The American Spectator

Sean| 6.11.09 @ 6:31AM

What a pantload. Israel's first act was to grab 23% more land than the UN mandate. The Nakba of '48 dispossessed 700,000 Palestinians, a figure arrived at by Benny Morris, official historian of Israel. Even David ben Gurion agrees: "If I were an Arab leader , I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal, we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been anti-Semitism, Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"

I add that killing to abet theft is murder.

Bram| 6.11.09 @ 7:40AM

Sean, drop the self-hating Jew act. 1948 was a war of Arab aggression. You feel guilt because the Israelis defended themselves?

Take a look at the pre and post WWII maps of Europe - there were far more dramatic land seizures and deportations. Prussia ceased to exist - the Germans who had inhabited the region for a millennium were booted out of their houses and farms and marched west. Poles, similarly kicked out of their homes in eastern Poland that was annexed by Russia were relocated there - in 1945.

History is full land seizures and take-overs. The Normans conquered Britain, the Franks conquered Gaul, my European ancestors took North America from my American Indian ancestors. They all got over it.

Instead of getting over it, the Palestinians have been used by the Arabs world to remain a thorn in Israel’s side. I’m tired of their continuous victimhood. Grow up.

Sean| 6.11.09 @ 8:27AM

Bram, if you're tired of something, change what you're doing. In your examples of takeovers I note you didn't include Iraq's conquest of Kuwait. Why were they denied the spoils of war?

As to your "war of Arab aggression: another quote from ben Gurion..."a Christian state should be established {Lebanon}. When we smash the Legion strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Trans-Jordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we will bomb Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo."

How would you react if someone said of 9/11.."I'm tired of their continuous victimhood. Grow up."?

Todd| 6.11.09 @ 9:14AM

Sean is a perfect example of the confused, muddled thinking and moral equivalence of the left when it comes to Israel. How stupid is his example of Iraq? Iraq invading Kuwait was a completely unprovoked attack and it was in everyone's interest to drive them out and defeat them. You don't get any spoils of was Sean if you get your ass kicked. Unfortunately we had that turncoat clown Powell stopping us from finishing the job then and there and let Saddam remain in power. His mention of 9/11 is just pure nonsense though many on the left want to pretend it never happened and forget the fact that the Palestinians were dancing in the streets in joy.

Israel has never attacked Arab states unprovoked and has always fought in self defense such as in 48 and 67 but since they won after being attacked, they determined what was necessary to protect themselves. Why the hell should they go out of their way to help the Palestinian's when all they want is to steal from them and kill them? All the evidence shows that the two-State solution is a farce, at least as long as the "Palestinian cause" is a proxy war against Israel by Iran and Syria through their agents Hamas and Hezbollah. If they were actually willing to follow the example of Egypt and lay down their arms but their is no evidence of that whatever Obama may think or say as is well stated by Mr. Tyrell. In the meantime, people like Sean will continue to be the useful idiots they are in their support of the "rights of the Palestinians."

Bram| 6.11.09 @ 9:16AM

Only the winners get to keep the stuff - that's why it's called "winnings." I was there in '91 - they were losers although they really did enjoy of few months of medieval style rape and pillaging.

If we set up a refuge camp in lower Manhattan for "victims" and kept them there in poverty for decades to revel in victimhood and be indoctrinated into terrorist groups, I would tire of it as well.

Todd| 6.11.09 @ 9:17AM

spoils of war, not was of course.

Sean| 6.11.09 @ 9:31AM

"The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its very existence was only bluff, born and developed after the war." - General Peled, in Ha'aretz, March 1972.

Bram, you fail logic. Todd, you fail history.

ncatty| 6.11.09 @ 9:57AM

The middle eastern view of land ownership is not the same as in the West in general and the US in particular. In the US, land is fungible, easily transferred, and people are highly mobile. For example, do you live on the same land as your parents, grandparents? The middle eastern view, and this includes the Israelis, is that land once occupied is forever owned by the family, tribe or state. This is why "trading" pieces of land is unacceptable to all sides there.

William R| 6.11.09 @ 11:11AM

We should follow Reagan's advice !!

Here’s how he explained it in his autobiography:

Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.

In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.

Sean| 6.11.09 @ 11:33AM

I'll give Bram the Lame one other example. Israel attacked Egypt in '56 in a murder-for-hire deal cooked up by France and England. Israel's seizure of the Suez Canal was to be the beard for England and France's "rescue" of their former colonial possession..only they were never going to relinquish possession again, Nasser be damned.

Eisenhower forced a truce on the Israelis, Brits, and French..they left. See, you can be conservative and anti-war.

Steve| 6.11.09 @ 11:48AM

The real stumbling block to peace is not Jewish settlements, or even borders. The borders were essentially defined 9 years ago--and nothing really has changed. If fact, reports are that the proposal that George Mitchell is pushing Abbas to accept calles for the major settlement blocks on the West Bank (those inside the fence) to be transferred to Israel, with Israel relinquishing a similarly sized portion of the Negev in return.

No, the real problem is the continued refusal by the Palestinians to drop the insistence on the refugee's right to return to land within Israel. That is a non-starter, since it would effectively mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state. It is also fundamentally unfair. Yes, as Sean points out, some 700,000 Arabs were displaced in 1948. But they were not displaced by the creation of Israel, but by the war declared by Arab states after the declaration of Israel's independence. This "catastrophe", far from being the moral equivalent of the Holocaust (as our President seem to frame it in his Cairo speech), is roughly equivalent to the displacement of over 800,000 Jews from Arab lands which occurred after 1948. The truth is that there was a population exchange--which the Arabs and the Left prefer to forget about.

The only difference between the displaced Jews and displaced Arabs is that Israel welcomed in their refugees, granted them citizenship, and trained and educated them. Their descendants now comprise about half of Israel's population. In contrast, the Arab states put their refugees into camps, where most of them still exist, dependent upon aid from a UN agency created for the sole purpose of keeping them at a subsistence level. Its pitiful. If the Arab states had treated their people like Israel treated its refugees, we would not have a problem today.

