To: zonder who wrote (50725 ) 10/10/2002 7:11:22 AM From: LindyBill Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500 found it rather sentimental and biased. I think I mentioned when I posted it that the language was strong. However, within the article was the information about the EAD that I was not familiar with. The thrust of this seems to be that Europe cut a deal with the Arabs after the 73 Oil boycott that resulted in good trade agreements and oil supplies for the Europeans in exchange for Europe lining up with the Arabs on the Israel/Palestine argument. The paragraph that struck me was this one. >>>> After the Yom Kippur War and the Arab oil blackmail in 1973, the then-European Community (EC) created a structure of Cooperation and Dialogue with the Arab League. The Euro-Arab Dialogue (EAD) began as a French initiative composed of representatives from the EC and Arab League countries. From the outset the EAD was considered as a vast transaction: The EC agreed to support the Arab anti-Israeli policy in exchange for wide commercial agreements. The EAD had a supplementary function: the shifting of Europe into the Arab-Islamic sphere of influence, thus breaking the traditional trans-Atlantic solidarity. The EAD operated at the highest political level, with foreign ministers on both sides, and the presidents of the EC ? later the European Union (EU) ? with the secretary general of the Arab League. The central body of the Dialogue, the General Commission, was responsible for planning its objectives in the political, cultural, social, economic, and technological domains; it met in private, without summary records, a common practice for European meetings.<<< This accord would explain the split I was ascribing to "Anti-Semitism" being stronger in Europe than America. I believe it is stronger, but this ongoing dialog that gives Europe trade preferences in exchange for going along with the Palestinian position in the ME makes more sense to me.