Pajamas Media

21 Comments

1. abu yussif:

The “Hizbullah as parasite” analogy is wrong because even if Hizbullah kills Lebanon, it will still be nourished by their Iranian/Syrian proxies and declare itself the “true Lebanon”. Instead, Hizbullah is a opportunistic carnivorous predator that is patiently waiting for the time to kill and present the Lebanese carcass at it’s masters’ feet.

May 9, 2008 - 4:55 am 2. John Samford:

With any luck this will have the same effect on the UN that Japan walking out had on the League of Nations. I doubt that it will but one can always hope.
Maybe we can move the UN from Turtle Bay to Beirut. Let the Diplos dodge sniper fire on their way to work and see if that doesn’t firm up their resolve to deal with the problem. I doubt that it will but one can always hope.

May 9, 2008 - 6:54 am 3. [snapped shot] Beirut Falls to Hezbullah? | Old Dominion Blog Alliance:

[...] Parliament that were hostile to them out of town, and Jeha has written a very eloquent analysis of the stakes of the game. He’s also updated his maps to illustrate the current state of affairs in downtown Beirut. The [...]

May 9, 2008 - 7:01 am 4. Concerned Citizen:

Israel and Syria talk about handing back Golan for peace.

Olmerts political opponents (and opponents of peace with Syria) push on an old scandal to oust him and blow up any deal.

Hezbo does its best to destroy Lebanon.

Interesting times!

Everyone feels sorry for the Lebanese people caught in the middle of this.

May 9, 2008 - 9:33 am 5. Lebanon Explodes Again:

[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptHezbollah may look like it is trying to take over Lebanon – but the truth is that such a victory isn’t in anyone’s interest – even Hezbollah’s. Here’s why. [...]

May 9, 2008 - 11:01 am 6. P. Ami:

@Concerned Citizen,
Olmert has political opponents that favor peace with Syria. His involvement in scandals came up even before his tentative feelers for peace with Syria ever did. So, lets not try and blame Olmert’s scandalous behavior on Hawks and “hardliners” as if there are no proper reason’s to have him ousted. Olmert declared a war with objectives, got his soldiers killed without obtaining any of his stated objectives, killed hundreds of Lebanese without obtaining any of his stated objectives, destroyed billions of dollars worth of property without gaining any of his stated objectives and one needs to push and old scandal in order to oust him? The man was on Sharon’s right hand when Israel decided to pull out of Gaza, was heavily involved in the pull-out and presided over a series of events in which the citizens of the country he is meant to protect are consistently under attack by missiles coming from the strip of land he vacated. Here is a very appropriate time to bring up those who oppose peace with Syria as these are the same people who opposed getting out of Gaza, for the very foreseeable consequences being lived by both Israelis and Palestinians today. The fact that Israel’s current PM is so easily tied to scandals, be they old or new, is a commentary on him and not his opponents.

I feel sorry for all the little people caught in the middle of this situation. The fact is that the Lebanese government, when there has been one, has not acted in the best interests of it people for decades. They didn’t stop the PLO from attacking Israel back in the late 70’s and 80’s thus forcing Israel to protect itself with a buffer zone. Lebanon again failed to control its means of war by allowing Hezbo to raid Israel time and again, forcing Israel tried to protect itself by raiding back. Now the Lebanese are again hearing saber rattling from Hezbo and do nothing but allow them to take control of another section of its capital. Nobody in Lebanon is being held accountable for their actions, not Hezbo, not the pro-West government, not Syria, not Iran and you want to get on Israel because it wants to hold its Prime Minister accountable for his actions?

I realize you are a concerned citizen but keep in mind there are concerns and citizenships of all kinds. Peace with Syria concerns citizens of another country, who quite frankly, do not want to go back to the old days when Syrian soldiers used to launch missiles at Israeli farmers on a daily basis. Syria has been a belligerent towards Israel for 60 years which is long before Israel conquered the heights. Since that time in ‘67, the state of belligerency hasn’t ceased but the attacks have. That satisfies the concerns of this particular citizen.

May 9, 2008 - 11:50 am 7. Michael Canzano:

Lebanon was doomed the minute they took in the Palestinian refugees none of the other Arab countries would accept. Islam took hold and put Christianity on trial for being non Muslim. Hezbollah/Hizbollah/Hizbo writes another chapter of proof ; “An addition of Muslims to a Nation is a subtraction in civilization”. A country once referred to as “The Riviera of the Middle East” is being turned into a “War Torn Ghetto”. Very sad.
American Christian Infidel
American Christian Infidel

May 10, 2008 - 4:10 am 8. Amber » Blog Archive » The Crises in Lebanon:

[...] Jeha, from Beirut, writes (9 May 2008): [...]

May 10, 2008 - 7:58 am 9. Patrick:

Michael C,

Don’t forget there were and are Christian Palestinians in those camps.

To all others,

Doesn’t strike anyone as amazing that the huge costs in both human and financial terms, the ongoing insoluble problem of MidEast Peace are in the main the result of European powers that couldn’t get along with a segment of their own population (European Jewry) and are not now, nor ever have been held accountable for this? With all the pogroms, Dreyfus Affairs and the like, finally culminating in the Holocaust I can’t say I blame European Jewry for wanting out, I’d leave too! Just check out where most of the original leaders of Israel came from, it sure wasn’t the Middle East! Combine this with the fact that a good number of Jewish communities lived in the “Arab World” for centuries with very little persecution when compared to Europe! In fact if you take all the slaughtered by the “other” peoples of the Middle East from 622 AD until today, and compare it with the number of Jews slaughtered by European powers from 1622 AD ( a one thousand year late start) to the present you’ll find the Europeans “win” hands down as having killed more Jews! It is almost like this whole sordid situation throughout the Middle East, of which Lebanon’s misery is a part, has been caused by Europe’s problem of ethnic hatred of the Jews!

Just a thought.

May 10, 2008 - 1:12 pm 10. Shef Rogers:

Let’s start by rewarding pundits who get it right and dropping those who are consistently wrong. I’m talking about Abe Greenwald, who on April 13 published an article in Pajamas Media called “The Arab Spring Is Now,” saying that Lebanon was blossoming into a pro-Western democracy. Why do we keep listening to people who’ve been wrong over and over again?

May 10, 2008 - 6:27 pm 11. P. Ami:

Patrick,
I agree with your assessment of the European treatment of the Jewish population and while the Jewish situation today is a bit better then in some of that history, and much better then other times, one could hope for a better general attitude towards Jews and their state from Europe. It will be enough to be left to be. I disagree with you regarding the Jewish situation in the Middle East.

