With the more than 2 billion a year we send to Israel in military and economic assistance, this is how we are thanked? I know this isn't the first time Israel has stolen valuable secrets from us. And now that it's out that the Phillippines, Japan, France, Taiwan, Korea and India are also trying to steal our secrets, it's even more obvious now that we need to stop babying these nations. Let South Korea deal with the North on their own, let Taiwan and Japan deal with Red China, India can deal with Pakistan when or if war breaks out between the two and the P.I. can also deal with their Muslim insurgents on their own without our help. And most of all, if France wants to continue the rivalry between our two countries... I'll go with it. Just makes George Washington's opinion about not being entangled in alliances with any one country more evident today. The U.S. Federal government hasn't always acted responsibly and honorably but at the same time, I'm tired of other nations and groups crying about the U.S. and how we make things so unfair for everyone else yet they don't hesitate to take our money every chance they get. It's time we stop catering to the other nations' needs and wants and start making our elected officials in government more fiscally responsible and stop all military and economic aid. How can we help others when we can't even get our own house in order?

With the more than 2 billion a year we send to Israel in military and economic assistance, this is how we are thanked? I know this isn't the first time Israel has stolen valuable secrets from us. And now that it's out that the Phillippines, Japan, France, Taiwan, Korea and India are also trying to steal our secrets, it's even more obvious now that we need to stop babying these nations. Let South Korea deal with the North on their own, let Taiwan and Japan deal with Red China, India can deal with Pakistan when or if war breaks out between the two and the P.I. can also deal with their Muslim insurgents on their own without our help. And most of all, if France wants to continue the rivalry between our two countries... I'll play. Just makes George Washington's opinion about not being entangled in alliances with any one country more evident today. The U.S. Federal government hasn't always acted responsibly and honorably but at the same time, I'm tired of other nations and groups crying about the U.S. and how we make things so unfair for everyone else yet they don't hesitate to take our money every chance they get. It's time we stop catering to the other nations' needs and wants and start making our elected officials in government more fiscally responsible and stop all military and economic aid. How can we help others when we can't even get our own house in order?

I would echo Eric's comment.

It's time to cut off Israel and all the rest from the Federal teat for good. Bring all forces home, including those in Europe, Okinawa and Korea.

As for getting rid of the spies, we need to do what has always been done with spies. Upon conviction, they need to dangle from the end of a rope. Espionage has always had the penalty of death, back to the days of Major Andre' and Nathan Hale. We hanged their spies and they hanged ours. Which is as it should be.

Unfortunately, I think the true problem is much more ominous. The neo-conservatives dominate government and even when Democrats occupy the White House, there are still numerous neo-cons occupying many sensitive government posts. I believe that these spies are being facilited by top people in the administration, whether Republican or Democrat. The ultimate solution is to elect an administration that totally refutes the ideas of neo-conservatism and that will conduct a total top to bottom purge of the Federal Government. If such individuals are senior civil service and cannot be purged, then they need to be publicly exposed and transferred to areas that they can do no harm, or placed under such close supervision as will allow them no opportunity to do harm.

I must say the party line is a bit indefensible when it comes to Israel. Israel is an actual front in the real war on terror, unlike Iraq or Iran. Israel is actually a free country being threatened by an unfree country, unlike the US-Iraq relationship. Look, I'm about as dove-like as you can get - I would have stayed out of World War I - but come on. There are 2 places that just need us: South Korea and Israel, two countries worth defending for our own interests as countries of the Western world. Oh, sure, the usual emotionalist criticisms apply (You sound like Bush!), but the fact is libertarianism shouldn't be an anti-reality political philosophy.

Matt,

Israel and South Korea each have sufficient resources to be able defend themselves.

Israel has the most modern and effective military, including nuclear arms, in the Middle East.

South Korea has a much larger economy than does North Korea.

It is important for Israel and South Korea that they re-assume fully their responsibility of defending themselves, if they are to be recognized as independent countries.

If they cannot assume their own responsibility of self-defense, then they are really closer to being colonies of the US than they are independent States.

