http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/middlefingersalute.jpg
"Holocaust Survivors' Soup for Herr Ahmadinejad" (http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/02/our_entry_in_pr.html)

love it, al hamdullilah...lol.

It's kind of a warning as well, that God's people WILL overcome anything!

i like it too
it's no wonder cnn censored him

It will be interesting to see what they come up with. Might be worth a chuckle. Bet it can't beat Family Guy's Jesus:

"I'm gonna turn this water...into FUNK!"

It'll probably be something in the: "Guilty Holocaust-planner-Europe has put Israel there"... hehe.
I am sure that Hitler's Muslim-Mufti would be missing...

It wold have been only funny, were not for the atomic weapons in the "hands" of these Satanic and damn serious evil.

Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!

"Do you think if we shout "Hitler!" enough, they will believe us? It worked calling Saddam Hitler. These guys are so stupid they will believe anything"

It's kind of a warning as well, that God's people WILL overcome anything!

Who are "gods people"?

Happeh; do you think that if you whine hard enough, we'll forget the obvious correlation?

Give us some credit.

Geoff

Who are "gods people"?
Christianity, Islam and Judaism do agree that He created everyone.

Christianity, Islam and Judaism do agree that He created everyone.

I understand that - However, I wanted to know who Ritri5432 was referring to. I have a feeling he/she would have a different answer.

so whats the Cartoon is supposed to be about ?

dear muslim radical: Happeh=BrianFoley=Dil_420=Disaster !
Are you worried about spelling it on islamic militant hitler of Tehran?
sorry-not for offending your Pro-Hitleristc "feelings".

An American entered this contest, see here:
http://www.thepaincomics.com/

Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!

"Do you think if we shout "Hitler!" enough, they will believe us? It worked calling Saddam Hitler. These guys are so stupid they will believe anything"

true theese lowfile loosers badly truly need a life!
SITTING HOME getting brainwashed by bush goverment and the bloodsucking media!

no life loosers!

As opposed to being brainwashed at the mosque?

Geoff

Two wrongs will always make a right! It's been mathematically proven, (-) x (-) = +!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course this sarcasm is only meant to tell Geoff that regardless of him being right about "mosque brainwashing", it doesn't solve the problem of "bush brainwashing".. and so this discussion is going nowhere and needs to be locked.

any attempt to sway another human to your way of thinking could be considered "brainwashing".
i prefer "The Devil Inside" flavor of brainwashing.
put a dollar in the basket, and you go to heaven!!

simple, eh?

I have a simple thing to state.

Why does Bush, or mosque brainwashing, even matter? It's not like you guys haven't been brainwashed from the day you were born. With cultural brainwashing, or even conditioning.

Take in example, Christians, they are raised to believe that God is real. The God fearing in them is conditioned by their parents in alot of cases.

Even watching tv, or anything else could be a form of brainwashing. Why does this matter? I simply think it would be your fault for allowing such propaganda to ever even reach your minds.

You've even brainwashed a person once in your life, i can assure of this. It's nothing new. It a tough issue to argue, simply because you've already been brainwashed since day one. So what's the harm, it's simply changing your initial brainwashed minds, and rebrainwashing you.

I can't truelly see anything to big about it, after all you have the choice to believe it or not, it's not like you're in the movie, "Clockwork Orange". That is the only type of brainwashing that is truelly the fault of the brainwasher.

Why complain about it? What does it do to affect us, or people who simply choose to ignore it. After all, you don't want to mess up your conditioning, or anything that major.

I'm pretty sure that you're confusing brainwashing with learning. Brainwashing consists of people being forced to endure reeducation, or as Wikipedia says:

Brainwashing or thought reform is the application of coercive techniques to change the beliefs or behavior of one or more people for political purposes. Whether any techniques at all exist that will actually work to change thought and behavior to the degree that the term "brainwashing" connotes is a controversial and at times hotly debated question.

AmishRakeFight

I'm pretty sure that you're confusing brainwashing with learning. Brainwashing consists of people being forced to endure reeducation, or as Wikipedia says:

Brainwashing or thought reform is the application of coercive techniques to change the beliefs or behavior of one or more people for political purposes. Whether any techniques at all exist that will actually work to change thought and behavior to the degree that the term "brainwashing" connotes is a controversial and at times hotly debated question.