In the long history of Jewish life in Persia, from the time of Cyrus until just a few decades before the Arab conquests, Jews did quite well. We had great Jewish centers of learning in cities such as Sura and Pumbadesta. Many of the sages of the late Biblical Period to the time when the Talmud was written came to the Land of Israel from Persia. One of the lower kings, he who represented the Jews in the Persian Imperial Court, was a line of princes descended from King David. This office, and many of the honors bestowed on it by the Jewish population and the Persian nobility, was intact at the time of the Arab conquest.

From the time of the Jewish Rebellion in 70AD until the fall of the Byzantine Empire (again to the Arab Conquests) the Jews eked out some sort of life between pogroms. Much of the hatred from the Romans to the Jews stemmed from the fact that Jews in the Land of Israel held very good relations with those Jews living in Persia. Those communities respected each other, traded with each other, and advised each other even as the Romans were at war with the Persians. Much as Jews in America tried to help Jews living under the Soviets, Jews in Persia did what they could to relieve the suffering of Jews under the Romans. The Romans used interpretation of Christian texts to justify various State and Church directed programs meant to undermine their native Jewish population. This might be one root of some of the conspiracy-style myths told about the Jews by anti-Semites to this day.

Towards the end the Persian Empire, it’s long tradition of accepting the diversity of population exhausted, they gave into their worries over imperial survival and began to enforce a homogeneity of culture. This, of course, became a struggle for the Jews no different then the Spanish Inquisition (predating the Spanish by a few centuries) and lasted for a number of decades. When the Persians fell to the Arab Conquests most of those recent converts to Zoroastrianism (I’m not sure how many Jews succumbed to the Zoroastrian pressure but many other people who had lived under the Persian for centuries did convert to the Fire Cult of Zoroaster) quickly took on Islam, as it was easier to do business, work and gain office if one was Muslim.

The Muslims restored some freedoms to the Jews of Persia and Babylon. Ultimately all Jews in all the Muslim lands fell under Sharia Law. While Jews could practice as Jews, there were special taxes and various jobs and offices unavailable to Jews and the threat of, many times the experience of, violence was present through out the whole period. Many Jews wound up in the new centers of learning, eventually in Spain, Vilna, all over the place. Jews had lived in Egypt during Roman times, Alexandria being one center, and with the Arab Conquests they reunited with many of their Jewish brethren in Persia, sometimes meeting even in the Land of Israel. As the Muslim World declined, and certainly by the Ottoman Period, the Great Jewish Centers were in Europe. Some for a time in Spain, some in France but most notably in Eastern Europe.

Life for Jews in Muslim lands was mostly bearable, so long as life for Muslims was and the Jews knew their Sharia Law. The reason that the leadership which eventually organized the nearly hundred year old project of reestablishing a sovereign Jewish State in the Land of Israel is that Jews in Muslim countries had no legal right to organize in this way. Ironically it was Europe which developed a culture of liberty. It was long in coming to the Jews but it came. The ascendancy of the European powers (who held little chauvinism as regards the Land as to which faith laid claim to it), American Evangelicism, and a resurgent Jewish will to migration all provided their considerable energy to making the State of Israel possible. Once the land was made open to Jews, the Jews living under Sharia Law did all they could to escape to it. Some left behind considerable wealth to come to Israel. I know people who had to trek through the desert, smuggling themselves and their families through hostile lands and borders to get to Israel. Today, the largest Jewish population in Israel are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants from Muslim lands.

I wouldn’t be so quick in suggesting that the Europeans were uniquely responsible for the Jews returning to their land. The false starts in Jewish history were like a dream in which mass movements of population imagined themselves living the Exodus only to have the waters fall on them and not Pharaoh. Shabbatai Zvi (stopped by the Muslim Turks, btw) was just one dream differed. It just so happened that the hard work of the late 2nd millennium Jewish Centers in Europe was what eventually woke the dreamers so we could live a miracle.

May 10, 2008 - 11:58 pm 12. Patrick:

Ami,

In paragraph 2 you give some history of the Jews in Persia. I would say that they were in Persia at this time because someone seriously misbehaved toward the Persian Empire before this! The razing of the first temple was a direct result of something on the order of a rebellion or an initial conquest occurring in what was then Israel. It was common practice for the conquerors to take as hostage parts of the noble families of any culture that was conquered and added to the empire or “re-conquered” due to rebellion to insure stability and encourage some kind of understanding (not to mention leverage over the direct leadership of the conquered people to better insure good behavior!) The Jews were not the only people taken to live in the Persian homeland somewhat by force. These hostages were generally treated well and had quite a bit of freedom and lived decent lives.
In you third paragraph you state that the Byzantine Empire fell to the Arabs. This is not correct it was the Ottoman Turks who were not Arabs. Constantinople fell in 1453 to Muhammad II (aka: The Conqueror) of the Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Also in the third paragraph you state that the Romans used interpretation of Christian texts to direct “various State and Church directed programs…” The Romans in 70 AD had no respect or concern for Christians this did not occur until 312 when Constantine won the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (you know the dream he had and the requirement he placed on his soldiers to put the cross on their shields.) In fact the Roman Emperors Diocletian in the years just before 302 and his successor, Galerius, both persecuted Christians to the “nth” degree. So any reference made to Romans paying attention to Christian texts as an excuse to level Jerusalem is incorrect. Keep in mind that the Jewish Rebellion of that time was not limited to the Fertile Crescent either. As an example, there was also a Jewish Revolt in Salamis, on the Eastern end of the Island in what in now known as Cyprus just north of Famagusta. Here the Jews slaughtered Romans and Greeks, so the Roman Legions fury at the Jews for this caused the Jews to get slaughtered in return. I suppose a fair question is “Why were the Jews revolting?” I don’t have the answer at least not in any form I consider valid. I do know that the Salamis affair was not due to any outright threats to the Jewish population living in Salamis if Roman records can be believed. One could ask also why this “rebellion” was fomented in any of the areas it occurred.
In paragraph 4 you speak of the Persians beginning to enforce homogeneity of culture. Again here, don’t think for a moment the Jews were the only that was set upon by this. While true, it targeted some of their “own” as well as other tribes living in what the Persians claimed as their “Empire” as it fell apart. It is rather telling to know that the Medes themselves were considered something like “hicks” or outsiders by the Chaldean Persians during this time and were not treated very well, and it was they (the Medes) that actually were responsible for the first Iranian Empire!
In paragraph 5 you mention a special tax Jews had to tolerate under Sharia Law. This special tax applied to all non-Muslims within the Islamic Empire and still exists today in Sharia Law. The Jews were not singled out here; Christians had to pay these taxes as well. Keep in mind that it was the “Law of the Land” and like or not if you wanted to live there you had to abide by the rules! No one, Jews included were being forced to stay.
In paragraph 6 you mention that the Jews had no legal right to organize “in this way.” Nor did anyone else or ethnic group for that matter, it was not targeting Jews only! Keep in mind an emperor is not likely to start giving territory and subsequently taxes away without it being taken by force.
You also mention in paragraph 6 that “once the land was open….the Jews living under Sharia Law did all they could to escape.” Be careful here Ami, I am a firsthand witness to some of this! The initial immigration of Jews to Israel started out of Europe and had nothing to do with Sharia Law. The term you use for “once the Land was open,” is open to debate as to when this occurred. Do you mean with the British dictates allowing the immigration initially, or from the time Israel gained its independence in 1948? My father was a “mercenary” pilot, hired by the nascent state of Israel to fly Jews that were willing to make the return from where they lived to Israel. I, as a young boy, rode in the cockpit of a number of these flights. There was a lot of confusion (particularly in Ethiopia) but little if any force I was aware of as these people left for Israel. True they left much of their household belongings behind (the aircraft were old DC-3, 4’s and some DC-6’s and could not carry everything the people had.) Kings Mohammed V and Hassan II of Morocco did in fact make pleas to stay (as with Mohammed V) and invited a return (as with Hassan II) of the Jews to Morocco. They seemed to feel the Jews were an important part of their culture and a beneficial part of their society! More to the point we (my dad with me in the jump seat or on the floor) skipped along the North Africa Coast and down in the Northeastern side of Africa and included the Southern Arabian Peninsula in the wanderings picking up Jews after 48’ war for independence. The bottom line here is that the war for independence was basically fought by European Jewry!
Also in paragraph 6 you mention the “treks” people took to get to Israel. The fact that these treks took place does not make them anything particularly Jewish in nature. Plenty of other peoples around the world have done the same thing while seeking a better life, more religious freedom or freedom from oppression in general. I don’t accept any “pity party” emotional displays for these treks no matter who made them nor for what reason(s). You only have to look to the American settlers, or the Pilgrims to see the same kind of thing in my country, or the Sudanese villagers in Darfur running across the border to Tchad to escape violence and persecution or the Hmong in Laos running from the Pathet Lao and Vietnamese to see other people suffering from the same kind of thing. Again, this is not solely a Jewish Tragedy or event and to make it look so is unfair to the larger numbers of peoples that have had to endue the same thing.
Finally in paragraph 6 you state that the “largest Jewish population in Israel are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants from Muslim Lands.” This is patently not the case Ami, and you know it. You are saying in effect that the nation state of Israel was started by Jews primarily coming from other Muslim lands. I should say that I suspect you are trying to hide the fact that it was European Jewry that was largely responsible for the establishment of the nation state of Israel. Shame on you for playing word games here, you won’t garner any sympathy or empathy from me for these kinds of shenanigans! While it may be true TODAY, I’m not sure; it was NOT true in 1948 and earlier!
In paragraph 7 of your response you advise me not to be too quick in suggesting that Europeans were uniquely responsible for the Jewish will to immigrate to “their own homeland.” Further you indicate that Shabbetai Zvi was “stopped” by the Muslim Turks in this ongoing dream of return. One cannot argue that for many years there has always been a sentiment, sometimes weak, sometimes strong (depending on the level of persecution at the time) about the idea of creating a Jewish homeland with a focus on the ancient land of Israel. This is due, and understandably so, in part for religious reasons, and the Biblical promise by God of the land of Israel to his chosen people. Benjamin Disraeli contributed to these thoughts in writing as did many others after him. I am personally not sure of any specifics before Disraeli to be honest, although there may have been. Now I also understand that this Shabbetai Zvi history is one of an individual that claimed to be a messiah of some sorts for the Jewish people of the world. The subsequent use of his name has become synonymous with the return of Jewish peoples to Israel. God may be involved, but to me that is an irrelevant argument because the guns the European Jewry got hold of is what won the war for independence. Given the number of items in history like the Balfour Declaration, the writings of Theodor Herzl and so on, most of which came out of Europe (including Mr. Shabbetai himself in the 1620’s I think) it is hard not to accuse the Europeans in general for the mess in the Middle East. Who leaves a place where they are generally happy, safe, and feel secure? A huge number of Jews living here in the US haven’t had the impetus to leave. Admittedly some have, but by and large the numbers are small when compared to those that stayed here when offered the opportunity to “return.” I think I’ll keep my opinion!
A couple of notes to add to this discussion follow. Are you aware that the Ottoman Turkish Empire had Jewish Financial Viziers occasionally? t\The Ottoman Turks (and their Iron boot) did not really care what you believed in as long as you paid the taxes. Next all the information I’ve gained about how many Jews have been slaughtered by one side or the other was gained from Jewish and/or Israeli sources. I did not accept any source that was “pro-Jewish” or “anti-Jewish.” This exclusion included Christian and Islamic sources that were either pro or con Jewish in nature and tenor. Basically, if it was a Jewish source, it wasn’t accepted.
Ami, have you ever asked yourself why Jews seem to be “singled” out? I’d really like to hear any thoughts you have on this.

PS: Use of the term “little people” in your initial post is really bad form, they matter because that is where the suicide bombers etc. come from!

May 11, 2008 - 1:03 pm 13. Patrick:

Ami,

One correction of my writing above, the last line of my comments to your response states that “Basically, if it was a Jewish source…” I meant to say that if it was NOT a Jewish source I wouldn’t accept it.

Apologies

May 11, 2008 - 1:15 pm 14. Danae:

This is a fascinating conversation. Thank you Patrick for your personal story as well. You really should publish, that is a little slice of history that should be told, and not forgotten!

D

May 12, 2008 - 2:28 pm 15. P. Ami:

Patrick,
“I would say that they were in Persia at this time because someone seriously misbehaved toward the Persian Empire before this!”

