The influential Middle Eastern politics blog, Syria Comment, has the scoop on a new development in the Syrian security apparatus that has “the potential to change the strategic balance of power in the region.” Here’s an excerpt:
However, on the heels of the Der Spiegel article, new evidence has emerged from Syria suggesting that the computer hacked by the Mossad agents was a decoy deliberately intended to distract Israel’s attention away from a much more deadly Syrian secret weapon under development.
Read the full article here.
November 4, 2009 at 8:17 pm
lak wlee 3ala aamti.
QNOIN has been beaten by Dr. Mahdoum and Dr. Kahrabji.
November 4, 2009 at 9:05 pm
The expansion of the Qnion during a global economic meltdown is impressive.
November 4, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Funny this Josh Landis…Very funny…If they were hiding something bigger…Ooops they let the cat out of the bag!!
Don’t these morons know that the rest of the world is not at the same intellect level as repressed arab masses in Syria???
November 4, 2009 at 11:17 pm
The Qnion is getting put of hand.
November 5, 2009 at 2:19 am
QN,
Is it your position that the Der Spiegel article is inaccurate?
November 5, 2009 at 9:41 am
AIG
I have no way of knowing whether the article is inaccurate or not. I do find it hard to believe that Hizbullah killed Hariri, though, and the author of that piece for Der Spiegel was the same author of the nuclear plant piece, so I’m not entirely convinced of his credibility.
November 5, 2009 at 10:22 am
QN,
You are waffling. You wrote a piece that belittles the der spiegel report. What was your motivation? Are you now enlisted in the Syrian PR effort?
November 5, 2009 at 10:48 am
AIG
On the contrary, my motivation was to alert Israel to the threat posed by the Syrian Computer Society.
Don’t blow my cover, man!
November 5, 2009 at 10:56 am
QN,
I asked a simple and direct question. Why won’t you answer constructively? What is your motivation in writing this piece?
November 5, 2009 at 11:18 am
AIG
I responded simply and directly to you. Here you are again:
Typically, when most human beings are “not entirely convinced” of something’s credibility, they tend to engage in complex rhetorical exercises and discursive jousts (commonly known as “poking fun”).
November 5, 2009 at 11:31 am
QN,
There is very little that is reported in any media outlet that people “are entirely convinced” of. Yet, we tend to be quite selective at what we disparage and poke fun at. So I was wondering what was your motivation in spending your valuable time helping the Syrian PR effort? Why did you pick this article specifically? If Alex asked you to do it, why did you agree?
November 5, 2009 at 12:15 pm
AIG
I would have thought you might have noticed by now that I’m precisely not very selective in what I disparage and poke fun at. I do it to blow off steam, let my hair down (such as it is), etc.
As for helping the Syrian PR effort… c’mon. I spent my “valuable time” writing a piece about how the Syrian regime is too broke, backward, and clueless to confront Israel effectively. Hardly a vote of confidence.
You need to stop worrying about Syria’s PR. Lighten up.
As I recall, though, you didn’t seem convinced by the Follath piece on Hizbullah either, am I right?
November 5, 2009 at 12:41 pm
I do agree that what the Der Spiegel is presenting about Hizballah and Hariri is not beyond reasonable doubt and that the jury is still out on how reliable Follath is. We will have to wait for the tribunal…
On the other hand, I think that the evidence is overwhelmingly clear that Syria pursued a nuclear option and was thwarted by Israel. I am not sure about every detail in the article, but belittling the Syrian/Iranian effort in my mind is a mistake and playing into their hand.
November 5, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Qifa Nabki … you should be thankful for AIG who is here to alert you when you are unknowingly turned into a tool for Syrian PR!
You know what is your problem QN? .. you are naive and gullible!
I have no idea how They admitted you to that ivy league University’s Ph.D. program.
