No party affiliation
Posts: 1,968 
Location: Oshawa
Location: Oshawa
April 21st, 2008, 12:29 PM
They know little about him, but who cares?
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
The more things change, say the French, the more they remain the same. But France of 2008 is no longer the distant 1950s France of my youth. I admit nostalgia.
In those days, most French refused to speak English, a process they found undignified and painful. Today, the new globalized generation loves English. France is becoming bilingual. Even France's entry into the Eurosong competition is -- mon dieu! -- in English.
Paris taxi drivers, who once sought to install plates in their rear seats to electrocute passengers, have become shockingly polite. Retailers and waiters actually seem pleased to see you. The French have discovered a new happy pill.
Wine and bread consumption, once staples of French life, are way down. French are drinking less but better wines. Oppressed French can't smoke in bars and restaurants any more. Youth live on junk food. The wonderful old smoky, black and white France of my youth, with her riots, Edith Piaf and Yves Montand, army plots, silly Left Bank intellectuals, and weird little Panhard and Simca cars has vanished.
Europeans are fascinated by the U.S. presidential race. During two weeks of TV and radio broadcasting, the No. 1 question I was asked is who will win the U.S. primaries and November vote.
LANDSLIDE
If all non-Americans had a vote -- I've always favoured a one-tenth vote for non-Americans -- then Barack Obama would win in a landslide. Like North Americans, most Europeans really don't know much about the experience-light senator, but what they see, they like beaucoup. You can feel a passion here for Obama that is quite remarkable.
He is, of course, the non-Bush. But so is Hillary Clinton, yet she inspires surprisingly little support even though hubby Bill, for reasons that elude me, was widely admired abroad. Hillary is regarded simply as an avatar of the Clinton political machine which, however formidable, is seen as empty of substance, and dedicated only to power and money.
The three Americans most respected internationally are Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. They are seen as representing America's best qualities. They are also a potent antidote to the rednecks, holy rollers, and totalitarian neocon ideologues who hijacked the Republican Party -- my life-long party -- and blackened America's name around the globe.
Obama is widely seen abroad as the candidate who can end the shameful Bush era and return America to a moderate, productive role in world affairs. He is expected to end the Iraq war and Bush's militarized foreign policy, and reintegrate the United States into the company of law-abiding, environmentally conscious nations, of which the European Union is now the leader.
Obama comes across to Europeans as dignified, decent, eloquent, and truthful -- qualities notably lacking in Bush and Dick Cheney who often represent some of America's cruder instincts and synthetic patriotism. Much of the world would hail and admire America for electing a man of colour, but even more so, one who appears to capture so much of what is great and admirable about the United States.
There are fears here the bitter Clinton-Obama contest may ruin both candidates, leading to four more years of Bush under John McCain.
TOUGHEN UP
But it may also benefit Obama. He needs to toughen up before facing the ferocious Republican attack machine that sunk war veteran John Kerry's campaign under a torrent of "swiftboat" lies. McCain is a gentleman, but not so Carl Rove's character assassins in waiting.
Obama could sharply improve America's highly negative image as a determined enemy of the Muslim world. Not because his father was Muslim, but because of his image of fairness and sensible foreign policy proposals calling for open dialogue instead of confrontation.
If Americans want to lower the terrorism threat against their nation, electing Obama is a good way to start.
It's distressing listening to the rich McCain and Clintons label Obama an "elitist" because he is intelligent, articulate, and poised. Next, they will brand him, "too French."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Colum...f-5337251.html
They know little about him, but who cares?
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
The more things change, say the French, the more they remain the same. But France of 2008 is no longer the distant 1950s France of my youth. I admit nostalgia.
In those days, most French refused to speak English, a process they found undignified and painful. Today, the new globalized generation loves English. France is becoming bilingual. Even France's entry into the Eurosong competition is -- mon dieu! -- in English.
Paris taxi drivers, who once sought to install plates in their rear seats to electrocute passengers, have become shockingly polite. Retailers and waiters actually seem pleased to see you. The French have discovered a new happy pill.
