"but the state of Israel stands out now with its inhuman inquisition-like treatment of the Palestinian people. " And the US military is doing similar atrocities in Iraq. Check out the Jesus camps in the USA for some creepy extremist religion: www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/09/18/video-kids-at-jesus-camp_n_29703.html

"palistiniansareamyth" is right http://www.conceptwizard.com/conen/conflict_2.html http://www.conceptwizard.com/trial/trial.html

Those words were first spoken by Jesus when his disciple, Peter, cut off the ear of a Roman guard that had come to capture him. He also said, in the face of the Zionist zealots of his own day that "the meek shall inherit the land." Some translate it as "inherit the earth," but it can be translated either way -- "inherit the land," meaning "inherit the land of Israel." And he taught "Blessed are the peacemakers." And he taught it is better to "turn the other cheek," than to seek revenge. Teachings of peace are typical of Christianity and run throughout its writings. Does Islam have similar teachings? (I don't know.) It seems to me Islam teaches jihad and use of the sword. You'll find no counterpart to those teachings in Jesus. That some fools who were Christian leaders have ordered violence in the name of Christ is a fact that stands not against Christianity, which consistently teaches otherwise, but against evil human beings who are so blind in their lust for control that they can't even understand their own religion. It's a sad commentary on those particular evil popes and on other evil human beings who have carried out attrocities while claiming to head a religion that teaches peace throughout its writings.

Yes, Christ's message of love is beautiful and so is the interpretation of Judaism by Rabbi Michael Lerner. He sent the following wishes for the new Jewish year in a email message to participants in his mailing list: I want to bless you that this coming year be a year of deep personal fulfillment for you, a year of health, a year of love, a year in which you become much more of who you are when you are the fullest embodiment of the God or spiritual energy or loving power of the universe. And I want to bless all of us that in this year we see some major movement toward societal sanity, environmental responsibility, peace and non-violence, social justice, human rights and a flourishing of hope overcoming fear. Love and blessings, and as we say in the Jewish world, shana tova u’metuka, a good and sweet year. Michael Rabbi Michael Lerner RabbiLerner@tikkun.org And from Islamonline.net, there is an explanation for Ramadan. This is from the conclusion: Ramadan is a celebration of God’s guidance to humanity, through the Qur’an, which is a guide for doing good and a warning against evil. In order to bring the soul into harmony with the Qur’anic ideals of belief and virtue, fasting is prescribed as a way for individuals to come closer to God and to lift their souls to new heights of piety. In doing so, the entire human body is able to transform itself into an agent of positive moral and social change that seeks to replace miserliness with generosity, anger with patience, revenge with love, and war with peace—in effect, replacing good with evil in the world. (Sohaib Sultan is the author of The Koran for Dummies and Muslim chaplain at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn where he speaks of the need to create a culture not just of tolerance, but of accptance.)

Please don't quote him. He is an apologist for Islamofascism.

By what authority do you claim that Rabbi Lerner is not a real Rabbi? There was no hate, no call for violence or murder in Rabbi Lerner's message. It was one of the most beautiful, peaceful, loving messages I've read in a long time. hmmm and you object to it. Go figure! You protest my use of this positive quote by a compassionate, intelligent Rabbi. I mean, it wasn't anything like what the Pope quoted about Islam. I don't see anything in his quote to indicate Rabbi Lerner is an apologist for islamofascists. But I suggest your objection to him makes you some kind of extremist.

