Friday, January 06, 2006

Ariel Sharon

The Mere Rhetoric blogsite here and here has been following Ariel Sharon's third surgery. "(3:28am PST) There has just been a discussion about whether or not the family is prepared to instruct the doctors to cease trying to save Sharon. It appears that the family has left it up to the doctors - 'it is the decision of the entire country'".

It's funny how the man so reviled as a warmonger in health has, on his sickbed, become the symbol of peace in the Middle East. Kofi Annan says he pleaded with Sharon to cut back on his workload after his first stroke. Newsday reports that:

Even former critics on the Jewish left expressed regret Thursday about the events that followed so quickly upon Sharon's change of direction. "I just returned to New York from Israel less than 24 hours ago and I'm having great difficulty collecting my thoughts," said Jamie Levin, director of Ameinu, a progressive Zionist group. "Had you told me a year ago that I would be a cheerleader of Ariel Sharon, I wouldn't have believed it. To me, it is inconceivable that this staunchly militant warrier has become a peacemaker, albeit a unilateral one. But he did. And now, with him lying comatose in a bed, I'm seriously worried for the prospects for the future of peace."

Are we talking about the same man who Belgium wanted to try for war crimes? The same Ariel Sharon who Amnesty International wanted investigated for crimes against humanity? Their absolution should be as worthless as their condemnation. And if so, what yardstick of opprobrium or praise can a man bear with him to eternity if he wants more than the judgment of the UN Secretary General? There is the comfort of good intentions, though those too can be mocked. After Neville Chamberlain died at the height of the Blitz, Winston Churchill, of all people, was asked to deliver the eulogy. Churchill never doubted that Chamberlain had meant well, despite all the ill that followed, and held those intentions up like a light to dispel the darkness of the legacy.

It fell to Neville Chamberlain in one of the supreme crises of the world to be contradicted by events, to be disappointed in his hopes, and to be deceived and cheated by a wicked man. But what were these hopes in which he was disappointed? What were these wishes in which he was frustrated? What was that faith that was abused? They were surely among the most noble and benevolent instincts of the human heart ... This alone will stand him in good stead as far as what is called the verdict of history is concerned.

But there was in Churchill's eulogy disappointment that "what is called the verdict of history" would render its judgments past Chamberlain's hearing. He was sorry most of all that Neville would never know how things turned out.

After he left the Government he refused all honours. He would die like his father, plain Mr. Chamberlain. I sought permission of the King, however, to have him supplied with the Cabinet papers, and until a few days of his death he followed our affairs with keenness, interest and tenacity. He met the approach of death with a steady eye. If he grieved at all, it was that he could not be a spectator of our victory; but I think he died with the comfort of knowing that his country had, at least, turned the corner.

This last must have been said to ease the grief of those present, for Winston himself could not have known in the winter of 1940 that "his country had, at least, turned the corner". Whatever Chamberlain thought on his deathbed, Winston at his funeral was supplying enough faith for the both of them, knowing perhaps that faith was all there was. The best of us live in the hope of receiving judgment, not escaping it. Ariel Sharon's course is run, but he too, I think, would have wanted to know how it turned out.

166 Comments:

Blogger enscout said...

"Their absolution should be as worthless as their condemnation."

It is, Wretchard, it is.

1/06/2006 05:31:00 AM  
Blogger sam said...

Sharon rushed back into operating room:

Sharon is back in surgery after a brain scan showed a rise in cranial pressure and some bleeding. The director of Hadasseh Hospital in Jerusalem says Sharon's blood pressure has also changed.

Sharon's aides rushed to the hospital following word of the surgery, the second in two days. The Israeli leader suffered a massive stroke Wednesday.

Operating Room

1/06/2006 05:36:00 AM  
Blogger Jamie said...

Churchill was generous and truthful both. His giant spirit enabled him to recognize the good intentions of a man who unwittingly nearly destroyed his own nation (and more!), even as he himself was engaged in trying to undo what Chamberlain had done. The story resonates in US politics today.

Praying for Sharon, and the will of God.

1/06/2006 05:43:00 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

It reminds me of how some fringe elements of the US left haled Tookie Williams as a man of peace before he met his fate at San Quentin. By sanctifying him, Sharon’s victims at Sabra and Chatilla are just as forgotten as all of Tookie’s victims were. If Pat Robertson is right then Sharon’s death sentence was signed by – and executed by -- Jesus Christ himself. One wonders what the crime was; dividing biblical Israel, war crimes during the invasion of Lebanon, or his failure to “do a De Gaulle” and define Israel’s final and lasting border with Palestine.

1/06/2006 05:43:00 AM  
Blogger Charles said...

The best of us live in the hope of receiving judgment, not escaping it.
///////////
Mercy is when you get don't get what you deserve.

Grace is when you get what you don't deserve.

1/06/2006 06:03:00 AM  
Blogger Matt Huisman said...

And if so, what yardstick of opprobrium or praise can a man bear with him to eternity if he wants more than the judgment of the UN Secretary General?

I think most men of character would gladly refuse any honor due them as they entered eternity if they could have 'the comfort of knowing that his country had, at least, turned the corner'.

Chamberlain may not have known the outcome of what was to come, but he at least left with the certainty that both roads had been explored fully - and that his successor was more than capable and definitively on the right one.

One wonders whether Sharon will leave with this same conviction - for it does not appear to be certain at all that he'll leave behind a capable successor or a country that possesses a clear vision of the road ahead.

1/06/2006 07:00:00 AM  
Blogger Baron Bodissey said...

The big question now is whether anyone can fill Mr. Sharon's shoes. Very tough times are ahead -- Israel will shortly have to act pre-emptively against Iran, since the US almost certainly lacks the political will to do so.

This will require a steady hand on the tiller and nerves of steel. Does any Israeli politician waiting in the anteroom have what's required?

Mr. Sharon, you chose an inconvenient time to leave us...

1/06/2006 07:02:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

But baron, the choice of the departure date was not Mr Sharon's to make, at least according to Mr Robertson.

1/06/2006 07:07:00 AM  
Blogger Sardonic said...

Candies and Rockets from Allah!?

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48203

What a bunch of stupid, evil, morons. If Satan himself hand crafted a religion devoted to the destruction of goodness... what would it's worshippers act like? Hmmmmm...

1/06/2006 07:11:00 AM  
Blogger Baron Bodissey said...

Rat --

Hmm. So you now consider Pat Robertson a reliable authority, eh?

Right up there with Barbra Streisand...

1/06/2006 07:11:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

No, but even a broken clock is right, twice a day.

The Iranian President, I read, is gleeful. Without a strong leader Irsrael will not have the Will to attack Iran, not if US objects.

An editorial from the Jeruslem Post is smack on the discussion of Tehran, Washington & Jerusalem.

" ... For Israel to be capable of carrying out an attack against Iran's nuclear installations it will need to receive US and NATO backing for the move. The majority of international security analysts agree that Israeli fighter bombers en route to Iran will need to fly over Iraqi airspace and may even need to refuel in Iraq. Turkish bases may also be necessary. Given this, Israel is today in dire need of leadership capable of handling some of the most sensitive and monumental diplomacy in its history - even if such leadership were only able to convince others to carry out the attacks in our place. ..."

It also well describes the chaos that the Palistinians have created in Gaza, the "new Somalia", and Israel's contribution to the effort.

" ... the Palestinians' terror capabilities have been vastly expanded as a direct result of Israeli policies.

Today, as the Palestinian Authority has ceased to operate in any coherent manner; as the Egyptian border with Gaza has been open for terror traffic for three months; and as Hamas has emerged as the most prevalent force in Palestinian politics and society, it is impossible to deny that Sharon's decision to withdraw Israeli forces from Gaza and northern Samaria has vastly empowered Palestinian terrorists. Today the Gaza Strip has become one of the most active and dangerous bases for jihadi terrorism in the world. ... "


Mr Sharon was governing in the 'wink & nod', 'trust me' mode. He never articulated the future steps required in attaining Israel's Goals, never presented a path to Victory and in a democracy of mere mortal men, that is a hazard.

Column One: Israel after Sharon from the JPost.

1/06/2006 07:33:00 AM  
Blogger Baron Bodissey said...

Mr. Rat, I think that the creation of the Terror State of Palestine is an unfortunate necessity for Israel. The old methods were worse than fruitless, and Israel could not take the proper action to defend itself as long as Israelis were on the other side of the line in "Palestine".

Once the wall is complete, Palestine can be considered a hostile foreign power and treated appropriately when necessary. The terrorists created in Palestine will find it harder to harm Israel, and they can be eradicated en masse by the IDF.

Unfortunately, the same terrorists can do harm to US interests, but that's our problem, not Israel's.

1/06/2006 07:39:00 AM  
Blogger exhelodrvr said...

Thanks, Wretchard. Hopefully Kadima still wins the election and whatever coalition forms will continue the process of the fence and withdrawal that Sharon started. Sharon was always (I thought) very pragmatic.

Charles Krauthammer has a good column on this also.

1/06/2006 07:50:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

I do not disagree with that assessment baron, though Ms Glick at the JpPost seems to when she writes
" ... Amid the threat now constituted by Gaza and the rising chaos in Palestinian society generally, three weeks before the Palestinian elections Israel's defense and diplomatic establishments have no answers to give. Israel has no coherent policy to speak of for dealing with the acquisition of Strella anti-aircraft missiles or Katyusha missiles by Palestinian terrorists in Gaza. It has no policy for contending with the fact that Al Qaida has now become an actor in the Palestinian areas and in south Lebanon. It has no effective policy for dealing with the repeated attacks against its vital infrastructures in Ashkelon or with assumption that the Palestinians will soon transfer their newfound capabilities from Gaza to Judea and Samaria. Israel's security brass has no policy for contending with the manifest links between the Iranian regime and Palestinian terror groups.

Our leadership's befuddlement was perhaps most sharply manifested on Wednesday by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, who in a public statement laid out Israel's conditions for opening a dialogue with Hamas. ..."

Was there enough Will to 'Crush" the Mohammedans in Gaza, even with Mr Sharon?

Ms Glick seems to think negotiating with Terrorists is ill advised. She and, I guess, the JPost see Hamas as a Terrorist Group. One of the Hamas candidate in the up coming Pali elections is the mother of three Suicide bombers, Ms Glick describes her as being a 'moderate' Hamasian.

So even under Mr Sharon there was discomfort with his Policies, without him... time will tell.

Mr Sharon though, I'm sure, did not choose to check out of the game. That decision was made by his DNA & lifestyle choices or God.

1/06/2006 07:52:00 AM  
Blogger RWE said...

When you consider what the Palestinians are doing to themselves as a result of Sharon's cutting them loose - I predict that some will find a new way to revile him.
Just look at the comments we have here:
Courageous Peacemaker
or
Terrorist Enabler?
Israel and the U.S. are often in the typical position of policemen called to a domestic dispute. If they haul the husband to jail the wife will wail about them locking up her man. If they don't lock the guy up they will be accused of not caring about the safety of the woman.

As someone once said to me following a highly unsatisfactory program management meeting: "Your problem is that you are trying to deal with this in a logical manner."

Sharon was both Churchill and Neville Chamberlain.
And that sums up the difficulty with dealing with the Middle East; to satisfy everyone you have to be both.

1/06/2006 08:05:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Basicly baron, Israel's stated Policy was not to create the conditions for War.
That was the 'wink and nod' from Mr Sharon to some of the public, like you. But not, I think, the 'trust me' with Mr Perez and the 'Left'.
If War was the projected outcome the IDF would not, if Ms Glick is correct, be befuddled.

The Battle of Iraq befuddled the US Military for over a year, the IDF could well be befuddled as well. They may not have been studying for war with a Terrorist State, next door.

1/06/2006 08:06:00 AM  
Blogger diabeticfriendly said...