Wine and bread consumption, once staples of French life, are way down. French are drinking less but better wines. Oppressed French can't smoke in bars and restaurants any more. Youth live on junk food. The wonderful old smoky, black and white France of my youth, with her riots, Edith Piaf and Yves Montand, army plots, silly Left Bank intellectuals, and weird little Panhard and Simca cars has vanished.
Europeans are fascinated by the U.S. presidential race. During two weeks of TV and radio broadcasting, the No. 1 question I was asked is who will win the U.S. primaries and November vote.
LANDSLIDE
If all non-Americans had a vote -- I've always favoured a one-tenth vote for non-Americans -- then Barack Obama would win in a landslide. Like North Americans, most Europeans really don't know much about the experience-light senator, but what they see, they like beaucoup. You can feel a passion here for Obama that is quite remarkable.
He is, of course, the non-Bush. But so is Hillary Clinton, yet she inspires surprisingly little support even though hubby Bill, for reasons that elude me, was widely admired abroad. Hillary is regarded simply as an avatar of the Clinton political machine which, however formidable, is seen as empty of substance, and dedicated only to power and money.
The three Americans most respected internationally are Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. They are seen as representing America's best qualities. They are also a potent antidote to the rednecks, holy rollers, and totalitarian neocon ideologues who hijacked the Republican Party -- my life-long party -- and blackened America's name around the globe.
Obama is widely seen abroad as the candidate who can end the shameful Bush era and return America to a moderate, productive role in world affairs. He is expected to end the Iraq war and Bush's militarized foreign policy, and reintegrate the United States into the company of law-abiding, environmentally conscious nations, of which the European Union is now the leader.
Obama comes across to Europeans as dignified, decent, eloquent, and truthful -- qualities notably lacking in Bush and Dick Cheney who often represent some of America's cruder instincts and synthetic patriotism. Much of the world would hail and admire America for electing a man of colour, but even more so, one who appears to capture so much of what is great and admirable about the United States.
There are fears here the bitter Clinton-Obama contest may ruin both candidates, leading to four more years of Bush under John McCain.
TOUGHEN UP
But it may also benefit Obama. He needs to toughen up before facing the ferocious Republican attack machine that sunk war veteran John Kerry's campaign under a torrent of "swiftboat" lies. McCain is a gentleman, but not so Carl Rove's character assassins in waiting.
Obama could sharply improve America's highly negative image as a determined enemy of the Muslim world. Not because his father was Muslim, but because of his image of fairness and sensible foreign policy proposals calling for open dialogue instead of confrontation.
If Americans want to lower the terrorism threat against their nation, electing Obama is a good way to start.
It's distressing listening to the rich McCain and Clintons label Obama an "elitist" because he is intelligent, articulate, and poised. Next, they will brand him, "too French."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Colum...f-5337251.html
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,587
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
April 21st, 2008, 01:44 PM
Interesting article, good common sense, and yes, Obama is a bright promise for change
in foreign affairs, and the beginning of a new and better connection with the rest of
the world.
Quoting Avro
They know little about him, but who cares?
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
is regarded simply as an avatar of the Clinton political machine which, however formidable, is seen as empty of substance, and dedicated only to power and money.
The three Americans most respected internationally are Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. They are seen as representing America's best qualities. They are also a potent antidote to the rednecks, holy rollers, and totalitarian neocon ideologues who hijacked the Republican Party -- my life-long party -- and blackened America's name around the globe.
Obama is widely seen abroad as the candidate who can end the shameful Bush era and return America to a moderate, productive role in world affairs. He is expected to end the Iraq war and Bush's militarized foreign policy, and reintegrate the United States into the company of law-abiding, environmentally conscious nations, of which the European Union is now the leader.
Obama comes across to Europeans as dignified, decent, eloquent, and truthful -- qualities notably lacking in Bush and Dick Cheney who often represent some of America's cruder instincts and synthetic patriotism. Much of the world would hail and admire America for electing a man of colour, but even more so, one who appears to capture so much of what is great and admirable about the United States.