AmishRakeFight


Well, that is only one form of brainwashing, you have to take conditioning, and cultural brainwashing into consideration as well. They're considered brainwashing techniques. Conditioning being one of the most effective means of brainwashing. Now political brainwashing technques are different, but still the same concept. But it's not like they're forcing you into these beliefs. It's still one's own choice, to accept this.

I am simply trying to point out how this type of brainwashing is directly the fault of the brainwashed. It's not like conditioning, or being culturaly brainwashed. So why the big fuss?

I have a simple thing to state.

Why does Bush, or mosque brainwashing, even matter? It's not like you guys haven't been brainwashed from the day you were born. With cultural brainwashing, or even conditioning.

Take in example, Christians, they are raised to believe that God is real. The God fearing in them is conditioned by their parents in alot of cases.

Even watching tv, or anything else could be a form of brainwashing. Why does this matter? I simply think it would be your fault for allowing such propaganda to ever even reach your minds.

You've even brainwashed a person once in your life, i can assure of this. It's nothing new. It a tough issue to argue, simply because you've already been brainwashed since day one. So what's the harm, it's simply changing your initial brainwashed minds, and rebrainwashing you.

I can't truelly see anything to big about it, after all you have the choice to believe it or not, it's not like you're in the movie, "Clockwork Orange". That is the only type of brainwashing that is truelly the fault of the brainwasher.

Why complain about it? What does it do to affect us, or people who simply choose to ignore it. After all, you don't want to mess up your conditioning, or anything that major.



Because "normal" people dont strap fucking bombs on their bellies and kill innocent women and children you titstick!

You have a simple thing to state ?

Aint that the fucking truth.

Because "normal" people dont strap fucking bombs on their bellies and kill innocent women and children you titstick!

You have a simple thing to state ?

Aint that the fucking truth.


That's religous conditioning. Not exactly political, in most countries, except of course countries with leaders who were religously conditioned. Can you see where this is going, or am I just too much of a "titstick". I don't know, perhaps your comprehention has greater flaws then you allow yourself to believe, but who am i to say.

But this is my first time seeing you here on the forum, so welcome to the worlds most annoying, and obnoxious forum, well somewhat. Happeh has left, and the racism is dying, but however there is the still the post-mongers.

Because "normal" people dont strap fucking bombs on their bellies and kill innocent women and children you titstick!

Yes they do Oliver. Everybody is "normal" until faced with that which one has to fight using any means. Given the situation, people will commit the most heinous acts. If seen in the context of survival, then all stops are out.

I take it you mean “Normal people” who aren’t faced with an abnormal situation. If your country were taken over, would you result to abnormal acts in an attempt repel the invader?

Originally posted by dkb218:
I take it you mean “Normal people” who aren’t faced with an abnormal situation. If your country were taken over, would you result to abnormal acts in an attempt repel the invader?

There are countless scenarios in history that include a nation being invaded and occupied just like the Palestinians. In the vast, vast majority of those cases, the occupying army is attacked.

The Palestinians have taken the attack to the civilian population of Israel, infuriating the occupying population. Since most occupied people do not attack the civilian population of its occupier, in this context it is indeed abnormal. The Palestinian's would have long had their land back had they not taken this route. Israel's own people would not have standed for the treatment of their neighbors if they did not feel threatened by the civilian attacks.
If there is any doubt, take a look at what happened in Lebanon. Hezbollah concentrated on military targets, and this gave the political freedom for Israel's politicians to decide to withdrawl. As long as Palestinians continue to attack civilians, then their occupation will be endless. If there is any indication of this, the election of Hamas is only proof of this trend. Palestinian leaders are a joke and will continue to rape their people as much as the Israeli's do.

Palestinians have a long history of shooting themselves in their own foot.

There are countless scenarios in history that include a nation being invaded and occupied just like the Palestinians. In the vast, vast majority of those cases, the occupying army is attacked.

The Palestinians have taken the attack to the civilian population of Israel, infuriating the occupying population. Since most occupied people do not attack the civilian population of its occupier, in this context it is indeed abnormal. The Palestinian's would have long had their land back had they not taken this route. Israel's own people would not have standed for the treatment of their neighbors if they did not feel threatened by the civilian attacks.
If there is any doubt, take a look at what happened in Lebanon. Hezbollah concentrated on military targets, and this gave the political freedom for Israel's politicians to decide to withdrawl. As long as Palestinians continue to attack civilians, then their occupation will be endless. If there is any indication of this, the election of Hamas is only proof of this trend. Palestinian leaders are a joke and will continue to rape their people as much as the Israeli's do.

