Likud members: Bomb Iran
Ilan Marciano
Published: 01.01.06, 10:16
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
35 Talkbacks for this article
1. Risible
Michael Steiner ,   EU   (01.01.06)
While I agree with bombing Iran's nuclear facilities--insofar as it would not endanger local civilian population--we must not forget that this Katz is the same scumbag who last week openly advocated committing war crimes by agitating for an ethnic cleansing of Aza.
2. Michael - please explain
David ,   Israel   (01.01.06)
Why is Katz a "scumbag" for suggesting "an ethnic cleansing of Aza" (which, by the way he did not suggest), and Ariel Sharon who DID ethnically cleanse Aza of all her Jews not a "scumbag"? I don't want to get into semantics of "ethnic cleansing" meaning killing off an ethnic / religious / national group (Katz certainly never suggested this), but rather moving an ethnicity from a specific geographical location based entirely and only on their ethnicity. I read your posts Michael - you are full of crap and have no idea what the Israel "street" feels like. I suggest humbly that for 2006 you try to loose some of your arrogance, open your eyes, don't believe everything you read in the left-wing Israeli press, and, hopefully, get a life. Happy New Year.
3. To 1
Shai ,   Israel   (01.01.06)
Surely you must have considered that not bombing them irrespective of endangering their local civilian population puts OUR local civilian population at risk, Michael. It is clearly their decision to put these facilities where there are people in order to inoculate them from military threat from those who think as you do. I don't have a stake in allowing the Iranians to think that I think the way you do. With an attitude like yours, WWII would either still be a war that hasn't ended yet, with many more dead than died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the Germans would have won it and of course you know that if they had, you and I wouldn't be here debating this. Many on this list would have cheered as Israel never would have been established. There surely wouldn't have been an "EU" either. There is a limit to how sacrosanct others' lives can be when your own is at direct and certain risk. There is a price to pay in lives by both sides by allowing a conflict to escalate when it could have been resolved earlier, as nearly all recognize with respect to Israel's attack on the Iraqi reactor. Whether "ethnic cleansing" of Aza is something that resolves or enhances risk to OUR lives is the ONLY issue, not the morality of it, because there is NO doubt that if the Palestinians the power, or the Iranians, and it's a matter of time before they get it at the rate we're going, they will use their territory and the power they accrue on it to kill us. How else do you explain a people who says at every suicide bombing that "it gives pretexts to Israel to hit back" or "it doesn't serve the interests of the Palestinian People", rather than condemning it as a moral outrage? We're not dealing with the same kind of "moral" mores that governs the EU with Iran and Palestinians. NOW is the time to face the facts and not unlike EVERY nation in the EU, to get a little dirty if we have to in order to survive, and if we have to, feel sorry about it afterward while we sip tea and sniff about the injustice in the world that EVERYBODY ELSE has caused. General Patton said, war's not about dying for your country, it's about making the other sonofabitch die for his. That's my attitude, too. Of course that won't be necessary if everybody wants to make nice, but they don't, so it comes down to a series of sharp question. "Are you willing to do whatever it takes to survive"? Having done whatever you needed to do, can you go on with life having felt that defending your life was just and necessary? Don't cut and run by saying that only as few as possible civilians should be endangered - that's obvious, I think. Nobody is talking about moral outrages, only defending their lives and the freedom of their country. The point is whether your life is worth more to you than your enemies' lives, whether your freedom is something you are willing to surrender, and whether you are willing to use your own two hands to defend yourself, your family and your People and to put YOUR life, Michael, on the line. Not fighting with words, but with your body. If not, you have no right to agree or disagree with what Israel does, because WE are the ones with something to lose and what we sacrifice is not what you sacrifice. You go ahead and snipe at us from the EU and talk about "Dr. Sharon" and what not. We'll take care of business and absorb the pain and anguish of war while you sit there in the EU and allow your soul to suffer the miseries of our enemies. I suspect based on what you've written is that your moral stance is that there are certain things you would refuse to do, and would rather die, and this includes EVEN suffering a nuclear hit because we didn't strike first for fear we'd harm civilians. Or, else clarify your stance.
