This is the proof that we are now under the rule of tyrants, whoâs goal is to destroy the Constitution and rule of law.
Itâs also proof, to me, that Iâm right in my contention that all ideologies that attack the Constitution should have been outlawed from the founding.
Enemy propaganda shouldnât qualify for the excuse of âfree speechâ, because this is how they âthankâ you for it.
But there is a contradiction in your thoughts. The freedom of speech amendment protects those who speak out against the Constitution. Itâs a reformulation of the perennial problem in all civilized constitutional societies - how do we tolerate the intolerant?
I know, exactly. Itâs a paradox.
But take for example, the fact that overt terrorist threats are not permitted, even on free speech platforms.
What is enemy propaganda but the same thing, only in a covert, more insidious form, poisoning slowly instead of blowing up quickly?
We have history to prove to us how destructive the communist/leftist agenda has been to our Republic - itâs been slowly but steadily undermined until we have now reached the point of total takeover.
In general, most conservatives have, traditionally, agreed with Liz. It was the Left who defended Free Speech â for their own reasons. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and the two sides have swapped positions. But neither side had/has a deep committment to Free Speech.
What has happened in America was not the result of propaganda by the Left. America has always had a strong Left, from at least the beginning of the 20th Century. (In the 1930s/40s, the Communist Party USA had nearly 100 000 members, around ten times that number of sympathyzers, some in important roles in government, Hollywood, the Press, the Universities) ⊠ordinary Americans never succumbed to their propaganda.
What has happened is that we are the victims of our own success. After WWII, when we were, by far, the strongest, richest coountry on the planet ⊠we raised a generation that didnât really have to worry about their future: they went to college, got good jobs, prospered âŠand became wide open to the âBlame America Firstâ Left, who slowly moved into the âcultural apparatusâ.
All this was a natural process, not a KGB plot. Each succeeding generation has gone further and further into hedonism: now they feel âunsafeâ if they hear anything critical of their ideas.
Theyâre not really âLeftistsâ, although the poverty of our vocabulary requires us to use that outmoded term. The old Left sought to win over the working class, despite its racism, sexism, etc ⊠their college students quit college and got jobs in auto factories in Detrot and organized unions. Our current âLeftistâ youth would drop dead if they thought they might have to get a job on an assembly line and stay there for the rest of their lives.
It wonât last. Nuclear weapons have changed everything, and made the future even more unpredictable than it naturally is. But if we did not have nuclear weapons, and had to face man-to-man infantry combat ⊠how long would we last?
The accident of our geography, making us impregnable to land- or sea-borne invasion, is another factor that will postpone the reckoning. But it will come.
We have to prepare for that eventuality. Christians believe that the âEnd Timesâ are coming, and that they will be swept away by Jesus, or something. We know that wonât happen. We need to prepare to face the âLast Daysâ, and survive them.
So I hope everyone erading this owns a kinetic protection tool and knows how to use it, has a stock of potassium iodide (your thyroid gland will thank you if the air gets filled with the isotope I-131), and has enough food and water to not HAVE to go outdoors for a few weeks, if things go pear-shaped. Plus toilet paper.
Far more dangerous than the delusions of religion is ânormalcy biasâ. [ Normalcy bias - Wikipedia ] Today was like yesterday and tomorrow will probably be like today ⊠so we project linearly into the indefinite future. To our peril.
I canât agree that âwhat has happened in America is not the result of propaganda by the Leftâ, and that it was a ânatural processâ.
You say yourself that our youth âbecame wide open to the âBlame America First Leftââ - correct - open to their propaganda. Leftist propaganda, in a free country, does not originate naturally - it has to be propagated, purposely, by people who want to undermine freedom and subvert others.
Lying may be a ânaturalâ phenomenon, since many people do it, but itâs unnatural in the sense that it has to be made up in order to twist and obscure the truth.
Yes, I was not very clear.
My point is this: a country which is always in a state of being challenged â by having dangerous neighbors, or a âleanâ economy where everyone has to work at jobs which may not be agreeable ⊠in other words, where the condition of scarcity exists â such a country tends to breed resilient people.
This described our country up through World War II.
Okay ⊠itâs more complicated than that. If there is great poverty at one poie and huge wealth at another, such a country will be susceptible to âspread the wealth, soak the richâ movements.
A country which has recently gone through a devastating war, and which has a section of its population which is actively anti-patriotic, like France was in 1940 ⊠will be susceptible to collapse in the face of aggression.
