Freedom of the Press vrs. Al Jazeera

[James Steven Beverly]

Hezbollah is a political party just like the Republicans (or Democrats, etc.) except that they are armed. They represent something like 20% of the Lebanese government.

Ya but if they're the guy's w/ the guns, they can pretty much make the other 80% do what ever the hell they want them to do. That's why the framers of our constitution put that little amendment in there. B)

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> They did air beheading videos and hostage pleas.

 

So did fricken YouTube.

 

I've never been in a warzone (though I've been asked), but I have seen unconscionably horrible things happen to people due to the stupidity of others. The important thing to realise is that that stupidity is a human failing. Nobody's subhuman here; I'm sure the citizens of southern Lebanon feel much the same way as the citizens of northern Israel, only of course, their suffering is vastly greater.

 

Phil

[James Steven Beverly]

"Not unless the damn tea exploded, dude, and killed innocent by-standers many of whom where also Americans."

 

HUH? Capt. Video??????? Perhaps you can clarify this rather cryptic statement.

 

You take the "typical" American attitude in all things, when "we" do it, it's right. When others do it, it's wrong.

 

My guess is you would be quite irate if you heard about American citizens joining foreign armies. And yet as I pointed out 33, 000 foreigners serve in the US military. And apparently that's just fine with the US gov't. I wonder how the US gov't would treat American citizens who serve in foreign armies?

 

R,

 

Let me put this simply in terms you can understand. I'll use little words so it won't confuse you. Terrorists KILL innocent poeple with bombs, the Americans didn't KILL anyone at the Boston Tea party so their not Terrorists. And yes most of the time the things we do are the right things to do, but noone said we're perfect. We are the ONE country in the world that ADMITS our mistakes and are willing to fight the government, even if it's only one person doing the fighting, to correct them. Remember it was outraged American solders at Abu Grabe that leaked those photos to the press not some investigative team.

 

Gareth,

 

A few quick lessons, and I'll try to make them simple:

 

1) Never ascribe blame on an entire group of people, religion, faith, color, etc., for anything.

 

2) The same here. There are many leaders of the Zionist (whether Christains or Jews) movement who have tremendous sway when it comes to U.S. Foreign Policy in the middle east. They are as rascist and fascists as the neocons in the Bush Administration, hence more wars and suffering, and refugees. This has nothing to do with the Jewish religion, which like every other religion teaches tolerance and respect as I have learned from reading the old testament.

 

3) Finally, if you are planning to use the predicatable "anti-semite" accusation, please note that I've learned this from a very brigh and kind Jewish Professor during several political science courses back in my college years. I would be more than happy to refer you to his work if you would like to read.

 

4) Finally, sense of sustice has no religious or ethnic boundaries. What is right is right, and what is wrong is wrong. Making fun of refugees and degrading Arabs by people like you and TSM is wrong.

 

So Gareth and TSM, know the facts, read up on reality, and respect other people, and quit thinking like Bush or in your case Gareth like Blair. Finally, I am always reminded by the edict: "No Justice, No Peace."

 

Nick Woods

 

There ya go again Nick trying to enlighten someone WHO'S LIVING THROUGH IT. Until you've been there and seen what this guy's seen your talking though your, and I'll put this cleanly, HAT. You have no idea what's REALLY going on there. So I would again warn you to watch what you say because your only making yourself look foolish when you tell someone who lives within range of Lebanese mortors and rockets that YOU know more than they do about the situation in the Middle east.

Edited July 26, 2006 by Capt.Video

[Guest]

Let me put this simply in terms you can understand. I'll use little words so it won't confuse you. Terrorists KILL innocent poeple with bombs, the Americans didn't KILL anyone at the Boston Tea party so their not Terrorists.

 

Ok so the destruction of property is fine, you agree with that, it's when people get killed that you draw the line. Ok good to know.

 

"And yes most of the time the things we do are the right things to do, but noone said we're perfect."

 

All right you just confirmed what I already knew you believed. Basically you're a whacko-nut job American, who THANKFULLY does not represent the majority of people in the USA. Let us all pray you are in the 1% minority. FYI, George Bush is in that 1% minority with you.

