Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Massive swing in NY Jewish vote towards McCain

Massive swing in NY Jewish vote towards McCain (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 08:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Sounds like World War III to me.

Pretty much the ultimate fail as far as safety is concerned.
How so? Which nations would back Israel, when Israel would attack the US military?

"Learn to swim"
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 09:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
How so? Which nations would back Israel, when Israel would attack the US military?

I see it as more likely that we would be the ones attacking them, unless you can propose some means whereby we could insure the more radical Palestinians don't take our changing of sides to mean it's open season on Israel.

We could do that by subjugating the Palestinians, but I would imagine you'd find that distasteful.

The only other option is for us to accept that our changing of sides would mean that we go along with the consequences of the more radical elements we have decided to protect the interests of, and therefore accept they have the capability (and desire) to commit acts of war against Israel. Once this happens, we will have de facto declared war.

At some point, after numerous attacks that are sanctioned by us, they're going to give the the ultimatum that we lay-off, or they'll go glass tabletop on most of the world's oil.

They'll mean it too. I'm sure you've noticed they've set a precedent for not ****ing around.

So, the answer to your question is, considering that we'd be the aggressors, pretty much all of them.
     
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 09:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I see it as more likely that we would be the ones attacking them, unless you can propose some means whereby we could insure the more radical Palestinians don't take our changing of sides to mean it's open season on Israel.
Simple. Close the border between Palestine and Israel to begin with while opening the borders between Palestine and its other neighbors. That way the Arab countries would have to share the responsibility of (re)building Palestine.
We could do that by subjugating the Palestinians, but I would imagine you'd find that distasteful.
That would probably be a step up from the current state. And if it would be done temporarily with a guaranteed independence based on the '69 borders a year or two down the line I'd be fine with it.
The only other option is for us to accept that our changing of sides would mean that we go along with the consequences of the more radical elements we have decided to protect the interests of, and therefore accept they have the capability (and desire) to commit acts of war against Israel. Once this happens, we will have de facto declared war.
Not at all. There'd always be factions on both sides trying to prevent a fair solution on this. But with closed borders between the two countries, but opened borders with the other neighbors you could minimize this enough to make the support for the extremists on both sides disappear with time.
At some point, after numerous attacks that are sanctioned by us, they're going to give the the ultimatum that we lay-off, or they'll go glass tabletop on most of the world's oil.

They'll mean it too. I'm sure you've noticed they've set a precedent for not ****ing around.

So, the answer to your question is, considering that we'd be the aggressors, pretty much all of them.
If Israel would use its nukes on the Arab nations (or any other nation)I can assure you that no nation would back them. That you get the idea that anyone would support them after that just shows how distorted the reality is in the US.

"Learn to swim"
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Wow, you really think highly of yourself don't you?

No one is always correct. Learn some humility will you.
From time to time, I make errors. I admit them, openly and honestly, and correct myself. My word is as always, honest and correct.

Got anything to back that up?
http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief3-25.htm

Israel wasn't losing sleep over the Iraqi threat, and had to ramp up huge defense expenditures as a response to the US invasion that it wouldn't have otherwise had to incur. So, the status quo would have been easier for Israel. Sharon told Bush this privately, and Danny Ya'alon, the Israeli ambassador also spoke of this.
If your prime objective is the safety of American citizens a quick and proper solution to the Palestinian Question is your best bet. Anything else is not thinking of American citizens first and foremost.

You mean I don't subscribe to what you think it means or that I don't subscribe to what they say it means? There's quite a difference between the two.

Wow, that's a stretch. Could you provide something other than blog as to examples of her supporting (your version) of Walt-Mearshimer.

And to be honest, you are actually proving her point.
What, that there's a Jewish lobby running American policy? Nonsense. The editorial (not a blog post) links to the proper interview. If you can't read things in commentary and then in original context when I've provided sources, you're not going to be convinced to come out of denial by any source on this earth.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 09:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
That would probably be a step up from the current state. And if it would be done temporarily with a guaranteed independence based on the '69 borders a year or two down the line I'd be fine with it.
(a) surrounding arab nations have always had an interest in keeping people who identify as Palestinians oppressed. Changing that would be interesting, and nigh-sisyphian.