Sharon was and is the leader that is not giving us the "peace process" he is/was the leader that gave us divorce. The simple truth? the Palestinians are like an insane/criminal 1st wife, time to cut her off, dump her cold. There is no peace process, there is disengagement from an insane enemy.

I thank Sharon for teaching me this simple truth.

for all the pundits out there that talk of "peace process" simply dont understand what sharon was saying..

the palestinians do, that is why the hate the fence/wall, it makes them irrelevant.

1/06/2006 08:23:00 AM  
Blogger Baron Bodissey said...

Rat, you could be right. But it's hard to tell what the Israelis really want to do, because we are so often twisting their arm to make them conform with the idiotic "peace process".

1/06/2006 08:39:00 AM  
Blogger sirius_sir said...

Winston himself could not have known in the winter of 1940 that "his country had, at least, turned the corner".

No, but by then he and Chamberlain both knew their country would at least fight the good fight.

Regarding Sharon, he dies knowing there is no shortage of talent to replace him. He knows he has shown leadership in both war and peace, and proved that it is not necessary to constrain resolve or action to comport with expectations of foe or friend.

All who follow will derive some measure of inspiration, courage, and conviction from his example. What better thing can a man leave behind?

1/06/2006 08:53:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"There is no peace process, there is disengagement from an insane enemy.
I thank Sharon for teaching me this simple truth.
"
Amen

Kevin,
So Jerry Brown is a
"Domestic Criminal,"
for the murders that occur under his Mayorship?

1/06/2006 08:54:00 AM  
Blogger Cobalt Blue said...

The wall could turn out to be a brilliant stroke: it gives, de facto, the palis a statelet on the outside of the wall. Hostilities toward Israel can then be met with a more conventional state-to-state response.

But wasn't it in Lebanon--another terror state--more than 20 years ago where Sharon stepped in it? Israel was harassed from south Lebanon by the terror state, and treating it as a state-on-state military matter (invading Lebanon) didn't permanently solve the problem. Arafat was sent into exile after that as I remember. Now I'm not sure we would know who to exile.

1/06/2006 08:56:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Lifestyle Choices"
Yeah, "choosing" to be human.
...but our modern health obsessives will have immortal life if avoidance of the battle will deliver them.

1/06/2006 08:59:00 AM  
Blogger enscout said...

Sharon's move to give up Gaza gave movement to a process whose inertia was going nowhere. It exposed the "Palistinians" for the untrustworthy,murderous band they are.

God knows where this turn of events will lead Isreal. The standoff with Iran, their clear major threat in the region, grows more ominous every day.

The thing that has not changed is that Isreal tries to exist to provide a secure homeland for a people whose very existance is threatened by her insane neighbors.

Could be time again for Netenyaho?

1/06/2006 08:59:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

My thoughts exactly, enscout.
Bibi would know what to do with the madman of Tehran.

1/06/2006 09:01:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Now I'm not sure we would know who to exile"
Parents that teach their children to hate?
...exile to Hell.

1/06/2006 09:11:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

What's the earthbound Mika's plan?

1/06/2006 09:12:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Yeah, but this invisible, singular, unnamed, abstract transcendental deity of yours, needs to decide what side in this tribal dispute it wants to take.

1/06/2006 09:12:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Heh,
anticipated your earthbound presence.

1/06/2006 09:14:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Heheh! Practicing Kaballah already?!

1/06/2006 09:18:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Doug,

I'm guided by a signal in the heavens
I'm guided by those birthmarks on my skin
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons..

First we take Manhattan then we take Berlin

1/06/2006 09:22:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

;-)

1/06/2006 09:23:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

ahhh, mika, you think there is only one? No wife, cousins or in-laws to bend it's ear?
Without brothers or sisters, a lonely existence to be sure.

The President of Iran and the 700 Club host agree that the end is near, both their Sacred Texts seems to agree on that, they think.

The outcome of the Battle, however, is in dispute between these men of books. Each varied Edition being authored, it's said, by the same Voice, just transcribed by different ears. From the Old Book to the 'New' inclusive of the transcriptions of Mohammedan as well as the translations of Joseph Smith.

Better, I think, a whole cast of Gods, then just one that seems as confused as Sybil.

1/06/2006 09:25:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"as well as the translations of Joseph Smith"
---
How about a cast of wives?
(Modern American Politics?)

1/06/2006 09:29:00 AM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

IF we weren't so ensnared into the ME by oil, religious faith, the Jewish media, and the Israel Lobby - what happens to Sharon and his country would mirror the total non-interest we would have in any other minor country lacking strategic lofation or assets.

The Gaboonian PM just had a stroke?

BFD.

What will happen to Gaboonian politics after the death, vegetative persistance, or dehabilitating infirmity of the Gaboonian PM?

Who cares?

Sharon is due slightly more attention than Arafat's demise, but the two of them are only considered major, important world leaders because they were puffed up to be and treated so in the international community. It wasn't because they headed major nations.

The parties in Palestine are 57 years past due for final borders and a Peace Treaty. And 57 years past due where the world should have stopped lavishing so much money, media coverage, and an inordinate squandering of attention and diplomatic resources on them (particularly by the UN, the US, and the similarly religious-driven non-frontline Muslim nations) - and focused more on major global issues that were ignored in the process.

1/06/2006 09:37:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

d'Rat,

Better, I think, a whole cast of Priests, and congregations as confused as Sybil.

1/06/2006 09:41:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Cedarfard,

Ever checkmated your opponent with a black pawn? It's how you play war by proxy.

1/06/2006 09:51:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Maybe C's Black Pawn fires Blanks.

1/06/2006 09:59:00 AM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"By sanctifying him, Sharon’s victims at Sabra and Chatilla are just as forgotten as all of Tookie’s victims were."

Yawn....Arabs mass murdering Arabs, so what else is new? Why have the S & C "massacres" (which were wholly the responsibility of Lebanese Christians against the Palestinians) become such a supposed indictment of Sharon? Because he stood by and didn't do anything to stop it?

Did Sharon do anything to stop the Jordanians from slaughtering thousands of Palestinians in the infamous "Black September" massacres, and if not, why is he not blamed for that as well?

Just exactly like we did with the Shiites and Kurds in Iraq following the Gulf War? Why doesn't this become such a firestorm of controversy? Far more Arabs and Muslims were butchered by Saddam!

Just like we do every Haj season when Muslims wildly stampede killing hundreds of their co-religionists in an orgy of mass killing? Sharon doesnt lift a finger there, either.

What about when Dad Assad wiped out entire cities and concreted over the remains, didn't those Arabs too die at the hands of Arabs? Did Clinton eventually announce he was sorry because he allowed it? Did Sharon?

And then there is the current little thing going on in Sudan, which we are allowing and not doing much about, does that create the same outrage as S & C, even though the casualties are far more staggering? Will it ever? Why isn't Sharon blamed?

1/06/2006 10:03:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Kevin will know.

1/06/2006 10:07:00 AM  
Blogger enscout said...

C4:

And why do you think that Israel is always in the news? Why do you think that The Israeli leader’s imminent death is such a big deal (as opposed the that of Gabon)?

Could it be that the land they currently inhabit was promised to them by their G-d thousands of years ago and that despite the world’s intentions of dispersing them to other lands or of eliminating them altogether, they not only survive but also continue to inhabit that land and continue to be the “light of the world”.

Could it be that the reason that Israel dominates the news is that their religion that has survived while nations have risen and fallen, is the fundamental religion for all modern Jews, Christians AND Muslims.

Could it be that despite Israel being the only working liberal democracy in the ME for the last half-century, she and her (sane) self-governing population continue to be reviled as a worldwide pariah, while her (insane) undemocratic, tyranical neighbors continue to get a pass by self proclaimed liberals worldwide?

Could it be that it is because ALL of the neighbors of Israel have vowed to eliminate her and her inhabitants from this world?

Sounds like a fairy tale that she exists at all. But, mysteriously, just like the universe that surrounds her, there she is.

1/06/2006 10:13:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Doug,

It's because the Sudanese don't have good restaurants as the Lebanese.

1/06/2006 10:18:00 AM  
Blogger Aristides said...

re: allowing atrocities.

If we know of evil, and have the power to stop it, are we not then allowing it to happen if we choose to do nothing? Are we not, after knowledge and power obtain, a proximate cause to the continuance of evil, and therefore morally culpable to its victims?

When guilt inevitably follows knowledge and power, some people will seek shelter by avoiding the former, and some will find comfort by abdicating the latter. "If we had only known" and "it is was out of our hands" are the redoubts of the unaffected.

1/06/2006 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger Baron Bodissey said...

Check out the "Sharon death candy" at Boker tov.

Hat tip: Wally Ballou.

1/06/2006 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Feel the Love.

1/06/2006 10:39:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Gaawd, I miss that Headscarf.

1/06/2006 10:41:00 AM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"are we not then allowing it to happen if we choose to do nothing?"

I like what Derbyshire says. Theres just a lot of atrocities that happen that we cannot stop even if we have the will and ability to stop them.

We are talking about Sharon "allowing" the S & C "massacres." Nobody has ever advanced a cogent theory of exactly what Sharon was supposed to do to stop them. Oh, send Israeli soldiers into a Palestinian refuge camp to protect them from angry Arabs? That sounds like a recipe for the pointless slaughter of quite a few Israeli soldiers. Maybe Sharon had a surplus of soldiers on that day, with nothing better to do than to send them off to be butchered for no apparent reason, with a high likelihood of failure.

Wouldn't the Palis have merely slaughtered the Israelis sent in to protect them?

Now, in Gaza, the gangs and terrorists are vigorously slaughtering each other. Send in the IDF to stop it? Sharon's responsibility? Under what theory?

It always feels good to advance moral sounding general postulates until you get down to the specifics.

1/06/2006 10:46:00 AM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Concerning Baron's question of 'whether anyone can fill Mr. Sharon's shoes', I offer Benjamin Netanyahu, and it just might happen that way.

With Sharon out of the picture politically, his Kadima party is unlikely to be as successful as it would have been with him in the lead. A switch in votes for Kadima to Netanyahu's Likud could give him a boost over Amir Peretz's Labor Party, and a serious shot at Prime Minister.

Netanyahu has already made it clear what he plans to do with Iran.

1/06/2006 10:47:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

To celebrate the demise of an Enemy is bitter sweet when you are not the cause of his defeat.

The Celebration though can still be sweet. The loss of Mr Sharon's skills will be sorely felt by the Israelis, at least for a while. The Mohammedans around the World celebrate that loss.

Not to worry, though
When Osama and Dr Z are dead and gone I'll pass out sweets for a week.
We may well Party for a month

I just wonder, though,
when will the Good Times Roll?

How long must US wait 'til we can celebrate?

1/06/2006 10:55:00 AM  
Blogger Evanston said...

Aristides and others address the subject of "allowing atrocities." He starts by asking "If we know of evil, and have the power to stop it...?" -- well, let's stop right there. We can't stop every atrocity, everywhere, because our power is limited. We need to pick and choose deciding first what to stop, and then how to stop it (polite suggestion, active diplomacy, sanctions, secretly funding one side, openly arming one side, sending in a few missiles, outright invasion, occupation, etc.). It sounds cruel, but cost vs. benefit must be measured in every intervention. I respect those who argue against Iraq (or Sharon's policies or whatever) when they take all factors into account and, on balance come out on one side or other. The "Bush lied" or "Sharon's 'Berlin Wall'" camps are truly childish, taking into account one factor (presence/absence of WMDs, creating a barrier) instead of measuring all factors (Saddam's use of WMDs against his own citizens and Iran, obstruction of UN WMD inspectors, harboring of Abu Abbas -- Sharon's fence keeping criminals OUT vs. Berlin Wall imprisoning an entire nation, abject failure of Palestinians in their part of the "Road Map" etc.). The sad, silly aspect of so-called Peace and Human Rights activists is how simplistic they are (while thinking they are "nuanced" and sophisticated). A different topic, Wretchard's closer: "The best of us live in the hope of receiving judgment, not escaping it." I gotta agree with Charles who said "Mercy is when you get don't get what you deserve. Grace is when you get what you don't deserve." I don't want what I deserve, I'll take the Grace.