There are fears here the bitter Clinton-Obama contest may ruin both candidates, leading to four more years of Bush under John McCain.
TOUGHEN UP
But it may also benefit Obama. He needs to toughen up before facing the ferocious Republican attack machine that sunk war veteran John Kerry's campaign under a torrent of "swiftboat" lies. McCain is a gentleman, but not so Carl Rove's character assassins in waiting.
Obama could sharply improve America's highly negative image as a determined enemy of the Muslim world. Not because his father was Muslim, but because of his image of fairness and sensible foreign policy proposals calling for open dialogue instead of confrontation.
If Americans want to lower the terrorism threat against their nation, electing Obama is a good way to start.
It's distressing listening to the rich McCain and Clintons label Obama an "elitist" because he is intelligent, articulate, and poised. Next, they will brand him, "too French."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Colum...f-5337251.html
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
is regarded simply as an avatar of the Clinton political machine which, however formidable, is seen as empty of substance, and dedicated only to power and money. The three Americans most respected internationally are Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. They are seen as representing America's best qualities. They are also a potent antidote to the rednecks, holy rollers, and totalitarian neocon ideologues who hijacked the Republican Party -- my life-long party -- and blackened America's name around the globe.
Obama is widely seen abroad as the candidate who can end the shameful Bush era and return America to a moderate, productive role in world affairs. He is expected to end the Iraq war and Bush's militarized foreign policy, and reintegrate the United States into the company of law-abiding, environmentally conscious nations, of which the European Union is now the leader.
Obama comes across to Europeans as dignified, decent, eloquent, and truthful -- qualities notably lacking in Bush and Dick Cheney who often represent some of America's cruder instincts and synthetic patriotism. Much of the world would hail and admire America for electing a man of colour, but even more so, one who appears to capture so much of what is great and admirable about the United States.
There are fears here the bitter Clinton-Obama contest may ruin both candidates, leading to four more years of Bush under John McCain.
TOUGHEN UP
But it may also benefit Obama. He needs to toughen up before facing the ferocious Republican attack machine that sunk war veteran John Kerry's campaign under a torrent of "swiftboat" lies. McCain is a gentleman, but not so Carl Rove's character assassins in waiting.
Obama could sharply improve America's highly negative image as a determined enemy of the Muslim world. Not because his father was Muslim, but because of his image of fairness and sensible foreign policy proposals calling for open dialogue instead of confrontation.
If Americans want to lower the terrorism threat against their nation, electing Obama is a good way to start.
It's distressing listening to the rich McCain and Clintons label Obama an "elitist" because he is intelligent, articulate, and poised. Next, they will brand him, "too French."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Colum...f-5337251.html
Interesting article, good common sense, and yes, Obama is a bright promise for change
in foreign affairs, and the beginning of a new and better connection with the rest of
the world.
House Member
Posts: 3,323
April 21st, 2008, 01:56 PM
Side note:
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
Side note:
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,224
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
April 21st, 2008, 02:23 PM
Oh well.
Quoting talloola
Until someone assasinates him and replace him with another Nixon or Bush and then we all go back to the way things were/are.
Interesting article, good common sense, and yes, Obama is a bright promise for change
in foreign affairs, and the beginning of a new and better connection with the rest of
the world.
in foreign affairs, and the beginning of a new and better connection with the rest of
the world.
Oh well.
Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,224
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
April 21st, 2008, 02:26 PM
Right now it's either Bush's way, or the Highway of invasion. Either confirm to a culture and government that the US can get profit and deals from, or face invasion or blockade.
Perhaps someone with a better understanding of their backgrounds/cultures might be able to make some decent deals for both sides which also do not conflict with both sides's cultural beliefs and interests.
I know.... that's a stretch.
Quoting Zzarchov
Possible... or perhaps that he'd be the leader of one of the bigger countries out there and that he has some actual background in their culture, they might see that as a possitive sign that talks might work withouth conflicting ideals that neither understand of the other.