(b) What are these '69 borders you speak of? That isn't a term in common use. If I recall, '69 was the year that Arafat launched Black September to take over Jordan for a Palestinian nation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan - "The PLO, reneging on this agreement, acted as a state within a state in Jordan. Between mid-1968 and the end of 1969, no fewer than five hundred violent clashes occurred between the Palestinian guerrillas and Jordanian security forces."
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 10:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Simple. Close the border...

A mortar knows no borders.


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
the '69 borders a year or two down the line I'd be fine with it.

Can you hook me up with a map? I've got '67 borders, and I've got '73 borders, no '69


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
but opened borders with the other neighbors

Open borders with neighbors?

This probably reflects well on you, but you don't really understand the finer points of subjugation, do you.


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
If Israel would use its nukes on the Arab nations (or any other nation)I can assure you that no nation would back them. That you get the idea that anyone would support them after that just shows how distorted the reality is in the US.

My scenario is a little more nuanced than that.

However, the above argument is based on the US being sympathetic to the more radical Palestinian elements, I'll accept that this can be avoided by subjugation, but I'd really like to hear how you could make that one fly.
     
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief3-25.htm

Israel wasn't losing sleep over the Iraqi threat, and had to ramp up huge defense expenditures as a response to the US invasion that it wouldn't have otherwise had to incur. So, the status quo would have been easier for Israel. Sharon told Bush this privately, and Danny Ya'alon, the Israeli ambassador also spoke of this.
Defense expenditures basically payed for by US tax-payers? Oh, I'm sure that hurt a lot.

Why was the Israeli opposition to the war only privately between heads of state?
What, that there's a Jewish lobby running American policy? Nonsense. The editorial (not a blog post) links to the proper interview. If you can't read things in commentary and then in original context when I've provided sources, you're not going to be convinced to come out of denial by any source on this earth.
I only read the original parts of the interview posted in that blog. I try as much as I can not to read commentaries of blogs.

I saw nothing there that supports the view that she is supports your opinion of what W-M mean.

But here's a question for you (since you are so honest). How much influence do you think the Jewish lobby has on US foreign policy?

"Learn to swim"
     
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
(a) surrounding arab nations have always had an interest in keeping people who identify as Palestinians oppressed. Changing that would be interesting, and nigh-sisyphian.
Besides the usual "identify as" idiocity from you I agree. The Arab nations have played their part in keeping the Palestinians oppressed. But probably for other reasons than you think.

Making them partly responsible for creating a prosperous Palestine would force them to stop playing the victims here and to start playing a pro-active role.
(b) What are these '69 borders you speak of? That isn't a term in common use. If I recall, '69 was the year that Arafat launched Black September to take over Jordan for a Palestinian nation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan - "The PLO, reneging on this agreement, acted as a state within a state in Jordan. Between mid-1968 and the end of 1969, no fewer than five hundred violent clashes occurred between the Palestinian guerrillas and Jordanian security forces."
I have no idea. I meant the '67 borders.

"Learn to swim"
     
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 10:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
A mortar knows no borders.
Correct. And that's a problem that would have to be dealt with appropriately (for example not bulldoze the whole street from where the rocket was launched for starters).
Can you hook me up with a map? I've got '67 borders, and I've got '73 borders, no '69
Probably not. I meant the '67 borders. God knows why I had 69 on my mind....
Open borders with neighbors?
Yes, you see a problem with that?
This probably reflects well on you, but you don't really understand the finer points of subjugation, do you.
Oh, I probably understand it better than you.
My scenario is a little more nuanced than that.
Elaborate please.
However, the above argument is based on the US being sympathetic to the more radical Palestinian elements, I'll accept that this can be avoided by subjugation, but I'd really like to hear how you could make that one fly.
Why should the US be sympathetic to the extremist Palestinians? Who said that would happen?

Or do you think support for Palestinians = support for terrorism?

"Learn to swim"
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2008, 06:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Correct. And that's a problem that would have to be dealt with appropriately (for example not bulldoze the whole street from where the rocket was launched for starters).

Unless our goal was to start a war with Israel, the only acceptable response to this scenario would be to find and execute the perpetrator(s).

Unless of course we couldn't find them, which would mean we'd have to execute someone else.

I'd personally take the bulldozers, but suit yourself.


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Yes, you see a problem with that?

If I'm charged with protecting Palestine's interests? Abso-frigging-lutely.

There are far too many people who would (literally) kill themselves for the opportunity to sell the Palestinians down the river if it meant they could take a shot at Israel.