4. To 2
Shai ,   Israel   (01.01.06)
David, I think Michael thinks a "scumbag" is somebody who wants to commit a "war crime". A "war crime" is whatever the EU and the Arabs and the UN decide it is, and the definition is tailor adjusted to protect their interests. The odd thing is, the current international law regarding war crimes are recent, within the last few decades. And, the idea of "non-combatant" is not applied equally - it's applied however you want it. These laws were established after WWII for the most part to avoid situations that lead the world into constant wars, the stealing of countries one from another, outrages against non-combatants. It never occured to them that sometimes population transfers or realignment of boundaries can actually lead to peace. In order for what Israel does to be a warcrime, instead of a dispute over national rights, they had to invent an Arab proto-people, the "Palestinians", and twist and mutilate every international law until the disputed lands in the WB and Gaza became a "Palestinian Right" instead of what it was, and that's the Jewish patrimony upon which Arabs lived who had no national identity as "Palestinians". That identity was created solely as a lever to pry out the Jews, to assuage Arab anger over the loss of the "pan-Arab" keystone between southwest Asia and north Africa, and their wounded pride over colonialist triumphs in those areas. The conflict then evolved into a religous one, thanks to Arafat's invention of Jerusalem as this "People's" capitol. Well, ain't that rich. Convenient, isn't it, that now the Jews are now the colonialists and the Nazis and the Israelis are now the Cossacks and the Soldiers are the Goliath while the poor Arabs are the "new Jews", the "little David", the "indigenous peoples". And Jesus who turns the other cheek is now a Palestinian, and Abraham, Isaac, Moses, David and others are now "Muslims". Jews aren't even Jews anymore, but Khazars. The Temple Mount isn't the Temple Mount anymore, but Al Aqsa. Israel wasn't here anymore, but in Yemen somewhere. Our rights are not here, but in Alaska. All these lies go on and on with the EU's and UN's collaboration only so that they can feel a bit better about letting the Jews die in WWII, to show us that when our backs are to the wall, even we can be a bit callous. Well, EU and UN, you're about to have your point proven in a big way. Instead of telling the PA to get their act together, you made them pay no price for terror. Now, peace is not possible. Amazing how "light becomes darkness and darkness light". You'll probably know where that quote comes from, and why I think we're confronting our final battles, where once and for all everything will be decided. May G-d help us.
5. Shai, col hacavod
RobertK ,   Jerusalem   (01.01.06)
for your clear, factually based logic. I think you're giving Michael more credit than he deserves, though. He's not really interested in listening to people and intelligent debate (even if he sometimes makes a pretense of it), but in getting people riled and calling them scumbags. Sign of not having much of life.
6. shai/david
kapara   (01.01.06)
Well spoken guys. Mike Steiner should direct his attention to advocating reparations for the hundreds of thousands of jews ethnically cleansed from the arab countries as a direct result of the arab decisions to make war instead of peace with Israel. Why doesn't he protest the fact that the arab world refuses to move forward and absorb the arabs who left because their brothers made war instead of peace? The same brothers who keep them in "refugee camps", who won't allow them to move forward. Why doesn't he protest that the arabs successfully ethnically cleansed their countries of all the jews, but Israel is not allowed to complete the process they the arabs started? And I don't want to hear his sissy statements about "two wrongs don't make a right". This is war and bad things happen. How could he be concerned with potential civilian casualties in Iran? I gues it is better in his eyes that millions of jews die than hundreds of Iranians. THis is a sign of someone who values nothing but himself, nothing greater. Dear G-d please don't put our future in Mike's hands.
7. psychotic and stupid
jim ,   Oly, WA   (01.01.06)
Attacking Iran as a political platform? Are you all completely insane or just plain stupid?
8. To 5 and 6
Shai ,   Israel   (01.01.06)
I have no problem with M. Steiner's views, if he states them as an Israeli who lives here and who's kids, job, property, life and future are endangered by what goes on here when we follow the pollyanic views he espouses. In other words, as somebody who's got something to lose in this high-stakes game, and is trying to find a way to make sure he doesn't lose it. I feel MIchael treats us like a hobby or a favorite sports team. He cheers on "Dr. Sharon" like he was a top coach.I find it difficult to tolerate this. Being cheered on when we "perform" for "the Man", and reamed out when we don't makes me feel like we're some kind of travelling minstrel for him, when we in reality are just trying to "fiddle a simple tune without breaking our neck". The risks here are literally life and death - I don't think I or people like me deserve his jeremiads because we think, and we were proven right, that the withdrawal from Gaza would worsen our security. Yet, he calls people like us fanatics or scumbags. I've even got no problem with Amira Hass, so kal v'chomer, I've got not problem with Michael's views. But at least she's here and has something to lose, and I think she really believes what she's doing, that her approach is what will bring peace, probably to the same degree I think she's wrong. But she's here and Michael isn't. That means everything to me. So I don't need to tell Michael what to believe. Let him believe what he wants - it's cool with me. But the kinds of comments he makes are cheap shots from somebody who doesn't live here and if I were him, I'd keep them to myself out of a sense of respect to my fellow Jews living in Israel. Even if I disagreed with them, I'd keep quiet. If it mattered that much, I'd move to Israel. Otherwise, I'd just try to support Israeli democracy and pray that G-d gives their leaders the wisdom to stear us clear of danger.