AIG,
Are you blackmailing Qifa Nabki? .. are you again trying to play your Israeli watchdog role? … you guys are hilarious! … If President Carter is honest enough to call Israel an apartheid state your Fox news “tools” start insinuating “some people say that President Carter has been drinking”, if Qifa Nabki felt like making fun of Der Speigel’s spy fiction news stories, you come here to accuse him of perhaps (for now it is perhaps) turning into a Syrian PR tool.
Leave people alone AIG … “freedom of speech” remember? … if Israel’s watchdog robots like you are running everywhere making sure anyone who dares to criticize Israel will be bothered and accused of all kinds of bad things then you are a threat to western values, such as freedom of speech ..
If your Israel is a war criminal apartheid outlaw state which is in violation of numerous UN security council resolutions and which already stocked hundreds of nuclear weapons build by stealing technology through Israelis spies in western countries, you won’t be able to hide it for long through your media watchdog bullying of anyone who writes opinions which are not to your liking.
As for Syrian officials supposedly traveling to London carrying “all the details of Syria’s Illicit nuclear program” on their laptops … I can only laugh at the idea. I think whoever wrote that story for Der Spiegel has no clue how Syria, or any other country, handles information related to any “secret” military application. Let them list all the senior Syrian officials who traveled to London at the time (one or two?) and let’s think about it … why would that civilian official NEED to have all the details about that alleged Syrian SECRET nuclear program on his/her laptop? … to edit a power point presentation he was doing at the hotel’s conference room explaining Syria’s SECRET nuclear ambitions?
And since when do we have documents that are emailed or distributed that include ALL THE DETAILS of our secret military programs?
If Syria indeed had a nuclear weapons program (I still doubt it) and managed to keep it secret for all those years despite all the wonderful spies at most foreign embassies in Damascus and despite probable Israeli monitoring of Syrian online and telephone communications, then I assume the Syrians knew how to keep things secret … including not sending an official with all the details of the nuclear program on his laptop.
November 5, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Hi QN!
Haven’t been here in a long while… Sorry.
But now that I see you’ve turned Syrian-PR-man, I’ll be sure to stop by more often…
As you intended, I also didn’t interpret your satire as anything of particular contribution to Syria’s “strategic capabilities” or her PR. Especially not the picture with the sheep… (I started thinking of Trojan Sheep, rather than Horses).
November 5, 2009 at 5:47 pm
Alex,
If “freedom of speech” were really the issue, AIG would be allowed back on Syria Comment.
The whole ME/Arabist narrative is a loooong compilation of conspiracy theories, finger-pointing, and anti-semitism rolled into a sweet dessert and served with turkish coffee.
Why shouldn’t AIG ask for the recipe?
November 5, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Akbar
1) AIG is allowed on SC but he is moderated .. his comments are almost always released. What he is not allowed to do, is to hijack and monopolize the whole discussion like he used to do
Did you forget that AIG is the only winner of Syria Comment’s Grand order of the Mulukhiyeh?
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=765
He held the record for the most number of comments ever on SC … I hope this answers your question Akbar … the Syrians on Syria Comment have respected freedom of Speech until the Israelis hijacked the place.
3 out of the 7 top spots are held by Israelis .. including you.
November 5, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Alex,
It is hilarious to hear you speak of freedom of speech. I am moderated, which means that my comments are sometimes allowed a few days after the discussion has moved to a completely different subject. Only for an a antidemocratic and a syrian regime lackey like you, a person who talks too much should be silenced or moderated. I agreed to limit myself to 5 comments per day without moderation. You rejected that because you cannot handle people speaking their minds. Here is a challenge for you. How about I limit myself to ONE comment per day without moderation? Can you live with SO MUCH freedom of speech?
November 5, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Alex,
As for your whole view of freedom of speech, you are thinking like an authoritarian. You believe that just by questioning QN I am threatening him or shutting him up. What is wrong with you? Debate means asking each other questions.
The reasons for my questions were simple. I know QN is not a fan of the Syrian mafioso regime. So I was wondering why he was doubting Syrian nuclear efforts and helping their PR effort in this case. You immediately move into your conspiracy mode and view me as “blackmailing” QN. Wow! Your tolerance for debate is ZERO.