The conquest in which the 1st Temple was destroyed, and the elite population of Jews was taken away, was a Babylonian conquest. The Jews where allowed to return 70 years later, after the Persians conquered the Babylonians. While many Jews returned to the Land of Israel with Ezra, many stayed and these are the roots of the population we today call Persian Jews. It is this population which developed the many centers of learning in Persia and wrote the Babylonian Talmud as well as many other classics of Jewish literature.

“So any reference made to Romans paying attention to Christian texts as an excuse to level Jerusalem is incorrect.”
— I did not say the Romans used Christian texts as an excuse to level Jerusalem. Read my text again. Later Romans did use Christian theology to justify pogroms against the Jews living in the Land of Israel. I consider the Byzantines Roman, as did they, and this is what I referred to when discussing those pogroms, although the earlier pogroms by the pagan Romans count for something as well. I didn’t date these pogroms as they occurred over a long period of time, from Constantine’s day until the Muslim Conquest. The Jews had been used to being ruled by foreigners over a period of centuries. The only time you had any serious rebellions was when the non-Jewish authorities delegitimized Jewish practices (teaching Torah, circumcision, keeping the Temple holy, keeping the Sabbath holy etc…). As examples, the Jews welcomed Alexander but a few generations later rebelled against Antiochus IV Epiphanes when he desecrated the Temple by bringing in idols and pigs for slaughter. The rebellion against the Romans was first instigated by Caligula implanting himself as a god, with plans to place an idol to himself in the Temple, as well as Hellenist appointed as High Priest by the Romans and the theft of huge treasure from the Temple by the Roman procurator (which Roman sources corroborate). These activities radicalized the Jewish population, swelling the Zealot ranks and eventually erupted into full rebellion.

“In you third paragraph you state that the Byzantine Empire fell to the Arabs.”
— My error was that I didn’t clarify that I meant Byzantine control of the Land of Israel. The Arabs did take over the Land in the 7th Century and held it until the Crusaders came. The Crusaders then succumbed to other Muslim conquests, eventually Ottoman.

“The Jews were not the only people taken to live in the Persian homeland somewhat by force.”

— I originally wrote, “I’m not sure how many Jews succumbed to the Zoroastrian pressure but many other people who had lived under the Persian for centuries did convert to the Fire Cult of Zoroaster”.

— I consciously added this in parentheses in the hopes of conveying to you that I was aware that many people lived under Persian rule, many peoples gained the rewards of the culture the Persians developed and many peoples suffered from their cruelties. I’m sorry I did not make that clear enough.

— We are discussing Israel and the fact that Jews chose to create the State of Israel. My comment was plenty long without my having to go over the many hundreds of peoples and the many millions of humans who suffered under Sharia law. I never said that suffering and inequity are uniquely Jewish experiences but since we are talking about the Jewish State, an attempted solution to that inequity, I have been focused on the Jewish story. You are making the point that Europe was unique in its inequity towards the Jews. I am making the point that the Muslims and their culture were in no way uninvolved and that Israel was a response to a whole world treating Jews as second class citizens. In bringing up the many difficulties which the Jews suffered to arrive in Israel, their willingness to leave behind their wealth (btw, the Jews leaving the Arab countries had to forfeit what wealth they had to the government for the right to leave. Morocco is unique in its relationship with the Jewish population.), I was actually assuming the point you made, “Who leaves a place where they are generally happy, safe, and feel secure?”. I am making the point that the liberties, the education and the wealth of the West provided much of the energy for the State of Israel to become a reality but the Jews living in the Muslim part of the world were no happier.

— I brought up Shabbatai Zvi as one example in which Jews attempted a mass movement to Israel. The importance of that movement was that for a number of reasons, its massive failure being the main one. The Rabbis spread the word that no such mass movement of Jews to the Land of Israel should be undertaken again. The loss of many thousands of people, some whole communities, all through out Europe and drawing folk from North Africa as well, was a hugely depressing event and it took a few hundred years for the Jewish people to recover from the trauma. It wasn’t until 2 centuries later that Jews in the Land of Israel were again greeted by immigrant Jews, come to swell the ranks. Jewish return to the homeland has been a constant since biblical times. Jews have always tried to organize a mass return to the homeland. The surging might of a liberalized Europe (and their various interests), combined with American Evangelicism, the continued decay of Muslim civilization and the Jewish will to return was the combination which actualized what had failed many times over the centuries. Wherever it was the Jews gathered and settled their culture, they began to work on getting back to Israel.

“Given the number of items in history like the Balfour Declaration, the writings of Theodor Herzl and so on, most of which came out of Europe (including Mr. Shabbetai himself in the 1620’s I think) it is hard not to accuse the Europeans in general for the mess in the Middle East.”

— The Middle East was a mess before the Jews began returning in the 19th century. You can blame the Muslims for the plague, the economic depression, the agricultural stagnation, the meager population, the lack of education and the basic backwardness of the Land of Israel that the Ottoman’s ruled over. The Europeans did not dictate to the Porte their policies and it was the slow collapse of the Ottoman’s which cried out for filling by the Europeans. Can you blame anyone for not quite understanding the nuances of the tribal politics, the dynastic rivalries and the religious diversity of an empire as large and disordered as the Ottoman one? Don’t forget that the Europeans took over an Ottoman Empire that had just gotten through murdering 1.5 million Armenians and had involved itself in a European war, all on its own accord. The history of the West is well dotted with aggression coming from Muslim Dynasties. I don’t think you have a balanced view of the political climate of the last few hundred years.

“Finally in paragraph 6 you state that the “largest Jewish population in Israel are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants from Muslim Lands.” This is patently not the case Ami, and you know it. You are saying in effect that the nation state of Israel was started by Jews primarily coming from other Muslim lands.”

— I actually know that most Israelis are descendants of Mizrahi Jews. I in no way am saying that these same Mizrahi Jews were the primary population of citizens during the War of Independence? The point I am making is that the Mizrahi Jews were miserable enough living in Muslim countries to come and live in the Jewish country (which they kept hearing was about to be annihilated by the Arab armies, btw) built primarily by Ashkenazi Jews, with a healthy dose of Mizrahi contribution. Just last week, my sister-in-law lost her 96 year old grandfather who migrated from Yemen in the 1920’s and was part of the defense of Israel during the War in 1948. He, and many other Mizrahi citizens distinguished themselves in service to the Jewish State. They then had plenty of kids, many of whom married Ashkenazi Jews, and now account for much more then 50% of the genetic material in Israel. Its not my doing if my exact wording, “Today, the largest Jewish population in Israel are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants from Muslim lands.” leads you to think that my thesis is that Mizrahi Jews created Israel. Again, my point is that Mizrahi Jews did not want to remain in the Mizrah and suffered the usual and expected slings and arrows in order to return to the Land of Israel. Israel is not a European phenomenon. It is a Jewish one.

