The Palestinians lost the keys. Three people lost there lives. Some terrorist murderers lost their freedom. Israel lost faith (if it ever had any) that the PLA could hold an agreement. USA and UK lost face, in that they proved they were unable to guarantee a simple international agreement - big face.

By coalescing and just sitting on the roofs whilst the prisoner in Jericho freely used their mobile phones, for God knows what purpose and then pulling out under the pretence they were unable to control the situation, the USA and the UK have demonstrated their complete inadequacy in being a grantor for any Middle East agreements.

The US and the UK are the big losers.

what percentage of people in the middle eastern area are athiest's?

The Palestinians lost the keys. Three people lost there lives. Some terrorist murderers lost their freedom. Israel lost faith (if it ever had any) that the PLA could hold an agreement. USA and UK lost face, in that they proved they were unable to guarantee a simple international agreement - big face.

By coalescing and just sitting on the roofs whilst the prisoner in Jericho freely used their mobile phones, for God knows what purpose and then pulling out under the pretence they were unable to control the situation, the USA and the UK have demonstrated their complete inadequacy in being a grantor for any Middle East agreements.

The US and the UK are the big losers.

Are there ever any winners in the middle east? It's an impossible situation for either UK or US to deal with, it's a no-win situation.

what percentage of people in the middle eastern area are athiest's?

That's an interesting question. I wonder if there are any statistics on it?

The Palestinians lost the keys. Three people lost there lives. Some terrorist murderers lost their freedom. Israel lost faith (if it ever had any) that the PLA could hold an agreement. USA and UK lost face, in that they proved they were unable to guarantee a simple international agreement - big face.

By coalescing and just sitting on the roofs whilst the prisoner in Jericho freely used their mobile phones, for God knows what purpose and then pulling out under the pretence they were unable to control the situation, the USA and the UK have demonstrated their complete inadequacy in being a grantor for any Middle East agreements.

The US and the UK are the big losers.

1. Did Israel hold on to all of their agreements?

2. Did the 'policemen' of the West hold on to all of their agreements?

3. The whole world lost face and is the big loser (because of ignoration...)

4. People in the World are sick and tired of the problems in the Middle East; nobody in the streets discuss the many problems/casualties anymore, whether in Israel/Palestine, Iraq (!) or any other country in the area; after the 8.00PM news is consumed, and dozens of lost lifes mentioned again and again with bombings .....life goes on

5. If there are bombings in Madrid or London...the world is shocked and after a while...life goes on there as well. During/after 9/11 the world was shocked...and life goes on.

6. Untill a BIG BANG with a nuclear (dirty) BOMB....than the world will wake up (again)

LaoPo

I think I will go the ladyboy bar tonight

I think I will go the ladyboy bar tonight

What . Hard Rock Cafe ? ...

Well, send Jimmah Carter over there again.

Maybe he can straighten out the mess?

Well, send Jimmah Carter over there again.

Maybe he can straighten out the mess?

Doubt if even Jesus Christ could sort that lot out...and err... wasnt he an athiest?

Well, send Jimmah Carter over there again.

Maybe he can straighten out the mess?

Send Arnold S

Arnolds comming..

Takes a few mins.

The Palestinians lost the keys. Three people lost there lives. Some terrorist murderers lost their freedom. Israel lost faith (if it ever had any) that the PLA could hold an agreement. USA and UK lost face, in that they proved they were unable to guarantee a simple international agreement - big face.

By coalescing and just sitting on the roofs whilst the prisoner in Jericho freely used their mobile phones, for God knows what purpose and then pulling out under the pretence they were unable to control the situation, the USA and the UK have demonstrated their complete inadequacy in being a grantor for any Middle East agreements.

The US and the UK are the big losers.

Are there ever any winners in the middle east? It's an impossible situation for either UK or US to deal with, it's a no-win situation.

what percentage of people in the middle eastern area are athiest's?

That's an interesting question. I wonder if there are any statistics on it?

We can count them...

1. My sister (lives in Dubai)

2....

what percentage of people in the middle eastern area are athiest's?

That's an interesting question. I wonder if there are any statistics on it?

We can count them...

1. My sister (lives in Dubai)

2....