1/06/2006 11:15:00 AM  
Blogger enscout said...

d rat:

We had our party in the nineties!

Sorry you missed it,;-)

1/06/2006 11:17:00 AM  
Blogger david bennett said...

Dude:

You really need to get a newspaper subscription. Messages from the aliens just don't cut it as an information source.

Sharon's shifting in policy and his splitting from the old Israeli right have been a matter of headlines for months.

Just because it's in the MSM doesn't mean it isn't true.

1/06/2006 11:34:00 AM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

This from Wikipedia, which demonstrates S & C, which Sharon "allowed," was puny in comparison with the other massacres of Arabs upon Arabs taking place contemporaneously, and which are forgotten because after all, Sharon was not in proximity:


"Infighting and massacres between these groups claimed several thousands of victims; notable massacres in this period included the Karantina Massacre (January 1976) by Phalangists against Palestinian refugees, Damour massacre (January 1976) by the PLO against Maronites and the Tel al-Zaatar Massacre (August 1976) by Phalangists against Palestinian refugees."

So as soon as the anti-Sharon folks get as bent out of shape about the Karantina, Damour and the Tel al-Zaatar Massacres as they are about the S & C, then I will accuse them of being slightly intellectually and morally honest.

Not until then.

1/06/2006 11:55:00 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

The simple truth? the Palestinians are like an insane/criminal 1st wife, time to cut her off, dump her cold.

Let’s just forget about the justification part, you know -- your G-d promised you that land; the pre-1967 borders were indefensible; law of the jungle – we were stronger so we just took it; we needed the water; whatever, let’s just accept that the invasion and occupation and colonization of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were totally and completely justified – did you really expect the Palestinians, no matter what the justification -- to accept your invading armies as loving husbands? Did you really think Abu the peasant was going to tell his daughter to “go put on your best pleated schoolgirl skirt and get some lipstick on those lips; I want you to go out and make those nice Israeli soldiers feel welcome. And go show them where our fresh water spring is” as the tanks rolled in? Did you really expect farmers, villagers, and goat herders to just jump aside and say “yes Mr. Israeli, feel free to build a colonial settlement on the land that was never really ours”?

Somehow I think the proper analogy would be that the Palestinians see you more as home-invading thieves that won't leave instead of as soon to be ex-husbands.

1/06/2006 12:00:00 PM  
Blogger pragmatist said...

Kevin:

A few weeks after the
Six Day War int 1967
Levi Eskol offered to
return ALL the land back
the Arabs for a peace treaty.

I'll let YOU research what
their response was.

And before then, say 1949
to 1967, why didn't the
Arabs establish a state
in the West Bank and Gaza?

YOU can research that one
too.

1/06/2006 12:14:00 PM  
Blogger geoffgo said...

Aristides
allowing massacres:

It occurs to me that we are enabling many atrocities-to-come, by forcing Irael to take care of the Iran problem,instead of the U.N./EU/NATO/ARAB League, et al.

More arab hate directed at the U.S. can be tolerated better than eternal arab rage directed at Irael. Israel should not have to deal with this problem alone.

If the mullahs nuke Irael, they will kill a country. How many nukes will the Iranian people deserve?

After the fact, will allowing the overthrow of the Mullahcracy be sufficient, even if we hang the 5,000 most responsible on the spot, on TV?

1/06/2006 12:16:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Well kevin, I have never heard of anyone burning down their own house, after the home invader left.

Your analogy there is a bit weak.

The Gaza could be many things, but a Country, not likely. It would not even qualify as a City State in times of old.

No, like Sinai, Gaza is but a part of greater Eygpt, this can be readilly seen as the Reuters News Agency reports:
" ... GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinian gunmen bulldozed a barricade on the Gaza Strip's border with Egypt, disrupted traffic across the frontier and stormed government offices on Wednesday in growing unrest ahead of elections later this month.

The gunmen, renegade members of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militant group in President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction, went on the rampage after police arrested a local leader on suspicion of involvement in the kidnapping of three Britons last week.

Having commandeered a bulldozer to cheers from onlookers, gunmen smashed through concrete blocks lining the border near the Palestinian refugee camp of Yibna, witnesses said.

Palestinians swarmed through into no-man's land. Egyptian police fired twice into the air to ward off Palestinian youths who cut through a fence on the Egyptian side of the frontier. But scores of Palestinians reached Egyptian soil, witnesses said. Most soon returned, including some clutching cheap merchandise. ..."

So it seems that the Border between Eygpt and Palistine is pourous. Whose fault is that?
Mr Sharon's?

Reuters goes on to describe Hamas in these terms

" ... Sworn to the Jewish state's destruction, Hamas is riding high on a wave of popularity among Palestinians over its suicide bombings during 5 years of fighting with Israel, corruption-free reputation and extensive charity network. ..."

Free of Corruption but dedicated to Death to the 'other' and Charity for the tribe. Perfectly suitable to negotiate with, why my oh my, they are Corruption Free.

Gaza gunmen rampage on Egypt border as unrest grows from Reuters

1/06/2006 12:21:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/06/2006 12:23:00 PM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"let’s just accept that the invasion and occupation and colonization of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were totally and completely justified"

War DOES create some strange borders. Gaza (part of Egypt) and the West Bank (part of Jordan)were not "Palestinian" territory in 1967, nor after. The fact is the West Bank was not Jordanian territory that defensible and Gaza was not worth defending by the Egyptians. Which are excellent arguments why Egypt and Jordan should not have attacked Israel without provocation in the Six Day War. This entire sorry spectacle would be analogous to Germany, post World 2, having been beaten out of the Rhine, suddenly taking an interest in an independent Rhineland and the self-determination of the Rhinelanders.

"– did you really expect the Palestinians, no matter what the justification -- to accept your invading armies as loving husbands?"

No, but I would expect, after about 60 years of relentlessly making bad choices to attempt to "drive the Jews into the sea" that they would eventually grow up and accept the fact of Israel's existence.

Are you arguing that the Palestians should have no consequences for their relentlessly terrible choices to go to war with Israel?

Give some other historical examples of groups of people who got away with declaring war and suffered no consequences please.

1/06/2006 12:25:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

It sounds cruel, but cost vs. benefit must be measured in every intervention.

This is true, and why those with knowledge and power must carry a heavy burden.

Allowing evil is wrong except when it's necessary. To give or withhold assistance is not a decision for the innocent, or the pure.

1/06/2006 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"your G-d promised you that land"

No need to indulge in ancient history and metaphysics. Cuz recently, in the 1940's, the UN majority promised them "that land."

You DO support UN decisions in general, no?

I always thought the left opposed the 2003 Iraq invasion because it was not authorized by the UN, and yet when it DOES authorize something by majority vote, they are opposed to THAT too.

How come the State of Israel is always the victim of this conundrum and no one else? Or are you deep down inside, a consistent US unilateralist? Please explain.

1/06/2006 12:37:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

"Somehow I think the proper analogy would be that the Palestinians see you more as home-invading thieves that won't leave instead of as soon to be ex-husbands."



Kevin, only it wasn't their home or their land to begin with. The vast majority of these people are very recent migrants, basically squatters and simple farm hands (Fellahin), to land that belonged to absentee landlords or Jewish landlords. I'd like to see the land titles to the sand dunes of Gaza, or to the then barren hills of Judea prior to me buying into your Myth.

1/06/2006 01:30:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Bigger Diggler - Repeats the Big Lie that Zionists have found it so useful to follow others footsteps in so doing:

Which are excellent arguments why Egypt and Jordan should not have attacked Israel without provocation in the Six Day War.

It was Israel that struck 1st, with provocation, but Zionists brought up under Stalin cannot resist embellishing the truth or just flat out lying. Another great myth, or lie, is extended to all Israels wars - Five times, Arab armies have attacked tiny helpless Eretz Yisrael without provocation, each time G_d and the plucky heroes defeated them Truth is the ethnic cleansers of 1948 attacked Arab villages simultaneously with Arabs taking pot shots protesting Jewish money bribed UN officials and gave them the best lands in Partition. It was only a month later that hastily assembled Arab forces tried pushing the Zionists back from Arab lands they were not given in Partition as the Arab Legion was bribed to stay on the sidelines. 1956 was launched first by Isral in a classic imperial land grab. 1967 was a preemptive war started by Israel. 1973 the Arabs attacked first and the war was fought almost exclusively on occupied Arab land. 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon.

Another Biggler Diggler lie in service of Zionism:

Cuz recently, in the 1940's, the UN majority promised them "that land."

You DO support UN decisions in general, no?


Jews, 1/3rd of the population, used the power of the purse to get half the land awarded in Partition, then seized another 30%, killing and cleansing out the inhabitants - ending up with ~80% of Palestine. Generally the world supports UN resolutions more than Zionists do, who ignored UN resolutions to withdraw from the cleansed 30% of land in 1948 or to pay a single shekel from those they thieved land, property and bank accounts from, or to comply with UN Res 242 when the Zionists grabbed the remaining 20%.

The Rhineland analogy is wrong except as you look at 1967 as a war of land-grabbing aggression that violated the 4th Geneva Protocol, and shouldn't have resulted in Israel keeping all its booty and not paying a shekel out anymore than we should have accepted German land grabs.

Since the UN was created, with all it's flaws, only two nations have expanded and seized new lands in aggressive war. Israel and China, with Tibet. China got away with it, but Israel has had considerable communications difficulties explaining how Hertzl and Vladimir Jabotinsky and Begin and Shamir and the rest of their terrorist class came to the conclusion G_D came them all lands between the Nile and the Euphrates after a 2,000 year abandonment while they pursued better business and money-making opportunities elsewhere on the planet.

1/06/2006 02:17:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Cedarfard, where are you getting your information?


The 1919 Faisal-Weizmann treaty provided the foundation for League of Nations ratification of the Balfour Declaration at the San Remo Conference in 1920. The proposals covered Palestine - from the Mediterranean through the entire Galilee, up to the Litany River, hundreds of miles east of the Jordan River through all of current day Jordan, and into part of the Sinai. The League assigned Palestine Mandate administration to Britain, entrusting it to establish the National Home for the Jews.

1/06/2006 02:46:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"If we know of evil, and have the power to stop it, are we not then allowing it to happen if we choose to do nothing? Are we not, after knowledge and power obtain, a proximate cause to the continuance of evil, and therefore morally culpable to its victims?"

- aristides

Never mind that the power (as in means) does not exist to end evil in the world, but this proposition so confuses, even corrupts, the very concepts of agency and responsibility as to obliterate them altogether.

It is tiresome and offensive to listen to the Left assert that every instance of cruelty, suffering and emiseration in the world is the fault of an indifferent (or worse) US. The assertion does not improve when it's made by those on the Right.

As for this: "Allowing evil is wrong except when it's necessary. To give or withhold assistance is not a decision for the innocent, or the pure."

I've no idea what you're saying unless it's that the decision to give or withhold assistance is one that ought to be made by the guilty, or the corrupt.

1/06/2006 03:23:00 PM  
Blogger exhelodrvr said...

I guess you're not including North Vietnam in nations that grabbed land. Or any of the back-and-forth that goes on in Africa. And there have certainly been plenty of attempts, including the Arab attempts to grab Israeli land in 1948.

1/06/2006 03:47:00 PM  
Blogger enscout said...

Pipes thinks Sharon's new Kadima party, that under his leadership was likely to become the new majority party in the Knesset, is doomed.

His opinion (which i respect) is that Binjimin Netenyahu's Likud party will reurn to power by gaining more of the electorate fallout from the demise of Kadima.