Hanania along with other other biased Arabs (not moderate Arabs and radical Islamists) live in the past. The Catholic church has evolved and is still evolving. Spewing sarcasims (sarcasm can be used as an excuse to express hatered and not understanding ) about the distant past of the Catholoic church such as the inquisition only opens old wounds. It is strange how Hanania can't deal with the realistic observations of the Pope as expressed through the the quote. Just read YNet when it cover the rehtoric of current Muslim clerics. They still speak of spreading Islam by violence although they veil it in double speak about Islam being the religion of peace and God's favorite religion. Does this seem normal or tolerent. Please radical Muslims and those non Arab Muslims who patronize them: restrain yourselves. Do not answer this yet. Fish have little objectivity over what really goes on in their own fish bowl. Perhaps one of the shinning virtues of the Muslim world is their respect for sexual morality -- when they are not putting the burden on their women and killing their women for transgressing. Is this peacefull or constructive or just plain dysfuntional. They do this NOW, not just in the pass. ANYONE WANT TO ADD SOME MORE CURRENT EXAMPLES. If I wanted to be polite, I would call this dysfunctional, but lets face it: it's better called just plain crazy. There is no objectivity in the fish bowl. Give them insight, and all Hanania can do is hurl sarcasism about something that had happened over 500 years ago. "Your another." The teapot calling the kettle black. How adolescent. Everyone knows about the inquisition. Why bring it up. It's over. Can't you think of something sarcastic about the present situtaion that would be more constructive? There is no selfdetermination in a faciast culture or facist religion. Hanania, keep responding sarcastically about abhorent events of the past -- read Guillotine and other items that you claim are "proudly Christian European" and one thing is clear. Hanania cannot remove the plank from his own eye to objectively judge the culture he so passionately defends. I swear, reading Hanania's "moderate" sarcasm is like watching an adult veil school yard rehtoric in just less offensive words. The tactics are the same. It is not good sarcasm nor is it constructive sarcasm. The Pope was right on with his observation. To bad he chose to apologize. I guess he had to. I think the peaceful, mature hotheads Hanania choose to defend just murdered a nun recently. Yes Hanania, the best defence of the radical Muslim culture is a good offense. Hey Hanania, have you gone back and read Royko or other successful sarcastic columnists as I have suggested? If you don't have time, just read some of my sarcasm in the paragraphs above. It is constructive criticism, not personal attack. WELL FOLKS, I'M GOING TO BATTEN DOWN THE HATCH AND RELAX FOR A WHILE IN CASE HANANIA DECIDES TO REACT WITH HIS USUAL "HATER, EXTREMIST, AND STEW*RAT* To bad, he didn't ballance his sarcasm with comments about other inciteful statements made by prominent Islamists and Jews. That may have been a constructive column, AND very funny. If your editor neglected to suggest this, you may want to look for a new one.

Its good for the Jews

A former 1960s Berkeley radical, Michael Lerner (b. 1943) is the founder of Tikkun magazine, a publication whose philosophy is an admixture of Old Testament teachings, medieval cabala mysticism, and 1960s-style campus Marxism. Though Lerner identifies himself as a duly ordained rabbi, many of his critics dispute that claim - on grounds that he was given a controversial private rabbinic ordination by "Jewish Renewal" rabbis, whose ordinations are recognized only by those within the Jewish Renewal community and Reconstructionist Judaism. Orthodox Judaism, the Reform movement's Central Conference of American Rabbis, and the Conservative movement's Rabbinical Assembly all consider such ordinations invalid. http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=632 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Lerner_(rabbi) He is is much of a rabbi as I am the Virgin Mary.

Ray; Once again you've missed the mark, by several miles. The reaction to the popes comments (actually a restating of an ancient quote) more PROVES the point of the comment. While there's no excuse for what the Christians did during their history, using that as justification is just plain STUPID.

According to AUTHENTIC Jewish beliefs, a rabbi is a TEACHER of Halachic Judaism. Since Michael Lerner neither teaches or believes in AUTHENTIC and/or HALACHIC Judaism, I believe that he is not entitled to be referred to as a rabbi, any more than Eric Yoffee (see the complaint he made when meeting Israeli Pres. Katsav).

.. what humor is...

I realise your brothers in arms need some levity from time to time, but please, spare us your failed attempts. Do you honestly believe that Christians were the very first to practice beheading out of some form of displeasure or as a pogrom? Please...

Ray Hanania, What ever you think, The word of the lord is truth, You are a blashpeeemer and should be be-headed. well, tell a better storyline matey!