Our allies wouldn't have to stoop to this level if our own government were more transparent. It occurs to me that secrecy in government is largely obselete anyway. What could the government be hiding that isn't shady at this point? Aside from troop movements on the battlefield, I can't think of anything the US does that isn't common knowledge. We widely advertize the size of our military, the extent of our arsenal, and who we'd like to kill with those resources. The locations of our strategic facilities is known by just about anyone with a map. As for nuclear secrets, they aren't secrets anymore, and they haven't been for a long time. The instructions are right here on this very internet for *&%$ sake. Anyone who can afford to build a nuclear weapon has done so. Anything else that has to be kept secret is probably something we have a right to know that they didn't want getting out. If they have to keep their agenda or their past activities a secret, it's only because they know we'd all be very angry if we heard about what they've been doing. So I say HUZZAH for espionage, we're doing it to our allies on a much more invasive level, so they have every right to try it on us. I mean, god forbid the world might find out our nation's remaining secrets, which in the nuclear age pretty much amounts to the location of jimmy hoffa's body, how sleek our new fighter jet looks, how many times over we could blow up a given country with our nuclear arsenal, and who we're spying on (which is pretty much everyone.) If there's stuff beyond that, it probably involves super-viruses or half-baked conspiracy theories that turn out to be true, and if that's the case then we're doing stuff we shouldn't be, and that should become public knowledge.

Chance you are soooo nieve, are you in 5th grade? To think the government does not have secrecy tells me you do not have a clue. NONE.
Just because you see something publish does not mean it is all fact, real or not.

I am sorry to say but what you just said is idiocy. I hope the people who should get voted in from the Libertarian Party, will not be someone who thinks like you. This is a very dangerous thinking from your part.

And unfortunately we have people who think like you in some areas that are in charge of this party which is one of the reason why it is running poorly.
I agree with most of their principles but however things need to be worked on.

It is a scary situation that someone who thinks like you can vote.

Frankly, we've paid enough to several nations to simply have bought them outright like we did the Louisiana Purchase.

Why aren't the countries we have defended at huge expense not simply additional states of the United States now?

And can we get a refund from France for Louisiana?

----------------------------------------

As an aside, singling out Israel has the kind of bigoted undertones I don't think any Libertarian should get into. We've spent thirty years bribing Israel to withdraw from Arab lands and refrain from beating up the Arabs any further. We bribe Jordan and Egypt with a nearly identical amount (about $3 billion annually) to stop throwing themselves in front of Israeli guns.

Just by letting one group shoot and one group get shot, we could save ourselves $6 billion.

----------------------------------------

The Libertarian solution is the only one that isn't head-in-the-sand:

- Bring our boys home -- all of them

- Demobilize our military to defense-only levels

- End all of the $30 billion in foreign aid we send overseas

- Repeal all laws prohibiting individual Americans from participating in foreign affairs and allow them to do so at their own risk

----------------------------------------

Chance Kramer makes and excellent point -- that we are spying on everyone -- including the same allies listed in the "revelations" -- ourselves; so we righteous indignation is hypocritical.

----------------------------------------

I forget who it was, but there was a man dragged before the House Un-American Activities Committee (McCarthy) hearings in the fifties who was asked what should be done about Communist infiltrators in the government.

His answer was to "eliminate the jobs."

Libertarians correctly ask where the authority is listed in the US Constitution to establish a Federal police force.

If the US government were simply returned to its Constitutional limits, there would be no highly-paid FBI bureaucrats with access to masses of "sensitive" material.

There would be no FBI.

----------------------------------------

Were America pursuing a noninterventionist foreign policy, there would also be little reason for spies to bother with us at all. Some nations spy on us just so future activities of the U.S. government can be somewhat predicted.

You know -- like trying to find out which rebel or opposition groups are being covertly funded by the American government. Or maybe when our troops will land.

Wow. D Walter, you sound like a expert on this stuff. :D

And ya know something? You're 100% right on the money.

I agree with you too Walter.

One quick aside on the subject of Israel. There is a fine line between anti-zionism and anti-semitism. It is possible to endorse the former while rejecting the latter. Zionism is so tied up in neo-conservatism as too be virtually indistinguishable at times. So when I mention elimination of funding from Israel, it is merely in the anti-zionist, anti-neocon mode of thought. Israel will still be more than capable of taking care of itself, so no danger of it being overrun by arab armies.

BTW, our buddies over at UNICEF are running an ad campaign in Belgium that features the Smurfs being bombed and smurfette being killed. If they promise to run a "Care Bears meet Al Quida" campaign, I may be tempted to donate $5.00 at Halloween.

And no, I am NOT making the part about the smurfs up, go check out Drudge.

Walter D. makes a lot of sense. Though the point that non-interventionism removes the necessity of spying is incorrect.

