All of us are familiar with Godwin's rule. One formulation is as follows:

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"

It is with great pride that I announce two new rules of online discussion:

MEYER'S FIRST RULE

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of Israel being attacked approaches 1.

MEYER'S SECOND RULE

No matter what the original topic if an online discussion continues for long enough the proportion of posts devoted to attacking or defending Israel approaches 100%

You're full of it Steven.
A simple look at any long running thread will prove your argument totally false.

The preponderance of debate about Israel and its conflicts is because it is at the heart of all of todays wars, conflict and terrorism.

I am reformulating the first rule:

REGARDLESS OF THE ORIGINAL TOPIC as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of Israel being attacked approaches 1.

mikk's right, stevenlmeyer is full of it on this topic. If he's basing his silly 'rules' on online discussions at OLO, I haven't noticed Israel being "attacked" unless the OP or article originally pertained to the actions of that rogue State.

On the other hand, I have noticed that a number of OLO users persistently try to shift the discussion to that of Islam and/or Muslims, regardless of the original topic. There's also another handful of nutters who will try and invoke some kind of comspiracy theory, regardless of the topic. There's yet another bunch who will try and divert any discussion at all into a group whine about awful feminists. Etc etc.

I don't, however, think that such behaviour is generalisable into 'rules' like Godwin's Law - which does seem to be proven regularly. Indeed, stevenlmeyer provided a good example himself last night on his own thread about Yusuf Islam.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3683#89171

Dear Steven,

The American historian Norman Finkelstein argues
that, in fact, criticism against Israel has not
increased. What has increased however is the
meticulously orchestrated media extravaganzas
(by Jewish groups) to not only exploit the historical
suffering of Jews abut also to deflect and
immunize Israel against criticism.

Finkelstein explains the Jews inflate the
"antisemitic threat when there are renewed
international pressures on Israel for their
actions, and to withdraw from occupied Arab
territories..." Finkelstein of course, has been
vilified as a result.

" Criticising Israel is not anti-Semitic and
saying so is vile. But singling out Israel
for opprobrium and international sanction -
out of all proportion to any other party in
the Middle East - is anti-Semitic, and not
saying so is dishonest."
(Thomas Friedman).

Its interesting Steven that you bring up this
topic at this time when there is global
outrage at Israel's current actions -
making the news globally.

I suggest you read -
Haaretz.com
They have an excellent analysis of the current
situation. But perhaps you'll see that as a
criticism as well.

mikk,
<<The preponderance of debate about Israel and its conflicts is because it is at the heart of all of todays wars, conflict and terrorism.>>
Correction:
Islam "is at the heart of (most) of todays wars, conflict and terrorism."

"Islam is the victim of (most) of todays wars, conflict and terrorism."

Fixed

Dear Proxy,

Get the facts first.

You can distort them later!

mikk and Foxy,

Here are the facts:

* Infidels are your sworn enemies (Sura 4:101).
* Be ruthless to the infidels (Sura 48:29).
* Make war on the infidels who dwell around you (Sura 9:123, 66:9).
* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day (Sura 9:29).
* Strike off the heads of infidels in battle (Sura 47:4).
* If someone stops believing in Allah, kill him (al-Bukhari 9:84:57).
* Take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends (Sura 5:51, 60:13).
* Never be a helper to the disbelievers (Sura 28:86).
* Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (Sura 2:191).
* No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel (al-Bukhari 1:3:111).
* The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land (Sura 5:33).

"Islam is the victim" of what?
Having it's teachings publicised?

Who is distorting?

What's it like being surrounded by books,
having relinquished the capacity to learn?

Heh, thanks to Proxy for illustrating my earlier point very nicely, i.e. "I have noticed that a number of OLO users persistently try to shift the discussion to that of Islam and/or Muslims, regardless of the original topic."

Support said correction, Islam & the global jihad, are at the heart of EVERY conflict on the planet today (even indirectly in the Korean crisis - they are a major source of cash for the North Korean regime).

If peace activists and journalists really wanted to demonstrate how peace-loving our Moslem brethren are, why don't we ever see them taking the opportunity to supply the peace-loving Taliban supporters in Northern Pakistan, or those in Hellmand Province?

It wouldn't be because they'd be captured, tried and beheaded would it? Surely not...

