don't pollute my party with your anti-semitism and terrorist support.
thanks.
Dear Jillian:
1. First I ask to clarify and apologize to you if I offended you unintentionally by my comments. In no way do I support or believe in imposing religious views on someone either personally or especially not by govt or party pressure. But I do recognize this is going on.
I sympathize equally with the Jewish and Palestinians/Muslims who want peace with each other, but are overrun by people on both sides who abuse political authority or influence to threaten violence and commit acts of war as retaliation instead of using armed forces for defense only. It should never be for attacks to incite more wars, but people on both sides will do that, at the expense of their populations who want peace and civil negotiations.
The same with our political parties, where the media messages and images skew the very worst of each party's approaches, and censor the good goals they actually share in common. That does not win elections, so spending money on campaigns is not going there.
2. If it gives you any hope, as a fellow Democrat, I have participated in a resolutions/platform meeting where one of the committee members pointed out how useless it was that every year the pro Jewish members propose one resolution while the pro-Palestinian members propose another, and the two cancel out each other's ability at any real progress towards peace. He suggested instead some process between the members where there is collaborative dialogue and concerted effort to address common issues and agree on common points and goals, instead of competing separately to overrule the other.
If we were to enforce the Constitution and respect views equally, only the policies that satisfy both sides would survive the editing process. So we would reward the peacemakers who are equally concerned for and protecting the interests of people from both sides of any conflict, and quit empowering and egging on the bullies to censor and exclude trying to win.
I agree in the use of military forces for security and protection; but emphasize that these should be used for defense only, same with using the legal and political process for DEFENSE of equal justice and protection under the laws, and not for attack.
If we can first make peace and work together on common goals of national security, for ourselves and others equally, then the physical steps of enacting and enforcing such an agreement will follow. I'm interested in hearing more from the people who can bring about peaceful working relations on both sides, and give more authority to them first.
I find the people whose authority is most respected and who have the greatest influence are the ones who respect people on both sides. When it is clear the decisions made are by unified agreement on what is good for all people equally, that has greater chance of being enforced rather than policies imposed that both sides fear is favoring the other more.
I believe we will see peace in our lifetimes, by agreeing to seek this central and unifying authority in decisions and policies, and putting our personal politics aside to be resolved as a consequence of peacemaking, not as a condition place on peacemaking in advance.
I saw hope within the members of the Democrat Party, but we are fighting a similar battle where the peacemakers working behind the scenes are too often overrun in the scramble by elected leaders to get votes by exploiting issues instead of solving them. So our uphill battles are not unlike the Jewish and Palestinian people facing similar situations, where they are often used as pawns in a powergrab among leaders looking to dominate the others.
Whatever we can achieve at home, we can use that experience to help people in other countries and situations. But if we cannot even make peace within our own parties, without giving in to popular politics to bully or bulldoze over opposing sides, what authority do we have to ask other people to quit giving in to the same political games not solving problems?