Does this still hold true: Jan 30, 1998 Jonathan Rosenblum wrote in the Jerusalem Post: ""Clergymen who reject the Halacha should not be charged with responsibility for preparing converts for a halachic conversion. Conversion is the means of acquiring citizenship in the Jewish nation. Just as one who wishes to become an American citizen must undergo a rigorous screening process and swear fealty to the laws of the land, so too one who wishes to join the Jewish people must declare his or her allegiance to the laws of the Jewish people: the Halacha." The "Jewish nation"? hmm has the ring of a theocracy? sort of like Muslim state? and I've even read that there are Christian fundamentalists who want to establish the USA as a Christian theocracy. Go figure! And then there's Rabbi Lerner who's trying to bring peoples of different faiths together, a TRUE teacher in my opinion... but according to some "letter of the law," he's not a REAL Rabbi. Oh yes, the "letter of the law' which separates while the "spirit of the law" as expressed by Michael Lerner unites peoples. And then there is the Pope's divisive academic talk. Christian love at its best? Give me Michael Lerner any day, or the Sufis or the Kabbalists or the Gnostics... though I probably prefer the pantheists who focus on our shared humanity and our shared story - The Epic of Evolution, The Universe Story.

Well, as far as I know, the Inquisition set out to wipe out all heretics, either by conversion or by burning at the stake. Accordingly, Israel should be engaged in a mission to "wipe-out" the Palestinians. This however, is from Sami Hadawi, author of Bitter Harvest: http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/4/1/Hadawi43-59.html "According to the Palestine Government statistics, the total population of Palestine in 1918 was 700,000 persons. Of these 570,000 were Moslems, 70,000 were Christians, and 56,000 were Jews;[9] with the Jews owning less than 3% of the total land area. According to a study carried out by the British authorities soon after the occupation of the country, the estimated Jewish population between the years 1882 and 1922 was placed at a figure of 24,000 in 1882, rose to 85,000 in 1914, dropped to 56,000 during the war years of 1916-1918, and according to a government census rose in 1922 to 83,794 persons.[10] By the year 1948 when the British mandate over Palestine came to an end, the population of the country stood at 1,415,000 Arabs (including 35,000 "others"), and 700,000 Jews who not formed one-third of the total population.[11] Jewish ownership of land increased from about 3% to about 6%, still an infinitesimal figure." I do not agree that most Christians were Arabs, since so many Greeks and Armenians claim to have been here for several generations (I even had a colleague for a while, a Christian Arab whose grandparents came to Bethlehem from Greece – yet she can claim Palestine for her own? And were there no Druze? They are Arabs, alright, but not Muslims, and they have no problem living side by side with the Jews in the State of Israel and serving in the IDF. What strikes me is that the Muslim population increased nearly 2.5 times in 30 years. That is no natural growth, rather massive migration, in an attempt to balance the inflow of Jews and to thwart the attempts to create a Jewish State over half of ancient Palestine. However, Arabs claim that due to the creation of the State of Israel there are some 800,000 refugees – 1948, 1963, etc., not to mention the "massacres", "genocide", etc. Yet, a great number of Arabs did not flee the country and seem to have survived the alleged crimes against the Arab population. They are now Israeli citizens and live within the State of Israel. The last census shows that they make up 20% of the Israeli population: "According to Central Bureau of Statistics, the population of the State of Israel at the end of 2005 was comprised of 6,990,700 people, of which 5,313,800 were Jewish (76 percent of the entire population), and 1,377,100 were Arab (19.7 percent) according to data published by the Central Bureau of Statistics." In 2003, there were some 1.5 Arabs living in Gaza, alone. Unfortunately I have no data on the West Bank. But somehow the numbers do not add up – genocide means the systematic extermination of a people, or a group of people. Yet the Arab population seems to be on the increase despite the allegations. Strange, don't you think? All in all, I think Hadawi' story is but a story, bearing more similarity to the "Arabian nights" than to actual facts. But why should that surprise anyone? A rabbi, much like a priest, has to be ordained by some kind of authority. Just as the title of professor has to awarded by some recognized university. This has nothing to do with conversion. Judaism does not encourage conversions. But then, Arja, if Ray is your professor, then Michael Lerner can be your rabbi. And your opinion is just an opinion, same as everybody else's. Same as Jonathan Rosenblum's, just another opinion. He may have changed his mind since 1998. As our assassinated Prime Minister, Itzhak Rabin used to say, only donkeys do not change their minds...