Appropriate military defence requires intelligence. Knowledge of an impending attack, an initiation force, is crucial in planning the appropriate response.

One advantage from a Libertarian adminisration wuld be the free marketeers roaming the globe, at their own risk and for their own profit. The number of agents would be greatly expanded, should the compensation be substantial.

The draw back of this Libertarian Foreign Policy would be millions of American opportunists using their new found freedom to manipulate, the always greedy, foreign governments.

The fact that the manipulation is being done by private citizens, at their own risk, will be missed by those hurt and oppressed by the actions of said Americans. Since everyone in this whole world is a collectivist they will draw no crucial distinctions and will hate us all. I offer the 19th century as proof.

As much as we all want it, there is no easy solution future conflict. There is no easy solution to any of our problems.

Let's work on it.

Bruce

Eric,
Just a reminder that the Philippine government did not sanction the espionage activities of Aragoncillo. On the contrary, it was the opposition that abetted, encourage and ultimately made use of said information for their own nefarious designs.

So, we give billions to numerous countries and causes for countless told and untold reasons. We spend time effort to police the problems of the world, whether we are asked to or not. Maybe we would be better off lining our borders with the whole of the Armed Forces. Maybe we wouldn't. International politics is an arena of power, struggle, and accommodation. That being the case in a world inevitably growing smaller, I'm not sure I trust the well being of our institutions left in the hands of countries that can not govern their own affairs amicably let alone their inability to play well with others. How do you create order, find an accord among nations, none of whom wants to be subject unto another? It's a competition and no one wants anyone else to win. It's sad to say, but the relationships between States, NGO's, IGO's, MCN's, etc. are very incestuous at best. Greed is difficult to avoid, regardless of what any given entity is greedy to have. The fact remains, we are a great country and display this fact routinely, despite our own political bickering. The comments of other political leaders only arise as a means of saving face in their own country's or organization's public eye for they lack the gumption to face the difficult challenges this world presents, let alone the challenges that exist within our own borders.

Yes, flush out and hang the traitors and spies. But anyone thinking we don't have secrets is a fool. Anyone thinking that we (and by WE I assume other's are meaning the people of the American public) have the RIGHT to know these secrets of the United States government, that it belongs in the realm of "public knowledge", is sadly misguided and delusional. Whether or not we have non-interventionist foreign policy, having spies in most certainly in our national interests. To think that other countries would cease to spy if we had a non-interventionist stance is also a little naive. No matter what we may want or think, the world is becoming smaller and other countries will have an interest in us. Yes it's not a perfect world or a perfect system, but a spy network (like the CIA who works outside the borders of our nation) is very useful to our country. In a way, it can act like a tornado warning siren. You don't know "the bad guys" are coming, but there?s a system that warns you before they get here. Same goes for the FBI (their jurisdiction is within the boundaries of this country in this regard). They are like a carbon monoxide detector you plug into your wall. You can't see "the bad guys" as they attempt to come into the country or who are already here and recruited, but it's their job to detect and alert us. Even with non-intervention, we are still at risk. And granted these systems need a little work to get past the bureaucratic crap, but ideally those are some reasons we want them around.

Colonies, Imperial States, Foreign Sovereignty, National Interests, whatever. We have come a long way since the late 19th early 20th centuries when events in the world made it difficult for the United States to remain isolated. Should we continue to pay welfare to other countries? No, that much is obvious when our own nation system is ineffectually remiss. But should we completely remove ourselves from the international arena through complete non-intervention? I believe in Libertarian principals, but find it difficult to find a scenario in which this ideal is possible. Intervention seems unavoidable in some respect given the globalization of economics, technology, and pretty much anything that free trade involves.

P.S.
True American - it IS sad when you think about what kind of people are able to vote in this country
D Walter - your passion is appreciated, but some of your points seem tied to it a little too much
Bruce - the only voice of reason on this issue. there needs to be more people like yourself to work and make that difference

Now's as good a time as any for me to state my position on foreign influence in the US: If you want to influence the US Government, apply for statehood.

I tend to hear a lot fewer British accents after I say that.

