic who says it like it is.
Obama should listen to this 'wiser head' and take notes
 
 
+9 # genierae 2012-11-21 11:23
I don't understand why there's a rift between Obama and Carter? The last time all the presidents got together at the Obama White House, Jimmy Carter was pretty much ignored, and even in the official picture of the occasion he stood apart from the rest. He is a very wise man and like Bill Clinton, could play a useful part in Obama's administration. Surely the problem is not racially motivated.
 
 
+1 # demongel17 2012-11-22 17:36
Indeed!!! In my opinion, Jimmy is the one and only truly honest President this country has EVER HAD!!!
Not only should Obama be listening, he should be graciously giving up his seat to Jimmy!
 
 
+31 # sameasiteverwas 2012-11-20 23:10
"The outside world just tends to be too impatient. The United States declared our independence from Britain in 1776, and it wasn't until 12 years later that we had a constitution."

True! How much has the 24-hour news cycle impelled us into jumping the shark on events when a more reasoned response would save us much craziness?

I love Jimmy Carter. Once again, a simple, clear, dispassionate, compassionate voice in a bizarre and screaming world. And he speaks the truth, perhaps not as one side or the other sees it, but as decades of experience show it to be true.

The answer to the riddle at the center of the universe? Quien sabe? Like Shirley Valentine says: "It's like the Middle East. There's no solution." But I wish they could find some common ground -- like maybe not killing each other's children.
 
 
+5 # bmiluski 2012-11-21 08:58
Or stealing land that was in an accord that the Jewish people signed.
 
 
+9 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:41
I don't get the point. Israel declared independence 64 years ago. Israel still does not have a constitution, and has shown no inclination to declare borders.
 
 
-5 # tref 2012-11-21 16:55
Quoting sameasiteverwas:
But I wish they could find some common ground -- like maybe not killing each other's children.


I'm sorry but that is so naïve and insulated. How can you expect extremist Muslims to not kill Israeli children in exchange for Israelis not killing the children of Gaza when the extremists kill THEIR OWN children without hesitation? The Taliban is an extremist Islamic group. They don't want girls to get an education. One 14 yr old Pakistani girl wrote a blog objecting to them forbidding her an education so they boarded her school bus and shot her in the head.

In the last 10 years, how many Israeli children have been "persuaded" to be suicide bombers?
None that I could find using google. But children from Gaza?
At least 9 confirmed 2000-2004

One mother, Umm Nidal, sent three of her sons, including one 17 year old, on suicide attacks. She said, "I love my children, but as Muslims we pressure ourselves and sacrifice our emotions for the interest of the homeland."
EMOTIONS??? Her kids are just HER emotions? That's twisted.

This data is hard to nail down but it IS clear that Hamas uses kids as suicide bombers and Israel does not. I find it hard to sympathize with a group that has no compunction about devouring its young.
 
 
+5 # tomtom 2012-11-23 07:57
Quoting tref:
Quoting sameasiteverwas:
But I wish they could find some common ground -- like maybe not killing each other's children.


I'm sorry but that is so naïve and insulated. How can you expect extremist Muslims to not kill Israeli children in exchange for Israelis not killing the children of Gaza when the extremists kill THEIR OWN children without hesitation? The Taliban is an extremist Islamic group. They don't want girls to get an education. One 14 yr old Pakistani girl wrote a blog objecting to them forbidding her an education so they boarded her school bus and shot her in the head.

In the last 10 years, how many Israeli children have been "persuaded" to be suicide bombers?
None that I could find using google. But children from Gaza?
At least 9 confirmed 2000-2004

One mother, Umm Nidal, sent three of her sons, including one 17 year old, on suicide attacks. She said, "I love my children, but as Muslims we pressure ourselves and sacrifice our emotions for the interest of the homeland."
EMOTIONS??? Her kids are just HER emotions? That's twisted.

This data is hard to nail down but it IS clear that Hamas uses kids as suicide bombers and Israel does not. I find it hard to sympathize with a group that has no compunction about devouring its young.


Sorry, Tref, but the act of sending any Child to war and áreas of danger is equivalent to sending suicide bombers. América sent 65,000 "suicide bombers" to Vietnam.
 
 
+4 # tamarque 2012-11-23 10:24
Of course there ia a solution. It requires honesty and a good look at the racism that is at the core of the problem. Isreal has never accepted the land division of 1948 which was imposed upon the Palestinains. Even Balfour in 1919 acknowledged that the Palestinians would never have agreed to why ask them. Hmpf!
Just ignore the 700,000 people living on the land divide up their homeland for a foreign, racist group of people.

While history cannot be undone, it sure can be acknowledged. And Isreal needs to be helf accountable for its genocidal and colonialist policies and practices. Isreal has never stopped attacking the Palestinians on every level possible. They have never stopped physically assaulting them whether it be bombs, assassinations, destruction of their farmlands or even their homes, at times with the people still in them.

The solution is for the world to stop dealing with Isreal. Put them under economic and military sanctions. Recognize the right of the Palestinians to their own security and right of self-determinat ion. And get Isreal back behind the 1967 borders which Hamas and Abbas would accept. Reparations need to be made to the Palestinians in and out of Isreal. How many years did Isreal carry on about their reparations for the Holocaust? Why should they be compensated and not the Palestinians? What makes Isreal's geneocidal behavior moral? Nothing! Hold Isreal responsible for what they have illegally done and peace will be acheived.
 
 
+4 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:11
tamarque, if you read and analyze the Balfour Declaration carefully you will see that it really does not give to the Zionists anything that they claim it gives them. It does not even promise them a homeland, let alone a state. All it says is that the British government "looks with favor" on the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Weizmann was not pleased with the document, but it was the best they could get, so they pretended it was more than it was.
 
 
+37 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-11-21 01:35
Pres. Jimmy Carter: you, as one of the most under rated leaders in the world's and this country's history, deserve our undying gratitude, as this so wise and educating article determines. If I may be so bold as to offer a bit of translation for any and all.....

The root of good and Godly (certainly including the Great Spirit, Allah, et. al.) is love, while the root of evil is pride, which most often hold hands with greed and power. The core hope for we humans, and this ain't always easy, is to foster love, caring, giving, sharing, while we recognize and reject the evil that, tragic and then some, erupts and seeks to rule us all.

Thank you, dear Pres. Carter, for giving us all a much needed Bible school session. Would that every religious leader follow your goodly/Godly example, and help us deliver ourselves from the evil slaughter that's going on in Gaza, and end war, war, war for $$$ and power over all.
 
 
+13 # umrayya 2012-11-21 08:32
"The root of good and Godly (certainly including the Great Spirit, Allah et. al.) is love"

Lovely sentiment, thanks.

Just a small point of fact: Allah is not a different entity from God. Allah is the Arabic word for the God of Abraham, just as Gott is the German word, Dieu is the French word, Dios is the Spanish word, and so on. All just different words for the same God.
 
 
+29 # seeuingoa 2012-11-21 02:13
The Israelian flag says it all.

The upper and lower blue lines symbolize
the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, with the David Star in the middle.
Zionist Israel with no place for the
Palestineans.

Unfortunately, it is always difficult
to be critical towards anything Israelian.

If you are a non-Jew living outside
Israel, you are automatically labelled anti-semite.
If you are Jew living outside Israel,
you are automatically labelled a
"self-hating" Jew.
Only a Jew living in Israel can be
critical without being labelled, and
that makes it of course a little
difficult for the rest of the world.
 