9. to Shai
RobertK ,   Jerusalem   (01.01.06)
I agree with everything you say in #8, but I also think dear Michael enjoys getting people ticked off because he does it so much, so many complain about it, and he keeps doing it.
10. ps
RobertK ,   Jerusalem   (01.01.06)
If we could manage to ignore Steiner, which I admit isn't easy, maybe he'd find time to go to a shrink.
11. Does Likud care?
Anoosh ,   US   (01.01.06)
How many Israelis and Jews, living outside Israel, will pay with their lives if the lunacy that Likud is perpetrating as a "political platform" to bomb Iran becomes reality? No wonder even the renowned Zionist war criminals are leaving Likud to create a “saner” party. It is becoming progressively obvious that Likud has joined the KKK and the Nazi party in the history's junk bin, and its members know it. Bombing Iran’s nuclear reactor will not bring an iota of security for Israel. On the contrary such an illegal and irrational act will certainly unite the Iranians behind their unpopular government and their revenge on Israel will be remembered in the annals of Israel’s historical blunders for a long time. If Israel’s seek security they should strive to end the occupation of Palestine, killing and humiliating its population, and compensate them for the land that the Zionist have stolen, and are still stealing, from them.
12. #7
Jane   (01.01.06)
Whether or not it is a political platform for the Likud, I cannot know. As to whether or not striking Iran is valid, I only know that words such as those spoken by Iran's leader went unheeded in the past, at the cost of 6 million Jewish lives (not to mention millions of non-Jews). The situation is not one that can swept under the persian carpet. It would be insane AND stupid not to recognize and deal with reality.
13. Anoosh
Jane   (01.01.06)
Though the Likud is not what it was, there is no correlation with Nazis (gee, you sure like to throw that name around loosely) or the KKK. Actually, the Palestinians are more like the KKK and Nazis, insisting that no Jews live among them (let's be clear about who is what). Occupation is a term that is used to describe taking over a sovreign nation. The Palestinians never had a sovreign nation, other than the 78% of the original mandate for Palestine that is called Jordan. Killing and humiliating [its] population? Palestinians have been killing Israelis for years. They cannot expect to do so without paying a price. Humiliating? I find it more than humiliating that they deny our right to have a state, that the Temple Mount exists, is ours and that they have built a mosque over it. Compensation? What about compensation to the Jews forced from Arab lands? Stolen land? Yes, they stole our land.
14. To 11
Shai ,   Israel   (01.01.06)
Anoosh, you're probably right.. Bombing Iran's nuclear plants will simply unite Iranians with their government against us, because their government will be intact and we won't likely succeed in destroying all of the nuke plants, at least not if we do it alone. The solution is to bomb their government (Yeah, Marcel - I spilled the beans - I bet nobody's ever thought of it before, and now because Shai's said so, they're gonna be waiting - I'm sure they read Ynet to find out what the Israeli government's thinking). Wait for them to be in session for some meeting, and lob a bomb right on top of them and let them empty the heavens of virgins meeting the needs of these bigoted clerics under the rubble of the Iranian Parliament building. Then and only then, if the building is ruined, should we lob a few on their nuclear plants to delay them for a few years. Then let the Iranians elect the government they really want. They'd probably do all I mentioned themselves if they could, and probably the best thing to do is to "enable" them to do so without doing it ourselves (but we'll be blamed anyway). As far as "illegal", who cares. The last thing I worry about when somebody's got a gun to my head is whether I'll damage him trying to remove it. Take us to court and sue us if you want. As far as the "occupation of Palestine" and all that rut, blather on about that to those who are part of a conflict that did NOT try as hard as we did to come to a solution with the Palestinians. They simply will not be satisfied, they are not responsible partners in seeking peace, and I and most Israeli's are now convinced that absolutely nothing will be gained by even giving them everything they want. They are simply incorrigibly fanatical haters of Israel, blame everything they do to themselves on us to heighten the hate. Nothing is ever going to change that, because they are an anti-People. They are defined by their opposition to Israel, not any positive national feature. They were invented solely to wrest us from our Homeland. I am not going to wait for the Palestinians to give me security. Whatever security I get is only useful if I don't have to depend on others for it. So, if my security is lacking because the Pals aren't my pals, so be it, because that will never happen.
