You are correct: visitors to pumphead syndrome will now be redirected to postperfusion syndrome. However, keeping the redirect is a good thing, because people will continue to search for and make adventitious links to the less formal synonym, and they'll be sent to the right place. -- The Anome01:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The edit summary of your recent edit to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict article reads totally disputed article unless you are Tewfik, Silverburg, et al then it's perfect. This is a personal attack made in violation of WP:NPA. The comment was a bad-faith comment directed at individual users and had nothing to do with the edit you were trying to make. This comment reflects very poorly on you as an editor here, and I strongly suggest that you restrain yourself from making similar such comments in the future. Dasondas17:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a personal attack. It's an explanation that the article is in dispute. The dispute tag has been removed among others by Tewfik and Silverburg. So they don't dispute the article but others do. Removing dispute tags are so discorteous and childish. So is false accusations of perspnal attacks. Chhers. Will314159 17:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Whatever behavior they may have engaged in previously does not excuse your own. You may protest all you want, but your edit summary was a personal attack. If you want to submit this to WP:PAIN to get a third-party opinion, let me know. I'll be happy to do it. Dasondas17:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The content of the article is now covered in the page on Heim theory. The maths that was on the page can be found on the page on difference operators. If you read the VFD discussion, then you'll see that there wasn't much support for a separate article on selector calculus as it is not a separate branch of mathematics at all. It only survived the VFD because the contents of the article had not been moved to the relevant articles. These issues have now been dealt with. Count Iblis18:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth noting that creating a redirect is an editorial action that anyone can take, regardless of the outcome of an AfD. -- SCZenz01:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tewfik reported some of your recent behavior to the Administrator's Noticeboard recently. Your actions constituted violations of WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and WP:NPA. In addition, you recruited meatpuppet editors off-site. Although this is strictly not punishble, I did take it into account when considering the length of your block. Therefore, a block of 10 days has been placed against your account. Regards, RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!)20:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(1)Tewfik took down a dispute notice and then Silverburg took it down. When I put it back up, I said this article is in dispute except to Tewfik, Silberburg and their ilk. That is not offensive, that is truth. Controlling content thru constant reverts is one thing. Removing dispute signs and trying to hide the fact that there are genuine disupute is very dishonest, and then trying to silence opposition by using administristative process and wikilayering is grotesque. It will be the death of WP. That's why citizendium will replace it, just because of bullcrap like this. I was not notified. There was no due process. I was not suspended pending a hearing. Just out of the blue, 10 days.
(2) meatpuppets. Soliciting greater participation in WP from neutral sources is ?meatpuppets." Comeone. What dutch cleanser have you all been smoking. Any Israel related article in WP is contgrolled by Israelis and symphatizers. There are very few Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians with the Englilsh skills to participate in the project. Making this fact known and asking for volunteers to redress the balance is "meat puppetry." That is bull crap. A sock puppet is an IP address fictiously used by one person to disguise himself as another. A meat puppet is when it's done for financial gain.