 
+28 # Merschrod 2012-11-21 05:09
And, there is a lot of debate w/in Israel that Outside mainstream news/media will not carry for exactly that reason, i.e., be called anti-semitic. Read Haaretz for a more balanced set of opinions; also try Al Jazzera to see what others in the world believe and opin.
 
 
+9 # dkonstruction 2012-11-21 08:41
Quoting Merschrod:
And, there is a lot of debate w/in Israel that Outside mainstream news/media will not carry for exactly that reason, i.e., be called anti-semitic. Read Haaretz for a more balanced set of opinions; also try Al Jazzera to see what others in the world believe and opin.


Also, read sources that include those involved in the Israeli peace bloc such as Gush-Shalom...i agree that there is alot more debate/dissent amongst Israeli Jews than is generally known or acknowledged here in the US.

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_en.html
 
 
+6 # aaheart 2012-11-21 09:35
Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated with the help of the Shin Beth because he sought peace. Even if you are a Jew in Israel you must not stray from the party line.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-21 10:12
It is not clear that Rabin was, in fact, seeking peace. The Oslo Accords was full of loopholes allowing Israel to delay implementation of their requirements, and those loopholes were used to continue to create facts on the ground.

Arafat should never have agreed to the Oslo Accords as they were written.

I WOULD be interested in seeing evidence that the Shin Bet was involved in the murder of Rabin. I have seen nothing so far to convince me that this is the case.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-22 22:33
RoiTov-Three gunshots had shattered a dream. Rabin – Israel’s Prime Minister – had been assassinated by a religious Jew, and a promising peace process had died.

The event had been videotaped by Roni Kempler – a man with unclear but published connections with the security services – who was standing on the “Gan Hair” shopping mall roof. Inexplicably, he was allowed to stand within the sterile security area surrounding Rabin’s exit point. In the minutes before the killing, his video focused mainly on the assassin, as if he knew what was about to happen. In the video, the rear bodyguard was seen clearing the way to the assassin, who shot three bullets before he was restrained by the police.

Rabin was allegedly the best secured head of state in the world. The thought that a civilian could enter the “sterile area” surrounding Rabin was unbelievable.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-22 23:42
Later, it became known that the assassin, Yigal Amir, was targeted by the Shin Beth months before that and that the Shin Beth trained him in the use of arms. Avishai Raviv, a Shin Beth employee, was placed next to him. They claimed he was only an information gathering agent. Yigal Amir, a former Yeshiva student studying at the religious Bar Ilan University, killed Prime Minister Rabin with the blessing of his Pharisaic rabbi. He moved from one rabbi to another until he found one who agreed that the killing would save many Jewish lives; and thus – the religious authority claimed – it was justified.

Raviv knew that and reported Yigal Amir's plan to assassinate Yitzhak Rabin, based on “din rodef,” law of the pursuer, which rabbis interpret as allowing the killing of another Jew to prevent him from handing Jewish land over to non-Jews.

Despite that, the Shin Beth did not stop Amir.

http://www.roytov.com/articles/devil.htm
 
 
+3 # tamarque 2012-11-23 08:03
Quoting aaheart:
Later, it became known that the assassin, Yigal Amir, was targeted by the Shin Beth months before that and that the Shin Beth trained him in the use of arms. Avishai Raviv, a Shin Beth employee, was placed next to him. They claimed he was only an information gathering agent. Yigal Amir, a former Yeshiva student studying at the religious Bar Ilan University, killed Prime Minister Rabin with the blessing of his Pharisaic rabbi. He moved from one rabbi to another until he found one who agreed that the killing would save many Jewish lives; and thus – the religious authority claimed – it was justified.

Raviv knew that and reported Yigal Amir's plan to assassinate Yitzhak Rabin, based on “din rodef,” law of the pursuer, which rabbis interpret as allowing the killing of another Jew to prevent him from handing Jewish land over to non-Jews.

Despite that, the Shin Beth did not stop Amir.

http://www.roytov.com/articles/devil.htm


Always interesting to learn of the government conspiracies (not theories). History is filled with these secretive maneuverings.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-23 09:43
This is just something someone wrote on the internet. There is no evidence to support it. Therefore it is just another conspiracy theory, and not a particularly interesting or convincing one at that.
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-23 17:39
YOU are just something someone wrote on the Internet. Therefore you are merely a conspiracy of one or more claiming someone else's interpretation is conspiracy theory. YOU are merely digitized opinion, too, and not particularly interesting or convincing at that.

Somehow you don't seem to want to see that the people who were in an area that was the most security-sensit ive and vital for a successful assassination provide primary evidence of the machinations of Shin Beth.

Your not wanting to see suggests that you are playing the role of gatekeeper doing damage control, keeping the discussion from getting beyond what the Truth Ministry deems out of control.

You also showed no interest in discovering who actually was quoted. The URL was available so you could research my source in this regard.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-23 19:55
Now you are just being silly, aren't you?

What I want to see is evidence for the claims made in the article, and I have seen none. And by the way, what you claim is not primary evidence for anything. If there were actualy that the assassin was in such a security-sensit ive area, then that would constitute circumstantial evidence, and would not be conclusive, but could contribute to a case against the Shin Beth, not necessarily for complicity, but certainly for a breach of responsibility.

Try to understand that when YOU make a claim it is not MY job to research and produce the evidence, it is yours, and you have failed to do so.

And oh, yeah, I am an Israeli agent - you have busted me. (shakes head)
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-24 15:57
OK, I claim that Roy Tov claims that evidence has been made public that Avishai Raviv was a paid agitator for Shin Bet and that Raviv knew Yigal Amir as a friend who shared anger about the Oslo Accords. Amir's brother and a friend both testified that Raviv knew of Amir's plan to assassinate Rabin. The video of the assassination showed the assassin in the area secured by Shin Bet with Raviv standing nearby and it shows the Shin Bet bodyguard clearing out the target zone behind Rabin.
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-23 20:28
Following Rabin’s assassination, the Shin Bet agitator Avishai Raviv appeared in an Israeli court. There we learned about “Haagaf Hayehudi” (The Jewish Department of the Shin Bet) and about Avishai pushing Yigal Amir into committing the hideous murder in the name of hatred, war, and war bankers.

http://www.roytov.com/introduction.htm
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-23 22:33
Once again, this is an unsupported claim, and does not constitute evidence. The fact that someone writes something on the internet that you want to believe does not make it evidence.

I would be happy if you stopped showing unsupported claims written by someone on a website, and showed some real evidence.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-24 16:54
Real prima facie evidence is in the hands of the prosecution and the State of Israel. Since I would never be permitted to hold such evidence in my hands and would not be able to show it to you on the Internet, your demand for real evidence is essentially impossible to meet...a part of the skewed design of your argument to mislead and obfuscate discussion of an issue you find too sensitive to permit online.

the Shamgar Judicial Commission of Inquiry established that Raviv worked for the Shin Bet

Shin Bet was responsible for Rabin's security.

Shin Bet permitted the assassin to enter a secure zone behind Rabin as he exited the building.

But expecting this evidence to result in an honest trial in the highly politicized State of Israel is to demand too much of justice in a skewed judicial system.
 
 
-3 # umrayya 2012-11-23 08:24
Sorry, that is not evidence, it is an internet article filled with unsupported speculation, similar to the many articles purporting to prove that LBJ was really behind the murder of JFK, or that 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush administration.