 

"We are the ONE country in the world that ADMITS our mistakes and are willing to fight the government"

 

This statement is so beyond nutty, I doubt it's possible for any reasonable human being to even come up with a response? Would any one care to try?

 

Capt. Video are you a coke addict? Are you under the care of a mental health professional?

 

R,

[David Mullen ASC]

There ya go again Nick trying to enlighten someone WHO'S LIVING THROUGH IT. Until you've been there and seen what this guy's seen your talking though your, and I'll put this cleanly, HAT. You have no idea what's REALLY going on there. So I would again warn you to watch what you say because your only making yourself look foolish when you tell someone who lives within range of Lebanese mortors and rockets that YOU know more than they do about the situation in the Middle east.

 

You don't think there is some young Lebanese or Palestinian college student who could write a similarly angry post as Jonathan's? That only Israeli's have to live with the threat of bombs and missiles? Or are only Israeli's lives of any value -- everyone else deserves whatever they get? There is more than enough suffering happening on both sides of the border.

 

I posit that someone ducking from falling bombs certainly has a unique and valuable perspective on a situation... but it doesnt guarantee that they have the most accurate view of the whole situation. I can understand Jonathan's anger but until he makes some attempt to understand the anger of the other version of Jonathan on the other side of the fence, and vice-versa, no one is going to break this cycle of violence. Maybe for now they'd rather hate each other and kill each other, but eventually both of them are going to want to get back to something resembling a normal life.

[Jaan Shenberger]

... a bunch of barbaric cowards wearing rags on their heads...

 

...And let me tell you, I do not live in some f-----g desert with a bunch of camel jockeys. Israel is as modern as Skokie, New York, Chicago and Dallas...

 

...These aren't human beings we're dealing with.

 

it's ignorance and language like this that makes me feel embarrassed to be an american.

 

apparently, you had been very well-educated on these issues, based on the inference that you previously thought israel was a "f-----g desert with a bunch of camel jockeys" rather than a modernized country. it literally makes my stomach hurt to think that your education level on the israel-palestinian conflict reflects that of a large percentage of americans.

[Dan Goulder]

Hezbollah is a political party just like the Republicans

Whoa! How could you say such a terrible thing about...Hezbollah?

[David Mullen ASC]

I think we need to have a zero-tolerance policy here on this forum when it comes to racial slurs. Hopefully Jonathon will refrain in the future and everyone else will refrain from quoting his post.

[Gareth Munden]

I think we need to have a zero-tolerance policy here on this forum when it comes to racial slurs. Hopefully Jonathon will refrain in the future and everyone else will refrain from quoting his post.

 

I agree 100%, but hope that covers the anti semitic undertones that appear in some posts.

[James Steven Beverly]

You don't think there is some young Lebanese or Palestinian college student who could write a similarly angry post as Jonathan's? That only Israeli's have to live with the threat of bombs and missiles? Or are only Israeli's lives of any value -- everyone else deserves whatever they get? There is more than enough suffering happening on both sides of the border.

 

I posit that someone ducking from falling bombs certainly has a unique and valuable perspective on a situation... but it doesnt guarantee that they have the most accurate view of the whole situation. I can understand Jonathan's anger but until he makes some attempt to understand the anger of the other version of Jonathan on the other side of the fence, and vice-versa, no one is going to break this cycle of violence. Maybe for now they'd rather hate each other and kill each other, but eventually both of them are going to

want to get back to something resembling a normal life.

 

NO DOUBT WHAT SO EVERY there is David. That's my whole point. TERRORISTS cause this situation in which Lebanese kids and Israeli kid and Palistinian kids are dying because some Koran spouting lunitic twists the words of Ala into a message of evil the same way white supremisits twist the words of the Bible into a message of racial hate. The point I was making is that TSM (I clicked on the wrong one of Nick's rants) has more first had knowledge of this war that any one of us ever will, other than perhaps Kemper. These guys are living it while we watch it on TV. We can't possibly know how it effects them on a human level and to sit there spouting essoteric retoric about the great cause behind the people trying to BLOW HIM UP is ubserd and insultive.

 

Let me put this simply in terms you can understand. I'll use little words so it won't confuse you. Terrorists KILL innocent poeple with bombs, the Americans didn't KILL anyone at the Boston Tea party so their not Terrorists.

