Courtesy Sweetness and Light, more enabling of a dark age culture by boosters of multiculturalism:
For a small piece of cloth meant to conceal  the word comes from the Arabic “hijaba†which means to hide from view  the hijab has never been a more conspicuous or controversial symbol.
It may be more visible than ever today at McMaster University, where a professor organized a Wear My Hijab day. Women, whether Muslim or not, were invited to wear a head scarf all day to show support for those who regularly wear it.
Does this even make sense? What are they showing support for, exactly? The fact that Muslim women are buried in burlap because Muslim men can’t be expected to control themselves?
Yay! You go, oppressed sisters! We support your willingness to cover yourself in a tablecloth like some hideously stained oak slab that must be kept hidden from guests…
In recent years, the hijab and the meaning it represents has been a lightning rod for controversy worldwide, touching off as it does sensitivities on matters social, political and religious.
In Quebec, an 11-year-old girl was recently ordered by a Muslim referee to get off the field at a soccer tournament for refusing to remove her hijab.
Last fall, an influential Australian Muslim cleric was ultimately forced to apologize for having compared Muslim women who do not wear a hijab to “uncovered meat†who tacitly invite rape from men. Recent photos of British sailors captured in Iran have caused a furor, in part, because the female sailor is wearing a head scarf, presumably against her will.
In Canada, the hijab has again laid bare the uneasy relationship between the country’s multiculturalism and secularism.
To some, the hijab is a symbol of oppression, since in some countries and cultures there are Muslim women who cover themselves under threat of force, implicit or otherwise.
To others, the hijab is a symbol of religious faith, and even a liberating choice for women from social dictates on how they should look.
Uh huh. Well then they might try throwing on sweatpants, putting their hair up in in a ponytail, and refusing to put on makeup. That’s how my wife “liberates” herself from such oppressive “social dictates.”
Beyond that, the hijab—while it may in fact be a “symbol of religious faith”—is a symbol in a religious system that treats women as second class citizens and subjects them to “religious” laws that are, frankly, barbaric.
And let’s not kid ourselves. I doubt this same university would be sponsoring a “Wear My ‘Jesus Saves’” t-shirt day.
No, this is about exoticism and narcissism. Desirous above all else to be seen as worldly and sensitive to Otherness, these enablers of female oppression do the work of fundamentalist patriarchs—all while fancying themselves truly cultured and open-minded.
They are, in the classic sense, useful idiots. And yes, I’m talking to you, too, Nancy.
But don’t take my word for it: after all, I have no right to criticize, given my status as an outsider with no ties to the “culture.” He, on the other hand, has a bit more “authenticity”—though given that he’s become “westernized” and broken away from mainstream Islam, I suppose the multiculturalists can argue that he is an Uncle Achmed or some such.
You know, if there were no armed jihad in the world, no Islamist terrorism, no intimidating demands from Muslims for special treatment in the West, no taxi drivers refusing to carry “unclean” fares, this type of thing wouldn’t be a big deal at all. It really would “mean” solidarity with those who are merely different.
In that world, of course, we’d also have a “wear my crucifix/yarmulke day” too, and the ACLU wouldn’t even flinch.
I wonder what color the sky is in that world…
TW: It’s got96 to be a marmalade sky!
I’m just waiting for next week. They are having “mutilate female genitals day” in solidarity with their brothers who do. And don’t forget “stone a rape victim” day. That’s always a hoot!
There’s no pork in marmalade is there?
Don’t make me go medieval on your ass, d.
I like it. Maybe some students could throw pebbles at women leaving the Campus Rape Crisis Center, in a show of solidarity with those who stone to death those filthy whores who allow themselves to shame their family by being raped.
Maybe some ‘performance art’ students could put on an impromptu outdoor play where they hold down a young girl and force a female circumcision on her. Hey, who are we to say they aren’t right?
Maybe they could pelt a gay guy with bran muffins to show support for the culture that executes gays by collapsing brick walls on them.
Crusaderist!
Scoff if you like; I think it’s a good look for Ro.
Women who take their clothes off for money. Now that’s a group that is badly in need of some solidarity. Let me take this opportunity to propose April 7 as “No Hijab and Topless Day”. C’mon ladies. We’re all God’s children. Show your support by going without your support for one day.