But our problem was the problem of success: After WWII the strongest country in the world, very prosperous â at least for its educated middle class â with high ideals that it didnât always measure up to, which induced disaffection among its idealistic young people ⊠that was us.
We had one big Challenge: World Communism, centred in the Soviet Union.
But we won the Cold War. Communism collapsed, and almost no one now things the government should own all the industries (although the word âsocialismâ still has its attractions for many. In that sense, itâs very much like the word âChristianityâ: almost no one who thinks Christianity is the religion to follow, actually adheres to any of its actual precepts.).
In a word, weâve gone soft. Or rather, a large part of the upcoming generations has. Itâs me-me-me with them.
Why the ruling class has allowed this to happen is a mystery to me. In the past, ruling classes have always understood the importance of having a state, including a military â the core of the state, along with the police. But these people are hollowing out the core.
One explanation is that they have âgone globalâ: the world is their country. But itâs very hard to believe that people who are intellilgent enough to run the economy, think that their interests and, say, the interests of Chinaâs ruling elite, are identical.
But we are where we are. The whole population has been stupefied by prosperity: the Left are the only people who are active, active in destroying the country. The liberals are sometimes a bit uneasy about it, but are too embarrassed to criticize their hard left allies. And while conservatives see whatâs happening, few of them actually want to do anything about it, if it would mean interrupting their daily routines.
That flat-screen TV is just too attractive. Anyway, Jesus, or Donald Trump, will come to the rescue. So why put oneself to any trouble?
But no one knows the future, and perhaps some shock will awaken the patriots. Even then, there are dangers: being angry is not enough. Youâve got to be smart, or follow leaders who are smart. 6 January showed what can happen when you arentâ and donât.
I can agree with that. And I think the ruling classes have âgone globalâ, as you mention.
Itâs hard to understand how and why, though, that anyone - globalists or even Communists - would go along with the orchestration of a total collapse of the worldâs economies. Itâs insanity that really only fits the profile of a completely psychotic megalomaniac, who wants power at all costs.
Itâs very hard to understand why. Impossible, for me, in fact. These people are at the very top of the heap. But ⊠they act like this is some unchangeable fact of nature, and nothing they do, or fail to do, or that anyone else does or fails to do, can change their position.
So it doesnât matter if weâre heading towards a military made up of resentful, less-than-competent, non-patriotic affirimative action hires, mixed with competent patriots over whose head theyâll be promoted, who are thus simmering with anger.
It doesnât matter if the police who keep their chi-chi shops and upscale neighborhoods from being looted by premature reparations seekers, are increasingly afraid to do whatâs necessary when facing violent resistance from a member of a âprotected classâ.
It doesnât matter if their schools and universities are moving towards Soviet-style education, where you just say the right things --âdiversity!â âstructural racism!â â and where everyone has to get an âAâ or youâll be accused of racism and worse. (Iâm waiting for the âindigenous peoplesâ science is just as good as white European male scienceâ movement to hit the departments of mathematics, chemistry, physics, and engineering. But since the people who gush this nonsense and those who benefit from it probably couldnât factorize a simple quadratic equation, these departments wonât suffer â at least for a while â from illiterate and innumerate applicants in the first place. But they had better watch out when they hire new professors. After all, who cares if you can solve a second-order partial differential equation, or even know what one is, if youâre the right race/sexual orientation.
And itâs in these departments â the âhardâ subjects in both senses â that I suspect the backlash will start. The humanities and so-called âsocial sciencesâ will take anything thrown at them. After all, the drug-dealing triple killer [Murder of Betty Van Patter - Wikipedia] Huey Newton was given a PhD by the Cal Berkeley âHistory of Consciousnessâ program [ Huey P. Newton - Wikipedia ], although they may have had the excuse that he threatened to kill his examiners if they didnât pass him for the doctorate.
But itâs going to be pretty hard for a self-respecting mathematician or physicist to have as a colleague someone who is unable to multiply two two-digit numbers.
So I predict a backlash. But the people at the top ⊠seem not to care whether the countries they rule have competent scientists, or militaries that can actually win wars. (While, at the same time, acting like they have an invincible military â as witness their pushing the Ukrainians to prod the Russians into a war. ⊠where we may very well have to back them up at some point with actual bodies and not just money and military hardware.)
In short, itâs a mystery.