I would like to see real evidence. I don't think there is any.
 
 
+1 # tamarque 2012-11-23 13:40
Quoting umrayya:
Sorry, that is not evidence, it is an internet article filled with unsupported speculation, similar to the many articles purporting to prove that LBJ was really behind the murder of JFK, or that 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush administration.

I would like to see real evidence. I don't think there is any.


Evidence can be a very transient thing you know. In courts people get convicted with the flimsiest of presentations. Evidenced based medicine in the US today usually means that someone had enough money to buy the FDA and media, and that includes the top medical journals. When we talk about events like 911, there is so much factual evidence that contradicts the snow job accepted in Congress that it IS possible to construct a different scenario that is backed by international leaders such as the Prime Minister (I that was his position) of Italy who publicly stated that 911 was put together by the US and its allies. As for LBJ being involved with the assassination of JFK? Again, there is good evidence to point in that direction. Given the sleaze of most governments and their predilection to kill those who get in the way of power, one should keep an open mind to such theories.

As for Isreal, their self-serving marketing propaganda is confronted by the realities on the ground.
 
 
-2 # umrayya 2012-11-23 15:37
So, to summarize all that verbiage, there is no evidence whatsoever to support the implausible claim that the Shin Beth was involved in the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. :)
 
 
+1 # tamarque 2012-11-23 16:42
Quoting umrayya:
So, to summarize all that verbiage, there is no evidence whatsoever to support the implausible claim that the Shin Beth was involved in the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. :)


Perhaps your lack of verbiage doesn't produce support for you either.
 
 
-3 # umrayya 2012-11-23 18:08
tamarque, it works like this: YOu made an allegation. It is your responsibility to support it with evidence. I made no allegation, therefore there is nothing for which I need to produce support.

Get it? :)
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-23 17:56
Spinmeister umrayya, you've been exposed.
 
 
0 # Dion Giles 2012-11-23 22:50
Umrayya is not a spinmeister to "expose" - his posts show deep knowledge and care with truth.

That said, tamarque and aaheart have brought forward evidence that a faction was behind the murder and that the faction might have included Shin Beth or part of it. One can visualise the kind of faction that would wish to do that, like the kind that would have engineered Kennedy's murder and for similar reasons.

Such factions do conspire behind closed doors, do recruit others, do involve patsies, do cover up, do fail to cover up ALL evidence, do deride suspicion as "conspiracy theories". It is likely that in many such cases (Rabin, Kennedy?) too much will be buried and there will be too much reluctance to look for nasties under rocks for anything ever to be proved.

None the less, shaky lone gunman theories remain implausible and it is right to challenge them as it is right to challenge the wild conspiracy theory that a group of Arabs hidden in tunnels managed unaided to stand down America's defences, level the Twin Towers, hole the Pentagon, and junk maybe for ever much of what America stands for at home and abroad that is decent.

In all such cases "cui bono?" is a compelling clue, and bits of the truth show up even where too much is hidden for it to be possible to demonstrate the whole story.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-24 11:13
Dion, tamarque and aaheart have, so far as I have seen, not brought forward anything but unsupported statements from one specific website that appears to contain only articles written by the owner of the website. Some quick research turns up the information that this author is an "Israeli dissident who converted to Christianity". Those appear to be his only qualifications.

The links in the articles I have looked at all appear to refer back to other articles by - you guess it - the author of the original article. This does not meet even the minimal requirements to qualify as evidence.

There may have been members of the Shin Beth involved in the murder of Rabin, but nothing in any of the material presented by tamarques or aaheart is convincing.

All I am saying is show me something real.
 
 
+1 # tamarque 2012-11-24 12:41
Quoting umrayya:
Dion, tamarque and aaheart have, so far as I have seen, not brought forward anything but unsupported statements from one specific website that appears to contain only articles written by the owner of the website. Some quick research turns up the information that this author is an "Israeli dissident who converted to Christianity". Those appear to be his only qualifications.

The links in the articles I have looked at all appear to refer back to other articles by - you guess it - the author of the original article. This does not meet even the minimal requirements to qualify as evidence.

There may have been members of the Shin Beth involved in the murder of Rabin, but nothing in any of the material presented by tamarques or aaheart is convincing.

All I am saying is show me something real.


Please do not confuse me with others. I noted Balfour's comments, not the Balfour Declaration. Just yesterday I read some of his quotes on the situation historically and thoae are what I referred to.

But to tell the truth, aside from some egotism on your part, I have no idea what your points really are on this situation. I suggest that if you have something to contribute to this discussion, please present your ideas/facts/int erpretations. Otherwise, you are being redundant for no meaningful purpose.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-24 16:22
I'm sorry, tamarque, but I have not made any reference here to any remarks about Balfour. What I am referring to here is an unsupported claim that the Shin Beth was involved in the murder of Rabin. I was responding to this comment from Dion Giles: "tamarque and aaheart have brought forward evidence...". If you believe you were brought into this incorrectly, maybe you should take it up with Dion?

All I have done here is ask for some actual evidence to support the claim that the Shin Beth was involved in the Rabin murder. I am not required to present ideas/facts/int erpretations when I am simply attempting to gather information.
 
 
0 # Dion Giles 2012-11-24 20:17
Yes, sorry, I mistakenly included tamarque on Rabin. I took the brief exchange starting at 012-11-23 13:40 as an indication that he was open to the possibility that Shin Beth was involved. So am I, though not acting as the arm of the state as (like umrayya) I don't think Rabin was ever an existential threat to Israel. The Roi Tov site has alluded to Shin Bet involovement but hasn't presented this with name, rank and serial number.

Although unlike Tov I am not a Christian I can well understand his plight as an Israeli officer. That's the down side of military service - hogtying yourself to the immorality of the state (pretty well any state).

I would not dismiss Shin Beth involvement as umrayya has all but done (Wikipedia [1] lists a large number of indications that Yigal Amir was a patsy misled through his own religious lunacy).

The context of the murder is one in which Rabin was dangling the diversionary Oslo chimera which would have freaked out powerful extremists who took it seriously. Shin Beth is the sort of outfit that could well include some of these. Securocrats usually include some cowboys.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin_assassination_conspiracy_theories
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-24 21:39
Dion Giles, to be clear for the record, I have not dismissed Shin Beth involvement. All have done is dismissed unsupported claims. That's quite a different thing, as you know. I do think it is entirely plausible that, as you said, Yijal Amir was a "patsy" of some extremist right wing persons or group(s), some of whom may have held positions in the Shin Beth. I would have to see some pretty good evidence before I would believe that the Shin Beth was behind the assassination.

As I have said previously, my opinion based on quite a bit of evidence is that Oslo was a hoax on the Palestinians, and that the Israelis who negotiated it with Arafat never intended for it to be carried out. That's opinion, not fact, but I have strong reasons to believe it is correct.
 
 
0 # tamarque 2012-11-25 07:06
As I have said previously, my opinion based on quite a bit of evidence is that Oslo was a hoax on the Palestinians, and that the Israelis who negotiated it with Arafat never intended for it to be carried out. That's opinion, not fact, but I have strong reasons to believe it is correct.

Wish I could find the video that I saw about a year ago. It was on Netanyahoo, sitting in someone's home, assuring them that the 2-state solution would never happen.

But the biggest facts we have are on the ground, as they say. It is what they do, not what they say, that provides facts of their goals.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-25 10:27
Yes, indeed, actions speak louder than words!

