Pro-Palestinian activists leave ‘eviction’..

[+and-then]

and it does not help your rationality to believe only "News by Jews", either.

I listen to the victims, not the ones lying about their misdeeds.

They blame the Arabs for chasing the Palestinians out of mandated Palestine.

But somehow, the Jews (Zionists) ended up with the land, and all the Arabs want the Palestinains

to go back home.

Amazing how that works, huh?

"buffer area" - sorry, it is not legal. It would be like the US seizing Canada and Mexico to make buffer areas. And then having the chutzpah to say it is Ok to do for that purpose - "buffer area".

Your argument has a hole. In fact, it's a sieve.

Oh, yeah. They'll give back stolen land if the receiving country "recognizes" Israel and, if

Israel gets ka-$billions a year forever from the US. yup.

Why should they sign *anything*? It is up to Israel to GET OUT with no strings attached.

You *know* neither will sign the peace accord because Israel has "demands" in there for them right?

They will get their state. and they won't be licking the thieves boots to get it, either.

Actually they could have their state tomorrow if they had any inclination to share the land. But they look around the world and see opinions like yours and think...hmm..maybe we still can get it all. You mentioned earlier that the Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and so on could do what the UN won't. Earl do you realize what these people would do to the Jews if no one could impede them? What they actually SAY they want to do? And you speak of this as though it's a good thing? Does the idea of women and children being literally slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands seem a just recompense for what you believe the Palestinians have suffered? And before you start side stepping - these groups regularly talk about Jews in terms not of conquest but of ANNIHILATION. Their words - not mine. If the chance came, would most of their enemies actually do this? I don't know - but they certainly are brainwashed from nursery school about the Jew not being even human. Attitudes like your's will bring this world to within a hair's breadth of destruction someday Earl. You seem to think Israelis are either stupid, weak or bluffing. The only weakness they have is being tired and longing for peace. But when they finally see there is no hope of that while their enemies live, they may well finally unify. Woe betide anyone coming against them that day.

[Yamato]

Palestinians getting "all the land" has nothing to do with Earl's opinion that I can tell. Maybe I missed something.

[RoofGardener]

.....

They blame the Arabs for chasing the Palestinians out of mandated Palestine.

But somehow, the Jews (Zionists) ended up with the land, and all the Arabs want the Palestinains

to go back home.

Amazing how that works, huh?

Not amazing at all, really. It's an (almost) inevitable consequence of starting - and then losing - a war of aggression.

Egypt and Syria - with massive Soviet support - invaded Israel. They lost, and where chased back into their own territory ,which Israel subsequently occupied as the aforementioneod buffer.

Had Egypt and Syria WON, then we wouldn' t be having this discussion, because the Jewish population of Israel would have been slaughtered, and the state wouldn't exist.

"buffer area" - sorry, it is not legal. It would be like the US seizing Canada and Mexico to make buffer areas. And then having the chutzpah to say it is Ok to do for that purpose - "buffer area".

Your argument has a hole. In fact, it's a sieve.

Interesting thought.

If Canada and Mexico co-operated in a land invasion, then YES - I would expect the USA not merely to expel the Mexican and Canadian troops, but to chase them back across the border, and into the Mexican/Canadian interiors, and then to set up a demilitarised zone.

Consider this: the USA doesn't tolerate hostile regimes anywhere NEAR its borders. Look at what they did to Nicaragua and Grenada. For that matter, how about the "occupied territory" of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ?

I think my arguement regarding buffer zones remains standing.

Why should they sign *anything*? It is up to Israel to GET OUT with no strings attached.

The UN disagrees with you. (Security Council Resolution 242)

You *know* neither will sign the peace accord because Israel has "demands" in there for them right?

The UN sanctions and supports the 'demand' about recognition. (Resolution 242 again).

Edited April 28, 2014 by RoofGardener

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Actually they could have their state tomorrow if they had any inclination to share the land. But they look around the world and see opinions like yours and think...hmm..maybe we still can get it all.

Possibly, but let me add this view. I think that for the Pals to have peace with Israel over land and over a State,

they have to sign an agreement that spells out the Zionists' demands, not least of which is recognizing the state of Israel.

Let me make an example as to why this approach is wrong. Saddam Hussein takes Kuwait and throws everyone out.