A pro-Israeli lobbying group is not the Israeli government, so I think it is misleading to act as if our ally is spying on us. I don't think any libertarian would like it if the private actions of a group that claims to represent America were taken as the offical policy of the government.
Furthermore, I agree with Mat's comment. South Korea and Israel need America's help. They are free countries trying to resist neighbors who are very anti-freedom. Now, if we were to totally abandon international aid, troops, etc, I would understand that as a matter of principal, though I think it might be a mistake if taken to the extreme. But for Israel to be a target, out of all possible nations, of criticism... given all the aid we give out, including to Palestine, with whom they are in constant conflict... confuses me greatly. I believe that they are a crucial U.S. ally.

Let's see.

US aid to Israel: $3 billion.
US aid to Palestine: $100 million.

In other words, the aid we give to Palestine is just 3.2% of the aid we give to Israel. So J, perhaps now you understand why the previous author made "Israel to be a target, out of all possible nations, of criticism... given all the aid we give out, including to Palestine, with whom they are in constant conflict."

You can criticise the United States for giving foriegn aid, but this argument is circular. You can make it seem like part of a conspiaracy perpetuated by the elites of this country that Israel gets a high proportion of the aid that is given out, or you can recognize that Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9665550/site/newsweek/
Bush meets a guy at the mall to run the FEDS.
I think someone needs to speak up to impreach him. He is crazy.

First, AIPAC is a powerful US lobbying group that acts on behalf of Israeli officials. The post also pointed out that classified information was given directly to an Israeli official.

Second, Israel is the only country that holds real elections in the region (a democracy), but that doesn't mean it's "free." In the 2005 Economic Freedom of the World Report, America is tied for third; Israel is tied for 50th. Though Israel is more advanced and tolerant than its neighbors, it's nevertheless a socialistic/militaristic theocracy.

Third, as has already been pointed out, Israel ALREADY has by far the strongest military in the Middle East. It wouldn't be difficult for Israel to singlehandedly destroy the entire region, if it were indeed attacked. Apart from the fact that forcing Americans to subsidize another country is unconstitutional, not to mention immoral, the notion that Israel DEPENDS on America for its very survival doesn't match reality.

I don't hate Israel. I just think we should have get our facts straight here.

whoa, whoa, true american is calling me a fifth grader. i think i need to state my point better. i'm not claiming that our government doesn't keep secrets. i'm saying that our government keeps them unecessarily, and most of what they have to hide is stuff that we as americans AND as members of the human species deserve to know. i have been charged with nievete, but i would counter that allowing the government to maintain secrecy from the very people they are supposed to be representing, and then assuming that ability will not be abused under our present system is the real nieve pipe-dream that got us into this mess. We live in an age where there's no purpose to hiding something unless it's underhanded or sinister. And if the united states is preparing to do something underhanded or sinister (which we very often do) then our allies have every right to make sure we're not about to %$#@ them over. If we were conducting ourselves abroad in a responsible libertarian way, there'd be no reason to lie to anybody about anything. Besides, i was under the impression that transparency in government was part of our platform.

Great good job on the clarification, now it makes more sense.

May not agree totally on the extent of the disclosure, but think that your general proposition has some validity.

Libertarian TV Said:

"US aid to Israel: $3 billion.
US aid to Palestine: $100 million."

And again, please let's not make it sound like we're singling out Israel.

A more evenhanded way to make the above point is this:

"US aid to Israel: $3 billion.
US aid to Palestine: $100 million."
"US aid to Egypt and Jordan: $3 billion.

Or better yet, let's just talk about the $30 billion in cash welfare we give to nations around the world, period.

I suspect there are also many billions more in "in-kind" donations.

For instance, it's a basic principle of market economics that when you strangle supply, prices rise. Now consider all of the ways in which exploration, drilling, refining and delivering oil-based products have been hampered by law in the United States -- such as local zoning that prohibits "non-conforming uses"; the huge number of licenses, permits, regulations and so on that state governments require, and then the same red tape at the federal level.

So how much of a hidden subsidy have we stupidly been giving to oil-producing nations since oil production turned into a "by your leave, king" enterprise?

Given that Americans now import well over half of the 20 million barrels of oil they consume daily, one might assume that artificially-restricted domestic production adds several dollars per barrel at minimum.

Oh, yeah -- that must be a good thing. Our oil will still be in the ground after we've tapped the rest of the world dry.

Governments have no friends, just temporary allies, and then only so long as their national interests converge.

Foreign aid will never produce allies but after creating dependence offers some leverage over those in power that distrubute it.