Conjecture here, but Netenyahu's moment may be well timed since he has always been a no-nonsense type w/regard to the Pali's. Timed with their leadership debacle in Gaza, his leadership style may not only show the most popular response to the situation there, but the most effective as well.

The power vacuum left by Sharon will be filled quickly.

The one in Gaza has a more uncertain future.

1/06/2006 03:52:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

You're right, Trish, power is an amoral concept. The power to kill and the power to save can be the exact same thing.

re: allowing evil, think of it in terms of causation. Both action and inaction can affect outcomes; inaction in the face of evil is, therefore, a proximate cause to its continuance.

This does not mean that moral culpability is the same for the actor and the spectator. But if the spectator can act, consequences flow from whichever decision he makes. If I see a baby in a puddle of water and do nothing, my inactions are the proximate cause of the baby's death, even if drowning was the cause in fact.

Now, what if I saw two babies in the same predicament, but by saving one I made the other's death inevitable? If I save neither, both will drown, but I cannot save both.

The greatest evil would be, of course, to do nothing. The lesser evil would be to save one and let the other die. But no matter how much I wish it, there is no good outcome here.

The very existence of such a decision is a loss of innocence. Furthermore, this act of choosing between evils is a priori a negation of purity. That is all I meant.

There is always cost. Those with responsibilities understand this, and are neither innocent nor pure. They can't afford to be.

1/06/2006 04:01:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

The power vacuum left by Sharon will be filled quickly.

The one in Gaza has a more uncertain future.


This reminds me of Condi Rice's remarks explaining Why Democracy. She said that democracy solved the one hob-goblin that afflicts all other forms of government: the transfer of power.

All rulers die, and all power shifts: only democracies can peacefully absorb these facts. When all other regimes guarantee conflict, there is nothing wrong with embracing a question mark.

1/06/2006 04:16:00 PM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"Furthermore, this act of choosing between evils is a priori a negation of purity."

And that, unfortunately is precisely the choice between evils Sharon had to face at S & P. As is well documented, the S & P Arab v. Palestinian massacres was a very minor massacre among Arabs against Arabs going on at the same time.

Why is the smallest of the massacres which not incidently occurred under Israeli watch the only one that is condemned? Wasn't S & P the smallest precisely because indeed it took place in an Israeli controlled area?

How do you decide which Arabs you are going to stop from massacreing other Arabs? In the S & P case, it seems axiomatic that Sharon "allowing" Arabs to slaughter Palestinians probably saved both Palestinian and Israeli lives, probably more than were killed in the massacre itself.

And the "lack of purity" you speak of is a constant for any nation that follows its self interest i.e., a strange little phrase that equates to national survival. And Palestinians, in hindsight, have invariably chose the wrong side when it comes to either US or Israeli or their own self interest. Hence, it is best to let them slaughter themselves rather than us. It is a cruel cold calculus. That is the dreaded moral story of the hated fence: Now the Palestinians only have themselves to slaughter, since no other Arabs are around to do it for them at the present moment. And that is because the Palestinians have been cruelly and viciously expelled from every single muslim country to which they gained temporary refuge.

1/06/2006 04:21:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

At the risk of provoking laughter from the wise secularists here and causing Cedarford to turn to another chapter of "Mein Kampf";let me invoke the Good Book.Without referencing the promises of the Abrahamic covenant,I refer to Ezekial 38-39,a prophecy concerning a war in Palestine in the latter days.
Who are the players?Israel obviously.She is dwelling safely in the land when she is invaded by a coalition of nations provoking divine intervention probably in the form of a nuclear war.
Who are the antagonists?One is Persia(Iran),one is Gog and Magog(probably the settlers of the Caucasus region(modern day Russia) and various other regional nations.Most prophetic interpretation believes this will usher in the rise of Antichrist and the end of history as we know it .
Could it be?We''ll see,won't we.
Incidentally lest anyone think we believers speak as one,in my humble opinion;Islam is a demonic cult,Joseph Smith was a horse stealing conman and Pat Robertson is a flaming imbecile.

1/06/2006 04:27:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"Those with responsibilities understand this, and are neither innocent nor pure. They can't afford to be."

So the inability to save two babies - as well as untold billions of human beings suffering some form and degree of evil - makes for culpability in their death and/or misery? By what moral code does inability impute guilt - a lack of means become moral corruption?

You render the very notion of "responsibility" meaningless - by turning it on those who cannot realistically, logically be considered responsible (that is, blameworthy). Leave it to the Left, would you? The US needs no more unearned guilt.

1/06/2006 04:44:00 PM  
Blogger enscout said...

trang said:

"Most prophetic interpretation believes this will usher in the rise of Antichrist and the end of history as we know it."

History, as many have stated here is the surviving narrative of peoples. Could this interpretation be describing what we are seeing unfold with the "denial" of events by the MSM & the left?

Reminds me that the new series "Book of Daniel" premieres tonight. I know this - not because I follow TV guide but that I overheard on the local news that many affiliates have refused to air the series. Surely they're not afraid that some of their veiwers might be offended by seeing something religious on at prime time.

1/06/2006 04:45:00 PM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Cedarford, your description of a number of Israeli wars is questionable at best.

Starting with 1948: Immediately after Israel was formed, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq invaded. Israel rushed to defend itself against the superior Arab forces and eventually was able to counterattack and drive the Arabs back. Was it pretty? No, check out the Deir Yassin Massacre. But I can't recall a single war ever fought that was free of tragedy or atrocity. However, in this situation Israel had a legitimate right of self-defense to respond to Arab military attacks.

Next up, 1956. Your categorization isn't that far off. Sure, the Egyptian fedayeen had been launching raids into Israel for years but that wasn't the issue. It was a textbook proxy war of the Cold War. (The US and UK decide not to help Egypt build the Aswan dam because the Egyptians were looking to the Soviets for weapons, so Egypt nationalizes the Suez Canal. The UK and France join up with Israel and march off to war. The US sits and watches until the Soviets threaten to join up with Egypt and go nuclear, at which point Eisenhower forces a cease-fire.) It was a particularly meaningless war, and one the last efforts of British and French intervention in the Middle East. 'Imperial land grab' is not much of a stretch, but they didn't actually get any land out of it.

Onwards! 1967. The Six-Day War. Yes, it was a preemptive war. Why? Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran, thus blockading the Israel at the northern coast of the Gulf of Aqaba. Aside from the fact that a blockade is an act of war, a short time later the Egyptians and the Jordanians formed a mutual defense treaty with each other and then proceeded to move their armies to within 10 miles of the Israeli border, a position which would allow them cut Israel in two in under an hour with a well-coordinated assault. Naturally, Israel wasn't going to wait around and get slaughtered. They proceeded to annihilate the Egyptians, and then the Syrians and the Jordanians, who had been tricked somewhat by the Egyptian mutual defense treaty they signed just days earlier. Preemptive strike? Yes. Strategic necessity? Probably.

Moving down the line! 1973. The Yom Kippur War. A surpise attack by the Egyptians and Syrians. In this situation, Israel had the foreknowledge and the ability to launch a preemptive strike, but they didn't. This decision is still quite controversial, but probably a wise one. As Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir said, 'If we strike first, we won't get help from anybody.' Henry Kissinger later confirmed that sentiment. Once again, the Soviets threatened to intervene yadda, yadda, yadda. As for your statement that 'the war was fought almost exclusively on occupied Arab land', why does that matter? The Arabs lost the land in 1967, and in 1973 it was part of Israel. To the victor go the spoils. Like in the Six-Day War, the Arabs proceeded to have their asses handed to them by the Israelis, most notably by a commander named Ariel Sharon.

Finally, 1982. The invasion of Lebanon. You're pretty much right about this one. Israel had little reason to invade, PLO artillery attacks aside. We now know that the decision to invade was based largely on false information and exaggerations. Sound familiar?

History is never very clear-cut, Cedarfod.

1/06/2006 04:49:00 PM  
Blogger enscout said...

BTW, trang;

I'm not laughing at your observations re: the Book of Ezekiel but I am at your glib last statement.

1/06/2006 04:50:00 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

The Jews should just conquer Gaza and the West Bank and expel the inhabitants. Period. Borders may be decided by treaty, but no real nation was ever established and maintained by anything but war. The Jews now already have a war they cannot fully prosecute and a horrendous Catch-22 political situation, based as it is on Arabian manifest destiny and the triumph of post-colonial thought. I've read enough on both sides to know there is no discovering the real truth, and certainly no way that even an immaculate rendition formulation of the actual truth would satisfy either side. Just form the statelet and destroy it. Whatever results - since I do not think an Arab holocaust will result - will be better than the deletrious idiocy now masquerading as a political problem. The answer to "oh it'll never be solved, they hate eachother irreconcilably" is not to do nothing but war. Let the Arabs develop themselves to the point where they are a match for tiny Israel; let them reconcile themselves to the modern world beyond the politics of exploitation and bad faith and engage as equals, rather than glorified "petrol stations," in the commerce of nations. Let the Arabs and the Cedarfords have their grievances, and let us admit that the facts are at least murky. But this is an absurd problem, and the Soviet Union is gone. Enough already.

1/06/2006 04:54:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Believe it or not, Trangbang, the 189 out of 191 nations that have official issues with Israel and the many lies its Zionist followers put out are not "Nazi states", following Mein Kamf.

Just because you are an unquestioning Zionist booklicker with a Pavlovian response to try and brand any critic of Israel as Nazi, does not a Nazi make. It speaks more to the genius of making enemies of the rest of the world, every people in contact...

Mika - so you say two subject peoples of the Brits made an agreement to carve up the British Empire in the ME? Oooooo, that's impressive! Heard the one about how the Spanish and the Portugese decided how the world would be divided in half between them?

1/06/2006 05:01:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Again, you are right, Trish. I most assuredly did not have an ability to save both babies in the scenario I invoked, so I can't be held accountable for the fact that one baby died.

However, before I decided, my ability to save each baby was absolute. Only by deciding did my ability to save baby x fade, or if I saved x my ability to save y fade.

I may not have been able to save both, but whichever one I didn't save died because of me; at one time I had the power to save that particular baby, and I chose to save another.

A hard truth, but truth, nonetheless.

I didn't create the situation, so my moral culpability is not absolute. But I had the power, and I made a choice, so I was responsible for the poor soul that died.

My guilt would, of course, be tempered with the fact that I did manage to save one baby. But I would no longer be the earnest crusader. I would no longer be pure.

I would be resigned to evil. Either I'd have faith that it's all for a greater good, or I'd despair. But I would never again be innocent.

1/06/2006 05:20:00 PM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Cedarford said: "Just because you are an unquestioning Zionist booklicker with a Pavlovian response to try and brand any critic of Israel as Nazi, does not a Nazi make."

Kinda like how you throw around labels like 'unquestioning Zionist bootlicker?'

1/06/2006 05:41:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

Aristides, I don't really think you recognize what real corruption and culpability in evil - nor evil itself - are, so badly do you confuse these with properties and actions of innocence (such as inability and helplessness).

On the one hand, "power is amoral." On the other, lack of power - inability - constitutes guilt.

That's quite a system you've got there.

1/06/2006 06:18:00 PM  
Blogger Glenmore said...

Charles (6 am):
Justice is when you get what you deserve.
Mercy is when you don’t get what you deserve.
Grace is when you get what you don’t deserve.

1/06/2006 06:24:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Cedarfard,

1/ Jews, "Arabs" (a misnomer, really), were subject peoples of the Ottoman Empire.

2/ At the end of Ottoman rule these parties agree on how a mutual border between them should look.

3/ Palestine, is agreed upon as home of the Jewish nation, and is to include all of what today is Jordan, all of Israel (Gaza, Judea, Samaria), and parts of what today is Egypt and Lebanon/Syria.