That's my overall point that you seem to be missing. If we are to protect Palestine's interests and avoid a war with Israel, considering the high stakes involved the only safe course of action for both of our sakes would be a total lockdown.


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Why should the US be sympathetic to the extremist Palestinians? Who said that would happen?

As I explain above, this wouldn't be necessary if you don't have a problem with the total lockdown, and the other extraordinary measures we would have to take to insure the peace.

If we weren't to take those measures to the letter, the result would be a war with Israel.

If the US going to war with Israel isn't something Palestinian extremists would sympathize with, I don't know what is.


Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Or do you think support for Palestinians = support for terrorism?

If we are charged with protecting the interests of the Palestinians, we get a package deal. We can't disown the small looney-tune minority, nor can we ignore the non-Palestinians who would take advantage.
( Last edited by subego; Sep 23, 2008 at 07:14 PM. )
     
Ratm
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 02:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kerrigan View Post
While Obama is out trying (not unsuccessfully) to start the "race war" his supporters are clamoring for, an interesting shift has occurred. In the past month, a thirty five percent swing has occurred among New York voters who are Jewish, to the point where McCain leads 55% to 32%.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/bl...odhoretz/31061

What is it about Obama that is driving this traditionally Democrat-voting demographic to the Republican candidate?

And furthermore, what is it that is turning traditional true-blue states like NY and NJ into near toss-ups for McCain? It is unfathomable to think that a state like NY is within five points of the Republican candidate's reach.

Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup. I say ****'em. The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 02:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Or do you think support for Palestinians = support for terrorism?
The question wasn't addressed to me, but I'll answer and say yes: support for so-called "Palestinians" currently occupying the Jewish land West of the Jordan River is support for terrorism. It is support of the PA and/or Hamas, both of which revel in Jewish blood. It is support for historical revisionism that seeks to erase the 4,000+ years of Jewish history in Eretz Yisrael. It is support for those who wish to destroy the one Jewish country on the planet.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:06 AM
 
One of my friends who is a Democrat received an email a few days ago telling her about an organization of young Jewish Obama supporters who are going to go to Florida to convince retiree Jews to vote for Obama.

http://thegreatschlep.com/site/index.html

The email basically charged older Jews with being largely afraid of black men, and to a lesser extent being afraid of what Obama would do with Iran and how it would affect Israel.

The former is a pretty disgusting charge, the latter is completely legitimate.

The campaign for this organization is essentially the same as the DisneyLand advertisements: "Kids, go ask your parents to take you to Disney!" only it's "Kids, go ask your Grandparents to vote for who you tell them! And tell them it's our guy!"

What this tells us is that (A) Floridian Jews may be McCain supporters and (B) that prospect has Obama supporters so scared that they're willing to call their own grandparents racists in the process of trying to sway their vote.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:28 AM
 
Yeah, that's obscene. I also saw on the news that BHO is handing out buttons in Florida with the name Barack Obama transliterated in Hebrew (which is similar to BHO telling Jewish audiences his Jewish name is Baruch). One can't pander much more than that.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup.
That opinion of yours is ignorant, racist, and xenophobic. The Jews care about pretty much every other people on the planet. When a Tsunami strikes and Sri Lanka says that they'd rather not accept aid from Israel because they don't want the Jews coming, when a typhoon batters Bangladesh and the same thing happens? Israelis go and provide anyway. Why? Because it's the right thing to do, to help people in need. The total population globally could have been 18-24 million or greater, but instead it's 12 million. Get rid of Israel and it will go to about 6 million.
Originally Posted by Ratm
I say ****'em.
That's so progressive of you. That's so open-minded. Liberal.
The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
(A) only when the US is ready to pull support for all of its allies, break treaties, and cancel foreign aid to everywhere else, including Egypt, the PA, etc. and (B) Israel had a plan to get off US aid. Netanyahu authored it, and it stressed economic self-reliance. Reality is, you can't enact policies when you aren't in office any longer.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Yeah, that's obscene. I also saw on the news that BHO is handing out buttons in Florida with the name Barack Obama transliterated in Hebrew (which is similar to BHO telling Jewish audiences his Jewish name is Baruch). One can't pander much more than that.
The transliterated campaign buttons and stickers doesn't bother me at all. Usually, though, they're made by supporters without the support of the campaign, rather than official from the campaign, which makes the Obama material a little different.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:42 AM
 
Wow, that's a grossly inaccurate reading. My Jewish wife and in-laws thought it was funny.
And by the way, calling your own relatives a little bit racist is okay if they are
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 08:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Mithras View Post
Wow, that's a grossly inaccurate reading. My Jewish wife and in-laws thought it was funny.
And by the way, calling your own relatives a little bit racist is okay if they are
It's Sarah Silverman in the video on that page, so of course it's going to be funny to some. I don't claim a monopoly on determining 'funny.'