Some suggest a more favorable result would be seen if direct foreign aid were replaced by unrestricted free trade. The US can promote but cannot enforce free trade. It can and is negoiating for more open trading between nations and is seeing some success. In the meantime expect foreign aid to continue at some level as the US followes more that one policy track at a time.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46771

This article was from a hard core conservative. Yes, many conservatives have now concluded they have been had. The words "compassionate conservatism" (pronounced 'G R E A T S O C I E T Y') don't represent what we were expecting to see when we voted for Bush. Tax cuts don't sound so good when spending is wildly out of control (you need BOTH low taxes and low spending). Building a Pax America is not very good if the enemy is already behind the lines and in the tent, with a nuke. Jobs are not very optimal if they are in .... India or China. Low interest rates are not too useful if the houses they help you buy are ten times as expensive as they should be due to overcrowding. And freedoms listed in the constitution are not very real if they can be taken away anytime a society encounters problems or any time someone is offended. I think the Republicans may take it on the chin in the next election. Unfortunately, that may give a worse party a turn at the helm. Then, we can vote them out too. So, Libertarians, you have 4 to 8 years to get your party ready for prime time. Democrats, you have less time to wrest control of your party from the Gores, Clintons, and Sharptons

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46771

This article was from a hard core conservative. Yes, many conservatives have now concluded they have been had. The words "compassionate conservatism" (pronounced 'G R E A T S O C I E T Y') don't represent what we were expecting to see when we voted for Bush. Tax cuts don't sound so good when spending is wildly out of control (you need BOTH low taxes and low spending). Building a Pax America is not very good if the enemy is already behind the lines and in the tent, with a nuke. Jobs are not very optimal if they are in .... India or China. Low interest rates are not too useful if the houses they help you buy are ten times as expensive as they should be due to overcrowding. And freedoms listed in the constitution are not very real if they can be taken away anytime a society encounters problems or any time someone is offended. I think the Republicans may take it on the chin in the next election. Unfortunately, that may give a worse party a turn at the helm. Then, we can vote them out too. So, Libertarians, you have 4 to 8 years to get your party ready for prime time. Democrats, you have less time to wrest control of your party from the Gores, Clintons, and Sharptons

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/12/D8D6KS7O1.html

lovely 16 children this woman has, my guess welfare such as us are paying for it, and she wants more.

Quote from somebody who didn't bother filling in the name field:
"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9665550/site/newsweek/
Bush meets a guy at the mall to run the FEDS.
I think someone needs to speak up to impreach him. He is crazy.
"

I'm pretty sure that's a joke. Or at least, if it's not a joke, I'll eat my face.

Nigel this isn't a joke, they want to pass an anti-hate law which means our freedom of speech will really be limited if not gone.

This is to be passed along for people to call the congress people badly. We really are being squashed into a corner.

I generally detest personal attacks. That said, whoever seriously posted the MSNBC article is severely retarded and shouldn't be allowed to post here anymore. The piece clearly says SATIRE at the top of the page (i.e., it's a joke). I'm so very embarrassed to even have to point that out.

What makes you think it's a joke? Mr or Ms J whoever you are. Maybe there is some truth to it. There is an article with a card from Mier to Bush and details of the card along with a picture. At this point if you haven't been aware of what is going on and a point to be made then you are not keeping up what is happening.
What is fact is here. The people in the big so called Government has taken a lot of our freedom away. Now they want to take our free speech as well. Your worried about being embarrassed. I think you may need to concern yourself about what is going to be happening in your life. A life that will soon not be yours, not the small stuff that is posted here.

As I already pointed out, "True American," the MSNBC article clearly says "Satire". Do you even know what that word means? Check a dictionary.

I don't think President Bush is an intelligent man. But if any Libertarian seriously believes he'd pick a "guy he met at the mall" to head the Federal Reserve, then that Libertarian should check himself into a mental institution.

Mr J. for someone who dislike personal attacks, you have just controdicted yourself. Obviously you've shown not to have good reading comprehension, as I have stated; there may be some truth to it. But then of course you seem to believe everything you read. The truth is what goes on behind closed door and how disorted does the media make it. There is such a thing also as reading between the lines.
Now I have bigger issues to attend to, do not waste my time any further with your small issues.

Hi, this is the person who first posted as J in this thread. Just so you know, someone has been using the same name as me. My posts were limited to the subject of this main article (i.e. Israel, foriegn aid, etc...) and I am not the one who called someone else a "retard." Maybe this site should have a login to prevent idiocy like this from occurring, I will not post anymore on this thread, so any more responses are not from me.

