If the Palestinians gain independence immaturely, and will control the border entries, they will be invaded by Iranian agents as it happened in Iraq and Gaza.

It is a good recipe for a sure failure.

The Palestinians should work hard to correct the historical failures of the Grand Mufti Amin Husseini, Shukeiri, Arafat, Abu Ala and Abu Mazen.

Haniyeh is not worth of mentioning, he is a true Iranian puppet.

Sorry for my immodest blog, radical Palestinians are still dominating the scene, by the volume of the screaming, not by the numbers.

The local Palestinian residents can not regain their independence unless the Diaspora Palestinian Lobby comes to a sensible stand.

This Palestinian lobby is undermining the peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

A few negative examples of propaganda advocates: the late Edward Said, Al Awda, Al Aryan, and do not forget the Egyptian-Swiss Prof. Tariq Ramadan.

Well balanced experienced observers should deal with this aspect of the conflict, too.

If Jews are a people, which we are, then we have a right and responsibility to self-govern.

If we are only a movement, or an assimilated minority, then we don't need a state, but other means of self-governance.

For whatever historical sequence, and consequences to third parties, a large portion of Jews were forced by circumstances and opportunity to firm their/our nation in Israel, geographic and social.

There may be post-Zionism as in a European Union, but that takes time and acceptance.

A-Zionism is an intellectual exercise from a distance.

To the question, "what is it that you are, what is it that you are a part of?", it is either the non-answer "I don't know",

or best answer "multiple balanced identities, neither predominant",

or worst "nothing"

or worse than worse "ashamed of myself, my community, my world".

Then why don't all peoples have this same right? Why are white people called racist for wanting to live in a white community. Why are christians vilified for wanting a Christian nation (see John McCain's statements).

And the opposition comes from Jews, mostly.

I have no problem with that whatsoever. And I'm a jew. If you and your white supremacist friends (I don't mean that in a negative way, just descriptive) want to set up a whites only country somewhere. Go right ahead. As a libertarian I have no problem with it. I won't visit you there, but knock yourself out. Jews and others complain when those arguments are made about turning the USA, an existing multi-ethnic society into a whites only haven.
Since there are scores of countries in Europe that are governed by white christians, and scores of countries goverened by other same ethno-religious groups, jews would like one, just one country where they to can be a majority and govern themselves. You're right that it is a bit hypocritical, but often those jews complaining about a white supremacist country also complain about Zionism.
And from what I read there are a lot of non-Jewish Israeli citizens with the same rights as Jews.

But that's the problem, there aren't. Wake up.

This is pure BS.

The same complaints, the same screeching editorials and condemnations come from the same sources, when any western nation tries to organize itself around religion or race.

As for the US, no one is saying we need to kick anyone out, just make the US a Christian nation like Israel is a Jewish nation. Minorities can live among the Christians, Just like they live among Jews in Israel, but we will be able to preserve our "Christian majority", just like Jews protect their Jewish majority in Israel.

And America has been/was a Christian nation with a Christian majority for much long than Israel has been around.

You just can't see that Israel is a contradiction with current humanist values of the west, with Jews fighting hardest for humanism in one place, when it benefits them, and for tribalism in another place, when it benefits them.

It is a civil nation.

And I thank God and the innovative founders and amenders for it.

But your use of that term shows that you agree that the policies of Israel are essentially the same as the policies those people are asking for. Nice.

You arguments as to whether such policies are ok rests on the "tradition" of the country, which is not only inaccurate but also woefully insufficient. It is beyond weak.

"The John Edwards presidential campaign has a problem. Set to announce the appointment of former Rep. David Bonior as campaign manager in a few days, Edwards' strategists began to realize that the Michigan Democrat's strong support for Palestinians while Bonior was in Congress could hurt Edwards among American Jews.

And if Jewish voters started to get nervous about the former senator from North Carolina, a lot of dollars could be at stake.