Who knows whether the laptop story is true. It could be partly true. Perhaps this was a laptop used by some other person previously who believed he erased sensitive files but they in fact remained on the computer because the file system does not physically erase information, just deleted entries in the file table. Use your imagination a little.
But it does not matter. The evidence provided by Israel and the US is overwhelming. It is clear that Syria pursued a secret nuclear program that at some point and somehow was detected and then thwarted by Israel.
You know my view. If Syria wants to pursue a program it should go ahead. It should not complain about the results though. And it shouldn’t have signed the NPT.
November 5, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Alex,
You Syrians are way too lenient on AIG if you merely moderate his comments and then release them.
We here at qifanabki.com are much tougher. We take AIG’s comments into custody, torture them for a while, and then only release them once we are satisfied that they are saying what we want them to say.
Shoo bek ya zalameh?
But I think you should definitely take AIG up on his offer of one comment per day. He can’t cause that much damage that way.
November 5, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Shai! So nice to see you. Stick around.
November 5, 2009 at 8:02 pm
QN -
Let’s do a Qnion report on Mahmoud Vahidnia.
Looks to me the Iranian government is becoming an even more open society than Syria these days…
“The revolutionary leader’s fatherly response to critical youth.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091105/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_challenging_khamenei
November 5, 2009 at 8:22 pm
To be totally fair, Shai’s blog is even worse than SC. I couldn’t get even ONE comment published there. They moderated my attempts out of existence. Shai is tolerant towards what his enemies have to say, but fellow Israelis? Not so much. He would be happy to talk to Hamas. But debate AIG? Certainly not! I could never understand this strange attitude that is predominantly displayed by the left.
November 5, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Dear AIG,
Did you ever ask yourself why your friend Akbar Palace is still on Syria Comment leaving 2 to 5 comments per day? … Did you ever ask your self why YOU were allowed for a year to leave over 2500 comments in Syria Comment before you were moderated?
I would have been happy to give you 3 comments per day, not only 1, IF you showed signs that you were able to learn how to be less confrontational …
But you can’t.
I tested you today … I pushed you to react by questioning your tolerance to freedom of speech. And surely you are quick to react through your favorite and automatic debating strategy: argumentum ad hominem … the same one Israel uses against its enemies.
So if my tolerance for debate is “zero” and I am “a Syrian regime lackey” and “antidemocratic” .. then I don’t think I feel like coming back home at the end of the day to read your insults (always packaged by you as facts) … and to read a few emails from other readers you subjected to your attacks that day who are asking me to ban you or else they will never participate in SC again …
The problem is not my tolerance to arguments that I disagree with … Check Akbar Palacs (Right wing Israeli) and “Shami” who hates the Syrian regime and writes about it every day on SC.
And here is another problem with your debating style:
Whatever “opinion” you have, you expect us all to accept it as a “fact” .. whatever position Israel takes, you expect us to accept as fair and justified and moral … those of us who do not will almost surely be subjected to your personal attacks.
November 6, 2009 at 12:29 am
I don’t know what you Syrian PR guys have against that poor man at Der Spiegel.
He is more entertaining than John le Carré.
I hope that George Clooney will be starring in his next work, “The Spy Who Came in from Khoo-moos-land”.
November 6, 2009 at 2:17 am
Alex,
Wow, you claim I am “blackmailing” QN and then you object when I call you undemocratic. It is are ok when you insult others but you are unwilling to accept the factual consequences of your words.
I am not calling you ugly or stupid. Your tolerance for debate IS zero. Simple questions you view as “blackmail”. Is that tolerance?
I do not expect you to accept anything, let alone as “fact”. In fact, I do not expect you to agree with me at all. I write my point of view and people either agree with me or they don’t. I do not force anybody to accept anything.
The difference between AP and myself is that I pick apart arguments in an analytic manner while AP mostly posts links to differing points of view that usually do not address directly what people wrote.