The fair solution is for the Palestinians and the Arab states to recognize the reality of the population exchange--and rather than compensating the 800,000 Jews for their displacement, use that money to compensate the Palestinian refugees. Give them land in a new state to be created in most of the West Bank and Gaza--and tear down those awful camps.

ThinkTank| 6.11.09 @ 12:02PM

Sean - there's really no point talking to these people.
They've got their marching orders from Rush, and nothing - logic, or words from you - will change that

Todd| 6.11.09 @ 12:07PM

Well said Steve, that is the real history that people like Sean and Obama refuse to accept. Comparing the Holocaust with the displacement of Palestinian's due to war where they sided against Israel is moral equivalence at its worst. Sean would probably never admit to being anti-Semitic but the logic he uses and the facts of the situation show otherwise. Not anti-Semitic against Jews in general but for the State of Israel as there are numerous Jews here that no longer support Israel against terrorist States like Rahm Emmanuel. Funny Sean will tell Bram he fails logic and me history when it is him that does both. His logic about Iraq fails every test conceivable and only a person who lacks intelligence and integrity would make such an argument.

L. Ross| 6.11.09 @ 12:38PM

It's funny, reading all these posts about the ongoing struggles in and around Israel. Everyone is ready to blame or defend Israel, but no one mentioned the root of the problem, which is islam. muslims are taught from birth to hate and despise Jews, and having a Jewish majority nation right in the middle of their muslim lands literally makes them insane with rage. I don't have much to suggest as a way to solve the problem, or at least nothing that doesn't involve religious genocide, but unless we understand that at its core this is a religious war, we can't even begin discussing how to fix this problem.

By the way, is it just me, or does BHO seem to actively dislike the U.S.A?

Pete| 6.11.09 @ 1:24PM

It isn't just you...everything he does confirms it.

Joe| 6.11.09 @ 1:54PM

ThinkTank you should change your name since you certainly don't think. All of the evidence and facts/Truth presented by the above and you still can't see past your nose. All you can say is Rush and think that wins the arguement. Please!!!

Smitty| 6.11.09 @ 2:12PM

I agree, L. Ross--Islam is the problem. It's a backward, cave-dweller-troglodyte belief system. Just look at the way they treat their women.

They are a disgrace and doomed to fail.

Helen Donnelly| 6.11.09 @ 2:23PM

Sean,
You fail human logic.

Steve| 6.11.09 @ 3:08PM

While I agree that Islamic extremism/fundamentalism has become a serious problem, I don't think that history supports the proposition that it is at the root of the problem. The fact is that most Palestinian Arabs--while Muslim--are predominately secular in outlook. And that has been true since before 1948. The problem today is that most Palestinian Arabs have been indoctrinated/brainwashed into believing a false historical narrative. If you talk to Palestinians on the West Bank (I have), most believe: 1) Jews never lived in the area; Jews are not even of Middle Eastern origin but are European; 2) There was never a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem where the Dome of the Rock now sits; 3) The Hebrew Bible/Christian Old Testament is a fraud--falsified to make up a history that never happened; 4) The decedents of Abraham who were promised the land are the Palestinian Arabs; 5) The United Nations adopted the partition plan in 1947 because some nations felt guilty about the Holocaust and thought a good solution would be to ship the remaining remnants of European Jewry to Palestine because the Arabs were too weak to do anything about it ; 6) they weren't responsible for the Holocaust (to the extent it actually happened) so they shouldn't be the ones to give up land to give to the Jews; 7) Their land was stolen by Europeans---just another example of European colonialism; and 8) They were screwed.

Now, it is true that this narrative is consistent with and, to some extent, based upon Islamic teachings and it is certainly taught as part of their religious training--but even Palestinian atheists buy into it, as do some Palestinian Christians. And, remarkably, many ignorant people on the Left buy into some if not all of this narrative--and most of them are not Muslim (just misinformed).

The myths are perpetuated by Arab states who have found the Palestinian cause to be a very useful device to divert their peoples attention away from the obvious failings of their governments. Tyrants often use scapegoats to blame their problems upon--it is one of the oldest tricks in the book. The problem is that the false narrative is now so widespread that it will take many years to correct it--if it is even possible to do so.

Mike| 6.11.09 @ 3:32PM

An editor of one of the Israeli newspapers remarked that the problem with finding peace between Israel and the Palestinians is that only one-half of each group wants peace. The non-peace making half of each group believes they are living according to the dictates of a "higher law" that justifies the means they employ in the pursuit of their respective "righteous struggles." The real beginning of the peace process will be evident when each community confronts their own members who are roadblocks to any possibility of compromise.

CC Ryder| 6.11.09 @ 4:08PM

Islam hates because it envies those who prosper. They can't compete so they resort to violence. The rot is within.

Stammon| 6.11.09 @ 4:45PM

Sean;
Israel attacked Egypt because Egypt closed the Suez Canal to them. Egypt also attacked in 1948. There was a history of Egyptian provocations against the infant state of Israel, including the murder of several hundred Jews just months before the '56 war. Nassar was promoting pan-Arabism, and using hatred and warmongering as propaganda. Read history, expand your mind.

Patriot| 6.11.09 @ 6:47PM

What mind?

Richard Baker| 6.11.09 @ 6:55PM

The concept that the Arabs have is that no one except an Arab can live in this part of the world. I sometimes wish that the Israelis could go to another part of the planet so that the Arabs could continue their ages old blood feuds without being able to blame it on the Jews. Then the Israelis could live in peace and the Arabs descend, or continue their descent, into their Hell on Earth.

Marc Jeric| 6.11.09 @ 7:46PM

Abu Hussein from Kenya has finally found a sure way to win the war on terror and stop terrorist attack on Americans - let go of Israel and let the Arabs perform that "final solution" attempted by Hitler.