I do not believe this, can someone get this j idiot off. This is a political site. This guy is playing games.

lol

J wrote: "...you can recognize that Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East."

Well, I guess it depends on how you define the word "democracy." Egypt, Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Yemen, Oman, and Iran all have parliamentary elections, just as Israel does, so by that definition they are also "democracies." Only Qatar and Saudi Arabia are not democracies by this measure. But if by the word "democracy" you mean a free country, I don't think any country in the Middle East qualifies, including Israel.

Personally, I don't think we should be defining our friends in terms of whether they have democracies. After all, Israel is basically one great big military fortress where you can hardly go ten blocks without having to show your papers at a checkpoint and where Palestinians aren't even considered citizens and are treated like trash. Also this is a country that acquires territory by stealing its neighbors' lands in the name of "Zionism." Before 1947, what we now know as Israel used to be known as Palestine.

And if you like the idea of closing your borders and putting up razor wire fences (like some conservative-libertarians seem to want here in the US as part of the fight against terrorism) Israel is the perfect model. Personally, I wouldn't want to live like that, and I wouldn't consider myself free if I did live like that.

LibertarianTV, watch which propaganda you read as far as the "imperialist" type accusations you make.

Passy, as I said, that other person was not me and I would love for there to be a login to get into this site, and originally made the point that there should not be mudslinging, but actual political debate. Maybe reading that one paragraph was too much of a strain for you. Not sure how any of that makes me an "idiot," but if it makes you feel good to call me that go for it.

Yeah, the "Satire" at the top of the page ought to have been a clue to you people.

Good thing I don't have to eat my face.

If it concerns you that other J is not you, then change your name or add to it like spell it out. Maybe call yourself J II. lol lol

LTV I hate tell you the jewish people needed their own state for a lot of reason. How well you know the bible? the history or the holocust in which NO ONE IN THE WORLD wanted to help? Until the USA felt threatened by Hitler before they stepped in. So they have to rely on themselves, they have no other choice. While a lot of these jews were slaves in biblical times did they get compensated? You should only worry about what is considered what they stole to make their own state.
In this country they couldn't even buy a home different states. They were told do not sell to a jew, and even today a lot of us are still disliked.

Yet there are other religions that controdict themselves very badly.

But these other countries, it is horrible how they treat their women, children. It is beyond words that can discribe.

I would like to add going back to at least 922 BC
the state of Isreal existed between the mediterran sea on the west, phoenicia" Lebbanon" on the north, What is present day Jordan on the East and the jewish state of Judah in the south, Judah included Jerusalem, Bethlehem.

The border within this area have been fought over for centuries, when you select and arbritrary starting point, which represent the point and time in change of ownership, you will of course find the previous owners are not the same as the current owners.

Pasy, I am not prejudiced against Jews, despite what you seem to think. But that doesn't mean I think that theft is justified, even by history. Theft is still theft, no matter what justification is given for it.

I think it's also extremely dangerous to use the Bible (or the Qu'ran, for that matter) to justify anything where legal claims are concerned. Except for some who claim to read the Bible literally (although even they interpret without admitting the fact to themselves), most agree that the Bible is mostly metaphor and myth, albeit religious myth. Treating it as complete and objective historical fact often leads to disaster. Treating it as law is even more dangerous. Among other things, a literal reading of the Bible would sanction selling daughters into slavery, putting people to death for working on the Sabbath, prohibiting men from cutting their beards, and stoning to death farmers who refused to rotate their crops. Obviously, no one in modern days would consider these laws to be just, but the Bible says they are if we read it literally.

I'm not saying this to disparage or put down either Christianity or Judaism. On the contrary, I respect the faiths of all peoples. I'm simply pointing out that it is a mistake to treat the Bible (or the Torah) as the basis for legal law, because there is too little in it that is verifiable and so much that would be considered unjust and obnoxious in today's modern world.

-------------

J, I was not spouting imperialist propaganda. I was simply and accurately reporting what happened in the 1940s. It's not propaganda to say what happened historically by referring to facts that are well known.

What amazes me is the governmet had no spies abroad to tell them what's going on in DC!

Well, they did find these guys somehow.

LTV you are missing the point. Fact if you go back in history, the land of isreal belongs to the jews in the first place. They didn't steal it.

I do not know what book you have been reading but, there is scientific proof that they have found how the pyramids were built according to the bible.

My guess you come across a atheist.