15. bombing Iran
joevocht ,   Lincoln, NE   (01.01.06)
There was a time (the first 50 years of my life) I was totally for Israel...That time is have proven to be pathetic liers, and perpetrators of inexcusable slaughter much like my country did to the Indians...for shame...
16. Iran
Gus Pohlig ,   Waterloo, USA   (01.02.06)
Iran is surrounded by countries which have nuclear bombs.It feels threatened. Why should the Middle East not be nuclear free? israel bombed the Iraq facilities some years ago: She is the biggest threat in the area! All nuclear bomb facilities must be destroyed! Gus Pohlig
17. israel and iran
Sajid Rafique ,   sugar land. us   (01.02.06)
I challange the leaders of israel to approach iran with a friendly face and talk with them to not develope the nukes by assuring them that israel will also dismantle all of its nukes for such a co operation...Fair enough ? Iran has ten times the population of israel to protect from nukes and so is more justified to have nukes...but i think no one should have nukes !
18. bomb Iran
Sheik Yur Bouti ,   Eurabia   (01.02.06)
you should be ashamed of yourself and your forefathers who killed Indians for pleasure. In Israel´s case though, they were the original Indians who came back to reclaim their land from Arab "squatters" since the Romans left. At least the US turned out to become a very successful nation in less than 200 years. Palestine (ex-Israel) in more than 1,900 years produced nothing except for some Orange plantations and olive trees. 40% of Israeli exports are high-tech related services and goods with Israeli companies having over 70 listed companies on the nasdaq - not too shabby for a nation re-built from scratch only 58 years ago. Success is nothing to be ashamed of my friend - failures on the hand is shameful
19. Bombing Iran
BP Storm ,   USA   (01.02.06)
So now you want Isreal to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities like they did Iraq's. Tell me, is there a Jewish owned corporation building their nuclear reactors like the French Jewish owned company that was building the Iraqi nuclear reactor that Israel bombed? Tell me how many Guatamalan's did your Israeli Military Advisors help murder and dissapear? Why don't you Khazars give it up. Everybody has got your number, along with the Americans.
20. reply to 15 & 16
E. Rabin ,   NY, USA   (01.02.06)
I am ashamed i live in the same country as you both. BOMB Iran and do it quick, just remember that you have the right to criticize because of where you live. Imagine living in Iran without any freedoms.
21. #15 and #16
Jane   (01.02.06)
F off. We will not die to make you happy. Can't stand Jews who fight back, can you?
22. anoosh
jay ,   cavagnac france   (01.02.06)
my history must be missing some pages. When did Arabs successfully steal jewish land?
23. Answer to BP storm
sajid rafique ,   sugar land .US   (01.02.06)
Mr Storm, If a people have left a land (israel) and settled elsewhere, they cannot just come back and lay claim to it from its people (palestinians)..jews and palestinians were living in palestine for thousands of years..the idea of bringing jews from europe and re-establishing israel is just out of the pale !! And of course, americans should be ashamed of killing the native americans (dont call them indians..that is me !! ) for essence, it is the white skinned europeans who are a ruthless race ..whether they are the european israelis or americans or germans or british or are all a brutal race and i have read a lot of history of their uncountable atrocities...and u call the freedom fighters(palestinians) terrorists...please be ashamed of your genes !
24. answer to rabin
Sajid Rafique ,   sugar land US   (01.02.06)
Yes, i have seen many of you in my last visit to NY...It is you who run the affairs of this USA...what a despicable nation you are want to have your nukes in israel but no one else should have it, i get the premonition that a lot of destruction is on the horizon and certainly,israel,being a tiny place , will be wiped off , if not in the next 5 then perhaps in the next 10 years...and this will be credited to israel's own unjust policies..i will not blame iran.