No, let's pick on Israel... We know they will have to explain their actions (instead of hiding in a hole in Iran), we know they will eventually let us out and we know that they won't execute people purely because they are a different religion.

The hypocrisy is astounding, also scary, the current state of the UN equates to that of the League of Nations when Italy invaded Ethiopia... A completely irrelevant body, whom nobody listens to.

Well done, NOW we face the real risk of major conflict

In fairness CJ Morgan it was you who brought up Islam / Muslims in your first post on this thread.

I suppose in a way you have proved your own rule. ;-)

Yeah Steven, but I clearly wasn't trying to shift the discussion to being about Islam. I was providing an example, among others, of why your OP was a crock.

As I said, Proxy proved my point very nicely.

CJ Morgan,
mikk's statement...
<<Israel...is at the heart of all of todays wars, conflict and terrorism.>>
and your...
<<mikk's right>>
...are blatantly false.
mikk further statement...
<<Islam is the victim of (most) of todays wars, conflict and terrorism>>
...is more falsehood.
How can Islam be the victim in...
"India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and England and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Turkey and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Germany and Australia and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal and the Maldives and Argentina and Mali and Angola and..."?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
I mean, what are the chances that Islam is the victim in wars and terrorism right around the globe, all because of Israel?
I'm not a statistician, but the chances seem slim to me.

Proxy, do you have anything to say about stevenlmeyer's original post, or are you just going to persist in derailing the discussion into your obsession with Islam?

Israel hardly gets a mention unless the topic is Israel focussed. In my experience, gender and religion would top the list for OLO.

Why is Israel a no-go zone for criticism? Israel has been in the news of late because of the recent attack of an aid ship (details still coming to hand so too early to make judgements) and passport forgeries.

Dear Proxy,

Don't be jealous.

You might not have the
qualifications or necessary
experience to work in a public library
but you can join. Become a member.
That way you'll be able to borrow.
My advice is, start with the picture
books first.

Dear CJ,

Israel's actions are now in question.
Their response however, should not simply
be to blame people. That's inadequate.
Decisions taken by their own responsible
authorities must be probed. The responsibility
rests with the Israeli government and the
military. They need as well as a national
inquiry - to begin forcusing on justice
for both Israelis and Palestinians, and not just
on military might. The Jewish state can
only ignore world opinion for so long.

CJ Morgan,
If it wasn't for Islam,
Israel wouldn't be a problem.
It would just be getting on with its
usual business of turning desert land productive,
instead of vice versa like its neighbours.
Israel does a good job in providing for the welfare
of both its citizens and the ungrateful Palestinians.
Israel is in a constant state of seige
because it is surrounded by Islamic threats.
The threats originate from Mohammed's antipathy toward the
Jews and the resultant Koranic exhortations to destroy them.
(and you thought it was Allah that hated the Jews!)
I admire their resilience and stoicism,
surrounded as they are by barbarism.
The Jews are hardworking, intelligent and
enjoy higher than average success as a result.
Their dominance in the Nobel Prize awards is just one testament to their genius.
They haven't let their religion permanently
fossilise their development at the stone age level.
I would sooner live under Israeli hegemony than Islamic hegemony.
Israel is an oasis of relative sanity in the maelstrom of the middle east.

disclaimer:
Just as I am not a Christian, I also am not a Jew.

Foxy, your 'anti Proxy' post was mean spirited.

Dear Al,

Bit of a double standard -
you're advocating.

I was merely responding to Proxy's
remark made to myself and Mikk about
" being surrounded
by books - without having the capacity
to learn."

Foxy:"Bit of a double standard -
you're advocating."

*snigger*

Dear Antiseptic,

Only reply if you have something
new to add.

Foxy,
I'm surprised that the library system doesn't possess a copy of the Koran.
Surely this can be the only explanation for your apparent lack of understanding of what the Koran actually says.
Or did you start to read the book and it's turgidity put you off?
Might I recommend:
"The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran",
by Robert Spencer?
You are, after all, an infidel according to the Koran,
so this book would be a logical first step.
Failing that, might I recommend:
Robert Spencer's Qur'an commentary @
http://www.jihadwatch.org/quran-commentary.html
President and Founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) M. Zuhdi Jasser, M.D.
and Islamic thinker and reformer Tawfik Hamid,
are Muslim experts on Islam who respect and also share many of Spencer's views on Islam and the Koran.
http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/27/symposium-the-worlds-most-wanted-a-%e2%80%9cmoderate-islam-%e2%80%9d/
Surely it wouldn't hurt you to see what the experts have to say?