There is a simple way for you to show you are tolerant. Allow me ONE unmoderated comment per day on SC. If you can’t bring yourself to do even that, it will just prove your intolerance. QN thinks that I cannot do much damage with ONE comment. So, what are you scared of? All your other posters and readers will have plenty of time and as many messages as they want to show how wrong I am in my ONE measly post.
November 6, 2009 at 3:30 am
Did you ever ask yourself why your friend Akbar Palace is still on Syria Comment leaving 2 to 5 comments per day?
Alex,
I think it’s clear that I’m less of a “threat” than AIG. I don’t have the patience to dialogue over specific political nuances nor do I have the detailed knowledge of the actors that AIG has.
AIG said:
AP mostly posts links to differing points of view that usually do not address directly what people wrote
You can’t disprove a point-of-view. But you can disprove a myth with factual evidence. Usually my links show articles from objective news sources that disprove some myth proported by a poster.
For example, some still claim that Israel did not destroy a Syrian nuclear facility. The factual evidence shows it was. Professor Josh fell into this trap. Initially he poo-pooed the notion the facility was nuclear. Now he’s claiming is was.
AIG,
If you ever feel you’ve lost reality on blogs like this or SC, go to Professor Steven Plaut’s (University of Haifa) blog to get a “reality check”.
http://stevenplaut.blogspot.com/
November 6, 2009 at 2:15 pm
After reading this thread I came to the conclusion that Lebanon and Israel can become friends if there are more Israelis like AIG and less like Shai. I based my last observation on the accompanying picture of the offending Israeli. Even though the Lebanese are a bunch of pretentious fools they dislike others who pretend. We like to keep pretension as our exclusive domain. Got that, Shai? You may have to change that picture. In addition, I think the words of your comment are somehow connected to the photo and they all talk of pretension. Just cannot stand this level of pretense.
AIG is a down to earth person who you can easily trust and relate to. Unfortunately the choice of his alias is deceptive because it implies other Israelis have similar qualities. I suggest to AIG that he should change his name to something like UIG (A.K.A. AIG) for Unique Israeli Guy.
Having said that I may have to digress and ask myself the questions: why didn’t Lebanon and Israel become friends after 1983? Why did May 17 fail? I may be inclined to answer this question at this point in time by saying that there were not too many Israelis like UIG (A.K.A AIG) at that time. If there were, Israel would have behaved differently. For example it could have sent reassurances to Walid Jumblat that the killing of his dad by the Syrians will be avenged instead of encouraging his foes (the LF’s) to expand their presence in the mountains. What a stupid way of losing a potential ally? This would have saved Walid Beyk the agony of having to wait until 2005 to place his failed gambit of capitalizing on the Americans to accomplish his goal of putting his dad’s soul to rest. It would have also redrawn the political map of Lebanon and would have prevented the war of elimination which had eternally divided the Christians. This oppor lost opportunity by the short sightedness of the Israel of Begin has permitted a mediocre autocrat like Hafez to inflating himself and the Syrian wasteland to a disproportionate size saving us the task of having to adopting a deflating process to bring his son to proper size.
On the other hand, I do not see how a German sounding name like Alex could be taken seriously despite the fact that he contributes a lengthy comment which leaves you with the answered question: What the hell is this guy talking about? Why did I waste my time with such garbage?
Hey QN, if you want to do some control over your blog, you should start by weeding out those Syrians whose only interests are in expanded cyber estate forcing us hapless readers of having to put up with keeping a left finger firmly pressed against the mouse while it points to extreme right side of the window below the scroll bar. Encourage other UIG’s (A.K.A. AIG) to contribute more and perhaps another workable 17 May could emerge. Discourage those with photos as their emblems because they only contribute to irritating us Lebanese. And who cares about covers? Don’t we already know who the enemy is? Do you really think Jumblat really flipped? Or is it more like: a hand you cannot break kiss and wish it would eventually get broken.
November 6, 2009 at 2:19 pm
AIG (or UIG?)
