The most odd idea is that of paying possibly corrupt governments. It's like don't reward them for their bad behavoir and for hurting their own people. It's better to hold them accountable.

When 1.3 billion of them reject the 4 million in their midst, one must assume that they are not people. They belong to no one, and no one wants them. They have been rejected by ALL muslim, islam, arab states for 63 years (and before). The Jordanian hate them, Bahrain expelled them, the british despise them (low class status), the Egyptians kill them. Normal people, when deciding their own future, and agree to take a chance in a foreign land, have to assimilate to new customs, language, behavior, education, etc..AND not try forcing the host country to become what they are -- Rejects. This is what their rotten leaders, their kings, despots, imam, mullahs, ayatollahs, have forced them to become. And this is what the so-called civilized, enlightned americans, europeans, and others have taken upon themslves, in order to shut them up, to pour billions $ into this huge cesspool of "non existant people" -- oil. oil, oil. --- what can one expect?. Today is payback time, and the rapacious, voracious, greedy do-gooder of yesterday want little Israel to pick up the pieces, to pay for the Kiss of death that shook the world. Not satisfied for slaughtering 6 million of us and millions of others, The EU WILL decide when the time is ripe for this tiny country to live in peace, or being chopped-up piecemeal. After all, they are experts in life and death situations.

Again we have a clear example of how weak and ineffective the UN and EU are, and how detached the Islamic world is from human rights. Sudan drags on as a human rights nightmare, yet nobody does anything. It's ok for tens of thousands of innocent people to be murdered, displaced, enslaved and abused - because they happen to be in Africa in a place where Islam is showing how evil it can be (note my wording, I say how evil it "can" be) when power is put in the hands of evil Muslims. The problem festers, year after year. Tens of thousands more die every year, yet the Islamic nations of the world don't care, don't get involved, and let their fellow Muslims suffer. Instead, of course, they waste their time on the "zionists", which is much easier and less troublesome than actually doing real work to help their fellow Muslims and solve the Sudan problem.

so your reply was mostly irrelevent, but still up to your usual standard in regards to sarcasm and incredible rudeness.

I missed nothing. The poster at No. 18 made a typographical error -- judging from the content of his post, he has no idea of the historical significance of the year 1933. Moreover, if you believe that mentioning "1933" was deliberate, then the balance of the post was a complete non sequitur, agreed? I chose to respond to the rest of his post, which makes my rejoinder topical indeed and hardly irrelevant. By the way, it is not "in regards to," but rather "in regard to." I am being neither sarcastic nor rude; I am merely trying to help you master English grammar and usage. It is obvious to me that you need all the help you can get.

In 1933 through to the years of the second world war and the holocaust, the United States closed it's border to Jewish refugees and sent them back to the slaughter. That is the reference, open your mind.

And what does that have to do with the rest of the post at No. 18? For that matter, the first words of that post constitute a fragment that makes no sense and refers to nothing.

What refugees are doing in Europe? Search on your own. I can not put exact words here. Or I will be called racist.

Is this a joke? There are tens of thousands(36,000 with 2,000 coming in November of this year) of these infiltrators creating havoc in our cities, and we brag about 150 being sent back. Please!!! This is an insult to every one's intelligence.

form of the verb ''to regard'' . Therefore if I say ''in regards to'' then the verb ''regards'' is related to the subject of the sentence , which in this case is singular ( usual standard) e.g. ''but still up to your usual standard in (so far as your usual standard) regardS to sarcasm and rudeness. '' I can't be bothered trying to explain that more clearly. Its hardly worth it.

Well, your usage would be wrong and would result in your sounding like a complete illiterate. Go for it! I'll bet your comfortable with that! By the way .... wouldn't proper usage be "It's hardly worth it" .... as opposed to your "its hardly worth it?" Game, set, match. Try harder next time.

Oh, quite!. Because I REALLY pay attention to drivel posted by scum wishing to remain anonymous ....

According to the Grammar Police manual you are right and this grammar policeman is wrong. This suggests that your time in primary school was not a complete waste of time. But how about your time at Harvard law school ? ...hmmm well lets think about thatr shall we--> while you spend your time arguing with self-confessed losers like me about the correct position of apostrophes in words on online talkbacks, your friend from law school,who you consider a loser - President Obama- spends his time discussing the fate of the world with people who are considerably higher up on the intellectual food chain than unemployed gits like me. Now what was it that Nixon said about people like you having an incurable need to prove themselves all the time...hmm. He sure has your number huh game set and match? hell I don''''t even care - that puts you even lower on the food chain than me....depressed yet ?? oops ...that question might start a whole new competition, - unless you actually have a life

game set and wgaf