Topic: The West, Israel and Islam - Your Opinion (*)

[Andy G]

The following is an interesting discussion from the 9/11 thread between myself and Yorkykopite.  So as not to take that thread off topic, as all of us are remembering those that perished and their families, I have continued in its own thread.  Please feel free to throw in your three penneth.

I also thank Yorkykopite for the interesting counter-position that he/she is putting forward and hope he/she continues to do so.

Not only was America effected by the events of that day, but subsequently the Middle East too.  Again, innocent people have lost their lives – numbering far more than those killed on US soil.  I can‘t help but think of the number of lives that have probably been saved by talking to the terrorist of Ireland and achieving peace.  An average of about 300 a year were dying from the 70’s until peace was brokered.  In the 13 years since 9/11, that would mean around 4000 lives at the same averages, 33% more than died on that terrible day.

There's no one to 'talk' to though. This isn't the IRA. It's Islamic State and Al Qaida. What they want is something no one can ever give them.
RIP

I don't believe that to be the case.  From speaking to many muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere, the biggest grief is with the complete backing of Israel (who are bastards to other Muslims) and the invading of Arab countries.  Both of those can be discussed and resolved.  The extremeists do not want to kill us for nothing.  Let's talk to them and see where we can meet in an effort for peace.  Nothing to lose.

Well apart from Israel!
Even then it wouldn't be enough. The extremists - not your friends - want East Timor back in the 'Muslim world', they want Sharia, they want a Caliphate and they want everyone in it to conform to their own rigid, misogynistic, and hateful interpretation of the Koran.
There's simply nothing to talk about.

[Andy G]

If there is no room for talking, then we are all doomed.  Military intervention will never succeed.  I remember working with an exiled Iraqi in Malaysia in 2002.  He hated Hussain as he had done things to his family - hence his exile.  He told me that most Iraqi's would fight any invading force first, and then Hussain or any other dictator second.  This may be one individual, but the sentiment has been repeated in different ways over the years by the Arabs, Persians and Muslims generally that I have been able to converse with over the years.

As was the case in Ireland, the extremists are powerful through fear, but few in number.  As we have seen across the world and all over history, when the people are strong, they tend to influence those in power.  Refusal of the likes of the Taliban and other extremists to accept a potential peace process will unite the resistance if nothing else.  Of course, there could also be a blood bath as a result of that, but the People want peace and the People will eventually win if it is sought.

A far more searching question is why the US was so eager to go to war in Iraq.  Why does it support Israel when Israel commits more atrocities than we have witnessed through Islamic Extremist terrorism?  I think when we answer these questions, then we may have a possible path to peace, as these are the reasons that the extremists have the power.  It can be argued that we are the aggressor.  The question then, is whether the US and the UK are prepared condemn the atrocities of an ally.  Whether it can persuade Israel to compromise and whether its leaders and backers are prepared to give up the enormous financial rewards that destruction and re-construction enable.

I agree with you about the hateful interpretation of the Koran that is used to drum up tolerance of the extremists (bullies) in their own countruies.  Surely we have a similar hateful interpretation of the bible.  God Bless America, We must fight this evil etc..  It is pretty much the same language as used by the extremists.  Such words strengthen the resolve of our good people against the evil that we face.  Our similar words strengthen the resolve of their good people against the evil that they face.  That is why the real extremists are in power - they are fighting a common enemy.  Perhaps we should ask the same question of ourselves.

I am not saying that your points are wrong as you and I both know only a little of the reality or the cultures involved.  But surely taking the moral high ground an attempting to talk is better than constant and un-winnable battling from both sides, where the only losers are the common people.  Change comes from within those with power.  Let's encourage that change.

[Corkboy]

To really combat terror, end support for Saudi Arabia

Ramped up rhetoric on security makes no sense so long as the west cosies up to dictatorships that support fundamentalism

Owen Jones The Guardian, Sunday 31 August 2014

The so-called war on terror is nearly 13 years old, but which rational human being will be cheering its success? We’ve had crackdowns on civil liberties across the world, tabloid-fanned generalisations about Muslims and, of course, military interventions whose consequences have ranged from the disastrous to the catastrophic. And where have we ended up? Wars that Britons believe have made them less safe; jihadists too extreme even for al-Qaida’s tastes running amok in Iraq and Syria; and nations like Libya succumbing to Islamist militias. There are failures, and then there are calamities.

But as the British government ramps up the terror alert to “severe” and yet more anti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster is surely needed. One element has been missing, and that is the west’s relationship with Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism. And no wonder: the west is militarily, economically and diplomatically allied with these often brutal regimes, and our media all too often reflects the foreign policy objectives of our governments.

Take Qatar. There is evidence that, as the US magazine The Atlantic puts it, “Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra”, an al-Qaida group operating in Syria. Less than two weeks ago, Germany’s development minister, Gerd Mueller, was slapped down after pointing the finger at Qatar for funding Islamic State (Isis).

While there is no evidence to suggest Qatar’s regime is directly funding Isis, powerful private individuals within the state certainly are, and arms intended for other jihadi groups are likely to have fallen into their hands. According to a secret memo signed by Hillary Clinton, released by Wikileaks, Qatar has the worst record of counter-terrorism cooperation with the US.

And yet, where are the western demands for Qatar to stop funding international terrorism or being complicit in the rise of jihadi groups? Instead, Britain arms Qatar’s dictatorship, selling it millions of pounds worth of weaponry including “crowd-control ammunition” and missile parts. There are other reasons for Britain to keep stumm, too. Qatar owns lucrative chunks of Britain such as the Shard, a big portion of Sainsbury’s and a slice of the London Stock Exchange.

Then there’s Kuwait, slammed by Amnesty International for curtailing freedom of expression, beating and torturing demonstrators and discriminating against women. Hundreds of millions have been channelled by wealthy Kuwaitis to Syria, again ending up with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra.

Kuwait has refused to ban the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, a supposed charity designated by the US Treasury as an al-Qaida bankroller. David Cohen, the US Treasury’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, has even described Kuwait as the “epicentre of fundraising for terrorist groups in Syria”. As Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, an associate fellow at Chatham House, told me: “High profile Kuwaiti clerics were quite openly supporting groups like al-Nusra, using TV programmes in Kuwait to grandstand on it.” All of this is helped by lax laws on financing and money laundering, he says.