No, Dr. No, Ray is not my prof, though he does entertain me and alerts me to areas for further study and exploration. I have many knowledgeable profs in many places. My principal Rabbi/Pastor/pPriest is Nature. I find most "traditional" religions to be divisive. Michael Lerner, Rumi the Sufi, Thich Nhat Hanh and others of various spiritual persuasions beautifully enhance my learnings from Nature. Ursula Goodenough, a profesor of biology, expresses a theory of "religious naturalism" in her book "The Sacred Depths of Nature." She writes "Once we have our feelings about Nature in place, then I believe that we can also find important ways to call ourselves Jews, or Muslims, or Taoists, or Hopi, or Hindus, or Christians, or Buddhists. Or some of each. The words in the traditional texts may sound different to us than they did to their authors, but they continue to resonate with our religious selves. We know what they are intended to mean."

then will be a termite. It looks like a pile of trouble, dig deep and right on the double. All the religions are not worth the words and bullets are cheaper than paper. Time to change the topic.

Dr. NO, are you sure you do not really spell your name KNOW. You really seem to have a lot of your facts down. SAME FOR MANY OTHERS EXCEPT FOR HANANIA'S CHOIR. Hey, all they probably want is too spin their way to peace in Israel, demand that it give up being a Jewish state, demand that every Muslim gets two votes -- OH I FORGOT, THEY WILL ALREADY GET 4 OR 5 SOON WITH ALL THE KIDS THEY BIRTH -- demand that Africa, and the southern Far East and Indonesia adopt Sharia Law after Lebenon and Israel falls . . . ad nauseaum. All this current nonsense just to get Israel to return to it's pre '67 boarders? I wonder ... what if they succeed beyond their dreams ... oops sorry ... delusions. CALL ME A HATER AGAIN RAY AND DON'T FORGET TO FORGET TO TWIST MY NAME TO STEW*RAT* AS YOU ALWAY DO. YOU KNOW THE ABOVE IS THE HIDDEN AGENDA, BUT IF YOUR MUSLIM FRIENDS ADMITTED IT, WHAT WOULD BE LEFT TO WRITE? Let's hope hope King Abdullah II of Jordan and President Mubarak prevail on the Mideast with their solution. It could work. Thank goodness for rational leaders like King Abdullah II, his father King Husein, and his father King Abdullah I. They all realized the benefits of letting the Jews return to their ancestoral homeland along with the technology and democratic culture it could bring to the region. Come up with the money and stabilizing force to secure a Palestinian nation that will not degenerate into another terrorist breading ground and launch pad for terrorist rockets, AND you may be able to build a nation that just wants to get on with business and prosper by parterships with Israeli business. REMEMBER HANANIA, this was the plan Clinton and Rabin worked out with Arafat . . . a man who never missed and opportunity to miss an opportunity. IT'S NOT MUCH MORE THAN ABOUT THIS. The rest are all details and old, emotional wounds that can be worked out and assuaged if some rational minds could prevail. BUT DON'T TELL US HANANIA THE PROBLEM WITH RATIONALITY DISPROPORTIONATELY RESIDES WITH THE CHRISTIANS (the current, modern Pope) AND JEWS. YOU'RE RIGHT HANANIA. AS YOU YOURSELF HAVE SAID, YOUR WRITING "IS SARCASM AND NOTHING MORE." What a waste of cyberspace.

Your dead on. It's all about feelings like Dr. Ursula Goodenough says. If everyone could just get their feelings in place with nature, we'd all be friends. Their are no other issues (power, money, land ...) It's all solved by . . . LOVE . . . Geeze (Jesus), I must have missed it all this time. Just between me an you, I suggest you stop reading all that feel good, new age philosophy nonsense and take a few courses in history and polical science from some moderate to conservative professors if you can still find any in the University systems of the world especially Canada and the US. Please take a rest and hand your pen to Sarah for a while,

I'm talking about respect and tolerance and better methods for conflict resolution. Friends, is going too far, Stewart. But way too often religion and jingoism get in the way! So what do we all have in common? No matter how much some political and religious leaders try to dehumanize and demonize the "enemy," we're still human beings -- even the "devil" Bush! It's time for the human species to mature and abandon juvenile behaviours.

"Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for fifty generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times 'by the sword' to get them to abandon their faith." This is a quote from Uri Avnery's article "The Pope's Evil Legend: Mohammed's Sword" at www.counterpunch.org/avnery09262006.html I'll admit, I don't have the time to check out the accuracy of all that Avnery claims. Perhaps there's some history experts in this forum who could read the whole article and report back.... are you volunteering Stewart? Here's an example, from Avnery's article re Jewish history in Muslim Spain: "THERE IS no evidence whatsoever of any attempt to impose Islam on the Jews. As is well known, under Muslim rule the Jews of Spain enjoyed a bloom the like of which the Jews did not enjoy anywhere else until almost our time. Poets like Yehuda Halevy wrote in Arabic, as did the great Maimonides. In Muslim Spain, Jews were ministers, poets, scientists. In Muslim Toledo, Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars worked together and translated the ancient Greek philosophical and scientific texts. That was, indeed, the Golden Age. How would this have been possible, had the Prophet decreed the "spreading of the faith by the sword"? What happened afterwards is even more telling. When the Catholics re-conquered Spain from the Muslims, they instituted a reign of religious terror. The Jews and the Muslims were presented with a cruel choice: to become Christians, to be massacred or to leave. And where did the hundreds of thousand of Jews, who refused to abandon their faith, escape? Almost all of them were received with open arms in the Muslim countries. The Sephardi ("Spanish") Jews settled all over the Muslim world, from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east, from Bulgaria (then part of the Ottoman Empire) in the north to Sudan in the south. Nowhere were they persecuted. They knew nothing like the tortures of the Inquisition, the flames of the auto-da-fe, the pogroms, the terrible mass-expulsions that took place in almost all Christian countries, up to the Holocaust."

about Maimonides - Maimonides's full name was Moses ben Maimon; in Hebrew he is known by the acronym of Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Rambam. He was born in Spain shortly before the fanatical Muslim Almohades came to power there. To avoid persecution by the Muslim sect — which was wont to offer Jews and Christians the choice of conversion to Islam or death — Maimonides fled with his family, first to Morocco, later to Israel, and finally to Egypt. He apparently hoped to continue his studies for several years more, but when his brother David, a jewelry merchant, perished in the Indian Ocean with much of the family's fortune, he had to begin earning money. He probably started practicing medicine at this time. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Maimonides.html run any kind of search on Maimonides, even Wikipedia, and see that he was not really protected in his native Spain (Cordoba) by the Moorish invaders. More likely in Egypt. Thus an all encompassing statement that Jews were offered protection for 50 generations is not entirely accurate (but then is Uri Avneri an authority on anything?) The oldest reference to using mandatory articles of clothing to identify and distinguish Jews from the rest of society was in 807 CE. In this year, Abbassid caliph Haroun al-Raschid ordered all Jews to wear a yellow belt and a tall, cone-like hat.1 http://history1900s.about.com/od/holocaust/a/yellowstar.htm The idea of such a discrimination (wear a distinctive mark) seems to have been derived from Islam, in which the dress of the Jews was distinguished by a different color from that of the true believer as early as the Pact of Omar (640), by which Jews were ordered to wear a yellow seam on their upper garments (D'Ohsson, "Histoire des Mogols," 1854, iii. 274). This was a distinct anticipation of the Badge. In 1005 the Jews of Egypt were ordered to wear bells on their garments and a wooden calf to remind them of the golden one (S. Lane-Poole, "History of Egypt," 1901, vi. 126). Later on, in 1301, they were obliged to wear yellow turbans (ib. pp. 300, 301). It may have been some sort of retaliation for a similar restriction placed upon the Christians in Islam, since the order of the Council applied to Saracens as well as to Jews. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=83&letter=B I am sure, Arja, that a person of your perseverence and dedication can find more in the same line, just to try and prove Uri Avneri right.