The Kuwaitis demand their country back. Hussein says, "You will only get the land if you

sign this peace agreement."

Do you honestly think for one minute the US/UN would pay any attention to that arrogance?

The bombs fell soon after Saddam refused orders to get out of Kuwait.,

Now, UN resolutions 242 and 338 told Israel a LONG time ago,, "Get out of the occupied lands".

The bombs should have been reigning down on Tel Aviv *not long* after Israel's refusal to vacate,

and frankly, after Israel's middle finger went up to the UN, the Palestinians, and the whole world.

You mentioned earlier that the Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and so on could do what the UN won't. Earl do you realize what these people would do to the Jews if no one could impede them?

Of course I realize what they will do. That is why I hope cooler heads will prevail.

Please understand the hatred those people have for the Zionists - I am sure you do.

They want revenge, plain and simple. Cooler heads should prevail and tell Israel to get out

of the occupied lands and see what happens from there. It's all about enforcing the LAW.

What they actually SAY they want to do? And you speak of this as though it's a good thing? Does the idea of women and children being literally slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands seem a just recompense for what you believe the Palestinians have suffered?

Not at all "just recompense". the Israeli youths of today had nothing to do with what their fathers and grandfathers

did long ago. *But*, that don't mean WWIII won't happen and the only way I see of defusing the situation

is *not* for Palestinians to sign a peace agreement they don't want, it is for the Pals to get their land

and homes back *WITHOUT STRINGS*- meaning,, Israel has to vacate the occupied lands.

And why, oh, why, must we even be discussing whether or not Israel has to stop an illegal occupation, anyway?

And before you start side stepping - these groups regularly talk about Jews in terms not of conquest but of ANNIHILATION. Their words - not mine.

This does not shock me, truly. Lots of built up hatred over the years.

If the chance came, would most of their enemies actually do this? I don't know - but they certainly are brainwashed from nursery school about the Jew not being even human.

Hmmm, well, this is a bit of a surprise from you. I would think the knee-jerk response is, YES,

of course they would do-the-dirty, if they could. *Some* of them would, anyway. That's MO.

Attitudes like your's will bring this world to within a hair's breadth of destruction someday Earl. You seem to think Israelis are either stupid, weak or bluffing.

I truly don't want to see this end up in a mushroom cloud, wiping out millions of species, ours included.

And I don't think Israeli's are stupid and weak, just pig headed. And, I just think Muslims are *tired* of the eternal abuse.

And if the Muslims can't get *their* peace, too, no one will have peace, 'til death do they part.

The only weakness they have is being tired and longing for peace. But when they finally see there is no hope of that while their enemies live, they may well finally unify. Woe betide anyone coming against them that day.

The Zionists in the ME never ever said a *word* about peace, until they stole all the biblical lands

they wanted right from the early Zionist strategists in the early 20^th century. They were;

Golan, Gaza, Sanai, Judea and Samaria, Gaza, Shebra Farms.

Then all-of-a-sudden, once that was all accomplished in 1967, Israel wants PEACE!

You know they won't get their "peace" until the Palestinians get theirs.

It's called "eye-for-an-eye"

[+and-then]

Earl you begin with a flawed premise. The UN is NOT a dictator like Saddam. You are arguing that the UN was wrong to give the land and that it is a decision that should be reversed. I'm truly curious - no malice at all, no pushing for effect - how do you feel Israel will ever be caused to leave that land they have been building on for almost 70 years?

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Not amazing at all, really. It's an (almost) inevitable consequence of starting - and then losing - a war of aggression.

Not buying that the Palestinians, who had no formal army, ever started a "war of aggression". Not with Israel!!

It was Israel that went into the now occupied lands, not the other way around. They were the aggressor.

Israel also bombed front-line Syrian troops, taking out many tanks, and Israel bombed many

Egyptian jets STILL ON THE TARMAC. Who was the aggressor....? Israel wanted West Bank and Gaza and knew

They had to render the Arab troops in the region moot, so the Israelis could attack the Palestinians.

It worked! And the lying Israelis said, they took out those three nations to prevent an attack on *them*.

Egypt and Syria - with massive Soviet support - invaded Israel. They lost, and where chased back into their own territory ,which Israel subsequently occupied as the aforementioneod buffer.