I found a few stats, though the ones from Adherents.com are suspect (just look at the stats for Buddhists.)

From another site (cut from the main article):

Middle East

According to a 2004 survey commissioned by the BBC, 15% of those in Israel do not believe in God. According to Yuchtman-Ya’ar (2003), 54% of Israelis identify themselves as “secular.” According to Dashefsky et al (2003), 41% of Israelis identify themselves as “not religious.” According to Kedem (1995), 31% of Israelis do not believe in God, with an additional 6% choosing “don’t know,” for a total of 37% being atheist or agnostic.

A 2004 survey commissioned by the BBC found that less than 3% of those in Lebanon do not believe in God.

According to Moaddel and Azadarmaki (2003), less than 5% of those in Jordan and Egypt do not believe in God. According to Inglehart et al (2004), less than 1% of those in Jordan and Egypt do not believe in God.

According to Barret et al (2001) less than 1% of those in Syria, Oman, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen are secular. According to Johnstone (1993), less than 2% of Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, and Kuwait is nonreligious. According to Johnstone (1993), less than 1% of those in Iraq are nonreligious.

The whole article (dated "2005") can be found here: Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns

From Adherents.com.

According to their stats, 16% of the world is atheist/non-religious, though they then decide that half of those people believe in God, but don't consider themselves "religious". They don't break it down by region either.

Adherents.com

A link from that site leads to what is supposed to be an Encyclopedia Britannica (?) article (dated 1995 though). Unfortunately, it lumps the "Middle East" in with the rest of "Asia".

Encyclopedia Britannica's Adherents of All Religions by Six Continents's

The Palestinians lost the keys. Three people lost there lives. Some terrorist murderers lost their freedom. Israel lost faith (if it ever had any) that the PLA could hold an agreement. USA and UK lost face, in that they proved they were unable to guarantee a simple international agreement - big face.

By coalescing and just sitting on the roofs whilst the prisoner in Jericho freely used their mobile phones, for God knows what purpose and then pulling out under the pretence they were unable to control the situation, the USA and the UK have demonstrated their complete inadequacy in being a grantor for any Middle East agreements.

The US and the UK are the big losers.

Are there ever any winners in the middle east? It's an impossible situation for either UK or US to deal with, it's a no-win situation.

what percentage of people in the middle eastern area are athiest's?

That's an interesting question. I wonder if there are any statistics on it?

We can count them...

1. My sister (lives in Dubai)

2....

But don't make the huge error of assuming the conflict in, and around Israel, has anything to do with religion. It does not.

Religious groups in the area respect each other faiths and customs far more than in any semi-secular western country does.

If you want root causes to the conflict, try tribalism, the lust for hegemony, over ambition and the machinations over control of that black sticky stuff.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

Well, from what I read a few months ago about the origins of this conflict, the land wasn't "stolen", it was abandoned.

When the Israeli's announced they were going to declare themselves an independant state, they offered the Palestinians full citizenship.

The day after declaring independance, the Arab nations attacked Israel (Israel did not attack all it's surrounding neighbours). (Actually, there was fighting going on before the Israeli declaration, but it was more of a guerilla warfare style conflict, as opposed to a full scale invasion).

Most of the Palestinians fled the area, fearing that they might be mistaken for Jews and slaughtered along with them.

Small problem. Isreal didn't lose the war and get wiped out as expected. The Palestinians were in a quandry. Do they return (sheepishly) and try to to get on with their lives, or stay in the refugee camps and hope the Arab nations could regroup and attack again ?

Well, the Arab nations eventually tried again, and failed again, and again. Oddly enough, Jordan actually managed to gain control of the West Bank and held it for (15 ?) years. During that time, they made absolutely no effort to establish a Palestinian homeland.

Why not ?

Keeping the Palestinians homeless allowed the Arab nations to continue using them as an excuse for further conflict. Notice that NONE of the Arab nations surrounding Israel have offered their Muslim brothers, the Palestinians, a place to call their own ? There has been little, if any, effort to integrate and/or absorb the Palestinians into their own societies. Why not ?

Deep down, they are still hoping that conditions will prevail that will allow them to wipe out the Israelis (actually, the terminology they usually use is "The Jews" or "The Zionists").

Note the recent comments of the Iranian president. That is still the deep-rooted desire, the total destruction of Israel (or the removal of it's entire population from the Middle East. Basically, they want the Jews out of there one way or another)

As I mentioned before, even if Israel gave the Palestinians everything they wanted, the violence wouldn't stop.

I don't think it has much to do with oil either. Israel is an oil importer. The stats I read today note that Israel produces around 2,700 barrels of oil a day, and consumes around 250,000 barrels per day. Their "proven" reserves of approx 90 million barrels would therefore last about 270 days. Hardly worth fighting over.

If the US ever stopped supporting Israel for some reason, I don't think you'd have long to wait before seeing another war in the region. The Euro nations might not approve of such an action, but without the US, they probably wouldn't do much to try and stop it either.

Only time will tell the eventual outcome of this very messy, very nasty situation.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

Well, from what I read a few months ago about the origins of this conflict, the land wasn't "stolen", it was abandoned.

When the Israeli's announced they were going to declare themselves an independant state, they offered the Palestinians full citizenship.

The day after declaring independance, the Arab nations attacked Israel (Israel did not attack all it's surrounding neighbours). (Actually, there was fighting going on before the Israeli declaration, but it was more of a guerilla warfare style conflict, as opposed to a full scale invasion).

Most of the Palestinians fled the area, fearing that they might be mistaken for Jews and slaughtered along with them.

All correct, however, the Arab leadership ordered the "Palestinians" to leave the disputed land to make it easier to "wipe out the Jews". Israel told them that if they stayed on their land they would keep it and gain full citizenship as well.

Those that listened to their "brother" Muslim's orders made their own beds.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

Well, from what I read a few months ago about the origins of this conflict, the land wasn't "stolen", it was abandoned.

When the Israeli's announced they were going to declare themselves an independant state, they offered the Palestinians full citizenship.

The day after declaring independance, the Arab nations attacked Israel (Israel did not attack all it's surrounding neighbours). (Actually, there was fighting going on before the Israeli declaration, but it was more of a guerilla warfare style conflict, as opposed to a full scale invasion).

Most of the Palestinians fled the area, fearing that they might be mistaken for Jews and slaughtered along with them.

All correct, however, the Arab leadership ordered the "Palestinians" to leave the disputed land to make it easier to "wipe out the Jews". Israel told them that if they stayed on their land they would keep it and gain full citizenship as well.

Those that listened to their "brother" Muslim's orders made their own beds.

I can accept these analyses with this little proviso:

The UN in 1947 offered the Palestinian Arabs their own state, at the same time Israel was offered its part of the old British Mandate. Israel accepted - the Arabs rejected.

The partition resolution was never suspended or rescinded. Thus, Israel, the Jewish State in Palestine, was born on May 14, as the British finally left the country. Five Arab armies (Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq) immediately invaded Israel.

Their intentions were declared by Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

Needless to say the Arabs lost and have been complaining, allowing their brothers to rot in refugee camps, whining, making terrorist actions, killing innocents, blowing up their own children, ripping off millions from the Palestinian treasury - generally behaving like denied spoilt 3-year olds with a Kalashnikov - all because they will not recognise that they blew it in 1947.

Had they accepted, they would have had the same land they want now for their Palestinian state.

The Palestinian state would have been 57 years old and a lot of lives would have been saved.

I can accept these analyses with this little proviso:

The UN in 1947 offered the Palestinian Arabs their own state, at the same time Israel was offered its part of the old British Mandate. Israel accepted - the Arabs rejected.

But what was the reason for their rejection ? It surely couldn't have had anything to do with oil or "stolen" land back then.

Their intentions were declared by Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

I read about similar statements made by other Arabs around the same time. One was during an interview on an American radio station. I don't have the transcript anymore, but he said basically the same thing. They were going to exterminate the Jews. (maybe this was the same guy and same interview)

Needless to say the Arabs lost and have been complaining, allowing their brothers to rot in refugee camps, whining, making terrorist actions, killing innocents, blowing up their own children, ripping off millions from the Palestinian treasury - generally behaving like denied spoilt 3-year olds with a Kalashnikov - all because they will not recognise that they blew it in 1947.

I'd say they blew it a few times, and are still working at blowing it now. They won't be content until the green flag of Islam prevails throughout the Middle East.

Had they accepted, they would have had the same land they want now for their Palestinian state.

The Palestinian state would have been 57 years old and a lot of lives would have been saved.

Even if the Palestinians had of accepted what they were offered in '47, I think we'd still be seeing violence in the M.E.

The only difference is that "they" wouldn't have the Palestinians to use as an excuse for the violence. "They" get a lot of sympathy for their cause by using the Palestinians.

The Palestinians themselves aren't helping their own cause much either though. Allowing themselves to be used by other Arab nations in a larger conflict, and allowing their own people to screw them over, all the while blaming Israel for every possible injustice.

I'm very interested in this topic, so I started this one on a slightly diferent angle...

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=63316

I can accept these analyses with this little proviso:

The UN in 1947 offered the Palestinian Arabs their own state, at the same time Israel was offered its part of the old British Mandate. Israel accepted - the Arabs rejected.

But what was the reason for their rejection ? It surely couldn't have had anything to do with oil or "stolen" land back then.

The oil industry began over five thousand years ago. In the Middle East, oil seeping up through the ground was used in waterproofing boats and baskets, in paints, lighting and even for medication.

Lord Curzon, the British Foreign Secretary, denied that oil interests influenced policy in Iraq, but the archives show that the British government rushed troops to Mosul in 1918 to gain control of the northern oil fields. Britain and France clashed over Iraq's oil during the Versailles Conference and after, but Britain eventually took the lion’s share by turning its military victories into colonial rule. The powerful Iraq Petroleum Company, in which US and French firms held minority positions, acted always in the cartel interests of the Anglo-American companies. To the furty of the Iraqis and the French, it held down production to maximize profits elswhere. The company kept a monopoly of Iraq’s oil sector until nationalization in 1972.

You can still buy maps of the area showing the pipelines from the Iraqi oil fields ending in the port of Hiafa, Israel.

Read more on Global Policy Forum's website (Global Policy Forum’s mission is to monitor policy making at the United Nations, promote accountability of global decisions, educate and mobilize for global citizen participation, and advocate on vital issues of international peace and justice. GPF is a non-profit, tax-exempt organization, with consultative status at the UN. Founded in 1993 by an international group of concerned citizens, GPF works with partners around the world to strengthen international law and create a more equitable and sustainable global society.)

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issue...ilhistindex.htm

This information might help you, and others, decide who THEY really are.

Their intentions were declared by Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

I read about similar statements made by other Arabs around the same time. One was during an interview on an American radio station. I don't have the transcript anymore, but he said basically the same thing. They were going to exterminate the Jews. (maybe this was the same guy and same interview)

Needless to say the Arabs lost and have been complaining, allowing their brothers to rot in refugee camps, whining, making terrorist actions, killing innocents, blowing up their own children, ripping off millions from the Palestinian treasury - generally behaving like denied spoilt 3-year olds with a Kalashnikov - all because they will not recognise that they blew it in 1947.

I'd say they blew it a few times, and are still working at blowing it now. They won't be content until the green flag of Islam prevails throughout the Middle East.

Had they accepted, they would have had the same land they want now for their Palestinian state.

The Palestinian state would have been 57 years old and a lot of lives would have been saved.

Even if the Palestinians had of accepted what they were offered in '47, I think we'd still be seeing violence in the M.E.

The only difference is that "they" wouldn't have the Palestinians to use as an excuse for the violence. "They" get a lot of sympathy for their cause by using the Palestinians.

The Palestinians themselves aren't helping their own cause much either though. Allowing themselves to be used by other Arab nations in a larger conflict, and allowing their own people to screw them over, all the while blaming Israel for every possible injustice.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

I got my cd´s nicked a few years ago....

I´ve moved on.

Maybe it's not that complicated.

Maybe the Palestinians see it as land stolen from them.

Ahh - but who stole it?

The Israelis, or the rich absentee landlords sitting in Beruit and Damascus who sold the land to the Jewish settlers?

I got my cd´s nicked a few years ago....

I´ve moved on.

I've had my car stereo ripped off. Actually, twice in a span of two weeks. Boy, was I pissed.

Somehow I've moved on, too.