Palestinians have a long history of shooting themselves in their own foot.

Because some people fed up with occupation and resort to killing those people have colonized and settled their land with violence, by returning violence, this somehow lessens their right?

America did the exact same thing with the Native Americans, and look at what became of them. They would raze villages and then when the Indian chiefs warred against American settlements on their land in desperation, this was used as an excuse to exterminate entire tribes of Indians by the American military and its funded militias.

The Palestinian struggle is a revolution based on perserving the rights of freedom, justice, and honor of the native people of the Holy Land. The fact that the West supports this and infact warred against the sovereign Muslim nations of Afghanistan and Iraq, both on lies and deciet, is proof that the Western elite have not abandons their dreams of a world completely subjugated under their hands under the banner of 'false freedom' using state-terrorism and neo-imperialism to obtain their objectives.

History proves that when a nation gets too greedy, then it will fall by itself. We see the falling of American power in the world and understandable hostility from the Muslim masses over invasions and interference in politics of Muslim lands. America will fall because of its own greed, and this is how it will humiliate itself.

"Does Western free speech allow working on issues like America and Israel's crimes or an incident like the Holocaust or is this freedom of speech only good for insulting the holy values of divine religions?" the Iranian paper Hamshahri said.

If they wish to attack the Islamic Republic of Iran, then let them open Pandoras box in the Muslim world. Iran is three times the size of Iraq, with a population highly support and patriotic to their country. Iran, unlike many nations in the world, has the widespread honor and respect from its poor who revere their country. Iraq had understandable problems with Saddam's heavy rule (though the US is much worse) and diverse groups, but Iran is completely different. Invading Iran would also highly effect politics in Iraq and would trigger a Shiat rebellion against the US to a larger degree than what is happening now.

All I say to this is why didn't the world put sanctions on the following countries for the statements of their leaders. The double standards and hypocrisy of the West continue to suprise me. One more thing:

Ahmedi Nejad Zindabad!!!



We are being challenged by Islam these years – globally as well as locally. It is a challenge we have to take seriously… We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance." -- Queen Margrethe II (Danish Queen), April 15, 2005

We should be conscious of the superiority of our civilisation, which consists of a value system that has given people widespread prosperity in those countries that embrace it, and guarantees respect for human rights and religion ... This respect certainly does not exist in the Islamic countries … [the West would] continue to conquer peoples", [as it had] "already done with the Communist world, and the moderate Arab states."'Islam is inferior, says Berlusconi'
by Bruce Johnston 28 November 2001, The Daily Telegraph

Vladmir Putin, Russian Prime Minister:"Islamic Fundamentalism is a danger growing like virus. You are in danger. They speak about the necessity of killing all kafirs [nonbelievers], all non-Muslims, all 'cross-bearers,' as they call them. If you are a Christian, you are in danger. If you decide to become a Muslim, even this will not save you, because they consider traditional Islam to be hostile to their aims. Even in this case, you are in danger. If you want to become a complete Islamic radical and are ready to undergo circumcision, then I invite you to Moscow. We are a multidenominational country. We have specialists in this question [circumcision]. I will recommend that they carry out the operation in such a way so that afterwards, nothing else will grow.”' EU/Russia: Is European Silence On Putin Outburst Good Manners Or Good Politics?'By Jeremy Bransten, Russia Weekly, 14 November 2002

John Ashcroft, U.S Attorney General:"Islam is a religion in which God requires you to send your son to die for him. Christianity is a faith in which God sends his son to die for you"Los Angeles Time, February 16 2002

Originally posted by DiamondHearts:
Because some people fed up with occupation and resort to killing those people have colonized and settled their land with violence, by returning violence, this somehow lessens their right?

They are not returning violence against the soldiers, they are returning against an innocent population who for the most part wants peace. Whether fed up with occupation or not, there is no good reason to kill innocents.