 

Ok so the destruction of property is fine, you agree with that, it's when people get killed that you draw the line. Ok good to know.

 

"And yes most of the time the things we do are the right things to do, but noone said we're perfect."

 

All right you just confirmed what I already knew you believed. Basically you're a whacko-nut job American, who THANKFULLY does not represent the majority of people in the USA. Let us all pray you are in the 1% minority. FYI, George Bush is in that 1% minority with you.

 

"We are the ONE country in the world that ADMITS our mistakes and are willing to fight the government"

 

This statement is so beyond nutty, I doubt it's possible for any reasonable human being to even come up with a response? Would any one care to try?

 

Capt. Video are you a coke addict? Are you under the care of a mental health professional?

 

R,

 

Yes Richard, I'll take the destruction of property over the loss of human life any day of the week, as for being on drugs or insane, I'd have to be it I thought for one second YOU represented the majority of Americans. The fact that you find ME having anything in common with Bush calls into question your own mental state at the moment. You know they do have state subsidized mental health programs, perhaps you should look into them because you are clearly delutional if you feel your views on this subject are valid in any way. Of course the insane don't know thy're insane so it may not be your fault.

[David Mullen ASC]

The Boston Tea Party was an act of vandalism, not terrorism. No one was "terrorized" by the thought of tea boxes floating in the harbor... except maybe the head of the tea company.

 

But there is a lesson to be learned from the American Revolution, in that the most powerful country in the world sent the most powerful army in the world across the ocean to put down an armed insurgency, and seven years later walked away when it realized it couldn't defeat it, after spending a lot of money and losing countless lives.

 

The British fought a conventional war and captured and occupied all the key cities at some point -- New York, Philadelphia, and Boston -- which would have signalled their victory, but it ultimately didn't mean anything if they couldn't catch and destroy Washington's small army.

 

I want to see "victory" as much as anyone else here against terrorists, but conventional wartime practices like bombing headquarters, marching in with troops, are only going to have limited and temporary success. There are no real capitals to capture and even the leadership is replaceable.

 

You have to attack the root causes, the reasons why terrorists are breeding like flies in the Middle East, and you have to make sure that your actions aren't doing more to help their cause than hurt it. I think we are only really disagreeing on strategy, not goals. I see a lot of waste going on, a lot of blundering, just like the British in the American Revolution. We have to be smarter than the enemy. Right now, it's hard not to get the feeling that we are being "played" by the Syrians and Iranians... and that is starting to piss me off (at them and at us for letting ourselves be manipulated so easily).

 

As for anti-semitism, there's no place for that here in this forum, but just don't define the term as "being opposed to Israeli policy regarding the Palestinians" because there are even Israelis that don't agree with everything their government does. Yes, I realize that "Zionism" is a loaded word and some people use it as a perjorative while others simply feel it defines a certain movement or belief system. It's probably one of those terms that when used repeatedly by somone becomes suspicious, a code word for something negative. I suggest we give it a rest.

[Gareth Munden]

David

 

By anti-semiticism I do mean the use of Zionism as a negative word and not attacks on Israels policies .

FREE countries are open to attacks on policy, in fact SHOULD be attacked ( with words ) thats freedom.

 

Thank you David for pointing out what wrong with using the word Zionism in this way.

[Jonathan Benny]

David

 

By anti-semiticism I do mean the use of Zionism as a negative word and not attacks on Israels policies .

FREE countries are open to attacks on policy, in fact SHOULD be attacked ( with words ) thats freedom.

 

Thank you David for pointing out what wrong with using the word Zionism in this way.

 

Guys,

 

Its "anti-semitism" not "anti-semiticism".

 

AJB

[David Mullen ASC]

Thank you David for pointing out what wrong with using the word Zionism in this way.

 

Well, on the surface it's a fairly mundane word in the dictionary. My Webster just says: "an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel." I even have heard some American Jews call other Jews "Zionists" to describe a certain personality type, I'm guessing the "anything that Israel does is justified" types.

 

Trouble is that the term can be thrown around too much and it starts remind one of the Jewish banking conspirary nuts, i.e. it's given a vaguely sinister aura about it, hence why I think it's a loaded word. But I'm not going to assume Nick is anti-semitic because he used the term, but I think he should give it a rest now because it makes some people uncomfortable obviously.