Side note:
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
Right now it's either Bush's way, or the Highway of invasion. Either confirm to a culture and government that the US can get profit and deals from, or face invasion or blockade.
Perhaps someone with a better understanding of their backgrounds/cultures might be able to make some decent deals for both sides which also do not conflict with both sides's cultural beliefs and interests.
I know.... that's a stretch.
House Member
Posts: 3,323
April 21st, 2008, 02:37 PM
Still, knowing the culture won't exactly be helpful if they won't talk to you. It would be like an openly satanist president trying to work with the pope to help with the aids endemic in Africa...not gonna happen.
Converting away from Islam is an incredibley blasphemous sin in the muslim culture, even in relatively secular areas.
Still, knowing the culture won't exactly be helpful if they won't talk to you. It would be like an openly satanist president trying to work with the pope to help with the aids endemic in Africa...not gonna happen.
Converting away from Islam is an incredibley blasphemous sin in the muslim culture, even in relatively secular areas.
Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,224
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
April 21st, 2008, 03:03 PM
Before, we were told that Hamas didn't want peace with Israel and that they wanted to destroy them and wipe them off the planet, etc. etc. ~ Yet with Cater actually talking to them directly, it would seem as though they're actually willing to talk and that they would like to see a resolution in some manner or another. But if you listen directly to what the US and Israel claim, they're blaitent terrorists who can not be reasoned with and thus, the blockades, the air strikes, incursions, etc. are all nessicary to teach them a lesson.
Clearly they're not learning anything as they are still attacking, the air strikes and blockades are not deterring them and if all they are going to see thrown at them are attacks, then attacks is what they will dish back.... and so on and so forth.
Talking and relations are the first step to gaining any understanding. If you want to keep killing and blowing one another up, just don't talk to one another and keep blowing each other up.
Whether or not they think him converting out of their religion is a very bad thing or not, he doesn't live in their countries with their beliefs and he doesn't have to abide by their rules, just as much as we shouldn't expect them and their culture to abide to our rules and way of life. Until the moment both cultures stop trying to shove our cultures into each other's faces and claiming to be the right way, things will never change.
Tit for Tat... who started what?
Irrelevent who started it all, current issues and way of our lives are the problem, and no matter who's ego will be hurt or who finally admits the wrong, if there is an obvious solution to our current problems, then shouldn't it be taken?
Then again, one also has to look seriously into what you said here:
"he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East."
Seriously compare the two:
One guy renounced his faith of their religion.....
One guy declaired war on their religion.....
who do you think they would be more willing to talk to?
Neither?
I guess time will obviously tell if the elections are in his favor.
Quoting Zzarchov
Well it all depends on if you want the two sides to come to some mutual agreement which benifits both sides, or obliterate one another.
Still, knowing the culture won't exactly be helpful if they won't talk to you. It would be like an openly satanist president trying to work with the pope to help with the aids endemic in Africa...not gonna happen.
Converting away from Islam is an incredibley blasphemous sin in the muslim culture, even in relatively secular areas.
Converting away from Islam is an incredibley blasphemous sin in the muslim culture, even in relatively secular areas.
Before, we were told that Hamas didn't want peace with Israel and that they wanted to destroy them and wipe them off the planet, etc. etc. ~ Yet with Cater actually talking to them directly, it would seem as though they're actually willing to talk and that they would like to see a resolution in some manner or another. But if you listen directly to what the US and Israel claim, they're blaitent terrorists who can not be reasoned with and thus, the blockades, the air strikes, incursions, etc. are all nessicary to teach them a lesson.
Clearly they're not learning anything as they are still attacking, the air strikes and blockades are not deterring them and if all they are going to see thrown at them are attacks, then attacks is what they will dish back.... and so on and so forth.
Talking and relations are the first step to gaining any understanding. If you want to keep killing and blowing one another up, just don't talk to one another and keep blowing each other up.