S.L. Toddard| 6.11.09 @ 7:49PM

Just so we're all on the same page here, let me know if I have this right:

Israel is Good

The Palestinians are Evil (or, at best, people who *could* be good but are misled by wily Evil Islamists)

When Israel slaughters Palestinians it is in justified retaliation for Palestinians slaughtering Israelis

When Palestinians slaughter Israelis, it is NEVER in justified retaliation for Israel killing Palestinians, it is because they are Evil Terrorists

Every Israel attack has been in essence an act of self defense

No Palestinian attack can be justified as self defense - they are all by definition Evil Terrorist Attacks

In the Gaza War, in which 13 Israelis were killed, Israel was the victim

In the Gaza War, in which 1,100 Palestinians were killed and over 5,000 wounded, Palestinians were the Evil Terrorist Agressors who Deserved It

Israelis, who forced Arabs from their homes at gunpoint, occupied their land, confined them to an open-air prison for four decades, deny them freedom of movement or access to medical supplies, deserve our support because they are The Victims, they are Good and are Surrounded by Enemies

Palestinians, who were driven from their homes at gunpoint by Israelis, had their land occupied, have been confined to an open-air prison for four decades, are denied freedom of movement or access to medical supplies and live under humiliating conditions imposed by the Israelis do NOT deserve our support or sympathy because they deserved ALL of it and it is ALL justified because they are Evil Terrorists.

Every act of Israeli violence is legally and morally justified

Every act of Palestinian violence is morally unjustified and never in retaliation for anything, but merely the acts of anti-semitic, Nazi-like Evil Terrorist Jew-Haters who wish to extinguish the Jewish People

--------------------------

Is that about right?

Bob R| 6.11.09 @ 8:25PM

S. L. Toddard nails it! Way to go.

Simply amazin'.

SL Toddard - Lousy Argument| 6.11.09 @ 10:23PM

SL Toddard:

Poor attempt at an argument by purposefully misrepresenting the other side -- few "pro-Israel" people, including myself have ever said Palestinians are "evil" or that the slaughter of anyone is justified; it clearly is not! You essentially are making up this argument so as to justify to yourself your position on the subject.

So I suppose because more Japanese died in WWII than Americans, we were the evil aggressors? Few Israelis died, this is true - but this is partly because Israel protected its own citizens by establishing early warning systems, building bomb shelters and evacuating schools - many of which were hit by Palestinian rockets but there were no casaulties b/c the Israeli authorities evacuated the schools. Would you have prefered Israel not done all these things? Should those kindergardeners not have been evacuated? According to your logic, had Israel done so, and had Israeli 6 year olds been killed, then all this bloody conflict would've been "proportional". What moral drivel - Israel is automatically wrong because not enough Jews were killed!? All that would've need happened to make the Gaza war justified in your eyes if enough rockets hit their targets and managed to inflict what was intended for them! Plus, what of Hamas' actions on its own people - firing rockets from civilian areas, militant leadership hiding in hospitals - and bomb shelters not for its populace, but for its elite. Could this not account for some of the disparity in casaulties?

S.L. TODDARD = IDIOT | 6.11.09 @ 10:47PM

More proof of that with every comment he makes.

Christopher Holland| 6.11.09 @ 11:48PM

Maybe Obama can enlighten me on how America was settled - the Indians never invited European settledment, as far as I can recall. How does this fit into the world view about the evils of occupied land? Unless, of course, exception number 1 always applies - it is different for Jews.

Richard Baker| 6.12.09 @ 12:05AM

Mr. Holland:
If you don't know the difference between discovery and return, then the development of both the US and Israel would seem confusing. Were you aware that all countries have experienced some displacement of people in their development? At what point in time do we return to start again? Should you and yours return to the countries of your ancestors to make it equitable? Think carefully.

Pauley| 6.12.09 @ 2:05AM

SLToddard--Obama Nazi extraordinaire.

Jessic Milton| 6.12.09 @ 3:47AM

nice post.i like science information.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 7:54AM

"Poor attempt at an argument by purposefully misrepresenting the other side"

Misrepresting how? Right after you asked that question you went on to confirm that you believe that:

In the Gaza War, in which 13 Israelis were killed, Israel was the victim

In the Gaza War, in which 1,100 Palestinians were killed and over 5,000 wounded, Palestinians were the Evil Terrorist Agressors who Deserved It

No?

Sean| 6.12.09 @ 7:58AM

Israel was always meant to be America's Gibraltar. It will not outlast its usefulness to US oil interests.

Mike Donavan| 6.12.09 @ 10:03AM

Wow ! I am amazed to feel so much hatred while reading those comments... That is dreadful !

Moreover the author is not fair : he uses manipulation. He writes "time for the Palestinians to eschew violent assaults", but these assaults are being commited by Hezbollah and Hamas which are extremist groups and which have nothing to do with the Palestinian population who are civilians.

You must be blind not to see that you are being fooled by the author. Ask him about his relationships with pro-Israel lobbies, you may find out the reasons why he wrote such a dump.

Steve| 6.12.09 @ 11:08AM

"Hamas which are extremist groups and which have nothing to do with the Palestinian population who are civilians."

Wow! The Palestinians in Gaza vote in Hamas and the majority there support Hamas in its extremist views and actions. Hamas functions as the government in Gaza. But in your view, the Palestinian population has no responsibility for that? I guess they aren't responsible for anything then. What drivel.

Sean| 6.12.09 @ 11:42AM

Richard Baker, I'm coming to supplant you and yours..get ready to move. I had no idea I could do that 'til I read your post.

Richard Baker| 6.12.09 @ 12:13PM

Sean:
See you on the barricades,pal. Do bring more than your anonymity. I would recommend that you read Roger's Standing Orders-1759. This is the Ranger and Infantry standard. See if you can understand what it takes.

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 1:25PM

From the Jerusalem Post:

"The number of Palestinians killed in Operation Cast Lead did not exceed five or six hundred, Lorenzo Cremonesi, a correspondent for Italy's Corriere della sera reported on Thursday.