4/ After the losses suffered in WWII, Jews agree to a fraction of what was agreed upon earlier. (The repartition plan). This offer is rejected by the arab league which declares war in 1947. In 1948 the British leave, Israel proclaims independence.

5/ With the discovery of oil in the ME, Jihadi nationalists calculate they have the economic power, the military power, and the diplomatic power to do as they like. They attack.

6/ Arab totalitarian theifdoms pursue intensive land grab policy through forced demographic redistribution of Jews and other minorities.

1/06/2006 07:35:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

That's quite the statement, Trish, since I began this line of thought by stipulating both power and knowledge.

Perhaps if you read again what I have written...

But let's do this logically.
If X or Y is true, choosing X also means choosing not Y. If Genocide or Unilateralism is true, choosing not Unilateralism is the exact same thing as choosing Genocide.

Opportunity cost is pretty basic. Why do you reject it?

1/06/2006 07:42:00 PM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"Kinda like how you throw around labels like 'unquestioning Zionist bootlicker?'"

Yeah, that was the first time this third-generation native non-jewish non-fundamentalist protestant Idaho cowboy who lives in the part of the state most famous for Aryan Nations has been called a "zionist."

That's really a hoot! Me, a Zionist! I guess there is a first time for everything!

This demonstrates once again that Pro-Palis and leftists have absolutely no clue whatsoever why so many Americans viscerally despise the palestinians. especially post 9-11.

You know what? Most people in Idaho don't like Jews much. They don't like them because many Jews live in the city and Idahoans don't much care for city-slickers. And Idahoans didn't much care for the Aryan Nations either, not because we are particularly fond of Jews, but because as one Idahoan put it "We don't need no Californians coming up here to tell us what to do with our Jews."

"They're our Jews. You Californians leave 'em alone."

If that makes me a "Zionist" then I would guess about 97 percent of Americans nowadays qualifies as a "zionist."

And it wasn't that way in the 1990's. I would hazard to guess that about 97 percent of Americans like myself were somewhat befuddled by old Yassar Arafish and how many times he slept in the Lincoln bedroom. We were kind of puzzled and ignorant about the ins and outs of that whole perplexing situation, but basically felt that something good must be going on with all the effort being put into it.

But the entire dispicable Palestinian cause instantly earned my undying and uncomplex hatred when I watched them dance in the streets on 9-11. You really need to face that really horrible fact if you really care about the Palestinians , because that really was a defining moment for a lot of Americans like myself.

So go ahead, call me a Zionist if it makes you feel better.

1/06/2006 08:13:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Probably a Hyperlinker too.

1/06/2006 09:11:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/06/2006 09:25:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Whatever, Biggler Diggler, you tossed out a few hoary old Zionist lies and were called on them.

Perhaps you are just one of those rural Christians that has accepted the "5 sneak Arab attacks propaganda" as well as other myths and lies that are sort of an adjuct to Israel worship as an expression of your Christianity. As the saying goes, the only group more Zionist than the Zionists are the Christian Zionists. I'm sure Pat Robertson believes all the Arab sneak attack stuff, too, and is convinced that Sharon was smote down by God for abandoning God's land that only Jews should own....(why Evangelicals believe no Christian has a right to any part of the Holy Land is one of those great latter-20th Century mysteries)

Jesse Clark initially called my characterization of the 5 wars questionable, then goes through and admits my characterization is basically right, except for the 1948 one which he describes as follows:

Immediately after Israel was formed, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq invaded. Israel rushed to defend itself against the superior Arab forces and eventually was able to counterattack and drive the Arabs back.

If by "immediately" Clark is talking about the hastily formed Arab armies that tried to go in 1 month after jews and palestinians erupted in civil war after Partition was announced. Some versions of the lie say "almost immediately" to account for the 1 month wait after the cleansing of Muslims and Christians started.

If by superior forces, you must mean the ragtag, ill-equipped Arabs who also had less people in arms than the Haganah. But the key was the Zionist organization, discipline, and money to buy American, Czech advanced weaponry that all but the Arab Legion could not match. They had been training for and preparing for conflict, with ethnic cleansing plans ready for years. As for the Legion, the Zionist moneymen made some well placed, huge bribes to keep the Arab Legion out of the fighting which really helped.

1/06/2006 09:26:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Enscout,I apologize for my glib last statement.It was inappropriate concerning the seriousness I believe of the prophetic hour we live in.
Cedarford,I don't know what you are,but its hard not to tag you antisemitic because everything on your radar screen is obscured by your disdain for all things Jewish.
I ain't licking nobody's boots,homeboy.I believe as a Christian I have an affinity with the Jews who are people of my Book.
Even if I was a pragmatic smart guy instead like some here I would choose the Israeli dog in that fight over the wild beasts of the star and crescent.

1/06/2006 09:26:00 PM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Cedarford, I gave you 2 out of 5 for accuracy. (1956 and 1982) That's 40%. If you've ever attended an academic institution you'll appreciate that 40% is somewhere between embarrassing and shameful.

1/06/2006 09:34:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

The Arabs enjoyed a clear superiority in heavy arms and firepower. The ordnance count on May 15, 1948 is as follows:


Tanks:
IDF: 1 (w/o gun) Arabs:40

Armored cars (w/ cannon):
IDF: 2 Arabs: 200

Armored cars (w/o cannon):
IDF: 120 Arabs: 300

Artillery:
IDF: 5 Arabs:140

AA and AT guns:
IDF: 24 Arabs: 220

Warplanes:
IDF: 0 Arabs: 74

Scout planes:
IDF: 28 Arabs: 57

Navy (armed ships)
IDF: 3 Arabs: 12



Cedarfard, I know you've been through these arguments too many times not to be thoroughly schooled about the lies you put forward. I also know you're able to discern the truth from the fictional narrative you parrot off Jihadi sites. Why do you do it?

1/06/2006 10:13:00 PM  
Blogger jewarab said...

Cedarford - You are right, if we can defeat the Zionist conspiracy to rule the world the world will be a much better place! We can get rid of all of those worthless jews - like Einstein, Spielberg, Salk, Annenberg - with all their worthless inventions and contributions to humanity ( vaccines, art forms, libraries, ngo's...).
You silly hater! the proof that jews DON'T rule the world is that it is not a better place. Any place jews have had a chance to live with freedom and equality, they have excelled and produced arts, sciences, businesses and the society has prospered. If you really want a better world and believe in a Zionist conspiracy (to own a piece of land 1/16th the size of California), you should become its biggest cheerleader. Ra ra siskoomba ! Go Jews, Go Jews, Gooooooooooo Jews!!!!

May G-d bless Sharon.

1/06/2006 10:23:00 PM  
Blogger heather said...

Every Arab loser in the world would like to think that they lost all those wars because of their pathetic lack of weaponry.

Well listen up. The Arabs lose and keep losing because they keep marrying their cousins which means they don't get out of their house and their village long enough to start using their brains. They are weak because their entire society is twisted from the inside: their mothers, their sisters, their daughters are abased. Their fathers, their brothers and their sons are kinglets with no kingdom; with false pride, they are frustrated at their impotence. They value all the wrong things. THEY ARE LOSERS. How do I know? Because they are the poorest and most violent people on earth. OK??

As to Sharon: this is one more reason for Armageddon (the one with the twinkly eyes) to think he can win an attack the Great Satan (in Iraq) and the Little Satan (in Israel.)

Think of it: Europe and Russia are not in the equation here!! And neither is India, by the way.

1/06/2006 10:25:00 PM  
Blogger ledger said...

Jesse Clark: ...question of 'whether anyone can fill Mr. Sharon's shoes', I offer Benjamin Netanyahu... A switch in votes for Kadima to Netanyahu's Likud could give him a boost over Amir Peretz's Labor Party, and a serious shot at Prime Minister.

Netanyahu has already made it clear what he plans to do with Iran.


Yes, he did and I hope he emerges. But, with Israel's complex political position and the volatility of the voters it's a long shot. But, I hope so.

enscout notes: His [Pipes] opinion (which i respect) is that Binjimin Netenyahu's Likud party will reurn to power by gaining more of the electorate fallout from the demise of Kadima.

Conjecture here, but Netenyahu's moment may be well timed since he has always been a no-nonsense type w/regard to the Pali's. Timed with their leadership debacle in Gaza, his leadership style may not only show the most popular response to the situation there, but the most effective as well.


Again, I would like to Netenyahu emerge as a leading force. But, Israeli politics is too volatile to predict. But, Netenyahu would be my choice at this juncture in time.

1/06/2006 10:45:00 PM  
Blogger Karridine said...

Cedarford, do a Google on deAtkine, and read his "Why Arab Armies LOSE"

The could have, TODAY, fabulous cutting-edge technologies and weapons systems, but their culture defeats their use of those weapons!

Persians AREN'T Arabs, but with the Holy Land being sacred to Jews, Christians, and Those Dedicated to the Glory of God (the Lord of Hosts) it is going to be an INTERESTING few months!

1/06/2006 10:53:00 PM  
Blogger Charles said...

Glenmore said...
Wretchard:
The best of us live in the hope of receiving judgment, not escaping it.
Glenmore said...
Charles (6 am):
Justice is when you get what you deserve.
Mercy is when you don’t get what you deserve.
Grace is when you get what you don’t deserve.
6:24 PM
////////////////////
So how can unholy men enter into the presence of a holy God and live.

1/06/2006 11:01:00 PM  
Blogger Cutler said...

I used to be a huge fan of Netanyahu. After all, he's a slick talker who speaks English superbly with great rhetoric. Over the past year of so, however, he's struck me as Clintonish, political. Course, I became a huge Sharon fan [for his practicality], so perhaps I'm just resentful of Bibi's attempts to undermine him in Likud.

As for campaign promises, in 1996, he said he wouldn't meet or deal with Arafat. Of course, he then did, for whatever reasons. So, I wouldn't take everything he says as the bible.

1/06/2006 11:44:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Was listening to someone who is a personal friend of Bibi's who said essentially the same thing about his words vs deeds in politics.
...I guess we would have to assume the same lack of trust in his words about policies if he were he in power?

1/07/2006 03:05:00 AM  
Blogger sam said...

Doctors Wait to Assess Sharon's Condition:

The poll showed Peres would net 42 seats as Kadima leader, but analysts said it was unlikely he would be chosen to lead the party. Peres met with Olmert on Friday but did not give details of their talk.

"We will know how to continue Israel's policy ... to continue Ariel Sharon's policies," Peres said.

Doctors Wait

1/07/2006 03:12:00 AM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Carridine, I was just about to bring up de Atkine's thesis, but you beat me to it! :-) His points about information monopolization and lack of an effective NCO class--the very core of what makes modern armies so versatile--are irrefutable.

For those of you who haven't read the document in question, you can find it here.

1/07/2006 05:18:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

By the way, congrats on yr mention in Mark Steyn's webpage, Wretchard D. Cat, as he also speaks well of the motley crew that posts here.

1/07/2006 05:37:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

trang said:

"Most prophetic interpretation believes this will usher in the rise of Antichrist and the end of history as we know it."

Doesn't history show us that the world of governance by kings and ecclesiastics, existant for the prior 7,000 years, has come to an end?

Hasn't the world of 'no faster travel than speed of horse' come to an end? The world which was home to ALL the recorded Messengers of God, from -5,000 to +1844 was a world of agrarian, illiterate masses and literate, armed kings & priests.

Please don't try to say that the world has NOT ended.

1/07/2006 05:42:00 AM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Carridine,
Without getting into pointless theological debate which will bore many here to tears and make me and you no closer in understanding,let me make one point.
Jesus defined the end of history as"the end of the time of the Gentiles".This would seem to imply not a technological leap,but a time when Gentile world rule would end and Israel would be saved from annihilation by the return of Christ.This is what I referred to in my post.

1/07/2006 07:13:00 AM  
Blogger Charles said...

trangbang68 said... said...