Take for example the thread:

"Intelligent design: scientifically and religiously bankrupt"

Now I would have thought it was IMPOSSIBLE to bring Israel into that.

Yet I've counted two posts mentioning Israel.

Let's hope Foxy's silence indicates she is reading :)

Dear Proxy,

I haven't read the Qur'an, but then I
haven't read many other religious
texts. I am not a theologian. I have
my own religion.

In order for me to be
able to make any sort of judgement on
anybody else's religious texts -
I would have to spend years studying
them, and even then - the texts are
open to individual interpretation,
a person's personal orientation,
knowledge, experience, and of course -
bias.

Barbara Thiering spent over 20 years
in her studies, prior to writing the
book, "Jesus The Man." She presented the
virgin birth, the miracles, and the
resurrection in an entirely new light.
And as she pointed out - they were never
literal events --- nor were they myths,
traditional legends, as scholars have
often held. Something really did happen,
and what happened opened up a whole new
understanding of historical Christianity.

Dear Steven,

It may help you instead of counting how
many times Israel is mentioned (or not)
in various threads - to take a look at
the context in which it is being mentioned
and why.

Dear Foxy....you said:

//I haven't read the Qur'an, but then I
haven't read many other religious
texts. I am not a theologian. I have
my own religion.//

Fine..but if you have not read the Quran...on what basis can you (or Morgan or Pericles) condemn those who have...as being "Islampophobic"?

It makes no sense at all.

You don't need to read it all..nor do years of study. Common sense should tell you that you only need look for the core teaching, and it's summarized in many places. Then.. the wise enquirer would look for criticisms... and then.. look at the grounds and basis for those criticisms..and do a bit of comparative reading..and then form a conclusion based on the above.

You only need to know that (for example) "Judaism advocates the killing of all non Jews".. just that ONE bit.. is enough for you to explore the claim (which is false by the way).. see on what evidence it might be based...and finally.. put it all together on a balance of probability.

Say for example.. Judaism says:

-Respect your parents.
-Love your neighbour.
-Help the fatherless.

You think. WOW..all that is really great !

Then you look for 'criticism of Judaism' and a wiki article will generally include that.

So..click click.. you open up Wikipedia and type "Judaism" then you see the headings "controversies"

-Kill non Jews.

Now..in such an article, it will have information about 'who' makes this claim.. and on what such a claim is based. Then..you can see their sources.. and evaluate their arguments.

It's not that hard

If you make pronouncements on other peoples motives or arguments without exploring their reasons why..that is irrational and a phobia :)

Dear Al,

You have created the perception people
have of you.

Deal with it.

Well said, Foxy.

He doth protest too much, methinks :)

Dont worry Foxy; you are too witty and intelligent for those new souls with a great deal to learn. Keep educating [as you do best in your profession]:students can be rather nasty and hurtful, part of the process of learning for some [admittedly myself on occasions too].

Let me add, if and when such happens (Anti-Israel Personality Disorder, or AIPD), the chances of being given, gratis, the opinions of self-hating Jews like Lowenstein or Finkelstein also approaches 1.

The amusing thing is, how many self-hating Palestinian's can you name?

Dear Custard,

You're asking the wrong question.

You should ask yourself - why do you describe
Loewenstein and Finkelstein as "self-hating"
Jews?

Antony Loewenstein tell us in his
book, "My Israel Question,":

" From the moment I first entered public debate
over the Israel-Palestine conflict. I discovered
it wasn't possible to tread carefully - people
got upset. I had simply suggested, in an article
in the "Sydney Morning Herald," that the Israeli
occupation of Palestinian land must end if there
was to be any chance of a comprehensive peace.
In response, I was accused, often by Jews who
chose to remain anonymous, of being a self hater
and antisemite... The message was clear.
Anyone who dared to criticise Israel would receive
threats and abuse. You were either with us or
against us."

Some statistics on the extent of IOD (Israel Obsession Disorder)

Online Opinion posted pieces on six topics on Thursday 3 June. The number of comments at the time of writing is shown in brackets:

--Flotilla sailed for confrontation, not for aid: (67)

--Tough talk about a return to the Pacific Solution: (51)

--The closet is the enemy: (57)

--Has Obama changed the world in 18 months? (4)

--RSPT is not some weird tax invented by Ken Henry: (6)

--The Cheonan attack: torpedoing the chance of peace? (0)

Two of these, the treatment of asylum seekers and the RSPT are of direct importance to Australia. Between them they do not command as many comments as the one about the "Gaza Flotilla."