 

Thanks for the spelling correction, Jonathan.

[James Steven Beverly]

I have to agree with you whole-heartily on that point, David. Conventional warfare alone will never win this war, just as the British soldiers were never able to fully defeat the IRA. The shadow war is going to be just as vitally inportant to bringing millitants to the negociating table as the American and Israeli armies are. Dare I say those three little letters that make almost everyone uncomfortable CIA. In the end, this is going to be a clock and dagger war with intellegence playing prehaps the most significant role it's played sence the end of the cold war.

[Jonathan Spear]

I'd like to apologize for the tone of my last few posts. You're right, I am angry. Furious.

 

David, trust me, I've been thinking about "the Lebanese and Palestinian versions of Jonathan" way before this all started. I've had nights where I couldn't sleep knowing that someone just like me was being bombed because his second uncle was a suicide bomber. I got over it because I know who I am and what I'm not.

 

I have a few Arab friends and have worked with plenty of Arab-Israelis and have eaten in many Arab restaurants; both Christian and Muslim. I was raised in a warm, loving, open minded house with educated parents that taught me the importance of respecting my fellow human being regardless of skin color, nationality, religion, etc.

 

I draw the line when it comes to ignorance.

 

Of course there are innocent civilians caught up on both sides. However, I completely disagree with the popluar belief that Arabs and Israelis are "brothers". We're neighbors, and we have our differences.

I do not hold the value of a Jew or CHristian's life above a Muslim's, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to people's actions and reactions.

 

My Jewish friends, my Christian friends, myself and my family will NEVER resort to such attrocities as suicide bombings, kidnappings, intentional murder of innocent civilians, but I'll admit, behind my computer screen I do get carried away verbally, sometimes to the brink of racism and fascism.

 

Israelis really are stuck in the middle east. On every level. Israel is not a middle eastern country. It's a western country. Israelis, including those that come from middle eastern descent, the wave of Russian and Ethiopian immigrants -- all have western values.

 

Like everywhere else on planet earth, there are always a few bad apples.. but you will NEVER see a sane Israeli say or do something like this.. ever:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060727/ap_on_...ghting_al_qaida

 

That's why I'm so angry. When I watch the Israeli news, the reports include both Israeli, Lebanese and Palestinian casualties. Israel expresses deep regret when innocents are killed. When I watch CNN, BBC or SkyNews the reporters are broadcasting from an area that's just been hit by the IDF, wearing bullet proof vests and acting like Rambo or Gi Jane. It's pathetic, ridiculous, a complete biased coverup of the truth for sleazy shock-value. It's a paranoia-inducing marketing device that has the rest of you overseas biting your fingernails.

 

By the way, have you ever noticed the commercials that air during CNN?

 

Quatar Airways.. Dubai Resorts and Hotels.. big-biz Saudi corporations..

[Jonathan Spear]

Country = state.

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

Got this off CNN's website this morning. Its also on FoxNews.com

 

 

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Al Qaeda's No. 2 leader issued a worldwide call Thursday for Muslims to rise up in a holy war against Israel and join the fighting in Lebanon and Gaza until Islam reigns from "Spain to Iraq."

 

In a taped message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahiri said the terrorist organization would not stand idly by while "these (Israeli) shells burn our brothers.

 

"All the world is a battlefield open in front of us," said the Egyptian-born al-Zawahiri, second-in-command to Osama bin Laden.

 

"The war with Israel does not depend on cease-fires ... . It is a Jihad for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahiri said. "We will attack everywhere."

 

 

They openly admit their goals. To think that a cease fire alone is going to be the answer would be ignorant on our part.

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

A big difference I see between the British vs. the colonists and America vs. Taliban or America vs. Al-Qaida in Iraq is that the British were unjustly pursecuting (via taxes and no representation in the British Parliament) the colonies. It was a more complete "us vs. them" mentality. They had little support in America. Where as we as America in Afghanistan are working with that government to get it up and runing on its own and to develop and prosper. With the goal in mind that if that society can be esablihed to be free and strong its one less place in this world that will breed and support terrorists. We are not trying to take or limit their freedom we are trying to give it to them.