I’ve been wondering for a while now if many in the crazy-Left would just submit and utter the shahadah. Their adherence to the Left is religious in nature; and the totalitarian tendencies of so many of them are unlikely to find fruition in Stalinism or Maoism (or National Socialism), since these have been discredited by history, as they might once have. Islamofascism isn’t so very far away, as it embraces what seems to be the core belief: rabid anti-Americanism and maybe a little anti-Semitism to boot.
I find it odd that the Speaker of the House would have her picture taken in a hijab. Gutless. Any woman worthy of that job would have told the Syrians to FOAD.
Laura Bush: “useful idiot”
AJB, there simply is no comparison between the two.
Nancy chose to show respect to a religion which routinely represses its women, blames them for rape etc etc etc..
Laura chose to show respect to a religion that does none of these. In fact, quite the opposite.
So take your equivalency test and shove it up your ass.
Laura Bush got a lot of flack for donning the headscarf too. But,thanks for playing.
I am recalling Fallaci’s interview with the Ayatollah with increasing fondness…
I give Pelosi a pass for wearing the headscarf. She was in a mosque, so it’s the same as a goyishe politician wearing a yarmulke when visiting a shul, or for that matter a shikse wearing a shmatta when visiting an Orthodox shul.
Now as for being in Syria in the first place, fuck her and the greenhouse-gas spewing jet she rode in on.
I was just rereading the excerpt quoted above:
Do they mean, like, a pasty, or thong or something?
More seriously, do folks here have any objection to the scarf-like covering for hair (versus the bandit-mask model of hijab)
I think on Pelosi, the bandit-mask version would be more becoming.
And appropriate…
Why not a Pimp My Hijab day?
Michael Totten says Hezbollah has a rather liberal attitude towards woman. They dont even have to wear a scarf if they don’t want to in their territory.
Hmmm.
Those Jibjab dudes are hilarious.
If they really want to go for authenticity, they should all be beaten for being outside of the home without a mahram. Or killed for having relations with a man they’re not married to.
Wear My Beating!
I hear tell that there’s a sect in Darfur that has relaxed some of their more strict interpretations and they only cut off one of the girl’s boobs after raping her.
progress?
That could be hilarious. One with blonde hair? One with chasing LEDs along the edges? One with a Star of David on it?
Maybe on “Wear my Merkin day.”
I’m fine with wearing a head scarf in holy places.
I never were a hat, but if I did, I’d take it off in church. I was raised to respect people’s customs.
I also believe in being a good guest. No smoking weed in the house before noon? OK.
No shoes in the house? OK
My feeling on the two photos shown is that one is an attempt to be respectful and is in complete character since Laura Bush is a classy respectful person. The other signifies capitulation and solidarity with a sworn enemy, Pelosi is consistently disrespectful to the President, to our military… but suddenly she gets all respectful with an enemy.
tw: under sharia, Pelosi received64 lashes for her insolence
No, but the “Pork on the Bottom Yogurt” has quite a bit.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wanted to send a message to Bashar Assad that Israel has no intention of launching an attack on Syria. Luckily there was an adult in the neighborhood willing to help him out. Nancy Pelosi.
Condi in a hijab. Scroll down to the bottom past all the other pics of Laura, Jackie Kennedy etc. in scarves & hijabs.
There’s talk Pelosi wore it the whole day, which was unnecessary. In a mosque, fine. Elsewhere, she’s setting back Syrian women a long way.
MarkG8, et al.
That’s kind of why I’m curious about the whole hijab thing (past just Pelosi). I mean the wearing of a headscarf in general isn’t much of one thing or the other. Old babushkas do it. Mennonites do it. BFD.
However, when the covering gets to the point that “showing a little cheekbone” gets to be scandalous, then that strikes me as just being too much.
I know that this line of inquiry totally undershoots the more sophisticated kinds of topics generally dealt with in this blog, but, heck, I’m kind of curious.
BRD
If the choice is be a good guest or stay out of the mosque, I’d stay out of the mosque. But I don’t go in churches of any type. Not knowingly, anyway.
Yah.
See also the delight the “artistic” community takes in lampooning Christian themes, contrasted with their walking-on-eggshells approach to Islam. Off the top of my head, I can think of four cases of Islamic-imposed censorship here in the US—a guy who carved a Buddha out of a Koran in protest of the Bamiyan Buddhas being destroyed (the gallery he was showing at pulled it); a locally-written play here in Cincinnati that went out of its way to portray a teenage Palestinian suicide bomber in a favorable light which the regional Islamists objected to because it showed her “doing things no good Muslim girl would do”, like talking about boys and listening to popular music (the theater company that was planning to stage the play pulled it); the Motoons (one, maybe two newspapers in the US printed them, right?); and the South Park episode that had Christ crapping on the flag (but Mohammed just showing up at the door was cut).
