The most annoying thing about the Christian crusade to legislate their morality on me
The majority elects leaders to make laws according to their principles. The tiny atheist minority, on the other hand, uses unelected, activist, rogue judges to get their way in society (abortion, "homosexual marriage," etc.). While Christians promote their ways constitutionally, atheists engage in judicial terrorism and run roughshod over the will of the people.
The ACLU is the American Taliban, tearing down crosses and Ten Commandments monuments. Atheists are the religious fascists. They're the most intolerant segment of American society, shoving their militant secularism down our throats, banning Bibles from schools, prayer from public events, etc. The American people want to worship God, and they have a right to do it in government, in schools, in the workplace, on the street, and all over the land.
You have the right to go to hell. Nobody's forcing you to be a Christian. That would be impossible. You choose your own path, and let the people of this democratic republic choose the path of the nation.
This country was very much founded on religion. Here are a few quotes.
"The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His Apostles.... This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government." - Noah Webster, _History of the United States_, 1832, public school textbook
"It is impossible to govern without God and the Bible." - George Washington
"Do not let any one claim to be a true American if they ever attempt to remove religion from politics." - George Washington
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." - John Jay, First Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
"The Christian Religion, in its purity, is the basis and the source of all genuine freedom in government." - James Madison, "Father of the Constitution" and 4th U.S. President
You understand ZERO, ZILCH, ZIP, NADA about Christianity or President Bush. The same goes for everyone who modded you insightful. It's hard to fathom the intellectual rot and moral bankruptcy of a person who would compare the Bush administration to the Taliban. It sounds like your post came straight out of Soviet Russia.
Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and the others in charge of our country do *not* practice republican ideals: small government, reduced spending, fiscal responsibility,
They are fascists, pure and simple.
First of all, these criticisms (only those I quoted above) apply only to Bush. I think that Cheney and Ashcroft are solidly conservative.
Your complaints are really that Bush has been acting like a liberal, not a fascist.
and a respect for personal liberty and responsibility.
You're all wet on that one, IMHO. I give a thumbs up to all three of them on that measure.
The problem with the Puritanical morality of the US right now is that it's insincere. People claim to be "offended" by things because it's in style, not because they are actually offended.
It's called temptation. There are things we know are bad for us, but we do them anyway because of our base impulses. This is all the more reason that public nudity is so infuriating to people who want to be pure. Christians are human. Nude breasts are stimulating to nearly all men. But outside of private relations with your spouse, it's displeasing to God.
The Apostle Paul addressed the issue of struggling with sin in Romans, chapter 7 (NLT paraphrase):
14 The law is good, then. The trouble is not with the law but with me, because I am sold into slavery, with sin as my master. 15 I don't understand myself at all, for
I really want to do what is right, but I don't do it. Instead, I do the very thing I hate. 16 I know perfectly well that what I am doing is wrong, and my bad conscience shows that I agree that the law is good. 17 But I can't help myself, because it is sin inside me that makes me do these evil things.
18 I know I am rotten through and through so far as my old sinful nature is concerned. No matter which way I turn, I can't make myself do right. I want to, but I can't. 19 When I want to do good, I don't. And when I try not to do wrong, I do it anyway. 20 But if I am doing what I don't want to do, I am not really the one doing it; the sin within me is doing it.
21 It seems to be a fact of life that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. 22 I love God's law with all my heart. 23 But there is another law at work within me that is at war with my mind. This law wins the fight and makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. 24 Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin? 25 Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God's law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin.
My Godly self wants porn out of my face because my sinful self does want it. Here's a good Christian perspective on pornography and sexual addiction.
In 1774, Hezekiah Niles, a British governor, wrote to England about events in America in "Principles and Acts of the Revolution in America"
"If you ask an American, who is his master? He will tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ."
This comment became known in the colonies and the rallying cry became "No King but King Jesus." Later, at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Samuel Adams commented:
"We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His Kingdom come."
Yikes. Man, chill out. No need for a personal jihad. I just think that you are very prone to make mounds out of molehills. In the grand scheme of things, nothing you mentioned that Real has done really matters. You act as if Real has perpetrated some great scandal. I think your perspective is really skewed to get so upset about it. And I am alarmed that almost nobody here is acknowledging the reforms and improvements Real has made.
Nobody is entitled to software that doesn't advertise. Nobody is entitled to have softare that works exactly like they want it to.