Let us just say that our accounts of history differ.

And I believe I can demonstrate that the Syrian, Egyptain, and Jordanian militaries were not even battle ready in 1967

when Israel hammered them under the guise of "protecting ourselves". But in any event, the first shots fired were Israeli.

Syrian tanks, that did nothing, blown up. Egyptian jets, sitting on the tarmac and did nothing. blown up.

And The Israeli's flew into Aman, Jordan, and just dropped a few bombs there, and that was that!

Three nations, 6 days. And then all summer long, and into the fall it took, to take out the Palestinians.

Make sense?

Had Egypt and Syria WON, then we wouldn' t be having this discussion, because the Jewish population of Israel would have been slaughtered, and the state wouldn't exist.

Right. which is why Israel did the "Pearl Harbor" thing to them. Then, they just took the lands they wanted,

and started leading the Palestinians Muslims off to "Resettlement Camps" that were already

built and waiting for the Pals.

Sound like a plan? You Betcha'!! Sounds like something the Nazis would do.

Interesting thought.

If Canada and Mexico co-operated in a land invasion, then YES - I would expect the USA not merely to expel the Mexican and Canadian troops, but to chase them back across the border, and into the Mexican/Canadian interiors, and then to set up a demilitarised zone.

Consider this: the USA doesn't tolerate hostile regimes anywhere NEAR its borders. Look at what they did to Nicaragua and Grenada. For that matter, how about the "occupied territory" of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ?

I think my arguement regarding buffer zones remains standing.

We disagree. The US would never be entitled to take land in an act of war, not matter who started it.

That is UN law,.

The UN disagrees with you. (Security Council Resolution 242)

The UN sanctions and supports the 'demand' about recognition. (Resolution 242 again).

You keep bringing up 242, but not 338. Is that a tell?

Regardless of what the US-run UN says, its laws are quite simple and quite real.

the same laws that said Hussein was wrongful and illegal in his occupation of Kuwait, are the same laws

that govern what Israel did in the ME as well.

BTW, what happens if Russia invades Ukraine? Same laws apply again?

Now, if the crooked cop United States "fixes it" so Israel is not thrown out, then so be it.

This is why I told "if then" that a coalition of ME forces will do the job that the UN should have done.

That's all. Common sense, not "technicalities" and "Snafus". Israel is illegally occupying

the lands they took in '67 (and a lot more than that), it's time to GO.

[RavenHawk]

Edit to add this is in the wrong place for this as NYU is not in the middle east.

NYU is in the "MIDDLE" of Lower Manhattan, which is in the "East" part of this country....

[RavenHawk]

That's the whole point. That way there, they can "feel" first hand what it must have been like.

That's inappropriate and not the same. These students have paid their tuition so they have a right to be there. As was pointed out, these Jewish students may not be Israeli. And as far as I know, there have been no incidents before this of Muslim students threatening to kick the Jewish students into the Hudson. But I guess it was a good thing that this prank didn’t backfire.

And why is it not supported that Palestinains were evicted this way, because you choose not to believe?

Oh I don’t know, maybe because they are squatters and don’t have a proper deed to the land and it is being used to attack Israeli targets?

[RavenHawk]

The real "double standard" here is how you treat Muslims and how you treat Jews.

The double-standard is that Muslims can mistreat Jews and any other non-Muslims and it is ok but be critical of that and one has committed a capital offense.

[RavenHawk]

Losing your home, farm, job, and everything you own, including the beds your children sleep in? THAT's pain

Now you know the pain that every Israeli feels when the neighbors are willing and able to kill them. The Jews fought back. What did the Jews have in a Dhimmis environment?

PS: Before there was in Israeli "government", Jeff, Jewish Terrorist groups in the Levant did the same thing to 600,000 Palestinians in 400+ villages in MANDATED Palestine. Those were individuals.

What were you saying about "ignorance"?

It was poor Palestinian leadership. Panic set in and al-Husseini ordered an evacuation (not eviction – it was self-imposed). The Jews took advantage of the situation and encouraged the flight. If the Palestinian leadership could have sat down and negotiated in the first place, there would have been no panic. The reason there was panic was because the Palestinian was feeling the ages old guilt of maltreatment of the Jew.

[RavenHawk]

You're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I think that ownership of land based on religion is totally absurd.