Israel belonging to the Jews in the first place? Have you READ the Bible? How about that whole bit with the wars and the conflicts over people turning to the native pagan gods? Please, don't bring your passion fueled ignorance to this board. If you want to talk about facts, fine, but we do not need religious dogma, and especially do not need total fabrications.

Also, the whole notion of how oppressed you are as a modern day Jew... Well, if I'm not mistaken, it is a Jewish man who is running the Federal Reserve, and therefore can be seen as one of the most powerful men in the world. If he were to accidentally sneeze one morning, the dollar would change in value erratically. Given the nature of this nation as it pertains to greed and property, I don't think this can very well be overlooked.

Just to be clear, I am far from anti-semitic. I live with a Jewish roommate, and the last girl I was involved with was Jewish. I am, however, quite fed up with all of the whining that goes on by members of certain groups pertaining to oppression that is either a thing of the past or total fabrication. Nobody in this world has a perfect life. Everybody has some people that hate them, be it for their race, gender, or otherwise. This thread has had some good points brought up pertaining to the status of Israel, and bringing up such ideas as ancient ownership, dogma, or even persecution. Not to sound overly callous, but foreign policy is something that should deal with the self-interest of a nation. The reasons to step in in times of genocide such as the holocaust largely have to do with self-interest on some level. While this may seem to run counter to some peoples' religious morals, it doesn't pose as big of an issue as one would think, because often one's own self-interest is best preserved through helping others. After all, free-trade benefits everyone, and you can't readily have free-trade without people capable to trade with. Nor can you expect to have freedom without helping to secure the freedom of your neighbor. At this point, our intervention involving Israel is not something I would consider helpful, but rather a crutch for their government to inflict its rule both upon its people as well as surrounding lands, and also serves to leave them dependent upon us. The last thing the middle east needs is war, and our readiness to supply them arms is about as helpful as the person who gives a junkie a bag of dope. Our aid does little except promote the separatist ideology of the theocratic state of Israel, and such an ideology is incongruent with trying to establish secular republics in the area. It's time to pull the plug on our little satellite nation.

No Pasy, you are the one missing the point. The Bible not a valid source for making law. End of statement.

Even worse, you seem to think that I'm an atheist and that this somehow invalidates my comments on some level. I am not an atheist. My relationship with God is solid and intact. However, even if I was an atheist...what difference would it make? Are atheists somehow incapable of telling or understanding truth? Of course not. Your innuendo on this point is insulting, demeaning, and uncalled for.

You also miss the point regarding historical claims. Whether or not Israel previously existed in that land is immaterial, for the same reason that whether or not Native Americans owned the land before us here in this country is immaterial. What is that reason? Simply, we rightly understand and hold today that the son is not responsible for the sins of his father.

There is not a shred of doubt that the Native American tribes in this country were abused and robbed of their land by the white settlers, many of whom have descendants living here today. But the claims of those abused Native Americans were against those white settlers. Those same claims are not valid against whites currently living in America. Also, current Native Americans do not inherit the claims of their ancestors. Thus, there is no morally justifiable way for modern Native Americans to hold modern whites accountable for what whites 150 years ago did to Native Americans living at that time.

You have fallen for the false logic that the claims of nations against their conquerers carry through the centuries to their descendents. You are wrong. If we were to apply your logic across the board to all such claims, there would be no end to the "just" wars that would be fought to satisfy such claims. The entire world would be constantly at war. Curiously enough, that pretty well describes what HAS happened over the past 500 years or more.

It's time to stop that way of thinking.

On a slightly different note, there is an outstanding new article at LewRockwell.com about how people could possibly become members of things like fascist movements. I recommend it to all here.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/fields1.html

You know what I think, LTV, you say things as you see fit and how it is convience to your way of thinking.

You know the truth is the truth, is the truth, is the truth.

Just like certain media news put out what they choose, not what should be there.

LTV, I agree that Israel is a socialistic-militaristic state that America shouldn't subsidize or seek to emulate.

But let's not compare democracy in Israel to "democracy" in countries like Iran, Syria, or Egypt. Israel DOES have regular, competitive, open elections (in fact, it's had four different prime ministers in the last decade). Elections in most other Middle Eastern countries resemble the elections in the former Soviet Union: people could vote for whomever they wanted--as long as they were Communists.

