Skip to main content

Or is that not allowed?

Muslims, Jews, and Christians could live in peace without fear of mutual destruction.

There would be no more need for US AID or justification for Dimona.

We could bring down the Wall, send prisoners home, and families could be reunited.

We could dismantle checkpoints, open crossings, and pull down barbed wire fences.

There would be no more settlements or armed settlers because the people would be united.

We could replant trees and olive groves and rebuild battered cities.

No more suicide bombers or sniper fire, and no more dead civilians.

No more targeted killings and hell-fire missiles, or systematic demolitions.

Palestinians and Jews could live together and the world could address other issues.

What a simpler place this world would be

if there was no need for a Jewish majority - where there would otherwise be none.

Is it so hard to imagine?

Israel killed at least 23 Palestinians in Gaza on Wednesday,including nine members of one family . . .
The air strike killed a local Hamas leader, Nabil Abu Selmeya, his wife and seven sons and daughters aged 7 to 19, medics said. His eldest son, who was not at home, survived.

A later Israeli air strike using two missiles killed at least five other Palestinians, aged 15 to 20, in central Gaza.

Evidently, yes. And I'll be branded a terrorist for trying.

Originally posted to qrswave on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:41 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Everyone catching their breath, here? n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Change your Title OR NO ONE (0+ / 0-)

    will read this for what it is.

  •  could we just move Isreal to, like, (4+ / 0-)

    New Jersey?

  •  Scottie 'Bottombear' McClellan's Mango Pie (18+ / 0-)


    10" Pie shells: 2
    Mangoes Peel and scoop out meat: 10
    Egg yolks slightly beaten: 5
    Sugar: 2 Cups
    1 Box Mango Helper™
    Margarine slightly melted: 1/2 Stick
    All Purpose Flour: 3 Tablespoon
    Nutmeg: Pinch

    In one bowl combine items 3 through 7. Combine well. Add Mangoes & fold them in the mixture. Fill Pie shells.
    Cover Crust with Tin foil. Pre-heat oven to 350° F. Bake 20 minutes

    Remove Tin foil and place on head.

    Bake 20 minutes.

    Bake pie also.

  •  Not so hard to imagine (33+ / 0-)

      As there was no Israel before 1948, and everything was peaceful between Jews and Arabs in the region before then.  Everybody was full of peace and love and happiness.  There were no riots and no attacks on Jewish citizens, particularly not in Hebron in the year 1929.

      And of course the rest of the world was at peace during this period; the most peaceful times of all being between 1939 and 1945, when the Jews flourished in Poland, Germany, and all over Europe.  Truly it was a paradise-like time.

      Why those darn Jews had to leave their happy, joyous life in Europe; why they had to demand their own state and make life difficult for all of the kind, peace-loving Arabs -- who can tell?  It's just one of those things.  Probably some kind of conspiracy or other.  Why not turn the clock back to those happy days of 1945?

    •  Actually (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TiaRachel, naltikriti, blingwad

      as you may already know, the Jews began their immigration into the Levant well before they were persecuted by the Nazi regime. Continually the Jews felt like foreigners in Europe and the modern movement began after the pogroms against the Jews in Russia in the late 19th cent. During the late 19th cent. Jewish immigration began into the region and continued throughout the first half of the 20th century.

      Thinking about it, the 1st generation Jewish immigrants into the Levant probably felt a lot like the massive amount of Palestinian refugees scattered around the region today. Unwanted, persecuted, with no home and no country truly willing to assimilate them into their culture.

  •  You're not a terrorist... (11+ / 0-)

    ...just deluded.

    You think that if we just got rid of Israel, everyone would get along?  That Jews and Palestinians could live side by side?

    It is a nice fantasy.  The problem is that it isn't what anyone wants.  What both Israel and the Palestinians desire is self-determination, and what the one-state-solution folk never understand is that people everywhere would rather die than not have it.

    The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

    by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:45:10 PM PDT

  •  Yeah. And sometimes I imagine the world (8+ / 0-)

    without people.  No need for bombs.  Nobody to use them.  No polution.  No hospitals needed.  No military.  No schools.  No government, even.  Think of how much money we would save.

    We wouldn't even have you here to waste space.
    Imagine that!

    "The Future's So Bright, I Gotta Wear Shades."--Pat MacDonald

    by hopscotch1997 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:47:17 PM PDT

  •  Sure, it's allowed (9+ / 0-)

    But the Jewish people have survived every fool that wants to see the world rid of them.

    What other people have kept their culture and identity through so much hate and persecution? And living in exile to top it off! Personally I think the State of Israel is the culmination of an amazing journey. I hope it remains.

  •  Flame retardent suit? CHECK! (7+ / 0-)

    Flame thrower in good working condition?


    Grenade repeller donned and activated? CHECK!

    Popcorn in the microwave? CHECK!


    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" - Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

    by redfish on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:48:42 PM PDT

  •  crazy about econs, crazy about politics (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    taylormattd, hopscotch1997, mattes

    You've gone from fringe to troll

    Dismantling Israel won't fix all the problems in the middle east.  I'm no big supporter of Israel (think George Marshall was right) but the fight of moderation v. fundamentalism would continue.  

    And if you think suddenly Jew and Muslim would live happily ever you might want to consider how ugly the Shia v. Sunni battle has become in Iraq.

    •  and why is that? what created the modern state (0+ / 0-)

      of Iraq?  answer? The victors of WWI.  It's phony state with stupid borders created by western europeans.  Can we stop blaming the victims please?

      Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

      by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:07:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Say which? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Sure those borders are BS.  How does that justify killing your neighbors?

        I dont see how suddenly wiping the govt of Israel off the map would change much.  

        Shia/Sunni battling long pre-dates WWI....

      •  and your suggestion... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        And do you suggest that if the victors of WWI had not done anything after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the middle east would now be a beacon of peace in the world?

        Lying can never save us from another lie - Vaclav Havel

        by Muwarr90 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:44:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no, (0+ / 0-)

          I'm saying when western governments draw polical borders for their convenience ignoring differences, blaming the victims is an ignorant response.

          Of course Iraq is a mess, it has three very distinct groups living in a shared state.

          Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

          by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:33:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The Irony is that it Would Be more Peaceful (0+ / 0-)

          More in line with Asia or perhaps even Europe. For one thing, natural legitimate leaders would have emerged from countries that had legitimate borders. There might have been some strife, but without European meddling in internal affairs, there would have been more of an incentive to actually make deals that were lasting and able to last. The British appointed a King of Iraq, the United States a Shah of Iran, putting democracy on the back burner for decades, and as a result creating an opposition that had to be just as authoritarian and paranoid to survive police raids.

          That period meant that leaders are more likely to come from absolutist stances and it becomes an "all or nothing" approach.

          As for Israel, do you know that Bolivia and even a spot in Africa were actually considered as alternative spots? If that had been the case, Israel would have been considered the way Vatican City is, a place of pilgrimage where only the superdevout and professionals live, and everybody else does the pilgrimage and goes home at the end of the day. No displacement, no billions of American tax dollars spent on its defense, and perhaps the whole oil-petropolitics thing could be dealt with more rationally.

          A Dean Democrat-because I could have been an evacuee.

          by CarolDuhart on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:38:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Another counterfactual history (0+ / 0-)

              Would just as easily predict that such a pseudo-Israel would have been wiped out in a few decades as easily as Sikkim.  (If you don't know what Sikkim is or what happened to it, look it up.)
              The Soviets created their own "Jewish state" called Birobijan -- far, far away from the old Ashkenazic Jewish settlements, in eastern Siberia on the borders with China.  (It was also called the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast".)  It was not a big success; today the population is 90% Russian, less than 2% Jewish.

