To: Hawkmoon who wrote (187418 ) 5/25/2006 10:24:21 PM From: neolib Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 281500 The minute Israel ceases to uphold democratic values, they are no different than the rest of the countries in the region. They are currently no more democratic than the white Rhodesians were or the white South Africans. You might recall that for a brief period of time just before South Africa got majority rule, they tried to split off a number of black homelands as quasi independent states (like Swaziland and Lesotho already were), to allow black rule in those regions, while keeping the matrix of the country under white rule. The world response was not supportive. This is the same tactic that Israel is following, but with generally better world support. Israel has control over millions of Arabs, but neither grants them citizenship, nor gives them their land back. Israeli politicians, and indeed the American press make no excuses for the fact that Israel MUST be an ethnic state IN ORDER for it to be a democratic state. That says it all. You might also recall that the blacks in South Africa were terrorists. Yet they had tacit western support. I don't recall people like you saying "the terror must stop before we can negotiate" in Southern Africa. Or did you? BTW, just like in South Africa, Israel is trying to keep the best parts of the country for themselves. I've often wondered in the white South Africans had been a tad less greedy, they might have carved out a sustainable white tribe homeland, but they liked all the nice farmland, and all the gold mines, and ... I see the same thing in Israel. They will keep all of Jerusalem, and most of the nice farmland and water. Greed is not good when you have a demographic problem. Could you explain to me what the different is between the Dutch Afrikaner culture of South Africa, and Jewish culture in terms of why one deserves an ethnic state, but not the other?