 

David, in reading your thoughts on strategy versus terror groups I find myself seeing the logic there and so begin to agree with you. But then I think about these terror groups and about their goals and their mentality. By their own admission they are the aggressor. They mean to be the aggressor and no amount of agreements of cease-fires will deter them. As much as i think, in principle, your ideas are right I have to think that even if we approached them peacefully they would continue to stir the pot. That is how they interpret their Quaran. At some point you have to say, they are going to attack me, they are attacking me, I have to defend myself. And how does one defend themself? Through either diplomacy or military action. And as they continue to point out diplomacy will not deter them from their holy fight. To me that leaves the latter. War is a hundred negative things, but contrary to a few liberal statements I've seen lately it can solve problems. You use it when its being used against you.

 

I would like to hear anyone else's specific thoughts on how to deal with terrorits, with Hamas, with Hezbollah. Please be more specific than "diplomacy", or "cease-fire" give me specific actions or steps to take. I certainly don't have the answers and I'm not expecting anyone else to have them either. I would just like to know your thoughts, to just talk. So please leave the angst at the door. You have your opinion, I have mine, and I just want to hear you out.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Paul Wizikowski

[Tim J Durham]

Got this off CNN's website this morning. Its also on FoxNews.com

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Al Qaeda's No. 2 leader issued a worldwide call Thursday for Muslims to rise up in a holy war against Israel and join the fighting in Lebanon and Gaza until Islam reigns from "Spain to Iraq."

 

In a taped message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahiri said the terrorist organization would not stand idly by while "these (Israeli) shells burn our brothers.

 

"All the world is a battlefield open in front of us," said the Egyptian-born al-Zawahiri, second-in-command to Osama bin Laden.

 

"The war with Israel does not depend on cease-fires ... . It is a Jihad for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahiri said. "We will attack everywhere."

They openly admit their goals. To think that a cease fire alone is going to be the answer would be ignorant on our part.

 

This is exactly what I was talking about. Even as Fox and CNN are broadcasting the tape, they feel compelled to add "In a taped message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahiri said..." as if that absolves them of the complaints people make about Al Jazeera broadcasting these messages.

 

Once again, if CNN or Fox got the tapes first instead of Al Jazeera, they'd treat them the same way. Well, maybe not Fox, but any reputable news organization. After all, these tapes are NEWS and AJ is in the news business. They just don't feel they need to get their stories vetted by the Bush Administration or their huge mega-conglomerate masters before they air them.

 

Now it remains to be seen whether the foreigners now fighting in Iraq will move over to Lebanon.

[David Mullen ASC]

A big difference I see between the British vs. the colonists and America vs. Taliban or America vs. Al-Qaida in Iraq is that the British were unjustly pursecuting (via taxes and no representation in the British Parliament) the colonies. It was a more complete "us vs. them" mentality. They had little support in America.

 

I don't think that is accurate. We were a British colony and many members were proud of that. The island of Manhatten was fairly pro-British throughout the war which is why so many fled when the war was over and they realized that they would be persecuted.

 

I think I read somewhere that perhaps as much as 50% of the population was opposed to the war against Britain -- it had to be SOLD to them and it took a long time, past 1776. It took increased atrocities on the part of the British army on the population, plus Washington's few victories, to reverse public opinion and make them embrace the rebellion. I mean, think about it -- back then you might have been British-born, or your parents were, you think of yourselves as British citizens, and suddenly some new taxes and other indignities, plus the Boston Massacre, is enough to convince you and the whole population to take up arms and create their own government? It was definitely something that had to seep into the popular consciousness as being logical and inevitable, and many were waiting to see if Washington's army even had a chance of victory. It's always dangerous to take sides during a civil war, basically, so most just hold out as long as possible to see who might be the winners.

 

I only brought it up as a warning not to underestimate a determined insurgency fighting on their own land.

 

Going back to the IRA example, would the British government have "won" the war if only they had dropped bombs on Belfast apartment buildings from airplanes? Being overly aggressive and indiscriminate against a population can cause them to align themselves more and more with the terrorists. It becomes counter-productive.

 

It goes back to whether both Israel and Hezbollah are being "played" by bigger fish -- someone (Syria?) might be willing to sacrifice a lot of Hezbollah's members as a way of drumming up support against Israel. The question again is whether you really want to win this war or just blindly take revenge.