But that does not tell the full story of the extent of IOD. In subsequent days there were no follow up pieces on these two important topics. However today there are two more pieces about Israel.

--Gaza: conveniently ignoring the truth (16 comments)

And

--Unions must boycott Israel (15 comments)

At the time of writing these two between them command more comments than those all other pieces posted today put together.

But this STILL does not show the full extent of IOD. Irfan Yusuf's piece, "Legacy of a whingeing bogan" has two posts discussing Israel / Jews.

In other words, for posters on OLO as a group questions about Israel / Jews appear to be more important than the treatment of asylum seekers, a tax that may alter the entire course of Australia's economy and racism in Australia all COMBINED.

On 28 May Claire Mallinson had a piece called "Obstacles to justice".

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10486&page=0

It included comments about the arrest warrant for Sudan's President Al-Bashir. I hope I need not remind OLO posters that even if ALL their allegations about the never to be sufficiently damned Israelis were proven correct it would not begin to match the twin genocide attempts of Al-Bashir's regime.

This piece attracted a mere 9 comments.

I rest my case.

IOD is a real disorder. I wonder if it will make it into DSM V

I think you're being a tad hypersensitive, Steven. Most of the relevant discussion I'm seeing at OLO presently is about Israel's appalling recent actions. Some people conflate that with Jews in general, but I and others have argued against them.

There's certainly a bit of Antisemitism about at OLO, but there's also plenty of bigotry routinely expressed here about all sorts of people. I can't see that Jews are inevitably vilified in irrelevant discussions.

There's lots of hatred expressed here. There's hatred for Muslims, hatred for women, hatred for gays, hatred for boat people, hatred for Greens, hatred for Indigenous people, hatred for Christians, hatred for environmentalists, hatred for feminists, hatred for just about any category of people you could name.

Yeah, Israel and Jews come up fairly often, but no more so than anybody else. Personally, I rarely comment on them unless it's relevant to a particular discussion, but I agree that some people seem to be able to work a disparaging allusion to Jews into just about any thread - indeed, in much the same way that a few trolls inevitably blather on about Islam, homosexuals, feminists or environmentalists.

I'm afraid it seems to be part of the OLO culture. Imagine how victimised you'd feel if you were gay or Muslim (for example) and reading some of the filth that's routinely posted here about homosexuality or Islam.

Oooh myy...CJ...

//There's lots of hatred expressed here. There's hatred for Muslims, hatred for women, hatred for gays, hatred for boat people, hatred for Greens, hatred for Indigenous people, hatred for Christians, hatred for environmentalists, hatred for feminists, hatred for just about any category of people you could name.//

CODE :) what he means is.. "there is disagreement about"..which for poor old CJ..means 'HAATTTREEEEDDDD' (at this point imagine that gory horned satan like creature rearing up in the background, snarling at all and sundry in that deeeeep voice.)

Mate.. you mentioned someone else needing medication.. you need something stronger...

Just out of curiosity..do you hate your father ? Have you always been this way ? When did the symptoms first become noticable ? (the 'disagreement is hatred' syndrome)

Awwww c'mon.. u need a big hug :) that'll save ya.

STEVEN.. interestng observations.

I think I'm going to be sick.

So far I have been dealing only with "above the line" pieces.

At the time of writing there were eleven "below the line" pieces on the "front page." See below:

I have no problem with a 'super tax' BUT! (31)
**Kurdistan: Why do we stand back and allow the slaughter to continue? (40)
Could the BP Gulf of Mexico Disater Happen Here? (16)
*Israel's choices. ( 49)
*OK - What should a Nation's Military do to Blockade Runners? (59)
What to do with Aboriginal Communities? (21)
Green votes and Major Parties. (20)
Let's get real here (5)
Time to look at Australia's capabilities in the 21st Century .(17)
*Meyer's two rules of online discussion (36)
So You Think You're A Pollie? (0)

*Specifically about Israel
**Has become de facto about Israel

Of these three are explicitly about Israel. One has been hijacked by the Israel obsessed.

