Axxman

What a bunch of freaks this Westboro Church is...but they are not stoopid. They held a demonstration in a public area, supervised by authorites, without disrupting the funeral. Now I can't say I blame the guy for wanting to sue them, cuz I'd be pretty upset myself. But legally I don't think they did anything wrong...and if thats the case why should they have to spend $16k to defend themselves in court? When you sue somebody, you should be prepared to lose the counter-suit.

If ever there was an example of the dangers of a welfare state, the conditions of Native American reservations should sound loud warning bells.

Woodward and Berstein didn't even discuss their anonymous source until two years after the arrests at Watergate. They had compiled thousands of pages of evidence (for their book) that verified what their source was telling them. Nixon has resigned by the time the book came out and everyone found "Deep Throat" the anonymous source. And while many people wondered and guessed at who the anonymous source was...there was no doubt that the source was a good one and his info was remarkably verifiable. About Rosenberg's source...you can assume whatever you want about his source. You could assume it was Netanyahu himself..that doesn't make it true. Assumptions are rarely reasonable. In this case we are being asked to believe that someone close to Netanyahu or Obama, an advisor of some sort, violated confidences and went to his pal in the media to spill the beans. For some reason, the meetings details are being kept behind closed doors by BOTH parties involved. Rosenberg thinks they are wrong and has decided to air his own version of events...I'd say that if the source is telling the truth then he is smart to stay hidden because he'd probably be fired on the spot for running his mouth to the media. I personally don't see how this reflects well on Rosenberg, or the source. I don't think that Rosenberg's source is in the Netanyahu camp because this source is alledgedly privy to Obama's phone calls to foreign leaders and what he is saying to them. I personally think thats a bit far-fetched...but I'll reserve judgement since I have NO WAY of knowing who the source is, what they know, or what their motivations are.

What do you call this? Easy...I have a bias on his skills as an author. But thats not what the topic is about. The topic is about what alledgedly happened "BEHIND CLOSED DOORS." On that topic I have been completely unbiased. Even in my re-quote above I said his credibility "is equal" to everyone elses. I really don't see what the big deal is asking for a source. For what its worth I'm sorry if I've deflected the topic to my opinions of Rosenberg the author...but I think its worth mentioning how he operates. I personally think his weblog is one of the most even-handed blogs on the subject of Israel. I personally applaud the fact that he goes to great lengths to identify terrorists as extremists, and not muslims in general. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing him write one unkind word about muslims. And he's not afraid to give peaceful muslims the benefit of the doubt. I agree with him on a great many things.