 

Of course, there is always a chance that any strategy will backfire. Right now, certain players are more interested in increasing thier sway over the population by looking tough against Israel and the U.S. Looking back before the War in Iraq, we all wondered by Saddam was so catty and evasive about the inspections for WMD's when later it turned out that he didn't have them, but being evasive made his look suspicious. Well, the answer is probably he didn't want his own people to know he didn't have them, and it was more important at the time to act tough to hold power locally than appease the U.N. inspectors. But obviously that plan backfired on him. But for now, it seems to me that Iran, Syria, etc. are all playing this deadly game of stepping on the tiger's tail and getting the predictable angry military response from Israel or the U.S. because it helps drum up support for terrorist groups and themselves. And the question I have (without an answer) is whether we are being too predictable and conventional in fighting this war. We shouldn't be surprised at the classic assymetrical warfare techniques being practiced here against us, but it seems we haven't learned anything from Vietnam, etc.

[Guest]

"Yes Richard, I'll take the destruction of property over the loss of human life any day of the week, as for being on drugs or insane, I'd have to be it I thought for one second YOU represented the majority of Americans."

 

Ah I'm Canadian, incase you didn't read any of my other posts. So I don't represent American opinion in any way. But I did go to university in your country and live there for a long time.

 

Of course I could list off any of the other genocidal activities committed by the USA in the past, i.e. slavery and the elimination of the American aboriginals. Would you add those activities to your list of "we are always right."?

 

R,

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

This is exactly what I was talking about. Even as Fox and CNN are broadcasting the tape, they feel compelled to add "In a taped message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahiri said..." as if that absolves them of the complaints people make about Al Jazeera broadcasting these messages.

 

Once again, if CNN or Fox got the tapes first instead of Al Jazeera, they'd treat them the same way. Well, maybe not Fox, but any reputable news organization. After all, these tapes are NEWS and AJ is in the news business. They just don't feel they need to get their stories vetted by the Bush Administration or their huge mega-conglomerate masters before they air them.

 

 

In this particular article there are none of the elements that have caused the uproar against Al-Jazeera. Everything in this article is simply news. The difference to me is that Al-Jazeera seems to be an open mouth for these extremists. Its one thing to cover what they've done or discuss what they have said or are saying its quite another to play their demands, their beheadings, and their propoganda without ethical or objective filtering. I understand certain news agencies in the US have played snippets of the videos and tapes that Al-Jazeera first aired but they do so attempting to stay on the side of news and not propoganda. I guarentee you if CNN or Fox aired a beheading video and included the beheading in the airing there would be just as much of an uproar against that agency as there is against Al-Jazeera.

 

The question here perhaps shouldn't be about free speach but rather is Al-Jazeera operating ethically and objectivelly? Public opinion here is that they aren't.

[David Mullen ASC]

But you also have to factor that not all countries have the same standards in regards to showing images of violence. I'm always surprised when I see some foreign newspaper routinely show a photo of a horribly managed or burned corpse from some accident or killing. To an American's eyes, it looks exploitative, just to sell newspapers (and maybe it is), but I'm not sure that's how the local population thinks about it -- they may just be less squeamish than we are, I don't know.

 

I'm just saying that the same journalistic standards are not applied worldwide. Some cultures don't hide images of death so you have to factor that in.

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

I don't think that is accurate. We were a British colony and many members were proud of that. The island of Manhatten was fairly pro-British throughout the war which is why so many fled when the war was over and they realized that they would be persecuted.

 

 

I do not not agree with you. (intentional double negative there) I appreciate any level headed explanation. I simply felt there were some notable differences between that and what is going on now worth pointing out.

 

 

And its quite possible that Isreal is in all this chaos giving Syria/Iran reason to act in the future. I have to think that at some point the differences between Syria and Iran and the West will boil over. Not condoneing here. Just stating thoughts. Now the actions to get to that point remain to be seen and one can only hope that they are generations away when there can be time to seek a change in the menatily and culture that breeds such hatred. Which is yet another reason for Isreal to seek other means of retaliation. All that said, if someone keeps swinging at you you have to do what you can to push them out of arms length.

 

Any other thoughts?