Of course, it would not surprise me to hear Netanyahu say that the two-state solution will never happen. What most people do not seem able to wrap their heads around is that Labour has done every bit as much as Likud and more to prevent it. They just tend to be a bit more smooth and discrete about it.
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-24 17:05
I am far more likely to find honest information from an Israeli dissident than from a participant in the State of Israel. Roy Tov was a scientist deeply involved in the development of Israeli enterprise. Another very useful source is Gilad Atzmon whose family was deeply embedded in the terrorism that founded the State of Israel. Both knew the inside of the terrorist state before they chose to reveal the darkness inside.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-24 21:43
Someone can be a resident of a state, or a citizen of a state, but how does one "participate" in a state?
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-23 17:55
Shin Beth TRAINED the assassin in the use of arms.

An employee of Shin Beth was at the side of the assassin in a place where security would demand only cleared personnel with a need to be in that location would be permitted.

That same employee knew that the assassin had searched for a rabbi who would support the killing of Rabin and reported this to his handlers.

The videographer focused on the assassin prior to the assassination and then on the movements of the bodyguard who cleared people away from the target area to give the assassin three clear shots.

"I would like to see real evidence. I don't think there is any."

To say that you don't think there is any evidence implies an inside knowledge of the assassination, believing that the coverup by Shin Beth was successful.

Certainly enough questions would have been raised from this evidence to direct a more vigorous investigation, but expecting Shin Beth to investigate itself is naive. Instead, Shin Beth employs internet hasbara to provide a limited hangout.
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:43
Shin Beth was found by an Israeli court to have been involved in the Rabin assassination.

http://www.roytov.com/articles/jewishfatherlandlaw.htm
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:15
Another unsupported claim. I'm not saying it's not true, I am saying that so far no one has shown any documentation or other evidence whatsoever to support it. Absent any evidence, I cannot accept this as factual, simply. If you want to believe it without evidence, you are free to do so.
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-23 20:30
The Oslo Accords were INTENDED to be a 5-year stop-gap measure to establish a peace in which a final document could be negotiated.
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-23 22:23
I am among many people who don't buy that and never did. We believe that the Oslo Accords were intended to allow the Israelis to stall and buy time to confiscate and colonize more land that eventually would be annexed to Israel.

In signing the Oslo Accords Arafat sold out. I recommend Hanan Ashrawi's book, This Side of Peace.
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-24 16:01
Rabin's assassination was just a coincidence and that his assassin was opposed to the Oslo Accords is also a coincidence? You must be a coincidence theorist...
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-24 21:49
Good grief! Now you are making stuff up out of thin air. How on earth do you get anything about Rabin's assassination being a coincidence from what I said?

Yigal Amir murdered Yitzhak Rabin, presumably because he (and whoever may have aided, abetted, or put him up to it) believed that Rabin was going to give away part of what they consider Eretz Israel.

I do not believe and have never believed that Yitzhak Rabin intended for Oslo to be anything but a way to buy time to establish enough facts on the ground to obviate a Palestinian state.

How that adds up to me saying that Rabin's assassination was "just a coincidence" is beyond comprehension.
 
 
+1 # CL38 2012-11-21 12:54
Sounds like Republicans.
 
 
+2 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 20:01
# seeuingoa: "Only a Jew living in Israel can be critical without being labelled" [a self-hating Jew"

Within Israel too I'm afraid. One Israel-born Jew who was so labelled was Ilan Pappe, who on the basis of extensive scholarly research wrote the blockbuster "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine." Because of his probing research he was drummed out of his post at the University of Haifa and now is a senior professor at the University of Exeter, UK. Worth Googling him - better, reading his book (mine is an Amazon Kindle edition at $9.99).
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 23:08
Actually, although Ilan Pappe is a fine academician, the bulk of the research he uses in The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine was done in the '70's by Benny Morris who wrote the seminal works on the expulsion of the Palestinians. 1947-49. What Ilan does is bring a different, and in my view, more realistic perspective to the information than Benny Morris does.
 
 
0 # Dion Giles 2012-11-22 09:35
I agree that Ilan Pappe built on research done by Morris. Where the two authors come across to me as differing is that pogroms that Morris held just sort of happened Pappe cited good documentation to conclude were a planned ethnic cleansing programme in which Ben-Gurion was the central driving force.

A book also worth following up is Shlomo Sand's "The Invention of the Jewish People". Another thoroughgoing Israeli scholar to be reviled by the Zionists as a "self-hating Jew". I got mine through Amazon Kindle but they have paperback too.
 
 
0 # umrayya 2012-11-22 12:11
Yes, that is what I meant when I said that Ilan brings a "different, and in my view, more realistic perspective to the information". :) When I first read Morris's work in the '70's I was struck by the fact that he seemed utterly unable to come to the obvious conclusions one must come to from the information he uncovered.

I should probably break down and read Sand's work just so I fully understand it. I have not read it, partly because I have other priorities, and partly because I do not find these types of attempts at delegitimizatio n to be helpful.

For example, my reaction to the whole Khazar controversy is, and always has been "so what?". It does not matter at all whether Ashkenazi Jews are descendants of the Israelites of Biblical times, or of European converts to Judaism. They are Jews no matter how they got that way, and they have every bit as much right to their Jewishness and all it means to them, including feeling connected to the land of the Israelites, as do my Iraqi friends who are direct descendants of the Jews of the Babylonian exile.

Trying to delegitimize Zionism by delegitimizing all or a segment of the people who consider themselves Jewish is a deadend, just as are the attempts by various means to deligitimize the Palestinians. Both ignore the real issues here of foreign colonization, dispossession, displacement, and oppression of the weak by those more powerful.
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-24 16:06
Zionists have made claims to justify their barbarity and have used undocumented history to support those claims. Counterclaims that point toward another, mnore historical reading of history can be effectively used to deny the false justification of land theft and tribal supremacy.
 
 
+12 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 03:12
Sharia law and other religious laws are perfectly fine just so long as they are for consenting adults only. The moment they seek to rule by coercion the personal and civil lives of others their enforcers earn and deserve the outspoken contempt of everyone who values the rights of the people which means of every individual.
 
 
+8 # Luis Emilio 2012-11-21 07:44
Quoting Dion Giles:
Sharia law and other religious laws are perfectly fine just so long as they are for consenting adults only. The moment they seek to rule by coercion the personal and civil lives of others their enforcers earn and deserve the outspoken contempt of everyone who values the rights of the people which means of every individual.

I would add the same for [religious] Jewish or, for that mater, any religious law.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-21 09:47
Jewish Noachide laws have been brought into the American political landscape by dual citizen politicians and zionists. The U.S. Congress officially recognized the Noahide Laws in legislation which was passed by both houses. Congress and the President of the United States, George Bush, indicated in Public Law 102-14, 102nd Congress
 
 
+1 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 19:42
# Luis Emilio: Yes. That applies also to laws applied to all not by the state but by religious groups with the state's connivance such as the ban on driving in parts of Israel on Saturdays.

A colleague once complained, on my calling for return of the exiles, that that would end up with Sharia law in Israel and I responded in jest (sort of) that that would be a bad thing but it couldn't happen to a nicer mob. Well, until the foreign settlers returned to their homelands, anyway.
 
 
+12 # hjsteed 2012-11-21 03:31
Could a one state condition for Israeli, Palestinian and Gaza territories be the best solution for a peaceful democratic government in the area - that is in harmony with the U.N. Charter & Universal Declaration of Human Rights - where all citizens have equal human rights, including a one man one vote mandate?