The Jews in Poland had complete autonomy in their internal affairs. In each city in which they were allowed to live there was a special Jewish college called "Kahal," which governed the Jewish affairs of the community In addition they had other colleges, such as that of neemunim to supervise or police the community; shamaim to collect taxes, gabbaim to attend to charities, and others. The members of the colleges were elected annually from among the taxpayers. Every year during the great fairs at Lublin and Jaroslav the representatives of the Jews from all the provinces of Poland assembled in synods to settle the internal affairs of the various communities and inter-communal matters; also to make joint representations to the King and to apportion the taxes levied upon them as a body. In time the Jewish autonomy became weaker, and they came more under the supervision of the woyevoda and his subordinates, but they always retained their right to appeal to the King's court for redress. In 1699 the King issued a special codification of all the privileges concerning Jews and by this document their status was clearly defined. The Jews could not settle in the towns belonging to the Catholic Church, and in such cities of the Crown as Warsaw; for example, whose ancient charters forbade their settlement. To insure themselves against competition, the burghers made the Jew's sign covenants limiting the scope of their pursuits. In some cities the Jews were prohibited from leasing real estate or handling customs and other tax collections. In those cities, however, where they had a right to settle, they could own real estate and houses. In the villages the Jews were subject to the jurisdiction of the landlord. On the whole, their disabilities in Poland were comparatively few, although from the very beginning the Jewish settlers were looked upon with disfavor by the peasants, and were made the subject of numerous complaints and blind vengeance: particularly in times of economical crises or other calamities like the Black Death of 1360. The laws of the country were designed to protect them against outrages and cruelties on the part of the native population and were effective until the time of the Catholic reaction, when all non-Conformists, either, Christian or Jews, became ostracized and subject to the "tumults" of the ignorant and fanatical street rabble. As a matter of fact, the Jews suffered less than the Protestants, and had more protection than the Christian non-Conformists. Upon joining the Catholic Church the Jews received nobilitation and came into possession of the golden liberties of the nobility, the highest privilege the Republic could offer. The liberality of the Polish law giving a wide autonomy to the Jewish population worked against the best interests of the Republic, as it was conducive to the perpetuation of a distinct race consciousness, and prevented the polonization and nationalization of an element of the population which had become attached to the land of their adoption, where they found homes, work and protection at a time when they were cruelly persecuted almost everywhere else in Europe. Subsequent laws modeled after foreign patterns, which prohibited Jews from employing any help other than that of their coreligionists, from sending their children to Polish schools, from living outside of ghettos, and from wearing apparel like the rest of the population, helped to widen the gaps which the original grants of autonomous rule had established. http://freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~koby/political/chapter_11/11constitution.html The Jews expelled from Europe in the wake of the Black Death (plague epidemic) were invited to settle in Poland by King Kazimir the Great (1347) Their rights and privileges eroded over the years and the 20th century witnessed the Holocaust.

but it doesn't toally discredit or refute what Uri Avnery wrote in his article. Yes, there is a danger in generalizations because there are always exceptions. But it does corroborate my view of traditional religions as obstacles to human development. The basis for traditional religions is a dominator rather a partnership model. The religious leaders of these paternal, judging gods control and manipulate the worshippers with promise of rewards and threats of punishments. Thus, people continue to be treated as children so they are unable to mature beyond their juvenile beliefs and behaviours.

Arja, under Islamic Law (Sharia Law?) those non Muslims refusing to convert to Islam must pay a special tax or they could be executed. The current wave of Islamic fundamentalism is being very open about wanting to impose this on the world as they bring it under Muslim control. DO YOU REALIZE WHO YOU ARE DEFENDING? Don't tell me, "They don't really mean it." "The are just talking." OK, How close will they try to come to this is they can get away with it. So they don't murder the nonbelievers who refuse to pay their tax. What kind of world are you defending? Their clerics and leaders have been recently qouted as saying, "Islam is God's favorite religion." ARE ANY OF THESE BELIEFS STILL NORMAL OUTSIDE OF THE ISLAMIC WORLD?" Do you realize who and what you are defending? WHY DO YOU ATTEMPT TO INTELLECTUALLY SUGAR COAT WHAT THESE TRADITIONALISTS AND FUNDAMENTALISTS BELIEVE AND ARE WILLING TO FIGHT AND KILL OTHERS FOR. I must assume since you defend the Muslims that you agree with them. You have argued the details and defended their beliefs as if you are one of them or have all the time and money in the world in addition to an endless supply of research both Jewish and Islamic to provide you with the rehtorical means to convince anyone that "you know better" provided they are not as well studied as you. HOW IS THIS LUXURY SUPPORTED? MOST PEOPLE ARE TOO BUSY MAKING A LIVING OR COMPLETING THEIR COLLEGE ASSIGNMENTS TO BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO "TALKBACK" AT THE HIGH FREQUENCY WITH THE TIME AND EFFORT IF TAKES TO FIND AND INCLUDE THE SUPPORTING LITERATURE FROM WHICH YOU QOUTE OR ALLUDE TO. HMMMMMM? (And please don't tell me you are retired and have nothing better to do.) YOUR CHOICE OF KNOWLEDGE AND FACTS THAT YOU CHOOSE TO *NOT* INCLUDE IS VERY SUSPECT TO ME FOR SUCH A SEEMINGLY WELL INFORMED PERSON. Also, please do not claim you are being personally attacked as Hanania has. If you are not entirely innocent in these regards then you are not honestly presenting the impression of who you are, and you could then be very well intentionally misleading others. P.S. My appologies to my moderate Muslim friends from such countries as Jordon, Lebenon, Turkey, and Egypt who are truely peace loving and just want to get on with life. You truely have a peaceful interpretation of your religion, and have allowed in to evolve beyond what some men snuck into it under the guise of "Alla's" real words.