Well, I may not know "it all", but I clearly know more than you. I NEVER once said he thinks he's clairvoyant. In fact, I've said a couple of times that he denies such claims. It would be much more accurate to say that HE KNOWS he's not clairvoyant, or prophetic, but he has no problems with advertising or selling his books based on such misleading tactics. In other words...he is not above using something like this to make a buck and further his agenda. This stuff isn't hard to see. He is not clairvoyant, he doesn't say he is, but he has no problem pretending that he makes accurate predictions of the future in order to sell books. Thats almost laughable. He doesn't have a history of sensationalism??? His entire career his held up by sensationalism now. This guy has turned a book about a terrorist who hijacks a plane and tries to fly it into a presidential limo into a post 9/11 career...lol. His book Epicenter (the last of his I've read) says this on the inside cover, "From the author who predicted 'a kamikaze attack on the U.S.' a war with Saddam, the death of Yasser Arafat and Iran's nuclear threat..." No, not sensationalistic much...lol. Its like a joke. Its even more of a joke that people fall for this garbage and buy the book. I seriously consider those people in the same league that buy Dan Browns books looking for evidence of the Illuminati. Its just annoying when authors start to believe their own fiction...and hey, Rosenberg isn't the first...Steve Alten comes to mind too (and I loved his books.) If he is willing to peddle his wares and make a quick buck by annoucing his pseudo-psychic abilities on the cover of his books...then that speaks precisely to his credibility and just how far he will go to push his agenda. Because anyone with a shred of common sense knows he didn't predict those events anymore than a fortune cookie writer predicts events. Yeah, cause you "know?" What a crock. Yes..as a matter of fact...I do know. What is a crock is that I suspect (you being a pretty smart guy after all) know it too. Way to change the point. I never once inferred that a person had done something wrong. Are you implying that someone may have broken the law? Is Rosenberg's source now doing something he shouldn't be doing? Or is it just a matter of principle that when someone tells you something in confidence...you should keep your mouth shut. I don't see how either of those scenario's builds the character and credibility of the anonymous source. He is either breaking the law...or he can't be trusted with private information. This is compounded by the fact that Rosenberg apparently has no problem getting his info from such an untrustworthy person. I prefer to stick with option three...because I don't think Rosenberg would hang with people that broke the law or had no principles (you can believe that if you want.) I think the source is anonymous because he doesn't want to be held accountable for his words...and it protects Rosenberg because if it turns out to be bad info...he can blame some anonymous source. ROFL! Now thats an ironic statement. I haven't heard that put-down since I was a kid. I just want to clarify. I don't dislike Rosenberg, and I know it may sound like that based on what I've written. I love techno-thriller books. I read them all. He was really good. I don't even begrudge his tactics of using a few similarities from his novels to sell more books and make money (its the American way). However, I personally think it affects their writing when they start believing the hype. This was painfully evident when Rosenberg wrote the Copper Scroll...I hate when it happens to a cool author. Of course, that is only my opinion.

When are people going to wake up and outlaw this religion....

AGAIN! I have not given an opinion on this subject because I am not claiming to know what happened "BEHIND CLOSED DOORS." Rosenberg may be the next Einstein and I don't care because he wasn't in that room and his lone source isn't verifiable. If thats good enough for you...great! Its not for me because I'm a bit tired of the spin that is put on every story we get based on the word of some yahoo we will never know. The info is suspect because there is nothing to base it on. There is no way to verify it at all. It could be completely accurate info...but who knows? I never said the info was suspect..you made that up. All I asked for was the source. Rosenberg's opinions are based on the obvious...as are his laughable prophecy skills. What sensitive information? You yourself said that what Rosenberg reported "has been a common demand that has been made by "peace" proponents for years." Whats so sensitive about that? People "in the know" as you call them DO have a lot at stake...what they don't have is accountability. They can say whatever they want to their favorite blogger anonymously and never have to answer for it. Then the blogger gets to put whatever kind of spin they want on it and nobody can ascertain the truth because its all unverifiable and anonymous.

What bias do I have? Is it a bias to ask for verifiable information? I will admit that I don't know what happened "BEHIND CLOSED DOORS" anymore than you do because all we have is a slew of anonymous and unverifiable sources. I am aware of Rosenbergs career and have read several of his books including Epicenter. In my opinion, his last good book was the Ezekiel Option. After that he started to believe the hype about his clairvoyancy (inspite of his public denials) and it ruined his books. Again, I can admit thats just my opinion. He's the zionist version of Dan Brown...looking for clues and conspiracies all around him. I didn't say he has no credibility...I said his credibility on this issue is equal to everyone elses because they are all using mysterious unverifiable sources to spin their agendas.

I've already said that. Its on both sides...in both countries. The media is trying to upset the apple cart, and they are using all these unverifiable sources to do it. I'll choose to believe the people that actually know what they are talking about, and can verify it. At this point, 0% of those people are stepping forward.

It is better than yours. LOL..>Rosenberg writes fiction and has (smartly) turned that into a cash cow for clairvoyancy. The guy is a middle-east version of the old western medicine show. Now...that is an opinion. It is the only real opinion I have given on this topic. There is no opinion of mine to compare to Rosenbergs opinion. I simply asked for the source of the info...apparently that is offensive. I never even said that Rosenbergs source was wrong...he may be right. My issue is with all the anonymous sources claiming to know something and driving all the separate agendas...on both sides. I think the media should chill (another opinion.)