Carridine,
Without getting into pointless Gentiles".This would seem to theological debate which will bore many here to tears and make me and you no closer in understanding,let me make one point.
Jesus defined the end of history as"the end of the time of theimply not a technological leap,but a time when Gentile world rule would end and Israel would be saved from annihilation by the return of Christ.This is what I referred to in my post.

7:13 AM

////////////////////
the way to say this in future historical terms is to point out there is a slow division occuring even now between earth history the larger space history just as in the early 1500's in europe a slow divide opened between those who would stay in europe and those who would leave for the new world.

1/07/2006 08:20:00 AM  
Blogger Bigger Diggler said...

"Whatever, Biggler Diggler, you tossed out a few hoary old Zionist lies and were called on them."

Does this mean that I no longer deserve to be called a "Zionist," now that I have proved my extremely unlikely bonafides? Heck, I was just getting to the point of enjoying that....in fact I went down to the cowboy bar last night and whispered menacingly to a local toughie: "Yeah, Yeah, you look tough and all, but just today I was called a Zionist. Put that in your pipe and smoke it."

About the hoary old zionist lies that I told, can one theoretically remain a zionist even if one then ceases and desists from telling zionist lies, hoary and otherwise? Can I still be a zionist even if I cease and desist from ALL lies? I'm kinda new at this so help me along. By now, you should be able to tell I want to remain a card-carrying member of the Zionist conspiracy in good standing. Do you know how hard it was to join the secret conspiracy to begin with, being a Northern Idaho non-Jew?

1/07/2006 09:05:00 AM  
Blogger exhelodrvr said...

Cedarford,
For one thing, you are forgetting the Jordanian troops (I don't remember if they were called the Arab Legion or the Jordan Legion, who were well-equipped and well-trained, both by the British.

1/07/2006 09:10:00 AM  
Blogger exhelodrvr said...

I have no idea if this is true or not, but either way it makes a great point. (Got it from another poster on another site.)

"Have you heard the one about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Chairman Yasir Arafat finally sitting down to negotiate? Sharon opened with a "biblical" tale.
"Before the Israelites came to the Promised Land and settled here, Moses led them for 40 years through the desert. One day, miraculously, a stream appeared. They drank and then decided to bathe. When Moses came out of the water, he found all his clothes missing.

" 'Who took my clothes?' Moses asked. 'It was the Palestinians,' replied the Israelites."

"Wait a minute," interrupted Arafat. "There were no Palestinians during the time of Moses!"

"All right," smirked Sharon, "now that we've got that settled, let's start talking."

1/07/2006 09:11:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Well folks, here is an interesting piece on the topic of Mr Sharon.

Amir Taheri, an Iranian writes in the NY Post about Sharonism and the Palistinian Battlefront of the Mohammedan Wars.
His take is though the Israelis won all the Wars, they did not reap the rewards of Victory. The Palistinians and Arab community never swallowed the bitter pill of defeat.

"... As a professional soldier, Sharon saw that Israel had won all its wars with the Arabs in military terms, but failed to translate those victories into lasting political gains. At some point, he must have wondered why. ..."

"... Paradoxically, many Palestinians say, even in public, that they would rather see Sharonist unilateralism at work than a prolongation of the stalemate that has lasted since 1948. It was clear that Sharon, his denials notwithstanding, was planning to claim victory for Israel and impose an Israeli peace. ..."


" ... Sharonism need not fade away. It is still possible for Israel to create on the ground the kind of peace it can live with and then let the Palestinians decide whether or not they, too, can live with it.

My guess is that they will. ..."

Mr Amir Taheri is a member of Benador Associates
Mr Taheri sees the Palistinians as coming to terms with the reality of Israel, wonder why?

1/07/2006 09:19:00 AM  
Blogger Cutler said...

Not only was it well trained and equiped, Helo - it was led into combat by British officers.

The only country that was willing to sell the Israelis arms was Czechoslovakia [hence, high tech "Czech arms"], when the Soviets were trying to acquire Israeli friendship. As a result they had to scrounge everything they got off the black market, and their weaponry was a mix of everything European, from a few ex-Spanish Me109s and American B-17s.

1/07/2006 10:17:00 AM  
Blogger Cutler said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/07/2006 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger Cutler said...

and = to

1/07/2006 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Wikipedia: This imbalance in ordnance, along with the entry into the fray of the regular, relatively well-equipped and trained forces of the armies from the neighboring Arab states, led to a nearly universal, world military opinion about the outcome of the conflict. A typical example was the statement by Field Marshall Montgomery, commander of the victorious Allied armies in North Africa and Northern Europe, that the new State of Israel would be defeated within two weeks.

1/07/2006 10:29:00 AM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Cedarfordapedia:
Freakin'Zionist swine killed Abraham Lincoln,steal the pennies out of blindmen's eyes,rile and intimidate the huddling peaceful masses of Muslim lambs,were everything Julius Steicher warned us about and are the lone impediment to a New World of peace and harmony.

1/07/2006 11:12:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

"Sharonism need not fade away."


It's not Sharonism, but Lapidism.

Sharon's plan was to usurp Shinui's voter blog by largely adapting its platform and presenting voters with more palatable personalities than Tommy Lapid and his group. In the election of 2003, Shinui gained 15 out of 120 Knesset seats, making it the third-largest party, after Likud and Labour. The calculation is simple. Sharon's Shinui party (Kadima) by ceasing the alienating attacks of Lapid's Shinui party on the religious right usurps Shinui "centrist" platform to gain 35-40 Knesset mandates. Likud and Labour draw a strength of 25-35 Knesset seats each. Kadima + either Likud or Labour = majority of 60 plus Knesset seats.

This could've allowed Sharon to bypass the usual complications (extortions) involved in having Shas or the smaller Arab or Nationalist parties in the coalition; or having to be ideologically accountable to the Likud party in a Likud-Labour coalition.

1/07/2006 11:41:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Trendy Politics at Europe’s Oldest University

My professor and many other academics suffer from the mental disorder of Palestinianism—an obsession with and hatred of Israel that disguises itself by promulgating Palestinian rights as the major, sometimes only, humanitarian cause of our time.
The hypocrisy of these partisans knows no bounds.
Feminists or homosexuals will side against the only country in the region that respects their rights, liberals will side against the only democracy in the region with any semblance of the rule of law or due process, and Arab activists will remain deafeningly silent as Arab militias carry out genocide and gang rape on a massive scale in Darfur.

At Bologna then, an understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict does not appear to be the goal. The blurb on the back cover of The New Intifada captures the intent better:
The case for an international grassroots movement in support of Palestinian rights is made with urgency and persuasive clarity.”
Whatever it is, it is not “la dotta” or anything having to do with scholarship.

1/07/2006 12:36:00 PM  
Blogger Jesse Clark said...

Cedarfordapedia?

You mean the Huffington Post?

1/07/2006 12:38:00 PM  
Blogger Mike H. said...

Gentile

1. One neither a Jew nor a Christian; a worshiper of false
gods; a heathen.
1913 Webster

2. A person who is not Jewish; -- used in this sense by Jews.

1913 Webster.

Perhaps Jesus was speaking of his ministry when he said the end of the gentiles? Perhaps he was speaking of conversion, in keeping with sense one?

1/07/2006 01:55:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

I like Westhawk's take. In part:

"Mr. Sharon’s work is complete
Mr. Ariel Sharon has suffered a massive cerebral hemorrhage, ending, in all likelihood, his political career and probably his life. Mr. Sharon had a giant influence on the modern history of the Middle East. Some have speculated that his demise 'could prove to be one of the great disasters in [Israel’s] near-60-year history.'

"We disagree. Mr. Sharon has completed his work. He has left behind inside Israel a consensus on how to proceed with its national security policies. This is actually a good, not a bad time for Israel to sort out its next generation of leaders.

"Had Mr. Sharon suffered this stroke three years ago the same could not be said. Three years ago, the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign raged and blood ran in the streets. Israel for a time faced a moral crisis on how to defend itself, with a significant minority on Israel’s political left confused by the collapse of the Oslo agreement and stunned into paralysis. Having tried both colonization and negotiation, Mr. Sharon pushed through strict separation from the chaotic Palestinians, a policy that unlike the others, appears to keep Israeli citizens alive."

And this last is what really matters.

I've been an admirer of Netanyahu since the early Nineties, but as a gifted writer and speaker more than as a politician.

I vividly remember Sharon in a moment of very undiplomatic speech directed at the White House and State Department during the worst days of the Second Intifada: "Israel will not be another Czeckoslovakia!" (Bush shortly responded to the PM with no less apparent anger.) It certainly was bracing, but begged the question, "What're you gonna do, Ranger? What're you gonna do?"

1/07/2006 01:55:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Robertson: Ignorant Remarks Caused by God’s Wrath
“If Christians would read the Bible, instead of just watching TV, they would understand that people who claim to know exactly why God does what He does are usually false teachers,” said Mr. Robertson.
God disciplines American Christians for their willful ignorance of the Scriptures by having me embarrass them every 60 days or so with another ridiculous remark.”

1/07/2006 01:57:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

"All right," smirked Sharon, "now that we've got that settled, let's start talking."
---
Unanswered is the larger question:
Did he get Arafat to bathe?

1/07/2006 02:23:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

That is of little consequence now, doug.

It will be interesting to see what happens as Israel imposes it's version of Peace.
The Mohammedan reaction, it's scope and scale will be interesting to watch.

It will be proof of whether there is a real War, or not.

1/07/2006 02:32:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/07/2006 03:43:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Lebanon to US: "You came to Iraq and you can do the same thing in Syria."

What makes the Syria-Lebanon situation especially volatile, Jumblatt explained to Ignatius, is that it is linked to the radical new Iranian regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Jumblatt argued that Iran is using its alliance with al-Assad and Hizbullah in its larger strategic battles against Israel and the United States. "It's as if we are defending Iranian nuclear facilities from the border of Lebanon," he said.

Jumblat said "If Bush considers Lebanon one of his major achievements, now is the time to protect Lebanon," He told Ignatius: What can the United States do, realistically, to keep the Syria-Lebanon situation from exploding? The answer partly is to stick with the UN investigation that is slowly wrenching out the truth about Hariri's murder.
John Bolton, Call your office..........

'Rat, Cutler, Phil
1. "Stranger in a Strange Land"

1/07/2006 03:44:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq.

1/07/2006 03:57:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

The Weekly Standard story, doug?
The one that makes C4's point about translaters all the more important. Why have the residents of Dearborn, MI not been enlisted in the effort to translate the mountain of data available?

The truth will out, doug.

To even debate the fall of Saddam and the Invasion is wasted bandwidth of the brain.

It is in tomorrow the Challenge lies, not in yesterdays news.

1/07/2006 04:21:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Important point is lives that could be saved by getting the info instead of letting it rot.
---

Olmert emerges as successor to Sharon
Senior advisers to Ariel Sharon, Israel's stricken prime minister, are to launch Ehud Olmert, his deputy, as the country's new leader and the only politician capable of leading Israel towards peace with the Palestinians.

1/07/2006 04:46:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Exactly my point, doug.
There is an ethnic Iraqi population in the US that is an untapped asset in the Battle.

To whom is the Responsibility for processing this intelligence assigned, and why have they not been replaced?

The Bush Administration does not take this War seriously. Just look at their actions, or inaction as the case most usually is.

1/07/2006 05:00:00 PM  
Blogger Kirk Parker said...

Doug,

"..but our modern health obsessives will have immortal life"

Yes, as someone once said (alas, I forget who to attribute this to):

"health food nuts are going to feel very stupid one day, lying there in the hospital dying of nothing"

1/08/2006 12:39:00 AM  
Blogger sam said...

Olmert vows to carry out Sharon's wishes:

Sharon suffered a major stroke last week and remains in critical condition at a hospital in Jerusalem. He was given another brain scan today to help doctors decide when to bring him out of an induced coma.