There are a total of 294 comments for the eleven pieces. Of these 184, more than 60% appear on the four "Israel" threads.

In my view the thread deserving the most serious consideration is the one examinator started – "Time to look at Australia's capabilities in the 21st Century." I toyed with the idea of a post about the lessons Australia could learn from Israel about how a small country can become a science and technology giant. I decided against it because, while I believe the lessons that Australia could learn are important, the mere mention of Israel would derail an important topic.

I need not have worried. This topic got only 17 comments.

Examinator, next time title your thread: "Australia's capabilities in the 21st Century – what can we learn from Israel? "

It'll get a ton of comments. Unfortunately none of them will address this important topic.

Graham, if you're reading this I would be interested in your comments. Why IOD?

Don't worry steven there is certainly more than a hint of Islamophobia going around, so it evens up your scoreboard.

If criticism of Israel is seen as a negative just because it is "Israel" then peace will continue to be a long way off. One can criticise a friend while still caring about them. One can criticise a friend without it naturally inferring support for bad behaviour on the part of their historical foes.

In fact honest and open communication and some self-reflection on both sides of this conflict is what is needed.

Now a bit of statistical homework for those who are interested. It's called "Spot the humanitarian crisis".

Here are eight groups of people in alphabetical order:

(1) Australian Aborigines

(2) Australians (Average for whole country)

(3) Egyptians

(4) Gazans

(5) Iranians

(6) Jordanians

(7) Saudi Arabians

(8) Turks

Here is male life expectancy at birth in years in ascending order for the eight groups:

59.4, 69.8, 69.9, 70.4, 72.1, 74.4, 78.6 79.3

Here is female life expectancy at birth in years in ascending order for the eight groups.

64.8, 73.0, 74.2, 75.1, 75.4, 78.7, 81.3, 84.2

Here are infant mortality rates per thousand births in descending order for the eight groups:

34.7, 26.2, 24.8, 17.7, 17.0, 14.5, 11.2 4.7

NB: These numbers are NOT in the same order as the groups. The groups are in alphabetical order. The numbers are in either ascending or descending order.

Your task is to match the numbers with the groups. For example, which group has male life expectancy of 79.3?

Which has a female life expectancy of 73.0?

Which has an infant mortality rate of 34.7 per 1,000?

And so on.

Pelican, CJ Morgan, etc

You are misinterpreting my reasons for these posts. I am NOT complaining. I am merely reflecting back at you what you're doing and asking you to think about the "why".

What you do about this is up to you.

Graham, if you're reading this please do not take my previous post as an implied complaint. I am simply exploring an interesting phenomenon.

Make that a FASCINATING phenomenon.

Dear Steven,

A historian can establish that an act took
place on a certain day, but this, by
historical standards, constitutes only
chronology or, "factology." The moment the
historian begins to look critically at
motivation, circumstances, context, or any
other considerations, the product becomes
unacceptable for one or another camp of
readers.

The same goes for your raising the IOD.
(Israel Obsession Disorder). You need to
look critically at - motivation, circumstances,
context, or any other considerations.
Of course explanations to some may seem tantamount
to sympathizing and excusing, which all too
easily leads onto the questionable practice
of stereotyping people. If people are reluctant
to modify their judgements continued stereotyping
can encourage "counter-stereotyping" and the
result is usually a complete breakdown in
communication.

I fully agree with Pelly, it is time for a
radical re-thinking of the conflict - and that
can only be achieved through honest dialogue
on both sides. There has to be mutual respect
and understanding. We must move past using
dehumanisation and delegitimisation as weapons
to be wielded against people. There must be
a way for Israel to exist securely while allowing
justice for the Palestinian people. A sustainable
future for Israel and the Palestinians should
be our central concern.

Foxy

Your last post misses my point.

There are many conflicts and situations about which one may write:

"…it is time for a radical re-thinking of the conflict…" etc, etc

Many of them are much deadlier than the conflict between Israel and its neighbours. To take some examples:

--Sudan

--North & South Korea

--The ongoing conflict in Jammu & Kashmir

There are also many issues of greater moment. To name but two, the ongoing threat of a global economic meltdown and the problems of energy supply.

Finally there are issues of greater direct concern to Australia including tax policy and the treatment of asylum seekers.

There is also the issue of a land grab in West Papua that makes anything the Israelis are accused of seem small by comparison.