            •  Wids (0+ / 0-)

              The difference was that Jews themselves would have sustained it. The Soviets (not believing in any religion) never intended to give up control of any facet of that state at all. Plus Birobijan was simply too unhospitable a place for foreign immigration-even assuming the Soviets would have allowed such immigration to take place at all. South America would have been warm, fertile-and with some diplomacy, the United States would have accepted the new nation rather equitably enough. And without holy sites to inflame passions, things would have become more normal in relations. And when one thinks about it, the South American place would have been a better place of refuge over all after the Holocaust: no danger of Hitler's successors reviving anything, far out of the way of European anti-semites to try anything.

              A Dean Democrat-because I could have been an evacuee.

              by CarolDuhart on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 09:32:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  you are brave aren't you? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I've often wondered where to find the best (most honest and evenhanded ) history of how Israel was created.  Can anyone recommend an honest recounting of the facts of how the state of Israel was created?  

    From what I remember a lot of cash changed hands in the initial years before the creation of the state.  Jews were moving there in a Zionist movement years before and buying great tracts of land, paid for in children's pennies collected in thousands of synagogues around the world.

    But, your diary begs the obvious.  This shit storm will continue until the "Palestine problem" is solved.

    •  At what point... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...does "brave" simply mean "crazy"?

      The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

      by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:59:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  good luck (0+ / 0-)

      finding an honest and even-handed history. I'd say just read as much as you can from every angle, with an open mind and a healthy skepticism.

      My own reading on the subject is somewhat stunted and inconsistent, but from what I've read, I highly recommend Abba Eban's autobiography. It's a bit of a slog but incredibly enlightening. Good for info on the diplomatic and bureacratic aspects of Israel as it is formed and as it finds its place in the world. Worth it for the anecdotes alone.

      For something more exciting, check out Menachem Begin's "Revolt", his own account of his years in the Irgun under the British Mandate (disclaimer: whenever I've tried to cite Begin on Dkos, people automatically reject it for being "unreliable")

      For lots of statistics and general history on pre-state zionism within Palestine, I'd recommend a History of Palestine 1898-1948. And if you want to know about the creation of Israel, you need to know about Chaim Weizmann. I've read the Norman Rose biography of Weizmann, but no others. The Rose book is pretty good though.

      I also highly recommend Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle", although it mainly deals with the conflict post-1967

  •  Really (0+ / 0-)

    I am starting to think none of this will ever be resolved because too many extreme people are in power.

  •  No thanks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, arbiter

    You know why? Because it's something that won't happen, and there's no point in reliving what was decided in the past.

    Deal with the present, no matter how aggravating it may be.

    Deny My Freedom
    "Inconvenient truths do not go away just because they are not seen." -Al Gore

    by PsiFighter37 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:51:52 PM PDT

  •  I wish there was a way to troll diaries (7+ / 0-)

    for this one certainly deserves it.

    •  The current method of troll rating diaries is... (0+ / 0-) post your favorite recipe.

      -5.75 -4.72 3.14159 2.71828

      by xynz on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:06:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So you catch a legal sized redfish (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coigue, pico

        Fillet it, and cut the fillets into chunks
        Cut up some vidalia onions
        Pour some olive oil into the bottom of a pot
        and let it get hot
        Throw in the redfish chunks
        Pour in a little red cooking wine
        When the redfish chunks are looking like they're almost done, throw in the vidalia onions you cut up
        Cook for another minute, then dish it out over some white rice.

        My less-than-ten-minute recipe for people like me who can't cook

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" - Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

        by redfish on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:41:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  just a dose of reality (8+ / 0-)

    Osama would still have attacked us on 9/11, it had nothing to do with Israel, muslims in france would still have rioted and burned cars, 22 arab countries would still be dictatorships, they would still blame the west for all their problems, their religious teachers would still teach them the same crap in the same madrasas, they would still fight with each other, shia would still be killing sunni and vice versa...

  •  Just my opinion (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FredFred, mhs505, hopscotch1997, Ubanks, melvin

    but I think this diary should be deleted.

    •  Opinions are like (0+ / 0-)

      arseholes everyones got one. Could you please explain why this diary should be deleted. I'd like to know what is wrong with it besides the fact that it often exposes inconvenient facts to the light of day.

      •  That's exactly it. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        I Publius

        Yes, because the diarist isn't Blaming the Jews or anything so tacky; it's all about that hard-hitting, muckraking journalism, saying those inconvenient truths that no one on earth will speak. I mean, except for like a billion Muslims,  a ton of college professors and everyone at IndyMedia. But aside from that, it's really brave. I have goosebumps.

      •  how about because (0+ / 0-)

        even the author won't defend it, which isn't surprising, given that it's an indefensible, idiotic rant.

        And what are those "inconvenient facts" you refer to?

  •  Saffron Rice (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    taylormattd, FredFred, hopscotch1997

    2 tablespoons olive oil
    2 cups long grain rice, rinsed
    1/2 small onion, finely chopped
    1 teaspoon sea or kosher salt
    1/4 teaspoon powdered saffron
    4 2/3 cups boiling water

    Heat the oil in a mediumsize saucepan, over a medium heat. Add the rice and onion and stir until the grains are coated with oil and the onion is turning translucent. Do not allow the rice to brown. Stir in the salt and saffron, and slowly pour in the water. Cover tightly, and cook over low heat until all the liquid has been absorbed and the rice is tender, about 20 minutes.

    Set aside, covered, for 5 minutes. Before serving, stir well to make sure the saffron is well mixed throughout the rice.

    Yield: 6 to 8 servings

    Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom. Mastering others is strength; mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tzu

    by FLDemJax on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:01:28 PM PDT

  •  The sad fact is (3+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    TAXme, naltikriti, qrswave
    Hidden by:

    no one who has commented knows the history of the area.  Troll all you want, but Muslims, Jews and Christians lived together in relative harmony. Non-Muslims did pay higher tax rates - but then so do single and childless couples in the U.S.

    The problem has always been Western invasions and attempts to control the area.  The Crusades, the French and British mandates after WWI, the inflow of European Jews and corresponding land grap, and U.S. attempts to control oil through puppet governments, Iran in the 1950s and now Iraq.

    Being anti-Israel is not being anti-Jewish.  I am anti-Israel because it's treatment of the native peoples is almost as offensive as Nazi threatment of Jews.  It is inexcusable and I will not tolerate Israeli apologists who choose to remain ignorant of 2000 years of history and who speak of the oppressed as terrorists and the oppressors as "god's chosen" people.  Such bullshit!

    Take a fuckin world history class because posting receipes and looking ignorant.

    Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

    by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:03:46 PM PDT

    •  Is your position (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      taylormattd, Jay Elias

      That people who disagree with you on the merits are simply ignorant of history?

      •  There are historical facts. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Admit them, then make your case.  I have no respect for anyone who defends Israel by talking out their ass or referring to them as exiled peoples.  The fact is the Jews that migrated to the area in the 20th century were European and American.  They were viewed by the native peoples for what they were, just one more European invasion. Jews and Christinas had always live in the middle east in peace and were always free to practice their faith.  The fact is, Muslims are taught to respect Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."  All three faiths are considered by Muslims to be the children of Abraham. Did you know that?

        It is not faith that is the problem - it is one more European land grap that is the problem.

        Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

        by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:14:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am curious to know (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          taylormattd, TiaRachel

          Your opinion of Sephardic Israeli Jews who have no European background. (Or at least, none since 1492.) The vast majority of them (as you undoubtedly know) were expelled from their home (Arab) countries after 1948.

        •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

          The fact is, Muslims are taught to respect Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."  All three faiths are considered by Muslims to be the children of Abraham. Did you know that?

          Thanks for showering us with your wisdom - we're all so stooopid around here.

          •  yes belittle Islam. (0+ / 0-)

            Fact is, it is Christianity that respects no other religion.  The fact is, the mission of Christianity, being an evangelical religion, is to destroy all other religions.  

            It's not surprising you react cynically to the respect and acceptance Islam offers Christians.  Most Americans/Christians wrongly assume that all faiths are conversion oriented with the goal of destroying all other faiths, but they are very wrong.

            Most of the world does not view religion as competition, that lovely idea is Christian.

            Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

            by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:48:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ahh, dude? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              taylormattd, hopscotch1997, Jay Elias

              He wasn't belittling Islam, he was belittling your arrogance.

              Lying can never save us from another lie - Vaclav Havel

              by Muwarr90 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:51:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Okay... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              taylormattd, Bhishma

              ...if you think that comment "belittles" Islam, then perhaps you're reading the part of it that the rest of us can't see.

              P.S. Islam is also an evangelist faith.  Perhaps you can recall how it wasn't long ago that an Afghan man was nearly put to death for converting to Christianity.

              The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

              by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:53:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  no, it's not. (0+ / 0-)

                while I don't defend it, there is a difference between resisting evangelism by Christianity, and being evangelist oneself.  The man was Muslim then converted to Christianity, not the same issue.

                Neither Islam or Judiasm are evangelist, but don't take my word for it, ask a Jew or Muslim.  Don't be surprise if they laugh at the thought of seeking converts.

                Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:00:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So what happens? (0+ / 0-)

                  Do people trip in the sidewalk and convert to Islam? How did Malcolm X, Mohammed ALi or Cat Stevens became muslims?

                  I read that Islam is actually one of the fastest growing faiths in the US, more specifically among the black population. Sorry but I don't believe they just heard a voice from heaven, someone talked to them about it.

                  •  Again, there is a difference (0+ / 0-)

                    between people chosing to convert to a faith and a faith having conversion as it's primary tenant.

                    Of course Islam welcomes converts, but it doesn't teach that everyone else is going to hell and must be saved through conversion.  It teaches respect for people of the book.

                    Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                    by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:14:07 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You really think that? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                        Good grief.  You understand, don't you, that the Qur'aan is filled with references to Hellfire and damnation from one end to the other?  And that a very large portion of the Muslim Hell is reserved for infidels of all types?  Christians and Jews don't get off just from having a limited form of legal toleration -- and followers of other religions don't even get that.  

                    •  Hmm, first 300 hundred years of Islam?? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      C'mon you kept talking about knowing our history. For a couple of hundred years, Islam was all about conversion at the tip of sword and all that. Or at least about taking power over all territory in the name of Islam. Many of their rulers were very enlightened for their time sure but then you also have your modern Taliban as bad seed in the family.

                      So please, I haven't seen people here attack Islam. Why don't you stop trying to make it some virtuous tradition with all the virtues and none of the vices of the other big and powerful religions?

                •  Have to disagree here with rusrivman (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  My experience with living in areas with sizeable Sunni Islamic population suggest that Islam is indeed evangelical (as is Christianity). Also in my experience, it Judaism is the least evangelically oriented of the three monotheisms which emerged from the Levant.

                  •  while I will agree, there is always (0+ / 0-)

                    social pressure to conform.  I'm a gay man. I know the power of social pressure from being different pretty damn well.  But again, that is different from being a primary article of faith.  

                    Christianity does not accept any other religion as legitimate. Conversion is the primary mission of the faith.  This is true of no other faith.  

                    This fact best explains why Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived relatively peacefully in the area for 2000 years.  It is only when westerners invaded that problems are created.  The problem isn't religion, it's European and American land grabs!

                    Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                    by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:19:34 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not quite convinced... (0+ / 0-)

                      I am glad that you feel comfortable sharing that you are gay openly, and can fully understand how you would have had to confront powerful and thoughtless conformist pressures.

                      Islam also, as far as I understand, is a strict monotheism, and cannot accept other religions (particularly pagan polytheisms) as being valid. I note that you did correctly draw attention to the distinctions drawn between "people of the book" (dhimmi) and "people without a book" (kafir); I suppose I would be among the kafirest of the kafirs.

                      Agree that Christianity is also a strict monotheism, and strongly geared towards evangelism.

                      •  yes, good catch! (0+ / 0-)

                        I correctly limited their tolerance to Christians and Jews.  I'm in the uncomfortable position of explaining very simplistically a faith I do not defend.  I think that the entire "mystery god" concept has been a disaster for mankind and would happily celebrate that extinction of all three faiths.

                        If one is going to have faith, I prefer ideals that celebrate human emotion, creativity, diversity and potential.  Personally, I have become quite content with no organized religion.

                        Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                        by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:49:06 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  Historical revisionism (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      TiaRachel, feinfeinfein

                        Warfare between Muslim and Christian states was continuous from the 7th century on.  The initial Arab invasions in the 7th century gave the Arabs control over Mesopotamia (formerly Persian) and the Levant (formerly Byzantine) -- these were bloody conquests, not peaceful transfers of power.  The wars did not end in the 7th century -- they simply moved to wherever the frontier was, in Spain, in France, in Asia Minor, in Sicily, in Crete, in Cyprus, in Armenia, in Iran, in India.  When the caliphate crumbled in the mid-10th century, the struggle shifted back into the Levant as the Byzantines advanced; the Turkish incursions of the 11th century made the situation more convoluted, as did the Crusades, which kept war going in the Levant from the late 11th c. to the end of the 13th c.
                        Concurrently, and down to the 15th century, there were bloody religious wars between Christians and Muslims in Spain.
                        Thereafter, Turkish conquests involved religious struggles all throughout the Balkans, which came to a high tide in the 16th-17th century, and then were gradually reversed in the 17th-19th century.  The Balkan wars at the beginning of the 20th century led directly to World War I and the final dismemberment of the Turkish Empir.  The wars in Bosnia and Kosova are one last relic of those Balkan conflicts; the strife in Cyprus, and in Israel and Palestine is another.
                         The "Golden Age" you speak of arose not from the beautiful tolerance of Islam, but from the very simple fact that an imperial power has low tolerance for civil war within its borders.  The Levant was not a scene of major religious fighting from c. 650-c.950 (bar border regions like Antioch) and again from c. 1500-1900 for the very simple reason that it was in a tightly controlled region of a larger empire.  Religious strife went on as usual in the border regions.  Jews were generally not involved for the simple reason that there was no Jewish state. Tolerance of Jews and Christians in Islamic countries was dependent upon the whims of the ruler of the day; this was also the case for Jews in Christian countries -- who were the only significant religious minority most Christians encountered off a battlefield.  Christian states did not generally have to deal with the question of subject Islamic populations, because -- except in fairly recent times -- they were on the defensive and did not have large Muslim minorities. Where they acquired Muslim minorities, they were sometimes expelled (as in Spain) sometimes more or less tolerated (as in the Crusader States), the governing factor being the ability of the state to enforce a strict religious policy (high in the case of Spain, low in the case of the disorganized crusader states).  Arguably this was the case in the Islamic states as well, though the fact that non-Muslims formed the source of a prominent revenue stream may have played a role as well.  But some caliphs had a much more hostile attitude, and some mass conversions of Christians to Islam can be associated with anti-Christian legal campaigns.

                        So no, the problem is not "only when westerners invaded"; it's a long-established difficulty of people of different creeds tolerating others who belong to a different social set with different beliefs.

                •  You really should (0+ / 0-)

                  acquire at least a modicum of knowledge about Islam (and other religions, for that matter) before acting as if you do.

                  Islam absolutely is evangelical in nature.  Not only do its proponents actively seek to convert infidels, but not being a Muslim is punishable by death in many Islamic countries.  

                  If you don't even know this much about it, then discussing the subject with you is pointless.

            •  You are a moron (0+ / 0-)

              if you thought I was belitting Islam.  I was belittling you for being an arrogant asshole.  Did it ever occur to you that you are not the only person who knows the stories of Abraham and Ismail?

            •  Ooh, stereotypes! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              I Publius

              All Christians are evangelical in the same sense that all ice cream is pistachio.

              Oh, and was this the kind of respect and acceptance you were talking about?

        •  they were not exiled? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          They hadn't gone through hell during the Hitler years all throughout Europe? They didn't wake up after the war to find persecution again in Poland, Russia and other countries? There weren't thousands of orphans with no place to go? Those are also historical facts.

          Their european origins should not be a crime. They decided to go back to a land that had cultural significance to them and emigrated there. Categorizing that as an invasions is the same type of rethoric that Tancredo uses to talk about Mexicans coming into the US.

          Oh, and somebody already mentioned the Hebron Massacre of 1929. So you see, not everything was peace and harmony in the land before the big immigration movement started.

          •  I noticed (0+ / 0-)

            you used the words 'cultural significance' to describe the zionists attachment to Israel. Is that because you have a problem saying 'historical significance' because you don't like telling lies? or is it because you know the agenda you are pushing is based on lies, crimes and racist ideology?

            Would you mind enlightening one of the cattle about why the Ashkenazis have the right to even a single grain of sand in the Middle East?

    •  Uh... (4+ / 0-)

      ....excuse me Professor, but I know loads about the history of the area, and not only are you waaaay off, but the pretense that somehow we could return to the relative harmony of the Ottoman empire is simply the result of too many magic mushrooms.

      The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

      by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:08:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  no where did I suggest a return (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Ottoman or early empire.  I am pissed off that so many peope here troll anybody who doesn't ignore historical fact and blindly support Israel.  The diarist is hardly a troll.  

        You want a solution, fine, I'll give you one.  1967 borders.  Palestians have indicated a willingness to accept that U.N. backed solution.  It is only the religious extremists, both Jewish and Christian who demand a greater Israel for their crack pot religious reasons that people continue to be oppressed and die.

        Can any here honestly defend the Israeli policy of bulldozering homes if one member of the family, whether they live there or not, is arrested for "terrorism"?  Who truly is the terrorist?

        Where did the hate come from? It's not difficult to discover if you really want to know.  But it's a hell of a lot easier, but guttless, to just blindly support Israel.

        Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

        by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:24:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well.. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          HiD, taylormattd

          ....when you speak of the time when Jews and Muslims lived in the middle east together in relative harmony, but when non-muslims had to pay higher taxes, you're talking about the Ottoman Empire.

          I'm not defending anything at all about the occupation, nor have I.  When I was in the IDF, I chose exile from Israel for five years over serving in the West Bank.

          The diarist is a troll, not based on this diary alone, but a long history.  But I don't blindly support anything.  And if you think that simply accepting the '67 borders will make all the problems go away, then again, lay off the mushrooms.

          The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

          by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:31:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  no, your correct (0+ / 0-)

            it won't make all problems go away.  But it would marginalize extremist on both sides.  It will take decades perhaps a few generations, but it is a realistic and practical solution.  The latest Israeli overaction only guarentees bloodshed and hatred.

            Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

            by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:41:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  On this... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              ...we can agree.

              The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

              by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:43:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I suspect we agree on a great deal. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                The past can't be undone.  We must marginalize extremists on both sides.  And I for one, will no longer tolerate verbal attacks on Palestinians just as I don't tolerate verbal attacks on Jews, Blacks,Hispanics, and now an increasing hostility towards Asians, especially Chinese. That is very different from defending or supporting the actions of governments.

                Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:54:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  We might... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...but I fear you won't find out, not as long as you are calling people like DavidNYC "stupid".

                  It takes reasonable people to have reasonable discourse.

                  The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

                  by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:57:10 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  You tolerate a lot. (0+ / 0-)

                  just as I don't tolerate verbal attacks on Jews, Blacks,Hispanics, and now an increasing hostility towards Asians, especially Chinese.

                  You've certainly tolerated quite a few attacks in this diary -- and launched some yourself.

                  Is America finally suffering from Idiot Fatigue?

                  by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:12:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I would have ignored the diary (0+ / 0-)

                    entirely.  I didn't find it particularly interesting.  But, the first comments I read attacked the diarist as a troll.  
                    You're right, that pissed me off.  I'm sick of pro-Israeli bullying of those who disagree.

                    Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                    by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:26:32 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You need only (0+ / 0-)

                      look at the diarist's history to see that he or she is a genuine, died-in-the-wool nutcase.  By any reasonable definition this diary is trolling.  Even if you want to have a serious discussion of the idea that a member state of the United Nations should simply be wiped off the map in order to promote peace, clearly this diary is not that discussion.

                      As for my original point (which you didn't address) you claim that you don't "tolerate" verbal attacks on anybody, but in my first pass through this diary you didn't object to any attacks on the existence of the Jewish state at all -- your intolerance (as measured by it's expression in this diary) does not seem to live up to your broad based ideals.

                      I recognize that this diary is not the sum total of your posting here at dKos and look forward to your links to cases in which you have objected to attacks on, in particular, Jews.

                      Is America finally suffering from Idiot Fatigue?

                      by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:37:14 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I will refer you to the John Lennon (0+ / 0-)

                        song Imagine.  I read the sentiment of the diary not as an attack on Israel, but as a reflection of the harm political borders and religions create.  I can certainly understand why one could read the diary as an attack on Israel, but it can be read differently.  
                        I said elsewhere, I didn't find the diary interesting.  The ideas are expressed better in John Lennon's song from thirty years ago.  It was the troll attack I found offensive.  

                        Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

                        by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:55:51 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If I follow. . . (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          . . . you agree that one could read the diary as a trollish attack, but you find people resonding to that reading (which, I have to say, is the most obvious one) offensive to you?

                          In all honesty, it sounds like you flew off the handle without even making an attempt to see other people's point of view.  That, or you are actually a sock puppet account for diarist (and I submit that the fact that the diarist is not responding to comments in the diary is itself evidence that he or she was trolling).

                          I'm quite familiar with the John Lennon song, which we played at my brother's funeral, and it most certainly does not suggest that this country or that country, or even this particular religion or that particular religion should somehow be eliminated.

                          Is America finally suffering from Idiot Fatigue?

                          by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 09:04:31 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  Listen, some folks (like me) (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rafaelh, Keith Moon

          find offensive a diary that imagines "a world without Israel" or a comment apparently approving the "eliminat[ion]" of Israel.  

          This does not mean I approve of the ideology or tactics of Likud, and it does not amount to "blindly" supporting Israel.

    •  Checkpoints = genocide? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I am anti-Israel because it's treatment of the native peoples is almost as offensive as Nazi threatment of Jews

      I am going to give you a chance to apologize before I troll you for equating Israel's actions with the deliberate massacre of six million people by the Nazi government (who by the way were supported by many Arab governments including Palestinians).

      •  Blatant misuse of Holocaust (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        It is clear that Israeli actions cannot be equated with the Holocaust, neither in degree nor principle (this is of course not to condone their every action).  There is so much blatant misuse of the Holocaust, especially when the Middle East is discussed.

        (The same would apply to such figures as Saddam or Bush--neither can reasonably be labeled a "Hitler"--yet.  Altho G.H.W. Bush did use the term about the former...).

    •  Moral equivalence. (0+ / 0-)

      almost as offensive as Nazi threatment of Jews

      Y'ever notice that the Israelis never get compared to the Khmer Rouge, or to Stalinists, or Maoists, or Ba'athists? It's always the Nazis.

      But they're not. Israel is held to a different standard than other governments in the region. If Israel is a genocidal, murderous regime, it's plainly obvious that they're really, really bad at it.

      Consider this bullshit about a cycle of violence---the idea that the Palestinians only attack the Israelis because the Israelis attack them and vice versa, and if the Israelis would knock it off, this would all stop. Consider what happens when an actual murderous dictatorship performs horrific retribution for a terrorist attack---the Hama Massacre, wherein at least ten thousand, mostly civilians, were slaughtered in a single day. Oddly, this didn't end up causing retaliation; far from it. There has never been another Muslim fundamentalist attack in Syria.

      But I've never heard that Syria is almost like Nazi Germany. Fancy that.

      Consider, then, the First Intifada. In six years of fighting, less than a tenth of the number killed at Hama die, many of them at the hands of their fellow Palestinians. (In the waning years of the Intifada, the Palestinians were the cause of more Arab deaths than the Israelis were.)

      The Nazis killed so many Jews that there are still not nearly as many as there were in 1931. In contrast, there are more Palestinians in the territories than there were at any point since the Six-Day War.

      As I said---if the Israelis are genocidal maniacs, they're really bad at it.

      Of course there are apocalyptic-religious nuts on both sides of the conflict. The difference is that they're in charge of the Palestinians, while the worst of Israel's extremists were expelled from their political system.

      But maybe all of this moral-equivalence nonsense is just a smokescreen, trying to convince the listener to throw up their hands and say that, oh well, they're both guilty of something, so who's to say one is worse than the other?

  •  sorry, but fuck you you fucking bastard (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    What an idiot you are... a complete, irreparable bloody idiot... you know so so so little about history and the truth of what's going on there.

  •  The stupid thing (5+ / 0-) that people think that the situation in Israel is somehow special, different from all other countries and political situations.  Well, no.  Two peoples struggling for control of a single piece of territory is by no means uncommon in history or today.  Let me just list some examples:

    • Northern Ireland: Protestant "Scots-Irish" vs. Ulster Catholics
    • Cyprus: Greek-speaking Orthodox Cypriots in southern Cyprus vs. Turkish-speaking Muslim Cypriots in northern Cyprus
    • Sri Lanka: Buddhist Sinhalese in SW Sri Lanka vs. mostly Hindu Tamils in NE Sri Lanka
    • Western Sahara: Moroccans vs. the Sahrawi "Polisario" front.

      This is a common political situation and often involves both brutal state action and murderous terrorism, both nominally in response to the other. Why, then, do we see people posting "Imagine a world without Israel" but not "Imagine a world without Sri Lanka"?  The Sri Lankan war has been even more destructive and both sides are even more intransigent than is the case even in Israel-Palestine situation.  Let's see a few diaries on that subject, with an equal amount of passion, and I might begin to take the indignation mustered wrt either Israel or the Palestinians somewhat more seriously.

    •  Kurdistan? (0+ / 0-)

      Isn't there also a movement afoot to split out the Kurds from Iraq and give them an independent Kurdisatn? I'd love for the author to explain how this would be functionally and substantively different from a jewish nation-state. Mind you, I think that Palestine has a right to exist, too, as a free, independent democracy, right next to a free, independent Israel.

      Bush is the Disaster President: Iraq--He Lied & People Died; Katrina--He Clowned Around While People Drowned

      by el ganador on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:07:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're right, and not just Iraq (0+ / 0-)

          But also Turkey, where (I think) an even larger number of Kurds live in the southeastern districts.  The Turkish majority has been very heavy-handed in suppressing Kurdish attempts at autonomy (sometimes accompanied by terrorism).  This has ameliorated to some extent in the past decade, but is by no means a solved problem.

    •  I always wonder this (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      taylormattd, TiaRachel, Jay Elias, Bhishma

      Indeed, the Tamil Tigers are considered by many to be the inventors (or at least, perfecters) of modern suicide bombing.

      And how about places where there isn't even a pitched battle any longer? I'm thinking particularly of Tibet here.

    •  Probably because... (0+ / 0-)

      many who post here are familiar with Jewish people (if not both Jewish and Arabic people), which makes the problem somewhat less distant. Familiarity on average with Sri Lankans, Sri Lankan Tamils, Cypriots, Moroccans, may be more rare....hence, the disconnect.

  •  HAMANTASHEN (7+ / 0-)
    4 large Eggs

    1/2 cup Oil
    1-1/2 cups Sugar
    1 medium Orange rind

    4 cups Flour

    2 teaspoons Baking powder
    1 teaspoon Vanilla
    1/4 teaspoon Salt

    Beat eggs, add sugar gradually. Sift flour with baking powder and salt, and add to egg mixture alternately with oil. Add orange rind last. Form into soft dough. Form into a ball and wrap in floured waxed paper. Refrigerate for several hours or overnight. Break off a piece large enough to roll into a ball about the size of a golf ball. Roll and pat it down and into a circle about 2 - 3 inches in diameter, on top of a floured piece of waxed paper (you may want to flour your hands a little bit, too).

    Fill with your favorite filling. Roll up the sides and pinch corners together in the shape of a triangle. Place on greased cookie sheet and bake at 350 for 20-25 minutes or convection bake at 325 for 15-20 minutes, or until LIGHTLY browned. Cool on racks.

    Suggested fillings: Chocolate chips, M&M's, chocolate kisses, cherry pie filling, apricot jam and marzipan. Yield: 36 servings

    Bush is the Disaster President: Iraq--He Lied & People Died; Katrina--He Clowned Around While People Drowned

    by el ganador on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:04:24 PM PDT

  •  Imagine? Israel seems to trying to make one (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie, Monkey In Chief, TAXme, qrswave

    I guess the recipe a few comments up is meant to suggest that this thread is troll fodder. But I can't resist. I see from that it is true that Israel has invaded Lebanon. They sure seem to be trashing Gaza, over one kidnapped soldier (for whom I do feel pity).

    Passing over all the moral and historical arguments one side vs the other, and ignoring the fact that collective punishment is a war crime, I will merely paraphrase some words of Gwynn Dyer, as touching on the obvious facts of the matter.

    The day will come when the US is not the preponderant world power and/or will have other things to worry about than Israel.

    The day will come when the arab and muslim worlds are not powerless.

    The day will come when the dragons teeth that Israel has frantically been sowing will have hatched.

    On that day, it will be too late to find a solution consistent with the continued existence of the State of Israel.

    I do not look forward to that day, because it will bring great misery to countless more-or-less innocent people. The concommitent wailing and gnashing of teeth by the damn guilty is fun to contemplate in the abstract, but will not make up for the rest.

    The people of Israel has better snap out of their delusions, and wise the hell up. But I do not think that they ever will. As far I can see, the hegemonists are using these mere pinpricks to justify an agressive expansionist policy that has been their sin qua non since for ever. Says so in the bible.

    It is very sad to watch this unfold, as it surely will.

    •  Lentil Stew: easy and good for you! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GN1927, mango
      Boreal, the subject of Israel's invasions may not be troll fodder, but this diary sure as hell is.

      One pound brown lentils, washed.  
      two onions
      bay leaf
      three medium turnips
      lots of cumin

      Cut everything up, throw it in the pot, and boil for an hour or two

      It's that easy, tastes great.  I've lived on it since the early 90s.

      •  sounds yummy! Here's my curry'd squash (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Do you mean actual turnips, or mere rhutabagas?
        And do you really mean 1 <pound> lentils? That would make choke an elephant. I prefer red ones, myself. Would they work in your recipe?

        Allow me to reciprocate, with my favourite dish.

        Three heaping tablespoons of yellow Thai curry paste.

        Odds and sodds of kaffir lime leaf, galanga, and lemon grass, chopped finger size (not the lime leaf!)

        Fresh death chilis, half chopped fine, half whole, but with the stem ends cut off so they don't explode, and so their lethal goodness can escape.

        Garlic and shallots, chopped fine. Lots.

        One of those obscene looking pale yellow squashes whose name I can't recall.

        Some cooking onions (three small, two big).

        1-2 cans of coconut milk, depending on number of guests and their heat tolerance.

        Chop squash into 1-2cm cubes. Chop onions fine-to-chunky.

        In 4l sauce pan, heat light cooking oil (Canola, my fave) to just shy of smoky. Add curry paste, and stir, mash and sweat for a minute or so while lowering heat so it don't burn.

        Add onions, and get them sort of 1/3 cooked.

        Dump in all other spices, herbs, and veggies. Mix a few seconds until all coated with curry paste, them add coconut milk. Heat to boil.

        Dump in chumks of squash, and heat somewhere between simmer and slow boil until a fork can pierce them easily. (Some authorities prefer to add the lemon grass, lime leaves and such during this process. I don't think it matters too much). All the while, be shaking in two or three teaspoons of fish sauce, and the juice of one or two limes, to taste. Kaffir lifes if you can get them. but ordinary limes, or even lemons, will work OK.

        While all this going on, you've been cooking a cup or two of bhasmati rice, with a bay leaf, or maybe a small bit of tumeric root added at the beginning for extra flavour.

        Once the squash is tender and the rice is cooked, ladle and serve (back-timing is everything in cuisine, I find).

        With this, I like to serve some fresh Gai Lan, lightly steamed in a big pan like it was asparagus (i.e., serve hot, and a little al dente), drizzled with the finest oyster sauce you can find. The quality of oyster sauce is proportional (on an exponential scale) to how close "oyster extractives" are to the top of the ingredients list. So is the price, but the good stiff is worth every penny.

        For desert, fruits in season, or canned jack fruit. With vanilla ice cream.

        Bon appetite!

        •  Okay. . . . (0+ / 0-)
          Boreal, I'll try this recipe.  It sounds really good.  But you're moving me WAY out of my cooking comfort range, here.  Part of the reason I make lentils so much is because one really can't mess them up.  If it comes out all right, I'll let you know.

          A whole pound of lentils, yup.  But I've had trouble with red lentils because they stick to the bottom of the pot . . . have to be stirred too often . . . and I have burned them more than once.

          •  don't be alarmed. (0+ / 0-)

            This dish is really easy. It's prep work, mainly. Get everything chopped and ready, is the tick.

            Heat oil. Add curry paste and stir for a minute. Add garlic, onions, and other cookable things and stir some more. Add coconut milk and everything left over, heat and stir. (I forgot to mention that a can a straw mushrooms, liquid drained off, is always an acceptable addition to the mix at this point). I also forgot to mention that you can use fewer onions, and generally substitute or drop pretty much everything except the curry paste, coconut milk, and squash. If you drop these, you're making something different.

            For the need a good solid cast iron sauce pan. Add 1 cup rice, just under two cups water, heat to fierce boil, stirring pretty often, so no grains stick to the botton. Add flavourant (e.g. one bayleaf). Cover, turn down heat to lowest, and cook for 20 minutes. DO NOT LIFT THE LID TO PEEK. For two cups rice, add maybe 3 3/4 cups water. They say 1:2, but it's a lie.

            There are a million variants, based on different main vegetable ingrediant (or seafood) and colours of curry paste. Your friends will think you a genius, and we don't need to tell them any different!

            If you like, I could walk you through it by phone some weekend. You really need to branch out a little!

      •  living in a dream world (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Do you really believe the US will remain the predominate military power on Earth forever?  There have been many great empires that were militarily untouchable at their height, including Britain, Spain, Rome, Greece, ancient Egypt that fell from power.

        I don't see how it's trollish in the slightest to suggest that denigrating your enemies and killing civilians is a risky long term strategy because the power balance could shift.

        •  trollish, or at least grouchy and disrespectful (0+ / 0-)

          I doubt anyone will read this, as the half-life of these exchanges seems to be about 3hr, but here goes.

          I did toss in a few gratuitous references to obtuseness and cluefulness.  Not helpfull in such a touchy issue. But we have virtually kissed and made up.

          I haven't participated in on-line exchanges much since I gave up on usenet about 10yr ago. I'd wasted  a good deal time there, starting back when 90% of traffic came from domains like foo.{cs|ee} (or would have if if one were translate the bang paths into modern parlance), and my manners may sadly reflect that history.

          This community is way different, and much more worthwhile...although I do miss a little. And Gordon Fitch (where are you?).

          chin chin

    •  The Bible? (0+ / 0-)


      I suppose you get your Ecology from there too.

      •  Yup, the bible (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Nope, oh, obtuse one. I do not get my ecology from the bible. I'd start with Darwin, myself, 'case you're lookin'.

        However, I think is it just a matter of fact that the proponents of a Greater Israel do attempt to support their position from the Bible. Why else refer to Judea and Sameria, or whoever in hell they are spelled?

        I can't help recalling a scene from "Decline and Fall" wherein the headmaster opens the bible at random, and reads "a blood-curdling chapter of military history."

        I prescribe for you your very own grip.

    •  Before you criticize the mote... (0+ / 0-)

      They sure seem to be trashing Gaza, over one kidnapped soldier (for whom I do feel pity).

      Okay, so what would your recommendation be if a foreign government kidnapped one of our citizens and started making demands? That's pretty much an act of war, isn't it? Remember, Hamas is now the legitimately elected ruling party over there; this isn't just a bunch of kidnapping punks, it's the Palestinian government doing this.

      What's your recommendation? Would you appease them by giving them guns, Reagan-style?

      The day will come when the arab and muslim worlds are not powerless.

      I know, it must be so hard for them, what with a billion people and the largest windfall of natural resources any civilization has ever known. I'm shedding a tear, right now.

  •  Also qrswave, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Proud SW FL Lib, Skaje

    I see you are sticking around to recommend comments, but have not posted any of your own.  Why don't you do so?  

  •  No comments from the diarist? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, taylormattd, Bouwerie Boy

    Of course not.

  •  Why don't you just cut to the chase (0+ / 0-)

    and imagine a world without jews.

    Fucking asshole.

    Tämä Mia Dolan on ihan hirveä (That Mia Dolan is just awful or This Mia Dolan is made of Moose )

    by Mia Dolan on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:22:09 PM PDT

    •  It is you who equates Jew and Israel. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Monkey In Chief, qrswave, blingwad

      I refuse to accept Zionism.  I have no interest in exterminating Jews, or any other peoples for that matter, but no group gets a free pass in oppressing others.

      Patriotic, flag waving, radical centrist Howard Dean Democrat. Until we stand on principle and lose our fear of defeat we will never win.

      by rusrivman on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:32:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Does your lack of acceptance... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        taylormattd, Mia Dolan

        ....make it disappear?

        With your UID, I'd have thought you were a charter member of the "reality-based community".

        The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. ~ H.L. Mencken

        by Jay Elias on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:37:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Fuck off n/t (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Monkey In Chief

        Tämä Mia Dolan on ihan hirveä (That Mia Dolan is just awful or This Mia Dolan is made of Moose )

        by Mia Dolan on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:37:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Fuck off n/t (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Monkey In Chief

        Tämä Mia Dolan on ihan hirveä (That Mia Dolan is just awful or This Mia Dolan is made of Moose )

        by Mia Dolan on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:37:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  One more time (1+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Monkey In Chief

        Fuck off

        Tämä Mia Dolan on ihan hirveä (That Mia Dolan is just awful or This Mia Dolan is made of Moose )

        by Mia Dolan on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:38:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Also... (0+ / 0-)

        I don't hate black people, but I'm against reverse discrimination.

        I don't hate Mexicans, but I'm against illegal immigration.

        I don't hate women, but I'm against feminazis.

        So, of course you don't hate Jews, but you're against Zionism.

        It's entirely possible to have a principled stand against Zionism that's not rooted in anti-Semitism, just as it's entirely possible to feel that strong borders are an essential element of national security and take a position on the immigration debate that has nothing to do with one's feelings about Mexicans.

        But it's not bloody likely. So stop pissing on my head and telling me it's raining.

      •  Wait, I have more... (0+ / 0-)

        From the desk of Tad Disingenuous...

        I don't want to shove religion into the public schools, I just think that schoolchildren should hear both sides of the debate.

        I don't want to make women barefoot, pregnant and forced to bear the spawn of their rapists, I just care about the sanctity of human life.

        I'm not a shill or enabler for an oil company, but I think we should have all the facts before rushing off on some half-baked plan to "stop global warming".

        I don't want to enforce draconian "digital rights management" regimes on consumers in order to take away rights that they're guaranteed by law under the Audio Home Recording Act among other laws and precedents, I just want to make sure artists are fairly compensated.

  •  Dammit (6+ / 0-)

    Anytime Israel starts doing really stupid things somebody here says something like this and then Im defending Israel.

    •  Isn't it just the way? (0+ / 0-)

      It's like there's sometimes no middle ground between calling them Nazis and calling them angels.

      Sheesh, people, it's a parliamentary democracy, as fractious and complex as the United States, and just as impossible to pigeonhole all at once.

  •  Imagine my evening without reading this thread (5+ / 0-)

    I think it would have been better.  

  •  Imagine a tiny city of democrats (0+ / 0-)

    on the Bush ranch, surrounded by Cheney and his hunting pals.

    This is so sad. I blame this administrations stupid stupid stupid foreign policy, which has inflamed the Middle East to this flash point. Right along with holding Democratic elections in Palestine, toooooo soon, for political gain that gave Hamas a victory.

    This is the Bush Legacy. Abu Ghruiab, Gitmo and War in the Middle East.

    Overthrow the Government ~Vote~

    by missliberties on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:35:15 PM PDT

  •  Imagine there's no Palestine... (4+ / 0-)

    Makes as much sense as the crap you're selling in your diary.

    Really, I'ds much rather imagine that the Israelis and the Palestinians find their way toward some form of peaceful co-existance like Northern Ireland. Yeah, it's far from perfect, but at least they aren't killing each other any more.

    Lying can never save us from another lie - Vaclav Havel

    by Muwarr90 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:37:15 PM PDT

  •  Did the Vietnam war have to do with Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    How dare Jews have their homeland were they can protect themselves.

    Jews need their homeland after they got slaughtered and 6 million died and countries including the U.S didn't care for far too long.  Read up about FDR it is scary.

  •  Does Kashmir conflict have to do with Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Your diary makes no sense.

  •  How does the Sudan conflict relate to Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Can you answer me that question.

    You sound like the President of Iran and the Saudi King who blames Israel on everything.

    You sound like the nuts that attacked the soccer player for waving the israeli flag at the world cup.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

  •  How does North Korea conflict relate to Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Please answer me that one.

  •  How does Chechnya-Russia conflict involve Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I can't see how it does.  How would that conflict be any different without Israel.

  •  Shiites and Sunnis would still hate eachother (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Iraq-Iran war nothing to do with Israel.

    Iraq invading Kuwait nothing to do with Israel.

  •  Kurds vs Turks nothing to do with Israel (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Your diary is bunk.

  •  Imagine a world without Radical Islam (3+ / 0-)

    Women having rights, no killing women for adultery like in Pakistan.]

    Kids can watch the world cup without getting slaughtered like in Somalia.  

    No Taliban rule.  What does the Taliban have to do with Israel.

    No blowing yourself up for 72 virgins and Allah.

    No beheadings, no textbooks in school about suicide bombings.  

    More tolerance to gays.

    No more stoning to death.  Less gruesome executions like in Saudi Arabia.

    Imagine a world without radical islam terrorism.

    We could be focusing on issues like stem cell research, health care, poverty instead of worrying about radical extremists blowing up trains.

    Without radical islam no spain, uk, india train bombings.

    No bali bombing.

    No 9/11.

    No governments like Somalia.

    Radical Islam is the curse on this world we need to eradicate not Israel.  

    People like the Iran President that feed hatred about Israel need to go down and Israel needs to rise.

  •  imagine a world without the issues isreal has. (0+ / 0-)

    i have long admired isreal, but i have to say in recent years, most very much! their right wing politicos hurt them also.

  •  DailyKos is going down the rathole. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mia Dolan, Bhishma

    If these nauseating, trollish threads are allowed to continue in full force, then I am convinced that this blog is going to self-destruct.

    Are we so willing to be distracted by these inflammatory issues that we are unable to focus ourselves on kicking the Bushies out of power?

    Are these posters who infest this board on the payroll of Karl Rove?  It sure seems so because they are sapping our attention when our attention needs to be directed elsewhere.

    "Pro-life" really means "pro-criminalization"

    by Radiowalla on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:56:45 PM PDT

  •  i just wish we could have a real discussion (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    on the pros and cons of isreali foreign and poliical actions, but everytime it gets mixed up with the past. isreal has a right to exist and defend themselves. the polices of the arab governments stink, but then some of isreal's policies aren't so great either.

  •  One state Solution is the Way Ahead (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GN1927, qrswave

    Let them all live together in a democratic state. The Israelis would have the economic power and Palestinians the political power. And cut all aid totally until they agreed.

    •  I used to think this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

        But practically it is a non-starter.  If both Israel and Palestine develop strong internal institutions and a well-developed internal dialogue which eschews extremism, some sort of a two-states-in-one-state solution (like Bosnia) might be possible -- in 50-75 years.  Right now, unfortunately, too much of "national identity" on both sides is defined by hostility to the other.  

      •  But I come from the 2-stae solution is now doomed (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and will lead to generations of warfare as the Palestinians will be left walled off in small enclaves of unarrable land and with no trade resources. The numbers will soon be far too high for this land and inevitable disaster will ensue. If Israel wants peace it must be willing to share more of what it has. That is why a 1-state solutioon would be far better in the long run even if it is hard to see now.
        A 2-state solution just allows Israel to dictate where the Palestinians will live without givibng them anything.

        •  Oh, come on. (0+ / 0-)

          Don't knock it. Back in 1947, the Jews didn't get contiguous territory, and yet they'd have been fine with it then.

          The Palestinians would have borders with Egypt and Jordan; the Gaza strip has plenty of shoreline. It's hardly an enclave.

          It should also be pointed out that the land there was unarable when the first Zionists arrived. While you may be justified in saying that the Palestinians are entitled to a state, I don't think they're entitled to have someone make the desert bloom for them. Besides, they didn't do too well with the free greenhouses left behind by the settlers; what makes you think they'd do better with more resources?

    •  Perhaps all of Palestine should (0+ / 0-)

      be made a US administered territory subject to the general laws of the United States and jointly selected general laws of California if at least 75 percent of Palestinians and 75 percent of Israelis agreed and the neighboring countries agreed.


  •  No comments for nearly two months (0+ / 0-)

    and this is what you came back with.  Next time do us all a favor and just stay away.

    The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

    by deathsinger on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:29:33 PM PDT

  •  I don't think... (0+ / 0-)

    it's that there's a country named Israel, that makes the strife go 'round.

    I think it's the method in which Israel was formed, that really sticks in the collective craw of Arabs.

    From what I've read/seen/heard, Prior to 1948, Israel was more or less considered an "overlay" geographic region in the area the state of Israel is now. Except, it was, of course, not a political designation, Simply a predesignated place (by the ruling powers, i.e. British and Arabic monarchies) considered more or less a cultural homeland.

    Problem is, the indigenous Arabs were feeling more and more crowded out (like the oldest child as he/she sees more and more siblings born and attended to) as by 1890, Jewish settlers constituted a majority in the area.

    As history moved on, Jewish settlers became more and more convinced that the British authority had essentially abandoned the movement, though they (British authority) apparently were simply sidestepping the strife that would be created by embracing the creation of a state. Add this to the increasing contempt held by the indigenous Palestinians, and you have the stage set for violence. Throw in the creation of the Haganah and Irgun (essentially, militias) and you're ready for declaring independence.

    And they've been wanting each other extinct ever since.

    I can also be found here, rambling incoherently.

    by BullitNutz on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 08:51:11 PM PDT

    •  I don't think that's fair. (0+ / 0-)

      The Israeli government has not, to my knowledge, had as its position the extermination of the Palestinians. Consider the Camp David summit, where Arafat walked away from a deal which would have provided the Palestinians with sovereignty. (Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia told him, "If we lose this opportunity, it is not going to be a tragedy. This is going to be a crime.")

      The goal of the Israeli government has been to prevent a "right of return" which would amount to a wholesale invasion of Israel. The goal of the Palestinian leadership has been to kick the Israelis into the ocean. (Need I point out that the ruling party's charter states in part "Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion""?)

      Stating that each group wants the extinction of the other is nonsense. Israel has stated that the Palestinians can keep their territory and Israel will keep theirs; the Palestinians have never, to my knowledge, accepted anything less than the destruction of the state of Israel.

      •  'Prevent a right of return' (0+ / 0-)

        That's their beef with the UN's Declaration of Human Rights, as I recall. I'm talking about the gratuitous displacement, the walling off of vast areas of land, and the "security" strawman. When you drive people away from water, away from arable land, into the desert, you don't necessarily expect them to flourish, do you?

        As much as the countries surrounding Israel must first condemn and move to stop terrorism originating from NGE's within their borders before peace can be seriously considered, Israelis should re-examine their government's heavy-handed responses to things like the kidnapping of two soldiers, regardless of how much they wish to exterminate hezbollah.

        In the interest of peace, it is my opinion that Israel should offer assistance and reasonable (retention of borders, greater access to Israeli society) incentive to countries who agree to work towards to extinguishing terrorist groups like Hamas, IJ, al-Aqsa martyrs, etc. I don't think bombing Beirut is a peaceful OR effective way of pursuing what IS a worthwhile objective in the removal/disarmament of hezbollah.

        I can also be found here, rambling incoherently.

        by BullitNutz on Fri Jul 14, 2006 at 01:12:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Back when Israel was still... (0+ / 0-)

    ...on the drawing board, one of the locations under consideration was in Argentina.  In retrospect, that might have been a better idea than where it ended up.

  •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

    what an asshole you are qrswave. Imagine a world without retarded shitheads like you.

  •  This is the most disgusting (0+ / 0-)

    vile and simplisticly naive diary I have ever read at DailyKos (or anywhere else, for that matter). Let's get rid of Israel, even though they are, like, recognized by the UN and stuff and have as much of a right to exist as the US.

    What would your "final solution" be for the Jews living in what was once Israel? You really think they would be safer?

    Seriously, I don't even know why I've bothered to comment on this. I am just ashamed that you are a part of the DailyKos community.

  •  I've recommended this diary because (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Hugh Hewitt and the racists at Little Green Footballs are touting this as "anti-semitism."

    I don't agree or disagree with the position of your diary, but I do think that it should not be out of bounds for anyone to discuss whether Zionism is a good thing or a bad thing for the world, though I personally think that any religious or ethnic-based privilege always leads to strife, and therefore whether it's Polish nationalism or Jewish nationalism or Japanese nationalism or American nationalism, it's a net minus.

    That said, realistically, we live in a world with nation states, and we have to, within the nation states in which we find ourselves, find a way to a better world. Or we'll all suffer.

    "It's better to realize you're a swan than to live life as a disgruntled duck."

    by Mumon on Thu Jul 13, 2006 at 06:13:06 PM PDT

    •  LGF has never been more lame. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      First, there's the fact that their "post" consisted of nothing more than a one-liner ... the ignoramus acts with impunity.

      Second, there's the fact that their post didn't depict the item being "anti-semitism". That, however lamely presented, is arguable. They actually called it blatant anti-semitism.

      Combine the two and you have a clarion call for "Suck my cock" and suchlike.

      I've been anticipating this for years: political correctness is taking a whole new spin; it began with an aversion to sexist humour and racist slurs, but now it's contemptuous deprecation of any unconventional thought.

      BTW I won't say that the item was well written. It makes good use of language, yes, but with no regard to people's sensibilities ... and that's pret'near foolish. Anti-semtic? Arguably. Blatantly anti-semitic? That's ridiculous. To use the world more properly: the item was righten with blatant disregard of people sensibilities.

  •  you moron (0+ / 0-)

    you think those palastinians would rebuild anything?  if not for israel that would be majorly a desert anyway.  I can not belive anyone other than a idiot or an arab would post something as stupid as this

    To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. -Sun Tzu

    by wargolem on Sun Jul 16, 2006 at 10:15:52 PM PDT

Click here for the mobile view of the site