Are religious differences a impenetrable wall against a peaceful state of being?
 
 
+8 # Merschrod 2012-11-21 05:12
Sounds good, except that the Zionists will not go for that - they would be out voted and also their apartheid-like laws would have to be lifted. Not good when you are trying to establish a Jewish only state.
 
 
+5 # handmjones 2012-11-21 05:35
As in Apartheid South Africa, a single State is the only solution.
THe Jewish people, to their credit, have fought for equality for themselves and all others around the World but in Israel they wish to continue superiority through racial laws and exclusion of others.
 
 
+5 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:44
Actually, in Israel Jews are not equal, they are, by the definition of the State, and by law and practice superior to all non-Jewish Israeli citizens.
 
 
+5 # aaheart 2012-11-21 10:26
Even Jews are not equal to other Jews. Ashkenazim have more rights that Sephardim. Black Jews are beaten and rousted from the country.
 
 
+5 # umrayya 2012-11-21 15:01
You are correct. Quoting aaheart:
Even Jews are not equal to other Jews. Ashkenazim have more rights that Sephardim.


You are correct. In Israel all Jews are equal, but some Jews are more "equal" than others.

It is no accident that the majority of residents of high-risk border areas such as Ashdod are Jews of Arabic origin. The Jews who were brought to Israel from Arab countries were settled in these dangerous areas while Ashkenazi Jews were given homes in safer, more desirable areas of the country.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 18:37
If you're a Christian visting the holy sites in Jerusalem be prepared to be spat upon. If you go to the Israeli police to file a complaint they will do nothing. Michelle Bachman take note.
 
 
+1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 21:04
There are extremist Jews, too, you know, and they are a minority just as extremists are a minority in every human group. That's why their called extreme and not the norm.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-22 05:19
Israeli Cops must also be extremists then since they don't go after the perpetrators.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-22 09:14
More likely that they are afraid to tangle with religious fanatics and the groups they are involved with.
 
 
0 # Mannstein 2012-11-27 07:09
If that's the case the Cops are cowards shirking their duty.
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-23 18:04
Over 90% of Israelis polled after Operation Cast Lead were in favor of the extremist position of Likkud's war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sometimes extremists are NOT a minority.
 
 
-4 # Stephanie 2012-11-21 15:02
Quoting handmjones:
As in Apartheid South Africa, a single State is the only solution.
THe Jewish people, to their credit, have fought for equality for themselves and all others around the World but in Israel they wish to continue superiority through racial laws and exclusion of others.



It is not as if Gaza was like how the Japanese were put in camps in the US. Things are good for parts of Gaza and they have an economy (hope I can post this link) http://www.israellycool.com/2010/07/20/a-taste-of-concentration-camp-gaza-the-grand-palace-hotel/
 
 
+3 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:59
It's great that you know so much about Gaza, Stephanie. How much time have you spent there? Did you live there, or were you just visiting? When was the last time you were there?
 
 
+10 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:17
It's not about religious differences. Political Zionism was never a religious movement, nor was the Palestinian objection to political Zionism based in religion. It is about a group of Europeans deciding they had the right to take someone else's land for themselves.

It can be interesting to read about some of the early intra-Zionist debates on how they would legitimize creating a Jewish State in Palestine in order to get the European powers behind them.
 
 
+8 # dkonstruction 2012-11-21 11:09
Quoting hjsteed:
Could a one state condition for Israeli, Palestinian and Gaza territories be the best solution for a peaceful democratic government in the area - that is in harmony with the U.N. Charter & Universal Declaration of Human Rights - where all citizens have equal human rights, including a one man one vote mandate?

Are religious differences a impenetrable wall against a peaceful state of being?


hjsteed, the one-state solution is actually an old idea going back to before the founding of the state of Israel. Some progresive Jews including Hannah Arrendt, Albert Einstein, Martin Buber and others supported the idea of one secular state of Palestine for all its inhabitants and warned that the creation of a Jewish state would lead to protracted if not unending conflict.

The problem at this point is whether the one-state solution is possible, still a good idea and whehther it would advance the cause of and ultimately bring peace.

Here's an interesting debate between Ilan Pappe (who supports the one-state solution) and Uri Avnery (who opposes it). Both are committed peace activists and have consistantly opposed the Israeli occupation and treatment of the Palestinians.

http://www.countercurrents.org/pappe110607.htm
 
 
+1 # hjsteed 2012-11-21 14:20
Thank you for your response & the one state issue dialogue some years ago with regard to the formation of Israel in a foreign land. These are complicated questions about how a territory or states should and can be governed without wars that result in the death and injury of so many innocent lives. It's perhaps naive and/or simplistic that we all can live peacefully in one universe under one God of life, truth and love for the benefit of mankind.
 
 
+22 # Don Thomann 2012-11-21 04:42
Israel's tacit goal is the total extermination of "Palestine and Palestinians" as such! Is that genocide?
 
 
-12 # Independentgal 2012-11-21 07:18
I think you have it backwards. Hamas' goal is to destroy Israel.
 
 
+10 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:46
Stop blindly repeating propaganda. Hamas has no such goal. On the contrary, Hamas' top leaders have stated clearly that they will accept and live peacefully with Israel within the pre-1967 boundaries.
 
 
+8 # aaheart 2012-11-21 09:52
You are parroting Israel's claim, but not the facts. Hamas has tried repeatedly to establish peace and the military commander who was assassinated early in this aggression was on his way to deliver a new version of a peace that Israel could not permit to see the light of day. Just as Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by his own people for daring to consider peace. Rabin is the proof of the lie you bring to this discussion
 
 
-1 # Dion Giles 2012-11-21 20:12
Like those bloodthirsty villains of the European Resistance whose goal was to destroy the Third Reich. The world's people including the world's Jews and the world's Germans owe them undying honour and gratitude for doing so.
 
 
+4 # Third_stone 2012-11-21 12:27
It is genocide. They will drive the Palestinians into the sea.
 
 
+4 # Mannstein 2012-11-21 18:43
Absolutely. When you have US politicians like Newt Gingrich claiming Palestinians are not a people or they don't exist the US is complicit. It may even be that it's a US tradition based on what it did to the indigenous population not so long ago.
 
 
+6 # fhunter 2012-11-21 06:15
I guess, Russian Jews, immigrated after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, have a very strong voting block supporting Netanyahu. They, the Russian Jews, live very well on the West Bank Settlements and not willing to give thim up, even if at the end will mean the destruction of Izrael. Obama needed the Jewish vote and did not interfere.
 
 
+7 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:18
Many of those Russians are not even Jews.
 
 
+8 # Solomon Davidson 2012-11-21 06:54
Jimmy Carter for President in 2016!
 
 
+1 # demongel17 2012-11-21 16:10
Ditto!!!!!!!!
 
 
-19 # Stephanie 2012-11-21 07:41
Around 1,000 rockets have been fired on Israel in the past 6 day alone!
When the 2 State offer was made at the VERY start, it was the Palestinians who said it was not enough land they wanted it all. It was Israel that forcibly removed their citizens from Gaza to give that land to the PLO. They are not in 'camps', there are luxury hotels, party/event places, high rise apt buildings, etc. They want more land. It is Israel that provides them with electricity as well as aid. The treatment at the borders were necessary to reduce the suicide bombers that were coming through. The ONLY reason there have been less casualties on the Israeli side is that most have been living in bomb shelters. The Palestianians set up their rocket launches in densely populated areas, apt bldgs and also set bombs in those buildings and kill their own. Let us not forget, that EVERY country the Palestinians lived in before, threw them out along with Arafat. If you had someone living down the block from you who kept firing rockets at your home, how long would you wait to fire back?
What is being asked of Israel is absurd - the Palestinians do not recognize Israel's right to exist - there is no place to start but there as a first step, no?
 
