What exactly is your point? That Arab regimes are abysmal dictators?

How doe that exactly exonerate Israel from its sins?

Again, you like to have it both ways. You want to claim Israel as a liberal democracy and deride the autocratic nature of its neighbors, while, when it suits you, justify its vicious policies by claiming oneness with the neighborhood.

Which one are you?

As I see no list of countries from you I shall continue without it.

Disenfranchisement and diminishment of the civil and human rights of Jews in Muslim governed lands many times prompted immigration to find shelter from those abuses. As Natives of the Middle East they were, however, refugees with no homeland to shelter them. UN Resolution 181 sought to outline a singular homeland.

Borders were defined in UN Resolution 181. http://www.cfi-usa.org/mapdata/historicalmaps.html

May 15, 1948, was the day envisaged for the termination of the British Mandate. Israel would then declare its independence from neighboring states.

Israelis understood the need to protect that assigned homeland.
Who chose to war against the Partition Plan?
Beginning on November 29, 1947, Palestinian Arabs took the offensive with the help of volunteers from neighboring countries.
http://palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_land_1948.php

There is an old story about a king who was considering invading neighboring lands. Unsure concerning his prospects he inquired regarding the outcome. The priestess at the oracle responded, “A great land will be lost.” Confident, the king proceeded with his invasion. But it turned out that the great land lost was that king’s land.

Repeatedly Arab countries conducted offensives against Israel and lost. Repeatedly agreements declared “interim” borders decided by the outcome of the battles. Repeatedly Israel has placed the land others lost in battles back into the hands of those who intend to oppress them.

Due to “interim” agreements Israel has independence without fully established borders.

As with the treatment of Jews, many Middle Eastern nations have disenfranchised and diminished the civil and human rights of Palestinians. In the Palestinian case, many governments have designated refugee camps and restricted their civil rights in laws. Those nations are therefore faulted twice over—once for their bigoted treatment of Jews, and once again for their hypocritical treatment of Palestinians.

There is no such thing as a refugee camp with permanent denial of citizenship or other civil and human rights anywhere in the United States.

With regard to Lebanon: Lebanon has yet to establish full independence from Syria. An independent government in Lebanon therefore remains pretentious.

I might be completely wrong and off base, but all I am saying is that I did not get the “HA supporter” from the comment itself , to me the comment could as easily have come from a Aounist, a HAist a Karamist or a Haririst jealous of Mus …
Again the problem could be me, and what is obvious to everyone completely went over my head.

BadVibel,
I know you are not replying to my comment n28 but just in case, your latest couple seem exactly on the point. So I guess I should retract my rant

If there is a state in the Middle East that does not violate the civil and human rights of others in one way or another, please name that state and demonstrate the even-handedness of its relevant laws.

You are still missing the point..

Let’s move on…

Yeah. No matter what I say, it’s always Israel.

You have yet to explain to me in a constructive way how Israel benefits from weakening March 14 by assassinating its MPs, and how it benefits from a presidential vaccum.

I’m not defending Israel here (so spare me that argument). Israel has committed countless agressions in the South and elsewhere. But it always follows the same laws of logic that I’m trying to apply here: Israel invaded the South to erradicate its enemy the PLO. Makes sense, from their point of view. Israel setup a security zone to defend their northern borders. Again, makes sense from their point of view. 2+2=4.

And here you have it from the horses’ mouth today: Farouq Al Sharaa says:
Sharaa had rejected “pressure” on Lebanese friends of Syria, saying “everyone now wants us to step in and pressure Aoun, Hizbullah, Berri, Wiam Wahhab, Oussama Saad, Karami and Franjieh.”

“They are all friends of Syria and they are better off now than they were when the Syrian forces were in Lebanon,” Sharaa had said, adding that postponing the elections “is not the end of the world.”

I don’t refuse the outside possibility that someone else is behind the assassinations. I am perfectly willing to ask questions (that is what you said, no?). But let’s not kid ourselves about motives and logic here. If you want to use these reverse-logic type of arguments, I’m going to go ahead and state something ridiculous like “What if Hezbollah is really working FOR Israel?” Maybe they abducted the Israeli soldiers last year on orders from Tel Aviv, specifically to give Israel a pretext to bomb the crap out of Lebanon…

How’s that for a reverse-logic theory?

Howcome nobody asks THOSE questions when it comes to Israel? But when it comes to Syria, got forbid we look at the LOGICAL answer. We always have to come up with some remote farflung theory that’s just as ridiculous as Hezbollah working for Israel.

So from now on, everytime Hezbollah does something and calls it “resistance”, I’m going to go ahead and prod you about howcome you’re not accusing them of being Israeli agents.

This stuff gets ridiculous after a while, man.