But don’t expect any concerted action from the British government. Kuwait is “an important British ally in the region”, as the British government officially puts it. Tony Blair has become the must-have accessory of every self-respecting dictator, ranging from Kazakhstan to Egypt; Kuwait was Tony Blair Associates’ first client in a deal worth £27m. Britain has approved hundreds of arms licences to Kuwait since 2003, recently including military software and anti-riot shields.

And then, of course, there is the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. Much of the world was rightly repulsed when Isis beheaded the courageous journalist James Foley. Note, then, that Saudi Arabia has beheaded 22 people since 4 August. Among the “crimes” that are punished with beheading are sorcery and drug trafficking.

Around 2,000 people have been killed since 1985, their decapitated corpses often left in public squares as a warning. According to Amnesty International, the death penalty “is so far removed from any kind of legal parameters that it is almost hard to believe”, with the use of torture to extract confessions commonplace. Shia Muslims are discriminated against and women are deprived of basic rights, having to seek permission from a man before they can even travel or take up paid work.

Even talking about atheism has been made a terrorist offence and in 2012, 25-year-old Hamza Kashgari was jailed for 20 months for tweeting about the prophet Muhammad. Here are the fruits of the pact between an opulent monarchy and a fanatical clergy.

This human rights abusing regime is deeply complicit in the rise of Islamist extremism too. Following the Soviet invasion, the export of the fundamentalist Saudi interpretation of Islam – Wahhabism – fused with Afghan Pashtun tribal code and helped to form the Taliban. The Saudi monarchy would end up suffering from blowback as al-Qaida eventually turned against the kingdom.

Chatham House professor Paul Stevens says: “For a long time, there was an unwritten agreement … whereby al-Qaida’s presence was tolerated in Saudi Arabia, but don’t piss inside the tent, piss outside.” Coates Ulrichsen warns that Saudi policy on Syria could be “Afghanistan on steroids”, as elements of the regime have turned a blind eye to where funding for anti-Assad rebels ends up.

Although Saudi Arabia has given $100m (£60m) to the UN anti-terror programme and the country’s grand mufti has denounced Isis as “enemy number one”, radical Salafists across the Middle East receive ideological and material backing from within the kingdom. According to Clinton’s leaked memo, Saudi donors constituted “the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide”.

But again, don’t expect Britain to act. Our alliance with the regime dates back to 1915, and Saudi Arabia is the British arms industry’s biggest market, receiving £1.6bn of military exports. There are now more than 200 joint ventures between UK and Saudi companies worth $17.5bn.

So much rhetoric about terrorism; so many calls to act. Yet Britain’s foreign policy demonstrates how empty such words are. Our allies are up to their necks in complicity with terrorism, but as long as there is money to be made and weapons to sell, our rulers’ lips will remain stubbornly sealed.

source

[HarryLabrador]

To really combat terror, end support for Saudi Arabia

source

Amen!

[Andy G]

Thanks for posting that Corkboy. 

[Corkboy]

Sleepwalking Toward Armageddon

Sam Harris

In his speech responding to the horrific murder of journalist James Foley by a British jihadist, President Obama delivered the following rebuke (using an alternate name for ISIS):

    ISIL speaks for no religion… and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. No just God would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings. Their ideology is bankrupt…. we will do everything that we can to protect our people and the timeless values that we stand for. May God bless and keep Jim’s memory. And may God bless the United States of America.

In his subsequent remarks outlining a strategy to defeat ISIS, the President declared:

    Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim…. ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way…. May God bless our troops, and may God bless the United States of America.

As an atheist, I cannot help wondering when this scrim of pretense and delusion will be finally burned away—either by the clear light of reason or by a surfeit of horror meted out to innocents by the parties of God. Which will come first, flying cars and vacations to Mars, or a simple acknowledgment that beliefs guide behavior and that certain religious ideas—jihad, martyrdom, blasphemy, apostasy—reliably lead to oppression and murder? It may be true that no faith teaches people to massacre innocents exactly—but innocence, as the President surely knows, is in the eye of the beholder. Are apostates “innocent”? Blasphemers? Polytheists? Islam has the answer, and the answer is “no.”

More British Muslims have joined the ranks of ISIS than have volunteered to serve in the British armed forces. In fact, this group has managed to attract thousands of recruits from free societies throughout the world to help build a paradise of repression and sectarian slaughter in Syria and Iraq. This is an astonishing phenomenon, and it reveals some very uncomfortable truths about the failures of multiculturalism, the inherent vulnerability of open societies, and the terrifying power of bad ideas.

No doubt many enlightened concerns will come flooding into the reader’s mind at this point. I would not want to create the impression that most Muslims support ISIS, nor would I want to give any shelter or inspiration to the hatred of Muslims as people. In drawing a connection between the doctrine of Islam and jihadist violence, I am talking about ideas and their consequences, not about 1.5 billion nominal Muslims, many of whom do not take their religion very seriously.

But a belief in martyrdom, a hatred of infidels, and a commitment to violent jihad are not fringe phenomena in the Muslim world. These preoccupations are supported by the Koran and numerous hadith. That is why the popular Saudi cleric Mohammad Al-Areefi sounds like the ISIS army chaplain. The man has 9.5 million followers on Twitter (twice as many as Pope Francis has). If you can find an important distinction between the faith he preaches and that which motivates the savagery of ISIS, you should probably consult a neurologist.

Understanding and criticizing the doctrine of Islam—and finding some way to inspire Muslims to reform it—is one of the most important challenges the civilized world now faces. But the task isn’t as simple as discrediting the false doctrines of Muslim “extremists,” because most of their views are not false by the light of scripture. A hatred of infidels is arguably the central message of the Koran. The reality of martyrdom and the sanctity of armed jihad are about as controversial under Islam as the resurrection of Jesus is under Christianity. It is not an accident that millions of Muslims recite the shahadah or make pilgrimage to Mecca. Neither is it an accident that horrific footage of infidels and apostates being decapitated has become a popular form of pornography throughout the Muslim world. Each of these practices, including this ghastly method of murder, find explicit support in scripture.