"Cremonesi based his report on tours of hospitals in the Gaza Strip and on interviews with families of casualties. He also assessed the number of wounded to be far lower than 5,000, the number quoted by Hamas and repeated by the UN and the Red Cross in Gaza.

"'It is sufficient to visit several hospitals [in the Gaza Strip] to understand that the numbers don't add up,' he wrote.

"In the European hospital in Rafah, one of the facilities which would presumably be filled with wounded from the 'war of the tunnels,' many beds were empty, according to Cremonesi. A similar situation was noted in the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, and in the privately-run Amal Hospital Cremonesi reported that only five out 150 beds were occupied.

"Cremonesi interviewed Gazans who echoed Israel's insistence of how Hamas gunmen used civilians as human shields. One Gazan recalled civilians in Gaza shouting at Hamas and Islamic Jihad men, 'Go away, go away from here! Do you want the Israelis to kill us all? Do you want our children to die under their bombs? Take your guns and missiles with you.'

"'Traitors, collaborators with Israel, spies of Fatah, cowards! The soldiers of the holy war will punish you. And in any case you will all die, like us. Fighting the Zionist Jews we are all destined for paradise. Do you not wish to die with us?' the religious fanatics of Hamas reportedly responded.

"Other Palestinians told Cremonesi of Hamas operatives donning paramedic uniforms and commandeering ambulances. A woman identified as Um Abdullah, 48, spoke of Hamas using UN buildings as launch pads for rockets.

"Cremonesi reported that he had difficultly gathering evidence as the local population was terrified of Hamas."

Sean| 6.12.09 @ 1:36PM

Nick, now do Lebanon. Explain how the 20,000 Lebanese dead were really just 87 bad apples.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 1:53PM

"From the Jerusalem Post"

Nick, if I were to post a different figure from a *Palestinian* source, what would you say?

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 2:06PM

The IDF claims 1,666 slaughtered. VS 13 on the Israeli side.

Man, those Israelis have it rough.

Steve| 6.12.09 @ 2:17PM

What profound logic. Let's see--73 million people died as a result of World War II, and only 131,000 were Americans. I guess, by this logic, we really were the bad guys.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 2:26PM

As I said in the other thread: Likudnik extremist neoconservatives are now preaching to an ever-shrinking choir, all their fear-mongering and so forth is now seen for what it is by the majority of Americans - the paranoid, terror-stricken ranting of a discredited, failed, fringe faction so far outside the mainstream as to be hardly worthy of notice.

Fortunately for the United States, Americans have woken up and want a more even-handed approach to the Middle East - one where we do not blindly favor Israel over her neighbors. And why should we? What national interest is served in doing so? They are a small, rather insignificant Middle Eastern country with no oil. Not only does our relationship with Israel *not* benefit us, it actually damages our national security by earning us the hatred of the Muslim world - and Americans are (finally) recognizing the fact that to urge a continuance of our policy towards Israel is literally to value Israel's security *over America's* - i.e. to be a traitor.

You will see America dividing into two camps - one who believes America should put its national security first, and one who believes that instead of prioritizing American national security we should continue blindly supporting Israel. The former will continue to grow while the latter shrinks to insignificance.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 2:28PM

"What profound logic. Let's see--73 million people died as a result of World War II, and only 131,000 were Americans. I guess, by this logic, we really were the bad guys."

Only if you pretend the two situations are analagous. It would be more like if Germany, retaliating for an uprising in the Warsaw ghetto which killed 13 Germans, slaughtered 1,600 Jews in retaliation, and then claimed themselves "the victims".

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 2:37PM

Mr. Toddard,

Your bias blinds you yet again.

The first paragraph specifically states this is a report by Lorenzo Cremonesi of Italy's Corriere della sera.

Or did you stop reading after you saw "Jerusalem Post"?

Of everything I've read, the IDF claimed between 1100 and 1200 dead Gazans. Most of which were Hamas militants, again according to the IDF. Also, the Post article doesn't mention it, but Cremonesi's source for the 500-600 dead was a GAZA DOCTOR at Shifa Hospital.

Hamas and the PA always lie and exaggerate death tolls and the number of wounded. Remember Jenin? Remember the "dead" guy in the coffin, who when it was dropped, got up and got back in. Or would you say this was a miracle?

p.s.- I appreciate a person who can admit they were wrong, as you did in that other thread.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 2:44PM

"The first paragraph specifically states this is a report by Lorenzo Cremonesi of Italy's Corriere della sera."

According to the Jerusalem Post, maybe.

I don't dispute the number, really (though the IDF does) - I was just making a point about arguing against the Arguer instead of the Argument. There are a range of figures available, and what they all have in common is this: it is ridiculous to consider Israel the "victim" in that slaughter. That is not to say that Palestinians are exempt from blame, only that the Israel Is Good And Innocent while Palestinians Act Out Of Evil Only narrative is laughably ridiculous. It is not a case of one side being Righteous Heroes and the other being Detestable Villains. It is an extremely muddled and complex conflict in which there are no innocent sides.

"I appreciate a person who can admit they were wrong, as you did in that other thread."

I try to always do that, honestly. I completely missed that line and was sort of baffled about what you were talking about until you re-posted the quote.

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 3:18PM

Mr. Toddard,

"I was just making a point about arguing against the Arguer instead of the Argument."

Then you made your point very badly. The "Arguer" is Lorenzo Cremonesi, who reports for ITALY's Corriere della sera. Not the "Jerusalem Post".

It is so easy to bait you!

You can read the whole article here (and I suggenst you do):

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2009/01/28/cremonesi-article-in-english/

Why did Hamas break the cease-fire by launching rockets? Were they not the aggressors?

When a SWAT team goes in to rescue hostages, and some of the hostages get killed, it is the HOSTAGE TAKERS who are to blame for their deaths. Not the SWAT team.

Hamas is morally responsible for HOWEVER many actual civilian deaths there were, NOT Israel.