At least one Cabinet minister is hoping Sharon will be back. But one of Sharon's surgeons says even if he does survive, there's realistically no chance he'd be able to resume his duties as prime minister.

Olmert Vows

1/08/2006 03:02:00 AM  
Blogger mal said...

Sharon war crimes ? the Kahan Commission said he was indirectly responsible.The acts of slaughter rests on the Phalangist forces.

http://www.jafi.org.il/education/actual/sabra-shatilla/

1/08/2006 05:28:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

"Jesus defined the end of history as"the end of the time of the Gentiles".This would seem to imply not a technological leap,but a time when Gentile world rule would end and Israel would be saved from annihilation by the return of Christ.This is what I referred to in my post."

The 'time of the gentiles' was fulfilled when gentile control of the Holy Land was terminated by the Edict of Toleration, forced upon the Caliphate by Western Christian nations, March 21st, 1844.

I agree with you, Sir, even though Christian CLERGY scoff and deny. They also don't like acknowledging that Jesus' promises about the Return happening when 'the Gospel is taken to every nation' were fulfilled in exactly the same calendar year, when Spirit-filled Christians finished almost 20 years of organized missionary work, and took the light of the Holy Gospel to "darkest" Africa...

1/08/2006 07:46:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

carridine
So he returned and was killed again? By the Mohammedans, the Christian bullets merely cutting the ropes that bound him?

I believe you wrote that once.

The ever famous Rapture and the dead rising happened in 1844 also?

The World is in what Phase of Armegeddon now?

1/08/2006 08:06:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Meanwhile in Pakistans wayward Province, Warizistan, the battle limps along.

" ... Eight soldiers and eight other people have been killed in separate incidents in Pakistan's tribal North Waziristan area, reports say.
The paramilitary soldiers came under attack from militants at an army checkpoint, the army says.

Elsewhere eight people were killed when military helicopters attacked a house, residents of the area say. ... "

In the attack on the Army checkpoint there are also a 'few' Paki Army MIAs.

The Pakistani Army does not take responsibility for reported helicopter attacks. In fact has denied reports of them in the past

"... In the other incident, people in the village of Saidgai, 12 km (eight miles) north of Miran Shah, say military helicopters opened fire on a house overnight.

"Helicopters bombarded the house late Friday night, leaving eight people dead," tribal elder Salimullah said, the AFP news agency reports.

He also said a number of people were injured.

The army says it is investigating the incident.

In December a man described by the government as a top al-Qaeda commander, Egyptian-born Abu Hamza Rabia, was killed in North Waziristan.

Officials said that he and four others died when their own explosives blew up. Local people said their house came under helicopter gunfire. ... "

This report from the British Broadcasting Company and as doug will tell you, the BBC is to be held, at times, suspect to bending the truth.
But so then is the Pakistani Army & Government at large.

1/08/2006 08:18:00 AM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Doug,

Any connection between Libya's nuclear project and Iraq. There's rumor floating that it was really Saddam's.

1/08/2006 08:39:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Yeah, I've heard rumors to that effect, also, Mika.
'Rat,
In this case you characterize the effort as limping along, but Musharoff still gets the
Iron Balls of the Decade Award
in my book.
Sure hope we have a good plan for when he's gone.

1/08/2006 01:21:00 PM  
Blogger Sparks fly said...

A born again Christian has passed out of judgement into life.

All who go to the Great White Throne Judgement have to answer for their deeds... "the books were opened" ... you don't want to go there.

Can any man or woman pay the price for their sins? NO! That's the problem. That's the reason we need a Savior. That's the reason we need Jesus Christ. He had that sinless life with which to pay for the sins of the world.

All we Christians want to hear "Well done good and faithful servant" but that is not judgement. Judgement is something else.

These are serious words.

I confess I have not read all the posts and someone else may have said this much better.

Blog-on.

1/08/2006 02:50:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

From September.
“Much of Gaza is a great mass of apartment blocks - flung up to house the exploding population.”
—unintended accuracy from the BBC

1/08/2006 03:24:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

“If the majority of the hardest hit victims of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans were white people, they would not have gone for days without food and water, forcing many to steal for mere survival.”—

CBS commentator Nancy Giles

Boy, that Nancy is a real racist:
Implying it took the black folk DAYS,
to figure out they'd have to get off their duffs if they wanted to eat.

1/08/2006 03:30:00 PM  
Blogger pete speer said...

Blatherskites, Wretchard, that's what we have on this subject.

May I suggest that we all go back to our caves and read carefully Karen Armstrong's "The Battle for God."

When we have understood the region's history, we will be better able to move toward the future.

In the meantime, the heat of the rhetoric, the personal umbrage and the lot have smoked up the sight of what is happening there.

1/08/2006 03:34:00 PM  
Blogger Hype said...

'executed by -- Jesus Christ himself' = sick

'Can any man or woman pay the price for their sins? NO! That's the problem. That's the reason we need a Savior. That's the reason we need Jesus Christ. He had that sinless life with which to pay for the sins of the world.'

what crap. everything you know about god is from other men. Jesus is god is heresy to Jews. christians are not from the same book. the new testament is false. it is a lie. the end times you guys predict over and over never happens.. it is pretty hilarious to read all this crap you guys post.

all this grandstanding about religion is the problem.

The Israeli people have become racist.

White Americans have always been racist.

I would say most everybody here is a white christian racist.

you make me sick. i don't hate you though. i pity you. i feel sorry for you.

-Hype

1/08/2006 04:02:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"In December a man described by the government as a top al-Qaeda commander, Egyptian-born Abu Hamza Rabia, was killed in North Waziristan.

Officials said that he and four others died when their own explosives blew up. Local people said their house came under helicopter gunfire. ... "

If true, it most assuredly wasn't the Pakistanis. They don't "do" al Qaeda. If true, it's good and promising news beyond just the killing of Rabia himself.

An early report indicated a UAV. Nice.

1/08/2006 04:10:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Down from the Heavens.

1/08/2006 04:18:00 PM  
Blogger Cutler said...

Is Hype satire?

1/08/2006 04:26:00 PM  
Blogger Mike H. said...

Hype is dipsomania.

1/08/2006 04:47:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

I would say most everybody here is a white christian racist .
Cutler,
If the shoe fits,
grin and bear it.

1/08/2006 05:04:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Well yes, doug, limping along is accurate. Thw Pakistanis were attacked at their base. They were not being aggresive, just targets. They seem to have been over run and their force scattered.
The Pakistanis do not take credit for taking down the Terrorists, but are investigating another mysterious bomb blast. They deny killing the Egyptian.
That is not a sprint, nor a healthy walking stride, no my friend, limping is how to describe our Pakistani ally's approach to the War on Fascist Mohammedans, at best.

How are those interviews with Dr Khan coming, oh that's right, General President M will not let US talk to the Doctor.

How about Osama or Dr Z, why won't the General President let US visit with them, either?

1/08/2006 05:10:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Bird flu is reported in the Van Province of Turkey, in the Kurdistan Region.
Amid reports of outbreaks also occurring near Ankara the Russian Health Officer said:

"... Russia's Interfax news agency reported on Sunday that the country's chief epidemiologist has told his countrymen not to travel to Turkey - a popular vacation destination for Russians - because of the bird flu outbreak.

"I earnestly advise Russian citizens to refrain from travelling to Turkey, especially to the eastern province of Agri and the city of Dogubeyazit... where the situation is particularly alarming," Interfax quoted Gennady Onishchenko as saying. ... "

But beyond that, in light of Mr Goss's visit to Turkey last month is this part of the report:

" ... Meanwhile Iran, which shares a border with eastern Turkey, has closed one of its border crossings, officials told Turkey's Anatolia state news agency. ... "

Perhaps where there are Border Closings there is progress?
Or is that just the oportunist in me?

Again from that trusted news source operating out of London it's the BBC calling.

Do the Birds fly next to Europe or to the Eurphrates River Valley?
What is the Bird migration pattern for that Region?

1/08/2006 05:48:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...

Doctors wait to bring Sharon out of coma:

In the West Bank, Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia wished Sharon a quick recovery and expressed hope for new peace talks.

"We are looking for a new era in which we can negotiate and be partners in a real peace that serves both peoples," he told his Cabinet

Doctors Wait

1/08/2006 06:02:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

I watched Dick Clark on New Year's Eve tv.
I beleive Mr Clark is in his seventys, and having had a stroke last summer it was an admirable acheivement for him to perform as well as he did.
Mr Sharon at best will require a lengthy recovery period. While he may hold on to life, power has slipped forever from his grasp.

The Palistinian's election in a couple of weeks could be more important then ever before to the political future of Israel.

With Hamas's growing popularity and percieved incorruptability they could well be the next agent of the Palistinian people. From Arafat to Hamas, what a step in the Peace Process.

How does a Hamas win effect the Israeli elections in March?

1/08/2006 06:17:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...

Rat,

Not too sure about the elections but it would put the wall construction on the fasttrack, wouldn't it?

1/08/2006 07:06:00 PM  
Blogger ledger said...

Cutler observes:

I used to be a huge fan of Netanyahu. After all, he's a slick talker who speaks English superbly with great rhetoric. Over the past year of so, however, he's struck me as Clintonish, political
As for campaign promises, in 1996, he said he wouldn't meet or deal with Arafat...he did I wouldn't take everything he says as the bible.


And Doug notes: Was listening to someone who is a personal friend of Bibi's who said essentially the same thing about his words vs deeds in politics...

I hear you guys.

I know Netanyahu has blemishes and doesn't always adhere to his grand hard-line rhetoric. But, most right-wing politicians always talk tough - but, soften in time. It's just the nature of politics.

The reason I would prefer Netanyahu is that he a "known quantity." He been around the block, he knows a the political terrain - and he is certainly no peace-nic liberal. Again, at this juncture (Iran obtaining nukes and so on) I would like to see him emerge as guiding political force.

[and]

Cedarfordapedia?

You mean the Huffington Post?
-Jesse Clark

Heh, good one Jesse!

1/08/2006 07:51:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

i have read this entire thread, and i find the discussion absolutely fascinating.

i would post a reply form another board here and see what the truth is.

In 1953, Sharon founded "Unit 101," a secret death squad within the IDF that committed several mass murders of civilians. In October 1953, Sharon's "Unit 101" massacred 66 innocent civilians during a cross-border raid into the Jordanian West Bank village of Qibya. Under intense machine-gun fire, local residents were driven into their homes, which were then blown up around them, killing the occupants by burying them alive in piles of rubble. The April 2002 IDF massacre at the Palestinian refugee camp in Jenin was, in fact, modeled on Sharon's "Unit 101" operations at Qibya.

On Oct. 18, 1953, the U.S. State Department issued a bulletin denouncing the Qibya massacre, demanding that those responsible be "brought to account." Instead, Sharon was rewarded for his war crimes by having his "Unit 101" absorbed into the Israeli paratroop corps. By 1956, Sharon had been appointed paratroop brigade commander.

Between Feb. 28, 1955 and Oct. 10, 1956, a Sharon-led paratrooper brigade conducted similar cross-border invasions into Gaza, Egypt, and the West Bank in Jordan. At the West Bank village of Qalqilya, Sharon's death squad killed 83 people.

During the 1956 joint British, Israeli, and French invasion of the Suez Canal, Sharon and his lifelong collaborator in mass murder, Rafael Eytan, carried out another horrific war crime: In three separate incidents, Sharon- and Eytan-led units murdered Egyptian prisoners of war, as well as civilian Sudanese workers who had been captured. All told, 273 unarmed prisoners were executed and dumped into mass graves. When the story broke, nearly 40 years later, in the Aug. 16, 1995 London Daily Telegraph, it nearly ruptured Israeli-Egyptian relations.