 
+10 # dkonstruction 2012-11-21 08:39
For literally decades now (since the original camp david accords) the Palestinians have said they would accept the two-state solution based on mutual recognition along the lines of the pre-67 borders but Israel has never agreed to give up all settlements (in fact they have continued to build thousands of additional settlement units) and create a contiguous Palestinian state (instead of a disconnected series of bantustans bisected by Israeli by-pass roads for the settlers)in which Palestinians control things that every sovereign state controls including their borders, airports, water supplies etc.

And, the fact that the Arab states have not treated the Palestinians any better than Israel because they have always seen them as a threat to their own dictatorial and or theocratic regimes (due to the fact that the Palestinian movement has historically been overwhelmingly secular and democratic and that the Palestinians have tended to be amongst the most highly educated populations in the Arab world)is an important critique but in no way excuses the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli gov't.
 
 
+6 # umrayya 2012-11-21 10:27
Arab states have NEVER treated Palestinians remotely as badly as Israel has. On the contrary, for the most part they have treated them far better. Jordan has given them citizenship. Iraq gave them privileged status, which sadly lead to huge problems for them after George W. Bush invaded Iraq and empowered the most extreme elements on all sides. Syria has accepted huge numbers of Palestinian refugees, and some of them have done very well there, Egypt, North African states, the Gulf States, Lebanon - all have large numbers of Palestinians living inside their borders, and in some cases doing very well.

Accepting Palestinian refugees inside their borders is a very costly matter for these countries, some of which are barely able to provide for their own citizens.
 
 
+3 # handmjones 2012-11-21 08:58
Israel should stop bringing in foreign workers and integrate all Palestinians into one State. It is so ludicrous to say that a Russian of dubious Jewish origins should be given a greater 'right of return' than a Palestinian whose family was driven out in 1948. The U.N. should expel Israel until they recognise its authority.
 
 
+9 # umrayya 2012-11-21 09:52
How many missiles and bombs has Israel fired into Gaza in the last 6 days?

much destruction has Israel caused in the last 6 days/

How many civilians has Israel killed in the last six days? How many children?

How many civilians has Israel maimed for life in the last six days? How many children?

"Let us not forget, that EVERY country the Palestinians lived in before, threw them out along with Arafat."

Really? Then how do you account for the enormous number of Palestinians living in Lebanon? in Jordan? in Syria? in Egypt? all over North Africa? In the Gulf states? In Europe? In the United States?

You have absolutely no clue what you are carrying on about, and yet you keep spouting this contra-factual nonsense. Do some research, get some real information, then come back and we can have a real adult conversation.
 
 
+3 # aaheart 2012-11-21 10:04
Small warhead if any, limited range, unguided, inaccurate big bottle rockets are more symbolic than effective. The ordinance delivered by Israeli aircraft are many, accurate, delivered with precision with aircraft WE gave them under agreements that prohibited their use against the Palestinian civilians.

Gaza is NOT a lightly populated prison. It is densely populated and has few, if any, bomb shelters.

Those rockets have mostly landed on Palestinian lands that are now illegally occupied by Israelis. They occupy that land with near impunity...but for the big bottle rockets that occasionally arrive in their stolen property.

Hamas had established a cease fire but Israel interrupted that with a bullet into the stomach of a 13 year old boy playing football in his neighborhood streets. Murdering children in broad daylight is not a good way for Israel to keep the peace.
 
 
-6 # Stephanie 2012-11-21 14:58
How long after the cease fire was the bomb thrown into the bus in Tel Aviv?
 
 
+7 # umrayya 2012-11-21 15:07
There was a study, I believe around the time of so-called Operation Cast Lead, that showed that some 75-80% of the time when a ceasefire, truce, or extended period of "quiet" has been broken, it has been Israel that has broken it. This is, of course, completely at odds with the propaganda, and media hype that always has Israel "retaliating" for some offense by Palestinians.
 
 
+2 # demongel17 2012-11-21 16:15
Seems like you are not too popular here, Stephanie?? I can understand why. I can respect you giving your opinion, but could not agree with you less. Sure, a war zone is a war zone. I have never personally lived in one. Have you? I have, however, lived on the streets here in San Francisco for a solid year in 1998 and found out the nastiness of this damnable system that we still choose to call a democracy. That, Stephanie is a laugher. Period.
 
 
+4 # umrayya 2012-11-21 19:03
Wow, Stephanie, you are a real wealth of knowledge, especially about Gaza. Tell me about the time you have spent there.

Oh, and if EVERY country the Palestinians lived in threw them out, how is it that there are millions of Palestinians living in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, the Gulf States, North Africa, Europe, the United States, Canada, Mexico, South America, Australia, and New Zealand?
 
 
-28 # artic fox 2012-11-21 08:14
ex-President Carter as usual is talking nonsense. His interference in international matters is his way of "showing" how relevant he is and trying to overcome the failures of his 1-time stint in the oval office. He should stick to his Habitat commitments and book writings.
 
 
+15 # bmiluski 2012-11-21 09:02
Very typical....accu sations without any facts to back them up. You can dis Jimmy all you want, but I want to see the walk.
 
 
+19 # Luis Emilio 2012-11-21 09:47
The main reason Carter was a 1 term president was the treasonous deal of Reagan with Iran.
 
 
+11 # Firefox11 2012-11-21 11:06
Quoting Luis Emilio:
The main reason Carter was a 1 term president was the treasonous deal of Reagan with Iran.


True. Carter's campaign manager wrote a book about it.
 
 
+10 # Firefox11 2012-11-21 11:10
Quoting artic fox:
ex-President Carter as usual is talking nonsense. His interference in international matters is his way of "showing" how relevant he is and trying to overcome the failures of his 1-time stint in the oval office. He should stick to his Habitat commitments and book writings.


As an American living overseas during the Carter Presidency I returned to a country that blamed its failures on him. In an effort to understand what his "crimes" were I have listened to his speeches to the American people where he encouraged them to adopt a more energy efficient lifestyle. Had the country followed his lead then, things would be much improved now.
 
 
+18 # tamarque 2012-11-21 08:18
Jimmy Carter seems to be genuine but he is naive if he ever believed that Isreal would be a peaceful and neighborly state. From the get go Zionism sought all of greater Palestine and the white, European zionist leadership was as racist as it comes so their murderous assaults on the Palestinians was never anything that affected them ethically or morally.

In order to prevent a two-state solution, it is obvious that growing settlements were designed as facts on the ground to promote Isreali land theft. The army is always positioned to support the rabid settlers as they rampage and destroy Palestinian farm land. Can you imagine the grief you would feel if you went out to your orchards to tend them only to discover 100's of your olive trees picked clean or, worse, cut down and bruatlized? Some of these trees were several hundred years old!

And Isreal the defenseless? $3 billion a year from the US for military purposes is not defenseless. Nor are over 100 nuclear warheads in a non-nuclear region. White phosphorous spewed out on a trapped population is pure genocide. For what purpose?

And as for peace? Isreal is not a partner for peace. They have destroyed every single effort put forth by the Palestinians. Only this past month there was a peace plan put forth by the Palestinians via an Isreali negotiator. Isreals answer was to kill a top Palestinian military leader and then drop a drone on home killing the entire family. That is Isreal the peace partner.
 
 
+13 # umrayya 2012-11-21 10:01
Well said, Tamarque.

Were you aware that Ahmad Jaabari, the "top Palestinian military leader" you referred to was the chief Palestinian negotiator for that piece plan you referred to? As Gershon Baskin put it, Israel assassinated the chance for calm.
 
 
+5 # Firefox11 2012-11-21 11:14
The plutocracy that rules the world has its hand in every corner, albeit under the table. Seems that this supposed David and Goliath situation is not what it appears either.
 
 
+1 # Luis Emilio 2012-11-21 12:49
Quoting Firefox11:
[...] Seems that this supposed David and Goliath situation is not what it appears either.

Can you be more specific?
 
 
+15 # mdj 2012-11-21 09:34
President Carter is so right.
What's happening in Gaza right now is nothing more than a demotic prison guards attacking a prison full of prisoners. The Palestinians have been sentenced to life imprisonment without committing a crime. They are walled in on three sides and on the 4th they are manned by gun boats. They are completely isolated and yet Israel try's to make us believe they are a threat! This is an so ridiculous. Israel and their laws are the threat.
 
 
+8 # Old Man 2012-11-21 11:42
And yet we as a nation keep stoking the fire of war with Billions of hard earned tax dollars to keep killing Palestinians.
Thank you President Carter for all your hard work. Maybe one day America will wake-up and quite flipping the bill for war on innocent people.
 
 
+7 # Deist 2012-11-21 12:34
I greatly admire Jimmy Carter. However, one point which he is incorrect about is the desire for a Greater Israel being a recent development. Israel is based on the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and does not even have a constitution due to the belief that no man-made law (a constitution) can be of more importance than God's laws (the Hebrew Bible/OT). The Hebrew Bible/OT is a blue print for putting Israel over all. It is loaded with promises allegedly from God that Israel will rule the world. This is not a recent development, it is about 3,000 years old.

To diffuse religious violence we need to strike at the root of the problem which is violence promoting "holy" books. The best way to do that is to take the advice of the American revolutionary and Deist Thomas Paine. In his landmark book on God and religion, The Age of Reason, The Complete Edition, Paine called for a revolution in religion based on our God-given reason and Deism. I think Thomas Paine was correct!

Progress! Bob Johnson
www.deism.com
 
 
+5 # umrayya 2012-11-21 15:15
Actually, the Greater Israel idea was originally not based in religion or the Bible. Political Zionism was a secular movement, and many or most of its originators and leaders were atheists.

Your claims about ruling the world sound disturbingly like the anti-semitic screed The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I hope that is not where you were trying to go with this.
 
 
+3 # Deist 2012-11-21 16:46
umrayya Have you ever read the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament? It's loaded with quotes allegedly from God promising the Hebrews/Jews that Israel will rule the world. For example, Deuteronomy 28:1 which has God saying to Israel "that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:" and Isaiah 60:12 has God threatening Gentile nations with "For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted."

Progress! Bob Johnson
www.deism.com
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:45
So, are you translating a historical religious text that was written in and about a world that existed thousands of years ago into a Jewish conspiracy to take over today's world?
 
 
+5 # Deist 2012-11-21 20:32
If Israel looked at the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament as a historical document I would say no. However, the Hebrew Bible/OT is very important to Israel and Judaism and is taken very seriously. This is revealed in many different way such as Israel not having a constitution due to no man-made law (constitution) being above God's law (Hebrew Bible/OT), Netanyahu saying that Jerusalem is not a settlement, it is Israel's capital and they've been building it for 3,000 years. The list goes on and on which shows Israel and Judaism take the teachings of the Hebrew Bible/OT for Israel to rule the world and of Jewish superiority very seriously. Also, the war-mongering neocon movement started by Leo Strauss fights to build a society based on the Hebrew Bible/OT. ( http://www.deism.com/neoconsbible.htm )

Progress! Bob Johnson
www.deism.com
 
 
-4 # umrayya 2012-11-21 23:19
Deist there are several problems with your argument that render it ineffective. Among them are the fact that Israel is a secular state most of whose laws are man-made.

Netanyahu's saying that Jerusalem is Israel's capital has nothing to do with the Bible. That claim goes back to Ben Gurion et al. who were all secular Jews, and mostly atheists and cared not a bit about the Bible.

What you are saying about Israel ruling the world is contrafactual nonsense, and sounds more and more like classical anti-Semitism. I hope it is not.
 
 
+2 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:14
Using the anti-Semitism epithet again, umrayya? That's the work of a propagandist.

Israel is a secular state that has used biblical texts to support its secular demands. Nothing ineffective about that. Your argument is rendered ineffective by your contrafactual assertions and epithet.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:18
aaheart, the claim that Jews plan to take over the world is classical European anti-Semitism exemplified by the fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

If I have made contra-factual assertions, then I am quite sure you can quote them.
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-24 16:35
In what way are thie Protocols of the Elders of Zion "fraudulent"? Do they not provide insight to a plan of action that can be seen in social development and manipulation discernible in the changes noticeable in our social, political, and economic reality?
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-24 20:20
In what way are the Protocols of the Elders of Zion fraudulent? Well, let's start with the fact, that the Protocols are supposedly a plan written by Jews to take over the world, but were written by anti-Semites in an attempt to spread hate against Jews.

And now that you are defending the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as realistic, I am finished talking with you. Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are not the same thing.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:50
And yes, I have read the Tanakh.
 
 
+1 # aaheart 2012-11-23 19:08
Defense against whom? Defense against 40,000 little Jews in Moscow that took over Russia, and then, in their devious ways, took over control of many other countries of the world. --Benjamin Freedman

Was Benjamin Freedman anti-Semitic?

Henry H. Klein wrote Zionism Rules the World.

Was Henry H. Klein anti-Semitic?
 
 
+4 # Activista 2012-11-21 13:19
"nearly 70 percent of Israelis surveyed recently said that Israel should accept a Palestinian state if the United Nations chooses to recognize it, according to a report in Thursday’s edition of The Jerusalem Post.
The poll results fly in the face of American conservatives and even President Barack Obama, who have taken the lead in discouraging the U.N. from voting on the matter, claiming that it could threaten Israel’s security???
www.disinfo.com/2011/09/vast-majority-of-israelis-want-to-recognize-palestinian-state/
It would seems that most INFORMED people agree - but our oligarchs have different goals.
 
 
-6 # Stephanie 2012-11-21 14:57
Yet I belive the Palestinian Charter does not recognize Israel or its right to exist. The first time in 48 that they were offered their own state/land, it was not enough - they wanted more - they say on their TV stations, they will only be happy to have it all - that is not happening.
 
 
+5 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:48
You need to get newer propaganda pamphlets. What you are calling the "Palestinian Charter" was written in the '60's. It is by now a historical document, not anything that is currently being applied to anything.

And how interesting that you know what "they" say on their TV stations. Where did you learn Arabic?
 
 
+6 # umrayya 2012-11-21 15:11
Far from threatening Israel's security, Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied territories and accepting a Palestinian state would go 90% of the way to solving the conflict.

Is everyone here aware of the Arab League Peace Proposal that has been on the table for a decade, and that the Israelis have refused to consider even as a starting point for negotiations?
 