“Are you aware that the Ottoman Turkish Empire had Jewish Financial Viziers occasionally?”
— So what? Rothschild was a Jewish family. Dryfuss was Jewish. Disraeli was a Jew even if he didn’t think of himself thus. The point is that all these people were viziers, barons, officers and PMs in someone else’s country.

“PS: Use of the term “little people” in your initial post is really bad form, they matter because that is where the suicide bombers etc. come from!”
— Good point. I do not feel sorry for the suicide bombers.

As for your question regarding the Jews being singled out. First, I find it interesting that you ask that question as you spent most of your last post making the point that Jews suffered no differently then anyone else. Second, every study into what sets the Jews apart focuses on some basic primary ideas that are of the highest value to those making the study. Nixon says everything is politics. Mozart says everything is music. Everything is math, everything is energy, everything is nothing. So, one can study the Jewish phenomenon with an eye to whatever is primary in one’s thinking and come up with a principle that fits one’s interest as to why Jews have had the struggles they have. Seeing that Jews remain Jewish, even when other groups assimilate, some nations would find that obnoxious. If you were to look at Jewish Orthodoxy, they don’t work on the many holidays, they won’t share most meals unless prepared by observant Jews, they tend to have their own very insulated communities and non of these traits beg for trust. In homogeneous cultures any outsider is considered dangerous. Christians have found reason to hate Jews in the writings of Paul and the Gospel’s. Muslims have texts which set the Jews apart and call them monkeys and the such. Both those groups see themselves as supplanting the Jew. The Christians see it with the “New Testament”. The Muslims do so through Ishmael. Israel is hated because it is viewed by Arabs and other Muslims as stolen land from dar-Islam. I am sure there are plenty of other reasons that people find to hate the Jew. There is no shortage for reasons to hate anyone. In the end, you can catalog the phenomenon’s in the universe and still be left with the question, why?

May 12, 2008 - 7:08 pm 16. Patrick:

Ami, I assume English is not your native tongue, but let me let you in on a little secret. Ben Gurion referred to the Palestinian Arabs as the “Red Indians” of Palestine, making the analogy with the US’s treatment of native Americans so the name calling etc is common practice for both sides. You’d better be able to prove that legitimately accepted Muslim texts refer to Jews as Monkeys and such, and I’m not interested in some far out nonsense either, I’m talking about genuine scholarly work. Here in the US some of the White Racist groups have some pretty unkind things to say about Jews too (along with Blacks and Catholics and anyone else they don’t happen to care at the moment) but they aren’t taken as serious scholarly work.

Here is your text! So don’t say that you didn’t say what you did!

“The Romans used interpretation of Christian texts to justify various State and Church directed programs meant to undermine their native Jewish population.” You stated in the context of what happened in 70 AD, go look yourself!

And on one point you are correct, Jews have no lock on the most suffering of any peoples which may come as a suprise to you. Want proof, try looking to the south of Israel into what is now the Democratic Republic of Congo and see the pygmies! You think you’ve had it hard! Check out the number of rape cases alone that occured in the North Kivu valley around the cities of Goma and Bunia that were treated at NGO hospitals in January of this year alone. This doesn’t speak to those that didn’t get to treatment.

On my point about there having been Jewish Financial Viziers in the Ottoman Turkish Empire, you need to keep it in context. It was mentioned as a rebuttal to your point that the Turks had some kind of special hatred and/or singled out Jews for any particular mistreatment. They had a habit of mistreating anyone that didn’t behave within what they felt was their Empire’s boundaries, including their own people. Look at the fratricide that was practiced by the Sultans to see this.

I won’t debate or discuss the Armenian situation (what relevance does it have in this discussion? Are you talking in circles or just trying to play on people’s emotions here?) as I don’t know enough about it but as with the politics in the Middle East in general, far too much emotion comes into play, which basically means to me that it will never get fixed and that as a taxpayer to the US government, I’m a bit tired of paying taxes to things that don’t ever get fixed, including the problems between the Palestininans and Israelis. Let’s face it, the Israelis will never accept current Palestinian demands and the Palestinians will never accept Israeli demands, at least not in this century! Please don’t bring up the Oslo Accords as this was merely a “deal” between Arafat and Perez then Netanyahu, it wasn’t a legitimate thing at all as all Arafat did was give into Israeli demands to secure his own position in power.

Have fun beatin’ each others brains out! I’ve watched it fairly up close and personal to the point when I was a student in Jerusalem on June 6th 1967 when the city was still Jordanian! Cool tank fight though and my hat is off to the Israeli paratroops at the wailing wall those guys did a great job!

Thank you for your response to my question, it is too bad you can’t see that the Hmong stay Hmong as an example, so the Jews staying Jewish doesn’t strike me as a valid reason. As far as supplanting Jews, this was the basic question to begin with, here in the US there are HUGE Christian sects that fully support Jews and Israel. A further note about this Ami, is that my tax money also goes to support things like the Herschorn Museum in Wash.D.C so your argument is not all that strong in some respects.

Darn it, I was really hoping that after the Berlin wall fell (which I didn’t expect to see in my lifetime) that some sort of peace would happen in the Fertile Crescent, guess that won’t be the case.

May 13, 2008 - 8:12 pm 17. P. Ami:

While I personally don’t feel compelled to consider the following any sort of proper scholarship, they happen to be the books which Muslims themselves consider to be the highest focus of their scholarship.
The Koran
V.51: O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who takes them for friends is one of them.
V.59: Say: O, People of the Scripture [Jews and Christians]! Do you blame us for aught else than that we believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed aforetime, and because most of you are evildoers?
V.82: Indeed, you will surely find that the most vehement of men in enmity to those who believe are the Jews and the polytheists.
V.60: Say: ‘Shall I tell you who will receive a worse reward from God? Those whom [i.e. Jews] God has cursed and with whom He has been angry, transforming them into apes and swine, and those who serve the devil. Worse is the plight of these, and they have strayed farther from the right path.’

The Sira
“Kill any Jews that fall into your power” said the Prophet: p.369

Anytime that you see Jews or Christian placed into the text with brackets its to denote what a euphemism’s common interpretation is, according to leading Muslims themselves. Now that we have your first request covered lets move on.

