Dear knee-jerk English Only people:

OK. So a man in Germany doesn't like people speaking English. Here (Inverness, Scotland) I hear all sorts of languages (German, French, Spanish, Polish) and I don't mind. For God's sake if a country is trying to attract tourists what do you expect? (Gaelic is different because as a taxpayer I'm expected to subsidise the future world domination of what would otherwise be a dead language). If your point is that English people should learn German then you have a point - except that our political masters are now suggesting Mandarin and Arabic as if children who can't master a European language will find these an easy option. Or perhaps they're just being realistic in understanding that it might be more useful in the future to know the Chinese and Arabic for "Heil Hitler" (or subsitute whatever name).
Anyway what's a Kraut with these sort of opinions doing in a MacDonalds?

What kind of country exudes from people who prefer the head-butt to a good right-hand roundhouse. A little goofy, I would think.

For the most part Americans, to the extent they "think" about this issue at all, believe they are blessed with English and that if the rest of the world wishes to associate with us, they better do it in English. After all, anyone who has read the King James Version of the Bible knows God speaks English.

English only is a tribalistic belief and comes from way down deep in our psyches. Much the way Chinese does in China, or Arabic in the Middle East, or French in France, etc. One problem Americans have in this regard is our culture is a product of our own insularity and as such believe we are the only blessed people on earth.

I would prefer in this country that every child learn at least three languages by the time they are ten. English, obviously, Central American Spanish, and one other of their choice. It would give us a more cosmopolitan attitude instead of this arrogant provincialism.

I'm certainly not an "English-only" person myself, but I think that for many people that belief is not so knee-jerk or provincialist. Remember, the US has seen many generations of immigrants, and after some initial turbulences (not to make light of the workings of racism) these immigrants have learned English in order to participate fully in society. The Italians learned English, the Poles learned English, most of the Chinese and Japanese immigrants learned English, etc. So, it seems to many people that Mexicans and other Latin Americans who resist learning English and insist upon using Spanish, are claiming a special privilege above these other immigrant generations.

To geneg - While I agree more foreign language education would be a good thing in the US, I don't think its really a solution to increase the cosmopolitanism of the average American. Except in major cities, many people are not in contact with people who speak other languages to a significant degree, so the education is seen as irrelevant. The only way to really open up one's view of world cultures is to experience them firsthand, which is rather difficult considering the geographical distance between the US and most other cultures.

Well, I am moved to offer a "little" opinion. I think the Spanish speakers who live in the U.S. are very similar to the Italian speakers who lived on the Lower East Side of New York City and who spoke mostly Italian; and similar to the German in Chicago, or Polish in Chicago, or Swedish in Seattle, or Puerto Ricans in New York's Harlem. Oh, that reminds me - China Town in San Francisco and every other west coast city of note. Every immigrant group had a history of the first generation arriving and some never did learn much English. Usually it was the second and third generations who became comfortable with English.

Most of the English only argument is ignorant of the multicultural history of the United States. And every country, or culture, has its "us only" people who are, in my not so humble opinion, just small minded.

But I am preachin' to choir, here.

Here is what I love most about the "You come to 'Merica, you give up your entire culture and assimilate to ours" people: imagine they were in a similar situation, i.e. couldn't make money here in America but knew they could make all sorts of cash if they moved to, say, Poland.

When they move their family to Poland, they have two choices: going native, learning Polish right away, and abandoning all American mores, holidays, decorations and foods in favor of Polish ones.

Or, they could move to "Americatown," full of American expats just like them. They can get the foods they are used to at American grocery stores, get American magazines and newspapers, and socialize with people that are pretty much like them. They can learn enough Polish to get by, but their job doesn't really require much.

Which do you think they would choose? I'm guessing that, not only is it easier on them and their family to get used to living in Americaville, they think that their cultural heritage is valuable enough to be worth preserving and passing on to their children. How can they blame all these immigrants from Spanish-speaking countries for doing this very same thing? Sure, they don't like looking at people who are different and it's inconvenient to have people around who don't speak their language very well, but if you look at it from their point of view, it becomes very understandable.