When it comes to GOD’s Covenant with the Jews, it is not absurd. However, that is just a small part of Israel’s claim to the land.

The problem with you is, you look from the outside-in. Try being these people being abused and

see if you don't change your tune.

Who says that no one is capable of looking from within? Yes, the Palestinian has the short-end of the stick and it is unfortunate. In this world of 7 billion, everyone cannot be happy. It is physically impossible. For some to be happy, others must pay the price. That is the nature of this world and nothing can change that. But do you think it would be any better without an Israel? The Palestinian wouldn’t be able to hang on to their own nation even at the hands of their own brothers. The Palestinian is unwanted and untrustworthy. The ineptness against Israel is proof of that. Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt will all try to take over as much land as possible to defend their sovereignty against the Palestinian.

Also, some of these Palestinians had homes that date back to the time of Christ when the House of

Juda was still thriving. Notice, *those* Jews had no problem having neighbors that were not Jewish.

It was only until the Zionist jews came into the Levant that the *muslim* problem came to the light of "Jews"

Those that did have a deed that could be confirmed are now Israeli citizens. Zionists had no problem living in peace side by side, but from decades of living with Muslims in Dhimmitude, a Jewish state could never be realized.

You are wrong, I have told you that MANY times in here. Israel now admits they were the aggressor and teaches that history to their children.

Of course they were the aggressor. If they were not more aggressive than the Palestinians, then they would be in the sea.

Also, it matters NOT who attacked who, who is on the defense, NOTHING, you cannot gain land in any kind of war, so says the UN

That is just so much BS. This is the basis of civilization from the first time two groups of human’s fought each other over territory or resources. What the UN says carries very little weight. They are ineffective against Putin. Even the UN’s predecessor was indifferent to the pleas of Haile Selassie.

[RoofGardener]

Possibly, but let me add this view. I think that for the Pals to have peace with Israel over land and over a State,

they have to sign an agreement that spells out the Zionists' demands, not least of which is recognizing the state of Israel.

Let me make an example as to why this approach is wrong. Saddam Hussein takes Kuwait and throws everyone out.

The Kuwaitis demand their country back. Hussein says, "You will only get the land if you

sign this peace agreement."

Do you honestly think for one minute the US/UN would pay any attention to that arrogance?

In terms of he UN's charter, YES... that is PRECISELY what they would do. Their charter is to attempt to prevent - or stop - conflict. NOT to seek reparations. You seem to misunderstand the UN's chartered function.

The bombs fell soon after Saddam refused orders to get out of Kuwait.,

Five months afterwards, roughly. And Saddam not only refused to get out, denying TWELVE UN resolutions, but formally annexed Kuwait, declaring it to be the 19th province of Iraq. This put it on a VERY different footing from the Israeli occupations, which never annexed anything, and always obeyed UN resolutions.

Now, UN resolutions 242 and 338 told Israel a LONG time ago,, "Get out of the occupied lands".

No, they do not. Have you ever read it ? ALL of it, not just selected sentences ?

The bombs should have been reigning down on Tel Aviv *not long* after Israel's refusal to vacate,

and frankly, after Israel's middle finger went up to the UN, the Palestinians, and the whole world.

The difference is that Israel always co-operated with the UN, and accepted its resolutions. (unlike most of the Arab states).

It's all about enforcing the LAW.

I agree. So tell the Palestinian Liberation Organisation - and the PA - to implement resolution 242 and obey the law, as Israel, Egypt and Jordan did decades ago. (338 is irrelevant in this context, by the way, as it relates to Lebanon, not the Palestinians. Do you ever READ these resolutions that you are so fond of quoting ?).

Not at all "just recompense". the Israeli youths of today had nothing to do with what their fathers and grandfathers

did long ago. *But*, that don't mean WWIII won't happen and the only way I see of defusing the situation

is *not* for Palestinians to sign a peace agreement they don't want, it is for the Pals to get their land

and homes back *WITHOUT STRINGS*- meaning,, Israel has to vacate the occupied lands.

And why, oh, why, must we even be discussing whether or not Israel has to stop an illegal occupation, anyway?

If - as you have just stated - the Palestinians truly do NOT want peace, then they shall have war. And the occupation is NOT illegal. READ RESOLUTION 242.