Take life in stride. Appreciate the good things available to you. If you get an offer you don't want, say no thanks (delete the link, disable the notices, uninstall the software, whatever), and be on your merry way.
If Real does something you don't like, by all means, send them a letter with your complaints and suggestions. If they don't change, smile and get on with your life. Friend, it does not matter. That's all I'm saying.
Why are all the complainers here hell-bent on holding grudges? Real has done a superb job in addressing all of the complaints, and yet you react as if they've poured salt on your wounds.
Some people are complaining that Real waited too long to make the changes. It's like someone posted above (who got modded flamebait by a seething troll moderator), they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. One thing I've learned about on Slashdot: There are certain companies and individuals that people love to hate, and they will keep hating no matter what.
What are the "evils" of Real? They put icons on your desktop and other temporary, minor inconveniences. Gasp! High crimes and misdemeanors!
No, here's what you do: Pay attention to the checkboxes during the installation, and delete the desktop icons when it's done. Is that such a horrible nightmare that four years later you're still kvetching about it? I've been using RealPlayer continuously since it first came out and I haven't had any experiences that were particularly terrible. Just turn off all the annoying stuff when you first start it up, and it's fine. As for buffering problems, QuickTime is much worse than RP in my experience. In recent years, I haven't had any buffering problems at all in RP.
we are told that each new version is that last we will need, and that each news version "fixes" Real's anti-social and sneaky behavior. But with each new version, we find that somehow, despite Real's protestations to the contrary, the anti-social behavior remains.
Anti-social?? Arrgggghhhh!
GET A LIFE
You are being totally ridiculous. You're taking this WAY too seriously. It's just a media player!
The Nazis didn't invent lying. The Communists lied. The Trojans lied. The Egyptians lied. All in various and sundry ways. And history, in some ways, repeats itself. There is no point in relating Real, Inc. to Adolf Hitler's regime except to insinuate that they both share some extraordinary kind of evil. Your disclaimer informing us that you were not doing what you so clearly were doing was itself deceitful propaganda more worthy of association with Nazi propaganda than anything Real has done.
I don't mean to be an apologist for Real, but I feel that I must counter the mindless, compulsive bashing going on. There's a true mob mentality in here, and it's scary.
Many small bug fixes and improvements are included in this new version (5.03) just from 5.02. Also interesting is that they removed AOD (those annoying AOL On Desktop links) from the installer.
* fixed a crash bug when playing some AVI files in in_dshow * added multimedia keyboard keys in global hotkeys default configuration * added "Manual playlist advance" in Repeat button popup menu in Classic mode * improvements in MP3 encoder configuration (added --alt-preset standard, etc...) * made the tabs in the preferences XP correctly themed under Windows XP * revamped the Media Library preferences a bit * new experimental WMA9 input plugin * gen_jumpex updates from DrO * added "Nuke library" action in Media Library * more upside down videos fixes * fixed crash if a plugin generated a pledit wm_windowposchanged on shutdown * fixed crash exploit in in_mod (thanks Peter Winter-Smith) * fixed various crashes in in_midi when playing invalid files * made in_midi store its settings in winamp.ini instead of the registry * fixed error during installation on computers with chinese/oriental regional settings * removed AOD from installer * added Shift-R to toggle manual playlist advance * updated VP6 video decoder to latest VP6.2 code * fixed crash when launching winamp with very long filenames from explorer * made registration dialog to appear in Explorer's taskbar when installing pro version * fixed pledit/video windows showing up at startup when minimized * modern skins updates: - winamp modern skin now uses a 3 state repeat button: no repeat/repeat all/repeat track - added appplication desktop toolbars capabilities for layouts, add appbar="left|top|right|bottom" to use them - upped maki binary version, improved stack protection - current skin version number is 1.2 (this should not change for a long while now, and of course we continue to support 0.8 to 1.1) - (very) limited maki debugger (for now you can bring it up with invokeDebugger(); in a script then use 'x' - to continue and 'i' to trace into) - fixed obscure capture problem with dragging windows - fixed rectrgn being forced to 1 in xml xuiobject buttons that are originally imageless - fixed hilited state not on after clicking on buttons while the mouse stays in area - fixed scripted onEnterArea/onLeaveArea not being always correctly called while mouse button stays down - fixed getToken being passed NULL throwing guru - fixed clipping of painting within the background's region of a group rather than within the composed region (the one you can change with sysregion) - fixed image cache problem when using the same bitmap as a map and a button image parameter
And the US policy of only supporting programs that preach abstinence isn't helping either.