Itâs formally analogous to previous collapses of countries: couldnât the Frenc h monarchy see what was coming if they didnât bring the new social classes into power? Couldnât the Czar realize what would happen if he insisted on autarchic rule, while his country underwent modernization? In those cases, there were people around these men who saw clearly the coming deluge ⊠it was the stupid rulers who refused to acknolwege reality.
But our ruling class is not stupid. Theyâre shrewd entrepreneurs, who can hire the best brains available. But theyâre letting the âwokeâ Left destroy the foundations of the structure upon which they sit.
Yes. You make it clear that the woke are evil. Always worth doing.
I like: âBut theyâre letting the âwokeâ Left destroy the foundations of the structure upon which they sit.â That is the case. And yes, why they are doing it is a mystery.
I disagree with you that âour ruling class is not stupidâ. It is obviously not clever. And Joe Biden is a plainly stupid man, always was, before he also became senile.
Speaking of suicide âŠwhere I liveâŠ
Great Britain: Multiculturalism and Islam Turn It Upside-Down
by Giulio Meotti
December 18, 2022
âLeicester has become the poster city for multicultural Britain, a place where the stunning number and size of the minorities â the 55 mosques, 18 Hindu temples, nine Sikh gurudwaras, two synagogues, two Buddhist centres and one Jain centre â are seen not as a recipe for conflict or a millstone around the cityâs neck, but a badge of honour,â was how, in 2013, the British liberal newspaper The Independent celebrated the transformation of Britainâs tenth-largest city.
There are places in Europe that visited the future sooner than others: Malmö in Sweden, Trappes and Roubaix in France, Cologne in Germany, Molenbeek in Belgium, Leicester in EnglandâŠ
This year, Leicesterâs famous multiculturalism, so praised by the establishment, exploded. Knife attacks, stone- and bottle-throwing, cars torched, religious symbols under siege, dozens wounded, including policemen. The burst of violence began after a cricket match between India and Pakistan on August 28. According to the media, some members of the Indian community in Leicester celebrated with the call âPakistan Murdabadâ (âDeath to Pakistanâ). A Sikh was attacked in the street. Social media networks spread the false news that the victim was a Muslim. The house of a Hindu family celebrating the Ganesh Chaturthi holiday was attacked and social media went wild with the false news of a âpremeditated attack against a Muslim.â According to another false posting, a Muslim girl was allegedly harassed by three Hindus. Then the hunt for Hindus began in Britainâs streets.
Just a year ago, Leicester was celebrated by the Institute of Historical Research in London as the most multicultural city in the UK.
âHere, everyone is a minority,â headlined The Guardian in 2010, rejoicing that âLeicester will soon become the first British city with a non-white majorityâ. Christianity had been replaced by Islam:
âHere, a Deobandi mosque, built in 2000, faces the Edwardian church of St Philipâs, started in 1909. The churchâs congregation is about 30, mixed white, Indian and African; the mosque across the road holds 500 people. And on Fridays âitâs full: prostration room only, with another hundred outside on the pavement,â says the rector of St Philipâs, Alan Race.â
âLeicester to be first city where white people are minority,â announced The Independent in 2007. Some understood that it would not end well. âPlural cities, opportunities or time bomb?â the Commission for Racial Equality headlined a conference seminar about Leicester.
What happened? Leicester became Islamized fast. In 2001, the Muslim population was 11%. By 2017, it made up 20%. Among children, Islam is dominant.
Data from the Office for National Statistics recently revealed that, in a major change since 1991, when ethnic minorities made up just over a quarter of the city, 59.1% of Leicesterâs population comes from ethnic minorities. Minorities also make up more than half the population in Luton (54.8%) and Birmingham (51.4%), the second-largest city in the UK, where, 20 years ago, 70% of the population was native English. Leicester, Luton and Birmingham are among 14 large areas of England where people who identify as âwhiteâ now make up the minority, The Independent noted. The highest proportion are found in the London boroughs of Newham (69.2%), Brent (65.4%) and Redbridge (65.2%). Outside London, the highest proportion of non-whites is in Slough (64.0%), followed by Leicester (59.1%), Luton (54.8%) and Birmingham (51.4%).
The most popular name among those born in England in 2022 is Mohammed.
Fewer than half the people in England and Wales are now Christian, the recent census revealed, with atheism and Islam gaining ground. For the first time since the 7th century AD, England is no longer majority-Christian. That was 1,300 years ago, when the islands were converted from paganism to Christianity. In 2011, in the previous census, Christians numbered 59% of the population. Now, they number 46%.