Can Arab Israelis take part in elections? Can the arabs in Israel live wherever they wish, and go wherever they want? If not then Israel is no more "democratic" than apartheid South Africa, or the segregationist South. And about the Jewish claims about there alledged slavery in Egypt and there history in the middle east. Http://www.jesusneverexistm/egypt.htm and Http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/choosen-people.htm

Anyone with Israeli citizenship (which isn't that difficult to get, whether they're Jewish or not) and who is at least 18 years old can vote in Israeli elections. ANYONE.

Jason I cannot find your website, but I will tell you it is documented that jesus exist by the romans.

As human migration populated the planet, every single land mass on earth has been claimed by some family, clan, tribe, culture, nation or some other grouping and those claims contested warfare over and over again. History is unable to reveal a rightful land owner so it really only matters who is the current resident and who supports or opposes that residence. Everyone can identify the supporters and decide who to allign with or be, just another observer.

History is a horrible way to name the true landowners; if you believe in the historical justification for Israel's existence you'd better get yourself packing back to Europe.

Nigel, if you don't believe in the historical justification for Israel's existence, then YOU can get packing back for Europe, because the United States actually DID steal and colonize North America from the natives who lived here, wheras with Israel the facts are much fuzzier. The difference to you? Maybe it's the religion of the people who live there...

Yeah, the UN stole the land for them. Not very fuzzy.

Unlike most of y'all (I'd imagine), I actually know and am friends with several Israelis. From this and my other comments on here it ought to be rather obvious that I'm no anti-Semite. I just don't think Israel's placement is justified. That's not to say, however, that I think they should leave. They've worked their backsides off to create a country, and that's admirable. I just wish Israel and Palestine could cooperate.

Not only was the land taken from the Indians, it seems the indians cared about the enviroment. Look at the enviroment now. Getting destroyed. Even now with somethings happens from years of abuse they are not listening enough to stop it and still continue to destroy this planet. With greed, power and control.

Patsy,

Not to worry - Ecological damage? Blame increasing population for demand for comodities from the earth, sun and sea. Modern man arived on the sceen quite recently in geological time and has endured a couple of ice ages so far. I prefer to believe the earth is self renewable over and over again but do not forgive waste or carelessness. Better to leave your space in better condition than when you found it for others to use.

Pasy: Actually it only seems like the Indians cared about the environment because when the European explorers saw most of them, their numbers had been so decimated by diseases that their population was too small to have much environmental impact.

The "Indians" cared about the environment about as much as the pre-industrial white settlers who arrived in the Americas, the Europeans were just more advanced at altering it.

No actually the Indian got the diseases from the white man. Just like when other different people had come in to this day track in different diseases. Sometimes not on purpose.

Stockman, good point in your thinking.

You know if we didn't have all these rules and building codes, and have to worry about re-assements. I would love to build a home according to the weather for safety, like a dome for example, or maybe 21 century homstead "eco-tech" growing your own foods. I would like not to have to worry about all the poision put in our foods that we eat.
The government hurt us by our foods we eat, when was the last time you had a delicious fresh tomatoe right off the vine? Now they are talking about cloning food. We have foods sprayed with pesticied, as well as bio-engineered.

The government hurt us with codes and rules that if we had the freedom to build and change our homes as we see fit. Maybe we could prevent some possible loss of homes during disasters because it would be made according to the eviroment.

The building codes do not necessarily help protect us. It just an illusion to led us to believe they know best when this is not always the case.

Another point of limited freedom.

FREEDOM:

A WORD - You write of freedoms, limited!
Americans spend less of their income of food than any people on the planet. Americans are free to grow our own, pesticide free food, with genetically unmodified seeds or we may buy organically grown food from the food stores. We may buy land, use our money to build, as we have, so there is no applicable building code unless we want someone to insure the buildings.

Codes set a minimum safe construction standard so what we build doesn't harm others. Such as their property or collateral of the lenders used to buy the things in the first place.

Individual freedoms are increasing limited by relationship and the proximately of others and concentration of people. Government is just the institution used to protect one from the other.

LP principle of self government - People may do what ever they wish, except infringe on the freedom of others.

Jason I cannot find your website, but I will tell you it is documented that jesus exist by the romans.

Posted by: at October 14, 2005 That's alright. I found out from a Jewish group that I belong to that the link's info is inaccurate. I just wanted to present a contrary point of view.

it's been a long time since i so enjoyed reading posts in the net. two thumbs up! substances that cure you: http://www.panasonic.com , substances that cure you , substances that cure you