Tim| 6.12.09 @ 3:36PM

Pharoah "succeeded" in driving the Jews into the sea three thousand years ago. The original Operation Desert Storm, about which a soggy Ramses II returning home on foot declared "My biggest victory ever!"

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 3:37PM

Nick, you have conservative tendencies. I really wish you would spend some time at American Conservative, Takimag, maybe Chronicles – theirs is a conservatism (true, traditional conservatism) that is consistent, logical and American. Go there each day for a bit and read with an open mind. Really consider what you read. Each site has different writers and you will not agree with all of them – they do not all agree with each other, and in fact disagree and argue with each other frequently. But they are most of them true Conservatives, and argue always from a Conservative perspective, and put their Conservatism – i.e. their honor and virtue – before party allegiance.

Step back and think about what you're doing - a conservative is one who reveres tradition and the permanent things. Who loves Liberty, and recognizes - as the Founders did - that the greatest threat to our own Liberty comes from one's own government. Because of this, a Conservative reveres the Constitution, the 2nd and 10th Amendments especially, as it serves (or should, at least) as a check on tyranny. A conservative believes in the Rule of Law and an open, constitutional Republic. A conservative loves his people and culture, and so opposes open borders and mass immigration. A conservative believes in localism and subsidiarity, that the Constitution granted the lion’s share of power to the States so that it would be more accessible to the People – what is called “States Rights”. A conservative believes in self-reliance and responsibility - both for himself and his gov't, and so he demands balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility. A conservative loves the soldiers who stand ready to defend America, and because he values them he recognizes they should be sent to war only in defense or in the face of an imminent attack. A conservative believes in a small, un-intrusive federal government, partially because a massive federal government is inherently wasteful, but first and foremost because it is a danger to one's Liberty. A conservative opposes federal social programs first and foremost because they are unconstitutional, and secondly because they do damage to the moral fiber of the people.

One cannot consistently believe these things and support the GOP. Read through the above paragraph again – you KNOW in your heart that the GOP has not only failed to advance a conservative agenda, they have consistently and unwaveringly done the opposite. They dominated congress for over a decade and had the White House for eight years. They did not seal the border with Mexico – instead, they actively maintained an open-border policy. They did nothing to restore to the states their traditional and constitutional powers – instead, they further consolidated power in the federal gov’t – especially the the executive branch – at the States’ expense. They did NOT strengthen the Rule of Law – they violated it egregiously, they seized radical, unprecedented, unconstitutional powers for the Executive, they instituted an illegal spying regime to eavesdrop on American citizens, they constructed a torture regime in violation of domestic and international law etc. They did not decrease spending and the size and power of the federal government – instead they DRASTICALLY increased spending – more so than the two previous Dem administrations – and increased the size and scope of an already massive, overbearing, socialistic behemoth of a federal government. They did not decrease social spending – instead, they increased social spending dramatically and initiated and sunk billions into monstrous, massive new social programs worthy of LBJ. And they did not value the lives of our soldiers – instead, they flung them into the Middle East to conquer a country that posed no threat whatsoever, without ever having ANY evidence that Iraq was planning to attack us. Whatever evidence they had – whether drummed up or not – NONE of it ever demonstrated a clear and present danger.

You do not want to believe these things, but in your heart YOU KNOW. And every vote for the GOP – every word of support – is support for an anti-conservative agenda that does damage to America as sure as any terrorist attack. It goes without saying that the same goes for support of the Democrats. There is one solution only: for Conservatives – true, American conservatives – to reject un-conservative policies and the people and parties that enact them, to do so loudly and often, in conversation, in writing, and at the ballot box. That means registering Republican and only voting for true Conservatives and never voting for the lesser of two evils. It means having to vote Third Party more often than one would like. It means depriving the GOP of your vote – even if it means the Democrats will win in the short term – until they adopt a truly Conservative agenda.
Otherwise, despite having conservative leaning, you are supporting an un-conservative agenda no less than Barack Obama is. No less than any liberal. You know the GOP’s record – erase the rhetoric and you’re left with *nothing* conservative whatsoever.

YOU KNOW THIS, NICK. Admit it to yourself, and then act accordingly. It might be difficult at first – you will no longer be part of a false “side” in a constructed, phony Left vs phony Right narrative, and you will find scant politicians to support or revere. But it will get better. You will find that you no longer have to do be dishonest with yourself, or contort logic to the breaking point to defend oily politicians. You will find yourself liberated from the false narrative that governs the political thought of the Herd – that there is a Conservative party and a Liberal party, and that what the former does is Conservative and that what the Liberal one does is Liberal. You will recognize (as demonstrated inarguably above) that neither major party is for you, if you are Conservative, and as such you will feel the tainted scales of petty party loyalty fall from your eyes, and you will watch people who think as you used to and wonder how they cannot see.

YOU KNOW THIS NICK.

YOU KNOW THIS.

YOU KNOW.

YOU.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 3:51PM

"Then you made your point very badly. The "Arguer" is Lorenzo Cremonesi, who reports for ITALY's Corriere della sera."

According to the Jerusalem Post, who I was pretending to dismiss.

"Why did Hamas break the cease-fire by launching rockets? Were they not the aggressors?"

WHY do you believe that? WHY? Neither side lived up to its ceasefire obligations. Hamas agreed to get the rocket fire to cease - it never did, but it was understood that they were trying. Israel agreed to allow goods and supplies to cross the border but *never* delivered. Both sides failed to live up to their agreements, but the ceasefire nonetheless went on because Hamas had managed to greatly curtail the rocket attacks. The ceasefire fell apart only after *Israel* attacked and killed six Hamas militants in a tunnel near the border. It was an *Israeli* attack that caused the end of the ceasefire - it held, even though neither side fully lived up to the agreement, until the Israeli attack. That is not in contention.

"Hamas is morally responsible for HOWEVER many actual civilian deaths there were, NOT Israel."