When you disrespect one group constantly, but kowtow to the sensibilities of another, it means you’re either bigoted against the first group or scared shitless of the second.
Or both.
Nice, alp.
Shall we judge all religions based on the worst behavior of members of their confession?
Seems like the pro war crowd hates the most liberal sects of Islam and allies itself with Islam’s most repressive regimes.
A curious strategy.
Or, as has become the situation in some parts of Europe, not wearing a head-covering is considered “asking to be raped”.
Hmm…
Well, the way I figure, is that the head scarf appears in a lot of contexts. So, appearance of headscarf, while in this case, is pandering to “The Other” and so on, the fact that it’s not completely alien to the west seems to make the outward observance of the form a lot less onerous.
However, the niqab is so far out there, that I’m tempted to say to hell with it, in toto cultural respect or not, there is nothing in the world that seems to objectify (non-inflatable) women more than that.
Beats me.
Today is one of those days when I left my good brain at home, and have to make do with a loaner.
BRD
Screw it.
I’m missing the point here.
Fight threadjacking and stupidity.
IGNORE ALPHTARD
Enough with the Nancy in a rag deal, she was observing customs. But she didn’t have any reason to go over to Syria other than to make the Bush admin look like boys who won’t play nice, and for that she should be roundly condemned. The Syrian regime is about as crooked and fascist as they come, and dealing with them at all is a total mistake. They have been on the State Department list of state sponsors of terrorism since the lists inception in 1979, and they have repeatedly undermined the rule of law in Lebanon as well as in Damascus.
It is utterly appalling that a sitting congresswomen would ignore the atrocities committed by this regime for a political stunt. And I’m not ignoring the repubs who went with her, they should be booted off the island too.
I mean for chrissakes, the Assad regime assassinated the PRIME FUCKING MINISTER of LEBANON and the UN has the smoking gun, and Nancy wants some face time? Is she shopping legal counsel for Assad or something? Gahhhhhhh..
Makes my head hurt, it does.
Yeah sure, like being elected third in line for the presidency of the United States is such a poor role model for anybody, even Syrian women. Maybe you guys would like to go completely fucking nuts over Keith Ellison. He’s muslim!
Uh markg8,
You still have a little pelosi on your chin there.
Here’s a suggestion. I think all Dem politicans including Pelosi ought to show their respect everytime they meet with Bush by wearing a flightsuit complete with codpiece.
Maybe you should just fuck off.
And even such a powerful woman chooses to wear a scarf and bow and scrape to the lowliest of Muslim men.
You’re sundowning, aren’t you?
Doesn’t Pelosi realize that American politicians are supposed to wear traditional body armor when visiting the Middle East?
Nah… Somebody might get the mistaken idea that they were serious about supporting the troops and fighting the war.
Apparently, the message Pelosi chose to send on behalf of Israeli wasn’t quite the same one as what the Israelis actually asked her to send.
From the linked story:
So, the third most powerful woman in the US Government can’t even send a message from a key US ally, underscoring the importance of getting Syria to first cease supporting terrorists?
From the ABC article:
If that’s bowing and scraping I’ll take more of it. Sure beats Condi’s ineffectual bullying.
She didn’t want to offend her new friend, the murderous dictator, with the detail that he’d have to give up killing Jews if he wants peace talks.
Nice choice of articles to quote from, markg8.
Here’s a, uhm, somewhat more complete version of what was said:
I’m sure that given a choice of selling out one’s allies and Condi’s bulling, you absolutely would prefer selling them out.
Of course you will, quisling.
It gives you a chance to put your rump in the air….
“Bullying” in leftyspeak means telling Syria what it doesn’t want to hear: stay out of Lebanon, stop helping Hezbollah, and stop helping Iran.
Because, to lefties, it’s just too much to ask that the dictator stop doing the terrorist-supporting thing.
JohnAA:
You’re far too kind. As we see from markg8’s selective choice of articles to quote from, bullying means asking the Syrians to please recognize the right of Israel to exist.
One has to wonder whether markg8 and Neville Chamberlain share more than a passing acquaintance?