Islam has quickly advanced on the religious scene. In the census of 2011, there were 2.7 million Muslims (4.9% of the population). In the 2021 census, there were 3.9 million Muslims (6.5%): an increase of 44% in just 10 years.
Nearly 10 years ago, the Daily Mail newspaper published an article about a church and a mosque a few meters from each other in the heart of London. At St Georgeâs Church on Cannon Street Road there were no more than 12 people to celebrate mass. When the church was built in the 19th century it was designed to accommodate 1,230 worshippers. The numbers were similar in St Maryâs Church in Cable Street, which opened in October 1849. Built to seat 1,000 people, there were no more than 20 worshippers there. While the two churches were empty, the mosque in Brune Street Estate had a different problem:
"The mosque itself is little more than a small room rented in a community centre, and it can hold only 100.
âHowever, on Fridays, those numbers swell to three to four times the roomâs capacity, so the worshippers spill out onto the street, where they take up around the same amount of space as the size of the near-empty St Maryâs down the road.â
Christianity is becoming a religion of the past; Islam appears that of the future. In 2015, the Spectator featured on its cover âThe Last Christianâ, in which an elderly lady was the only worshipper in a cathedral. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, warned that Christianity âis a generation away from extinctionâ.
The UK, over which the late Queen Elizabeth reigned for decades, has gone with her.
We now face the aging and self-destruction of the Christian populations of Enlightenment and their religious and cultural traditions; the exponential growth of Islam; the elites celebrating multiculturalism rather than working for the integration of minorities, and overturned demographics. What could possibly go wrong?
Why shouldnât the Victoria and Albert Museum and other British museums remove portraits of the Islamic prophet Mohammed so as not to offend Muslims? Why shouldnât cinemas ban the viewing of films that âoffend Islamâ? Why shouldnât cities approve public calls to prayer over the outdoor loudspeakers of minarets? Why, in areas where Islam is dominant, such as the London borough of Tower Hamlets, shouldnât patrols be formed to enforce Sharia law on alcohol-drinkers and homosexuals? In Luton, there are schools where 95% of the students are Muslims. Why shouldnât sharia courts be allowed to decide family issues? The former president of the UK Supreme Court, Lord Phillips, has said that English law must âincorporateâ elements of sharia. Why shouldnât Muslims protest against âIslamophobic professorsâ? Why shouldnât Sky News black out the Charlie Hebdo cartoons about the prophet of Islam?
A British bishop, the brave Michael Nazir-Ali, was attacked for denouncing the existence of âno-go areasâ in the UK.
An American writer for the Wall Street Journal, Andy Ngo, recounted a visit to Luton, population 225,000 and approximately 32% Muslim:
"At the Central Mosque, I met a friendly group of Punjabi-speaking young men. âYouâve come to see Luton?â one struggled to ask me in English. The young men asked me to follow them through the town center.
"Within minutes, we walked by three other mosques, which were vibrant and filled with young men coming and going. We passed a church, which was closed and decrepit, with a window that had been vandalized with eggs⊠All the businesses had a religious flair: The eateries were halal, the fitness center was sex-segregated, and the boutiques displayed âmodestâ outfits on mannequins. Pakistani flags flew high and proud. I never saw a Union Jack.
âThe men finally led me to a discreet building that housed a small Islamic center. They spoke privately to its imam. I was led upstairs to see him. The imam asked me if I was prepared to convert.â
Here is the situation today in major British cities and boroughs. The total population is listed on the left, the Islamic percentage, in parentheses:
- Birmingham, population 1,149,000: (29.9%)
- Leeds, 792,000: (7.8%)
- Sheffield: 584,000: (10.3%)
- Bradford: 536,000 (30.5%)
- Manchester: 553,000 (22.3%)
- Bristol: 467,000 (6.7%)
- Cardiff: 357,000 (9.3%)
- Leicester: 357,000 (23.5%)
- Nottingham: 331,000 (12.2%)
- Newcastle: 315,000 (10.3%)
- Blackburn with Darwen: 148,000 (35%)
- Fenland: 101,000 (12.2 %)
- Luton: 218,000 (32.9%)
- Slough: 164,000 (29.4% )
- Watford: 96,000 (13%)
- Pendle: 91,000 (26%)
- Oldham: 237,000 (24.3%)
- Rochdale: 211,000 (18.8%)
- Kirklees: 438,000 (19%)
- Barking and Dagenham: 211,000 (24.4%)
- Brent: 331,000 (21.4%)
- Newham: 352,000 (34.8%)
- Redbridge: 303,000 (31.3%)
- Tower Hamlets: 319,000 (39.9%)
- Westminster: 261,000 (20%)
And now let us imagine these cities in 10, 20, 30 years. The Muslim total population in Britain is estimated to be 13 million by 2050. According to Ed Husain, one of the leading Muslim intellectuals in the United Kingdom:
âWith almost five million Muslims, there are thousands of new buildings with domes and minarets and in the decades ahead, mosques are predicted to mushroom across the whole land.â
Nothing to worry about. Half of the mosques in the UK are affiliated with the Deobandi movement, adhering to the same Hanafi school of law that created the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Soon, half of Birminghamâs population will also be Muslim. âThere were 301,000 Muslims in Birmingham in 2018, making up 27% of the local population,â wrote the Birmingham Mail in 2019. âThe number of Muslims has risen by 21% from 249,000 in 2011.â The same newspaper noted that Muslim children in the city now outnumber Christian ones.