You mean because:

When Israel slaughters Palestinians it is in justified retaliation for Palestinians slaughtering Israelis

When Palestinians slaughter Israelis, it is NEVER in justified retaliation for Israel killing Palestinians, it is because they are Evil Terrorists

************

Honestly, Nick - don't you recognize how simplistic your take on the conflict is? You really believe it's like professional wrestling, Good Guys vs Bad Guys? Like a comic book? Like a GI Joe cartoon?

It's beneath you.

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 6:54PM

Mr. Toddard,

You wrote: "'From the Jerusalem Post'

Nick, if I were to post a different figure from a *Palestinian* source, what would you say?"

Again, the "source" for these FIGURES was Lorenzo Cremonesi, not the Jerusalem Post.

How can you pretend to dismiss a "source" that was just quoting another source? I would never dismiss a Heritage Foundation report just because it was quoted in the NYT.

I could have cited other sources for Cremonesi's report (I did later). I baited you and you bit.

Your problem is you have bought into the canard that both sides are morally equivalent, both committing immoral acts. This is propaganda by pro-Palestinian leftists and the liberal MSM.

You repeat the pro-Arab spin by stating both sides didn't live up to the cease-fire, but that it "fell apart" because of Israel. You admit Hamas didn't stop the rocket attacks. Where was the "cease" in the "cease-fire"?

Also, Israel says it did open crossings to let supplies into Gaza. You cite only one side's version of events.

I freely admit Israeli soldiers have committed bad acts. Israel also, like us, prosecutes these offenses. I'm sure Hamas and Hezbollah do the same to their bad actors, right? But then they would have to lock themselves up, wouldn't they?

When Hamas attacks Israeli forces from civilian areas (a war crime, by the way), and the IDF defends itself, any civilians "slaughtered" are the fault of Hamas.

When an Israeli helicopter sends a missle into an apartment to take out a Hamas leader, a military target, any collateral damage is the fault of the Hamas leader for hiding in the apartment.

Just like when we took out Zarqawi. Is this so hard to understand?

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 7:25PM

Mr. Toddard,

Let me reccomend some reading for you. Try Human Events, Michelle Maulkin, American Thinker, National Review, Ann Coulter, Hugh Hewitt, and NewsBusters. To name just a few.

When I want to find out what the other side thinks I put on CNN or Msnbc.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 8:18PM

"Let me reccomend some reading for you. Try Human Events, Michelle Maulkin, American Thinker, National Review, Ann Coulter, Hugh Hewitt, and NewsBusters. To name just a few."

I subject myself to nearly all of those sources daily, except for Malkin and Ann Coulter, who are the contemporary equivalents of Morton Downey Jr - rather dull-witted bottom-feeders scraping the sewer of the right-wing punditocracy. They are jokes.

"When I want to find out what the other side thinks I put on CNN or Msnbc."

Good lord. You really think there are only two sides? How old are you?

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 8:18PM

I should have added that it was Michell Maulkin, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin and other conservatives like them that stopped the Shamnesty legislation, pushed by President Bush and John McCain, from passing.

So I don't know where you get this false notion that I'm some GOP party flack or supported everything GWB did. If you've ever read comments of mine where I eviscerated McShame and GWB, you should know better than to make such a bogus claim as this.

S.L. Toddard| 6.12.09 @ 8:22PM

"Again, the "source" for these FIGURES was Lorenzo Cremonesi"

Sure - according to the Jerusalem Post. How do I know they're not lying?

" When Hamas attacks Israeli forces from civilian areas (a war crime, by the way), and the IDF defends itself, any civilians "slaughtered" are the fault of Hamas.

When an Israeli helicopter sends a missle into an apartment to take out a Hamas leader, a military target, any collateral damage is the fault of the Hamas leader for hiding in the apartment."

Right - because:

When Israel slaughters Palestinians it is in justified retaliation for Palestinians slaughtering Israelis

When Palestinians slaughter Israelis, it is NEVER in justified retaliation for Israel killing Palestinians, it is because they are Evil Terrorists

No?

"Israel says it did open crossings to let supplies into Gaza"

Israel did allow the supplies in? Source?

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 8:35PM

Mr. Toddard,

"Sure - according to the Jerusalem Post."

No. According to Cremonesi.

"How do I know they're not lying?"

About what? That Cremonesi reported this? Again, Cremonesi's original report was reported on by many others and easily verifiable. If you had bothered to check.

But now you have twisted yourself into a pretzel trying to defend your flawed rebuttal to my questioning of your sources.

Nick| 6.12.09 @ 8:54PM

Mr. Toddard,

"When Israel slaughters Palestinians it is in justified retaliation for Palestinians slaughtering Israelis"

When Israel attacks military targets and civilians are killed, yes, that is justifiable. The intent is to kill the military target, i.e. the Hamas leader.

"When Palestinians slaughter Israelis, it is NEVER in justified retaliation for Israel killing Palestinians, it is because they are Evil Terrorists "

No, it is never justifiable to deliberately target civilians and kill them, no matter who does it. The intent is to kill innocent, unarmed people who are soft targets.

There have been Jewish extremists who have shot-up and killed Arab civilians on purpose. These are disgusting and vile acts. And the Israelis prosecuted them.

I don't know of any instances of Jews launching homemade rockets into the West Bank though.

There is simply NO MORAL EQUIVALECNE to the attacks that Moslem extremists, like Hamas, have committed and the way Israel has responded to them.

Richard Baker| 6.12.09 @ 9:40PM

Gentleman:
We have millions of Americans who know nothing of the world about them. Remember, these are the folks who live by the motto, "Don't confuse me with the facts, I know what I know". They use the names of various writers and publications but it is easy to see by their writings that their understanding is a mile wide and an inch deep, if they've even read them. I doubt, as an example, that most of these US critics have even read the Founding documents, and the Federalist Papers, of this country. Skulls full of Mush, indeed!

Rebecca| 6.12.09 @ 10:19PM

Yes, lots of stupidos in our country and Fascist Liberals like SLToddard pretending to be on the Right.