The point I am trying to make is the fact that they would stand a considerably better chance of gaining back their land and ending the occupation if they would avoid bloodshed of civilians. The Israeli population would be less likely to support the occupation if the Palestinians took to peaceful resistance or at least kept to military targets.

The logical thought pattern is that if the Israelis were forced out through violent resistance, what would prevent the Palestinians from continuing the attack even after a withdrawl from occupied territories? The mindset becomes that you must continue the offensive to remain safe. A peaceful movement would alleviate any concerns and make it politically impossible to hold on to occupied territory.

My concern here is that the Palestinians seem willing to create child martyrs for the cause. If you do not believe this, take a look at gun fights between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian rebels. There are almost always children runnin around watching the fight. Would it be that hard to keep your children indoors during such situations? Would you let you child throw a rock at a soldier? The Palestinians and their leaders have a nack for shooting themselves in the foot.


America did the exact same thing with the Native Americans, and look at what became of them.

Actually, what the Americans did to the natives was far worse, it was true genocide. Israelis are no where near practicing genocide.


Indian chiefs warred against American settlements on their land in desperation, this was used as an excuse to exterminate entire tribes of Indians by the American military and its funded militias.

You only prove my point, it gave an excuse for the settlers to continue their onslaught. This situation differs, however, because the world spotlight is on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, while noone cared about the Native Americans. A peace movement would have done little good to such an aggressive invader.


America will fall because of its own greed, and this is how it will humiliate itself.

Whoa, Whoa, were getting a little off topic here. American bashing can be saved for later....


Does Western free speech allow working on issues like America and Israel's crimes or an incident like the Holocaust or is this freedom of speech only good for insulting the holy values of divine religions?" the Iranian paper Hamshahri said.

Now were on free speech. By the way, western free speech does report all about crimes against the Palestinians. I find it funny that the one of the lowest rated nations for freedom of the world would have any comment on the matter.


If they wish to attack the Islamic Republic of Iran, then let them open Pandoras box in the Muslim world. Iran is three times the size of Iraq, with a population highly support and patriotic to their country. Iran, unlike many nations in the world, has the widespread honor and respect from its poor who revere their country. Iraq had understandable problems with Saddam's heavy rule (though the US is much worse) and diverse groups, but Iran is completely different. Invading Iran would also highly effect politics in Iraq and would trigger a Shiat rebellion against the US to a larger degree than what is happening now.

Now we are on some speech about the invasion of Iran. REAL off topic here...

You have to answer these questions?

a) what have the Palestinians gained by attacking Israel's civilian population?

b) what could the Palestinians gain by a peace movement that would give them the obvious moral edge over their occupier?

The Palestinian resistance groups for the most part have targeted illegal settlements on their sovereign territory which is recognized by the UN as Palestinian land. Some groups have launched attacks in Israeli territory on major cities, but Israel kills scores of civilians as well.

The fact is that the conflict is a double-sided conflict but starts from the side of the Israeli government which in all means is better armed and militarily superior. Israeli forces raid and bomb attack Palestinian leaders and civilians quite often. We see this when we look at the murder of the late Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin who was bombed from an Israeli helicopter while he was leaving a mosque in his wheelchair from Friday prayer. This didn't only kill him, but scores of civilians. This is actually quite common and goes unreported in the Western media, but is reported extensively in the Middle East. However the West usually chastises the Palestinians, but never even expresses a little distrust of Israeli violence. Palestinian attacks are responses to agggression, and are defensive in nature. After 50 years of subjugation and genocide, what more do you expect from the Palestinians.

"Who is the innocent? Is the Jew who took my home, land, and expelled me from it by force, killed my children, wife, and parents, is he innocent? The important thing is to determine who is the aggressor, are we the ones that attack Israelis first or is it them? If you know that, the answer would be clear for you." - Shaikh Ahmad Yassin (rest in peace), 7th May 2003

Before the beginning of the intifada, the Palestinian people and Palestinian resistance was mainly peaceful and nonviolent. This had no effect on the consciences of the Israelis or the Western governments who held power at that time. When the Israeli destruction of the homeland of the Palestinians reached an unbearable degree that's when the intifada (uprising) started. The right should be already obvious for the freedom of the Palestinians over their homeland, which the Palestinians have negotiated for only the 1967 area which was their right according the the UN.