Not buying that the Palestinians, who had no formal army, ever started a "war of aggression". Not with Israel!!

It was Israel that went into the now occupied lands, not the other way around. They were the aggressor.

Israel also bombed front-line Syrian troops, taking out many tanks, and Israel bombed many

Egyptian jets STILL ON THE TARMAC. Who was the aggressor....? Israel wanted West Bank and Gaza and knew

They had to render the Arab troops in the region moot, so the Israelis could attack the Palestinians.

It worked! And the lying Israelis said, they took out those three nations to prevent an attack on *them*.

Oh PLEASE EoT ... look at the sequence of events.

1) Egypt blocked Suez and the Straights of Tiran to Israeli traffic - in and of itself an act of war.

2) Egypt threatened to attack the UN peacekeeping force on the 1948 armistice line in the Sinai. The only way they could DO that is if they planned to CROSS the armistice line. The UN peacekeeping force bravely ran away, hardly boosting Israel's confidence in the UN - or Egyptian intentions.

3) Egypt massed armour, troops and aircraft close to the Israeli border. These included elite veteran units (ground and air), and Tu-17 heavy bombers, and command/control HQ units.

(note: one reason Israel was able to disable so many aircraft on the runways, is precisely BECAUSE many of those aircraft had been specifically moved into strike positions close to the border.)

4) Jordan and Syria followed suite, with Syria using artillary on the Golan Heights to shell Israeli towns and villages.

5) Iraq moved two divisions into Jordan, close to the Israeli border.

6) Iraq and Saudi Arabia moved strike aircraft into Jordan.

7) Egyptian and Syrian politicians - and military leaders - where making public statements that they where about to attack Israel.

And ALL of this was happening at the same time, with clear signs of collusion between the parties. Facing THAT, what would YOU have done ? If the Israeli's hadn't attacked the Egyptian air force when it did, then Israel would have been annihilated by an Egyptian/Jordanian/Syrian/Iraq/Saudi first-strike. Israel is a small country - it would take the Egyptian tanks only a couple of days to get to Tel Aviv - and the Tu17 bombers around 30 minutes.

Regardless of what the US-run UN says, its laws are quite simple and quite real.

You really don't understand the UN, do you ? It doesn't make laws, it makes resolutions. Those resolutions CAN be backed by force under certain circumstances, but they are NOT laws.

the same laws that said Hussein was wrongful and illegal in his occupation of Kuwait, are the same laws

that govern what Israel did in the ME as well.

Yes. The difference is

a) Iraq formally annexed (e.g. permanantly occupied) Kuwait, unlike the situation with Israel.

Iraq formally repudiated the UN resolutions. Israel has obeyed them.

BTW, what happens if Russia invades Ukraine? Same laws apply again?

Highly unlikely. Russia has a veto on the security council, and I doubt that the Ukraine would have sufficient support amongst the General Assembly to activate the Unite for Peace veto-overide mechanism.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

That's inappropriate and not the same.

We agree! On both accounts, it is *not* the same, and it *is* inappropriate!

These students have paid their tuition so they have a right to be there.

Really!?!?!?! So Palestinians paid for their homes, had title to their homes, *don't* have the right to be in their homes?

RavenHawk, what Israel did to the Palestinians was FAR more shocking and devastating and horrific.

It was real, - innocent men, women and children taken from their homes and shuffled off to

lovely resettlement camps by a bunch of ruthless animals.

As was pointed out, these Jewish students may not be Israeli. And as far as I know, there have been no incidents before this of Muslim students threatening to kick the Jewish students into the Hudson. But I guess it was a good thing that this prank didn't backfire.

Oh I don't know, maybe because they are squatters and don't have a proper deed to the land and it is being used to attack Israeli targets?

And you guessed wrong. The first thing the Israeli's attacked in West Bank in 1967 was a very important Palestinian science museum.

The second item to come under attack was the Registry of Deeds so the Palestinians' claim to their homes were now moot.

BTW, RavenHawk, you claim that Palestinians had "no right" to be in Mandated Palestine,

while never explaining how the Israeli's *did* have the right to be in Mandated Palestine.

BTW, again, RavenHawk, some Palestinian homes dated back to the time of Christ.