If I were to move to Poland "in order to make money" it would be very significant if I moved to a neighborhood with only other English speaking Americans like myself. It would speak volumns about why I was in Poland. I wouldn't care about Polish people, Polish vital political interests, Polish history, Poland's future. Would Poland need people like me? Should the Polish people consider me to be a good citizen or should they consider me to be a clear and present danger to them.

Is it good for any country to be diverse and to have a bunch of various groups with each seeking its own interests? What is good about being a nation of "one from many". What is good about being a nation of "many from one".

As I understand it, Jacob Javits from NYC was the key legislator who brought about change to America's immigration policies so that we began bringing in immigrants from places other than western Europe. He did this not because it would be good for America but because it would be good for Jews who did not wish to stand out as a minority.

Can't we look at this issue objectively and have an honest debate about what is good for America?

It is unconfortable to talk about race in this context for those who fear they might be labeled racist. But isn't politics ALWAYS about race. Isn't Jesse Jackson all about race? Isn't Bill Kristol, one of the leading neocons, all about Zionisim? Isn't the Hispanic Congressional Caucus all about race?

What will America be like in 2050 under Globalization
when we are overwhelmed by immigrants from Africa, Asia and the middle east as had been perdicted by the UN. If Christians are outnumbered by Muslims will Christians be free or persecuted. Will the Consitution survive? What do these people know or care about the Consitution.

Did you know that Brits are leaving Great Britian because of immigrants and the Pope is concerned that Europe is becoming Islamic.

Who began the philosophies of "Policial correctness" and "diversity" and why? Under political correctness it is not acceptable to talk about race in any context. What does that mean for white Americans as opposed to non-white Americans. Oprah has no problem talking about me. Hollywood has no problem calling me a hillbilly and a redneck. Turn things around and what happens if i call someone "THE N WORD" or a hymie.

Leo Strauss, the neocons' philosopher taught that Jews could get rid of the old ruling class WASPs and take its place but first they had to discredit their culture, religion and history. How are white European heros treated today. In what light are White Anglo Saxon Protestants held today. Who are the neocons for the most part?

Irving Berlin wrote White Christmas in order to make it a meaningless holiday for everyone. One of Christianity's most holy days. Happy Holidays everybody. And this after WW2 when the Christians in this nation had just freed his family from the Nazis. You can read the following article and judge for yourself regarding the attitude of pride and boastfullness of Harold Myerson.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=10775

Rahm Emanuel is the democrat who chooses party nominees. He was born in Israel and you should google his bio.

All of this can serve as a springboard for discussion about diversity and the English language and whether or not we wish to simply fade into the background and let the future take its course because to do otherwise might be preceived as racist since we are white people.

dixiereader (#8)
Did you know that Brits are leaving Great Britian because of immigrants and the Pope is concerned that Europe is becoming Islamic.
Well I'm not sure the flight of "Brits" is entirely down to immigrants. Having worked overseas for many years I think climate may have something to do with it (but I'm aware the world of British expats is not identical to that of British emigrants. Other factors may be just what is perceived as a general social decline in the UK, the breakdown of law and order, inadequate health care and so on. Young emigrants who are leaving to work perhaps see a better economic future elsewhere. And I sometimes worry about the country becoming Islamic and "dry" (and I don't mean as a result of global warming). But there is some good news for the Pope. The Roman Catholic church is recently reported to have overtaken the Anglicans in terms of numbers of adherents. Is this due to an influx of Polish migrant workers or to wishy-washy leadership by Anglican divines.

I agree with dixiereader. This influx of flatland furriners is bothersome. Many of the Native Americans tried a program of unfettered immigration and how did that work out for them?