That's not true. In fact, quite the opposite. Africans find the notion of condoms bizarre and offensive. Most Africans are religious and respond much better to the message of abstinence. African pastors are having a lot of success in reducing the spread of AIDS in their communities by preaching sexual abstinence before marriage.
Re:This is what is wrong with this idea.
on
ICANN Meets Annan
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
With all due respect, the main problem going on in the UN *is* the US.
Right, it has nothing to do with the dozens of third world dictatorships in the body. The problem must be the biggest democracy and protector of freedom in the world.
If this were the case then the people who live there would be Israeli citizens, subject to Israeli law but also entitled to rights as Israeli citizens. If the occupied areas are not part of Israel then Israel has a responsibility to withdraw from them as quickly as is feasable.
At the moment, Israel is making itself look really bad by doing neither of these things. It won't announce the annexing of the land but at the same time, its actions are preventing a move towards the lands moving out of its control.
Bravo! You have really hit the nail on the head. This is the crux of the stalemate and also of Israel's negative image. Whatever Israel believes, it needs to DO it! The current situation is anarchic and intolerable to all sides. PM Sharon's leadership, or lack of it, is deplorable.
Israel is acting like a guilty party by not being resolute. It is too timid to outright claim the land occupied by militant Arab settlements. Furthermore, when "mean, bad Israel" bends over backwards to be nice to its enemies, it gives the impression to the outside world that it is compensating for some wrong things it has done. Outside observers mistake Israel's compassion for admission of guilt.
What's worse is that when Israel turns the other cheek, Palestinians never fail to slap it. They exploit every act of tolerance and kindness toward them. If Israel lets up on curfews, attacks increase. If the IDF stops patrolling a PA area, attacks increase. If an IDF soldier answers a Palestinian's plea for medical help, he gets blown up. It happens all the time.
Early Jewish settlers used a campaign of terrorist attacks to put pressure on the British to grant land for the formation of a Jewish state.
Evidence?
At the same time, the Arabs attempted to do all they could to prevent the formation of Israel.
But notice that there was no talk about "Palestinian liberation" until 1967.
I truly think that a solution starts with everyone acknowledging that there have been wrongs committed on both sides (and that wrong continue to be committed on both sides).
As individuals, we have all done wrong. And certainly every government and leader has made mistakes. I understand the tendency to assume that everybody involved in a long, nasty fight must share the guilt. You think that equalizing the guilt of both sides will set the stage for sober, cooperative dialogue. But that results in a travesty of justice. It whitewashes the reputation of mass murderers who have every intention of continuing their actions and destroys the character of people who have bent over backward trying to make peace. It obliterates the history of what has happened, and it prevents you from understanding the true motivations of the actions that have taken place. Blacking out the past of the parties involved creates a foundation of ignore-ance on which to begin a peace process. A peace process must take into account the integrity and the deeply-held, ongoing desires of its parties. This is why every peace process has failed.
When it comes to historical and geopolitical legitimacy, civility, and morality, there is a huge gulf of difference between Israel/Zionism and the PA/Palestinianism. The only major wrong that Israel has commited is being cowards and prolonging the situation.
First, they should lay official claim to the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, Sinai Peninsula, and Eastern Jerusalem. Set the offical borders, and make it clear that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel.
Second, tell the Arabs: If you don't want to live peacefully in the Jewish nation of Israel, pack your bags. (Those black and white U.N. vehicles could finally be put to good use.:-) No nation should be expected to tolerate violent, radical subversives within its borders.
Third, there will inevitably be many violent subversives who won't leave voluntarily. Israel should apply increasingly greater pressure on them to leave. If necessary, and it almost certainly will, Israel should employ the flying-lead variety of persuasion methods.
There are 120 members of the Knesset. If one fifth of the population of Israel is Arab, why is only one twenty-fourth of the Knesset Arab?
I just thought of another response I should give.
Why is Israel held to a civil standard so much higher than the PA is? Let's compare and contrast a little bit. There are ZERO Jews in the PA's council. In a way that makes sense. Jews make up 0% of the PA-controlled areas' population, so there need not be any Jewish representation.
Isn't that strange? Israel has over a million Arabs, but the PA areas don't have a single Jew. The reason the Jewish population there is zilch is because any Jew who even accidently wanders into that area is likely to be soon stabbed, stoned, beaten up, shot, lynched, or tortured by the rabidly anti-Semitic residents. Thus, no Jewish residents or voters are to be found there.