25. Bombing Iran
Havesh Yacoub ,   New York, USA   (01.02.06)
We want actions from Uzi as well! Let all the Likud members leave Israel and return their property to the Palestinians. Quick, before they go completely mad and try to start WWIII again. We have had enough of the corruption and insanity, even Ariel bailed out. Ship them of to an island somewhere with their cell phones and they can call each other and scream the sky is falling all day long. In truth it's time for Israel to return Palestine and pay compansation to all Palestinians. Go away, leave us all alone and for the sake of world peace be quiet! Shalom.
ahamd ,   canada   (01.02.06)
I hope some one gets rid of Irans nuclear potential.Look at north korea.Once contries that are extremeist have these kinds of weapons than the world is in a seriously dangerous place.If Iraq had nuclear weapons when they invaded Kuwait what do you think would have happened.No more Saudi Arabia Iran etc... Thank Israelis for saving the world ...Muslims should also thank Israel.I know they would never thank Israel because it is an unpopular thing to do ..but under thier breath all of those who criticise Israel for bombing Iraqi nuclear power plants are thankful today.Hope Iran is next.Too dangerous for a country like Iran to have nuclear weapons.They would use them.Or threaten thier use to hold the world North Korea...
27. Re: Shai's comments
qizba ,   Canada   (01.02.06)
To all who advocate Israel's bombing of Iran, I contend you must also be advocates of global instability on a scale the likes of which we have possibly never before seen. China and Russia will not sit on their hands this time, and the global energy market cannot tolerate Iran being off-line for any amount of time. For Israelis who condemn Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions, it's hard to not see the irony there. Israel is herself a nuclear power, and has explicitly pursued a policy of nuclear weaponisation as her principal means of defense. Other Middle Eastern countries are simply following the lead established by Israel, particularly within the context of a bellicose, erratic, and violent administration in Washington. As for Shai's comments about Palestinians being a proto-Arab people with no historical precedence, you know that that is simply a pile of racist crap, and many, many Israeli archaeologists and anthropologists are in total agreement about this, though I assume you would accuse those people of being infected with poisonous UN/EU ideas. I swear, some of you must be sitting around hoping for armageddon the way you carry on.
28. To 27
Shai ,   Israel   (01.02.06)
Nonsense. No country on earth is more responsible for global instability than Iran's, whose support for global insurrection movements are renowned. And don't flatter yourself. China and Russia could care less about Iran, as long as the next Iranian government is friendly to them. Russia has its own oil and is not threatened by Iran's lack of supply. The opposite, Russia would only benefit from the price spike during a period when Iran's oil is unavailable, and maybe for once Iraq will be able to get a steady supply going once Iranian supported insurrectionists can no longer blow up the pipelines there. Regarding the rest of your comments about Israel's weaponry, our policy is one of deterrence by possessing these weapons, not "defense". Further, nobody really expects that Israel would use these weapons unless their existence is threatened. It's clear that the only one's who want Israel not to have these weapons are the very ones who are deterred by them from going to war with Israel. Nobody is threatening Iran's existence, while Iran explicitly threatens Israel's. There is no equivalence between the two cases. As far as the other blather of yours about "racist crap", there is nothing racist about it. Jews aren't a race, and never were. We were always, from teh time of the Patriarchs, multi-racial. Moreover, "Palestinians" aren't a race, so don't throw words around carelessly. I dare you to try to support your statement about "many, many Israeli archeologiests and anthropologists are in total agreement" about Palestinians. You and they will both be exposed as frauds. I challenge you, qizba - if you can produce one of these flat earther equivalents that supports your view, whose views are generally accepted by archeologists OR anthropologists, I'll eat my hat. Go ahead and make my day. LOL!!!!