âIn the working-class district of Small Heath, in the eastern part of the city, 95 per cent of the population is Muslim,â Le Figaro reported in 2017 about Birmingham.
âSome shops have different closing times corresponding to those of the daily prayers⊠The bookstores are religious. Travel agencies guarantee âMuslim friendlyâ holidays with destinations where customers - especially female customers - are offered access to facilities with non-mixed spaces and swimming pools where women can swim and âpreserve modestyââ.
No one knows what Britain will be like in 30 years. We might, however, be concerned about a scenario in which large parts of the UK and Europe could resemble Pakistan. Brexit or not, that would be the end of Britain as we know it.
Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.
Yes, I had seen that. But maybe other readers hadnât. Gatestone is an excellent site.
I remember reading somewhere that when the Muslim population gets to a certain percentage of the overall population of a country (possibly 20%, donât remember exactly) thatâs it. They will go from âtaqqiyaâ to overt forcing of Islam on everyone, and subjugate that country. Britain is already there.
What would be interesting â Iâll see if I can find any data on it â is this: is the drift away from religion which is now overwhelming in the formerly-Christian population, also present in any degree among Britainâs Muslims.
I have mentioned my Muslim friends (Muslim the way I am Christian), but theyâre hardly typical. So ⊠whatâs the reality among the typical?
I believe so too. India has an 18% moslem population and there are always violent undercurrents present. Israel has 20% moslem population. This is why I am not optimistic about Israelâs survival
George Orwell â (a socialist!!! Therefore according to some people, pure evil) â wrote a book, 1984, where a totalitarian government is able to make people believe â and not just pretend to believe â that 2 + 2 = 5.
Ironically, it was in 1984, that the intellectual basis for sexualizing children was spelled out. This was done by a member of a section of American academia â a âdisappointed Leftâ according to some (honest liberal!) critics â which had started laying the intellectual foundations for this perverted approach to truth a decade earlier.
The latest City Journal has an excellent article by Christiopher Rufo documenting this: how the earliest, foundational writings of postmodernist theorists laid the basis for the current drive of the Left to sexualize children, in preparation for breaking down the last sex-related barrier of modern society, that against âinter-generational sexâ, as they delicately put it. [https://www.city-journal.org/the-real-story-behind-drag-queen-story-hour]
What does this have to do with the survival of Israel, and of the Islamisation of Europe?
One of the Leftâs favorite slogans is âDiversity is Strengthâ. This could have come straight out of 1984. Anyone who has the least familiarity with other countries where there is serious diversity, knows that it has the often-realized potential to lead to bloody conflict.
âInter-penetrated peoplesâ go to war with each other from time to time. (And the spread of democacy has just exacerbated this problem. Amy Chua [Amy Chua - Wikipedia] has documented this in her World On Fire [ World on Fire (book) - Wikipedia ]
When the Jews jumped out of the windows of the burning building of Europe - where they had been subject to genocidal violence not just from the Germans, as our history books would have it, but from other Europeans as well. (During the Cold War, we wanted to portray the East Europeans under Soviet domination as innocent lambs, with only the Germans being guilty of mass murder. Not so.)
