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?