Whether or not they think him converting out of their religion is a very bad thing or not, he doesn't live in their countries with their beliefs and he doesn't have to abide by their rules, just as much as we shouldn't expect them and their culture to abide to our rules and way of life. Until the moment both cultures stop trying to shove our cultures into each other's faces and claiming to be the right way, things will never change.
Tit for Tat... who started what?
Irrelevent who started it all, current issues and way of our lives are the problem, and no matter who's ego will be hurt or who finally admits the wrong, if there is an obvious solution to our current problems, then shouldn't it be taken?
Then again, one also has to look seriously into what you said here:
"he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East."
Seriously compare the two:
One guy renounced his faith of their religion.....
One guy declaired war on their religion.....
who do you think they would be more willing to talk to?
Neither?
I guess time will obviously tell if the elections are in his favor.
House Member
Posts: 3,323
April 21st, 2008, 04:54 PM
Actually if you listen to Hamas claims, they call Carter a liar and tell him not to put words in their mouth.
They don't want peace, they want all the occupied territories in exchange for a 10 year truce before resuming hostilities with Israel in a bid for full conquest.
If you are unsure about the Muslim reaction to Obama being an Apostate, there is alot of literature on the subject. Suffice to say that Bush is not unpopular with all muslims, especially leaders (such as the Saudi family or Musharref)
Actually if you listen to Hamas claims, they call Carter a liar and tell him not to put words in their mouth.
They don't want peace, they want all the occupied territories in exchange for a 10 year truce before resuming hostilities with Israel in a bid for full conquest.
If you are unsure about the Muslim reaction to Obama being an Apostate, there is alot of literature on the subject. Suffice to say that Bush is not unpopular with all muslims, especially leaders (such as the Saudi family or Musharref)
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,587
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
April 21st, 2008, 06:57 PM
him one, and his father left the family when barack was very young.
He attended catholic school in Indonesia, (elementary level).
Quoting Zzarchov
He's not an ex muslim, it was his father who was a muslim, doesn't automatically make
Side note:
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
If Obama becomes president, as an Ex-Muslim, won't that forbid him from travelling to most of the muslim world under pain of death?
Not that foreign opinion matters, but he could very well be the only possible president you could elect who would be less popular than Bush in the Middle East.
him one, and his father left the family when barack was very young.
He attended catholic school in Indonesia, (elementary level).
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,587
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
April 21st, 2008, 07:00 PM
not talk to anyone, and the statement from the whitehouse today proves that, they just give
the old rehersed answer. The reason for that is their arrogance, and also they would
never admit that anything carter, or any other democrat for that matter said had any
merit to it, because they are democrat and because, it is 'they' who want to give all the 'orders',
right or wrong.
Quoting Zzarchov
I listened, and read carters report after his meetings. Why would he lie, he has no reason to lie, but he did prove that the u.s. government is 'same ole same ole', will
Actually if you listen to Hamas claims, they call Carter a liar and tell him not to put words in their mouth.
They don't want peace, they want all the occupied territories in exchange for a 10 year truce before resuming hostilities with Israel in a bid for full conquest.
If you are unsure about the Muslim reaction to Obama being an Apostate, there is alot of literature on the subject. Suffice to say that Bush is not unpopular with all muslims, especially leaders (such as the Saudi family or Musharref)
They don't want peace, they want all the occupied territories in exchange for a 10 year truce before resuming hostilities with Israel in a bid for full conquest.
If you are unsure about the Muslim reaction to Obama being an Apostate, there is alot of literature on the subject. Suffice to say that Bush is not unpopular with all muslims, especially leaders (such as the Saudi family or Musharref)
not talk to anyone, and the statement from the whitehouse today proves that, they just give
the old rehersed answer. The reason for that is their arrogance, and also they would
never admit that anything carter, or any other democrat for that matter said had any
merit to it, because they are democrat and because, it is 'they' who want to give all the 'orders',
right or wrong.
House Member
Posts: 3,323
April 21st, 2008, 10:21 PM
actually it does as far as being an apostate is concerned, all the male lineage of muslims are considered muslim (usually denoted by having a muslim name, which Obama does have, Hussein) are considered muslims.