I couldn’t really figure out what you intended to express when you mentioned the possibility that English is not my first language. First, you assumed wrong. Second, whatever ever language I learned first will probably not dictate whether I am in on the secret of Ben-Gurion’s use of the phrase “red-Indian”. I suppose I can just chalk it up to an expression of your general contempt for me. If you would like to better hide your contempt you might want to use fewer condescending phrases.

Listen Pat, I never used the words “level Jerusalem”. You tried to attribute those words to me and if you look at the whole paragraph that has created such an issue for you it began with,”From the time of the Jewish Rebellion in 70AD until the fall of the Byzantine Empire (again to the Arab Conquests) the Jews eked out some sort of life between pogroms.”. You see, I included the Byzantine era. I didn’t think I was writing for anyone whose attention span won’t survive a short paragraph.

“I’ve watched it fairly up close and personal to the point when I was a student in Jerusalem on June 6th 1967 when the city was still Jordanian!”
— I’m assuming, since you mention the part of Jerusalem that you lived in was Jordanian, that you lived in the Old City? I’m curious how you managed to get into Jordan in the 1960’s seeing that you and your dad flew missions for Israel in the late 40’s and early 1950s? Did the Israelis not stamp your passport? As far as I know, if you ever went to Israel in those day,s they would not allow you into most Arab countries, certainly not Jordan.

“And on one point you are correct, Jews have no lock on the most suffering of any peoples which may come as a suprise to you.”
— So, which is it Pat, am I correct in stating that the Jews have no lock on suffering or am I surprised by the point I myself made? You can’t have it both ways.

“It was mentioned as a rebuttal to your point that the Turks had some kind of special hatred and/or singled out Jews for any particular mistreatment.”
— You’ll have to be as convoluted in your reading as you are in your writing to find any place in my posts in which I said the Turks had a special hatred for and/or singled out the Jews. All I ever said was that Jews were generally miserable while living under Muslim rule and this is bourn out by their desire to take on the hardships of immigration to the Land of Israel. It was my point that the Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians. A person who brings up such a point seems to be quite aware of the sort of cruelty the Turks visited on non-Jews. I wasn’t really interested in debating the Armenian issue. I was making the point that the Turks were coming apart at the seems and behaving in ways that made the trenches of WWI look like love ins. I am well aware of the cruelty of Muslims towards each other as well as towards infidels. I am aware of the cruelty of Europeans towards each other and towards non-Europeans. I am aware of the cruelty of red Indians towards each other as well as to non-red Indians. I get it Pat, the world is a harsh place and not just towards the Jews.

Far be it for me to bring up Oslo. I think it is a crime against the Jewish State and the Jewish people. I don’t quite agree with your assessment that Arafat gave into Israeli demands but hey, I’m not all that impressed with other of your assessments either.

The Miao people that I’ve spent time with, I’m not sure if they were Hmong or not, were pretty well assimilated into Han Chinese Culture. Those who still dress in traditional garb, speak their dialect, and live in the traditional Miao manner are currently treated decently but that is a phenomenon in China that is only a few decades old. Yes,the Chinese allow their minorities some level of autonomy (although the Uigur and Tibetans are being aggressively overrun by the Han Chinese) but they too are treated as an other and have suffered violent and prejudicial action, most especially those who have not assimilated. So, my point still stands that folk who do not assimilate are generally made to feel prejudice of various degrees.

I was giving an overview of reasons that Jews are and have been hated. I wasn’t presenting my thoughts on why we are hated as I don’t think there is a reason any more then there is a reason that two hydrogen atoms combine with an oxygen atom. We understand the mechanism by which water is formed but why is another matter. I don’t think there is a rational reason for anti-Semitism. There are simply many rationales. Anti-Semitism is a human phenomenon.

The Christians who support Israel and Zionism are doing so with the expectation that a return of Jews to Israel will bring about the “return” of their messiah. They also expect his supposed return to convince the Jews to become Christian. While that is a form of support it is certainly not support given with the intention that Jews remain Jews.

You’ve gone over my head with the Hirshhorn Museum. I’m pretty sure all the Smithsonian Museums are partially paid for by taxes. What makes this particular museum an especially odious burden and what does it have to do with European causes for disorder in the Middle-East?

You are probably right that the Middle East has a few more decades of strife in it. I simply a not buying that this strife would never have occurred if the Europeans had “minded their own business” or if the Jews had never establish a State in their homeland. There was strife in the Middle East before European intervention and there will be strife there if all Europeans or Jews were to one day abandon that region. Hell, considering what a surprise the Berlin Wall’s fall was for us both, lets hope we are also wrong in prognosticating the duration of strife in the Middle-East.

May 14, 2008 - 1:02 am 18. Patrick:

Ami,

You’ve basically “cherrypicked” the sayings from the Koran and the Sirah and haven’t bothered to include what is said around the verses and in which context they are used. I admit it is all a bit violent for my tastes, but then the Old Testament, which is a collection of Jewish writings if I understand correctly has some pretty nasty things to say concerning the “others” as well. In no case though do they use the words monkey etc. as you indicated above.

You’ve accused the Muslims as being responsible for the Plague and economic down turn in the Fertile Crescent and Europe. If you look at your history and go back to Kublai Khan’s reign in China, you’ll find out where came from and how it spread. Don’t blame the Muslims for this! Also keep in mind that today there is plenty of climatic evidence to suggest a “mini-ice age” occuring around that time which added to the problems.

Next you seem to confuse Muslims with Arabs. Not all Muslims are Arabs and not all Arabs are Muslims. Certainly, not all are enemies, most are folks that if left alone and treated as they felt was fair would probably just raise their kids and work and fight with their wives just as is the case with most “little people” on the face of the earth.

Finally, if you want to hold up things that a people, any people have suffered, Jews included, as something special or more to the point especially specific to that group, it cannot be something that many many others have endured as well. Basically, if you decide to hold something up as “special” to a group of people, it should be something that only that group dealth with or if you wish to mention it, include the others that have endured it as well. A half truth, especially in as emotional a setting as this problem, only leads people to incorrect assumptions. It is false advertising if you will. You seem to have a penchance for holding up things as “Jewish” that have been suffered by many other people, which is why I continually point this out. The Holocaust is an exception (in my view) of an example of a group, the Jews, that suffered something specific to their group. This of course is from a Western perspective only. Other cultures looking at this event ask somewhat incredulously, “why didn’t they fight back?” Thus put little importance on the event!