The Jews then in the House of Juda, had no problem with the various peoples that lived with them,

it was only the mad-dog Zionists from Europe who had a very short history in the Levant that

did the religious cleansing dirty to the Palestinians.

Have a nice one!

[+and-then]

We agree! On both accounts, it is *not* the same, and it *is* inappropriate!

Really!?!?!?! So Palestinians paid for their homes, had title to their homes, *don't* have the right to be in their homes?

RavenHawk, what Israel did to the Palestinians was FAR more shocking and devastating and horrific.

It was real, - innocent men, women and children taken from their homes and shuffled off to

lovely resettlement camps by a bunch of ruthless animals.

And you guessed wrong. The first thing the Israeli's attacked in West Bank in 1967 was a very important Palestinian science museum.

The second item to come under attack was the Registry of Deeds so the Palestinians' claim to their homes were now moot.

BTW, RavenHawk, you claim that Palestinians had "no right" to be in Mandated Palestine,

while never explaining how the Israeli's *did* have the right to be in Mandated Palestine.

BTW, again, RavenHawk, some Palestinian homes dated back to the time of Christ.

The Jews then in the House of Juda, had no problem with the various peoples that lived with them,

it was only the mad-dog Zionists from Europe who had a very short history in the Levant that

did the religious cleansing dirty to the Palestinians.

Have a nice one!

I've listened to vehement anti Zionist tirades for a couple of years here Earl and the arguments stay the same. Bottom line is that two very diverse opinions of who is right and who is wrong exists and no one is budging on their position for any reason. It is a fantasy of the left in this country that Israel will simply give up someday - or be forced into capitulation by some magical set of circumstances and then vacate all the land they have been building on for 70 years. When pondered soberly only one conclusion makes any sense - only war and total annihilation of one or the other group will ever solve this kind of hatred. But if dreaming anti Zionist dreams makes it easier for you to sleep then I guess it's a good thing.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

When it comes to GOD's Covenant with the Jews, it is not absurd. However, that is just a small part of Israel's claim to the land.

Who says that no one is capable of looking from within? Yes, the Palestinian has the short-end of the stick and it is unfortunate. In this world of 7 billion, everyone cannot be happy. It is physically impossible. For some to be happy, others must pay the price. That is the nature of this world and nothing can change that. But do you think it would be any better without an Israel? The Palestinian wouldn't be able to hang on to their own nation even at the hands of their own brothers. The Palestinian is unwanted and untrustworthy. The ineptness against Israel is proof of that. Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt will all try to take over as much land as possible to defend their sovereignty against the Palestinian.

Those that did have a deed that could be confirmed are now Israeli citizens. Zionists had no problem living in peace side by side, but from decades of living with Muslims in Dhimmitude, a Jewish state could never be realized.

Of course they were the aggressor. If they were not more aggressive than the Palestinians, then they would be in the sea.

That is just so much BS. This is the basis of civilization from the first time two groups of human's fought each other over territory or resources. What the UN says carries very little weight. They are ineffective against Putin. Even the UN's predecessor was indifferent to the pleas of Haile Selassie.

You have too much for me to address totally, RH. So let me respond to your rebuking of UN law

which prohibits any nation from gaining land as the result of an act of war:

Cain killed Abel, too. Does this mean we should abandon laws prohibiting murder?

You appear to be a person that adheres to the word of God...? I think?! If so, then....

"Thou Shalt Not Kill"

"Thou Shalt Not Steal"

So much for your lawless world

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

In terms of he UN's charter, YES... that is PRECISELY what they would do. Their charter is to attempt to prevent - or stop - conflict. NOT to seek reparations. You seem to misunderstand the UN's chartered function.

Five months afterwards, roughly. And Saddam not only refused to get out, denying TWELVE UN resolutions, but formally annexed Kuwait, declaring it to be the 19th province of Iraq. This put it on a VERY different footing from the Israeli occupations, which never annexed anything, and always obeyed UN resolutions.

No, they do not. Have you ever read it ? ALL of it, not just selected sentences ?

The difference is that Israel always co-operated with the UN, and accepted its resolutions. (unlike most of the Arab states).

I agree. So tell the Palestinian Liberation Organisation - and the PA - to implement resolution 242 and obey the law, as Israel, Egypt and Jordan did decades ago. (338 is irrelevant in this context, by the way, as it relates to Lebanon, not the Palestinians. Do you ever READ these resolutions that you are so fond of quoting ?).