You may come back and complain to me about Israel when there are three Zionist Orthodox Jewish political parties in the PA areas and five elected hareidim on the PA ruling council (or whatever they call it).
There are 120 members of the Knesset. If one fifth of the population of Israel is Arab, why is only one twenty-fourth of the Knesset Arab?
The question is why ANY of the Knesset is Arab. Not that I am against the right of Israeli Arabs to be Members of Knesset, per se, but look at the ones there now. The current Arab MKs are viciously anti-Israel. They support the PA's terrorism. They are traitors to the nation and ought to be executed immediately in my opinion. The only reason that they are tolerated is because Israel is afraid of criticism of being anti-Arab or anti-Muslim. Basically, the Arab MKs are spies for Yassir Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et al. It is insane that this is allowed! What about national security? Could you imagine al-Qaeda members being Senators or Representatives in the US Congress? It's outrageous. But Israel is so petrified of being accused of making Arabs second class citizens that they let the enemy occupy seats in the government. And Israel STILL gets criticized with the very charges that they have bent of backwards to allay. Unbelievable.
The ones that I have met didn't seem to want anyone dead, of any religion.
Where do these "Palestinians" live? Were they born anywhere near Israel? The thing is, being a Palestinian (in the current conflict's parlance) is a choice. It is not defined by an ethnicity, genealogy, or place of birth. Anyone anywhere can claim to be a Palestinian, and if they're Arab, most people will accept the claim. For instance, there are many - probably thousands - of Arabs in Michigan who claim to be Palestinian. What makes them so? No legal documentation mentions Palestinians. No science differentiates Palestinians from other Arabs. They are bound only by their ambition of establishing a new Arab state on the land of Israel.
The term "Palestinian" is PURELY POLITICAL. It was hijacked from history by Yassir Arafat for Arab nationalist aspirations. It used to refer to Jews, but nationalist Arabs took it for themselves when they created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). They've tried to create this farce that there is such a thing as a distinct Palestinian people. See my other post on this.
"Palestinian" is a CHOSEN LABEL that one uses to identify himself as agreeing with the anti-Israel, nationalist ambitions of the PLO -- being for the creation of a new Arab Islamic state called Palestine and the abolishment of the state of Israel and the Jewish people from the Middle East by any means possible. No one is born (biologically) a Palestinian. A person becomes a Palestinian by agreeing to these goals, or having been raised from childhood to believe in them.
Now, I do have to cede something to you. I'll add one more phrase to the sentence above: or having grown up among a society (Gaza, for example) of those who believe in the goals. In this case, a person could be considered a Palestinian even though he's not really on board with the whole deal. I know there are some Arabs in the PA-controlled territories who don't like what's going on. Unfortunately, they are the minority. (I would genuinely appreciate any evidence to the contrary. I would like to be wrong.) And I don't see how this applies to "Palestinians" in other countries. I don't see how some Arab in Chicago or Detroit could be a Palestinian without agreeing to the concept of Arafat's Palestinianism. Maybe they are trying to create their own moderate version of Palestinianism. That version of Palestinianism has nothing to do with the Palestinianism in the Middle East. As far as I can tell, it is a separate development; it is irrelevant to the Middle East conflict.
Moreover, let's not forget: ALL Palestinianism is illegitimate, whether moderate or militant. There has never been an Arab state of Palestine. It is 100% fabricated myth. There is plenty of unoccupied Arab land in the world for these folks to settle on. The purpose of an Arab Pa
Over 1,000,000 Arab residents have been given full citizenship and voting rights. There are three Arab political parties in Israel and five (I think) elected Palestinian Arab representatives in the Israeli Knesset (their equivalent of congress/parliament).
The peaceful Arabs are Israeli citizens. The ones that want to wage war have put their chips on the side of Arafat's Palestinian Authority, so they have chosen not be Israeli citizens. Why would you want to be a citizen of the country you're seeking to destroy? They don't want citizenship in a pluralist, democratic Israel! They want the non-Muslims dead (Jews first) and Israel to be replaced by an Arab Islamic state of Palestine.
Slashdot Mirror
The majority elects leaders to make laws according to their principles. The tiny atheist minority, on the other hand, uses unelected, activist, rogue judges to get their way in society (abortion, "homosexual marriage," etc.). While Christians promote their ways constitutionally, atheists engage in judicial terrorism and run roughshod over the will of the people.