But there is now a large industry of obfuscation designed to protect Muslims from having to grapple with these truths. Our humanities and social science departments are filled with scholars and pseudo-scholars deemed to be experts in terrorism, religion, Islamic jurisprudence, anthropology, political science, and other diverse fields, who claim that where Muslim intolerance and violence are concerned, nothing is ever what it seems. Above all, these experts claim that one can’t take Islamists and jihadists at their word: Their incessant declarations about God, paradise, martyrdom, and the evils of apostasy are nothing more than a mask concealing their real motivations. What are their real motivations? Insert here the most abject hopes and projections of secular liberalism: How would you feel if Western imperialists and their mapmakers had divided your lands, stolen your oil, and humiliated your proud culture? Devout Muslims merely want what everyone wants—political and economic security, a piece of land to call home, good schools for their children, a little leisure to enjoy the company of friends. Unfortunately, most of my fellow liberals appear to believe this. In fact, to not accept this obscurantism as a deep insight into human nature and immediately avert one’s eyes from the teachings of Islam is considered a form of bigotry.

In any conversation on this topic, one must continually deploy a firewall of caveats and concessions to irrelevancy: Of course, U.S. foreign policy has problems. Yes, we really must get off oil. No, I did not support the war in Iraq. Sure, I’ve read Chomsky. No doubt, the Bible contains equally terrible passages. Yes, I heard about that abortion clinic bombing in 1984. No, I’m sorry to say that Hitler and Stalin were not motivated by atheism. The Tamil Tigers? Of course, I’ve heard of them. Now can we honestly talk about the link between belief and behavior?

Yes, many Muslims happily ignore the apostasy and blasphemy of their neighbors, view women as the moral equals of men, and consider anti-Semitism contemptible. But there are also Muslims who drink alcohol and eat bacon. All of these persuasions run counter to the explicit teachings of Islam to one or another degree. And just like moderates in every other religion, most moderate Muslims become obscurantists when defending their faith from criticism. They rely on modern, secular values—for instance, tolerance of diversity and respect for human rights—as a basis for reinterpreting and ignoring the most despicable parts of their holy books. But they nevertheless demand that we respect the idea of revelation, and this leaves us perpetually vulnerable to more literal readings of scripture.

The idea that any book was inspired by the creator of the universe is poison—intellectually, ethically, and politically. And nowhere is this poison currently doing more harm than in Muslim communities, East and West. Despite all the obvious barbarism in the Old Testament, and the dangerous eschatology of the New, it is relatively easy for Jews and Christians to divorce religion from politics and secular ethics. A single line in Matthew—“Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”—largely accounts for the why the West isn’t still hostage to theocracy. The Koran contains a few lines that could be equally potent—for instance, “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256)—but these sparks of tolerance are easily snuffed out. Transforming Islam into a truly benign faith will require a miracle of re-interpretation. And a few intrepid reformers, such as Maajid Nawaz, are doing their best to accomplish it.

Many believe it unwise to discuss the link between Islam and the intolerance and violence we see in the Muslim world, fearing that it will increase the perception that the West is at war with the faith and cause millions of otherwise peaceful Muslims to rally to the jihadist cause. I admit that this concern isn’t obviously crazy—but it merely attests to the seriousness of the underlying problem. Religion produces a perverse solidarity that we must find some way to undercut. It causes in-group loyalty and out-group hostility, even when members of one’s own group are behaving like psychopaths.

But it remains taboo in most societies to criticize a person’s religious beliefs. Even atheists tend to observe this taboo, and enforce it on others, because they believe that religion is necessary for many people. After all, life is difficult—and faith is a balm. Most people imagine that Iron Age philosophy represents the only available vessel for their spiritual hopes and existential concerns. This is an enduring problem for the forces of reason, because the most transformative experiences people have—bliss, devotion, self-transcendence—are currently anchored to the worst parts of culture and to ways of thinking that merely amplify superstition, self-deception, and conflict.

Among all the harms caused by religion at this point in history, this is perhaps the most subtle:  Even when it appears beneficial—inspiring people to gather in beautiful buildings to contemplate the mystery existence and their ethical commitments to one another—religion conveys the message that there is no intellectually defensible and nonsectarian way to do this. But there is. We can build strong communities and enjoy deeply moral and spiritual lives, without believing any divisive nonsense about the divine origin of specific books.

And it is this misguided respect for revelation that explains why, in response to the starkest conceivable expression of religious fanaticism, President Obama has responded with euphemisms—and missiles. This may be the best we can hope for, given the state of our discourse about religion. Perhaps one day we will do “everything that we can to protect our people and the timeless values that we stand for.” But today, we won’t even honestly describe the motivations of our enemies. And in the act of lying to ourselves, we continue to pay lip service to the very delusions that empower them.

source

[electricghost]

What a superb piece that is by Sam Harris

[vagabond]

An Open Letter from Majid Nawaz to ISIS fighters from the West

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/10/an-ex-radical-s-open-letter-to-isis-fighters-quit-now-while-you-can.html

Dear Western Fighters in Syria and Iraq, 

I address these words directly to you Muslims from Western nations who went to Syria to fight that brutal dictator Assad, and now may be feeling like you joined the wrong war.

I reach out to you hoping to be able to bring our countries closer to healing. I understand why you were so moved that you left your secure, comfortable lives to defend the defenseless in a far off land. Some time ago, I too left my comfortable life in Britain to export the idea of building a Khilafah [caliphate]. I went to Pakistan. I went to Denmark. And I went to Egypt. I too was originally moved by a horrific war in Bosnia, where Muslims were being slaughtered in a genocide, and I too wanted nothing but justice, peace and dignity for my religion. I eventually came to understand that there is a better way to achieve those things.

I know what an Arab dictator can do. I feel that same anger you do. Mubarak’s henchmen did the same to us in Egypt. We watched men succumb to their torture wounds and die before our very eyes in prison. We witnessed rape, dishonor and the destruction of families. I still feel that pain every day, eight years after being released.

So I know that you were not moved to emigrate—make hijra—and fight jihad with the aim of spreading corruption, injustice and oppression. Those were the very ills that you wanted to defeat, not help sustain. Your intentions were to answer the call of your brothers and sisters who were pleading for your support, to raise the word of Allah high. You found yourselves unable to stand by and watch while Assad’s henchmen tortured, raped and slaughtered their way through Syria.