The occupier Israel is an illegal entity which has ruled Palestinian society and influenced the future of the Palestinians by uprooting trees, destroying wells, razing villages, denying refugees return, and pressuring the Palestinian people into servitude.

The Palestinian resistance groups for the most part have targeted illegal settlements on their sovereign territory which is recognized by the UN as Palestinian land. Some groups have launched attacks in Israeli territory on major cities, but Israel kills scores of civilians as well.

By accident, not intention. Palestian terrorists - and others - often avow that all Israelis are targets.


The fact is that the conflict is a double-sided conflict but starts from the side of the Israeli government which in all means is better armed and militarily superior. Israeli forces raid and bomb attack Palestinian leaders and civilians quite often. We see this when we look at the murder of the late Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin who was bombed from an Israeli helicopter while he was leaving a mosque in his wheelchair from Friday prayer. This didn't only kill him, but scores of civilians. This is actually quite common and goes unreported in the Western media, but is reported extensively in the Middle East. However the West usually chastises the Palestinians, but never even expresses a little distrust of Israeli violence. Palestinian attacks are responses to agggression, and are defensive in nature. After 50 years of subjugation and genocide, what more do you expect from the Palestinians.

But here we have the pot calling the kettle black. There was indeed a point - three in fact - when the surrounding nations were better armed than the Israelis: 1948, 1967, 1973. In each situation the armed forces of the Arab nations lost. I'd say that Israel's enemies have had more than their fair kick at the can militarily. Israel has been in the same position that Palestine is now, and her enemies didn't offer any quarter. Why should Israel do so now? I would have thought that self-defense, as an islamic religious concept, would have been a reasonable use of force in your eyes.

May Shaikh Ahmad Yassin indeed rest in hell, if there is one.


The right should be already obvious for the freedom of the Palestinians over their homeland, which the Palestinians have negotiated for only the 1967 area which was their right according the the UN.

The Israelis offered them in peace almost everything they had lost through their own desire for war, but the PLO refused it so that Arafat could collect more money.

And here you accused me of parroting propaganda...

Geoff

By accident, not intention. Palestian terrorists - and others - often avow that all Israelis are targets.

It's not accidental to bomb a leader while many civilians are leaving from a mosque killing many, many worshippers. Also Israeli snipers and security forces often torture and beat to death palestinian kids and women.



But here we have the pot calling the kettle black. There was indeed a point - three in fact - when the surrounding nations were better armed than the Israelis: 1948, 1967, 1973. In each situation the armed forces of the Arab nations lost. I'd say that Israel's enemies have had more than their fair kick at the can militarily. Israel has been in the same position that Palestine is now, and her enemies didn't offer any quarter. Why should Israel do so now? I would have thought that self-defense, as an islamic religious concept, would have been a reasonable use of force in your eyes.


Israel was funded completely from the West, and thus Israel won because of support in weapons and also pressure from Western nations. The Arab nations tried to reclaim stolen Arab land but politics and betrayal from Jordan ended in their defeat. Israel on its very foundation is based on occupation and genocide. Israel has given no repsite to the Palestinians and degrades them every day. From digging up the holiest Muslim graveyard in Jerusalem, to choking the economy of the Jordan Valley, to expanding illegal settlements into Palestinian land. The colonizers have no right to even one inch of historic Palestine, it belongs to the Palestinians.



May Shaikh Ahmad Yassin indeed rest in hell, if there is one.





The Israelis offered them in peace almost everything they had lost through their own desire for war, but the PLO refused it so that Arafat could collect more money.


Israel still continues to build illegal settlements, uproot Palestinian olive trees, take over Arab Jerusalem, kill Palestinian civilians, and interfere in Palestinian politics. Israel has used every opportunity to advance on Palestinian sovereignty.



And here you accused me of parroting propaganda...

Geoff

You are a bigger supporter of Zionism and Colonization than the Israelis themselves.

It's not accidental to bomb a leader while many civilians are leaving from a mosque killing many, many worshippers. Also Israeli snipers and security forces often torture and beat to death palestinian kids and women.

It's not accidental that a leader is constantly surrounded by people, either. I find the "beating" issue a little hard to swallow, though I don't doubt it's occurred sometimes.


Israel was funded completely from the West, and thus Israel won because of support in weapons and also pressure from Western nations...The colonizers have no right to even one inch of historic Palestine, it belongs to the Palestinians.