In 1972, at the urging of American organized crime figure and leading right-wing Zionist Meshulam Riklis, Sharon resigned from the IDF to run for the Knesset. Henceforth, Sharon would be wedded to leading international organized crime figures associated with the Meyer Lansky National Crime Syndicate in the United States, and allied Jewish mafia figures from Israel and Russia.

Sharon's invasion of Lebanon began on June 4, 1982, and was aimed at wiping out the Palestine Liberation Organization, which had established its base in several camps near Beirut. Between June 4 and Aug. 31, 1982, the IDF, under Sharon's direction killed a total of 19,025 Palestinians and wounded 30,032 in a military campaign that Sharon called "Operation Peace in Galilee." Under immense pressure from the Reagan Administration, Sharon abandoned plans to assassinate Arafat, and, on Aug. 21, 1982, he allowed the PLO to evacuate 15,600 fighters from Lebanon, under an American-brokered cease-fire.

On Sept. 15, Sharon broke the cease-fire agreement, and the next day, launched a "purification" campaign against the refugee camps of Sabra, Shatila, and Burj El Barajneh. Falangist death squads—protected by the IDF, which encircled the camps—massacred unarmed women, children, and elderly.
On Sept. 19, 1982, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 521, harshly condemning the massacres at the camps. In a distant mirror of the current genocide in Jenin, Ramallah, and Bethlehem, Sharon ignored the international condemnations.

The Kahane Commission, an Israeli body convened to investigate the Sabra and Shatila mass murders, found Sharon to be complicit in the crimes, and he was fired by Prime Minister Begin as Defense Minister shortly after the report's release.

1/08/2006 07:59:00 PM  
Blogger Karridine said...

"The ever famous Rapture and the dead rising happened in 1844 also?"

Those who recognized Our Lord, the Righteousness That Is Christ, in His New Name, were truly enraptured (as were the early Christians!), lifted up to the heaven of holiness, even when threatened with maiming, torture and death: 20,000 chose martyrdom rather than turn away from enrapturement or deny the Lord.

1/08/2006 08:22:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Hey Ghoullio,why don't you source your allegations with a little more documentation than "a post from another board"Obviously everything posted on the internet is true,but a little sourcing would help.I haven't heard these allegations before,but one qualifier is your reference to the Jenin massacre in 2002.That Palistinian lie has been widely debunked.
Hey,Hype ,there's a village missing its idiot.Are you him?Run along and play,Junior.

1/08/2006 08:31:00 PM  
Blogger Karridine said...

Sorry, I didn't address the dead being raised, as Jesus raised the dead, as in Mt. 14:2 "And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him."

Having raised John from the pool of dead, unbelieving humans, He went on to preach to the dead/unbelievers, "I am come to bring life, in abundance." "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."

It is obvious, Sir, that Christ is Spirit, and LIFE is experienced by accepting the Holy Word of God when He comes, accepting what He teaches, now.

Those who have done this, in THIS day, have been 'raised from the tombs of their bodies', lifted up to the heaven of holiness, given LIFE in obedience to the Lord, God Almighty.

"For those who LOVE His coming He shall return."

Respectfully, Sir, when I learned of His coming, I was HAPPY, GLAD to know He'd come as promised, and I was IN NO WAY inclined to FIND 'REASONS' to deny Him, as Jews found 'reasons' to deny Christ in Jesus.

1/08/2006 08:35:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

ghoullio,

Thank you for your original and thoughtful contribution to this thread.

Btw, is your real name Jeffrey Steinberg?

1/08/2006 08:39:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Carridine,

It's not a question of "denying" Christ. Christ is a deity of Roman construct. Jews have their own tribal (construct of a) deity that they worship. Some of them do anyway. They're not interested in sharing their deity (and therefore tribal identity/nationality) with others, and they're not interested and sharing in other peoples deity either.

1/08/2006 09:05:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Pork:
He just keeps pushin!
Iran To Segregate Pedestrian Sidewalks By Sex
The worse it is for those poor bastards, the better it is for us
...Ace

1/08/2006 09:58:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Dick and you grew up together, huh, 'Rat?
...I know, makes you feel young again.
You may stroke out watching developments on the border.

1/08/2006 10:04:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Boy, you got more War Criminals than Germany, Mika!

1/08/2006 10:08:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

"How about Osama or Dr Z, why won't the General President let US visit with them, either?"
---
Survival Instinct?
I've forgotten your plan for the Pakis.
...they simply scare me out of my wits.
Or at least them and their Nukes do.

1/08/2006 10:13:00 PM  
Blogger Mətušélaḥ said...

Doug,

LOL. You know them Jews, always try to excel. :P

1/08/2006 10:24:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

whoa whoa whoa. im an innocent bystander here, and i was referencing a post by a resident moonbat at the forum "Its all Politics". i apologize for sounding like a dunce, i was really trying to get a concensus as to the events posted by me last night. im new to the realm of Middle Eastern politics, especially Israel. there are many sides to this tale, one must acrue knowledge where one finds it.

i was just curious to see if the list i copied and pasted was utter trash, as is common in anti-israeli types.

again, i apologize for any confusion.

1/09/2006 06:58:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

Mika, "...they're not interested and sharing in other peoples deity either."

I understood THAT a long time ago. What makes it more ironically potent is that Jesus Himself is reported to have said, Matt 7:22, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and calling ourselves Christians have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?"

IN THAT DAY... not in Jesus' day, but in that future time WHEN Christ had returned, in His New Name, but still the Robertsons and Swaggarts say, "Lawd Jeeezus! These blessings we ask IN YOUR NAME..."

Christians of integrity are stuck here: either Christ HAS returned OR we are in Jesus' day, as if in Jesus' day we had lasers, jets and cellphones...

So we're obviously in 'that' day, but Christian clergy are LOATHE to accept ONE GOD as God of all the humans on Earth... and UNWILLING to accept the Lord of Hosts, BECAUSE He has a New Name (Rev 2:17, 3:12)

So Jesus tells the Christians "...I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

1/09/2006 07:10:00 AM  
Blogger diabeticfriendly said...

_____Sorry, I didn't address the dead being raised, as Jesus raised the dead, as in Mt. 14:2 "And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him."

big deal, jews raise the dead daily, they are called DOCTORS, however the "messiah" shall raise ALL the dead... not one...

.... "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."

I kinda say the same thing to my employees....

....IN NO WAY inclined to FIND 'REASONS' to deny Him, as Jews found 'reasons' to deny Christ in Jesus.

well the truth? just cause I put oil in my hair dont make me annointed..

as for the "christ" in jesus, please provide any definition you choose to define these gentile terms

1/10/2006 04:40:00 PM  
Blogger diabeticfriendly said...

ghoullio said... whoa whoa whoa. im an innocent bystander here,

nonsense... your a troll

ghoullio said... and i was referencing a post by a resident moonbat at the forum "Its all Politics"

ok, please provide a link, but no you cant since that is a ZIONIST trick according to our resident Jew hater C4

ghoullio said.... i apologize for sounding like a dunce

I accept your apology for sounding like a dunce, now apologize for being a troll

ghoullio said...i was really trying to get a concensus as to the events posted by me last night.

concensus: what ghoullio says is crap...

ghoullio said...im new to the realm of Middle Eastern politics, especially Israel. there are many sides to this tale, one must acrue knowledge where one finds it.

no, one must learn to read AND understand, one does not have to read fecal stains to understand shit

ghoullio said...i was just curious to see if the list i copied and pasted was utter trash, as is common in anti-israeli types.

gee i seem to recall this post elsewhere?

http://groups.msn.com/ISRAELISTATETERRORISM/israeliwarcriminals1.msnw

http://www.alqassam.info/index.php

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=121559

http://www.islamicdigest.net/v61forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=b4402009a15c752d32ebbeea220b5948&topic=125.msg279

http://cecaust.com.au/main.asp?sub=culture/jewish/p3&id=article11.htm

http://www.larouchepub.com/

ghoullio said... again, i apologize for any confusion.

up yours...

1/10/2006 04:54:00 PM  
Blogger diabeticfriendly said...

Cedarford said...
Whatever, Biggler Diggler, you tossed out a few hoary old Zionist lies and were called on them.

Whores? Biggler Diggler? hmm.. I think c4 is seeing some cowboy movies that are "changing" him!

Cedarford said...Perhaps you are just one of those rural Christians that has accepted the "5 sneak Arab attacks propaganda" as well as other myths and lies that are sort of an adjuct to Israel worship as an expression of your Christianity.

Yep the Zionist Warriors that could cleanse the land of historic israel of the goy, and yet... today, israel is 25% non-jewish and the greater arab world is JEWISH FREE.. 21 arab nations and no Jews..

Cedarford said... As the saying goes, the only group more Zionist than the Zionists are the Christian Zionists.

which saying? I thought i heard you say the saying " work will set you free"

Cedarford said...I'm sure Pat Robertson believes all the Arab sneak attack stuff, too, and is convinced that Sharon was smote down by God for abandoning God's land that only Jews should own...

we'll he DOES believe in Jesus, dont you?

Cedarford said....(why Evangelicals believe no Christian has a right to any part of the Holy Land is one of those great latter-20th Century mysteries)

Actually there do believe that christians have a right to Jesus related places and are now, after being raped and murdered by the moslems have fled...

Cedarford said...If by "immediately" Clark is talking about the hastily formed Arab armies that tried to go in 1 month after jews and palestinians erupted in civil war after Partition was announced. Some versions of the lie say "almost immediately" to account for the 1 month wait after the cleansing of Muslims and Christians started.

and yet those pesty christians and moslems still live in israel at ever growing amounts.. and in the arab world there are no more jews...

Cedarford said...If by superior forces, you must mean the ragtag, ill-equipped Arabs who also had less people in arms than the Haganah.

yes, 125 million arabs did not have armies as large as those warrior jews, a hugh force of 27k jews..

Date: May 1948-March 1949
Location: Middle East
Result: Israel's victory, see 1949 Armistice Agreements
Combatants
Israel Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Arab Liberation Army, Holy War Army
Commanders
Yigal Allon Glubb Pasha
Strength
29,677 initially-108,300 by December 1948 Egypt: 10,000 initially rising to 20,000
Iraq: 5,000 initially rising to 15-18,000
Syria: 5,000
Transjordan: 8,000 (total strength)
Lebanon: 1,000 initially rising to 2,000 (Pollack, 2004; Sadeh, 1997)
An unknown number of Saudi and Yemenite troops

excuse me, i just wet myself...

yes 27 thousand, including holocaust survivors

interesting, no mention of any palestinians.. could it be they didnt exists?

Cedarford said... But the key was the Zionist organization, discipline, and money to buy American, Czech advanced weaponry that all but the Arab Legion could not match

no the key was that the jews were fighting for survivial, and the arabs were fighting for loot...


Cedarford said...They had been training for and preparing for conflict, with ethnic cleansing plans ready for years.

yes, from the death camps jews plotted the take over of Palestine... and in the end, the jews failed, now israel has 25% non-jewish christian and moslems living within it's 1967 borders and the arab world is jew free.. i guess the jews suck at ethnic cleansing, maybe they should take lessons from the arabs..

Cedarford said... As for the Legion, the Zionist moneymen made some well placed, huge bribes to keep the Arab Legion out of the fighting which really helped.

Wow, i guess those bribes dont work on palestinians or arabs today, all they want to do is shoot rockets and ied's...

thanks c4, you remind me that i am in fact 9 feet tall with a 12 inch schmuck......

1/10/2006 05:27:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

Big F YOU to Pork Rinds...

heres the link, assmunch. maybe you could learn a little bit before opening your trap. this was a serious post on the forum i visit, and i wanted to throw it up against the bigger brains here and see what stuck.

[url=http://www.itsallpolitics.com/2-vt8237.html?postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15]here.[/url]

if asking some Qs makes me a troll, so be it. after the warm reception from you, i am more than happy to crawl back under my rock.

1/11/2006 09:51:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Powered by Blogger