Israeli withdrawl from Gaza.

[Clint]

After all these years of Israelis being bombed by suicide bombers it would take acute myopia to suggest they would be the ones to retaliate with suicide bombers. Scrat’s comment is a clever yet transparent attempt to set up any bombings to look like they were done by Israel. The sad thing is that there are many people who would fall for the set-up.

[Clint]

Actually, those people you call “nutcase extremists” were for many years held in high regard by the people of Israel. They were considered pioneers. The reason it is important to the Palestinians that they be evacuated is so they can occupy high ground and a seaport. With the high ground they can launch missiles and with a seaport they can smuggle in weapons. When you see it on the ground it is obvious.

We have learned in the world we live in today that you don’t get peace by giving in to the enemy. The Palestinians will be demanding more just as soon as this phase is complete and if they don’t get their way they will increase the killing of noncombatants again.

I get my information from Israel. I actually talk to the people there and I have visited there. I see you select your information from those who's points of view agree with yours.

[Clint]

Constructive sounds good to me. I’m no apologist for the government of Israel. I am pretty fond of the people and the land though. I have met some very nice Palestinian people and I’m sure there are a lot more where they came from.

It is interesting (to say the least). No matter which side people are on, they seem to be solid on that side. The arguments by the other side seem to be baseless. I hear people argue the Palestinian side and they sound to me like they are making things up as they go.

Maybe there should be a special court formed. The court would not have the power to make a binding decision. It could have jury of twelve, made up of six Palestinians of good repute and six Israelis of good repute. Maybe the whole thing is televised worldwide. The witnesses from both sides and many different points of view would take the stand. After the cases for both sides were made and the whole world listened, the jury would deliberate. The jury deliberations would be televised as well. After the whole thing was complete the judge (moderator) could turn to the camera and say, “My verdict is that you must decide”.

After a process like that, at least more people would be informed as to why the problem exists. As it is I think much of the world thinks the fighting is over a huge amount of land and natural resources. Most people don’t know what a huge role faith plays in all of this. I don’t think that most people know how deep the feelings regarding the Temple Mount run.

Fences, walls and weaponry are only temporary. Information may only create more resolve on each side. I don't know. If informing the world doesn't improve the situation, maybe some of the people could start fighting for a cause rather than out of blind hate.

[Clint]

Scrat wrote: Here's the latest. I knew at least one terrorist would show up.

''In the West Bank, a settler killed four Palestinian laborers in a shooting rampage, which Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon denounced as a twisted act of "Jewish terror" designed to stop the historic pullout."

This tells me enough, there are terrorists on both sides. ---
It is very telling that you have to gloat over one “terrorist”. A guy who right or wrong is losing his home also loses control and kills three people. He shouldn’t have done it but it is in now way an act of terrorism comparable to the planned attacks of Hamas on innocent men, women and children.