The ACLU is the American Taliban, tearing down crosses and Ten Commandments monuments. Atheists are the religious fascists. They're the most intolerant segment of American society, shoving their militant secularism down our throats, banning Bibles from schools, prayer from public events, etc. The American people want to worship God, and they have a right to do it in government, in schools, in the workplace, on the street, and all over the land.
You have the right to go to hell. Nobody's forcing you to be a Christian. That would be impossible. You choose your own path, and let the people of this democratic republic choose the path of the nation.
Neither am I. I'm talking about morality and character.
Washington's philosophy was much better than Diderot's. America is proof that Washington was right. France is proof that Diderot was wrong.
I responded to the first quotation of Diderot here.
This country was very much founded on religion. Here are a few quotes.
"The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His Apostles.... This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government." - Noah Webster, _History of the United States_, 1832, public school textbook
"It is impossible to govern without God and the Bible." - George Washington
"Do not let any one claim to be a true American if they ever attempt to remove religion from politics." - George Washington
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." - John Jay, First Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
"The Christian Religion, in its purity, is the basis and the source of all genuine freedom in government." - James Madison, "Father of the Constitution" and 4th U.S. President
Sex isn't taboo, per se. Immoral sex is. Explanation
Here we have a proud smut pusher complaining about corruption. LOL Oh, what a twisted world we live in.
You understand ZERO, ZILCH, ZIP, NADA about Christianity or President Bush. The same goes for everyone who modded you insightful. It's hard to fathom the intellectual rot and moral bankruptcy of a person who would compare the Bush administration to the Taliban. It sounds like your post came straight out of Soviet Russia.
They are fascists, pure and simple.
First of all, these criticisms (only those I quoted above) apply only to Bush. I think that Cheney and Ashcroft are solidly conservative.
Your complaints are really that Bush has been acting like a liberal, not a fascist.
and a respect for personal liberty and responsibility.
You're all wet on that one, IMHO. I give a thumbs up to all three of them on that measure.
It's called temptation. There are things we know are bad for us, but we do them anyway because of our base impulses. This is all the more reason that public nudity is so infuriating to people who want to be pure. Christians are human. Nude breasts are stimulating to nearly all men. But outside of private relations with your spouse, it's displeasing to God.
The Apostle Paul addressed the issue of struggling with sin in Romans, chapter 7 (NLT paraphrase):
My Godly self wants porn out of my face because my sinful self does want it. Here's a good Christian perspective on pornography and sexual addiction.Anyone who's read the Bible knows that it says plenty about sex. There are more commandments defining sexual immorality than any other type of sin.
"Do not let any one claim to be a true American if they ever attempt to remove religion from politics." - George Washington
The religion of America is not the religion of France.
Ah yes, that's the motto of the American Revolution.
In 1774, Hezekiah Niles, a British governor, wrote to England about events in America in "Principles and Acts of the Revolution in America"
This comment became known in the colonies and the rallying cry became "No King but King Jesus." Later, at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Samuel Adams commented:Nobody is entitled to software that doesn't advertise. Nobody is entitled to have softare that works exactly like they want it to.
Take life in stride. Appreciate the good things available to you. If you get an offer you don't want, say no thanks (delete the link, disable the notices, uninstall the software, whatever), and be on your merry way.
If Real does something you don't like, by all means, send them a letter with your complaints and suggestions. If they don't change, smile and get on with your life. Friend, it does not matter. That's all I'm saying.
Some people are complaining that Real waited too long to make the changes. It's like someone posted above (who got modded flamebait by a seething troll moderator), they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. One thing I've learned about on Slashdot: There are certain companies and individuals that people love to hate, and they will keep hating no matter what.
What are the "evils" of Real? They put icons on your desktop and other temporary, minor inconveniences. Gasp! High crimes and misdemeanors!
No, here's what you do: Pay attention to the checkboxes during the installation, and delete the desktop icons when it's done. Is that such a horrible nightmare that four years later you're still kvetching about it? I've been using RealPlayer continuously since it first came out and I haven't had any experiences that were particularly terrible. Just turn off all the annoying stuff when you first start it up, and it's fine. As for buffering problems, QuickTime is much worse than RP in my experience. In recent years, I haven't had any buffering problems at all in RP.
we are told that each new version is that last we will need, and that each news version "fixes" Real's anti-social and sneaky behavior. But with each new version, we find that somehow, despite Real's protestations to the contrary, the anti-social behavior remains.