I think someone has a crush on you.
November 6, 2009 at 3:27 pm
UIG (formerly known as AIG) et alii,
I like when the discussion is derailed into a catfight between primadonnas. Very interesting.
November 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Mike,
I will stick with AIG because there are many Israelis like me. I would even say that most Israelis are like me. Shai represents a very small but vocal minority in Israel.
I have to say that over the years Israel has failed miserably in understanding the subtleties of Lebanese politics and the relations between the sects. Whatever decision was made, the law of unintended consequences always came back to bite us in the ass. In fact, I would venture to say that at this stage, Israel has realized that it really does not know what levers to pull to get its intended results in Lebanon.
This has led to the drastic simplification of Israel’s strategy towards Lebanon: Leave us alone or else…
This a rather dull blade but unfortunately the best we can do. Your country is just too complex for us. For example, you have a hard time understanding Jumblatt and Aoun, what can you expect from us?
Eventually, Lebanon and Israel will be friends. But it is really up to the Lebanese to decide when. In the meantime, no war is good also.
November 6, 2009 at 10:24 pm
UIG (A.K.A. AIG)
It is a clear contradiction when you say Israel failed miserably in Lebanon and then say it is up to Lebanon to fix those mistakes . Actually it is the other way around. It is up to Israel to prove that it learnt from its mistakes, to express a genuine desire to correct these mistakes and then to act on this desire. If you insist on this contradiction then you’re right on insisting that you’re just another AIG. UIG in this case would not be a suitable alias for you.
What can Israel offer to the Lebanes is what you should be asking yourself? You may say Lebanon is not important to Israel and Israel should offer nothing. That’s your choice which may prove again that Israel has not learnt anything. If you cannot acknowledge the strategic value of Lebanon in the region and why Syria is fighting teeth and nail to keep it under its control, then you’re just another irritating Shai to us Lebanese.
Hint: To begin with, how about a gas pipeline from Egypt to Lebanon through Israel purposely denying Syrian access to it in order to convince the Lebanese that they can benefit by looking southward. Denying Syria such access is central in order to convince the Lebanese that Israel means business and not just a shallow maneuvre.
November 7, 2009 at 12:43 am
Mike, the only gas pipe you will see is probably the one you are inhaling- not long ago you were accusing me of being subjugated by my jewish masters and now you are flirting with AIG and calling for a gas pipeline from Egypt to lebanon crossing the southern Lebanese borders with Israel ? hahahaha
that must be some good **** you are smoking
carry on brotha
November 7, 2009 at 10:17 am
It looks like you’re also stupid, V.
Sorry, I didn’t catch that last time.
November 7, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Mike,
What Israel has learned from its mistakes is not to meddle in Lebanon.
It would be best for Israel if Lebanon was a well functioning state that could control all of its militias. That would benefit Israeli security.
Israel would be happy to offer Lebanon normal relations which would benefit both sides. What else do we have to offer? But this offer is currently rejected by Lebanon.
November 7, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Mike am not going to stoop down to ********************* like yourself you do a great job showing everyone what an ******* you are
(Ed. keep it clean, V).
November 7, 2009 at 2:18 pm
It is up to Israel to prove that it learnt from its mistakes, to express a genuine desire to correct these mistakes and then to act on this desire.
Mike,
The potential benefits of peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors is staggering.
Unfortunately, there cannot be peace with Israel. Hezbollah and their masters in Syria and Iran will not allow it. If a peace treaty were signed between Israel and Lebanon, another Lebanese civil war would break out. You want peace with Israel? Vote for it. That’s the only advice I can give you.
As an American who has spent much time in Israel, I will concur with AIG. AIG’s POV is quite common and the norm. Israel has decided, smartly, to stay far away from Lebanese politics. It is too unpredictable.
November 7, 2009 at 2:59 pm
“Israel would be happy to offer Lebanon normal relations”
Are you kidding yourself?