Please reverse this block. Just the lack of procedural due process and the arbitrariness is mindboggling. Thank God there's a better product coming down the turnpike. Best Wishes. Will314159 22:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Soliciting outside participation in order to influence a particular debate counts as meatpuppeting; no financial gain is required. If you were encouraging people to get started on WP without pointing to any specific page or debate, I assume you would be fine. TheronJ15:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it counts as meatpuppeting unless you are encouraging people to participate in a particular dispute in a particular way. If you just post "look at what these right wingers (or whoever) are doing to the page on santorum!" there is no guarantee that the people who follow your link will think the same way you do. My understanding of "meatpuppet" is it's like a sockpuppet - someone you encourage to do your bidding on wikipedia. Simply letting the outside world know that you are engaged in a dispute on a particular page is not meatpuppetry, IMHO.--csloat17:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your understanding is wrong. meatpuppeting clearly says "It is considered highly inappropriate or unacceptable to advertise Wikipedia articles that are being debated in order to attract users with known views and bias, in order to strengthen one side of a debate." Advertising a specific WP aricle (as Will has done) on the blog of someone with known views and bias (pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli) with a comment that draws the blogger's attention to what Will wants changed ("there's an Israeli there user:Tewfik that's made 1,000 edits to the article and "owns" the article. He pushes his POV there unmercifully.") is a very clear and unambigous vioaltion of this policy. Isarig18:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How is my understanding wrong? What you quoted is exactly what I said. I'm not commenting on whether Will's ads were correct; I have not looked at them. I was commenting on the term itself, and as I said (and you seem to agree), "Simply letting the outside world know that you are engaged in a dispute on a particular page is not meatpuppetry."--csloat20:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Soliciting votes is a tricky area, either on or off Wikipedia. As I understand Isarig's quote, if you went to a pro-Palistinian website and said "Page X is being dominated by a bunch of Zionists - we need more input," you would be soliciting "users with known views and bias." You would be much safer just saying "Wikipedia needs more editors, please get involved" without a link to the page. (In general, the addition of a bunch of new editors without much experience in wikipedia editing won't add much to the discussion; it would almost always be preferable for the hypothetical new editors to spend a few weeks making general article edits to get a handle on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before they start jumping into edit wars). TheronJ21:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's where you got Juan Cole wrong Isarig (a.k.a. jedi knight thanks for the email). Juan Cole is pro-Palestinian pro-Israeli, pro-Human rights. What he is against, as you should be and all people of good will, are violators of human rights, UN resolutions, and the Geneva Conventions. How does that saying go, First they came for the gypsy, then the communist, then at last they came for me. Human rights applies to everybody. I get a laugh out of Avi Liebermann, he was a broadcaster in Baku, a Shiite country, where he admits he was famously treated. What does he want to do when he get to Israel, revoke the citizenship of Arabs born there. Go figure- that's the limitations of human existance- not being able to see beyong your limited point of view unless you are truly gifted like the Commodore for instance. Best Wishes. Will314159 18:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
How appropriate. The saying begins, "First they came for the Jews...". Why am I not surprised that you forgot that one? Good riddance. Dasondas20:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know very well how it goes Dasondas. I was trying not to embarass any present company by focusing on them. BUT "Good riddance." uh oh violation of WP:Civil b/ I can"t make a complaint b/c I"m in Tewfik gaol. On the honor system, would you kindly turn yourself in. Mate, remove the beam in thine own eye before complaining about the mote in thine neighbors. Best Wishes. Will314159 22:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll tell you what, chief. I'll be a good sport and hang around for the next week-and-a-half or so while you sit in the penalty box and reflect on how to make edits that are less thoroughly obnoxious and contain a minimal element of intelligent content. When you come back from editors' rehabilitation, by all means please turn me in. Let's see how that works out for you. Dasondas22:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dasondas"that are less thoroughly obnoxious and contain a minimal element of intelligent content" WP:Civil again, 2 in a row. Please try to contain your sarcasm and exuberance, why don't we as editors not be antagonistic and try to work together collabaratively to put out a NPOV product? Cheers. Will314159 23:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
PSSST ISAIG, since I'm under a disability, out of fairness, please excerpt the following and incorporate in the Israel-HA War article. It would be deeply appreciated. I will reciprocate the favor when I get out jail.
About 40% of the bomblets dropped by Israel (many of which were American-made) did not explode in the air or on impact with the ground. They now detonate when someone disturbs them — a soldier, a farmer, a shepherd, a child attracted by the lure of a shiny metal object.
Cluster bombs are, by definition, inaccurate weapons that are designed to affect a very wide area unpredictably. If they do not discriminate between civilian and military targets when they are dropped, they certainly do not discriminate in the months and years after the end of hostilities, when they go on killing and maiming anyone who happens upon them.
When the count of unexploded cluster bomblets passed 100,000, the United Nation's undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs, Jan Egeland, expressed his disbelief at the scale of the problem.
"What's shocking and, I would say to me, completely immoral," he said, "is that 90% of the cluster-bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution, when we really knew there would be an end of this."
That was on Aug. 30, by which time U.N. teams had identified 359 separate cluster-bomb sites.