ISIS appeared to be the most effective in fighting back against such brutality so you joined them, which at the time may not have appeared too controversial to you. For those few months it may have appeared quite simple to decipher the good from the bad. And you knew that were you to be killed while fighting Assad’s tyranny, you would be granted the status of sh‎uhadaa’—martyrs—by your Lord.

You probably flinched when you first heard that your group became locked in combat with other Muslims more than it was with Assad.  You probably felt sick to your stomach when you heard that even al-Qaeda had disowned ISIS, and worse when you heard that the two groups were killing each other. Now, and despite your best intentions, you find yourself as everyone's enemy, even other Salafi-jihadis. As roughly 30 of you from Britain recently declared, you know this is not what you went out to fight for. You are trapped, lost in a great tribulation—fitna—and most likely wondering how to get out without betraying your religion. But you know that no matter whether your cause is just or not, killing other Muslims is not jihad, it is qital, and those killed in qital are not martyrs who live, they are simply fighters who die. They will maintain no special status before their Lord. They will not be green birds flying beneath the great throne—arsh—of Allah until the Final Day. They will be subjected to inquisition, and will await resurrection in the grave like any normal Muslim.

If you look into yourselves, you know that you are no longer fighting jihad to alleviate oppression, and you are no longer warriors—mujahideen, but mere fighters—muqatileen who fight and obey orders to kill other Muslims. As such, you are fully aware that you can no longer be sure of Allah’s blessings, nor His victory. To make matters worse, the world is gathering against you. Muslim and non-Muslim are preparing to fight you. Many clerics—ulema—consider your group ISIS akin to the ancient seditious sect of Khawarij, and the rest of the world simply considers it the worst terrorist group to have emerged in history.

ISIS’s days are numbered, but yours do not have to be. There is still time for you to take account of your deeds before the world turns on ISIS collectively, for that day is surely coming.

Seek sanctuary in the justice systems of your home countries by surrendering yourselves. To do so would not be to turn your back on jihad. This is no jihad. This is the worst Muslim on Muslim civil war of our age. To consider what I ask must be scary. How will you be treated? Will you be arrested? Will you be imprisoned? Probably yes. You joined a group the brutality of which the world hadn’t seen since it rid itself of the Nazis and the Khmer Rouge. You may have even committed some of those atrocities yourselves. You will need to take responsibility for your role in joining ISIS, and the world will want to feel safe from you for a while. But while in prison in any democratic country, you know that you will not be tortured as Assad does his own people, nor electrocuted as Mubarak did to us in Egypt.

Islam allows you to acknowledge the fairness of non-Muslim justice, as the Prophet (upon him peace) did when he praised the justice of the Ethiopian King Habasha. You know deep down that, despite their many failures, democratic governments will generally treat their prisoners according to a defined set of standards. You will have rights to practice your religion. You will serve your time and, eventually, you will be released. All of this is better than dying in a great tribulation—fitna— and facing a most uncertain judgment from your Lord, which is your most likely alternative.

I make a promise to all of you who heed my advice. If you invite me, I will put myself on the line, as my colleague from Quilliam Dr. Usama Hasan and I did for Babar Ahmed and Talha Ashan at their invitations. We will fairly represent to the judge what you were probably thinking when you went, why people like you decide to return, and how it is possible to repent and regret such mistakes. I believe you yet have value in your lives, no matter what you may have done and I am happy to testify to that effect. If you choose to, I will also commit to meeting with you, listening to you and seeking to find a better way forward with you. Your effect in deterring others to travel without proper consideration would be hugely significant.

If you take one step to the good, we will all make leaps towards you. That is a promise. I have not given up on you. To do so would have been to give up on myself.

[Corkboy]

What a superb piece that is by Sam Harris

Isn't it? He's nailed a lot of the stuff that was being discussed on the old Islamist thread. Perhaps Doc Red and Sadred will show up to tell Sam how he's wrong.

[dotheoffski]

Your quote

"the biggest grief is with the complete backing of Israel (who are bastards to other Muslims)"

Comments like this irritate the hell out of me.  Yes there is huge distrust and often hatred between Jews and Israeli Arabs.  But unlike Saudi Arabia, Qater, Syria, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait etc every Israeli Arab's have the right to vote, own their own business/home's etc.  Unlike in some countries they can wear what they want and women can actually work or go to school and be educated.

If you think Israel treats Israeli Arabs so badly, then what do you think of these other country's that don't even give them the right to vote or allow women the right to work?

20% of the Israeli government is Arab (This government is messed up due to the having a  proportional representation voting system, this allows extreme parties to have way too much power in decision making).

In general Israeli Arabs are far better off than Arabs in most other Arab countries.  So to make a general comment that Israel are bastards to all muslims is absurd, when they have basic rights in Israel which they do not have in many predominantly Arab countries.

[Corkboy]

Your quote

Whose quote?

[Andy G]

Whose quote?

Quoted from my post, but I was repeating what Arabs had said to me.

Your quote

"the biggest grief is with the complete backing of Israel (who are bastards to other Muslims)"

Comments like this irritate the hell out of me.  Yes there is huge distrust and often hatred between Jews and Israeli Arabs.  But unlike Saudi Arabia, Qater, Syria, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait etc every Israeli Arab's have the right to vote, own their own business/home's etc.  Unlike in some countries they can wear what they want and women can actually work or go to school and be educated.

If you think Israel treats Israeli Arabs so badly, then what do you think of these other country's that don't even give them the right to vote or allow women the right to work?

20% of the Israeli government is Arab (This government is messed up due to the having a  proportional representation voting system, this allows extreme parties to have way too much power in decision making).

In general Israeli Arabs are far better off than Arabs in most other Arab countries.  So to make a general comment that Israel are bastards to all muslims is absurd, when they have basic rights in Israel which they do not have in many predominantly Arab countries.

I would rather not have the right to vote or not allowed to work than to systematically have my land and my home taken away from me, forced into refugee camps and be subjected to contant military attacks with the real threat of death on a daily basis.  I do not condone the civil rights that are ignored by the other countries that you mention, but that is not the discussion.  At no point did I write that Israel are bastards to all Arabs,  besides, as noted above, I was just repeating the view of other Arabs that I have spoken to.  I do think that to accuse Israel of being bastards to the Palistinians seems accurate enough though based on the events of the last 70 years.