TW: hand52, as in Is there sockpuppeting going on? Is alphie/Neville Chamberlain/monkeyboy’s hand up markg8’s backside?
Here’s a suggestion. I think all Dem politicans including Pelosi ought to show their respect everytime they meet with Bush by wearing a flightsuit complete with codpiece.
ROFLAMO you guys crack me up.
Yeah! I wanna see alphie drink a glass of water while ‘markg8’ posts!
Well JAA,
Syria is caring for hundreds of thousands of refugees from the paradise on earth the neocons have created in Iraq.
That’s mighty neighborly of him.
Enough with the Nancy in a rag deal, she was observing customs. But she didn’t have any reason to go over to Syria other than to make the Bush admin look like boys who won’t play nice, and for that she should be roundly condemned.
I agree with this. If she had been vacationing in Syria or another country where it was customary to wear a headscarf, who would care?
Or if she were there at the behest of the branch of government that is constitutionally charged with carrying out foreign policy, it would be no big deal.
But she has no business being over there in the first place, trying to broker a separate peace, playing footsie with Assad and maybe sharing her iPod with him…
I don’t like it when members of congress visit heads of state in other countries unless the Administration has sent them there for a specific purpose. And yeah, that goes for Repubs, too.
TW: I’m against67 it!
Perhaps the infidel Mark8 wants every jew in the Middle East pushed into the sea. Perhaps he just sees the sense in never stating it publicly. Yassar, Saddam and I were just discussing that strategy this morning during a swim in the lake of fire.
That goes without saying JAA. Just as Jews will have to give up killing Arabs. That’s what peace means.
And stop making Purim pastries with the blood of gentile children.
The complete article I cited:
Um, genius, who do you think is training and sending in the foreign Arab fighters? Syria is causing the problem.
Of course, trying to SOLVE the problem is CAUSING it in Newspeak. I forget. And the actual killers? No need to get into that, right alph?
What a cowardly statement.
Um, there’s a big difference between self-defense and “hey, let’s blow up a bomb in a cafe!”
Are you truly saying that Arab attackers, who go out of their way to attack hospitals and civilian facilities, AND to launch weapons from near them to draw return fire onto their own for propaganda purposes, are the same as a nation defending itself?
Did you know that in Jenin, where the supposed “massacre” happened, the terrorists actually shot Arabs trying to flee the fighting? That’s how much THEY value propaganda.
And people like you eat up every bit and more.
JAA,
Sure they are. And they’ve got Saddam’s nukes stashed away somewhere, too, right?
Nobody would ever object to foreign troops occupying their country.
That’s why America’s still a British colony.
Well it is Saddam, Yassir and Zarkawi, y’know….
It’s not like they’ve every been poster children for bravery….
Duh.
Nah JAA, that’s just part of the ineffectual bullying. Tough talk without results.
Hmmm… this guy thinks Pelosi did the wrong thing:
But what does he know?
Better to cave to the dictators, it gets results! “Peace in our time!”
Yes, markg8, we know you cherry-picked the article that left out a vital little detail.
You sure you don’t work for the Bushies? You know, sins of omission, selective reporting, cherry-picking details, that sort of thing?
What was it the Left termed that? Oh, yeah. LYING LIARS.
I have no idea what they have, and neither do you. Hundreds of trucks crossed that border in early 2003. Were they carrying anthrax? Or dates?
Yeah–it’s not like Bush invaded Afghanistan after they refused to turn over OBL and invaded Iraq after Saddam failed to comply with the UN resolution–it was just tough talk….
PSA:
Fight threadjacking and ignorance.
IGNORE THE ALPHTARD.
Um, there’s a big difference between self-defense and “hey, let’s blow up a bomb in a cafe!â€Â
A
Yadda, yadda, yadda, save it for your self pity fest. It’s exactly that kind onesided BS that has cost Israel the moral highground. You want peace in the middle east. Start thinking like an adult. Go back to the 1967 boundaries. Stop stealing Palestinian land and water.
And there you go.
Cut a leftist, wound an antisemite….
So, when was the Palestinian Liberation Organization founded? In that non-self-pity-fest (??), I presume you are aware that it was founded in 1964, right?
BEFORE Israel took the West Bank.
BEFORE ISrael took the Gaza Strip.
So, apparently the PLO, at least, is not about to accept the ‘67 borders. Nor is Hamas.
But, in the land of bowing and scraping liars, what’s wrong with selling an ally or three down the river? Especially if it’s merely populated with JOOOOOOOSSSSSSSS?