I am NOT defending the present day Muslims, any more than I am defending the Christians or the Jews. Perhaps during the Golden Age that Avnery refers to things were different. I really don't know and I'm not sure I care. But I did find his article interesting and so I quoted it and even asked if anyone knew anything more about it. Dr. NO replied with all kinds of information. I don't pretend to be an expert on history (as you well know, I'm NOT). But I am interested in social justice and that's why I'm here. I don't see where you get the idea I'm defending Muslims. Reread my posts, please! I have difficulty with fundamentalist religions of ALL types and am wary of religion in general. But like you mention there are some very peaceful interpretations of Islam, as well as of Christianity and Judaism. Those are the Muslims I would defend. But I do defend Palestine's right to exist and I do accuse Israel of violating their rights and illegally and brutally occupying their land. I sort of understand WHY the Palestinians might resort to their terrorist techniques, but I don't condone their actions. I recently watched a video called the Real Friends of Terror, a documentary report by Ted Honderich, Britain's leading moral philospher (www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15080.htm) (transcript at www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/RealFriendsOfTerrorTvProgramme.html) He states, "I believe a direct line can be traced from where we are now, through July 7, back through the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, on back through the terrible attack on America on 9/11, to here, the Middle East, the creation of the State of Israel and the ongoing tragedy that is the story of the Palestinian people." In the same video, Lord Ian Gilmour states, "The Palestinians have been under a brutal and apartheid occupation which is probably one of the longest, post war occupations. The result of which has been a sort of state of suspended war for the last sixty years, which has been a disaster for th Palestinians who have seen their country disappear." There is a differrence, in my mind, of defending Palestinians right to resist Israeli occupation and defending Muslim extremists. I also feel it is imperative that the conflict between Israel and Palestine gets settled in order to make some kind of peace possible in the Middle East... and the world. That is one reason I am focusing on this particular tragedy in our world ... and there are enough others, I just don't have time for them all. Besides I really feel that this is a LONG standing catastrophe and the Palestinians are largely ignored... their voices go largely unheard. The injustice of it all outrages me.

You are blaming the victims again. Perhaps you might be interested in watching this documentary as well, in case you haven't in the past: www.zippyvideos.com/3731945845958096/obsession/ also, please visit eureferendum.blogspot.com to get some idea of what some Brits think of themselves and their press. please also read what this New Zealander thinks of Palestinian terror: http://colorado.indymedia.org/newswire/display/14158/index.php you might also like to check out some of Prof. Michael Anbar's articles: http://www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/writers.pl?id=1 Arab Americans are beginning to speak up: http://www.freemuslims.org/news/article.php?article=148 http://www.ocnus.net/artman/publish/article_25873.shtml Egyptians apologize where the British accuse? http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020909/asalem.html How can you claim to be a moderate when you are so biased and have no wish to listen to the other side? you know, audietur et altera pars? It is not the Palestinian cause. It is islamofascism and islamoterrorism making a cynical mockery of the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and using them to promote the cause of global jihad.

They can't come close to your logic. All they (the haters on this talk back segment) have is hatred, double standards -- throwing mud and then pretending they are victims. Keep it up ... you inspire me. Ray Hanania www.hanania.com

less than the 28% you pay Stewart. Start adding. Ray, where is the Palestinian in the American? Haaretz looks mighty good right now.