Furthermore, like with the West, in my opinion it is not about what basic rights the People are awarded by their own governments, but by foreign governments  - namely the US, the UK and of course, Israel.  The consensus that I have gathered from the Arabs (and Persians) I have spoken to would reflect my opinion.

[jooneyisdagod]

Sam Harris has hit that for a six. What a tremendous piece.

[dotheoffski]

@dotoffski, two questions:

a) Are Arabs considered equals to Jews in Israel, and
b) Why are you comparing what claims to be a western democracy to nations that you yourself clearly don't consider very progressive?

a) What do you mean considered equals? Does high class English society call everyone equals? Do people in a Peckham high rise feel they are equals? How did the Arsenal football fans feel about Abu Hamza community closing a road every Saturday for prayers?  I don't know the ins and outs, but it goes both ways - I mentioned there was huge distrust and often dislike between the two religions.

But many Israeli Arabs are very wealthy and they have no constraints and are protected by the law, so yes I would say they are equals as much as they can be considering the mutual distrust.

b) It's amazing how Israel is held and judged by the standards as a western democracy, but in the same sentences not given the accommodations as any other western society would have to defend itself against aggression.

These other nations you speak of seem immune to criticism because they are considered backward, yet they do more to pave the way to the world we live in as the above articles mentioned than most other countries.

[dotheoffski]

Quoted from my post, but I was repeating what Arabs had said to me.

I would rather not have the right to vote or not allowed to work than to systematically have my land and my home taken away from me, forced into refugee camps and be subjected to contant military attacks with the real threat of death on a daily basis.  I do not condone the civil rights that are ignored by the other countries that you mention, but that is not the discussion.  At no point did I write that Israel are bastards to all Arabs,  besides, as noted above, I was just repeating the view of other Arabs that I have spoken to.  I do think that to accuse Israel of being bastards to the Palistinians seems accurate enough though based on the events of the last 70 years.

Furthermore, like with the West, in my opinion it is not about what basic rights the People are awarded by their own governments, but by foreign governments  - namely the US, the UK and of course, Israel.  The consensus that I have gathered from the Arabs (and Persians) I have spoken to would reflect my opinion.

Yes the Arabs certainly feel this way.  It constantly amazes me how it seems alright when the violence is muslim on muslim (Shia and Sunni) or muslim on anyone else, as in where is the mass hysteria of anger shown when bombs are going off in Baghdad markets on a daily basis, or in Darfur against Christians, or in Syria, or Lebanon, or king of Jordan having a war with the Palestinians, tribal leaders in Somalia, 9/11 etc etc. 

I think you are confusing the Israeli Arabs who live within the 1967 boundaries of Israel and those in the West bank and Gaza.

When are these constant military attacks?  This last episode was instigated and started by Hamas.
 
The refugee camps are a travesty of the circumstances of the 1948 war, and Israel needs to take more responsibility for them. 

There is no justification in my mind for the settlers, but the cock up here was that an Israeli government forced settlers out of Gaza and all it has lead to were a far worse security situation for Israel with suicide bombs and now rockets.  With that experience in mind it is unlikely that the settlement issue will be positively resolved by the Israeli government, especially as I have mentioned the voting system gives extremist parties far too much power in Israel.

[Corkboy]

Every American President in the past quarter century has now gone on television during prime time to tell the nation and the world that he has decided to bomb Iraq.

[BarryCrocker]

Every American President in the past quarter century has now gone on television during prime time to tell the nation and the world that he has decided to bomb Iraq.

Or:

Harry Truman

“I had faith in Israel before it was established, I have faith in it now. I believe it has a glorious future before it—not just another sovereign nation, but as an embodiment of the great ideals of our civilization."

Dwight Eisenhower

“Our forces saved the remnant of the Jewish people of Europe for a new life and a new hope in the reborn land of Israel. Along with all men of good will, I salute the young state and wish it well.”

John Kennedy

“For Israel was not created in order to disappear - Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and the home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom; and no area of the world has ever had an overabundance of democracy and freedom.”

Lyndon Johnson

“America and Israel have a common love of human freedom and they have a common faith in a democratic way of life.”

Richard Nixon

“Americans admire a people who can scratch a desert and produce a garden. The Israelis have shown qualities that Americans identify with: guts, patriotism, idealism, a passion for freedom. I have seen it. I know. I believe that.”

Gerald Ford

“My commitment to the security and future of Israel is based upon basic morality as well as enlightened self-interest. Our role in supporting Israel honors our own heritage.”

Jimmy Carter

“We have a special relationship with Israel. It's absolutely crucial that no one in our country or around the world ever doubt that our number one commitment in the Middle East is to protect the right of Israel to exist, to exist permanently, and to exist in peace. It's a special relationship. "

Ronald Reagan

“In Israel, free men and women are every day demonstrating the power of courage and faith. Back in 1948 when Israel was founded, pundits claimed the new country could never survive. Today, no one questions that. Israel is a land of stability and democracy in a region of tyranny and unrest.”

George H.W. Bush

"For more than 40 years, the United States and Israel have enjoyed a friendship built on mutual respect and commitment to democratic principles. Our continuing search for peace in the Middle East begins with a recognition that ties uniting our two countries can never be broken."

Bill Clinton

“American and Israel share a special bond. Our relationship is unique among all nations. Like America, Israel is a strong democracy, a symbol of freedom, and an oasis of liberty, a home to the oppressed and persecuted."

George W. Bush

"For more than a generation, the United States and Israel have been steadfast allies. Our nations are bound by our shared values and a strong commitment to freedom. These ties that have made us natural allies will never be broken. Israel and the United States share a common history: We are both nations born of struggle and sacrifice. We are both founded by immigrants escaping religious persecution in other lands. Through the labors and strides of generations, we have both built vibrant democracies, founded in the rule of law and market economies. And we are both countries established with certain basic beliefs: that God watches over the affairs of men and values every human life."