29. Reply to 28
qizba ,   Canada   (01.03.06)
I really don't know where to start. China has massive LNG and oil contracts with Iran. If I'm not mistaken, Iran is their largest energy supplier. China has a huge stake in Iran. Russia is heavily invested in Iran, both in its nuclear energy program and pipeline systems to carry Iranian natural gas and crude to Asian and European markets. Western Europe is also heavily reliant on Iranian enegry imports - it is not like the Iraq invasion at all in this regard. And I repeat, the world cannot afford the loss of Iranian crude, natural gas or LNG for even a small period of time. Balance between global supply and demand is razor-thin right now and probably will be from now on. A disruption of this scale will send economies into a tailspin. On the nuclear front, you play a game of semantics with deterrence/defense. The fact is that Israel has pursued a policy of acquiring nuclear weapons and appears hypocritical in my eyes when condemning another nation for possibly trying to pursue those same goals. Iran's intent to open an alternate stock exchange for middle eastern oil in April, 2006 certainly has something to do the the heating up of the war of words on all sides too. You said: As far as the other blather of yours about "racist crap", there is nothing racist about it. Jews aren't a race, and never were. We were always, from teh time of the Patriarchs, multi-racial. Moreover, "Palestinians" aren't a race, so don't throw words around carelessly. I didn't suggest that Jews are or aren't a race. I suggested that a previous post' s assertion that Palestinians are a Proto-Arab fictional people was a load of racist crap. If you prefer to substitute bigoted or culturally- imperialist for racist, that's fine. There are many documented accounts of the IDF systematically destroying the Palestinian archaeological record in order to undermine any historical claims to land, and many examples of Israeli archaeologists condemning such actions. I understand that the University of Haifa has a rather impartial department of archaeology. Nowhere in the world is the field of archaeology as politicised as in Israel. (Just ask the family of murdered American archaeologist Dr. Albert Glock who was working out of Bir Zeit University at the time of his assasination.) The fact is, as you allude to, the Middle East has always been multi-ethnic, and the Palestinians can count themselves amongst its many rightful inhabitants. And I still say that an attack on Iran won't be anything like the previous attack on Iraq. Such an attack would be the most destabilising thing Israel, the US or NATO (or any combination thereof) could possibly do. The results will be terrifying and far-reaching.
30. To 28
Shai ,   Israel   (01.03.06)
I don't think Israel or America or anybody else needs to consider the interests of others when attacking Iran. That Iran has made itself a target is its own doing, and if those whose interests are endangered by an attack can't convince Iran to change course, they'll have to suffer the consequences with Iran's peril. No apologies are needed. 1. China's contracts with Iran are no less of interest to my country, or them, than their contracts and relations with dozens of other countries. There is risk in dealing with Iran, and China does not need Iran as an ally so much so that they'll go to war over them. Iran offers nothing but oil, and there's nothing the mullahs can do to prevent China and Russia from getting it even IF there is an attack on Iran. The next government will sell it. And, both will find a happy supplier in Iraq, I can assure you. Iraq's supply is as low as it's been since the war precisely because of Iran's support for the insurrectionists who keep vandalizing the pipelines. 2. Nuclear "semantics". Defense is what you do when someone attacks you. Deterrence is what you do to prevent someone attacking you in the first place. There would almost certainly have been many other attacks had we not had the deterrence we have, and many more deaths. Nuclear deterence has saved lives, and that's not a semantic point I'm making. Israel has not used the nuclear weaponry in any of the past wars. I don't think Iran would show the same temperance, and therefore they should not get these weapons. 3. You used the word "racism". Don't expect people to know you aren't referring to "race", then. Your substitute words are fine, "culturally imperialst/bigoted". I'd rather say that your views are "third-worldist / moral subjectivistic /bigoted". I can support my view, you can't. 4. You "understand"? "rather impartial"? How do you determine that, based on whether you disagree with them or not? I don't see how you can say our archeological professionals are "politicized" when the Israel Museum specifically goes out of its way to conceal Jewish presence here in history, to advance non-biblical perspectives of local history, and many of our major archeologists are linked with non-biblical views of our history. I think your claim is just wishful thinking so that you can feel more like a victim. The fact is that Arabs get a complete and fair hearing in our archeological institutions, but there's a BIG difference between that and manipulating information to support the idea of a uniquely "Palestinian" history, when there is none. Albert Glock was not associated with Haifa University. He was the person who ran Bir Zeit's archeology department, and like that department, his sole desire was to use archeological finds to show Palestinian presence here in one form or another during the last 4 centuries. His task was 9 measures politics to one archeology. I don't think Glock's views pass muster as "impartial scholarship", and you've still not proven Israelis are trying to hide anything beyond simply saying it, which proves nothing. You're probably assuming Israelis were behind the assassination, and that's why you say we are trying to prevent archeological proof from becoming daylighted, but there's more proof that Hamas was behind the killing. Nobody ever said Palestinian Arabs are not "rightful inhabitants". But if "rightful inhabitation" was the criteria for statehood, Jews would have had about 30 states by now throughout Europe, the Middle East and the Americas. And, the way Palestinians have behaved toward Jews coming here gives us good reason to fight them without apology. Palestinians have done nothing to prove that they are qualified to receive, or deserving of a state. That they get one anyway is probably inevitable, but dont' expect us to give you any free passes to allow Iran kill our people just because you think it's "hypocritical" to do otherwise.
Next talkbacks
Back to article