Parsing out a stance on Israel? Maybe this will help...

[revtj]

These are definitions of some competing policies/theologies that are floating out there concerning Israel and the war against Hezbollah in Lebanon. I offer them for clarity since none of it seems clear and since Christians are hearing mixed messages from many sources.

Zionism is (originally) an American notion with 2 branches. One is militant the other is not. Militant zionists believe in Israel's right to defend itself and often raise money for the state's military. Militant zionists include pre-millilenialist and dominionist christians who believe a MidEast war will spark the return of Jesus Christ to earth.

(Non-militant) Zionists believe in the religious nature of Israel's existence and the coming of or return of the Messiah but advocate for peace. Some believe Messiah's coming will inaugurate 1000 years of peace. Zionism arose in the 1920s and marked the beginnings of sincere Jewish-Christian dialogues as well as attempts to address anti-semitism in Christianity and western culture. Many Americans have fond memories of the development of zionism and its positive cultural impact leading up to the founding of the state of Israel.

ANTI-Zionism is a refusal to recognize Israel as a legitimate state based on the circumstances surrounding the founding of Israel by British mandate in 1948-49. Anti-zionists are hostile toward Israelis and include terrorist groups like Hezbollah and other Palestinians who believe they have the righful claim to the land. The mutual hatred is taught from an early age by both sides, Jew and Palestinian.

NON-Zionists recognize Israel's right to exist but do not accept religious notions about their statehood or sovereignty. Non-zionists believe the land should be shared by Palestinians and Jews. Many believe the city of Jerusalem should be an international city accessible to all the world's people, governed by the United Nations. This idea was first advanced in Clinton's foreign policy. Non-zionists question the ongoing American military support of Israel insofar as it is completely out of line with our support of other nation-states such as Sudan, Somalia, Rwanda, Liberia, etc. Non-zionists often get lumped with anti-zionists in pro-zionist propaganda, but they really do not resemble one another at all. The average Israeli citizen, especially the youth, much like the Lebanese, and other MidEasterners caught in this viscious trap, are comfortable with the ideas of non-zionism and long for a secular, democratic state which offers repect to all the world's religions who have an interest in the land.

I am not posting this to ask anyone to take sides. I am posting it to clear up a whole lot of misinformation flying through the internet and television news. shalom:pray:

[NathanATX]

The body of Christ in Lebanon
by Jim Wallis
Like many of you, I have been glued to CNN and other cable news channels and feeling my heart broken by the vivid scenes of war's devastation and human suffering in the Middle East. We mourn this violence and, habitually, pray for peace. But what does that mean? What is the context and why is this happening?

Let me first say that I affirm Israel's existence and its right to live in peace and security. Let me also say that I believe Hezbollah has provoked this current crisis. Since the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah has built a stockpile of thousands of rockets, continued attacks on Israel, and then, recently, kidnapped two Israeli soldiers.

So we start by condemning kidnapping and Hezbollah's attacks on Israeli civilians. Hezbollah is a militant organization and movement that uses terrorism, i.e., it deliberately carries out lethal violence against innocent civilians. And no matter what the grievances or injustices, deliberate violence against civilians must be universally and unequivocally condemned as what a group of Palestinian intellectuals after 9/11 called a "short path to hell." Killing innocent civilians (often families and children) is evil and must be steadfastly opposed, and in response to such ugly violence we must draw a clear line in the sand. Further, Hezbollah is an organization that does not recognize Israel's right to exist and has vowed to destroy it. So let's be clear, by kidnapping Israeli soldiers and attacking Israeli cities with rocket attacks aimed directly at civilians, Hezbollah provoked this latest war.

Jan Egeland, the U.N. under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, who has been critical of Israel's "disproportionate" response, has also assailed Hezbollah's tactics: "Consistently, from the Hezbollah heartland, my message was that Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending ... among women and children."

Hezbollah's rocket attacks into northern Israel have killed 19 civilians and injured hundreds more. But the disproportionate Israeli air strikes in Lebanon, with their horrible death toll among civilians with nothing to do with Hezbollah must also be condemned. The latest estimate is more than 400 Lebanese civilians killed, with the needless destruction of the country's infrastructure, which took 15 years to rebuild after the devastating civil war. Israel has gone after Hezbollah, but is destroying Lebanon and, don't forget, its fledgling democracy. And let there be no double standards when it comes to how we label "terrorist" acts. When a nation state, such as Israel, carries out military policies which it knows will kill many civilians, including the use of cluster bombs, and deliberately targets civilian infrastructures and areas, does not the label also apply?

This week, Ze'ev Maoz, an Israeli professor, wrote in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: "This war is not a just war. Israel is using excessive force without distinguishing between civilian population and enemy ..." Another Haaretz columnist, Gideon Levy, wrote, "This war must be stopped now and immediately. From the start it was unnecessary, even if its excuse was justified, and now is the time to end it. Every day raises its price for no reason, taking a toll in blood that gives Israel nothing tangible in return."

The U.S. has provided no real leadership thus far, being unwilling to embrace the international call for a ceasefire. It has rather been Israel's major supporter and has expedited the shipment of additional weapons. I also believe that the U.S. invasion of Iraq has, inadvertently, contributed to the ascendancy of Iran and radical Islam in the region. Robert Kuttner, of The American Prospect magazine, who has been a constant critic of the U.S. war in Iraq, recently wrote: "Bush did not create radical Islamism, but he certainly gave it a boost. The point is not that the rulers of Iran, the Baghdad suicide bombers, and the fanatics of Hamas and Hezbollah are misunderstood good folks who need only a naïve olive branch from the west. On the contrary, these forces menace everything modern and democratic. They must be stopped, not appeased. The issue is the most practical and effective way of containing them." And that is indeed the issue.

Ultimately, the U.S. must take an active role in helping to negotiate a ceasefire and prisoner release, in the creation and deployment of an international force on the Israel-Lebanon border, and in aiding in the enormous humanitarian crisis that has resulted (the World Health Organization estimates 860,000 people have been displaced.) And, if the situation is not to spiral out of control in a wider regional war, the U.S. must also talk to Iran and Syria. The whole idea of diplomacy is trying to talk to your enemies and not just your friends.

For Christians there are also deeper issues involved regarding faith and the body of Christ. It's time for American Christians to start listening to Christians and churches in the Middle East, and Lebanon would be a good place to start. How many American Christians even know that Lebanon has had, for much of its history, a sizable number of Christians? Current estimates are 1.5 million Christians, or 40% of the population - which means there are fellow Christians potentially affected as casualties and refugees by the U.S. backed Israeli military attacks. It's time to challenge the theology of Christian Zionism advanced by many of the American Religious Right who are completely uncritical of Israel's behavior and totally oblivious to the sufferings (or even the existence) of Arab Christians in the Middle East. These Arab Christians may not be sympathetic to the tactics of Hezbollah, but they are certainly not supportive of the highly disproportionate military responses of Israel which now target their own families and fellow Arab Christians. Where is the American church's solidarity with them? In the Middle East battles between Islamic terrorism and Israeli military attacks, the perspective of Middle Eastern churches might indeed provide a much needed third perspective. I recommend an important dialogue in the online version of Christianity Today with Christian Arabs from the region. It's time to listen to some new voices.

The people of Israel, Lebanon, and Palestine have suffered enough. It's time for immediate action by the U.S. and the world community to achieve a situation in which Israel, Lebanon, and Palestine are secure and viable states living side-by-side in peace.

[nowvoyager]

Your clarification is much appreciated, thank you. I'd like in turn to point you to a good source of current writings about the terrible situation: www.openlebanon.org . I was pointed to it by one of my favourite bloggers, www.aboveallnations.blogspot.com

Peace

[Britt.]

Good post. I have to say I agree w/ what was said. Israel has a right to exist (certainly your average people who live there do), but they don't have a right to bomb the hell out of everything around them.

Nor do I feel the Shebaa Farms belong to them.

People spend a lot of time demonizing Hezbolla, justifiably so, to an extent (Hezbolla didn't appear out of nowhere, unprovoked), but be real. A terrorist is a terrorist, Hezbolla based or otherwise.

Frankly, I'm still waiting to see if this is, in part, an attempt to inspire Iran to fire a crappy missile at Israel or Iraq, so The Bushies can drop a nuclear bunker bomb in theoretical support of Israel, & re-assert the "authority" the U.S. asserted 60 years ago in Japan.

[Britt.]

Not relevant, but oh snap. That was my 50th post. Someone should bring me 50 tacos.

[kawika]

Hi folks. I apologize for posting here without first introducing myself in the Introductions forum. (I will, I promise!). In any case, just to clarify slightly, the beginings of Christian Zionism really go back at least to the 1800's and has Anglo-Irish roots.

In the summer of 2003, Sojourners magazine (since Jim Wallis has already been quoted in this thread...) ran a very good, very scary (and rather long!) piece tracing the history of this movement, from Lord Shaftbury's article in the Sunday Times of London in 1839 until the present day.

Here's a url to a copy of the Sojourners piece, however unlike the official Sojo site it doesn't require registration.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4010/is_200307/ai_n9284400

Shalom

kawika

[revtj]

Thanks, everyone, some great stuff to think about here...

Britt, chicken or beef? <ewww, don't say fish!!>:lol:

[Britt.]

Britt, chicken or beef? <ewww, don't say fish!!>

lol...

25 chicken. 25 beef.

[NonLemming]

Thanks, Rev, guess that makes me a Non-Zionist. I appreciate your clearing that up for some of us.

[revtj]

I saw Condi interviewed on PBS tonight. Thank God for her, I am very prone to think she's the only one with any sense in this administration. I had been concerned about her refusal to demand a cease-fire but she made it make sense.

The one thing that's encouraging about Condi is you don't have to worry about her being told what to say by her boss because he doesn't have a clue about Mid East policy. I found out a few weeks ago that her mentor in diplomacy/foreign policy was Madeline Allbright's father at the U of CO. He describes her as his best student ever.

I find myself praying for her personally because it bewilders me how or what to pray for in this mess. Lord, grant shalom to all the people quickly. :pray:

[BruceChris]

First of all, just who is a terrorist? I am strongly tempted to say, almost everyone in the Middle East, except for most women and children.

We seem to have two completely seperate realities here.

The state of Israel? We can look at the Zionist version of Manifest Destiny, which started as I recall, about sometime in the late-1800's This was and is a reality unto itself for all too many Jewish people. I cannot entirely respect that.

See also/Google Theodor Hertzl

The second reality is the Palestinian one. What the Europeans did to the Native Americans over a span of 400 years, happened to the Palestinians within a much smaller time and space

Then there was what may be the biggest lie the United Nations has ever been a party to, U.N. Resoltion 242

A final note. Arab spokesmen sometimes say that Zionism = racism. The Israelies somehow misunderstand the message here. The Arabs are not saying that the Zionists are racists, so much as saying that the Zionists are saying that God is a racist.

And anyone who accuses one side or the other of "starting" a war, is making the assumption that it has ever stopped

(edit)I guess that I do not have a specific point to make here, except to point out some observations that I do not believe to have been made enough.

So who are the good guys? Perhaps an easier question would be who are the Bad Guys?

(edit) I guess that would make me a non-Zionist

BruceChris

[revtj]

This article from Theocracy Watch is very disturbing, pointing out the White House's support for Christian Zionism.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/8/10/213055/581

On a lighter note, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart featured a comedian the other night who compared God to a cheating husband for promising 3 different world religions the same homeland. :rolleyes:

[revtj]

Just found this wonderful website. I LOVE the title (it's so Mel Brooks!) and I think it's great that progressive, moderate & liberal Jews are responding to Christian militant zionism...enjoy!

http://www.jewsonfirst.org/

[Giancarlo]

Well here is my take on the issue. I do believe Israel has a right to exist, but the way this war was conducted was improper and many Israelis believe that too. However, I believe that there should of been further measures taken before launching an all out war.

I do not recognize that Hezbollah should even exist, and their leader, Nasrallah demonstrated great ignorance right to the media. He thought by kidnapping soldiers he would not cause such a huge war. The man obviously was out of touch with reality.

Additionally I must say, Israel is very small compared to neighboring countries and has given up most of the land it captured when previous Arab/Israeli wars are taken into account. The Arabs numerous times wanted to stamp Israel off the map and have failed everytime. Egypt was one of the biggest opponents of Israel until the adminstration of late President Anwar Al-Sadat. Al-Sadat was a true visionary who wanted to end the war in the entire region, but he was killed for that dream. Yitzhak Rabin was an Israel leader who was assassinated for his dream of peace in the region. I sometimes wonder if the region was ever meant to be peaceful and I feel little optimism about the situation.

Do the people in the region really want peace? Does Hezbollah want peace? Hezbollah did an unprovoked act by kidnapping soldiers, and then started raining rockets on Israeli cities. At one point, I almost support Israel but not the way they conducted the operation. However, do not get me wrong... I do not think the region can be safe and peaceful while Hezbollah exists in its present state (perhaps if it disarmed, and became a political force).

The only legitimate military force in Lebanon is the Lebanese Military, and the United Nation Peacekeepers that assist it (as they are welcomed and requested by the Lebanese Government).

[revtj]

Do the people in the region really want peace? Does Hezbollah want peace? Hezbollah did an unprovoked act by kidnapping soldiers, and then started raining rockets on Israeli cities. At one point, I almost support Israel but not the way they conducted the operation. However, do not get me wrong... I do not think the region can be safe and peaceful while Hezbollah exists in its present state (perhaps if it disarmed, and became a political force).

Giancarlo, you raise some very good questions, especially about the leaders who have tried to move toward peace and then get assassinated.

This time, Ariel Sharon had a stroke (right after he began giving up land in the Gaza Strip) and Yassar Arafat had a strange death, then the prime minister of Lebanon was assassinated. More than once, I have wondered how such a string of events could have taken place so as to set up Hezbollah to strike as they did. The truly sad part is that I don't know if the USA may be involved in some part of the deaths of one, two, or all 3, and that disgusts me.

In years past, I honestly believed America was a decent player working for peace in the region. Now I doubt it. I do not believe oil barons and pirates have anything to gain if the Jew & Palestinian live together in peace. Add that to the violent religious beliefs of some Christians, Jews & Palestinians, and the situation seems hopeless for peace but profitable for warmongers.

In the last 6 years, we have seen the super-rich pit every possible minority group against another while they walk away with billions. None of their children die in these wars.

HOW LONG OH LORD? HOW LONG? WE PRAY FOR THE PEACE OF JERUSALEM, OVER WHOM JESUS WEPT, AND ALL THE PROPHETS CRIED.

[Giancarlo]

This time, Ariel Sharon had a stroke (right after he began giving up land in the Gaza Strip) and Yassar Arafat had a strange death, then the prime minister of Lebanon was assassinated. More than once, I have wondered how such a string of events could have taken place so as to set up Hezbollah to strike as they did. The truly sad part is that I don't know if the USA may be involved in some part of the deaths of one, two, or all 3, and that disgusts me.

Former Prime Minister of Lebanon was assassinated by the Syrians pretty much... Foad Siniora is still alive and breathing to my shock. He's a pro-Western Prime Minister in Lebanon. I'm surprised Hezbollah did not turn on him.

I do not see how you could say that the US would be involved in any of that however. That's quite an suggestion. I do not like the Bush adminstration, but that's almost outrageous. Sharon's health was because of his eating habits. I mean come on... the guy was practically on an all meat diet. And Arafat was just very elderly. And the former Lebanese Prime Minister who was killed was staunchly anti-Syrian and he was killed by Syrian government agents.

In years past, I honestly believed America was a decent player working for peace in the region. Now I doubt it. I do not believe oil barons and pirates have anything to gain if the Jew & Palestinian live together in peace. Add that to the violent religious beliefs of some Christians, Jews & Palestinians, and the situation seems hopeless for peace but profitable for warmongers.

This is where I partially disagree, but on one issue. Neither Lebanon, Israel or Palestine have any oil. But you raise good points... that is why Lebanon fell apart. Lebanon was once one of the most beautiful states in the middle east.

[revtj]

What I have said is outrageous because it is true.

We train assassins (http://www.soaw.org/new/)and we covertly support the same powers we publicly condemn. America sells weapons and then plays both ends against the middle to get something.

In this case, criminal elements have combined with the force of the executive branch, nearly shutting out Congress and the press, the UN, and the will of the people, to remake the Middle East in the USA's image.

Who trained binLaden? The US CIA.

Who sold Saddam weapons? Donald Rumsfeld.

We are not searching for binLaden.

We pretend Pakistan and Afghanistan are honky-dory and that Saudia Arabia is a warm, fuzzy friend.

The executive branch deliberately set aside the Geneva Convention, argues for torture, creates Abu Gharib, Guantanamo, and outsources other torture. Remember, this is a NEW kind of war, like a new soda pop or candy bar being sold to the world.

The truth is that the US government has been hijacked (through election fraud) by hypercapitalist terrorists of a different sort and they are slamming the places that are subtracting from their profits. That is way too much for the average American to wrap their minds around which is exactly how the executive branch is getting away with it.

It is indeed outrageous.

[Giancarlo]

Never mind. I edited out my message because I argue about this every day in classes. I have had enough of politics. Just look at my quote in my signature. I think it applies to both the left and right. I view both the left and right a danger to this country. I think your view is very extreme.

[revtj]

...but I can't help noting that your (and millions of other Americans) giving up on the issue allows current policy to move dumbly forward, which is precisely what my last paragraph complained about...please don't give up on the issue!

I love my country enough to give a scathing review of bad foreign or domestic policy. I especially love the fact that, although serious efforts are now attempting to take it away, I am still currently free to publicly criticize my nation and my government because that is precisely what makes democracy preferable to other forms of government. :love:

[Giancarlo]

...but I can't help noting that your (and millions of other Americans) giving up on the issue allows current policy to move dumbly forward, which is precisely what my last paragraph complained about...please don't give up on the issue!

I love my country enough to give a scathing review of bad foreign or domestic policy. I especially love the fact that, although serious efforts are now attempting to take it away, I am still currently free to publicly criticize my nation and my government because that is precisely what makes democracy preferable to other forms of government. :love:

Give up on the issue? Excuse me? I am going for my Masters in Political Science with a strong leaning towards international relations. I am not giving up on the issue, in fact I might work with it. I just get tired hearing about the same old rhetoric from both sides. Maybe we should moderate our views a bit? I get attacked for being a moderate because I don't entirely disagree with current policy.

Don't tell me what to do.

For one don't try to speak for me. I get a little edgy when people do that, and very defensive. Secondly, I'm not an American. I may live in Los Angeles, but I was not born in this country. Thirdly, I do not think you have any evidence to justify your statements. You made several accusations: That the US was behind the assassination of Former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri. That's false because the Syrians were. The US was behind the heart attack of Ariel Sharon. That's false because why would they be? Sharon was the biggest ally in the region.

http://www.rhariri.com - That's a website set up mostly promoting Hariri's policies.

There are some gaping holes in the foreign policy of this country, but to make accusations that serious... well, is almost insulting to anyone who lives in this country. Especially when you do it without evidence.

You know what disturbs me the most? It is the fact that no one I see, on either the left or right, are capable of coming up with their alternative plan. None of the opposition against Bush or the republicans for him have come up with anything. I want to see some alternatives because I'm quite frankly tired of hearing about criticism without a back-up plan.

Instead of criticizing so much, why not come up with some alternatives?

By the way, I never attacked your freedom of speech and I never said you couldn't speak out. Feel free to.

[Giancarlo]

...but I can't help noting that your (and millions of other Americans) giving up on the issue allows current policy to move dumbly forward, which is precisely what my last paragraph complained about...please don't give up on the issue!

I love my country enough to give a scathing review of bad foreign or domestic policy. I especially love the fact that, although serious efforts are now attempting to take it away, I am still currently free to publicly criticize my nation and my government because that is precisely what makes democracy preferable to other forms of government. :love:

Give up on the issue? Excuse me? I am going for my Masters in Political Science with a strong leaning towards international relations. I am not giving up on the issue, in fact I might work with it. It might be my career. I just get tired hearing about the same old rhetoric from both sides. Maybe we should moderate our views a bit? I get attacked for being a moderate because I don't entirely disagree with current policy.

Don't tell me what to do.

For one don't try to speak for me. I get a little edgy when people do that, and very defensive. Secondly, I'm not an American. I may live in Los Angeles, but I was not born in this country. Thirdly, I do not think you have any evidence to justify your statements. You made several accusations: That the US was behind the assassination of Former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri. That's false because the Syrians were. The US was behind the heart attack of Ariel Sharon. That's false because why would they be? Sharon was the biggest ally in the region.

http://www.rhariri.com - That's a website set up mostly promoting Hariri's policies.

There are some gaping holes in the foreign policy of this country, but to make accusations that serious... well, is almost insulting to anyone who lives in this country. Especially when you do it without evidence. But you know what disturbs me the most is the fact that no one I see, on either the left or right, are capable of coming up with their alternative plan.

Instead of criticizing so much, why not come up with some alternatives?

By the way, I never attacked your freedom of speech and I never said you couldn't speak out. Feel free to.

[zimnah]

Gee, I'm almost afraid to post on this subject, but I don't think I can remain silent.
As I've posted previously, I am a Jew. Not a Messianic Jew, but a Jew. I'm also a cantor trained in the Conservative Movement. I'm also ex-Army. From a military standpoint, there was no other response available to Israel when Hezbollah invaded and kidnapped the two Israelis. It's not the kidnapping, folks. It's the fact that they crossed the border, they INVADED Israel, that prompted the heavy artillary.
As a clergyperson, I have to say that I agree with something I heard on CNN a couple of weeks ago: military action will not solve anything in this conflict. It will only serve to inflame passions more. And as an American, blessedly removed from the violence, I can view the results of the bombings from both sides from the comfort of my livingroom and feel free to comment on what one side or the other should or should not do. Wow, what a luxury.
Here is what I pray is a reality check: even post 9/11, we Americans don't have a clue as to what it is like to live in a country divided right down the middle by a bunch of people claiming to have an equal right to a G-d given land. There's the Israeli side. As for the Palestinian side, their neighborhoods are called refugee camps for a reason: they came into the country after it was awarded to the Jews in '48 to protect Arab interests. The general fear then was that Jewish settlers would outnumber the natives and force them out, so Arab countries in the region began pouring in immigrants of their own. The truth of the matter is that there are precious few Palestinians who hold only one passport: most hold another passport from Syria, Jordan, etc. I will admit to feeling a bit frustrated with the media for referring to well-established concrete apartment buildings as "refugee camps," thus equating them to the sea of tents seen in Rwanda, for example.
Giancarlo, you have it right that we should not indulge in the rhetoric unless we have suggestions for a solution. I have one: we here who have the freedom of rhetoric should take ourselves to the nearest mosque and attend a few services and get to know a few Muslims. Learn a little about Mohammed's (peace be unto him) teachings. Then, we should go to the nearest synagogue, and get to know a few Jews, see what the Sabbath is like for Jews, hear the Torah in Hebrew. Then we should go to a church and get to know a few Christians, hear what Christians have to say about Jesus. The final step? Have a party at your house, invite all your new friends, and introduce them to one another. Encourage cultural exchange. As the old saying goes, if we are not a part of the solution, then we remain part of the problem...and our biggest problem now is ignorance of the cultures we judge. We made that mistake in Westward Expansion here in the US, WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia, Somalia...and I've missed a few. G-d forgive us, we sent peanut butter to Iraqis, who've never seen such a thing! (That STILL irks me to no end!) Its not enough that we know history. Our world is so small and interdependent that we have to know each other.
Well, that was a bit more vague than I would have liked, but I hope it was at least English.
Shalom, haverim.

[revtj]

Zimnah, your ideas are fantastic. I do wonder, however, whether we as a nation and as a planet are in any way moving toward this type of listening and learning. But it would do the whole world a lot of good!

Giancarlo, you certainly lack diplomacy skills so I'm praying an important part of your training will be self-reflection on the overbearing defensiveness that will keep you from being heard. I know that recently news media like Fox and others have made it appear that screaming at each other is somehow a healthy listening & learning process, but it is not. It is polarizing and ultimately violent.

Dialoguing with people you disagree with is a foundational principle of Soulforce. I have made it clear in all my posts that I don't know the answer to the region's woes, and I am very unhappy with the popular solutions, all of which involve war. But I feel you read some kind of personal attack into my words. That's the downside of email, but, I assure you, there was no attack on you, there was an attempt to speak truth to the power of the current administration in Washington which is hellbent on military solutions to MidEast squabbles.

You ask for evidence. Of what? Torture? War-profiteering? There is so much evidence for these 2 alone it would require a 2 volume set. If you're unaware of that evidence start with the torture (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MCC409A.html) prisons named in previous posts (including Uzbekistan, and other outsourcing by the CIA), then research Halliburton (http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/). That should highlight my evidence for you.

As for the strange deaths of the area leaders, all I said was I think it is strange. No, I cannot trust that Arafat wasn't poisoned, nor that America had something to gain by the assassination of Hariri, nor do I trust that some zionists weren't hugely relieved that Sharon had his heart attack when he did. I said it was strange, that's all. Likewise, I made it clear that I trust NONE of the governments represented. I do not think it is impossible that America is in bed with Syria, but that is about lack of trust for a corrupt adminstration, not something I can prove.

Can you engage my ideas which I, as an American, feel to be the truth in the context of the history of the USA as I have lived it and known it for 47 years? I already know my ideas are considered radical so a sniping rant is hardly going to change my mind. The odd thing to me is, 4-6 years ago my ideas were considered moderate. Live and learn!

[Giancarlo]

Giancarlo, you certainly lack diplomacy skills so I'm praying an important part of your training will be self-reflection on the overbearing defensiveness that will keep you from being heard. I know that recently news media like Fox and others have made it appear that screaming at each other is somehow a healthy listening & learning process, but it is not. It is polarizing and ultimately violent.

That's incredibly rude, and incredibly overbearing on me as a person. I do not appreciate people making judgements calls based on one post. I may appear to be defensive, but to say I lack diplomacy skills is an insult to me as a person. I'm far more diplomatic then you are, and I was trying to engage in a conversation. You however resorted to making judgement calls on me as a person. It is that attitude which leads to international stand-offs and disputes. Not only that what you just said is utterly unacceptable in any realm of debate. Ad hominems are totally INAPPROPRIATE!

I don't watch Fox News, CNN or the like. I prefer to get my news from elsewhere.

Dialoguing with people you disagree with is a foundational principle of Soulforce. I have made it clear in all my posts that I don't know the answer to the region's woes, and I am very unhappy with the popular solutions, all of which involve war. But I feel you read some kind of personal attack into my words. That's the downside of email, but, I assure you, there was no attack on you, there was an attempt to speak truth to the power of the current administration in Washington which is hellbent on military solutions to MidEast squabbles.

I have made it incredibly clear of what I believe in and that I typically side with the Israelis on issues. I'm unhappy with the present state of policy making. I also am dissatisfied with the opposition's inability to come up with a coherent plan. I have not seen a plan or an alternative from those who oppose Bush, and I have not seen a viable plan from Bush himself. I did back the Iraq war, and I did back Israel in this recent crisis... however, I would like to see a much clearer strategy. I did not read any personal attack, I just felt a bit intruded on.

You ask for evidence. Of what? Torture? War-profiteering? There is so much evidence for these 2 alone it would require a 2 volume set. If you're unaware of that evidence start with the torture (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MCC409A.html) prisons named in previous posts (including Uzbekistan, and other outsourcing by the CIA), then research Halliburton (http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/). That should highlight my evidence for you.

I didn't say there wasn't any evidence. I think there is plenty, Haditha is another place of interest. But these abuses are being prosecuted by military authorities. By the way, I have nothing against Halliburton and my father used to work for them. They are a respectable company.

As for the strange deaths of the area leaders, all I said was I think it is strange. No, I cannot trust that Arafat wasn't poisoned, nor that America had something to gain by the assassination of Hariri, nor do I trust that some zionists weren't hugely relieved that Sharon had his heart attack when he did. I said it was strange, that's all. Likewise, I made it clear that I trust NONE of the governments represented. I do not think it is impossible that America is in bed with Syria, but that is about lack of trust for a corrupt adminstration, not something I can prove.

I do not think Arafat was poisoned at all. And your accusation that America has something to gain by the assassination of Hariri is a false one. For one, Hariri was America's biggest ally after Faoud Siniora. Hariri was out of office when he was assassinated, and the concrete evidence points to the fact that he was killed by the Syrians. The Americans do not like the Syrians and have very little diplomatic ties with them. Sharon had a heart attack because of his bad diet. I would of hoped that Ehud Olmert would of continued his legacy, but it appears that might be on hold.

Additionally, it is an insult to this country to suggest that the US is in bed with Syria. RIDICULOUS, false and utterly slanderous. I do not like Bush one bit, and do not trust him... but I do not make utterly contrived statements like that one. If anything, the US is heavily funding inititatives done by anti-Syrian sources within Syria, and in Lebanon.

Can you engage my ideas which I, as an American, feel to be the truth in the context of the history of the USA as I have lived it and known it for 47 years? I already know my ideas are considered radical so a sniping rant is hardly going to change my mind. The odd thing to me is, 4-6 years ago my ideas were considered moderate. Live and learn!

I may be only 21, and I may not have lived through some things that have happened in this world, but I feel I do have an adequate grasp of the situation.

I'm a moderate, and I can find a compromise on a situation. I also am a realist. I know that peace... well peace is impossible in this world. Live and learn huh? So you're calling me ignorant? I think if you live and learn, being a moderate will be the likely option.

[revtj]

For one don't try to speak for me. I get a little edgy when people do that, and very defensive.

Giancarlo, these were your words and I agreed with them. I have not called you ignorant nor attacked you personally but that is how you are receiving everything I post.

I am bowing out of this thread and I suggest you study the Soulforce principles longer before engaging dialogue on this site. Please don't take that as an insult, it's meant to be an opportunity for you!

[Giancarlo]

Giancarlo, these were your words and I agreed with them. I have not called you ignorant nor attacked you personally but that is how you are receiving everything I post.

I am bowing out of this thread and I suggest you study the Soulforce principles longer before engaging dialogue on this site. Please don't take that as an insult, it's meant to be an opportunity for you!

I said that out of notice. I was not being insulting. There is a difference between being defensive and insulting. When being defensive I may defend my views more vehemently.

Study soulforce principles? I think I am very well in principle and am not insulting anyone. I afterall wasn't the one who employed ad hominem attacks. I think I will withdraw from this website.

[hankzzz]

I'm sure they will argue like heck over the lands, but the only way Israel can continue to exist is to be recognized by more of it's neighbors.

As those are American tanks, planes and bombs being used in Israel's military actions, we have an obligation to hold them to account if their (defensive) operations are too heavy handed. So far, the U.S. has given only unconditional support for anything Israel does.

To me, people are all equally precious and have a right to live in peace.