But the Jews and Palestinians are the same people, remember? And the Israelis were vastly outnumbered. Sounds like a fair fight to me. And Soviet diplomatic pressure suddenly counts for nothing?

If Arabs had treated the immigrating Jewish people as people and not tried to make them dhimmis, none of this would have happened. As always, some people couldn't look beyond their religion.

The rest of your post was basically propaganda.

Geoff

Originally posted by DiamondHearts:


We see this when we look at the murder of the late Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin who was bombed from an Israeli helicopter while he was leaving a mosque in his wheelchair from Friday prayer. This didn't only kill him, but scores of civilians. This is actually quite common and goes unreported in the Western media

In response to the civilians killed not being reported by western media, here was the CNN article on Yassin's death...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/03/21/yassin/


Seven others were killed in the strike, Palestinian officials said. Sixteen people were wounded in the attack, including two of Yassin's sons; seven of the wounded were in critical condition, hospital spokesmen said.

Here is a Cnn report reporting both Palestinian and Israeli civilian deaths..


-- A suicide bomber set off a powerful explosion that destroyed a suburban bus in the northern Israeli port city of Haifa on Wednesday, killing at least 15 Israelis and badly wounding at least 40, Israeli police said.


Hours later, Palestinian hospital officials said 11 Palestinians were killed and nearly 100 injured Thursday during an Israeli operation near the Jabaliya refugee camp.


Israeli forces have conducted an extensive campaign in Palestinian territories to root out terrorists, Israeli officials say. Palestinian Minister of Information Yasser Abed Rabbo said that campaign has killed 154 Palestinian civilians since the last suicide bombing.

"We condemn all attacks against civilians, including today's attack in Haifa," he said. "The attack will only serve to distract attention from the more than 150 Palestinian civilians killed by Israel over the last two months."

Western media reports Palestinian deaths in almost every article, including the total number, though I constantly here people claim otherwise. Many times bombings of civilians by Hamas or others would lead to bigger headlines because the immediate death total was more spectacular and easier to report.


Originally posted by DiamondHearts:
Some groups have launched attacks in Israeli territory on major cities, but Israel kills scores of civilians as well.

With some exceptions with rogue Israeli soldiers shooting innocents, most civilian casualties on the Palestinian side occur unintentionally when Israel strikes at militants. I see a vast difference between this and deliberately targeting civilians. All nations laws distinguish a difference, as well.


Palestinian attacks are responses to agggression, and are defensive in nature. After 50 years of subjugation and genocide, what more do you expect from the Palestinians.

As the vast majority of those occupied in nations before them, target military targets if you resist with violence. I think your accustation of genocide is ridiculous, considering around 4000 Palestinians have been killed. Opression, obviously yes, genocide obviously no. Jordan slaughtered thousands in Black Tuesday, more than Israel has killed in two intifadas. Was that genocide?Again, however, I will ask you these two questions because you seem unwilling to answer them...

a) what have the Palestinians gained by attacking Israel's civilian population?

b) what could the Palestinians gain by a peace movement that would give them the obvious moral edge over their occupier?

Once more, all surveys say the same thing about the Israeli people: They will give up settlements for a lasting peace. The only thing that allows Israeli politicians to keep taking land is the violence against Israeli civilians. If that stops, then the excuse will no longer be there.

Orginally posted by DiamondHearts:


Before the beginning of the intifada, the Palestinian people and Palestinian resistance was mainly peaceful and nonviolent.

I am not sure why you believe this. For instance, as far back as 1936, a group known as the Young Men's Muslim Association began to attack jewish farms and kill people of jewish decent, as well as resist the English. Between 1936-39, the "Great Arab Revolt" took place and thousands were killed.

One of the few things forgotten is that in 1949, while 750,000 Palestians fled, 600000 jews fled arab territory as refuges. The difference was is that the Israelis took their people in, while the arab counterparts treated Palestinians like second hand citizens. The arabs have abused Palestians as badly as the jews have.

More recently you have forgotton about the first intifada in 1987, not just the current one which began after the Camp David peace talks fell apart. Even as far back as the late 1800's, the Palestinians relied on violence to counteract the take over of their land. I say its time for a change. The Palestinians have gained nothing with violence so far. Take a look at where they are today. They need strong leadership, not bombs on buses.