The objective of my discourse is and has been to lay, at the feet of Europe, the modern day problems in the Middle East and the support Europeans gave to the Zionist Leadership from the end of the 19th century through to today. Yes, certain US interests were involved, but nothing like the scale (in the early 20th century) of how the Europeans were involved. I state and maintain based on the writings of many, that Europe agreed to all this because they didn’t want Jews on their “territory.” Summing it up as a question, why couldn’t Jews be left reasonably unmolested in Europe? This problem has cost us all.

Back several posts ago or so, you mention and I mention the “return” of Jewish people throughout the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere after the 1948 war for independence. These people had generally lived quite successfully in their respective areas for centuries. Yes, they did endure, on occasion, having to be targets of local hatred, but nothing on the scale the Europeans, Eastern Europeans, and Russians committed. Of course at the end of the 1948 war, they were given additional incentive to leave! The Arab nations counter to the establishment of the State of Israel were angry and as usual the innocent folks having nothing to do with it now started to be looked at as targets of this anger. There were segments of these communities of Jews, and some continued to (right up to this day) continue to live in the Arab lands in which they had for those centuries. The Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo is an example of this. They NEVER left for the “return.”

Other points are, no Passports are NOT stamped for aircrews, and when I did travel to Israel in the days AFTER the ‘67 war, I just went through Cyprus and had the Israeli immigration officials stamp a piece of paper with the seal on the way in and out, thus no record of my having been to Israel was evident when I returned to an Arab country, but this was only necessary AFTER the ‘67 war.

If you are interested, look up the old British NAAFI headquarters building if it still stands in Jerusalem and you’ll find out about the school I spoke of.

The point about the Museum is that we here in the US are paying for the support of Israel and not just directly! I’m grumbling about the fact that is seems pointless after so many years of trying, but NO one can say that the US doesn’t have Israel’s back! You need only go back to the Yom Kippur war in ‘73 to see this in a very direct manner. Elements of the 82nd Airborne were “on the ramp” in the Azores, in the event the IDF couldn’t handle the situation by itself. We had our targets and drop zone specified and it was in Jordan! Interestingly, about a year and a half later, King Hussein of Jordan showed up at Ft.Bragg, North Carolina and toured the 82nd and did push-ups with us! Mmmmm, seems like maybe the King wasn’t all that unfriendly to Israel inspite of having to look like it in public!

Again, to reinterate, I’ll keep my opinion that the troubles in the Fertile Crescent are a direct result of European meddling and European Governments inability (or unwillingness) to stop the mistreatment of the Jewish Europeans within their borders for a long long time leading up to and culminating in the Holocaust. True it wasn’t all that stable a place beforehand but the level of “needed” participation by the US wasn’t an issue either. It still wouldn’t be much of an issue had the Europeans been able to “take care of their own” properly.

I’m glad you “get it” though that Jews aren’t the only ones suffering and my point of view is that for us here in the US, the efforts aren’t worth it to keep trying to “help” solve the problem. This job should be handed over to the Europeans at least in some measure, especially now with the European Union in place. Again, if the Jewish people genuinely feel as though they are continual and extraordinary targets of ethnic hatred etc. maybe they, as a people, should look into themselves and come up with some answers. Stop complaining, do something, it is obvious no one else can!

I hold no contempt for you Ami, but as usual anyone that doesn’t agree with the usually accepted point of view that Israel is innocent in all things is automatically labeled negatively. If you feel as though I was being condescending, so be it, tis your problem it wasn’t intended.

The “Red Indian” statement by Ben Gurion, used as an epithet against Palestinians has been documented by Israeli scholars writing revisionist history, or “setting the record straight” as it were. I point this out as ammunition in my argument that Peace in the Middle East will not happen anytime soon and is the result of a mutual hatred and distrust on BOTH sides of the “wall” being built to separate the sides in the “holy lands.” You say the “Muslims” call you “monkeys” well your Leadership is known for the same kind of name calling!

Most of the actors in the arena that is the Middle East seem to be trying to regain lost empires! This is especially applicable to Israel, Iran and Syria. The religious noise coming out of all of you usually breaks down to this in the end. I’m sick and tired of paying for this.

PS: The Hmong moved out of Southern China about 400 to 500 years ago (according to the Hmong elders) into what are now the mountainous regions of Laos. They ain’t as a group in China anymore Toto!

May 14, 2008 - 4:59 pm 19. P. Ami:

@Patrick,
“You’ve basically “cherrypicked” the sayings from the Koran and the Sirah and haven’t bothered to include what is said around the verses and in which context they are used.”
— I provided the book and verse. You are free to figure out the context yourself. Seeing as how you challenged me to provide you with an instance in which Muslim texts called Jews monkeys, and that I answered that challenge, I wonder what mental block you have going which won’t give credit where credit is due. Today, some of the biggest, richest, and most influential Wahabi mosques (many of whom are based in Europe these days) have Imams whose preaching focuses on these specific tracts. The Haditha is full of legal interpretations of these texts. Those popular Muslim leaders consider these euphemisms as derogatory and as rational for hatred of Jews. Now you are free to interpret Muslim texts as you wish but there is little interest in your interpretations. What is of interest is how Muslim orthodoxy interprets them.

“You’ve accused the Muslims as being responsible for the Plague and economic down turn in the Fertile Crescent and Europe.”
— I never wrote the Plague using capitals. I wrote plague, little p, as the medicine and sanitation of the Muslim world, in the early part of the 20th century, was far below the standards of Europe in those days. It facilitated a major outbreak of plague. It also facilitated the spread of Malaria, TB, Cholera and many other communicable diseases. The LAnd of Israel suffered from these diseases and it wasn’t until the “European” Jews came with their modern understanding of science that these diseases were overcome. The Arabs, btw, benefited from this as well. Its considered pretty nice to not die of Cholera.

My quote was, “You can blame the Muslims for the plague, the economic depression, the agricultural stagnation, the meager population, the lack of education and the basic backwardness of the Land of Israel that the Ottoman’s ruled over.”
—You see, I wrote that I was specifically talking about the Land of Israel during Ottoman rule. Why is it that you are ignoring some informative portions of sentences I am writing for you? Do you have concentration problems? Personally I think you have a mental block. I never in all my writing said that Jews suffered any more then anyone else. I never used that suffering as a reason for the existence of the State of Israel. I never suggested that the Turks harbored any special hatred for the Jews. I never discussed the razing of Jerusalem and yet, you attribute these ideas to me. I would like to understand why that is. If you give me a compelling reason then I’ll accept it and might have some sympathy for your struggles to understand me. As it stands, I have to imagine reasons for this and they are not complementary of you.