SLToddard is an Obama Nazi Extraordinaire--like Jeremiah Wright and Von Brunn. Virulent Anti-Semites all.

Sean| 6.13.09 @ 8:34AM

Apparently Richard Baker didn't get the memo. Richard, God gave your stuff to me. I feel your pain, dude, but what can I do?

FED Criminal operation| 6.13.09 @ 9:44AM

Email: bronathanael@yahoo.com

Sources: The Jewish Laundry of Drug Money, Israel Shahak; Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America, Robert I. Friedman.

“FREE SOVIET JEWS!” was a slogan plastered all over America by the Jews from 1970 to the year 2000. What the slogan really meant was, “Let Jewish criminals from Soviet Russia flood American shores.”

The late Senator Henry Jackson, who was bought by the Jews, spearheaded in his 1974 Jackson-Vanik Amendment, the Jewish agenda to tie trade agreements between the US and the Soviet Union to “freeing” Jews Soviet persecution. What the Jewish Media did not tell Americans was that the Jews were the originators of the Soviet system, its prime beneficiaries, and its prime persecutors of Russian Christians.

Word soon got around that there was a “Russian Mob” in America. But no one dared say that the “Russian Mob” was in fact a bunch of “Russian Jewish Criminals.”

UNCOVERING THE RUSSIAN JEWISH MAFIA WILL GET YOU KILLED

The major figure in uncovering the Russian Jewish Mafia in America was a journalist named Robert I. Friedman who died in 2002 at the age of 51 from a so-called “tropical disease.” In his book, Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America, Friedman interviewed major underground Russian Jewish figures and uncovered their criminal activities in the USA.

After Friedman’s book was published, Russian Jewish Mafia leaders put a bounty on his head for $100,000. The Russian Jewish Mafia knows that it can murder with impunity given their working relationship with European and American intelligence agencies. Even the FBI in America keeps no files on the activities of the Russian Jewish Mafia.

In fact, the FBI, according to Friedman, is loathe to go after Russian Jewish mafia figures because of intense pressure, (and $$$ to key officials), from the Anti Defamation League (ADL). The ADL persuaded the FBI to call off investigations saying that it would “foster anti-Semitism” and bias Americans against genuine “Soviet-refugees.”

MAJOR RUSSIAN JEWISH MAFIA FIGURES

Marat Balagula: Born in 1943 in Odessa Ukraine. Amassing a large fortune in the Soviet black market, Balagula at the age of 37 moved from Odessa to NYC under the Jackson-Vanik Amendment. Balagula opened up a restaurant in the Brighton Beach Brooklyn area and named it “The Odessa.” Soon Marat Balagula had hundreds of Russian Jewish “employees” who had nothing to do with his restaurant business.

~ The restaurant became the headquarters for jewelry fencing, Medicare Fraud, prostitution, heroin imports from poppy fields in Chernobyl, and illegal gasoline distributorships which evaded NY taxes for which Balagula was later indicted but avoided long term incarceration.

S.L. Toddard| 6.13.09 @ 11:00AM

"When Israel attacks military targets and civilians are killed, yes, that is justifiable. The intent is to kill the military target, i.e. the Hamas leader."

OK. So when, in retaliation for Israeli attacks, Hamas attacks a military target - say a cafe where Israeli officers frequent, with the intent to kill those officers - and civilians are killed, that in your opinion is justifiable?

"There is simply NO MORAL EQUIVALECNE to the attacks that Moslem extremists, like Hamas, have committed and the way Israel has responded to them."

Right - because:

When Israel slaughters Palestinians it is in justified retaliation for Palestinians slaughtering Israelis

When Palestinians slaughter Israelis, it is NEVER in justified retaliation for Israel killing Palestinians, it is because they are Evil Terrorists

No?

Richard Baker| 6.13.09 @ 5:27PM

Sean:
Try rational thought. It'll hurt at first but hang in there. Center of mass.

Nick| 6.13.09 @ 8:54PM

Mr. Toddard,

1- Hamas has never shown any concern in limiting civilian casualties.

2- All the terrorist groups have as their intent to kill as many civilians as posibble to create terror.

3- Israel targets and kills terrorists to protect her citizens from attack.

4- Hamas, and the other terrorist groups, target mostly civilians to achieve political ends and acquire power.

So, RETALIATION against Israel, for defending herself, is not justifiable. Although I'm sure Israelis would prefer that all the terrorists stick to targeting just the IDF. These are easy to comprehend concepts to those who understand rights and have studied what is justified in a war.

Here's the source for the Israeli claims about the crossings:

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e017.pdf

Pages 11-13 deal with the crossings and supplies, but I recommend you read the whole thing to get a perspective you've probably never heard before.

Richard Baker| 6.13.09 @ 11:48PM

Sean:
Remember that a good sight-picture is crucial in properly hitting your target and that Cover and Concealment are different. Long bursts will be inaccurate. Try 3-5 round bursts. Want you to have a fair chance before you expire.

Sean| 6.14.09 @ 10:34AM

How's this for rational thought? You want to kill me for suggesting that I deserve what you own..but you want to take what is Palestinian and give it to Israel. You may be a danger to yourself and others, but you don't threaten logic.

bruce| 6.14.09 @ 4:06PM

there is no living in peace with pisslamic barbarians and any one who thinks other wise is a fool.the only solution is to kill them before they kill you.

Ashkenazi' are not Jewish| 6.14.09 @ 6:52PM

Zionist Occupation

Top: Jewish Occupied Governments: USSR

These Christians are but a few of the 100,000,000 Christian innocents who were exterminated by All Anti-Christian Jewish Red Commissars in Russia under the orders of Trotsky, the Jewish Commissar of Commissars. Yet Spielberg will never Direct a "Schindler's List" Movie for them or their genocide. Why is that? Because Jews did it.