Since then, the true dimensions of the problem have become even clearer: 770 cluster-bomb sites have now been identified. And the current U.N. estimate is that Israel dropped between 2 million and 3 million bomblets on Lebanon, of which up to a million have yet to explode.
In fact, it is estimated that there are more unexploded bomblets in southern Lebanon than there are people. They lurk in tobacco fields, olive groves, on rooftops, in farms, mixed in with rubble. They are injuring two or three people every day, according to the United Nations, and have killed 20 people since the cease-fire in August.
"What we did was insane and monstrous," one Israeli commander admitted to the newspaper Haaretz. "We covered entire towns in cluster bombs."
As Egeland noted, the majority of these bombs were dropped in the last three days of the war — a time when the U.N. resolution to end the fighting had been agreed on, when the war was virtually over, when it was clear that Israel had failed to accomplish its declared objectives in launching this campaign.
Dropped so late in the war, it's hard to imagine what specific military objective these bombs could possibly have been meant to accomplish. Instead, they seem to have been dropped as a final, gratuitous act of violence in a war waged against an entire population. The vast majority of the 1,200 Lebanese killed by Israeli bombardments were civilians; one in three was a child.
With 100,000 innocent people trapped in the south because they could not, or dared not, flee on roads that Israel was indiscriminately bombing every day, Israel's justice minister declared that they were all — men, women and children — "terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah."
Nor was this his view alone. The Israelis dropped leaflets warning that "any vehicle of any kind traveling south of the Litani River will be bombed, on suspicion of transporting rockets, military equipment and terrorists." The Israeli chief of staff was especially clear. "Nothing is safe" in Lebanon, he said. "As simple as that.""
Lebanon's War With Cluster Bombs
We know HA also used cluster and it's condemned but theirs were just bb's and were non explosive. The magnitude and lateness of use in the war is not mentioned in the article. It will get deleted by you know who but persevere. I know you are persistent and will do a good job. Cheers and Thanks in advance. Will314159 19:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
newer edit Will314159 19:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
NOW MR. User:RyanGerbil10, too young to vote in the last presidential election (?), let's step back these next ten days and evaluate if there's a void in that particular article's coverage and whether WP doesn't need more neutral editors. Best Wishes. Will314159 19:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article Policide on the Israeli-Arab conflicts is so extremely POV that, i.m.o., it is beyond repair. Please give your opinion on the AFD page!
About selector calculus, if you can write some non-trivial stuff from Heim's book that sets it apart from the standard difference calculus techniques then the redirect can be removed. But if all that'S there is simply the trivial elementary difference calculus stuff then we only need to say in the article on Heim theory that it Heim developed a form of calculus that uses difference operators, give a ref to Heim's book and a wiki link to difference calculus. That's what I've done. But, like I said, if there is some non trivial stuf that you want to write about, then that can be worthwile. Count Iblis13:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well Count, those that control the Israel articles have a way of silencing their opponents. Trust me, I did not call anybody any anti-semitic or ethnic names. You do not have to. All you have to do to incur the wrath of the censors, is to call for fairness in the articles and for NPOV, for balance, and for both points of view to be given. I am presently unable to vote. Thanks for the headsup anyway. Please encourage people more people to get involved as editors. Take Care. Will314159 15:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi will, I am so sorry that you are blocked. 10 days is unfair, especially if it is given to those who encourages more people to participate in wikipedia and make it less POV.
For an unknown reason, my email got an error and I can't access it. I only read your first email, and wrote you a reply. had you sent me other email after that, please resend to my new email if you don't mind. Nielswik(talk)07:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They are very, very nice people and I mean that in the sincerest possible way. Be very careful to always respond very graciously and positively. I figured the email was from Isarig. Take Care! Will314159 13:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC) No, just checked no email. Just general advice which I would give to anybody, which i myself could have benefitted from 1) don't make edit without a little discussion on talk page, it can be very, very brief- talk trying to build toward a consensus- not biting or trying to show superiority. 2) keep comments on edit log brief like "rv per talk," or rv pr vers of xxxx" 3} don't give anybody ammunition to use against you later, because they wll. Sad but true there may those out there that don't care about harmonious discussions and arriving at the truth disalectic and compromise but want their own exclusive version of the truth out their for political purposes. Take Care. Will314159 13:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Asia Times always has great articles. Here's one [1] Best Wishes Will314159 15:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Super Uri Avnery article Ehud von OlmertUri Avnery take care Will314159 17:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
SOMEBODY should post this in the discussion of the Neofascism article. The essence of neofascism is not being able to vote or not vote. It is repression of a segment of a population. In Israel, it is the treatment of the Plalestinians. That is the sine qua non of it. Below are Uri Avnery's comment that should be pasted in the discussion with a lilnk to column and attribution.