In the longer term there are issues around the sustainability of Medicare – surely something that must concern all Australians.

Yet with all this going on the one issue that attracts the most attention – and the most passion – is Israel.

That is what I find a FASCINATING phenomenon.

Not the issue itself. But the widespread passions it evokes.

Even if I agreed with everything you said about Israel I would still ask why so many people are fixated on this one issue. That's what I mean by Israel Obsession Disorder.

Do take a close look at my post of Monday, 7 June 2010 11:51:14 PM – the one previous to this.

By the numbers, where is there a humanitarian crisis?

Dear Steven,

There could be several explanations
for the ongoing reactions to Israel.
Firstly Israel receives substantial world
support globally (since its inception
in 1948) both financial, and moral.

The world therefore expects a lot
more from Israel.

Another factor is Israel
is the origin of many of the
world's religions and therefore the world
is disappointed in its lack of moral
responsibility and thus the passionate
reactions.

Thirdly, the current events have highlighted
Israel's treatment of Gaza with calls for an
international inquiry which is being rejected
by Israel.

Unless Israel recognises the rights of the
Palestinian people to be an independent nation,
the global reaction, I suspect will continue.

You mentioned North Korea that is deemed to be a
rogue state, is that what you want for Israel.
Because if Israel continues as it has done to date,
what is its future?

There is no doubt the world expects a lot more from Israel, but WHY?

WHY is Israel held to such a high standard?

WHY are their neighbour's held to such a low one?

WHY can Turkey & Iran use OUR intelligence to conduct a joint assault on OUR ally, Kurdistan, without criticism?

WHY is the Israeli Defence Force held to a higher standard than even our own Defence Force?

WHY are people here lecturing the online community about Israel's supposed genocide of GAZA/West Bank, when we kill approximately the same number of OUR indigenous people a year as they do... In fact probably more, due to the absolute lack of hope, the suicide rate is significantly higher in Aboriginal Communities, while petrol sniffing kills god knows how many per year.

WHY are people here complaining about the lack of opportunity for those in Gaza & the West Bank, when those on Aboriginal Communities get NO foreign aid, have no job prospects and little chance to achieve anything?

This is what I fail to understand, it is why I differ from Steven and suggest it is an associative disorder, Anti-Israel Personality Disorder...

An absolute contempt for the rules and regulations of Israel, distaste/disgust at the State having the power to defend itself & an absolute inability to consider why certain things happen certain ways, or to put themselves in the shoes of those in Israel, trying to deal with incessant terrorist attacks.

Dear Custard,

Please re-read my earlier post to Steven,
as to "Why" more is expected from Israel.
The question has already been answered
for you, I can only assume that you don't
read people's posts - which you should do
prior to posting.

From your posts I can see that you expect
people to continuously explain and defend
why they are taking a particular position.
In your last post you give so many examples
of "Why" people don't care about so many
unfortunate situations. (An assumption on your
part, or simply a provocation?) All that's
missing is the baying of the hounds at the
heels ...

As far as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
is concerned - you seem to
make no distinction between an occupied
people, and those who occupy them. Israel
talks about the right of self-defence.
How can an occupier claim self-defence but
deny the same right to those who are occupied
and have the right of self-defence with
whatever means are available to them?

Get real!

I've got a few questions you've neglected
in your rant.

Why do we constantly hear about Israel's
need for "security", as though that justifies
erecting walls, checkpoints and barriers?
Why is the world told to believe that the
Palestinians should only accept peace on Israel's
terms?

For the umpteenth time, many of us support the
state of Israel and believe in its existence.
However, not at the expense of the Palestinian
people. There must be a way for Israel to exist
securely while allowing justice for the
Palestinian people. A sustainable future for
Israel and the Palestinians should be of concern
to us all.

As for your other questions - concerning our
Indigenous people and others, if you seriously
want to discuss those issues - start new threads
on those topics, one at a time, so that people
can discuss each issue separately - otherwise
the assumption appears that you're merely trying
to derail this thread.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle
them with ..."

WOW!...foxyness actually knows about "history" and says:

//A historian can establish that an act took
place on a certain day, but this, by
historical standards, constitutes only....//

Amazing that history suddenly lives for you Foxy .. when it's not one of your pet topics that you wish to protect.

Dear Al,

Consistency requires you to be
as ignorant today as you were
when you first started posting
on this Forum!
(smile).