#Jon J

All I am suggesting is that people (including you) be required to have their real names and general area where they reside published with their comment - and to supply a phone number to the web editor who can verify the name and address of the person making the comment - if the editor decides that is necessary.

Someone has to make a stand somewhere and I don't underestimate the task involved in getting web editors to impose these conditions if one wants to have his comment published.

In my estimation we have long passed the point where people would do that voluntarily as the right and proper way to conduct themselves.

We all detest politicians who defame and denigrate people in Parliament - "the cowards castle" - but won't repeat those allegations outside.

Anonymous comments on the internet are similar and should not be published if the person is not prepared to come out of his cowards castle and put his name alongside his comment.

You need to establish identity for any variety of matters. Why not for commenting on the internet?

It is fascinating that virtually everyone who has posted on this thread so far has done so anonymously - with perhaps the exception of #halduell.

# halduell

Do I take it your name is Hal Duell?

#Emperor Julian (Dion Giles)

This is the first positive contribution you have made to anything I have written.

Congratulations for outing yourself.

Seems from your experience as though websites could be encouraging anonymity by inviting the use of nicknames.

Why then in your case just not put your name at the conclusion of each post?

Does the thought of being an Emperor secretly appeal to you more than being your real self?

#LEGO

I am not against anyone saying what they like. They should just be man enough to put their name under their comment. I always do so - and there are tens of millions who do so likewise on the internet.

Hey runner

You forgot crucified.

Mac,

I take exception to you calling me a 'poseur' - pretentious, yes, but not a poseur. Well, maybe.

My point was that anti-Zionists can indeed be anti-Semitic, in its narrow sense of being anti-Jewish. I'm not particularly pro-Zionist, but I can sympathise with the insuperable burden forced on Jews, from England in the 1200s to Venice in the 1600s, across to Uzbekistan (e.g. Irving Berlin) in the 1900s and all places in between in the meantime. One part of me says that no, it wasn't right to force Palestinians out of their homes and lands, that the problems of Jews in Europe should have been solved in Europe. But another part considers the immense power of discriminatory governments, and remembers those pogroms and the many millions obliterated in the Nazi death camps, and the callous turning away of so many other European and other countries, including Australia.

My step-grandfather, of fond memory, was a Hungarian Jew who had to flee after the defeat of the Hungarian Revolution of 1919, who taught maths for many years at the Ultimo Tech, and who was interned as an enemy alien during the War, being inadvertently still a citizen of fascist Hungary. He lost all his relations except a brother fighting with Tito's guerillas, his mother who he had managed to bring out here, and a cousin in Rumania. All the others, gone. He wasn't very observant, he used to get quite merry on Friday nights, and I don't think he cared much about Israel: he was okay, he was here, after all.

Life and powerlessness throw up many dilemmas for many people. What might have been the alternative for Jewish people after the Tsaristpogroms and the Naziexterminations ? To what, stand and fight ? To 'overthrow oppression' ? (That's sounds so easy on paper.) Or to try to return to the refuge of a long-remembered homeland ? Right or wrong, they didn't have too many options. Buy up land back in Palestine ? Okay. Defend what they had and drive invading Arab armies out ? Okay, mindful of the possible consequences.

[TBC]

[continued]

Sooner or later, the region will have to move slowly and painfully towards a one-state solution, a secular, democratic state that recognises no special religious rights, and with perhaps an internationalised Jerusalem.

But let's have sympathy for both Jews and Palestinians as they try to come to terms with each other.

Joe Lane
www.firstsources.info

david/whinge..<<..You need to establish identity..for any variety of matters...Why not for commenting..on the internet?>>

why?..because out..there..behind every rock..sits an..insane fool working for the mossad..who..run death squads..who think nothing of issuing fake passports..to..make a..levie into a singer..

or kill-off anyone threatening the insane zombie 4 th reicke..built for the capoe extremists..who chose who..lives and who dies..even in the death camps

to get online..i needed to..show photo id[knowing the david singers masters..will..have no trouble looking that up],..

THERE ARE NO SECRETS FROM..THE ZION DEATH SQUADS
are you deliberately ignorant david?

or..just acting dumb?

either way..the elders of zion..or just your new latest fake id

david is acting dumb..and then some
but i..gotta admit..its great as the subliminal threat

but im not frighted of you david
all you got is spin..and as for your masters..they TOO..may go to..hell

you use a name
PROVE..YOU ARE THAT NAME..

thats saying what?

thats all..you..got..and thats not worth snot

LEGO writes: “There are definitely double standards by people claiming to be anti racists. Take Israel for example. The usual anti semites here on OLO never stop attacking Israel while studiously ignoring Arab Muslim countries who's governments are a lot worse.”

Aside from the libel about “antisemites” (standard drivel from racists defending Zionism) and the forest of other errors in LEGO’s post there’s the standard “but what about the Palestinians?” ploy in defending the Zionist land grab. That belongs in the same dishonest stable as the defence of the Libs: “But what about Labor?” or the apocryphal story about the Soviet Intourist guide when a US visitor notices that the train is late: “OK, what about the way you treat your Negroes in the South?”.

This thread is about the Zionists not Moslems, because the stem article is a (ridiculous) defence of the Zionists. This defence of the Zionists is repeated again and again as the Zionist operatives (usually David Singer) trot out their Hasbara-qualifying propaganda articles on OLO (and of course elsewhere).

When Moslems and Western apologists and useful idiots peddle Islam that is the time to oppose their illiberal cult. On that very rare occasion on OLO I put my own view on record (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14869&page=2 ), but do read the article and all the other comments too. Yes Islam is a dagger at the heart of the Enlightenment, just as Nazism is. But that is no excuse to commit aggression against a country and exile most of its inhabitants. Poland and lands east were no oil painting in 1939 either, yet it was totally right, moral and just to reduce Germany to rubble and hang its ringleaders. Same over the invasion of Kuwait.