There is no scientific definition of fascism. But from experience one can say that it is a combination of world view and personality type, radical nationalism, racism, a cult of violence, dictatorship and more. When asked who is a fascist, I answer: When you see one, you will know.
Or, as the Americans say: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
More than once, Menachem Begin was called a fascist, but he was far from it. He was indeed an extreme nationalist, but also a confirmed democrat, with decidedly liberal views (like his guide and master, Vladimir Ze'ev Jabotinsky). Rehavam Ze'evi, who advocated "voluntary transfer" of the Arab population, came close to the definition, but he lacked the special character that makes the fascist.
The only leader in the history of Israel who can accurately be defined as a fascist was Meir Kahane. He did not grow up in this country but was an import from the US. He was and remained alien in appearance and style, and failed to impress the general public.
Now Israeli democracy is threatened by a much more dangerous individual.
AVIGDOR LIBERMAN is a clever person. It is not easy to nail down his views. They are always formulated in a slick and elusive way. But the rule applies to him: When you see him, you will know.
When he came to Israel from the Soviet Union, he already brought with him a racist outlook. He wants a purely Jewish state, with no Arabs. For this, he is prepared, so he says, even to give up Israeli territory in which a dense Arab population is living. He proposes to get these citizens out of Israel, together with the land they are living on. Not a second Naqba, God forbid: the Arabs will not be driven from their lands, as then, but will be expelled together with their land. In return, Israel will annex the territories on which the settlers, one of whom is Liberman himself, are living.
What's wrong with that? The basic idea is wrong: the turning of Israel into a state "cleansed" of Arabs. In German that would be called "Araber-rein". (Actually, it's an inversion of the Nazi phrase: not Juden-rein, but Rein-für-Juden. That is clearly a racist slogan, which appeals to the most primitive instincts of the masses.
The chances of this actually happening are, of course, nil. But the very voicing of this idea prepares the way for something even worse: the simple expulsion of the masses of Arabs from Israel proper and the occupied territories. Without euphemisms, without exchanges of territory, without any kind of spin. Once the fascist genie gets out of the bottle, no power can stop it before it leads to disaster.
The annexation of the settlements will, of course, put an end to any chance of peace.
But the menace of Liberman lies not only in his acknowledged or unacknowledged views. It is imprinted in his character. Witness: he is the sole leader of his party, which is almost entirely composed of new immigrants from the former Soviet Union. Like previous waves of immigration, this is a group of people who did not grow up in a democratic society, and tend to have an oversimplified view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Many of them live in Israel as if on an island, read only the local Russian-language press (almost entirely far to the right), and are isolated from the liberal and democratic tendencies in the country. They have pushed out Nathan Sharansky, who looks too weak, and vote for a tough, authoritarian leader whose main election slogan, even in Hebrew-language broadcasts, was "Da, Liberman!" (Yes, Liberman!) What does that remind one of?
Liberman does not hide his intention of totally changing the structure of the Israeli political system and establishing an authoritarian regime, headed by a strong leader (himself). As a first step, he has submitted a bill for the establishment of a "presidential" regime, in which the president would have almost dictatorial powers. He would not be dependent on the Parliament, which would become unimportant, and would control all the instruments of power himself. The immediate model is Vladimir Putin, the gravedigger of Russian democracy, but it seems that Liberman is far more extreme.
WHY DOES Ehud Olmert court this man? Why does he insist on including him in his government and agreeing to vote for his proposals? Why is Libermania fast becoming the hottest topic in Israeli politics?
Simply: Olmert, completely bankrupt, is clutching at straws.
Only seven months after becoming Prime Minister by a stroke of luck - Ariel Sharon's stroke - he is left with nothing, and right with nothing, too, it seems:. The public already understands that the Lebanon War, in all its facets, was a total fiasco. His refusal to appoint a Judicial Commission of Inquiry has deepened the feeling of defeat. The central slogan of his election campaign - "Convergence" - has become a bad joke. From the famous "Social Agenda" nothing has remained. Olmert & Co. have been left without any plan, any mission, except one: to hold on to power at any price.
One of the hallmarks of a person like Liberman is a talent for sensing and exploiting the weaknesses of others. He is making Olmert a seductive offer: he would join the government and bring with him his 11 votes in Parliament - without anything in return. Literally for nothing.
In the past he has demanded the post of Minister of Defense, or at least Minister of Police (officially "Minister of Interior Defense"). Now he talks about a nebulous title: "Minister in Charge of Long-Range Strategy" (translation: the bombing of Iran). But he does not insist even on that. He is prepared to be a minister without portfolio, not even demanding that two or three of his colleagues also become ministers, as the size of his party would justify.
An offer that cannot be refused. Liberman knows that the title is unimportant. What is important is to get his foot in the door and gain legitimacy as a minister. The rest will come in due course.
For the despairing Olmert, out to hold on to power, this looks like a gift from heaven. He has opponents in the government, especially in the Labor Party. His parliamentary majority is not safe. And here comes Liberman and provides him with complete security in office. People have sold their souls to the devil for less.
The official justification is: "One cannot reject any Zionist party" (a wording that automatically counts out all Israeli Arab parties). Adapting the famous words of Dr Samuel Johnson, it could be said: "Zionism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
Olmert wants to gain some more years - or months, or weeks - in power. Power for its own sake. Power for no cause or purpose, for no idea, for no action. In return, he is ready to open the door to the forces of darkness. What does he care? After him the deluge.
I HAVE said more than once that I believe in Israeli democracy. The immigrants from the Soviet Union are not the only ones who grew up in a dictatorial system - almost all Israelis, or their parents, grew up under tyrannical regimes. But Israeli democracy, the miracle that has no logical explanation, is holding up even in these difficult circumstances.
However, we cannot ignore the dangers that threaten our democracy now. Years of a brutal occupation have corrupted the state and the army, racism is flourishing in our daily life - not only against the inhabitants of the occupied territories, not only against the Arab citizens of Israel proper, not only against foreign workers. There exist in our society deep schisms that can be exploited by fascism in its search for power.
When Rome was in danger from the approaching Carthaginian army, the cry went up: "Hannibal ante portas!" We should now raise the cry: "Liberman at the gate!"
Ehud Olmert will be a passing episode in the annals of Israel. In a few years, nobody will remember him. Unless he acquires the status of the Israeli von Papen.
Best Wishes Will314159 18:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Scotsman on Lieberman[2]Will314159 19:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Lombards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The last Gepid king Kunimund was killed and Alboin captured his skull. Alboin (forceably) married Rosamunde the dauther of King Kunimund and the remaining ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
The_Bible_Unearthed needs to be worked in earlier articles such as Joshua, needs esplanation Jesus is form of Joshua. Unearthed article needs to be expanded to section Out of Canaan theory as opposed to out of Egypt theory. Hill tribes form separate identity. Best Amazon book of 2001 [3]
Interview: An expert on Shi'ite politics explains why Maliki feels let down by the U.S. — and why Iran should be seen as an ally, not an oponent, in the effort to stabilize Iraq
By Larry Saltzman
For PaestineChronicle.com
Middle East News Online
January 9th, 2002A revolution is happening in Biblical Archeology. Biblical Archeology is critically examining the Bible against the archeological record and is turning everything we thought we knew upside down. It may disturb many that hold strong political or highly conservative religious beliefs. This will be true of Christians, Muslims and Jews who interpret the Bible literally.
It will disturb many secular Zionists who justify modern Israel's existence and the proposed annexation of "Judah and Sumaria" based on the Biblical Texts. You can choose to believe this research or not. But it has profound implications for the Israeli Palestinian conflict. This article will review the theories of one of the foremost of these revolutionary Biblical archeologists -Israel Finkelstein.
Professor Finklestein (Head of the Archeology Department, Tel Aviv University), is an Israeli and has received a lot of criticism in Israel for his work from conservative elements in the society that are aware of what it means for the Biblical underpinnings of Zionism. To read more about the research that lies behind this summary, I refer you to the writings of Israel Finklestein. The most accessible book is "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts" written with Neil Asher Silberman and published by The Free Press in 2001.
Finkelstein is one of a group of radical archeologists that is turning the field of biblical archeology on its' head.
Archeologists live in a world of tells, strata, Carbon 14 dating, Jericho IV, The Early, Middle and Late Bronze Age, Iron Age I and Iron Age II and of course pottery shards and architectural styles. Slowly but surely as they excavate and date the significant Archeological sites located in modern Israel and parts of Occupied Palestine the history of the region as recorded in the Bible is being re-written from what the Bible has told us. What follows is a very brief summary of that research and an analysis of its' implications.
Professor Finklestein has not attempted himself to interpret his research in the context of the contemporary political and diplomatic complexities of the Middle East. He has simply presented the facts that the archeological record has revealed. Some archeologists still disagree, but his is a mainstream scientific view and not the work of a fringe writer with a political or conspiracy ax to grind. And more and more prominent scholars in the field are moving to something like his viewpoint, even though they may disagree on the details.
Israel, Judah and Samaria were simply Canaanite States that arose out of indigenous Canaanite culture and not from the invasion of a mythical people called the Hebrews.
Israel was a small Canaanite State that briefly achieved a golden age, reaching its' height of power and glory in the reign of King Ahab and Queen Jezebel. The House of David never ruled in Israel it ruled over the Canaanite State of Judah.
Finklestein is convinced that the House of David did exist. David and Solomon were probably tribal chiefs in the hill country that became the Kingdom of Judah Jerusalem was the Capital of Judah not of Israel. In the time of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was an unimportant very small town with no great Temple. The major cult centers were farther to the north in the cities of Israel. In fact the great cities of Canaan that were previously attributed to the Solomon were built by Israeli Kings like Ahab.
It was under King Josiah that the Bible was finally written and something resembling modern Judaism begins to take shape in the 7th and 8th centuries BC. It is political document that is designed to glorify the Josiah and to connect him falsely with the golden era when the state of Israel briefly rose up as a powerful and advanced civilized center.
The Bible is essentially a work of propaganda weaving, historical fragments, and myths of various Canaanite peoples into a powerful justification for Josiah's rule and expansionist policies.
I personally draw a positive conclusion from this research. As an American-Jew, I have long struggled with the contradictions and problems of Zionism and the unjust policies of the State of Israel towards Palestinians. For those brave enough to seize this research in the right spirit, there is a solution in it for the problems of the Middle East. Simply stated, European Jews, Middle Eastern Jews, and Palestinians are brothers and sisters and share a common Canaanite ancestry. There were a small number of voices amongst the early Zionists who were against the creation of a separate Jewish state in the region. They lost out to the bigger faction lead David Ben-Gurion, who suffered from the disease of European colonialism. Ben-Gurion and those in his camp saw the natives of the region as an obstacle to be eliminated. I believe Jews around the world need to take pride not in Israel as a modern colonialist State but in the entire region Palestine as the homeland of Canaanite and Israelite culture that we are descended from. European Jews are simply Europeanized Canaanites, Palestinians, whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish were simple Arabacized Canaanites. Even modern genetic research is proving that we come from the same ancestry.
Think of Irish-Americans or Italian-Americans returning to their ancestral homelands to experience the culture and the people. They do not think they have the right to conquer the land and dispossess those who stayed behind. Rather they go back to re-connect with their cultural roots from those who are part of the living culture. Because of Zionism, Jews lost the chance to return to Palestine and re-connect with the Palestinians who are the people that have carried forward the culture of ancient Canaan. Viewed in that light, I see the fight against Zionism as being as much my fight as the Palestinians fight. It is the Zionists who created a rift between family, where there should have been friendship and cooperation. It is modern Zionism that disconnected me from my roots not connected me.
It is that movement that even stole the spiritual base of Judaism and associated for the first time in two thousand years with aggression, and oppression of others. Whatever flaws my European ancestors had, they were not the ones starting wars and building colonial empires, as was the Christian majority in Europe.
It is the Zionists who through their acts of ethnic cleansing and on-going violence have made enemies out of people who share a common ancestry with me. The disease of European Colonialist thinking prevented them from seeing how much the Palestinians had to share with us of the ancient cultures and common heritage. Those who came from Europe may have had the advantage of European technology, but the Palestinians had something far more valuable that the Zionists treated with contempt and discarded.
My hope though, is that a new vision of the common ancestry of Jews and Palestinians can be shared and spread and used to defeat the discredited legacy of Zionism. The ancient Canaanites had a great culture. From their culture springs Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Their culture as expressed by the Canaanite civilizations of Judah and Israel exerts more influence on great portions of humanity than does that of far greater military powers and empires of the ancient world. Where the myths and religions of other ancient civilizations of the Middle East are no longer believed or practiced by many people, The religious heritage of Judah is practiced in the form of Christianity, Islam and Judaism by something approaching two billion people on every inhabited continent. When we can recognize and accept our profound common heritage, perhaps we can begin to overcome the suffering and warfare of the twentieth century and move towards lasting peace and justice in the Middle East.
___
Larry Saltzman is an American Jew who believes that the meaning of the Holocaust is that "never again" means that no people on the planet should be persecuted. He is deeply involved in organic gardening and has an orchard of some 60 fruit trees. He had been opposed to the Israeli occupation for some time, but when he learned of the wanton destruction of orchards and farmland by Israeli troops in the Palestinian Territories this past year, he decided to become active. He has a B.A. in Anthropology from UCLA but works as a computer programmer.
I started the article. One of the main points was to elucidate that the raison d'etre for their establishment was military. It was a way to subujugate the Palestinian population. From the IDF website:
"According to IDF information, the five Jewish settlements were constructed in order to disrupt the Arab territorial contiguity-- symbolized as 'a five finger print' on the Gaza Strip with each settlement and the road serving it being under Israeli control similar to a hand placed on the map. But after the Sinai relocation, a large settlement was constructed between the 3rd and 4th fingers uniting the two into one block, called Gush Katif. The 5th finger was lost upon peace with Egypt.[9][6]
Isarig expanded the article to include all the Gaza Israeli settlements which is great. Now while I am under a disabillity, I notice that the person who made the complaint that put me under a disability has made (corrected edit) endorsed a suggestion that the article be merged into Gush Katif. This is consistent with his point of view to emphasize matters from an israeli POV and to minimize them from a Palestinian POV. It is consistent with my POV that WP needs additional neutral editors and counterbalancing editors. I understand that position is not a punishable offense but was used as AN AGGRAVATING FACTOR FOR SENTENCING! The punishable offense was that I was uncivil upon repeated deletion of my NPOV dispute notice!!. Deleting a dispute notice when there is a genuine dispute of fact is the height of UNCIVILITY Regards Will314159 19:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thanks TheronJ. Tewfik's name was on the discussion page I assumed no one would have the discourtesy to propose a merge without starting a discussion first on the talk page. Wrong. Am I being uncivil. The history log shows
Shuki (Talk | contribs) (merge). Then again his user page would tend to show he is an Israeli who has visited(?) Lebanon. I don't think the kind of visit{?) he probably participated in merits a Lebanese flag on his user page. I"ll do a strikeout and make the correction. But to each his own. Regards Will314159 22:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
my new address is arxxxxr@yahoo.com ( i put it xxxx because i don't want to get spam)
and i sent you email with this timestamp Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:49:42 -0700 (PDT), but i don't know if your hotmail will show it in the same format and same timezone ok? Nielswik(talk)02:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
got it very good. . time stam pn it was Sent : Friday, October 27, 2006 3:08 AMlied. thanx Will314159 03:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