Barack Obama

 “The American people and the Israeli peoples share a faith in the future and believe that democracies can shape their own destinies and that opportunities should be available to all. Throughout its own extraordinary history, Israel has given life to that promise.”  (October 21, 2009)

"America's commitment to Israel's security is unshakeable, and our friendship with Israel is deep and enduring. And so we believe that any lasting peace must acknowledge the very real security concerns that Israel faces every single day ... The Jewish people have forged a successful state in their historic homeland. Israel deserves recognition. It deserves normal relations with its neighbors." (September 21, 2011)

“America’s Founding Fathers understood this truth, just as Israel’s founding generation did.  President Truman put it well, describing his decision to formally recognize Israel only minutes after it declared independence.  He said, "I had faith in Israel before it was established.  I believe it has a glorious future before it -- as not just another sovereign nation, but as an embodiment of the great ideals of our civilization. For over six decades, the American people have kept that faith.  Yes, we are bound to Israel because of the interests that we share -- in security for our communities, prosperity for our people, the new frontiers of science that can light the world. But ultimately it is our common ideals that provide the true foundation for our relationship.  That is why America’s commitment to Israel has endured under Democratic and Republican Presidents, and congressional leaders of both parties. In the United States, our support for Israel is bipartisan, and that is how it should stay.” (March 4, 2012)

[Broad Spectrum]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/israelgaza-conflict-mps-set-to-vote-to-recognise-state-of-palestine-9785875.html

Israel won't be happy...

[BarryCrocker]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/israelgaza-conflict-mps-set-to-vote-to-recognise-state-of-palestine-9785875.html

Israel won't be happy...

Nor will some Evangelical Christians in the US.

[RedGuy]

Or:

What's your point?

[HarryLabrador]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/israelgaza-conflict-mps-set-to-vote-to-recognise-state-of-palestine-9785875.html

Israel won't be happy...

The Guardian view on MPs’ Palestine vote: Israel should listen

The House of Commons has sent a symbolic message on statehood. It should not be ignored
Editorial   

 
The Guardian, Tuesday 14 October 2014 19.34 BST   

It is easy to dismiss Monday night’s vote in the House of Commons, urging the British government to recognise Palestine as a state. For one thing, the vote was not binding: David Cameron and his ministers are free to ignore it, as in the immediate term they surely will. For another, the vote only partially reflects the views of the House: more MPs did not vote, 364 of them, than the 274 who voted for recognition. And even those who supported the move conceded that Palestine falls short of any conventional definition of statehood, if only inasmuch as its territory is divided, under two competing authorities.

But this is to miss the point. Grahame Morris, the Labour MP who tabled the motion, himself described it as a “small but symbolically important” step and that’s right. What this will signify is a boost to the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority and its strategy of pursuing independence for the Palestinians through diplomacy rather than violence. Too often in recent years it has been Hamas that has been able to boast of making gains – whether the Israeli disengagement from Gaza in 2005 or the release of Palestinian prisoners – through force. Now Fatah will be able to point to a small victory achieved by other means. If that boosts the view that non-violence represents the Palestinians’ best hope, that is to be welcomed.

More broadly, this vote should be seen as helping the ever more fragile prospect of a two-state solution. For what MPs voted to recognise was a Palestinian state that exists alongside Israel. At a time when some on both sides are flirting with the notion of a single state – a set-up that would inevitably come at a cost to one of the two nations competing over this small land – the Commons vote should be understood as entrenching the two-state vision that remains, despite everything, the region’s best hope for peace. That, after all, was the idea blessed by the United Nations in 1947 – and which has never been fulfilled.

In this sense, there was nothing anti-Israel about the MPs’ decision. That much is borne out by the letter sent ahead of the vote by 363 leading Israelis, calling for UK recognition of Palestine. As they put it, the long-term existence and security of Israel depends on the long-term existence and security of a Palestinian state. The same view was echoed by the British Jewish, and avowedly pro-Israel, group, Yachad.

That said, the Commons move clearly reflects a growing frustration, not confined to Westminster, with both the failure to make progress on peace and the actions of the Israeli government. There was no more eloquent spokesman for that sentiment than Sir Richard Ottaway, Tory chair of the foreign affairs select committee. He became, he said, a friend of Israel before he became a Tory. His commitment to the state was deep and long-held. But, he explained, Israel’s recent conduct, including the appropriation of land on the occupied West Bank, had driven him to despair. And so he could not bring himself to vote against the motion. His message to Israel’s leaders was clear: “If they are losing people like me, they will be losing a lot of people.” Sir Richard is right – and Israel should listen.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/14/guardian-view-on-mps-palestine-vote-israel-should-listen

[TSC]

Why can't they all have a vote and agree on the best way to wipe those sick fucks ISIS off the face of the earth, instead of pandering to opinion?

[plura]

Why can't they all have a vote and agree on the best way to wipe those sick fucks ISIS off the face of the earth, instead of pandering to opinion?

Huh!!?

Yes ISIS should be dealt with, but should everything else in the world just be put on hold?

[jooneyisdagod]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/U0it4SAGAcU?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/U0it4SAGAcU?version=3&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;</a>


This is not strictly a middle-east issue but it discusses terrorism further across in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. One of the most important things to come out of this is indications that the border region in Pakistan is neither under Pakistani nor Afghanistan's control and rather is more or less under the rule of the Pakistani Taliban.

[Alan_X]

That Sam Harris piece is superb.

[Fat Scouser]

 Israel is absolutely terrified of talking, when a peaceful solution is bound to come up at some point.

[BarryCrocker]

Israel is absolutely terrified of talking, when a peaceful solution is bound to come up at some point.

The problem with talking is you have to listen.

[CorKopite]

A Palestinian-American teenager has been shot dead by Israeli troops who claim they were trying to prevent a “Molotov cocktail” attack amid clashes near Ramallah -

PHOTO: Israeli police detain Palestinian youth following clashes in East Jerusalem


A Palestinian-American teenager has been shot dead by Israeli troops who claim they were trying to prevent a “Molotov cocktail” attack amid clashes near Ramallah. The US State Department has called for a “speedy and transparent investigation.”

The 14-year old teenager was identified as Orwa Hammad. The US consulate confirmed that Hammad held a US passport, while local media reports that the teenager's father lives in the United States.

“We can confirm now that the teenager who was killed was an American citizen,” consulate spokesman Leslie Ordeman told AFP, without commenting further. Times of Israel reports that the boy was born in New Orleans and came to the West Bank at age six. The US State Department meanwhile called for an investigation of the incident.

