I found this really interesting.

The US is viewed as a greater threat to world peace than Iran?   Hmmm.  Thanks POTUS!

Even more interesting -- as the image of the US declines, in both France and Germany this polls detects a growth in sympathy for the Israelis and a lessening of sympathy for the Pallys.

As a matter of fact, yes, outside the US, we are viewed as a greater threat to world peace than the Iranians. With over 800 military bases housing over 1.5 million American troops spread out over the globe (NOT INCLUDING American or Iraqi based military assets), is there any wonder the world sees us as anything other than the Domineering Military Power?

As for part 2, why is this so surprising to you? Israel is a civilized, democratically run country, has made significant contributions to science, culture, industry, and certainly history, all the while your beloved gutty little freedom fighters in Hamastan are still arguing over whether or not to use bomb belts against Jewish children, or just shoot their own offspring. Meanwhile, they shoot themselves in the feet like the terrorist lemming morons they are.
You can blame the Israelis and the Jews all you want for the political ramifications of US Foreign policy vis a vis Israel.

Show me how you spin the blatant ignorance and barbarianism (not to menton sheer cut your nose off to spite your face stupidity) of your "Pallys" with their American and European degrees. The world is watching much more pointedly now, and most people can still tell the difference between civilized and uncivilized behavior. and certainly in France and Germany where their growing Islamist populations have created even more havoc than we are experiencing in the States.

Never Again

I think 800 might be a bit much unless you include every single two and three-man listening posts all around the globe.

Stepping back a bit, you have to entertain the possiblity that if the Pallys in PLO/Fatah and the Pallys in Hamas eliminate each other, well, that's a solution of a sort by default.

In a show of restraint, I had originally thought to post a news column from the Times or CSMonitor re Pally fratricide with the catchy heading, "Well, We'll Always Have Hizbollah" but given how heated some guys have gotten, and my contribution to heating them up, I refrained.

Public opinion  -- always malleable and subject to rapid and unpredictable change.  and you're going to believe the French about anything?  And you know the old saying -- "Opinions are like arseholes ; everyone's got one and they all are full of shit and stink."

where he points out that the pallys were first offered a pally state by the UN and rejected it in favor of war.Then much later were offered again by Barak a pally state over 95% of the west bank contiguous with Gaza, with east jerusalem as a capital AND offered 5% of israel's territory to compensate for the 5% retained for security of Israel.Again rejected by Arafat in favor of the 2nd intifada. He aptly points out that the pallys are more comfortable with "victimhood" than statehood......

Hmm, wonder where they learned that little trick?

CK always interesting but not above presenting the most favorable interpretations for his "fact-based opinions" in favor of his buddies in the Near East.

Next time, post the link please.

Glad to see you are adopting my terminology.  Imitation IS the sincerest form of flattery!

what favorable interpretation?
History, X, history.
The UN created Israel in 1949 out of some disjointed, disconnected territory. The "pally's" could have had their state too. Instead, 5 Arab countries invaded Israel simultaneously, and were soundly defeated by SMARTER forces.
The Barak offer is thoroughly and redundantly available via any number of news sources.

The ARABS living in the CONQUORED territories also known as the West Bank will never settle for anything less than the total destruction of Israel, and the extermination of the Jewish people. Hold your breath We outlasted the Egyptians, the Romans, the Ottomans, we will sure as Hell outlast Hamas and their foolish barbarism.

you forgot to list the Nazi's

Actually, I think it was 1948.  Didn't invade simultaneously, "declared war"  simultaneously, never attempt to coordinate their military operations.  Read all about it in "O' Jerusalem" by collins and LaPerrier [spelling?].

Lookit this way -- it took the Arabs/Moslems 200 years to evict the goofball Crusaders from those little statelets they managed to set up as a result of the 1st Crusade.

Given Arab demographics, and Arab "barbarism," do you think they're going to give up just because the thought of their doing so is emotionally gratifying to you?  Not in our lifetimes, but it's inevitable, Israel will fall to these folks. Just wonder how much collateral damage overall will occur.

PS. Was refering to the CK column itself, not the endless proposals which neither side takes seriously, neither side makes with any sincerity,  and neither side ever expects to be taken up.

how do you feel about this one, which claims to show that 60%+ of adults polled believe that AIPAC should be forced to register as the agent of a foreign power?

While I agree with the sentiment, I'm also aware that the organization sponsoring the poll has an interest in the results showing up that way.  With no idea how or when the poll was conducted, how the sample was constructed, the number of adults polled, the response rate [total number of people responding to the poll divided by the total number of people asked to participate in the poll], I'd have to say that the numbers are no more trustworthy than any numbers produced by AIPAC or Americans For A Safe Israel on an identical question.

