Strewth -

Re 'Arab leaders'. What precisely is an ‘Arab leader’? The president of a country? The Vice-President? A prominent Islamic cleric? Don't the bosses of Hamas and the PLO count as ‘Arab leaders’?

‘probably all just persons of ME appearance to you,’

Yeah, yeah, we get it – only an exquisitely ethnically sensitive person like yourself can tell an Arab from an Iranian.

’The Guardian, 14/6/06’

Did Steel also debunk the statement by the Iranian cleric Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who declared that the Muslim world could survive a nuclear exchange with Israel - while accomplishing the goal of obliterating the Jewish state. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/14/10132.shtml.

But perhaps Newsmax is fabricating it and it doesn’t matter anyhow because Rafsanjani is not an Arab.

The Hamas Charter is published on an Israeli site, so it is not correct? Do you honestly believe that the quotes from Hamas and PLO leaders are fabricated?

‘wasting my time with sus websites’

My most profound apologies for wasting your precious time - does the term ‘self-important’ ring a bell? I suspect that if I had quoted the Arab Press (or El Guardian), it would be perfectly acceptable to you. I avoid Arab sites because they are very sus. You could search MEMRI for quotes but I guess they’re sus too.

'destroying new Palestinian government'

The Palestinians are doing fine all on their own.

‘Please deal with my point about the the Israeli abuser’

Your point is? I have not denied that Palestinian casualties are greater than Israeli ones. I too have read early Zionist writings, so I have never believed that Israel’s hands are clean. My original point was simply that Israel is in a position where she must react strongly. No amount of wishful thinking on the part of Muslims will make the Israelis pack up and leave. Therefore, the situation has to be dealt with in that frame of reality.

So instead of wasting my time with undeniable events that happened in the past and cannot be changed, why don’t you tell us your solution for the present situation?

Israel is under the microscope again for self defence, while Arabs in Sudan are slaughtering, dispossessing and mass-raping black Africans; setting fire and destroying their villages and have rendered 2.2 million people homeless. The world is so obsessed with Israel's "outrages" that it has sucked the oxygen from far more worthy plights. It seems that we can't investigate anything that shows Arabs as anything other than suffering victims.

Darfur is outrageously passed off as mere "tribal conflict", where Israel is held to impossibly high standards in a fight for its survival. As we are so often told by Marxist do-gooders, national identity is nothing but a European nineteenth century imperialist construct designed to split the mighty Arab nation into pieces. By this reasoning, there is no such thing as "Palestinians". We so often hear the tiresome refrain that Kuwait, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria etc. were carved up unnaturally by Europeans. Can't have it both ways, I'm afraid. Is it to be one mighty Arab nation or tatters of European empire?

And I do not have one bit of sympathy for their "plight" in light of what evil savagery Arabs commit in Sudan, or against Kurds in Iraq or Berbers in the Maghreb.

If I were Israel I would give Gaza back to Egypt, and the West Bank back to Jordan (the original owners who showed no inclination of giving it to "Palestinians" when they had before '67) and then build the world's tallest fence, mine it from end to end and then put all so-called "Palestinians" on the other side of it. The UN decided to put Israel there and don't all bleeding hearts support mighty UN decisions?

• Bazz ... "The undewrlying problem is the behavioural problems of the arabs who have generation after generation married their cousins. Anyone who has had to deal with the behaviour of handicapped children (as I have) will notice the similarity in unreasonable attitudes when something does not go their way. It seems to be caused by, amoungst other symptoms, a lack of the ability to understand the position of other people".

• Dee ... "Irfan, if you actually read the post, you would have seen that I was answering Bazz's question on cousin-marriage within the Muslim world - does the truth bother you for some reason"? Not at all! Nor our Jew-lesser brethren (as a matter of fact), versus Zionist disinfo-blabbermouth (living in a glass-house), who clearly lacked elementary decency to divulge our readers about the ruling-class Jew aristocracy. The almighty-chosen to reign within the rule by the best.

To digest offered exposé, lets us to focus on the common denominator of the born to rule Russian Jew Romanovs, cousins of English Jew King George V, and German Jew Kaisers, related to Austrian Hapsburg's Jew dynasty. Whose blue-blooded spouses stock within the sought-after Jew princesses derived quite-often from a Danish father-in-law of Europe.

However I dreading even to mention evil origins of an utterly debauch Jew tyrant King Henry-VIII. With a lots of blood on his hands as half a dozen of his queens went to the chopping-block in succession. Whist born to rule King remarried repeatedly within his Anglican escapism exploits charade, away from Judeo Vatican. Only to plunge Catholic and Protestant masses into protracted bloody massacres, reciprocally stirred for generations.

• Bazz ... "BTW, cousin marriage was done for a good reason, to keep wealth and land within the family. Surprising however as rural people know all about inbreeding of stock. Perhaps they didn't think the same rules applied to people. It is a major failing of the religious hirachy that they did not forbid it. Cousin marriage was not unheard of in England in the 18th and 19th century, Queen Victoria married her cousin.

A solution to the present situation:

Ask Hezbollah for a cease-fire (as there was for 17 months before the Palestinian beach party was slaughted)in return for an Israeli withdrawal.

Negotiate a prisoner exchange.

Return to the negotiating table with whoever has been democratically elected.

This may not appear to suit Israeli expansionist ambitions, but it could be the foundation for future peace and security. The alternative is to continue with the slaughter of Arabs and multiply problems for a very long time to come.

Stan,

It would certainly not suit Israel, or the majority of Lebanese who abhor Hizbollah:

http://www.10452lccc.com/

http://www.canadianchristianity.com/cgi-bin/na.cgi?nationalupdates/060720lebanon

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008681

http://www.10452lccc.com/english06/officer21.7.06.htm

How about people understand that most Lebanese have as little time for Hizbollah as Israel and America do. The problem is that through repeating the Hizbollah/Syrian/Iranian misinformation ordinary people risk using their understandable distate for civilian casualties to prop up and prolong the malignant presence of Hizbollah in Lebanon. If Lebanese civilians can see the opportunity presented to them to move forward, entirely as a result of the current crisis, ie they can look past the inevitable civilian casualties caused by Hizbollah's illegal use of civilians to shield their activities, then why can't otherwise sane people see that force is sometimes necessary.

I shudder to think what would have been said if this forum existed during the second world war.

Inshallah

2bob

Stan1 wrote;
Ask Hezbollah for a cease-fire (as there was for 17 months before the Palestinian beach party was slaughted)in return for an Israeli withdrawal.

Negotiate a prisoner exchange.

End quote:

This is nothing more than wishful thinking. Doesn't anyone understand that there are two irreconsilable positions here ?
One side says that Israel must be annihilated.
The other says we don't want to be annihilated.
God tells one side to annihilate the Israeles.
God tells the other side to defend my people.

And you think you can find a solution to this ?

You have got to be kidding !!