But...as you so accurately pointed out... If this is so common...why all the secrecy? My only point is that nobody knows what was actually said. Is it so wrong to call for patience? We have 50 different news sources, and bloggers who all miraculously have a secret source and most of them have an agenda. Maybe the issue isn't the source of the info...maybe the problem is that everyone who is parsing out the info has an agenda they are pushing and we can't trust if they are giving the info accurately. And isn't it just like Joel Rosenberg to jump on some info that is completely common, highly plausible, and likely to happen...and pretend like he saw it coming before anyone else...lol. As for the rest of your post...yeah, I knew that.

LOL!!! Is that how it works? Now my opinions are on the line? You will jump in with both feet to support an anonymous source...but...you will question the person who would like to know the source. Too funny...and typical. For the record, I have seen similar opinions written as well, but thats all they are...opinions based on anonymous people. There are opinions all over the map on this stuff based on anonymous unverifiable sources. Not one person has come out and said, "This is what happened, and why." And yet, too many people with agendas are using all sorts of shady tactics to influence public opinion. I think Rosenberg has written a couple of pretty cool fictional novels (which he has transformed into a clairvoyant parlor trick) but his credibility concerning what happened "BEHIND CLOSED DOORS" is no better than anybody elses.

HA!! Joel Rosenberg is a human correct? I have seen far too many people I thought I could trust fall from grace. I like Joel Rosenberg...but he is not above scrutiny. I haven't the slightest idea why the source of his information "has to be" anonymous. Problem is that everyone in the media is claiming to have a fly on the wall that knows what really happened... And its so weird that everybody's mole tells the story of events from the perspective that most benefits their way of thinking. Its getting a little old having every news story translated to us through anonymous and unverifiable sources.

These tunnels are no big secret...they have existed for some time. There may be a couple (no evidence) that are big enough to drive through...I mean, I suppose its within the realm of possibility. But the vast majority are small and tiny. This is more the reality... To act as if Palestinians should be living glorious lives in Gaza because they can haul bags of cement on their backs through a series of small tunnels is a little bit disengenuous. I do agree, however, that Catherine Ashtons criticisms/comments are off-base as well.

Awesome...hopefully cooler heads will prevail.

An advisor to whom? Briefed by whom? In what capacity does this so-called advisor work? ...this is all hearsay from an anonymous source.

Netanyahu was excellent today! Its beyond ridiculous that he should even have to stand up and defend building homes in his own Capital city...but today he defended that notion well.

Hello eis...welcome to Worthy! Did you ever notice how in Matthew 7:22 that the "many" who will be turned away are all basing their salvation and knowledge of Christ in their works? Baptism (among other things) could easily fit in that scripture.

Exactly Brother! Our representative gov't took a huge blow yesterday. It set a precedent that the gov't no longer works for the people. The gov't now works for its own gain...and can on a whim hoist another $1 trillion dollars in taxes on the people. This was never about giving people free insurance...which isn't free btw. This was about putting a large percentage of the GDP under gov't control. Since Obama has become President we have seen a massive gov't takeover of the private sector including Fannie & Freddie, Banking, General Motors, student loans...and now healthcare. The gov't is invading and regulating the private sector at an alarming rate. That is NOT representation!

Ludicrous...borderline offensive...question!

Including Palestinians lives? Does Israeli interests top Palestinian lives? Or are there no innocent Palestinians?

So we all agree then? Israel did make a mistake? A "gaffe" if you will....

The current President we have certainly has issues. He isn't even interested in putting America's interests fiirst...so we can't be shocked that Israel's interests are lacking from this administration. With that said...I expect the US State Dept. to put Americans lives and American interests ahead of Israels. I would be pretty upset if they were putting Israels interests ahead of Americas. However, the US shouldn't expect Israel to put America's interests over theirs either.