See what I mean about believing polls?

The UN resolution to partition palestine was adopted in November 1947. The local palestinians started a few days later the so-called "riots" with "gang" attacks on jews(and resisted by Haganah forces) across palestine that intensified and increased in scope up to the declaration of the state of Israel in May '48.At that point the egyptians attacked from the south and simultaneously the syrians attacked from the north while it took the iraquis sometime to move a brigade to join the syrians in the attack.Not to mention that the british who opposed the UN resolution were intent on returning to Palestine through the "back door" of transjordan with the british Sir "Glubb Pasha" leading the jordanian arab legion to cut off Jerusalem from the rest of the jewish population.The fact that there was no military coordination between the attacking countries only goes to show the corruption of the regimes that sent their armies to attack (Think Nasser and the overthrow of the playboy king Farouk).
Finally, our antagonist claims that he was being imitated by referring to the palestinians as pallys.I think he should talk to C.Krauthamer who's more qualified than me to pinpoint the source(s)of his delusional grandeur.I'd expect him to post on his session and true to form even throw in some "fun" remarks about Krauthammers' stammer during the session.....      

-- Modified on 6/18/2006 2:14:59 AM

-- Modified on 6/18/2006 9:10:59 AM

Sorry superannuated philosemite, I do claim credit for the "Pally" thing.  If CK managed to slip it into one of his "fact-based" opinion columns prior to my using it, I'm not aware and it's just a coincidence.  

DK that CK spoke with a stammer. It does seem to me on things Israeli he often writes with a forked tongue! Did know that the  CK is a physisian but is mobility-impaired due to having contrated some illness during his medical school days.

Nope, I wouldn't goof on his stammer -- that sort of thing is beneath me.  His ideas, such as they are, provide sufficient ammunition for ridicule. As do yours.

And aren't you being a tad but hypocrtical? You're worried about CK's feelings, but you aided and abetted that malignant goofball HAHA in pouring all manner of foul verbal abuse and ridicule upon moi.  Get real.  Try to be just slightly less phoney than those idols of yours you choose to worship with such uncritical avidity.

Disregard public opinion when it doesn't fit the would-be Jeremiah's preconceived views...opinions are full of s*hit and stink like a$$holes except his of course that apparently drips nuggets of wisdom and smells like roses....what a delusional mind!

how do YOU FEEL about the little contribution I've added to this thread re AIPAC registering as a foreign agent?

It's a poll, right.  Based on public opinion, right? {Sure hope it's "fact-based" enough to pass your critical muster]. But it doesn't offer news palatable to you.  

So, do you buy it or not?

it's within the bounds of decency to refer to a totally incapacitated person as:"Or perhaps longer than Ari Sharon could utter a coherent phrase" (see a few posts below).

I still believe that CK, a bonafide psychiatrist, could help this guy overcome his delusional grandeur!

track of all my posts, despite your monontonous denials to the contrary.  That was in response to your gutersnipe buddy HA HA, who I see, in your typical ddouble-standard fashion, you do not attempt to take to task for his vulgarities and crudities toward me.  And you won't, Riem, since you were clearly an aider and abettor.  But life so on.

Don't know how I've managed to become so important to you, but, still, there it is.  Perhaps DR. CK can help you with your probs as well?   Maybe we can go in as "couples' therapy"?

Realisticallly, your hero AS is beyond all caring re what anyone says about him.  If I wanted to goof on CK's stammer, I'd refer to him as Krautstammer, which I haven't, as his speech impediment is news to me until twoday.

Still, it's the lameness of his ideas, as well as yours despite the fact that they are so clearly "fact-based" and not his enunciations which interest me.

And hey, you never know.  AS can come out of his coma, you never know.  I'm betting if he does, one of the first words out of his mouth will be "terrorist."  You, undoubtedly, will swoon at that point.

I'm not sure why you feel such animosity toward me -- for a guy who pretends to worry about POTUS Bush's attack on our rights and liberties, you sure seem deficient in caring about my right to express an opinion.  Can it be simply because it's an opinion with which you disagree?  If so, you obviously fail the test, and just reveal yourself as a mealy-mouth phony.  I can't believe one single contrary idea can get you into such a tizzy for so long.  Yet, there it is.

PS. Can you in all honestly claim that you resisted every and all temptation, when chatting with like-minded compatriots, to goof on Arafat when he was in his death throes?  Think about it.