You should take your, “Well if you say Franklin was so great than obviously you think everyone else was irrelevant!” straw man, stuff a mattress with it, and get some of that sleep you seem to be deprived of (among other things).

And you certainly don’t want to say who you are going to support if America enters into a war in the Middle East. Too busy wrapping yourself in the flag and deciding who hates America.

Washington was a good choice you say, but he owned slaves and he certainly engaged in ethnic cleansing. How do you reconcile the two?

If I understand you correctly, Franklin is the reason America is great, and the others are irrelevant?

For note, I think more people should have listened to Benjamin Franklin. He’s the reason the United States had the potential for greatness at all, and he should have been the first President (although Washington proved to be a reasonably good choice).

You are criticizing Witty for not supporting “the very foundations of what American society was originally founded on.” What exactly are those foundations? Seems to me the Constitution was definitely founded on slavery and the United States was definitely founded on a logic that had to lead to not only the ethnic cleaning of the American Indian, but even genocide of the American Indian. Kind of sounds rather like the original sins of Zionism we hear from you all the time.

So if the United States joins Israel in a great Middle East War that Taxi says is only around the corner, which side are you going to be on? Still going to play the role of the patriot?

I’d follow Donald’s advice and concentrate on Richard’s contradictions related to Israel. But then a declaration from you on the foundations of America would also be interesting.

I have some white friends that literally daily say thank you to the former native peoples that resided where they walk. I do when I spend time with them.

It doesn’t change the objective circumstances nor much of emotion, but it does transform the racism that results from overt hostility and neglect.

It can be practiced relative to Israel/Palestine. Thank you for living here prior.

It does not address the assertion of right to reside resulting from ancestral based claims.

Take your own advice. You should read more than just propaganda. You refuse to read anything that does not paint Israle is a glowing light.

The 1967 war was started by Israel. Both Rabin and Begin admitted that Nasser was not abot to attack and was no threat.

The 1973 was a hangover of the ’67 war.

The fact that wars unleash unrestricted violence is irrelevant, thought it explain why Israel prefers to pick fights with uananrmed opponents.

Your lies arew becomming boring and predictable Witty. You need mnew material.

Ergo, the American Revolutionary War.

Thanks for the compliments, btw, though it’s mixed in there with accusations of vanity.

On Emma, it’s unproven either way and I could easily be wrong. I still think it’s a step forward if hasbarists are coming out to admit that Israel commits war crimes and they only want to point out that gee, so does Hezbollah.

As for justice for war crimes, I don’t expect that. It rarely happens anywhere, except in cases where it is politically convenient for powerful people. If Israeli officials were prosecuted, it breaks down the notion that Western democratic leaders can’t be war criminals, so Western democratic leaders who want the policy option of committing war crimes will support Israel’s position on this. What I’d like is for the average person to start seeing Israeli violence as being as real (and on a larger scale) as Hamas or Hezbollah violence.