 
+6 # Sam Seaman 2012-11-21 14:50
Let them make it one state, and call it what they want.

If the democratic principle of one person one vote is applied, the next government of Israel would probably be Arab.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-21 18:49
It would probably be representative of the population based on whatever criteria were agreed upon.
 
 
+1 # mjc 2012-11-23 17:19
Very difficult to believe that Israel has any other policy than confiscating any territory that might be considered belonging to Palestinians. The other part of that "policy" is to eliminate the natives they fund ON the land they want to confiscate: the Palestinians. They have gone to great lengths to do just that, in spite of a birth rate three times that of Israelis. But wars are a good way to get rid of lots and lots of racial irritants.
 
 
+2 # umrayya 2012-11-23 21:21
Yes, mjc, the goal of Israel is to have the land of Palestine without the people, and they are unlikely to rest until they accomplish that, unless they are stopped.
 
 
-3 # umrayya 2012-11-23 19:48
No, aaheart. Someone published an article on the internet claiming that Shin Beth trained the assassin in the use of arms, that an employee of Shin Beth was at the side of the assassin, that the assassin was in a place where security would demand only cleared personnel would be permitted, etc. etc. etc. Those are claims, not evidence, and no one has presented any evidence that any of those claims is true.

Now, if you insist upon confusing claims with evidence, then you can believe anything you like to believe, and you can be my guest, but without evidence I am not going to believe something that is not very plausible to begin with.
 
 
-3 # The Voice of Reason 2012-11-23 20:01
This is the president who greased the skids for the Shah, and then let the terrorist Islamists overthrow Iran. Not that the Shah was the greatest, he was very pro-Oil Criminals and willing to bankrupt his country to buy weapons, but the alternative is horrible.

And Carter is in favor of shari'a law, the most punitive and unaccountable law in hisstory. And torture is a legal sanction in the Muslim countries. Iran hanged 175 people in one day this week. How many more people have to die for 'moral' crimes, while the most immoral people on the earth are the Muslim leaders, 'who lead after their own whim and desires. On their tongue the mention of God hath become an empty name, in their midst, his holy Word, a dead letter.'

Go ahead and back these losers all you like, the day will surely come when perdition overtakes you.
 
 
0 # hjsteed 2012-11-24 09:38
[quote name="The Voice of Reason"] "Carter is in favor of shari'a law"

Please explain. I thought he was a Baptist Christian and promoted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights...
 
 
0 # The Voice of Reason 2012-11-24 11:55
'But each country has a right - depending on whom the voters elect in democratic elections - to impose or not impose the principles of religious law like the sharia.'

It's the last line of his column. It's like saying the neo-Nazis have the right to vote in their fascist dictates, if they get enough votes. Shari'a law must be abolished.
 
 
-1 # umrayya 2012-11-24 12:18
Again, the self-appoointed Voice of Reason shows no reason.

But mostly you are showing utter ignorance of what Shari`a is. All you appear to "know" about Shari`a is what you have read on anti-Islam hate sites, I am afraid. In fact, to equate in any way Islam with fascism reveals your complete ignorance of both.
 
 
-1 # Dion Giles 2012-11-24 14:45
A Sharia-friendly description directed by believers in Islam to non-believers can be found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/beliefs/sharia_1.shtml.

Wrapped up in a lot of "motherhood" statements about moral living, when it comes down to stating what Sharia law actually provides once it gets to controlling civil law or any other form of coercion it is a gross affront to human freedom and dignity, to be resisted implacably by anyone who doesn't want the liberating gains of and subsequent to the Enlightenment reversed.

Sharia law is based at centre on bald assertions about the existence, requirements and authority of God as proclaimed by the authority of those who wrote the Moslem "holy books".

Democracy is about governing society, not about violating the autonomy of individuals. The role of a democratic state includes (1) to respect the autonomy of each individual and (2) to protect that autonomy from the intrusive exercise of the autonomy of other individuals or groups. It is within that that the state must govern the running of society and enact laws that apply to all.

Promotion of Sharia is and must be permissible in a democratic state but implementation to anybody but consenting adults is not. Brushing aside the sugar coating, the kernel of Sharia law is a dagger at the heart of human liberty.
 
 
+2 # tamarque 2012-11-24 15:38
Quoting umrayya:
Again, the self-appoointed Voice of Reason shows no reason.

But mostly you are showing utter ignorance of what Shari`a is. All you appear to "know" about Shari`a is what you have read on anti-Islam hate sites, I am afraid. In fact, to equate in any way Islam with fascism reveals your complete ignorance of both.


Once again, how about providing some of your understanding as opposed to simply attacking. You need to contribute in a constructive way, or give it up.
 
 
0 # The Voice of Reason 2012-11-24 21:04
Except when Palestinian Muslims worked with Hitler, fought with Hitler and served on his cabinet.

I don't blame your flat denials; for many, many Muslims it is impossible to break the cycle of violence that Muslims are raised in and have no control over. It is simply too much to believe there can be a life without torture and abuse, and they remain chained to a hopeless future and a dictatorial and unsustainable way of life.

The day will come when it all comes crashing down. On that day, the teachings of Baha'u'llah will still be there for you to show you the path to righteousness and unity.
 
 
-2 # Mannstein 2012-11-27 07:23
Does what you say about Palestinians also apply to Jews? A large number of Jews were active in the Lenin and Stalin government. One of the biggest mass murderers of the 20th century Lazar Kaganovich was a Jew responsible for the 7 million Ukranian deaths during the 1930's collectivizatio n. Please provide the names of any Palestinians which were in Hitler's cabinet. Making wild unsubstantiated statements just won't cut it.
 
 
+1 # hjsteed 2012-11-24 12:27
Stating a possible condition of "democratic" rule does not necessarily "favor" or endorse Shari'a law, especially if such religious laws violate basic human rights as articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in which President Carter strongly supports.

Is it fair to characterize a person's religious position as something that it may not be?
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-24 15:18
Obviously Operation Pillar of Cloud is not over. The ineffectiveness of the Iron Dome has been measured at 70% failure rate so Netanyahu knows that he will probably get more Israelis killed by his war mongering, but he will probably face the challenges to his leadership and decide to accept the collaterla damage.

The IDF now knows how long it takes to call up the reserves and another 50,000 have already been recruited and are in place.

There will be another attack on Gaza and this time the IDF will go in for a barbaric mass murder of a civilian population. The reluctance of the UN and world goverrnments has been measured and there is little that can be done in time to save Gazans. Netanyahu would have affected a fait accompli and smirk at the world, "so what are you going to do about it..."

http://www.roitov.com/articles/irondomepillarofcloud.htm
 
 
-1 # C. Winslow 2012-11-26 18:18
The leverage elite in Israel will never negotiate a settlement with the Palestinians because they believe, wrongly,that the Arab population was given a state in the Mandatory period, Jordan, then known as Transjordan. They both believe this fact and want the whole of Palestine. The Arab population will be kept as second-class citizens and prevented from exercising genuine political power. But Jove, Jethro's God, has a trick up his sleeve. With just a single jurisdiction, natural attraction will, by means of coitus, join the two populations together, and, one day in the far future, a descendant of one of the former Arab slaves will become Prime Minister of Israel. I hope this person will have had a Jewish mother and an Arab father. Jove's way is actually the fastest way, given the tribalism and conflict proneness of the two sides, and I see peace coming in less than 400,000 years.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN