July 29, 2004
ZIONISTS REGAIN CONTROL OF MARGOSTAN
Margo Kingston's "statement of fact" continues to amuse. Now the ridiculous woman claims to be "inexperienced in this debate" and describes her "statement" as "a throwaway line that I deeply regret".
Zionist controllers no doubt forced that retraction. But that's not the only comment Margo needs to address; The Australian has evidence of Margo rewriting history in a bid to dodge further trouble:
After commenting in her online "Webdiary" last Thursday that "the fundamentalist Zionist lobby controls politics and the media in the US and Australia", online journalist Margo Kingston went into damage control on Monday, apologising to those she'd offended. However, Diary understands Kingston posted the following even more incendiary remark on her website on Friday night: "Far from protecting Jewish people against future atrocities, the Fundamentalist Zionist lobby is actually promoting anti-Semitism by its actions and tactics. Neither major party in either country is game to protest, because the power of the lobby is such that careers can be ruined. It is becoming increasingly obvious that John Howard is the lobby's strong choice to win the election, and that means big money and big power will be behind him." Mysteriously, as Kingston confronted claims of anti-Semitism over her earlier remark, the later comment disappeared from her website. We're waiting to see how this squares with Webdiary's own code of ethics, which states: "I will let you know when archives have been changed except when changes do not alter their substance, for example corrections to spelling or grammar." Pretty rich from someone who frequently attacks the ethical standards of other media outlets.
Margo should fire herself. Meanwhile, Jack Robertson launches a passionate defense of the indefensible that has the added benefit of being unreadable.
Posted by Tim Blair at July 29, 2004 04:37 AMHmm. I *think* his point was that people should stop using labels, and start debating actual points.
But then he started ranting about how being called "anti-semitic" made him feel unwanted and unliked, "rather like being, well, a jew."
I think the only proper response is:
/boggle
Posted by: Hendrik Booraem at July 29, 2004 at 05:23 AMIf you want to bag Margo:
1. At least she has the guts to apologize when she makes an error (if that's what it was). When will Howard apologize for taking us to war on a lie?
2. Janet Albrechter and other are spewing pro-Israeli propaganda across the pages of Murdoch's The Australian - what about that?
3. Why the $%#& is Australia voting against a UN resolution that asks the Israelis to build their horrific war on their own side of the internationally recognised "Red Line"? Even Israel signed up to recognise the boundary, as did Australia and the USA! The Israelis - despite their bluster - are now preparing to move the wall anyway, but Australians have once again been disgraced by Howard's pathetically subservient attitude to the US.
Posted by: gandhi at July 29, 2004 at 05:50 AMgandhi.
What? Slogans.
What was the lie that Howard took Australia into Iraq on?
So Janet "Albrechter" writes from a perspective you don't agree with - why not try and "Fisk" her? Enlighten us and provide a critique of, maybe, a single one of her points.
Australia's opposition to the UN General Assembly resolution was carefully explained by Downer. The wrong words, the wrong forum. What don't you understand about that? As for "Red Lines" and "boundaries" - can you please try and put your thoughts into some intelligible language - English would be nice, but I can access Babelfish and am prepared to consider other languages.
As for Jack Roberstson's invitation - I'd be happy to meet him personally and discuss my views - but I'd prefer to send him an email constructively criticising his "lost it" article. But said Robbo doesn't leave an email address. Shame about that.
Posted by: Tony at July 29, 2004 at 06:04 AMPoint 3 of Ghandi's post shows just a basic ignorance of everything. Presumably you mean build "their horrific" wall, not "war".
I am not familiar with the "red line", is that in India somewhere? Perhaps you mean the Green Line?
The Israelis are making some changes to the route of the fence, for humanitarian reasons, but it is still not conforming to the Green Line, nor do I see a reason why it should.
"pathetically subservient attitude to the US."
It sounds like you can't handle people disagreeing with you. Australians can't actually have a worldview which differs from Europe can they?
Posted by: Amir at July 29, 2004 at 06:06 AMIsn't Unocal building a pipeline thru Margostan?But there was a taliban meeting in the late 1990's! Oh well. Horrific war? Freudian slip?
Posted by: YoJimbo at July 29, 2004 at 06:21 AMPoor demented Jack gets to write for Margo because he's one of the few people on the planet who make her look sane by comparison.