“Canadian University Holds ‘Wear My Hijab Day’”
Wow, Marky. That’s the most blatant example of an “I don’t give a shit about morality” statement I’ve seen in a long time.
Not to mention a complete buy-in to Palestinian propaganda.
Can we?!
So critisism of Israel’s foreign policy automatically equals anti-semitism according to the orthodox pro war speech enforcin’ crowd?
Who’d thunk it?
How does one combat such blatant identity politics?
It’s not a surprise. His comeback is basically, never mind the facts, it’s how they’re FRAMED that counts. And Arabs can do anything they want as long as they have a grievance against Israel.
It’s a line of thought that leads to genocide, not peace.
But maybe that’s what he wants.
Wow, I don’t know who this markg8 is, but he (?) manages to fulfill every leftoid cliché out there.
Yes, indeed, only Hijab Nancy could convey a message from Israel to the Syrians. Not a single other government has relations with both countries, and there are no lines of communications between the two! And, of course, being the one American amongst this group of Jews and Arabs, she is the only “adult.”
Stupid and condescending—what a charming combination. Add outraged, and you’ll have the lefty trifecta.
Oh, but Robert, markg8 most certainly does care about morality. It’s just a different morality.
Israeli actions are immoral, BY DEFINITION. Palestinian actions are NOT immoral, BY DEFINITION.
Anything that might justify Israeli actions is part of a “self-pity fest.” Israeli protective actions cost Israel the “moral high ground.” I’m sure that, in markg8’s world, the best piece of moral high ground is the one atop a pile of body parts of JOOOOOOSSSSSS, preferably ones who resisted not at all.
And it won’t be reported at all, by the press clippings he chooses to cite.
Remember that, the next time markg8 treats you to a lecture on morality.
What kind of sniveling whiner are you John? Syria’s a shithole with a third world army and 5th class leadership. Making it out to be a threat on a scale of Nazi Germany and comparing Assad to Hitler makes you guys sound like world class chickeshits.
But then what else is new?
And, right on schedule, markg8 cues the ad hom attacks.
You’re right E. Nough. Stereotypical leftoid behavior AND shtoopidly, slavishly adhering to the schedule of “outraged” behavior.
Time to hoist the right’s tattered “Mission Accomplished” banner, yet, LO?
Don’t forget to click your heels together three times while saluting it.
Hi All,
Just checking in. Zarqawi said he had found a crazed ani-semite here in the comments. I’m guessing its Mark8. Well tell the little sob that he’s too late I’m fresh out of cash for suicide bombers.
As g8 and everyone else knows, every world-conquering dictator popped out of nowhere with a huge army and navy. Recognizing a murderous dictatorship as a threat before it is able to conquer large territories—that’s just the “chickenshit” in you talking. (And this, from people constantly shrieking about their dissent being “silenced” and the Constitution being “shredded.” You gotta love that kind of self-absorbed cluelessness combined with emotional instability. The “bravery” of the ostrich—that’s just a final coup de grace.)
Also, appeasement is OK, as long as you’re appeasing “a shithole with a third world army.”
JohnAA and Gray, don’t mention where those special Purim cakes are kept, the ones made extra-delicious by using Palestinian gentile blood, or else markg8 will have a real reason to get on his high horse!
SSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Start thinking like an adult? What adult doesn’t understand you don’t get do-overs in life? What adult doesn’t understand that if bad behavior is rewarded it is going to be repeated? What adult doesn’t understand that if Palestine stopped fighting, they would immediately be given aid, jobs and investment money by Israel and the US. What adult doesn’t understand if Israel stops fighting they will be destroyed? What adult can possibly assert that the fucking Palestinians have the moral highground?
Didn’t somebody paraphrase PJ O’Rourke here? “Winners have air forces, losers have suicide bombs.” It’s about time Israel started acting like a winner again.
As Rabin said, “you don’t make peace with your friends, you make peace with your enemies.” It takes guts, guts you wingnuts don’t have. Trying cost him his life when a psycho wingnut coward murdered him. It’s a shame Israel doesn’t have a leader like that now.
And, as E. Nough notes, thus we see how a Chamberlain rises and a Churchill is ignored.
In 1936, what was Germany? Not third world, but certainly third-rate.
How many tanks (and were they better or worse than those of France and Britain)?
How many airplanes?
With a jumped-up corporal in charge?