Anti-social?? Arrgggghhhh!
GET
A
LIFE
You are being totally ridiculous. You're taking this WAY too seriously. It's just a media player!
The Nazis didn't invent lying. The Communists lied. The Trojans lied. The Egyptians lied. All in various and sundry ways. And history, in some ways, repeats itself. There is no point in relating Real, Inc. to Adolf Hitler's regime except to insinuate that they both share some extraordinary kind of evil. Your disclaimer informing us that you were not doing what you so clearly were doing was itself deceitful propaganda more worthy of association with Nazi propaganda than anything Real has done.
I don't mean to be an apologist for Real, but I feel that I must counter the mindless, compulsive bashing going on. There's a true mob mentality in here, and it's scary.
We believe in adaptation. Adaptation != [macro-]evolution.
That's not true. In fact, quite the opposite. Africans find the notion of condoms bizarre and offensive. Most Africans are religious and respond much better to the message of abstinence. African pastors are having a lot of success in reducing the spread of AIDS in their communities by preaching sexual abstinence before marriage.
Right, it has nothing to do with the dozens of third world dictatorships in the body. The problem must be the biggest democracy and protector of freedom in the world.
At the moment, Israel is making itself look really bad by doing neither of these things. It won't announce the annexing of the land but at the same time, its actions are preventing a move towards the lands moving out of its control.
Bravo! You have really hit the nail on the head. This is the crux of the stalemate and also of Israel's negative image. Whatever Israel believes, it needs to DO it! The current situation is anarchic and intolerable to all sides. PM Sharon's leadership, or lack of it, is deplorable.
Israel is acting like a guilty party by not being resolute. It is too timid to outright claim the land occupied by militant Arab settlements. Furthermore, when "mean, bad Israel" bends over backwards to be nice to its enemies, it gives the impression to the outside world that it is compensating for some wrong things it has done. Outside observers mistake Israel's compassion for admission of guilt.
What's worse is that when Israel turns the other cheek, Palestinians never fail to slap it. They exploit every act of tolerance and kindness toward them. If Israel lets up on curfews, attacks increase. If the IDF stops patrolling a PA area, attacks increase. If an IDF soldier answers a Palestinian's plea for medical help, he gets blown up. It happens all the time.
Early Jewish settlers used a campaign of terrorist attacks to put pressure on the British to grant land for the formation of a Jewish state.
Evidence?
At the same time, the Arabs attempted to do all they could to prevent the formation of Israel.
But notice that there was no talk about "Palestinian liberation" until 1967.
I truly think that a solution starts with everyone acknowledging that there have been wrongs committed on both sides (and that wrong continue to be committed on both sides).
As individuals, we have all done wrong. And certainly every government and leader has made mistakes. I understand the tendency to assume that everybody involved in a long, nasty fight must share the guilt. You think that equalizing the guilt of both sides will set the stage for sober, cooperative dialogue. But that results in a travesty of justice. It whitewashes the reputation of mass murderers who have every intention of continuing their actions and destroys the character of people who have bent over backward trying to make peace. It obliterates the history of what has happened, and it prevents you from understanding the true motivations of the actions that have taken place. Blacking out the past of the parties involved creates a foundation of ignore-ance on which to begin a peace process. A peace process must take into account the integrity and the deeply-held, ongoing desires of its parties. This is why every peace process has failed.
When it comes to historical and geopolitical legitimacy, civility, and morality, there is a huge gulf of difference between Israel/Zionism and the PA/Palestinianism. The only major wrong that Israel has commited is being cowards and prolonging the situation.
First, they should lay official claim to the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, Sinai Peninsula, and Eastern Jerusalem. Set the offical borders, and make it clear that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel.
Second, tell the Arabs: If you don't want to live peacefully in the Jewish nation of Israel, pack your bags. (Those black and white U.N. vehicles could finally be put to good use. :-) No nation should be expected to tolerate violent, radical subversives within its borders.
Third, there will inevitably be many violent subversives who won't leave voluntarily. Israel should apply increasingly greater pressure on them to leave. If necessary, and it almost certainly will, Israel should employ the flying-lead variety of persuasion methods.
Fourth, peace.
I just thought of another response I should give.