Your third paragraph in this latest post is idiotic. I’m aware that not all Muslims are Arabs (see, this is one of your condescending instances). I am aware that people are just trying to get by from day to day. The day to day survival of individuals is not the stuff of history nor is it what one must consider when worrying about the activities of your enemies. Its those with the means of violence that one accounts for. You consider the words of leaders; their hidden meaning, their overt meaning; the movements of arms and various supplies, the alliances and meetings of nations, not the shopping lists of individuals.

“The objective of my discourse is and has been to lay, at the feet of Europe, the modern day problems in the Middle East and the support Europeans gave to the Zionist Leadership from the end of the 19th century through to today.”
— I understand that this is your objective and I am underwhelmed by your argument. A Muslim Empire, the last caliphate, involved itself in a European War. They declared war on the European powers. It was not the first time. I pray it is the last as I hope there will never be a caliphate again. I wonder what you suggest the Allied Powers should have done with the Ottoman Empire, seeing as they were attacked by the Porte? What then do you do once your enemy has fallen? What do you do if the enemy has fallen and you see that chaos, already a thing barely kept at bay in those days, would threaten many of your national interests. The Suez Canal, for one, your need for oil, as another. You think maybe these issues were a little more of interest to the European Powers then finding someplace to dump their unwanted Jews?

“These people had generally lived quite successfully in their respective areas for centuries.”
— That is not true. If you want to point to a few exception then I can show you some in Europe as well. The fact is that a overwhelming majority of Mizrahi Jews chose to return to their Homeland.

“Interestingly, about a year and a half later, King Hussein of Jordan showed up at Ft.Bragg, North Carolina and toured the 82nd and did push-ups with us! Mmmmm, seems like maybe the King wasn’t all that unfriendly to Israel inspite of having to look like it in public!”
— I understand that Hussein was a moderate who found it easy enough to come to an agreement with Israel. The fact is that he mobilized his troops during the ‘67 War, made an agreement with Nasser to do his part in the war, agreed to allow Egyptian troops to swell his ranks, and his soldiers fired upon IDF forces from their positions. It’s pretty clear that at least some of his public display of unfriendliness towards Israel was backed up with unfriendly action. How a set of pushups with American soldiers is indicative of a King’s friendliness with Israel is a bit beyond me but then again, its not as if you bothered to explain what the Hirshhorn Museum has to do with support for Israel either.

“I hold no contempt for you Ami, but as usual anyone that doesn’t agree with the usually accepted point of view that Israel is innocent in all things is automatically labeled negatively.”
— As usual, someone who is disproportionately critical of one side while eminently forgiving to another will hide behind absolutes. Nobody expects you to think Israel is innocent of all things, I don’t quite get why anyone would expect that Israel, or the US, or Europe should be innocent of all things. I accept that humans are flawed. Israel’s flaws are much smaller then many countries, certainly smaller then any country that is even remotely in its position. and yet receives an over abundance of criticism.

“…but then the Old Testament, which is a collection of Jewish writings if I understand correctly has some pretty nasty things to say concerning the “others” as well”
— Really? I think its my turn to ask for examples. I would remind you that Muslim scholarship is what I referred to when I wondered what the Muslim orthodoxy means when they call Jews monkeys or when they say that a tree and a rock will say to the Muslim, look here, there is a Jew hiding behind me, so that you may then slay them. You should do the same when you read the Tanach seeing as it is the Jewish Orthodoxy, its interpretations and judgements, which provide the key to understanding what is meant by something like “an eye for an eye” or any other euphemism in the Bible.

“You say the “Muslims” call you “monkeys” well your Leadership is known for the same kind of name calling!”
— First you ask me to show you where the Muslims call us monkeys. You want to make sure I use real scholastic sources, as if my pointing it out to you would actually convince you to view the situation differently then you have up to now. Then you respond to these direct quotes by saying they not quite clear enough as the context might make it mean something other then what we infer from it, sub-human. You go on to then let me know that Jews say mean things about Muslims too, so its not a big deal anyway. Forget the fact that at least Ben-Gurion compared the Palestinians to another group of humans rather then an animal, forget that he was referring, not to an epitaph, but rather a historical phenomenon, forget that we are talking about a national leader and not the core text of a religion, it just seems that no matter what corner you find yourself in, you’ll just pour the paint all over your head, walk across the room and claim you were never cornered, seeing that the paint was your natural color anyway. You’ll never be convinced otherwise as that would require too many of your treasured prejudices be dispelled.

The Hmong ran from China because of the Han-centric policies regarding ethnic minorities. They got to Laos and eventually had their asses handed to them by the Commies. They ran to Thailand and settled there as well as came to the States. Sounds to me like my point still stands, folk who do not assimilate have to deal with some harsh responses to their uniqueness. I spent nearly 2 years in China, a decent portion of which were in the Himalayan foothills. I met one sub-group of the Hmong called the Miao, interacted with them, traded with them, ate with them, sang with them and generally thought them an attractive group of people. Seeing that the Miao have a Communist Party branch all set-up to apply the interests of the Miao people, so long as those interests aren’t onerous to the Han, I might be sane in considering there being a group of Hmong in China.

Woof, Woof Dorothy.

May 15, 2008 - 1:39 am 20. Patrick:

Ami,

It has become patently clear you are as guilty as any WWII Nazi of the prejudice and ethnic hatred of a people. You are neither worth the time to debate nor worth any attention. Big “P” or little “p”! Shame on you, playing games with words as you are doing only indicates enforced ignorance on your part. Which ever “p” you use you sink your ship and people with reasonable minds will either realize a) you don’t know your history or b) you are what the kids call a “hater” today. This I do say condescendingly so you might understand! Face it, you have broad brushed an entire group of people in your mind as an enemy. My point where you and people like you are concerned is proven. There is no sense in the US taxpayer funding anymore efforts to assist in the peace process, it should be left to the Europeans who caused the problem in the first place! It is almost a guarantee they will be no more successful than the US has.

Sincere apologies to PJM for engaging with person at all!

May 17, 2008 - 2:14 pm 21. Good Neighbours » Progress Without Principle:

[...] at least, seems indicative of the failure of that power-move and the true measure of political, economic, and military balances on the ground it has yielded. Not lightly does one declare the election of a [...]

May 17, 2008 - 4:14 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: