Oh, I don't know. They seem honest and sincere to me. Are you sure it's not just a mistranslation?

Why, they'd be great to have over for tea. Just think of the scintillating conversation!

I just finished Dexter Filkins's book on Afghanistan & Iraq (The Forever War, which, by the way, is excellent). He tells the story of an Iraqi woman, whose insurgent husband was tortured & killed by other insurgents. She promised to "drink their blood." When her family hunted down and killed the killers, they brought her a small bottle of their blood, and she drank it down. These aren't normal people.

PD:

No matter what, it's all the fault of the Jooz, for having the chutzpah to, y'know, exist.

Kishke:

The irony of the blood cocktail is that the Arab world loudly charges Jews with drinking the blood of Arab children. Another case of the moral inversion that grips the Arab Muslim world.

Here a few simple thoughts:

1. People are the not all the same.
2. Some cultures are better than others.
3. And some religions foster murderous pathologies.

And yet people will still make excuses for these pathetic purveyors of hate.

...and then, let's take a voyage to the New World on this new ship called the Titanic.......I hear that it is unsinkable

WOW - would they liven up a Hadassah meeting

I listened to that song - it has no beat and one cannot dance to it....

Robert, not that you need it, but if you want further evidence regarding Arab/Muslim pathologies, read Filkins's book. Some amazing stories there.

Anyone who still thinks this is a religion of peace is in a Kumbaya coma.

They sound like they'd be the life of a party.

"What could possibly go wrong?"

Nothing can possibly go wrong ... go wrong ... go wrong ...

Given that we hear endlessly from our political establishment that the first obligation of our leaders is to keep us safe—that’s the justification for everything from torture to presidential lawbreaking—what legitimate rationale is there for the U.S. Congress to act in unison to redirect worldwide anger against Israel toward American citizens? How are U.S. interests advanced by insinuating ourselves into such an entrenched conflict? Answers to those questions from supporters of the resolution were never required because those questions were never asked. As dubious a proposition as it is, the notion that American interests are inherently advanced by lending unquestioning support to Israel is one of the country’s most hardened and unexamined premises.

There are few matters more important to America’s future than the extent to which we continue to involve ourselves in endless Middle East wars. Our immersion in these conflicts profoundly affects every aspect of our country’s welfare—military, diplomatic, economic, and civil. Yet there is an almost perfect inverse relationship between the significance of these policy questions and the extent to which they are debated by our political leaders.