Shara, The way you've dealt with this is completely one-sided and hurtful. I'm Jewish, so of course I'll support an Israeli state--we need one, especially after the Holocaust. But at the same time, I'd like to think that I understand the other side of the discussion. But that's where my problem with your argument comes in: you didn't give Israel a chance at all. You launched into a rant saying that Israel's, "human rights record is probably worse than modern Iran's," and yet you: a.) gave absolutely no real backing for that point b.) didn't discuss the other side, which I know would immediately argue, "what are we supposed to do when we see our children being blown to a pulp on their way to school? Do you expect us, the Israeli citizens and government, to just sit by and watch this horror unravel?" What's more, you said that, "Israel is no more sane, safe, or free a country than Iran, and due to the power it has it is more dangerous to the world." I don't see how you can say this. As Mrs. Renner stated above, "in October 2006 Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be 'wiped off the map.'" So how is it that it would be a good idea to give someone as unstable as that the ability to create and deploy nuclear arms? Israel may have their own nuclear stockpile, and they may have made some incredible military errors in the past (e.g. the war this summer), but I didn't see a definitive quote in your comment from any Israeli official motioning to level another country. Whether you realize it or not, your stance comes off as incredibly biased and anti-Jewish: you're not illustrating an understanding of the broader picture, and have therefore created something incredibly offensive--and I'm not even that pro-Israel, compared to a lot of my Jewish friends. I realize you didn't mean to sound anti- Jewish, but by being so critical of the Israeli state, the subtext comes off as an attack all on its own. I'm sorry to address you so bluntly with this, but before you speak, you really should consider who is going to read your words, and how they're going to interpret them. In this sense, the thesis of your argument really seems to be a "contradictory, hypocritical notion [that] is based upon this American disease of racism and arrogance that our current political leaders have so successfully infected us with." I understand that you feel negatively about the Bush Administration--so do I for that matter--and I also understand that one sometimes must fight fire with fire, but as you point out, the Iranian government does not necessarily represent the views of all of the Iranian people. In the same vein you refuse to consider that the Israeli government does not represent the views of every Israeli citizen; not every Zionist is filled with hatred for the Palestinians, Lebanese, or any other member of the worldwide Muslim community. I think it's amazing that I've been able to have deeply involved discussions with Muslim students at Uni over this situation in the Middle East and leave without any negative feelings, regardless of the thinness of the ice on which we tread. But again, despite the fact that you may not have realized how this could have been interpreted, I felt that your comment really crossed the line. I don't expect you see things from my angle, I too am concerned about Israel's truly violent actions towards various Middle Eastern nations (though I do hope you can come to understand how we as a Jewish community feel deeply connected to Israel's plight) but I'm not asking for you to surrender your opinions. Rather, I just want to make it clear that in being so one- sided, you've illustrated a complete disregard for our existence as moral beings and instead have painted Jews as demonic figures. In doing so, you have ironically propagated the one myth that reflects the core of the Mideast controversy itself: a claim to justice by both sides that casts the other into the role of being the purveyor of pure and unmitigated evil. Instead of putting themselves in the others' shoes, both the Jews and Muslims in the Mideast have characterized the other as a malicious enemy. Yet the violence escalates and neither side has approached the other sympathetically and successfully. The only way to create a lasting and meaningful peace is to break down these barriers and to see everyone for who they truly are: frightened individuals who see retaliation as their only path to survival. I could post my own comment or column in response to what you've said, and give my own rant about terrorism and suicide bombings in Israel--how the IDF has every right to use their military might when walking in public isn't even safe. But I don't believe that, and in fact, I think that if we do espouse those views, we're just adding to the conflict and making it more hopeless than ever before. Something that hasn't been instituted by anyone in the Middle East is forgiveness, which is why I'm not going to be inflammatory towards you. But even while what you wrote was not directed at me or any other Jewish student at Uni, I felt that it was unfair, hypocritical, exceedingly offensive, and overall un-kosher. If you truly believe in peace, we'll be able to see eye-to-eye on that one point, at least.