Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (188737)	5/18/2004 12:12:38 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1585942

you talk as if you would do something differently. Tell me, what would that be? I would realize much sooner than those dummies that I am in a situation that is not tenable forever and would sit at the table and draw borders right now, while I still have the upper hand - i.e. the world's only superpower backing me whatever I do because it is run primarily by fundamental Christians to whom the second coming of Christ depends on Jews keeping that land and building some temple on it. I think some Israelis are beginning to realize they may not have the upper hand forever. Your post was well said.......when you keep people caged up long term, the results can be disastrous esp. for the zoo keeper. The Israelis are putting themselves in serious danger. ted

To: zonder who wrote (188737)	5/18/2004 12:20:06 PM
From: E. T.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1585942

"would that be racism?" No. "It is not "confusing" either" I find it confusing. "That statement is a logical fallacy" Fine, I'm a logical fallacist. "Would you pack up and leave back for Europe if the decendants of all those native Americans your ancestors killed or drove away were to come back and claim your cities?" No. Accomodation with Israel must be reached or there won't be peace, just as natives in NA continue vying for reparations, through courts, dialogue and not violence. Look, all I'm saying is that the PA and Israel have to create a framework (again) to sit down and talk and agree to not use military power and terrorism. At the end of the day won't the talks begin again where they left off in 2000. What has the use of terror gained the PA since 2000? Has it helped them, has the individual palestinian's situation improved? How will more terror further the PAs aims. To me, the PAs efforts lately signal an unwillingness to search out a way for the two peoples to live peacably with each other. "Draw the borders. Say, "that's your country, this is mine"." No different from where we were at in 2000. But great, let's go back there. "Tell my people that we are not hostile occupiers, our noble history shows we are people of culture and human compassion. That it has always been OTHERS who oppressed us" As part of Oslo was a commitment from both sides to publicly begin revealing historical events of the 40s and 50s accurately, which Israel began doing in its public television programming, admitting to having expelled many arabs. ... admitting for the most part that many Arab claims were legitimate. The PA never made such an effort to publicly disclose some of its equally distorted view of events. Coupled with disclosing certain historical events was the promise to tone the hate rhetoric, again something the PA never blunted. But that's in the past. Let's start again.