The Jewish population in the US is somewhere between 5.2 and 6.7 million
and declining due to low birthrates.
http://www.wwrn.org/parse.php?idd=9668&c=129



Two percent? I would have guessed (and did) much more.

Gould 0738 wrote:

NOTE: I notice that almost everyone who argues for the Isreali
position eventually calles anyone that makes any points against
it an anti-semite. That's like calling anyone who makes any
arguments against the US Governments policies "non-patriotic."


If the scrap was between Moslems and Hindus, nobobdy in the US would give a
serous rip. When was the last time you met anybody with a passionate opinion
about any of the several countries surrounding India, where inter-faith warfare
is a way of life?



I have passionate opinions about Tibet, which borders India, because I
have long been following the efforts of the Dalai Lama, and his country
fascinates me. His Holiness is a reasonably frequent visitor to the
United States and I had the opportunity to attend a lecture he gave
about a month ago at the National Cathedral. I couldn't for the life of
me figure out what he might have said to George W. Bush during *their*
meeting. I'd love to visit Tibet and Nepal.

I went to Bangladesh in the early 1970s to direct and produce an
industrial film for a client on the architecture of Louis Kahn, but I
don't care much for the country. I am saddened every few years when they
have those killer floods.

India has no fascination for me. I have no desire to visit there. And I
wouldn't go to Pakistan for any reason.

The Hindu-Islamic strife between Pakistan and India is very sad.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

"Roger Martin" wrote in message
...
An analogy of that period would be allowing mass migration from Mexico
into California and then only allowing Roman Catholics to vote in
elections
after they've chased off all of the non Roman Catholics.

Interesting analogy, especially when you think about why so many places in
California has spanish names.

But isn't arabs (i.e. the million who are israeli citizens) allowed to vote
in Israel (they have representatives in the Knesset) even if they are
muslims?

"Terje Trane" wrote in message
...
"Roger Martin" wrote in message
...
An analogy of that period would be allowing mass migration from Mexico
into California and then only allowing Roman Catholics to vote in
elections
after they've chased off all of the non Roman Catholics.

Interesting analogy, especially when you think about why so many places in
California has spanish names.

But isn't arabs (i.e. the million who are israeli citizens) allowed to
vote
in Israel (they have representatives in the Knesset) even if they are
muslims?



I think their representatives are non-voting in the Knesset.

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:44:29 -0400, Gary Warner wrote:

"Gary Warner" wrote:

You mean that their continually grabbing land that isn't theirs - even
while supposedly "negotiating" in good faith isn't showing teeth?

Israel has lots more money, militarty, and resources. They negotiate
but all the while continue to make land grabs. Then they wonder why
terrorists attack them. Hmmmm....isn't building walls annexing people
a kind of terrorism??



"NOYB" wrote:
No.

NOYB, I disagree with your curt and unsophisticated answer.

TERRORISM (From the American Heritage Dictionary):
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an
organized group against people or property with the intention of
intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or
political reasons.


Israel building settlements and fencing in land that is not theirs qualifies
as follows:

Unlawful?
Yes, by international standards (law) much of the land annexed by Israel is
not
theirs. Israel is in violation of UN resolutions on this subject. (I
believe - could be wrong)

Force?
Yep, they are taking land by force.

Intention of Intimidating or Coercing?
While it's hard to proove what someone's intent is, I believe the Israeli
leadership wants
to intimidate the Palestinians into just "accepting" that Israel WILL have
this land.

TERRORISM does not have to be killing of people or killing of civilians,
though Israel does that too.

Then you don't differentiate between Palestinians blowing up civilians and
Israelis retaliating against terrorist targets? And note I said
"retaliating". It doesn't appear that Israelis are first to strike.

--

Larry
email is rapp at lmr dot com

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 16:03:56 +0000, Larry wrote:

Then you don't differentiate between Palestinians blowing up civilians and
Israelis retaliating against terrorist targets? And note I said
"retaliating". It doesn't appear that Israelis are first to strike.

You obviously have a shorter memory than the Palestinians. The
Palestine/Israel conflict has been filled with atrocities on both sides.
The Stern Gang's tactics would fit most definitions of a terrorist
organization. Failure to recognize both parties having blood on their
hands is one of the reasons the Palestinian/Israeli conflict has been
raging for over 50 years. The boneheads in Israel's Likud Party seem
determined to continue the conflict for the next 50 years.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...
I think their representatives are non-voting in the Knesset.

Did some searching and I don't think so. Seems they have the same voting
rights as jewish israelis, but there are 18% arab israelis and 82% jewish
israelis so ...

There are 6 arab parties and 3 mixed jewish-arab parties in the current
Knesset.

Terje Trane wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...
I think their representatives are non-voting in the Knesset.

Did some searching and I don't think so. Seems they have the same voting
rights as jewish israelis, but there are 18% arab israelis and 82% jewish
israelis so ...

There are 6 arab parties and 3 mixed jewish-arab parties in the current
Knesset.


What, no party for Arafat?