Calling your relatives racist because they happen to have legitimate concerns that lead them to vote differently than you, is not even a little bit okay. Of course, I don't know your relatives, you don't know mine, and Sarah Silverman or Ari Wallach (guy behind the site) doesn't know either of ours.

They've just made the presumption that older Jewish relatives in Florida are racist. That's definitely not right.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 09:38 AM
 
Whatever. Obviously the video trades in types. Most humor does.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 12:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
That opinion of yours is ignorant, racist, and xenophobic.
Wow, somehow I completely missed that post of Ratm's. I don't think I saw it before posting mine. That's one outrageously hateful post.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Kerrigan  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 02:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup. I say ****'em. The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
Are you supposed to be a liberal?

A got endless flack years ago on here for saying that the whole Islamic world was "undeveloped," speaking in factual terms of economics and human rights. Of course, liberals attacked me left and right saying that I was generalizing from an unrepresentative sample, making hateful characterizations of Muslims' ability to function as economic agents, and so forth. And this little gem about Jews is greeted by liberals as "funny" and innocuous?
     
Sayf-Allah
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 03:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup. I say ****'em. The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
Completely uncalled for.

"Learn to swim"
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
Completely uncalled for.
I give you a lot of credit for that response.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 04:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup. I say ****'em. The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
Wow. Just wow.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 04:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kerrigan View Post
Are you supposed to be a liberal?

A got endless flack years ago on here for saying that the whole Islamic world was "undeveloped," speaking in factual terms of economics and human rights. Of course, liberals attacked me left and right saying that I was generalizing from an unrepresentative sample, making hateful characterizations of Muslims' ability to function as economic agents, and so forth. And this little gem about Jews is greeted by liberals as "funny" and innocuous?
Who said his post was funny and innocuous? If someone did, it's been removed. Unless I've missed something, I hope you have the integrity to retract that.

Ratm's hateful post is NOT representative of the liberal point of view on this board.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2008, 09:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Ratm View Post
Who gives a ****! The total population globally is about 12 million. That's a drop in the bucket. The jews are a group of ignorant, racist, xenophobes. They care only for themselves and place everyone else in a subgroup. I say ****'em. The US should pull support for Israel immediately and also any welfare the US provides them.
Mr. Pot, please let me introduce you to Mr. Kettle. Mr. Kettle, Mr. Pot. By specifically and explicitly grouping "the jews" and then attributing negatives such as ignorance, racism, and xenophobia to that group, you have instead revealed these traits in yourself.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2008, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kerrigan View Post
And this little gem about Jews is greeted by liberals as "funny" and innocuous?

No one did this.

There is more than one conversation going on and you have conflated them.
( Last edited by subego; Sep 29, 2008 at 01:28 PM. )
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 09:45 PM
 
I don't know about Jewish New Yorkers, but this says something different. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1031176.html
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:59 PM
 
That's Haaretz, who are left wing. So left wing, that the editor of Haaretz begged Secretary of State Rice to have the US "rape Israel."

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1416

Kindly take that into consideration when you look at the things they print.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 11:01 PM
 
Maybe he should have just linked directly to Gallup instead? Or are they also "left wing"?

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2008, 01:27 AM
 
Umm, yeah, kindly take into consideration whether that news had anything to do with Haaretz at all, much less "raping Israel". As Eric much more gently pointed out, it was just a reprint of a Gallup poll.

Or to put it right here, lest anyone have to touch any ooky lefty newspapers on the way:

     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2008, 06:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
That's Haaretz, who are left wing. So left wing, that the editor of Haaretz begged Secretary of State Rice to have the US "rape Israel."

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1416

Kindly take that into consideration when you look at the things they print.
Haaretz was merely the messenger. It was a Gallup poll. Nice try, though.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:14 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,