Plus, the last time they were playing Spot-the-Jew, he beat her and won another outing for his ego in Web Diary.
Prediction: One day soon, Margo will realise that everybody who isn't using her -- Jack, Tim Dunlop, Polly the Junkie -- is laughing at her. That's when she'll stick her head in oven. Trouble is, being Margo, it'll be an electric one, so she'll come out even uglier.
Filthy, toothless, thin lipped hag.
Posted by: superboot at July 29, 2004 at 06:34 AMThe great Jack Robertson in Web Diarrhoea
"The grim fact is that there are too many people itching to jump on the tiniest hint of bigotry (or its counterpart) at the slightest opportunity, including me, and it's crippling our discussions, and so prolonging the Middle East agony."
See, its all on poor Jack's shoulders. If you pricks would only let him think for a minute, this whole Middle East-thingy might get solved.
Oh, and never mind the Left cheering on the terrorists and foreign insurgents trying to kill our servicemen and women in Iraq. As the shameless Left continues to sabotage the future Iraqi democracy, remember that for safe, priviledged idiots with media access like Jack Robertson, this sabotage is just "the fun and games that is the great liberal intellectual tradition."
Posted by: max power at July 29, 2004 at 06:41 AM
Jimbo: A pipleline through Margostan? What, is their a global market for pus?
Posted by: superboot at July 29, 2004 at 06:51 AMI thought so. But then again, I missed by daily fax briefing from the NEOCON conspiricy for world domination. You simply can't attend fundamentalist Zionist planning council meetings and read marching orders at the same time! Mindnumbed robots simply can't multitask. My bad.
Posted by: YoJimbo at July 29, 2004 at 07:09 AMCan somebody break into the SMH and steal Jack Robertson's CAPS LOCK key?
Posted by: 2dogs at July 29, 2004 at 07:22 AMI especially like Robertson's claim that, if anti-semites are (correctly) identified as such, 'Hitler will have won'. ("If PAST atrocities are to 'justify' a stifling of PRESENT debate, we chalk up yet ANOTHER posthumous victory for the Pogromistas and the Hitlerites.") Pure gold.
Yes, if only the Jews hadn't allowed themselves to be slaughtered in the 1930s and 1940s, Margo and Jack wouldn't have all these problems. Those damn Jews, it's all their fault, don'tcha know.
Posted by: PW at July 29, 2004 at 08:46 AMI especially like the part where people jumping all over anyone showing signs of anti-semitism is prolonging the war aganst Israel in the mideast.
Posted by: R C Dean at July 29, 2004 at 09:17 AMCall somone anti-Semitic, and you're basically saying: 'Run along now, goy. You can't fit in, here. You're not sophisticated enough. You don't get it.' That's the way it always hits me, anyway. It feels - well, just like being Jewish must, sometimes.
I'm not exactly sure what his point is? Is he saying that he feels persecuted for his anti-semitict beliefs? that discrimination against anti-semites is just as bad as anti-semitism?
Posted by: Jonny at July 29, 2004 at 09:54 AMIf neocon zionist right wing nutjob control the US and Aus media then she's....
AN AGENT OF THE SUPERHUMAN JEWISH NEOCON FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN HETEROSEXUAL ILLUMINATI CABAL!
If they "control" the US, how can they have a patheticaly subservient attitude towards us?
Posted by: Joe at July 29, 2004 at 10:09 AMWhat a hero margo is, attacking Jews while surrounded by proud anti-Zionists, I presume her supporters salute her with right hands thrust high and their jackboots goosestepping.
Posted by: JBB at July 29, 2004 at 10:50 AMIf Margo can fire herself, she can go and fuck herself. It's only fitting.
Posted by: The Real JeffS at July 29, 2004 at 11:18 AMGHANDI
YOU BRING DISHONOUR TO A GREAT MAN/S NAME.
Please change it now.
Jack ROBINSON is a DEMENTED loon. HIS use of CAPITaliSATION suggests perhaps TOURETTES.
Posted by: Al Bundy at July 29, 2004 at 01:38 PMOne of the troubles of this discussion is that we - and mea culpa! - use terms like "insane" when people make stupid, ignorant or overly-emotional comments to such an extent that there are no words left when they become actually insane in the literal clinical sense.
Didn't we have a thing called a Press Council once?
Posted by: Sue at July 29, 2004 at 01:54 PMgandhi - re your first point, sure Margo used the word 'apologise', but it wasn't an apology - rather it was a poor attempt at justification followed by attempts at rewriting history (a typical trait of the looney left)
Posted by: tc at July 29, 2004 at 02:32 PMThe demented Jack Robertson writes:
STOP calling us 'Nazis' and 'anti-Semites', just because we disagree with your views on the Middle East.
No-one called Margo a Nazi that I'm aware of, least of all Andrew Bolt.
Margo was called an anti-Semite because of her repeated and indisputably anti-Semitic remarks. If it won't stop quacking, you can be reasonably sure it's a duck.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at July 29, 2004 at 03:15 PMSue:
You have a point. I got into an online argument with someone once, and only later did I discover that at the time he was undergoing treatment for paranoid schizophrenia. Sort of took the fun out of it.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at July 29, 2004 at 03:17 PMWhilst some might award margo woth an idotarian of the year award or a "Sydney peace prize" one can hardly ignore another gem worthy of her pen in today's australian written by BOB. (Not best on Board my any stretch of the imagination).
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10273610%5E7583,00.html
Yes BOB has fallen in love. ( even the aschen faced do that sometimes)
After the obligatory intro pargraph of Bush and Laura bashing , the same treatment is meted out to John and Mary.
This hors d'oeuvres consumed we come to the main course.
The Moore love Fest. No doubt inspired by "a beautiful mind" we know that this is the epithet which our bob assigns to the corpulent mike.
well to each his own.
Why has our prime minister not yet seen the euphemistically named "documentary" and not experienced the "feel good" post viewing emotions which obviously still linger on in Bob's brain ?
Perhaps John Howard might be a little more knowledgeable on the subject than Tassie Bob and did not need the "refresher course".
Here's my problem with this latest Margo implosion: if she were writing in the print edition, there's little doubt she'd be fired immediately for writing that trash (as would her editor, but that's another story). So what's so different about her Webdiary that she can get away with this, regardless of all the other cr@p she gets away with.
Posted by: Simon at July 29, 2004 at 04:29 PMFuck 'em - neither Kingston nor any of her mates would bat an eyelid about accusing Bolt or anyone else of sexism, racism, homophobia etc etc - their whole purpose/style/reason for being often seems to be a desire to drop everyone they don't agree with into a box with a suitable label (crudely lettered like a protest placard). THAT is what has reduced sensible debate in this country to a name calling excercise, screeched slogans and howling down dissent (and it happened years ago, you dickheads - only just noticed?) The "progressives" turn out to be the worst totalitarians of the lot - big fucking surprise!
"Not happy, Margo" you worthless lamebrain - have a look at your published output and ask yourself how much it has contributed to sensible interplay of ideas.
Posted by: Waste at July 29, 2004 at 04:44 PMRobertson says he only wants reasoned debates in the great liberal intellectual tradition, but at the same time he threatens to run Andrew Bolt out of town! Getting rid of those who disagree with you doesn't sound very liberal to me. It doesn't even sound like debate. Typical Leftist though - ie, eliminate the reactionaries!
Jean-Luc Bidet
Posted by: jean-luc bidet at July 29, 2004 at 05:09 PMMargo Kingston has a sister and her name is Gianna:
"... if we make hostages expendable for the bigger picture, don't they become a bit like suicide bombers? because then they too die for 'the cause'." [July 28, 2004 06:32 PM]
From a Road to Surfdom thread about the Philippines. Bringing you the best of the Left that Australia has to offer.
BTW: Has anyone else noticed how quiet Tim Dunlop at Surfdom has been on the Margo outbursts? She'd have been counting on a bit of support from the heavyweights. Must be a bit of a blow. But I guess since Jack Robertson's done such a good job...
Posted by: Hanyu at July 29, 2004 at 05:25 PMHaha. That Jack dude sounds like he wants to fight Bolt. Internet fights are so funny. Come round to my house, face to face, man to man when my wife isn't around. LOL!
Posted by: drscroogemcduck at July 29, 2004 at 07:30 PMHey Ghandi you dumb twat - take a look at UNSC Res 242. It says AFTER the arab world agrees to live in peace with Israel, Israel would give back land taken in the war (1967) - not "the land" not "all land"; Land that Israel sees fit. Israel is unilaterally following the UN ruling and idiot dumbfucks like you whine about it. Get a life, or better yet, don't.
"red line" - what an asshole.
Posted by: hen at July 29, 2004 at 10:45 PMSomeone posting under the name of the a man who pioneered non-violent resistance, is defending a group of organisation that perpetuates terrorism against civilians.
Jesus....wept.
group of organisation
Ah, that should be "group of people".
Damn dyslexia.
Posted by: Quentin George at July 29, 2004 at 11:00 PMJeffS, do I understand you correctly? Are you
invoking the Cheney Offense against Margo? It's not
a proper invocation unless it makes you feel better!
Now come clean, is it the Cheney offense or not?
Mike, it felt so good to tell that self-centered, neurotic, ignorant twat to go fuck herself, that I thought I had died and gone to heaven.
Good on you, Cheney!
Posted by: The Real JeffS at July 30, 2004 at 11:02 AMGhandi
Why do the Israeli's put up with these Jordanian and Egyptian squatters? The fact is that Israel won this land fair and square in a war started by SEVEN, yes seven, of its Arabs neighbours. Each of these invasions was contrary to "international law," and not ONCE did the UN help Israel. If I were Israel I'd tell the UN to go to hell. We should be proud that we do not toe the line of this long discredited gab-fest for fascist muslims.
Posted by: neoconchick at July 30, 2004 at 12:36 PMMargot's main problem is that her substance abuse provokes eratic, and often contradictory, rants.
Posted by: neoconchick at July 30, 2004 at 12:38 PMneoconschick : "Why do the Israeli's put up with these Jordanian and Egyptian squatters? The fact is that Israel won this land fair and square in a war started by SEVEN, yes seven, of its Arabs neighbours. Each of these invasions was contrary to "international law," and not ONCE did the UN help Israel. If I were Israel I'd tell the UN to go to hell. We should be proud that we do not toe the line of this long discredited gab-fest for fascist muslims."
Where do you get your propaganda from girl?
Where do you get your propaganda from girl?
Look, carlos, just because she doesn't operate as a mouthpiece for the PLO, is no reason to get stroppy.
Posted by: Quentin George at July 30, 2004 at 05:38 PMCarlos
Propoganda??? Oh For fuck's sake. Please tell me where my post belies "propognada."
Posted by: neoconchick at July 30, 2004 at 06:50 PMCarlos, I'd turn you upsdide down and spank you like a baby until you cried for mama if you weren't such a hefty son of a bitch.
Whoops, sorry. Wrong guy. I thought you were Michael Moore.
Posted by: Hanyu at July 30, 2004 at 07:22 PMYa see George, there was SEVEN of em see, and I was surrounded. But then we wupped their ass.
"Wow. You did? - Seven of 'em eh"
Yep - and we been wuppin' their ass fer years.
"Ariel you're my kinda guy!"
Yeh, but the UN's not givin' me any love.
"Screw the UN, screw those guys".
And another thing, it's them Palestinians came from across the Jordan River and the Red Sea.
"You mean WETBACKS???"
Yeah, I don't know what to do with them.
"Well, make them citizens like I did and you'll get their vote."
....
Israel should give the land back to Jordan and friends just to spite the Palestinians. Jordan will probably hold the land for itself, especially since Arafat spurned Jordan's peace offerings.
Posted by: drscroogemcduck at July 30, 2004 at 09:39 PMCarlos - Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, troops from Algeria, SA, and PLO irregulars.
That adds up to seven (7).
But please fucking humor me: Tell me that Israel started this war, did it for "imperial conquest" etc etc.
I love to start my day by listening to anti semitic, revisionist history bullshit.
Or better yet read "Six days of War" by Michael Oren and then STFU.
Posted by: hen at July 30, 2004 at 10:00 PM"Far from protecting Jewish people against future atrocities, the Fundamentalist Zionist lobby is actually promoting anti-Semitism by its actions and tactics."
That's right. It's not as if there was any antisemitism before the Six Days War when Israel took the disputed territories. Nor, of course, did anyone question Israel's right to exist until it grabbed those areas from the peace-loving Arabs.
Posted by: Alex Bensky at July 30, 2004 at 10:15 PMHen,
I don't doubt how many there was. Is there significance of the number? Is the bigger number better or worse? Is this like a soccer game with one player against SEVEN?? - The 1967 one was preceeded by the 1956 war when Israel attacked Egypt joined Britain and France over the Suez canal. So is that 3 on 1?
Thanks for pointing out the Michael Oren book.
Posted by: carlos at July 31, 2004 at 01:09 AMCarlos - you wanna play? you wanna talk about the 56 war were Nasser shut down the Suez, a casus belli of war? in other words, Nasser in 56 shot the first bullet. he did so again in 67. the arab world did again in 73.
really your grasp of logic and history is horrific. buy a fucking clue.
Posted by: hen at July 31, 2004 at 04:03 AMDammit, carlos, you chickenbomber! When are you going to get off the keyboard and go help the intifada?
Posted by: Sortelli at July 31, 2004 at 07:10 AMNo time, carlos! Quickly! There is terrorism for you to apologize for!
Posted by: Sortelli at July 31, 2004 at 09:15 AMAnother reason for Israel's attack in 1956 is that Egypt had for many years been sending squads of killers, called Fedayeen, into Israel from Gaza. They ambushed solitary hitchikers and others who looked vulnerable until Israel cleaned out their training camps in the Suez operation. If the Arabs don't want to lose any more fights to the Israelis they should stop trying to kill the Jews, it's as simple as that.
Gee, Arab terrorism back in the early 50s. Plus ca change, plus ca meme chose, eh? In fact Arab terrorism against Jews goes back to 1921 or even earlier. After more than 80 years of this violence Israel and those who support Israel are tired of it. It does not help matters that most of the world is perfectly satisfied with terrorism that kills Jews, and gets upset only by Israel's defenses against such terrorism. So to all the fine folks out there who hysterically denounce Israel's security fence and other actions in defense of its people, while ignoring the long history of Arab terrorists murdering Jews, FOAD.
Posted by: Michael Lonie at July 31, 2004 at 04:34 PMThe whole point is they build major parts of the wall on Palestinian land, cutting people off from their livelyhood, etc.(merde, c'est un imbecile non?)
Um carlos what Palestinian land??
The West Bank belonged to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt. I am given to understand that both countries have renounced their claims to the land so [drum roll please] it would appear that the land belongs to .... Israel. It should be noted that the highest court in Israel has made a ruling that at least part of the fence/wall has to be moved. Damn those pesky jews, having both democracy and the rule of law, can't they see how this oppresses the poor arabs?
My two cents worth on the the entire question of the "occupied territories" is this:
1. Israel was entirely entitled to annex land following the '67 war. Loss of land after losing a war has been a feature of human history for, I dunno, forever.
2. Where Israel made a big mistake was in either not expelling the arabs living in the areas annexed or granting them citizenship. What they should not have done and what I believe that Israel can be justifiably critized for is merely ruling the arabs without giving them full rights.
3. Therfore it being a little too late to expel them and given that the population is now so radicalized that it would be foolish to expect that they could ever properly integrate into the general population of Israel, the only option is to grant them statehood. However Israel is not in any way shape or form obligated to grant them that statehood based on the borders in existance in '67.
4. But Israel is entitled to protect itself as an entity and to take reasonable steps to protect the lives of its citizens. Ergo the fence/wall as a concept is perfectly justified.
Posted by: Just Another Bloody Lawyer at July 31, 2004 at 10:05 PMCarlos - Are you really this dumb or are you just funning us? I implore you: Read UNSC Res 242, then read Six days of war, then buy a good book that give you an overview of the ME (not at your fave anarchist bookstore, but a legit place) and then come back and you won't be such a fool.
Posted by: hen at July 31, 2004 at 11:47 PM"merde, c'est un imbecile non?"
Oh wow, you can say "shit, what an imbecile" in French. Can I kneel down on the floor now and give you a blow job?
Espèce d'idiot.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at August 1, 2004 at 02:22 AMI had something to add to the conversation, but Andrea made me laugh so hard I forgot what it was.
Posted by: Meryl Yourish at August 1, 2004 at 02:50 AMmerde, c'est un imbecile non?
merde, c'est un imbecile non?
merde, c'est un imbecile non?
ummm.....andrea....see, i can say it too.
can i ...ummmm....please have a blow job also?
Comments criticizing my short comment above have tended to concentrate on my typo (war instead of wall - Freudian or what?) and my mistaken reference to the "red line" (should have been "green line"). Obviously I was writing in a hurry. Sorry.
But the argument stands - why on Earth did Australia support the US/Israeli No vote in the UN, in defiance of the World Court and the rest of the civilized world? It's a shameful indictment of how grovellingly subservient the Howard government has become to US/Jewish interests.
For any unbiased readers (are there any at this blog?) wanting more background, I suggest the linked stories here at Information Clearing House.
Posted by: gandhi at August 1, 2004 at 08:54 AMThe whole point is they build major parts of the wall on Palestinian land
Miles of land have been conquered, people! ENTIRE MILES OF LAND!
And all because some Jews... uh... Zionists were blown up. Er, I mean... resisted.
Posted by: Sortelli at August 1, 2004 at 10:37 AMSortelli: ".....resisted..."????
-Superb choice of words.
The wall is part of the "resistence" ....
Let's file that one with "..making the desert bloom, purity of arms, land without people.."
Ariel is proud of you.
Andrea, mmmmmm I picture a big girl, but cuddly...
Posted by: carlos at August 1, 2004 at 11:34 AMCarlos, you're about to join those in the desert of the banned.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at August 1, 2004 at 11:58 AMcarlos must be a glutton for abuse. He drops in on a blog that is against terrorism, and openly supports terrorists and terrorism, ignores tyranny, and denies people their right of self defense. Generally to the point that he must resort to goal post moving, denying reality, and answer deflection to maintain his position.
No, wait, that isn't gluttony for punishment. That's giving carlos far too much credit. Shit, he's just an imbecile.
Posted by: The Real JeffS at August 1, 2004 at 01:09 PMwhy on Earth did Australia support the US/Israeli No vote in the UN, in defiance of the World Court and the rest of the civilized world?
Not to mention all the countries in the uncivilized world that also gleefully voted against Israel's security barrier, eh? Including countries such as Saudi Arabia who are building their own walls at this very moment...care for some fake outrage about that, too?
BTW, what's the World Court...can you play tennis on that? Squash? (Yes, I'm being sarcastic. Most commenters here don't accept the jurisdiction of the World Court on anything, so by definition it cannot be defied. Go peddle that junk on some leftist blog where people actually fall for it.)
Posted by: PW at August 1, 2004 at 04:00 PM-Superb choice of words. The wall is part of the "resistence" ....
Look, guys, maybe we really should be nice to Carlos. I mean, the dude can't even read. How can you dog someone for taking the most reprehensible side in an argument when he doesn't even know what the fuck he's saying or responding to?
Posted by: Sortelli at August 1, 2004 at 04:52 PMgandhi.
You said:
" ... why on Earth did Australia support the US/Israeli No vote in the UN, in defiance of the World Court and the rest of the civilized world?"
Answer given in my post above "Australia's opposition to the UN General Assembly resolution was carefully explained by Downer. The wrong words, the wrong forum. What don't you understand about that?" Is there still something you don't understand? If so, check out FM Downer's statement.
You said:
"It's a shameful indictment of how grovellingly subservient the Howard government has become to US/Jewish interests."
So, you're looking for the Australian Jewish conspiracy eh? Sad because you haven't been offered a membership card? Get a life, and carefully review your anti-Semitic opinion. Where's the evidence of PM Howard in thrall to the Jewish communities of Australia? If you can't put up, then shut up.
As for your invitation to view "Information Clearing House", I can only say that seeing the "information" it contains makes it clear that it, too, is happy to spout "apartheid wall" and "iron wall of Israeli domination" and "when the bully whines". Real balanced stuff there (not). I prefer to think for myself, thanks.
Actually, it's not entirely inappropriate for someone to post as Gandhi does, using the Mahatma's name. His advice to the European Jews was, basically, to be a model for passive resistance in the face of death.
However, as an American and a Jew, I will gladly pick up the cause of the Palestinian refugees when the Palestinians pick up the cause of the Sudeten German refugees who were displaced by a war their side started and nearly sixty years later are still rotting in refugee camps...oh, wait.
Posted by: Alex Bensky at August 2, 2004 at 12:30 AM