Dear CHERFUL,

Okay my friend I'm now going to ask something of you. Could you please at least do some modicum of research rather than just repeating mantras you have picked up from the misinformed, mischief makers on this forum. This is the second time I am having to correct you and I would be grateful if there wasn't a third.

Firstly the total fertility rate (the expected number of births per woman over her lifetime) for Lebanon issued by the World Bank in 2013 was 1.5 births. The figure for Israel is double that at 3.0.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate

That's right Israel has twice the fertility rate of Lebanon.

Not only that the Christian proportion of the Lebanese population is expected to increase in the upcoming years;

“Opposite to popular perception, the 40 years old trend of declining Christian numbers has been reversed. This report highlights the stable numbers of the Christian population over the last couple of years, with the above statistics (respectively, Christian percentage of resident Lebanese and Christian percentage of eligible voters) increasing to around 38% and 40% over the next 19 years, and to around 39% and 41% over the next 34 years. the fertility rate of Lebanon is well under that of Israel”
http://www.lstatic.org/PDF/demographenglish.pdf

So what is the situation in the occupied West Bank? There the Palestinian fertility rate is 2.83 births per woman while for the Jewish settlers it is 5.07 births, far outstripping the Palestinian figures.

So when you offer up this crap;

“Come to think of it are you sure it wasn't the Arabs that
raped all the women in the refugee camp, that seems to fit
their style of doing things. Maybe they just blamed it on
the Israelies.”

I know it comes from a nasty, deeply prejudiced place but at least it is opinion. What I can't abide you making statements fact which are patently not only incorrect but are the exact bloody opposite of the actual figures. It is deceitful at worst, moronic at best and does you no credit whatsoever.

Dear davidf,

May I please withdraw the cuffing remark and say instead I enjoyed the adroitness you displayed when replying to ttbn.

As I have said several times before you are a better man than I so I will endevour keeping any cuffing pleasures to myself.

The point you raised about Islam being attractive to people like Ali and Malcolm X because of the association with Christianity and the slave owners is a good one, especially remembering the 'CofE' with which the slaves owned by the Church of England were thus branded. One shouldn't forget though that slavery was a feature of Islam as well.

However I don't think this represents the whole picture. As you have mentioned in the past religion is about binding but it also provides order, hierarchy, and obedience – all crucial elements coincidentally in an armed resistance. Perhaps Islam is better equipped in providing these elements, particularly under the totalitarian regimes of the Middle East. The social services provided by organisations like Hammas are quite extensive and largely without the corruption rampant within government outreaches in the area.

Just a thought, ultimately there is not much separating the mass suicides of Masda and those of Jonestown. The power over the individual will of the people involved came from the same wellspring.

Dear SteeleRedux,

Some Muslims were slavers, but American black attitudes toward slavery and whites were formed primarily by their American experience and that of their ancestors. You referred to Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X. They were products of the American experience. The social services of Hamas were provided to a population already predominantly Muslim. It explains why that population voted for Hamas over Fatah but not why they were Muslim.

From what I understand of the Jamestown experience, there were many rehearsals before the actual ingestion of the poison. Many of those who took it were not aware this was other than a rehearsal and were duped. That was not comparable to Masada.

The fertility rate of Israelis does not bode well for Israel. It is apparently highest among the ultra-orthodox Haredi who are less likely to serve in the armed forces or to be well-educated in secular areas.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel:

Over the past decade the Jewish growth rate in Israel was 1.7% per annum while the Israeli Arab growth rate was 2.2%. However, the Jewish growth rate in Israel was 1.2% pa for non-Haredi and 5.0% for Haredim. The high fertility rate among West Bank Jewish settlers conforms to the high rate among the Haredim but not to the general Jewish Israeli growth rate.

SteeleRudux

Ok,
Your percentages show that the population in Lebanon
Is reasonable at this point in time. Good.
I did base my observation on my perception
Of these countries as being overcrowded.
The Indians too have an extreme overpopulation problem.

I always think that the overpopulation 7billion people and rising is
The cause of a lot of the refugee problems on the planet.
And it's about time family medical clinics were set up in every town and village across the world. Another perception I have is that it is the male leaders who
Cause a lot of the problems for their societies.

Again perceptions, from what I see and read about in some of these Muslim and Indian
And African countries.

I have always said the Palestinian conflict is a bloody, territorial dog fight and there is no answer to it apart from intermarriage, (mixing the blood lines),which is extremely unlikely given the nature of the Jews and the Muslims. Another solution would be for both sides to stop having children,again not likely. Or an all out war between the two sides with one winner.

Really, it is the fault of neither side, both sides want to have children and those children
Need ample land and resources to survive and prosper.
It is an existential problem for both.

What did I say about your misuse of the English language? Your very hubristic claim of my dicrediting should have read: ' On the contrary, ttbn, I and others have done it a few times'. You have misused a reflexive pronoun. Perhaps you were schooled in the current PC area where it is unfashionable to correct little darlings for fear of hurting their 'self esteem'.

And, you and your cronies have not discredited me; you have merely disagreed with, which is fine. Fact and history is on my side.

I also note that you get your material from such dubious, unsubstantiated sources as 'wonkypedia' and google. If you are reliant on technical gadgets, you can still find things called 'books', written by scholars, and and critiqued by their peers.

new about about ad hominem 'attacks' long before Wikipedia existed, and I did study Latin. So, while I really appreciate your provision of 'links' for my edification, I don't really need them, thankyou. Nor do I need to be told that I go AH on occassion in response to particularly silly comments, often AH themselves. It is not banned on OLO, being accused of it regularly by you has no effect, apart from boredom, on me. I will usually respond to objections to what I post, but this is the last time I will respond to silly name calling.

Pardon me. The above post was, of course, meant to be addressed to my favourite detractor, AJ Philips.