If - as you have just stated - the Palestinians truly do NOT want peace, then they shall have war. And the occupation is NOT illegal. READ RESOLUTION 242.

Oh PLEASE EoT ... look at the sequence of events.

1) Egypt blocked Suez and the Straights of Tiran to Israeli traffic - in and of itself an act of war.

2) Egypt threatened to attack the UN peacekeeping force on the 1948 armistice line in the Sinai. The only way they could DO that is if they planned to CROSS the armistice line. The UN peacekeeping force bravely ran away, hardly boosting Israel's confidence in the UN - or Egyptian intentions.

3) Egypt massed armour, troops and aircraft close to the Israeli border. These included elite veteran units (ground and air), and Tu-17 heavy bombers, and command/control HQ units.

(note: one reason Israel was able to disable so many aircraft on the runways, is precisely BECAUSE many of those aircraft had been specifically moved into strike positions close to the border.)

4) Jordan and Syria followed suite, with Syria using artillary on the Golan Heights to shell Israeli towns and villages.

5) Iraq moved two divisions into Jordan, close to the Israeli border.

6) Iraq and Saudi Arabia moved strike aircraft into Jordan.

7) Egyptian and Syrian politicians - and military leaders - where making public statements that they where about to attack Israel.

And ALL of this was happening at the same time, with clear signs of collusion between the parties. Facing THAT, what would YOU have done ? If the Israeli's hadn't attacked the Egyptian air force when it did, then Israel would have been annihilated by an Egyptian/Jordanian/Syrian/Iraq/Saudi first-strike. Israel is a small country - it would take the Egyptian tanks only a couple of days to get to Tel Aviv - and the Tu17 bombers around 30 minutes.

You really don't understand the UN, do you ? It doesn't make laws, it makes resolutions. Those resolutions CAN be backed by force under certain circumstances, but they are NOT laws.

Yes. The difference is

a) Iraq formally annexed (e.g. permanantly occupied) Kuwait, unlike the situation with Israel.

Iraq formally repudiated the UN resolutions. Israel has obeyed them.

Highly unlikely. Russia has a veto on the security council, and I doubt that the Ukraine would have sufficient support amongst the General Assembly to activate the Unite for Peace veto-overide mechanism.

A lot to respond to, but this has to be one focal point for me, and to demonstrate to you

why we just cannot post with eachother. Or knowledge base is too different.

"Five months afterwards, roughly. And Saddam not only refused to get out, denying TWELVE UN resolutions, but formally annexed Kuwait, declaring it to be the 19th province of Iraq. This put it on a VERY different footing from the Israeli occupations, which never annexed anything, and always obeyed UN resolutions"

No, it is NOT on a different footing. This is where I vehemently disagree.

#1 David Ben-Gurion signed an agreement spelling out precisley what would be the Jewish Homeland

and what would be "Mandated Palestine". What part of "Mandated" do you not understand?

#2 When Israel broke that agreement, the UN security council voted unanamously to tell Israel

to get out of the occupied lands, TWICE. How many times do you think it should take, Gardener?

#3 Sadaam Hussein was only taking back the 19th province of Iraq, which was wrongfully taken away

from Iraq by the British. Note, Sadaam Hussein was NOT trying to steal people's individual homes,

nor was he trying to take innocent people off to "resettlement camps", nor was he trying to chase

people out into the desert to die or live being a stateless person in someone else's land.

The more I think of it, Gardener, you are right, the two are NOT on the same footing.

The misdeeds of Israel are far more insideous than those of Sadaam Hussein's.

How's that for company, Israel < Sadaam Hussein.

[RoofGardener]

A lot to respond to, but this has to be one focal point for me, and to demonstrate to you

why we just cannot post with eachother. Or knowledge base is too different.

"Five months afterwards, roughly. And Saddam not only refused to get out, denying TWELVE UN resolutions, but formally annexed Kuwait, declaring it to be the 19th province of Iraq. This put it on a VERY different footing from the Israeli occupations, which never annexed anything, and always obeyed UN resolutions"

No, it is NOT on a different footing. This is where I vehemently disagree.

#1 David Ben-Gurion signed an agreement spelling out precisley what would be the Jewish Homeland

and what would be "Mandated Palestine".