[ Category:Holocaust massacres and pogroms in Poland - Wikipedia ]
[ Category:Holocaust massacres and pogroms in Ukraine - Wikipedia ]
[ Category:Holocaust massacres and pogroms in Latvia - Wikipedia ]
[ Category:Holocaust massacres and pogroms in Lithuania - Wikipedia ]
[ Category:Holocaust massacres and pogroms in Russia - Wikipedia ]
[ The Holocaust in the Independent State of Croatia - Wikipedia ]
As the great Marxist writer Isaac Deutscher put it, the ground in Europe was burning under their feet. So they jumped. And landed on the Palestinians.
How will it all end ⊠or will it ever end? My guess: at some point, perhaps pretty soon, a new Arab-Israeli war will break out â or the equivalent, a super-intifada â and the Israelis wil drive the Palestinians out of the West Bank, and maybe push out those Israeli citizens who are Arab as as well.
All tribal conflicts between interpenetrated peoples are nasty, and bring out the worst in all sides. But the Israelis have been the most civilized nationalists imaginable. However, reality eventually asserts itself.
One aspect of Israeli civilizedness was that some of their own people got bad consciences over how the Palestinians had been treated during the War of Independence â they became ârevisionistsâ and wrote histories that enraged hard-line Zionists.
But then one of them, Benny Morris, got mugged by reality, and came to the realization that there is only one solution that can bring peace to an interpenetrated-peoples situation: the Cyprus solution. If youâre not familiar with the events there nearly fifty years ago, hereâs a snippet from Wikipedia:
" Cyprus was placed under the United Kingdomâs administration based on the Cyprus Convention in 1878 and was formally annexed by the UK in 1914. The future of the island became a matter of disagreement between the two prominent ethnic communities, Greek Cypriots who made up 77% of the population in 1960, and Turkish Cypriots, who made up 18% of the population. From the 19th century onwards, the Greek Cypriot population pursued enosis, union with Greece, which became a Greek national policy in the 1950s. The Turkish Cypriot population initially advocated the continuation of British rule, then demanded the annexation of the island to Turkey, and in the 1950s, together with Turkey, established a policy of taksim, the partition of Cyprus and the creation of a Turkish polity in the north.
Following nationalist violence in the 1950s Cyprus was granted independence in 1960.The crisis of 1963â64 brought further intercommunal violence between the two communities, displaced more than 25,000 Turkish Cypriots into enclaves and brought the end of Turkish Cypriot representation in the republic. On 15 July 1974, a coup dâĂ©tat was staged by Greek Cypriot nationalists and elements of the Greek military junta in an attempt at enosis. This action precipitated the Turkish invasion of Cyprus on 20 July, which led to the capture of the present-day territory of Northern Cyprus and the displacement of over 150,000 Greek Cypriots and 50,000 Turkish Cypriots. A separate Turkish Cypriot state in the north was established by unilateral declaration in 1983; the move was widely condemned by the international community⊠These events and the resulting political situation are matters of a continuing dispute "[ Cyprus - Wikipedia]
The Turks took 40% of the island, drove the Greeks out, and ⊠ever since then, there has been peace between the two peoples. They canât get at each other to kill each other. The wise âinternational communityâ would like to reverse this and mix them up together again, so we could have more atrocities to witness on the evening news.
Benny Morris, the leftist revisionist Israeli, recognized that this is the only lasting solution to the Israel/Palestine problem. Two ethnically pure states, with the borders to be determined, as the Russians used to say, by âthe relationship of forcesâ.
Or would it be a lasting solution? The Iranians are working hell-for-leather on their nuclear weapons program, so that they can âwipe Israel off the face of the earthâ.
The Israelis are not sweet naive liberals where their own survival is concerned, so ⊠if i were living in Iran ⊠I would get out if I could, or move as far away as possible from any potential target that the Israelis may take out.
But hey ⊠âDiversity is Strength!â
Yes, thats the problem for Israel. Theyâre surrounded by Muslims who want to wipe them out. A âtwo state solutionâ just weakens them.
Well, the alternative is a âone-state solutionâ ⊠ie Muslims living in Israel, either as voting citizens, or as people deprived of the vote. Then, at some point, a Palestinian leader will arise who recognizes that the Israeliâs arenât ever going to let them have their own state ⊠and so heâll say, âOkay, itâs all yours. And we want to be citizens of it.â People like the monumentally-naive Noam Chomsky have advocated this soluton â a âbi-national stateâ for years.
We have a shining example of a bi-national state right next door to Israel â Lebanon. You could fill a page listing all the horrible massacres that have occurred there.
I personally think Ariel Sharon â no softy he â had the right idea.