Remember, only converts choose to be muslims, everyone else is born a muslim and sins if they convert away (pain of death).
its one of the reasons its been so strong and withstood assimilation in foreign cultures and governments well.
Its not about if he ever believed in Islam or practiced Islam, its whether under islamic law he's an apostate.
Quoting talloola
He's not an ex muslim, it was his father who was a muslim, doesn't automatically make
him one, and his father left the family when barack was very young.
He attended catholic school in Indonesia, (elementary level).
him one, and his father left the family when barack was very young.
He attended catholic school in Indonesia, (elementary level).
actually it does as far as being an apostate is concerned, all the male lineage of muslims are considered muslim (usually denoted by having a muslim name, which Obama does have, Hussein) are considered muslims.
Remember, only converts choose to be muslims, everyone else is born a muslim and sins if they convert away (pain of death).
its one of the reasons its been so strong and withstood assimilation in foreign cultures and governments well.
Its not about if he ever believed in Islam or practiced Islam, its whether under islamic law he's an apostate.
House Member
Posts: 3,323
April 21st, 2008, 10:23 PM
Its not about the whitehouse or carter, its about Hamas saying Carter is misrepresenting them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm
Quoting talloola
I listened, and read carters report after his meetings. Why would he lie, he has no reason to lie, but he did prove that the u.s. government is 'same ole same ole', will
not talk to anyone, and the statement from the whitehouse today proves that, they just give
the old rehersed answer. The reason for that is their arrogance, and also they would
never admit that anything carter, or any other democrat for that matter said had any
merit to it, because they are democrat and because, it is 'they' who want to give all the 'orders',
right or wrong.
not talk to anyone, and the statement from the whitehouse today proves that, they just give
the old rehersed answer. The reason for that is their arrogance, and also they would
never admit that anything carter, or any other democrat for that matter said had any
merit to it, because they are democrat and because, it is 'they' who want to give all the 'orders',
right or wrong.
Its not about the whitehouse or carter, its about Hamas saying Carter is misrepresenting them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,587
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
April 21st, 2008, 11:51 PM
translation I guess. Carter wouldn't knowlingly say one thing, when the other was
the truth.
Looks like the palestinians will keep on wasting their time trying to get rid of Israel for
ever. Those people are just a bunch of 'cement heads' in my opinion. I've heard the
same story now for decades, and it seems I will hear the same story for many more
years, then my children, and grandchildren.
Israel will continue to progress and improve their lives, put up with palestinians rockets,
and still make progress, while the palestinians will ignore their own, have tunnel vision
with their paralized views of the reality in their lives. They will spend their money on
rockets that change nothing, but they won't spend anything on improving their own lives.
They have no pride, they could have their own state of Palestine if they strived to do
so, but they won't. They will have children, then teach them to hate Israel and kill jews,
go ahead, it is you who will suffer the most, they are too backward to understand that and
too brain washed, with their biased views of the world.
Quoting Zzarchov
Yes, from the article, I see what you mean. It's a shame. Something went wrong in
Its not about the whitehouse or carter, its about Hamas saying Carter is misrepresenting them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm
translation I guess. Carter wouldn't knowlingly say one thing, when the other was
the truth.
Looks like the palestinians will keep on wasting their time trying to get rid of Israel for
ever. Those people are just a bunch of 'cement heads' in my opinion. I've heard the
same story now for decades, and it seems I will hear the same story for many more
years, then my children, and grandchildren.
Israel will continue to progress and improve their lives, put up with palestinians rockets,
and still make progress, while the palestinians will ignore their own, have tunnel vision
with their paralized views of the reality in their lives. They will spend their money on
rockets that change nothing, but they won't spend anything on improving their own lives.
They have no pride, they could have their own state of Palestine if they strived to do
so, but they won't. They will have children, then teach them to hate Israel and kill jews,
go ahead, it is you who will suffer the most, they are too backward to understand that and
too brain washed, with their biased views of the world.