You’re jumping over too many other issues that need to be settled before even this issue of normalization can be discussed. What about the refugees? They have to go back. Don’t they? Not a single Lebanese would agree they can stay in Lebanon. This is a problem created by you guys. First thing you have to do acknowledge your misdeed and then fix it. Normalization can then be discussed.
Solving this problem by taking the refugees back will go a long way into making Lebanon a stable country which you hope to eventually benefit from.
I’ll give you another hint. Think of Israel getting accepted by its neighbors as a privilege bestowed upon it by magnanimous neighbors and not as an inherent right. You guys have caused so many problems to the region, that obtaining this privilege is the best you can hope for. But you need to pay the price. So think refugees and not normalization.
November 7, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Mike,
Here’s a question for you.
You say that “not a single Lebanese would agree” that the Palestinians can stay in Lebanon. Actually, I know many Lebanese who believe that the Palestinians should be given the choice to settle in Lebanon or return to Israel (or to Europe, the U.S., other Arab countries) after a settlement.
What would be the problem with giving them the choice?
November 7, 2009 at 4:12 pm
QN,
Are we going to split hair on this issue?
Eventually it will boil down to this:
I said not a single Lebanese would agree they should be settled in Lebanon – an overstatement.
You said you know many Lebanese who think the Palestinians should be given the chance etc… But how many Lebanese do you know who think this way? Enough to tip the balance? If so, then show me.
November 7, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Mike,
I hate to disappoint you but practically every person that I know favours giving the Palestinians all rights that have been given to the Armenians and that are expected to be offered by any civilized society to those that reside within its borders. The vocal people who oppose a fair , humane and equitable treatment are the politicians who have always used the Palestinian cause to legitimize their credentials as patriots and nationalists. They always preface their opposition to settling the Palestinians by saying that it is bad for the cause as if keeping them in hovels is good for “the cause” Mike, that is a very weak argument and you know it. Lebanese politicians who never miss an opportunity to oppose Palestinian settlement in Lebanon ought to be ashamed of themselves for constantly using the Palestinian tragedy for personal domestic gains.
The major fear in Lebanon is that of upsetting the sectarian balance which can be easily remedied if the country is to implement Taif and abolish political sectarianism and the refugees could be easily given all their human rights over an extremely short period of time but the issue of citizenship could be phased in over say a 15 years period.
Next to adopting a strict secular amendment to the constitution Lebanon has the duty and the moral obligation to absorb totally the Palestinian refugees who have been contributing to the growth of the country for over sixty years. It is time that we treat others as we wish to be treated no more and no less.
November 7, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Ghassan,
I hate to disagree with you. The Palestinian issue is not the Lebanese politician’s problem. I am not against treating people humanely. In order to do so you must acknowledge that the inhumane status of existence of these refugees is caused by the Israelis and not by the host countries. Therefore, it is their (Israeli) responsibility and the problem should not be offloaded on others.
Secondly, I would still give you the same number as I gave QN. Your circle of acquaintances who favor an absorption solution is at best limited and it is incumbent upon you to prove otherwise.
I can say for sure, even if the Christians would favor such a solution, the Shia and Hezbollah in particular would oppose it vehemently. The Sunnis and Druze have their own reasons to also oppose such solution. So in effect you are calling for a new civil war. Let’s be realistic. What are the chances that Taif will be fully implemented? With this government as it ahs been formed already, there is very little chance anyone would be interested in such ‘de-confessionalized’ system.
Bottom line is this is a problem created by Israel and it has to bear the cost of the solution. Why don’t they start by making their own ‘Taif’ and secularize by taking the same people that were uprooted unjustly from their homes sixty years ago?
I further question the contribution of the refugees to the Lebanese economy. If you weigh this imaginary contribution against the cost of the civil war, they become an economic liability rather than an asset.
November 7, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Guys,
I have a post planned on this subject, so let’s save these excellent comments until then! Sorry I brought it up.