“We call for a speedy and transparent investigation, and will remain closely engaged with the local authorities, who have the lead on this investigation. We continue to urge all parties to help restore calm and avoid escalating tensions in the wake of the tragic recent incidents in Jerusalem and the West Bank,” US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.

The incident happened in the village of Silwad, north of Ramallah, amid other clashes in Arab areas in and around Jerusalem in which several people were slightly injured.

The IDF confirmed the killing of the teenager in the village of Silwad, where troops were ordered to protect a major road. The army said they spotted a person about to hurl a petrol bomb.

Israeli forces "managed to prevent an attack when they encountered a Palestinian man hurling a molotov cocktail at them on the main road next to Silwad,” Reuters cited Israeli army spokesman as saying. “They opened fire and they confirmed a hit."

The military said it would investigate the shooting.

Medical sources told Alquds.com that Hammad was rushed to Palestine Medical Complex in the city of Ramallah, in a “very critical” condition. Doctors tried to save him but their attempts were unsuccessful due to the severity of the injury to the child's head. Maan News Arabic reports that Hammad was shot in the head and remained motionless on the ground before ambulances arrived at the scene.

Local media reports that clashes between a number of young men and the IDF near Silwad after Friday prayers resulted in five civilian injuries, including one from live bullets as a protester was shot in the foot.

Smoke grenades and rubber bullets were also used by the IDF to disperse Palestinian rallies in the towns of Ni'lin, Bil'in, Nabi Saleh, Kafr and Bethlehem, Al Jazeera reports as demonstrators against Israeli occupation of Palestine continue for a third day.



http://rt.com/news/199116-palestinian-american-killed-idf/



Interesting to see how the Americans will react to this killing due to his US citizenship. Completely disproportionate response yet again and  just instils more hate in the Palestinian youth so that this conflict will continue into the next generation. Hopefully a jokeshop Israeli internal investigation will not suffice on this occasion.

[CorKopite]

Well if he's throwing a Molotov, I don't think it's disproportionate at all, is it?

Maybe in your opinion, mine is that it most certainly is yes. The same way I believe the Israeli decision to bomb schools, hospitals, kids on beaches etc has been completely disproportionate.


Take a look at Northern Ireland, every time a petrol bomb is thrown you think that person should be shot dead?

[CorKopite]

Sorry but you're making a massive leap from bombing schools, hospitals and kids to shooting a guy who is in the process of throwing a molotov cocktail.

Of course one isn't as bad as the other but in my opinion it just highlights how the Israeli reaction seems to be disproportionate no matter what the offence. I don't understand how they can't see that this continued over the top response only ensures the conflict will rear it's ugly head once again in the future and that future generations of Palestinians will have a deep rooted hatred towards Israel. My view on a resolution(however unlikely at this stage) involves the Israelis accepting that they need to be the bigger man in all of this. Incidents like this are the complete opposite.

I've criticized Israel for the carpet bombings, but what do you expect them to do here? Take his molotov, get nice and crispy and then take him out for a falafel?

No, I don't expect them to take the kid out for a falafel, not sure what the point in exaggeration like that is. The report makes it clear that in other areas where there were riots from Palestinians the Israelis responded with smoke grenades and rubber bullets. Could that not have been done here?

If you think an appropriate response is live fire then fair enough, that is your opinion. I think it's madness though and has a negative effect on both sides.

[CorKopite]

Interesting interview with a former IDF soldier, seems there are quite a large group of former soldiers who agree with him.


‘IDF don’t see Palestinian people as people, children as children’

Israeli troops serving in the occupied West Bank see Palestinians not as humans, and when they are ordered to arrest someone, it does not matter whether it is a child or an elderly person, former IDF soldier Nadav Bigelman, told RT’s In the Now show.

On Sunday the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) arrested an 11-year-old mentally ill Palestinian boy living in the outskirts of Hebron, a Palestinian town in the West Bank, a video revealed by Israeli rights group B’Tselem revealed. The teenager was arrested for throwing rocks at military vehicles.

According to UNICEF, every year about 700 Palestinian children from 12 to 17-years old get arrested, interrogated and detained by IDF.

RT: What do you make out of this latest video? Have you arrested children like that yourself?

Nadav Bigelman: Unfortunately it didn’t surprise me. I can say that as a soldier who served also in Hebron as a combat soldier between 2007 until 2010, I took part several times in arrests like this. I think what people need to understand is that … soldiers look at Palestinians in the way not as at human beings. In that way they also won’t look at them as at children or teenagers… As a soldier who served…in the Occupied Territories, I can say that when you need to arrest someone, that is the order you were given, you would arrest him, you would detain him, you would handcuff him. It doesn’t matter if he is 8-years old, 25-years old, 50 or 60. The order is very clear - if you need to arrest him or detain him, then you do it. If he is 10-years old you would also do it. After a while you stop looking at people as people, you stop looking at children as children, you stop looking at teenagers as teenagers, you look at them just as at Palestinians, just as at people that can always potentially be terrorists.

RT: What made you stop and look at these children as children, not just Palestinians?

NB: One of the things that I went through is during [service in] the army I started asking questions. It took me a while, only after I got out of the army, I broke my silence, - I gave a testimony to the organization I am a part of now, Breaking the Silence. And I started to be exposed to more and more things like that. What people should understand is that children and the youth are only part of these kinds of groups. We are talking about the elderly, or women, or any kind of groups of people that the army wants to deal with, to arrest, to detain, whatever, they would do it. I started to think that maybe the problem here is much bigger and that this is the nature of the occupation, this is how controlling millions of people looks like.


RT: Do you feel any pressure from your peers, from Israeli society for coming out, for speaking out against the IDF?

NB: I am not speaking against the IDF. I was a soldier. I am representing here a group about 950 soldiers that served either in the Gaza troop or the West Bank. What we are saying is that the problem in many ways is not the army, the problem is what the army is sent to do and that is to control about 4 million people under a military regime. We have been doing it for almost 50 years.

RT: So who is responsible for this problem, for using the army in this way?

