The moral "high ground" exhibited by some posters here, and pundits everywhere, in defence of Israel, can be lessened or obliterated by pointing out the very shady (I personally say "dishonest") way in which Israel got hold of Palestine in the first place. Bascially they fought a ragtag army of Arabs for it until after WWII, then declared "independence" when they were in fact only 1/3 the population of the region, and most of those not even native-born. How can you declare yourself a nation when you're clearly in the minority?

The fact the Israel was "recognized" by the US and Russia in the aftermath doesn't mean anything, other than that it was politically advantageous for those nations to do so.

What about the UN Mandate? It was never really followed by the Israelis in the first place, and the Palestinians never signed on to it, so that also is worthless as a defence.

And nearly half the land in question now was seized in the 1967 War, and not returned, though Israel did agree initially to do so via UN 242. Later they fell to haggling over the wording of the Mandate, and reneged.

So these calls to support Israel "defending itself" are absurd. The land really isn't theirs to defend. They've just hijacked it.

If you read the details of the Zionist movement starting in the early 1900's, it's plain to see, and at times often admitted, that the Zionists planned all along to get every bit of Palestine for themselves, and at no time seriously considered giving the Palestinians the right to live alongside them. And that's exactly what they're continuing to do now.

"Apartheid" is a truth here.

"Slow genocide" is another truth.

How sickening it all is.

Someday the Israeli hard-liners will be exposed for what they are.

Liars. Land-thieves. Murderers.

Entitling themselves to a piece of real estate, based upon their own interpretation of an ancient and arbitrary book.

Of course, the rest of the world already sees them for what they are. Only here in the USA are we deaf, dumb, and blind.

Even many Salon readers.

Sorry, but you're still morons.

For every person like each of you, there's another who's had the same problems with the same VW or Toyota you refer to.

As for the "mileage wars," my father drives a 1995 Chevy van with 325K miles, and still running. And in the national news last year was a report about a Chevy pick up that had just put the ONE MILLIONTH mile on it, and still going. That's 1,000,000 miles. So by your twisted mileage logic, I guess that means Chevy is 3X better than Toyota?

So keep wasting your money on overpriced sales and service. It's just too bad the rest of the country loses along with you.

Yes, you're morons. Like snobby, sniffling heiresses at an art auction, you look down your noses at US cars and bemoan their quality, while fawning all over Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. Of course, I'm willing to bet few, if any, of you even know how a car works, and have never dared try to fix one yourself, which no doubt you also feel is far beneath you.

But I've spent my life working on cars, all makes, and will tell you what's already been proven: smart money buys US cars. Dollar for dollar, they're as well-made or better the foreign cars, are far cheaper on average to buy and repair, and the profit made on those cars goes to a domestic company, not a foreign one.

What about the surveys ya'll cite? Any survey that involves self-reporting of defects or costs is notoriously flawed, as anyone in marketing will tell you. People spent more money to buy their Camry, and so of course they're going to report greater satisfaction with it. This illusion of a quality difference is ingrained in Americans now. All the "satisfaction" studies just reinforce that.

That said though, of course you're going to be more satisfied with a $30K Toyota than with an $18K Sunbird. Of course there will be a quality difference, just as there would be in any two items separated by such a large amount of money. But you dopes insist on comparing them anyway, and dinging the US carmakers for the difference.

Here's a simple test to show what I'm talking about: look at the all the cars around you on a busy highway. Lots of foreign cars, right? Now look at the relative ages of those cars. Maybe you can't tell easily, if you haven't been watching all along, but I can tell you my 1997 Blazer is nearly always the oldest car on the road. Where are all the Hondas/Nissans/Toyotas that are older?

They're already in the junkyard. You'll see them there, too, stacks of them, if you ever take the time to go look.

And save your "horror stories" of your prior experiences with the domestic cars. I've seen stories for every foreign car just as well. And in the mid 70's to late 80's, the domestic makers did need to play catch-up to Japan, but that's been corrected, as it should have.

Read the chapter in "The Millionaire Next Door" about car buying. It's a detailed analysis of the relative costs. You'll see how much money you've wasted worshipping the foreign cars.

Thanks for helping ruin US manufacturing, you idiots.