Why is Israel held to a civil standard so much higher than the PA is? Let's compare and contrast a little bit. There are ZERO Jews in the PA's council. In a way that makes sense. Jews make up 0% of the PA-controlled areas' population, so there need not be any Jewish representation.
Isn't that strange? Israel has over a million Arabs, but the PA areas don't have a single Jew. The reason the Jewish population there is zilch is because any Jew who even accidently wanders into that area is likely to be soon stabbed, stoned, beaten up, shot, lynched, or tortured by the rabidly anti-Semitic residents. Thus, no Jewish residents or voters are to be found there.
You may come back and complain to me about Israel when there are three Zionist Orthodox Jewish political parties in the PA areas and five elected hareidim on the PA ruling council (or whatever they call it).
The question is why ANY of the Knesset is Arab. Not that I am against the right of Israeli Arabs to be Members of Knesset, per se, but look at the ones there now. The current Arab MKs are viciously anti-Israel. They support the PA's terrorism. They are traitors to the nation and ought to be executed immediately in my opinion. The only reason that they are tolerated is because Israel is afraid of criticism of being anti-Arab or anti-Muslim. Basically, the Arab MKs are spies for Yassir Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et al. It is insane that this is allowed! What about national security? Could you imagine al-Qaeda members being Senators or Representatives in the US Congress? It's outrageous. But Israel is so petrified of being accused of making Arabs second class citizens that they let the enemy occupy seats in the government. And Israel STILL gets criticized with the very charges that they have bent of backwards to allay. Unbelievable.
The ones that I have met didn't seem to want anyone dead, of any religion.
Where do these "Palestinians" live? Were they born anywhere near Israel? The thing is, being a Palestinian (in the current conflict's parlance) is a choice. It is not defined by an ethnicity, genealogy, or place of birth. Anyone anywhere can claim to be a Palestinian, and if they're Arab, most people will accept the claim. For instance, there are many - probably thousands - of Arabs in Michigan who claim to be Palestinian. What makes them so? No legal documentation mentions Palestinians. No science differentiates Palestinians from other Arabs. They are bound only by their ambition of establishing a new Arab state on the land of Israel.
The term "Palestinian" is PURELY POLITICAL. It was hijacked from history by Yassir Arafat for Arab nationalist aspirations. It used to refer to Jews, but nationalist Arabs took it for themselves when they created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). They've tried to create this farce that there is such a thing as a distinct Palestinian people. See my other post on this.
"Palestinian" is a CHOSEN LABEL that one uses to identify himself as agreeing with the anti-Israel, nationalist ambitions of the PLO -- being for the creation of a new Arab Islamic state called Palestine and the abolishment of the state of Israel and the Jewish people from the Middle East by any means possible. No one is born (biologically) a Palestinian. A person becomes a Palestinian by agreeing to these goals, or having been raised from childhood to believe in them.
Now, I do have to cede something to you. I'll add one more phrase to the sentence above: or having grown up among a society (Gaza, for example) of those who believe in the goals. In this case, a person could be considered a Palestinian even though he's not really on board with the whole deal. I know there are some Arabs in the PA-controlled territories who don't like what's going on. Unfortunately, they are the minority. (I would genuinely appreciate any evidence to the contrary. I would like to be wrong.) And I don't see how this applies to "Palestinians" in other countries. I don't see how some Arab in Chicago or Detroit could be a Palestinian without agreeing to the concept of Arafat's Palestinianism. Maybe they are trying to create their own moderate version of Palestinianism. That version of Palestinianism has nothing to do with the Palestinianism in the Middle East. As far as I can tell, it is a separate development; it is irrelevant to the Middle East conflict.
Moreover, let's not forget: ALL Palestinianism is illegitimate, whether moderate or militant. There has never been an Arab state of Palestine. It is 100% fabricated myth. There is plenty of unoccupied Arab land in the world for these folks to settle on. The purpose of an Arab Pa
More pictures here
Then again, I'm sure these pictures still don't do it justice.
Sadly, that is not true. Some people never learn.
[insert pithy quote about infinite human stupidity]
The peaceful Arabs are Israeli citizens. The ones that want to wage war have put their chips on the side of Arafat's Palestinian Authority, so they have chosen not be Israeli citizens. Why would you want to be a citizen of the country you're seeking to destroy? They don't want citizenship in a pluralist, democratic Israel! They want the non-Muslims dead (Jews first) and Israel to be replaced by an Arab Islamic state of Palestine.