NB: There is no doubt that we are trying to show to the Israeli public and to the international community that we keep on choosing day after day to control millions of people. Once you do that, and I can say again from my own personal experience and after I had hundreds of testimonies, that this is how it works. You cannot control people without force, you cannot take people’s liberty and freedom without them resisting you and then arresting them, and then we can see images and videos just like we have seen in the last few days. This is how the occupation works; it cannot be quiet, it cannot be symbolic, it cannot be non-violent because my definition - it is a violent structure.


http://rt.com/op-edge/198596-idf-israel-palestine-children-violence/

[Jebediah]

Interesting to see how the Americans will react to this killing due to his US citizenship. Completely disproportionate response yet again and  just instils more hate in the Palestinian youth so that this conflict will continue into the next generation. Hopefully a jokeshop Israeli internal investigation will not suffice on this occasion.

Your article fails to mention that he was in the process of throwing a molotov cocktail at oncoming traffic on a main highway, which makes a difference of course.

It also fails to mention that the Palestinian rioting was in response to a terrorist attack where an Arab man drove into and murdered a 3 month old baby girl (about a 3 minute drive from my house), who was also an American citizen. Wonder what American will do about that..?

[Fat Scouser]

The problem with talking is you have to listen.

I consider myself lucky. I hate all human beings equally

[TwatMan]

Israel is absolutely terrified of talking, when a peaceful solution is bound to come up at some point.

Fats, you know you're anti-semitic in your views. I think you alluded to, in few of your posts on the subject before, about wiping off the jews off the face of the planet as they are the root cause of most of the evils. It's best if you stay off the thread as you're a priest on a sugar mountain.

[Fat Scouser]

Hang on a minute, Anti-Semetic.... where'd you get that from? As I said, I'm lucky enough to hate all human beings. I don't mind individuals. In fact, I think some of us are alright. But Human beings, far as I'm concerned, shite of the highest order and that goes for every loony sect, be it Juadism or Islam. But if there has to be a villain in this particular situation, then I think it's Israel. But that's really not because I have any preference over Jawah or Mo. I find the pair of them ridiculous. But if I was to believe in something supernatural that us dickhead humans invented, I'd at least pick a nice one like the Tooth Fairy.

[Fat Scouser]

I've got a terrible hang over and I'm waiting for the pub to open, so.... Me mate's aul fella was based in Israel back in the late 40's, early 50's. Mossad and Moshi Diane where setting off the bombs and considered the terrorists then. Aul Alec was on a check point. He stopped a car to search it, and the fella in it started screaming... I'm a Rabbi. I'm a Rabbi. Alec said, I couldn't give a fuck if your Popeye lad, I'm searching your car. And that more or less sums up my feelings on this. And if Balfour had the same attitude and kept his nose out, Jawah and Mohamed might still be getting along and poor kids getting mightn't be getting slaughtered by tanks for throwing a few bricks.

[youll never walk alone it]

The people who know the score in the middle east, and actually dare to criticide israel  are not anti-semetic at all they are actually anti zionist, which is totally different..theres a portion of israels who have a heart and soul.

[Fat Scouser]

The people who know the score in the middle east, and actually dare to criticide israel  are not anti-semetic at all they are actually anti zionist, which is totally different..theres a portion of israels who have a heart and soul.

You probably know him, but if not, check out Norman Finklstein. A human I don't hate

[Fat Scouser]

How many people are in IS? As far as I know, there's about the capacity of the Hawthornes at least, Old Trafford at best.They've got no planes, but I'm sick and tired of this new buzz, boots on the ground, word. Shell Shock, Battle Fatigue, Toilet Paper, Bathroom Tissue, it's all arse wipe. Lets have a bit of truth, and stay the fuck out of other people's business or go in there and wipe the lot out. We took the North Bank between the four of us. And on that, I'm off the pub. There's more sense and laughs in talking to rattling drunkards than there is in this malarkey. And as daft and ridiculous as I am, I'd put money on there being no peace in The Middle East until the Yanks and the Israelies have their way... control of the oil and the water in the Jordan basin and the omnipotance of the almighty petrodollar

[CorKopite]

I think that Israel can be the "bigger man" by turning up their shields to 11 and ignore most of the firecrackers Palestinians are lobbing at them, sure, 

So you do or don't think shooting him dead was necessary?

At what point is is reasonable to use deadly force? A molotov isn't enough, so what, should they wait until he brandishes a grenade? A shotgun? A tank?

Grenade: Yes
Shotgun: Yes
Tank: A Palestinian with a tank! HA! You must be looking at a different conflict to me.

Look, Im not going to change your opinion. As I said, I feel lethal force was not necessary in this case and the use of it only ensures continued hatred towards Israel in even the more moderate Palestinians. As long as Israel continue to treat Palestinians like they do then there will always be protests, that's something they just have to accept. How they react to those dictates how long the same routine will go on. At the moment they have just ensured this boys father/brother/friends(if they haven't been blown to pieces already) will either turn to or continue their support for extremist loons like Hamas. I do not think a homemade petrol bomb warrants the use of lethal force, you obviously do, all I can say is I'm thankful that closer to home in Northern Ireland live fire is not the response every time some teenager manages to get his hands on one.

Your article fails to mention that he was in the process of throwing a molotov cocktail at oncoming traffic on a main highway, which makes a difference of course.

It also fails to mention that the Palestinian rioting was in response to a terrorist attack where an Arab man drove into and murdered a 3 month old baby girl (about a 3 minute drive from my house), who was also an American citizen. Wonder what American will do about that..?

Tragic, RIP to the little girl. That still does not change my opinion that live fire was not necessary. What are your opinions on the thoughts of the former IDF soldier that I posted. I'd be interested to hear an Israeli's take on it.

Fats, you know you're anti-semitic in your views. I think you alluded to, in few of your posts on the subject before, about wiping off the jews off the face of the planet as they are the root cause of most of the evils. It's best if you stay off the thread as you're a priest on a sugar mountain.

Maybe he did, I'd like to see proof though. On the next page he seems fairly bemused by your claims anyway. I really hate when the anti-Jewish shit is wheeled out unfounded though. It's an easy tactic that many who blindly defend Israel's behaviour use. Personally, I couldn't give a flying fuck which imaginary man in the sky people choose to waste their lives worshipping, yet you'll still have the clowns who can't help but whip out the anti-Semite shit whenever someone dares have the audacity to be appalled by the cowardly behaviour of the IDF. I'm not implying you're one of these people by the way I just think dangerous tags like that need to be backed up.