An army that had failed to defeat the premier ground forces (French) and strongest navy (Great Britain), with an economy that was hardly comparable to that of the mighty French and British Empires. When had Germany actually defeated someone? 1866? 1870?
And let’s face it, in 1936, you couldn’t even accuse the Germans of being much more overtly anti-Semitic than anybody else. No Kristallnacht yet.
So why was Churchill yammering about this threat? Why NOT give them a few pieces of territory?
That appeasement is part of what feeds a third-rate power and makes it second- or even first-rate is forgotten. So is the veracity of the need for eternal vigilance. Or Franklin’s observation about trading for temporary security.
But why the controversy? It’s just JJJOOOOOOOSSSSS after all! And land- and water-stealing JJJOOOOOOOSSSSS at that, the worst kind!
And notice the lamentation about how Israel doesn’t have a leader willing to make more concessions—but the utter absence of an actual peacemaking leader among the Palestinians? Another piece of selective cherry-picking by markg8.
Funny thing, that. Especially when displayed alongside that special morality of his.
Well, if the alleged “adult” confuses his own feelings for the moral high ground…
Besides, in the line of “thought” toed by markg8 et al, the very act of winning a war denies you the moral high ground. Actually, the mere theoretical capability to win a war makes all your actions morally suspect.
I’ll be sure to salute it when you and the rest of the appeasement brigade are impaled ass-first upon it.
Wow, Markg8!
That worked so well when Israel handed over Gaza to the Palestinians, didn’t it?
Not considering the almost non-stop rocket attacks from Gaza after they did so, of course.
shorter markg8: Fuck you and your stupid facts, neocon.
marky, long walk, short pier. Do it.
Given enough time I wouldn’t have needed an air force. Once you have a bomb in hand you can improvise on the delivery systems. That’s okay though, looks like with Mark’s help, the Iranians may get their chance. I hate them true enough, but I have to admit they’ve handled their public relations alot better than I did.
MarkG8
I’m all for making peace with enemies. The Dalai Lama keeps his peace by surrounding himself with security.
As far as I can see he poses no threat to al Qaeda, but one of their cells threatened him.
I guess if you can insulate yourself in the mountains unilateral peace is doable.
Usually, unilateral peace in the face of extreme aggression just gets you dead.
If a third world army was lobbing rockets from Mexico into San Diego what would you do?
I have no idea what that even means, are you under the impression the Israeli’s have been using suicide bombers? WTF?
Yassar Arafat died a Billionaire. Why on earth would he want peace when terror is so profitable? You think the current Palestinian leadership didn’t notice this? How do you negotiate a peace with people who are profiting so handsomely from conflict?
You are going to have to try to think like an adult to answer these, so take your time and get help if you need it.
And g8 continues with the line of “thought”:
Start using its air force on the Arabs? Well, now, that’s an idea, but seems a bit premature…
And most of us don’t have a problem with the Palestinians’ choice of delivery methods. If they consider their teenagers disposable, it’s an interesting view into their ethics, but ultimately not our problem. It’s their target selection that makes them terrorists.
Rabin’s “peace” ensured that the PLO, who until then could do little more than watch impotently from Tunisia and wait for death, were armed with M-16 rifles and received military training, given a territory from which to operate, and all the time they needed to set up weapon supply lines and a full paramilitary infrastructure. Until that “peace,” Israel didn’t have much of a terror problem inside its territories—certainly not from the PLO. The Arabs occasionally took a plane hostage somewhere in Europe (a true Arab innovation, incidentally), but Israeli bus riders could travel without fear. After the Oslo “peace”? Not so much.
Truly, a genius move by that “brave” leader Rabin, gambling with the lives of citizens he swore to protect. I’m sorry that he was murdered, if only because he never got to see the consequences of his disastrous “bravery.”
Even the Israeli left has admitted that the Oslo peace turned out to be a huge mistake. What a great example, g8—exposes your yelping cluelessness and proves exactly the opposite of what you thought it did.
But hey man—“guts.” You’re very brave for spouting discredited peace tripe. Truly, a giant among us midgets.
Neocon “facts”, pablo?
Care to share a few of them with us?
Other than war is very profitable for a select few, of course.
Uh Bmoe you have links to Palestinians immediately being given aid, jobs and investment money by Israel and the US in return for peace? I thought not.
Who’s gonna do that? The Palestinians? The Syrians? LOL
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6421597.stm