My relatives and my fellow Christians were murdered in the USSR under Jewish Marxism between 1917-1945, and many of the Marxists came to Russia from New York to do this to Christians in 1917 after Jacob Schiff, the Jewish anti-Christian maniac banker who owned The Guaranty National Trust, the largest bank in the United States, financed Lenin and Trotsky $35 million for the Red Revolution and the mass killing of these Christian souls. We must never forget this.

Mike Donavan| 6.15.09 @ 5:47AM

Steve : "The Palestinians in Gaza vote in Hamas and the majority there support Hamas... Hamas functions as the government in Gaza."

Several comments :
1. All Palestinians did not vote for Hamas : respect those ones because they are hit by bombs too.
2. How could Hamas set a real government with infrastructure (including police stations) being bombed by Israel ?
3. The USA and Israel AGREED to let Hamas run for the elections. What where their second thoughts then ? They already knew they were extremists and they are responsible for Hamas being elected !

Richard Baker| 6.15.09 @ 11:04AM

Sean:
As I remember, you said that you'd run me and mine out of this country. You're welcome to try. Center of Mass

Sean| 6.15.09 @ 12:21PM

DickyB, no I didn't. I said God gave me your stuff, like he gave Palestinian stuff to Israel. You seem surprised that Palestinians react the same way you do.

Richard Baker| 6.15.09 @ 4:47PM

Sean:
Read your previous message on this subject. You ever want to try, Big Boy, I'll suggest someplace to meet and we'll see. Your choice of weapons. You want it personal then so it shall be. Face to face, laddy.

Missy| 6.15.09 @ 11:49PM

Could I purchase a ticket, Mr. Baker? I'd love to see you give that liberal brat a whoopin'.

David Coker| 6.16.09 @ 9:58AM

In the wake of Benjamin Netanyahu's speech on Sunday, what is the genuine liklihood that the Palestinian's will disarm? As long as they are egged on by Syria and Iran, I doubt that will actually happen.

Upon his recent departure, the former Israeli Ambassador to the United States told the attendees at the AIPAC convention in Washington that daily, Israel lives under the threat of over 40,000 rockets aimed at Israeli cities and military installations. It would take decades to root out all those munitions -- and, who, pray tell, would actually do the work: U.N. peacekeepers I presume?

Obama is dead wrong when it comes to pressuring Israel. Of course, he seems to be more comfortable among the Arabs but I must ask, to what end?

Sean| 6.16.09 @ 10:00AM

Who are you channelling, DICK? Braveheart? You're making Missy go wet as spring. As to my previous post, I already pointed out that you must have missed the memo about God giving me your stuff. You're making baby Jesus cry!

Missy| 6.16.09 @ 2:26PM

Sean, stop embarrassing yourself. Your mommy would be so ashamed of you. It's time to put the bong down, put your big boy pants on and get a real job.

The thought of a real job probably makes you soil yourself.

Another liberal loser--your numbers are legion.

Richard Baker| 6.16.09 @ 3:07PM

Sean:
Center of Mass

Sean| 6.17.09 @ 2:47AM

DICK, she wants it bad. I hear you do it bad. You two are made for each other.

Tabitha| 6.17.09 @ 5:11PM

Sean, you're just mad 'cuz you can't do the deed. Problems with Mommy?

My condolences, little wiener.

Sean| 6.18.09 @ 12:19AM

Tabitha, you're just butting in 'cuz your anal cyst is vexing you again and welfare won't pop for a cure.

Hot Shot| 6.18.09 @ 1:48AM

Bet that big nasty zit on your buns is bigger than your boy bits, babe. Maybe meds will help--probably not in your case, though, not enough there to work with.

So sorry for you, even sorrier for your boyfriend.

Sean| 6.18.09 @ 7:16AM

Hot Shot..is that your handle on Craigslist too? Aren't you ascared you'll miss a john while posting here?

Hot Shot| 6.18.09 @ 1:53PM

Well, I know you wouldn't be there--at least not on the straight side of Craigslist. You got no shot at all.

That's a Laffer!| 6.18.09 @ 6:07PM

Sean only needs a little baby bootie for his bunksock. lol

Sean| 6.19.09 @ 7:40AM

What I have is staying power. What you have can be treated with penicillan and a good douche.

Wimp Fighter| 6.19.09 @ 1:43PM

Nice spelling, Sean--it's 'penicillin' little douche bag. Of course, you're probably into enemas wimpy boy. lol

AfriSynergy| 6.19.09 @ 3:54PM

President Barack Obama is right to insist that the Israelis stop all settlements. No such thing as "natural growth", it's simply a code phrase for stealing land in the name of "security" which is another code word. Security means humiliate in the maximum until the suicide bombings start again and more crude missiles start flying.

It is time for the Israelis to realize that Iraq was enough and Iran is not going to happen. No more American blood and treasure for the seed of Ashkenaz (Genesis 10), not the seed of Abraham.

Obama is doing the right thing and more and more of the American people are backing him on this.

It was Netanyahu who stated that Israel "benefitted" from the 9/11 attacks. The American people do not want to be like the Israelis, stuck on stupid and creating new enemies.

As one writer said, the Bolshevik Revolution was all about Ashkenazim leadership killing ethnic Russians in the millions. This was an immense pogrom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMNiQqwBFLQ

Truth| 6.19.09 @ 6:13PM

Sean is AfriSynergy.

Sean| 6.20.09 @ 7:40AM

Wimp fighter..put your helmet back on. Caregiver's orders.

Truth| 6.21.09 @ 12:14AM

Grab your ankles a little tighter Seanie, this one is gonna hurt. Gotta stop your dirty ways, bunkyboy.

Sean| 6.21.09 @ 8:25AM

The voice of experience, huh.

McNumNuts| 6.21.09 @ 11:37PM

You say you've got staying power, Seany: With what, your pet gerbil, Sean Jr.?

Truth| 6.22.09 @ 5:11PM

Last laugh at Seanie's expense. lol

Lingerie| 9.17.09 @ 9:44PM

sexy lingerie wholesale lingerie