Actually, I'm a little disturbed about the black and white division of residents versus immigrants. The idea that if you throw over everything you know about living in a group of people, you become a "good citizen" whereas if you live with others of your own background you suddenly become a "clear and present danger" (what a crock of BS that is. Just one more thing for us Americans to be frightened of.) I hardly think so. Do the Germans consider American soldiers and their families a "clear and present danger"? Not only do the Americans in Germany live in American compounds where no one learns the language beyond enough to get by, and no one eats sausage kraut and beets, but imported American food, and, not only that, the Americans have an occupying Army in Germany. If Mexico had an Army of Occupation in the US, you can believe we, like the Native Americans before us, would be screaming bloody murder. I'm sorry. There are lots of good arguments to be made about the immigration problem, pro and con, but "a clear and present danger"? Come on fella, get a life. Stop listening to Lou Dobbs and Fox Noise long enough to find out what's really going on.

I think the whole thing is wildly overstated.

Firstly, I have to say the behaviour of the young German was clearly well out of order, and I hope they catch him. Having said that, he sounds a bit of a nutter, and I wouldn`t necessarily attach any wider significance to his antics.

#8, #9

People are not (unless they are completely neurotic) leaving England because of immigration. Europe is not about to become Islamic.

#11

The present time is the first time in my life I`ve heard people raise questions of assimilation about white immigrants - i.e. Poles. Previously, I think it has always been a race thing as Gene rightly comments. Now, I think it is more about `haves` and `have nots`than `whites` and `non-whites`.

To some extent, people don`t assimilate, even within the white community - I don`t think our conservative friend Doug would be offended if I said that he sounds to me like he`s primarily an American living in England, rather than an American-born Englishman. The English often cling to their regional identities, even when they move to other parts of the country.

I do not know why people bother. We adjoin a house shared by Polish immigrants. Most speak little English and, as far as I can tell, socialise almost exclusively within their own social networks. I could not care less. They are never an inconvenience to us in any way. We don`t specially want to know them, they don`t specially want to know us, I don`t really mind one way or another. I would be quite happy if one turned out to be one of these Polish skilled workers we are always being told are coming into the country as it`s bloody murder trying to find a decent tradesman round here who isn`t fully booked for months ahead !

For what it`s worth, I consider myself a very typical white Englishman of my generation. Me personally, I also have a strong sense of regional identity (although I do have a dream of living in Yorkshire or Wales). I also like reggae and Indian food. I am not so insecure that it worries me when others are black, brown or whatever.

I think there is a useful discussion to be had about immigration in some ways. One issue I foresee for England is that a lot of Poles are doing casual agricultural work. But the work they are doing is both seasonal and regional (I`ve seen large groups of casual agricultural labourers in Lincolnshire. Never in Derbyshire or Notts.), and involves the very crops (cabbage brussels etc) farmers are moving away from, due to demand from China and India for (machine-harvested) cereal crops.

For what it`s worth, it probably is true that skilled Poles can find work here. However, we do have a skills shortage - it`s been very difficult for years for a young English person to get an apprenticeship as neither the government or the private sector (as a whole) has been prepared to provide training. I can understand why some young English people find this annoying. But without the skills shortage, the Polish plumbers etc wouldn`t be coming here.

I`ve had white neighbours who were junkies - I`d have welcomed a law-abiding Moslem in their place, no problem ! My main sticking-point is, I couldn`t care less if my neighbours are Islamic, Polish or from Neptune or Pluto as long as they behave respectfully to others. That`ll do nicely for an uncomplicated soul like me.

One thing that hit me between the eyes as I read Dixiereader's post was how much attention is paid to "race" which has been scientifically proven to be a non-existant distinction between people. There are no races, folks. There are people of many differing biological heritages with some physical manifestations. I for one am an American with kinda white skin - my ancesters as far as I know came from England, Scotland, Wales, and North Carolina USA and I have very olive colored skin. I tan easily, burn rarely. Where did that come from? Who knows, and you know what, I don't really care. My genetics probably could be traced back to Africa, just like most of the entire population of the world today. No races, just subtle and not so subtle differences.

Classes? yes. Poverty? yes Lack of opportunities? yes.

OK, I'm done for now. I truly hope everyone is enjoying some time to contemplate the nature of the solstice and world peace.

>If I were to move to Poland "in order to make money" it would be very significant if I moved to a neighborhood with only other English speaking Americans like myself. It would speak volumns about why I was in Poland. I wouldn't care about Polish people, Polish vital political interests, Polish history, Poland's future. Would Poland need people like me? Should the Polish people consider me to be a good citizen or should they consider me to be a clear and present danger to them.

That's quite a stretch, there. The fact that you're living in an English enclave doesn't speak to concern or lack thereof for Polish culture.

And even if you were an apathetic person living in an English enclave, to jump from apathy to "a clear and present danger" is almost absurd.

Can't we look at this issue objectively and have an honest debate about what is good for America?


This sort of debate makes the hypocrisy clear to me when conservatives whine about what's good for the collective, when usually they're whining about infringement on individual rights. Isn't caring about common the good "communism"? Isn't what's good for the collective what's good for the individual? The main reason immigrants come here is to benefit themselves and their families, and that's whether they are a doctor from India or a farm worker from Mexico. Immigrants are getting rich off of our system, huh? Don't worry, it'll "trickle down."

Actually, I care about the common good as much as the next guy, but I think that it's an individual responsibility to seek out like-minded people, rather than others' responsibility to want the same things you want. I learned that when I was an misfit teen in a town full of rich Republicans. There was no way I could demand that everyone else just be more like me. WASP-y status quo types who feel threatened by the influx of other cultures would do well to learn the same lesson.

I am curious about what you mean in message 15. If I understand right you are saying that it is my responsibility to seek out and associate myself with people who think as I do, see the world as I do, and do pretty much the same stuff that I do. It is foolish of me to want others to think my way, see the world my way, and do what I do.

Is that pretty much what you meant?

Speaking for myself, I do find myself hanging out mostly with people who think as I do but I also actively try to listen to others way of thinking, too. There are times when that is hard because I "don't suffer fools easily" but I can try. I rather like having people in my life who see things differently, I sometimes can learn from them, and many times I am just fascinated to hear them talk.

What I'm getting at with that:

If you wish to associate with like-minded individuals, as most people do, it is your job to seek them out. If you find yourself surrounded by people who do not share your interests or values, and this bothers you, you should look for people who do share your values rather than complaining about the people who don't.

I was referring to esp. conservative Americans who feel that other cultures are threatening majority values. Rather than learning to either accept that values are changing, or seeking out like-minded people to keep them company, they whine that everyone else needs to share their values or get out.

There's plenty of room in America for many different types of people. While there definitely needs to be dialogue about values, insisting that all people share the same ones is, well, silly.

I understand your point better now. Thank you and I do agree. Complaining has hardly ever really improved any thing.

Are borders and countries passe? Should the world get rid of borders and allow an entity such as the United Nations to govern the world.

The toymaker Hasbro has made the doll GI Joe into a Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity instead of a United States Marine. GI Joe now soldiers for a world wide government. Are they preparing our children for their futures.

Rather than discussing soverign borders and what it means for Mexicans to come across our open borders we are met with accusations of racism and debate is silenced.

Ted Kennedy is for immigration reform so that we can show the world that we are humanitarians.

Globalization is about the merchant class. Its about Walmart and international corporations. Haven't we been warned from Bible times to Shakespeare about the merchant class.

Is there any awareness among you "liberals" about how the media saturates our society with propaganda. Is the only argument against open borders that it is racist. What other argument is there for open borders. Where are we headed with all of this.

Allowing the UN to govern the world must surely be a recipe for disaster. Nothing about its past record suggests that this is a competent organization. In Rwanda for instance even the commanders of its own forces had little good to say about it. And in Darfur?

Where are we headed with all this, indeed. The Bible and Shakespeare weren't the only ones to warn us of a merchant class. How about Marx and Lenin?

I remember when Jack Kennedy was elected President and he made his brother Bobby Attorney General, and how everyone just sang their praises to high heaven, both were obviously very bright, intelligent and caring human beings, and then, oh yeah, there was Teddy, well everybody can't hit a home run.

Maybe the Mexicans and the Native Americans who live south of the border just want their land back. Didja ever think about that? Can you tell the difference between an American Apache and a Mexican Apache. The Mexican Apache is the free one. Of course that's a non sequitur Indians in North America have two choices: assimilate or reservate. How about this, can you tell the difference between an Hispanic chica who is a twentieth generation resident of San Antonio and a young girl fresh off the boat across the Rio Grande?

This same immigration issue comes up every time a new group of foreigners discover the wonders of America. We used to be proud of the fact people wanted to come here. Now we are cold, harsh and mean-spirited. All the things we've learned to be under 40 years of the best conservative brains. Lou Dobbs will roast in Hell for this. I just wish I could be there to see it.

For all you Christians out there, God sez:

"You shall not molest or oppress an alien, for you were once aliens yourself in Egypt." Ex 22:20.

"You shall not oppress an alien; you well know how it feels to be an alien, since you were once aliens youselves in the land of Egypt." Ex 23:9.

"When an alien resides with you in your land, do not molest him. You shall treat the alien who resides with you no differently than the natives born among you; have the same love for him as for yourself; for you too were once aliens in the land of Egypt. I, the LORD am your God." Lv 19:33-34.

"For the LORD, your God, is the God of gods, the LORD of Lords, the great God, mighty and awesome. who has no favorites, accepts no bribes; who executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and befriends the alien, feeding and clothing him. So you too must befriend the alien, for you were once aliens yourselves in the land of Egypt." Dt 10:17-19.

"You shall not violate the rights of the alien or the orphan, nor take the clothing of a widow as a pledge. For, remember, you were once slaves in Egypt, and the LORD your God ransomed you from there; that is why I command you to observe this rule." Dt 24:17-18.

"Cursed be he who violates the rights of the alien, the orphan or the widow! And all the people shall answer 'Amen'!" Dt 27:19. (This is a call and response between the Levite Priests and the people containing twelve curses).

"Do not oppress the widow or the orphan, the alien or the poor: do not plot evil against one another in your hearts." Zech 7:10.

Seven injunctions against oppressing the alien in your midst, one of which is a curse.

I read this to mean border protection is okay, but once they're here, loading them on a bus and shipping them back to from wherever they came is verboten.

As far as International Soldier GI Joe and the UN go Internationalism is coming. Rather than fight it, we should scope out a place for ourselves which will allow us to live up to our dreams. I don't think the military is the solution. In twenty years China is likely to be the world wide peacekeeper. Then where will we be?

You should check out the group Pro & Con (stands for Progressive and Conservative. That's where we generally carry on this sort of discussion. I think there may be an Israel/Palestine thread over there. We do not encourage nor do we put up with unreasoned flame wars and shouting matches, as you are likely to find elsewhere on the internets. We don't squash debate. We discuss our differences. Check it out.

Growing up in the third generation of an immigrant jewish family, mostly in Brooklyn, I heard a lot of non english. No big. My parent's generation , at least the younger one's were born here and were native englisn speaker's, and we , the third generation of course are all native speakers.

Some of the older uncles and aunts were "born there" learned english as teen agers or young adults and still spoke the old languages and speak english with an accent. The grandparents mostly learned english, or what they thought was english, with varying degrees of success.

My maternal grandfather came here around the turn of the 20th century as an adult speaking Yiddish, German, Polish, Russian, and Lithuanian. Maybe some Ukrainian too. When I knew him he spoke tolerable english.

There were others in the neighborhood, plenty of Italians, and sure enough, lots of little old Italian grandmothers who spoke no english or only a smattering of english. All the kids spoke english as we did, fluently and with a Brooklyn accent, how else? Some of us picked up a little Italian on the side. We sure knew what it meant when a friends grandma said "Mangia!"

Dixiereader can rest easy, with my monthly check from the IJC (International Jewish Conspiracy) I do pretty well, and dont need to have spanish speaking immigrants as cammoflouge. Sheesh! Maybe he hasnt seen the Updated Protocols. The older editions have been deprecated, you know.

The difference is that some people are here legally and some people are not. Thats the issue. Should we just get rid of borders.

I don't understand it when people bring up the Indians in a discussion about illegal Mexicans coming into this country???

Are you saying the Indians had a country here that can in any way be compared to the United States? Are you saying they welcomed Western Europeans with open arms and were somehow tricked?

Are you saying white western Europeans were wrong to subdue the Indians and take their land and therefore it is ok for Mexicans to come here and take that land? Should we simply dissolve the United States based upon the idea that the Indians were wronged?

If we took Apache land what right does that give Mexcians to come up here and settle on it illegally?

Are you in some way grandizing Indians and making them out to be something they are not because they are so completely defeated? They do have their casinos.

What Europeans took was land. The USA is what they made of it. I hardly think Mexicans are entiled to it since if not for Europeans this place would probaly look like Mexico. It wouldn't even look as good as it does without the Spanish.

If it is ok to break immigration laws what other laws are ok to be broken. Laws regarding international war or concentration camps maybe?

The old testament is Jewish law. The New Testament is Christian. Its nice you know the old testament.

Should the government and the American people base decisions regarding immigration upon the Bible?

What did I say regarding Jews and immigration that I should have jewish conspiracy thrown in my face. modalursine if you are lumping yourself together with all other Jews that is your choice. But please don't do it and then accuse me of being guilty of it and stereotyping you.

The fact is we never got so involved between the British and the Irish and their problems that we caused the IRA to come to America and commit a terrorist act and kill 3000 innocent people and put a target on the backs of Americans. Nor have we done so with Italy, France, Germany, etc etc etc. If you wish to discuss Jews in America and what their contributions to America are I will be happy to do so.

Ref #24

Dixiereader expresses many ideas that worth talking about; but since one or two of his paraghraphs mention me by name, let me try in my bumbling imperfect way to put some light on the subjects he mentioned.

Believe it or not, jewish tradition frowns heavily (Which is putting it mildly) on spreading nasty rumors about other people, so I personally would not want to be guilty of saying that someone is an antisemite or a holder of anti-jewish conspiracy theories when he's not. That's called
"Lashon Hara" or literally "evil tongue", and regardless of tradition I suppose most people would acknowelge its "a bad thing".

I DID poke what I thought was gentle fun at what I perceived as dixiereader's tilt toward conspiracy theories with my crack about the Protocols.

But here's a fella who says "... Jacob Javits ... brought about change to America's immigration policies ... He did this not because it would be good for America but because it would be good for Jews..."

The ellisions are for brevity, I dont think they change the meaning of the passage. In any case the full text is here on this thread for anyone to check.

Now if someone says that a political figure, who happens to be Jewish, is motivated soley or mainly to do things that are "good for the jews" without regard for whether they are "bad for america" , he can hardly wonder if some of us, especially the jews among us, hear echos here in the new world, of the same old song we know so well, and which has been brought to such perfection in the old world.

I mentioned my own family background to add some specificity and some human warmth to my rantings and ravings; and also to bring out that there is nothing to fear about people speaking the old language and holding on to the foods, festivals and high culture of the old country while adding americas distinctiveness to their own.

As for ''Lumping myself in with all those other jews", well, I'm an American, a jew, an atheist, and a seeker of the sacred flame. I am wot I am and I do all these things.

You may be surprised to discover that the overwhelming majority of american Jews, myself among them, disagree with the policy recommendations of the Israel Lobby and the major jewish orgnizations, as do many, many (if not most) Israelis.

As for jews in america, I hope I'm not being overly chauvinistic in saying that not only has america been good for the jews, the jews have been good for america. Its a match! Since the end of WWII, jews in america have been considered "real white men" and counted as among the "model" immigrant success stories.

But in any case, there are only about 6 million jews in america out of a total population of around 300 million. We are an itsy weeny tiny teeny (no yellow polka dots bikini) minority.

#25 I too am hearing echoes in here. We all have somewhere in our genetic backgrounds people who have scapegoated for the current problems. Mine would include the Welsh who were greatly hated by the English at one time.

I truly believe the United States has been consistently gifted by all immigrant groups throughout its history.

My point about the Indians, since I guess I didn't make it before, was that yes, this was their land, yes, we as a country stole it from them, yes, in order to brook no interference, we reserved them, probably forever. What the glories white Europeans, African Negroes, and Chinese coolies built on this stolen land is immaterial to the fact that this is not and never will be "our land". By the same token what has happened, happened, and we must all move forward from that. We Americans are world champions when it comes to lying to ourselves about out inherent glory and righteousness.

Christianity is not the New Testament, alone. It is a continuation of the message of the prophets in the Old Testament.

My attitude toward law is: I (oh, I was taught so well by BushCo), will decide which laws I will obey, and which ones I will not. The law, sir, is an ass.

But most importantly, I believe a problem of semantics and foggy thinking is at root here. There are two separate and distinct political entities (political in the sense that all human interaction is political), the group of people who claim descent from the twelve sons of Jacob, and those who live in a portion of the Holy Land named Israel. The Israeli lobby has gone to great lengths to conflate the two groups. The Jews are a specific group of people, Israel is a world recognized nation-state with geographic boundaries and a geo-political world outlook. Whether unquestioning support of Israel is good or bad for the United States is a question that needs, even MUST be discussed. There is no inherent anti-semitism in a discussion of Israeli apartheid. After all both Arabs and Jews are Semites. Also, I hear a current theory being kicked around that the Arabs of Palestine are the Jews and Samaritans who stayed on after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. How ironic would that be if it is true.Yes, they may be Islamic now, but they are all brothers under the skin.

The problem with Israel is the state of Israel sits on land that was stolen from its previous inhabitants, by a group of Europeans who wanted to make their two thousand year old dream "next year in Jerusalem" have real meaning. Stolen. Have we forgotten the lessons of history? History is filled with population migrations that have destroyed millions of people, and created centuries long hatreds. This is one of those. Just as our problems with Mexico are another. This problem is fostered by our refusal to accept reality and to move on.

Dixiereader - I, too, have been tarred with the brush of anti-semitism. Not because I am anti-semitic, but because I refuse to conflate the state of Israel with members of a particular Jewish community.

I have one more of those twelve curses for you:

" 'Cursed be he who moves his neighbors landmarks! and all the people shall answer 'Amen' ". Dt 27:17.

Palestinians and American Indians share the same fate: their landmarks have been moved and they are strangers in their own land.

As far as Mexico is concerned, I live in a town which, until a hundred and fifty+ years ago WAS Mexico. After all, you are fighting the same battle the Mexicans fought 150+ years ago, and the Palestinians have been fighting since 1948. We sense someone is attempting, maybe not consciously, but nevertheless attempting to occupy our country and change it in ways we are not familiar with and don't approve.

The Native Americans, US, Mexico, Israel, and Palestine are all suffering under the curse for having moved our neighbors landmarks.

Welcome to History.

geneg - as I've noticed before your comments are always thought provoking and refreshingly well thought out. I don't know if I totally agree but I certainly am able to think about what you have said. Thank you.

Maggie1944, Thank you for the kind comments. I often feel like I'm pissin' in the wind.

Mexicans could not come across our soverign borders if we refused to allow it.

You either believe that we have a right to protect our soverign borders are you believe its no big deal and we may as well forget about borders.

Why do you believe that we no longer have a need for nations and borders?

Are you content with being politically passive and simply allowing those who are aggressive to make the final decision.

Why is it considered a good thing for America to be diverse but at the same time we are securing a Jewish state. How can you account for these policies by the government and by the liberals and neocons.

I can't seem to get a straight answer. Should we eliminate borders or not?

On the other subject, I am in no way dealing with Jewish history in Europe. I am not responsible for anything that happened in Europe and I had no control over it.

I am not talking about Reconstruction, the Boer war, the War of the Roses, Charlamane, The Holy Roman empire, the Greeks or anything else. I am discussing what is happening right here, right now, in America.

It does however seem strange indeed that every nation seems to have had the same reaction to the Jews. How could all of these people be so wrong and what condemnation of them could do universal justice to such an awesome historical anomaly.

I wonder why Jews should have to live under such a curse for hundreds of years. It also seems strange that it is never any Jews except the Askanazi Jews who are the targets of this strange, diabolical behavior. Bless their hearts. They are truly innocent victims. My heart goes out to them. I will attempt to do a random act of kindess for one of them today.

Don't feed the troll.