November 7, 2009 at 5:34 pm
party pooper QN, it was worth while watching the Nazi defend the right of return for the Palestinians. oddly enough its a common point he shares with the Syrian regime and hizballah
hahayyy
November 7, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Watch out QN. You’re making some a*****es upset.
November 7, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Mike,
It may be the case that you will prefer Shai to me after all. I believe the refugees in Lebanon are the responsibility of the Arabs because they did not accept the partition resolution of 49 and chose war and because they forced the Cairo agreement on Lebanon.
Israel has already born the cost of the solution. It has assimilated 850,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries. It is time for the Arabs to step up to the plate.
Furthermore, if you as an Arab cannot live with your Palestinian brothers, how do expect me as a Jew to do so successfully? The fact that you do not want them is the greatest proof for me that we should never agree to let them return.
November 7, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Actually I do not need to make any preferences AIG. Why should I? As far as I am concerned you and Shai are just intruders that do not belong in the region. So, I’ll just wait you out until you decide to go back where you came from.
By the way, you Shai and others are not the only intruders that eventually decided to pack up and leave. History proves my point over and over again. So in the final scheme of things the refugees have their homes that they will eventually go back to regardless of whether I can put up with them or not
Ask the crusaders and the mongolians and many many others.
Again you do not have an inherent to be accepted by a region you intruded upon. You can only hope to gain that as a privilege bestowed upon you. So keep that in mind if you have any inclination to survive in a region that is hostile to you – due to your own behavior of course. Otherwise, you will do as I said above. Believe me.
That would also mean the 850000 Arab Jews will go back to their former homes. So do not worry about that and give yourself credit where it is not due. No one kicked those Jews from their homes You only need to worry about the Polish, the Russian, the German, the Bronx’s etc…
November 7, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Mike,
I am a third generation Israeli. Both my parents were born in Israel. I am indigenous to Israel as anyone can be.
You are more than welcome to wait us out if that is your preferred strategy. History has of course proven the exact opposite of what you claim.
Unlike you, I do not have a crystal ball, but I like Israel’s chances. Let’s reassess in 50 years.
November 7, 2009 at 8:37 pm
There were 6th generation crusaders before you and they had to leave. They were exactly like you. They just didn’t belong.
Fifty years is probably too optimistic in your case. I go for that. But it is more like 20 to 30 years if not sooner.
November 7, 2009 at 9:07 pm
The Mike-UIG honeymoon is over already?
So disappointing when that happens.
November 7, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Life has its ups and downs. So we have to live with that QN.
But come to think about it. What is 50 years in the bottomless history of our existence? So who cares if AIG has to pack up and leave a place he doesn’t belong to and is incapable of adapting.
Life still goes on.
November 7, 2009 at 10:12 pm
It used to be that the Arabs promised that we would soon be swimming in the sea. Now I understand we will only have to leave. That is a big improvement!!!
November 7, 2009 at 11:36 pm
You could still leave swimming if that is what you prefer.
November 8, 2009 at 12:07 am
Thank you for taking into account our preferences! I think you represent a new more liberal breed of Arabs, an Arab that is willing to give Jews choices. I appreciate that.
November 8, 2009 at 1:02 am
FYI, I cannot claim all that you are ascribing to me. My understanding of Arab history make me believe that the Arabs have always been proponents of freedom of choice.
November 8, 2009 at 1:27 am
Of course, how could I be mistaken. Every Arab country is free and provides its citizens all the freedoms possible.
November 8, 2009 at 1:48 am
Well, at least when you leave you would have learnt something. But mistakes can also be costly sometimes, especially if you get to recognize them when it is too late.
November 8, 2009 at 10:12 am
I feel I can go beyond ‘broken hearts’ and ‘intruders’ and go back to the main subject of Syria’s secret weapons.
A deflated son of a mediocre father wrongly inflated by a historical error shows how desperate he is by revealing his real ‘secret weapon’.
http://www.14march.org/news-details.php?nid=MTc1NDE3
I am not trying to compete with Qnion or a Dr. kahrabji. I am just trying to say once again: “lak wlee 3ala aamti.”