Therefore Bonior has started making calls to influential American Jewish leaders, including some members of Congress, and to political donors. Bonior assured the leaders he would not be involved in Middle East policy, and said his appointment did not suggest any changes in Edwards's positions on Israel. But many Jewish leaders were still angry that their input was sought only after the decision had been made.

The move added Edwards to the Jewish list of Democratic presidential candidates whose support for Israel, while strong, has blemishes. Some of the leading White House candidates don't have long congressional voting records with which to assess their support for Israel, so Jewish voters use other indicators to gauge candidates, such as whom the candidates are associating with, and how often the candidates talk about Middle East issues when they aren't speaking in front of Jews.

Thus far, many Jewish Democrats have rallied behind Hillary Clinton. And although Jews love Giuliani because of his support for Israel, many influential Jewish Republicans have not taken sides in what they view as a wide-open GOP race.

A higher percentage of Jews vote than the general public, and many are active political donors. This time around, Jews could play an even larger role in both the primary and general elections.

Historically, Jews have lent most of their support to Democrats and to liberal causes. But as more Republicans have embraced Israel, the GOP has been gaining in the Jewish community in recent years. Bush garnered about 25 percent of the Jewish vote in 2004, up from 19 percent in 2000. Jewish support was seen as helpful in winning electoral votes for Bush in Ohio and Florida.

In 2008, Jewish votes could help in the primaries, because several states with large Jewish populations — including California, Florida, and New York — will vote on or before February 5. That's why Democrats have been actively pursuing Jewish supporters and donors.

Many Jewish leaders see the Clinton campaign as the most organized and the most pro-israel, and a lot of support has already coalesced around her.

"The Jewish perception is that Hillary’s going to win," said a Jewish official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "So Jews want to be with the winning team, and want to be there early."

Advisers in the Jewish community say Clinton has said and done the right things since being elected to the Senate in 2000, including leading the effort in Congress to have the International Red Cross recognize the Israeli branch known as Magen David Adom. "She has built a relationship with the Jewish community in New York that shows how she has evolved," a Jewish official said.

Barack Obama has made inroads with Jews that are opposed to the Iraq war, but Jews are not happy that Obama aligned himself with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's national security adviser, who defended the Mearschiemer-Walt book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.

Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the umbrella organization for American Jewish groups (including AIPAC), said Brzezinski is a concern to many in the Jewish community because of his positions on Israel.

"If a candidate doesn't have a track record of supporting Israel, then we focus on who's advising him," a Jewish official said. "Who are the voices that influence them? Who has access to the candidate's ear?"

Obama and Edwards have surrounded themselves with Jewish community leaders and supporters in an attempt to offset Jewish concerns. Obama advisers also stress that Brzezinski will not be advising Obama on Israeli affairs.

On the Republican side, Giuliani has attracted early support from Republican Jews. It helps that Giuliani was mayor in a city with a large Jewish population, and Giuliani is well known for his strong ties to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Giuliani also scored points for kicking Arafat out of a concert for world leaders in 1995.

"The Orthodox community in New York is obviously not the only Orthodox community in the country, but it's the largest," said one Jewish leader, speaking of the more conservative strand of Judaism. "And so far, they are going with what they know, and that's Rudy."

Elsewhere in the country, Jews are concerned about Giuliani’s and McCain’s electability. "It's disconcerting," said Fred Zeidman, a Republican fundraiser in Houston and the chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, who has been raising money for McCain. "None of us are making serious headway in the Jewish community."

Some analysts said Jewish donors may be more likely to give once the candidates discuss their Middle East policies. Positions may become clearer on October 16, when the GOP contenders gather in Washington to address the Republican Jewish Coalition. At that meeting, most of the candidates will address an audience interested primarily in the Middle East, and some campaigns will use the forum to discuss where they stand on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and their views on dealing with Iran.

Indeed, Iran has become the new bellwether for the Jewish community. Historically, Jewish voters were most concerned about whether candidates supported Israel. Now that support for Israel is a universal policy position in Washington, the new test is how tough the candidates will be against Iran, and whether they would favor Israel taking pre-emptive action.

Source:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21266470/