Ummm.... no... I don't think he did.

Ben Gurion declared the existence of Israel, with borders based on the original UN resolution for partition. But I don't think he made ANY specifications in that deceleration to the Arab sectors. (how COULD he ? They where not his to give away). The key thing here is that it was a unilateral declaration about ISREAL... it was NOT an agreement (see comment below).

What part of "Mandated" do you not understand?

The letter "d". That has always given me difficulties.

#2 When Israel broke that agreement,

It didn't. Apart from anything else, there WAS no agreement.

The Arabs had rejected the UN Partition plan (resolution 181) in the General Assembly, threatening to attack if it was implemented. Israel then summoned itself into existence, entirely independently of the UN (albeit following its plan), and the Arabs (not the Israeli's ) duly attacked.

the UN security council voted unanamously to tell Israel

to get out of the occupied lands, TWICE. How many times do you think it should take, Gardener?

But it didn't, did it ?

I'm assuming you are reffering to resolutions 242 and 338 ?

Resolution 242 required that all belligerent parties should meet with UN special representatives in order to accomplish:

1) A withdrawal of Israeli forces from land occupied when it pushed the invading Arab armies back.

2) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

Israel agreed, and met with the UN representative.

The Arab nations refused to even MEET the representative, and absolutely refused to acknowledge Israel's right to exist, in peace or otherwise.

This rendered the entire resolution void, with the fault being on the Arab side. (the UN's opinion, not mine).

Egypt and Jordan eventually DID meet with the UN, and discharged their duties as UN members, under resolution 242. Israel immediately returned their territory.

Syria and the PLO did NOT - and still havn't. So the territory remains occupied.

I'm assuming your reference to TWO resolutions is in regard Resolution 338 ? If so, then this resolution was leveled against the Arabs when they launched the Yom Kippur offensive, and was basically a warning that by attacking, they where in further breach of 242. (I seem to recall that - in another post - I stated that 338 was in regard the Lebannon war. I was getting muddled up with Resolution 1507. Sorreeee......)

#3 Sadaam Hussein was only taking back the 19th province of Iraq, which was wrongfully taken away

REALLY ? When did THAT happen ? I thought Kuwait was a Kingdom all the way back into antiquity, and certainly pre-dating modern Iraq. ?

[Peter B]

And then said:

As a protest it is an innovative approach. In execution it is reprehensible. The students involved should be reprimanded for lack of judgement. It can justifiably be considered a threat of physical harm against other students. The idea that every eviction of a Palestinian is illegal and immoral is not supported.

Earl of Trumps replied:

That's the whole point. That way there, they can "feel" first hand what it must have been like.

Why specifically did only Jewish students have to "feel first hand what it must have been like"? Did the people who undertook the prank know the political alignment of all the Jewish students?

[RavenHawk]

We agree! On both accounts, it is *not* the same, and it *is* inappropriate!

It’s inappropriate because Muslim apologists are trying to compare apples to oranges. Strictly as a process (form), it is perhaps the same but the rationale (substance) is completely different and that is what matters. Jews are not competing with Muslim Apologists for dorm space. Plus, because NYU is dar al-Harb for the Muslim students, they are under treaty to conform to the non-Muslim world while living here.

RavenHawk, what Israel did to the Palestinians was FAR more shocking and devastating and horrific.

It was real, - innocent men, women and children taken from their homes and shuffled off to

lovely resettlement camps by a bunch of ruthless animals.

Palestinians were not taken from their homes. They left on their own in 1948 and abandoned their homes and the land they did not own. Granted, in the heat of the moment, I’m sure you could find some (identified trouble makers) that were encouraged to move on with their brethren, but most that stayed are now Israeli citizens. Many of those troublemakers probably ended up in Jordan and triggered Black September. As far as being innocent, they are all guilty. And as and then has been pointing out the practice of how the Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews has not changed - ever. The Pogroms and massacres of the Jew at the hands of Muslims make any reprisals pale in comparison.

And you guessed wrong. The first thing the Israeli's attacked in West Bank in 1967 was a very important Palestinian science museum.

What guess? We are talking about the museum that housed the Dead Sea Scrolls and was being used as a lookout by Palestinian fighters? Gee, I don’t know why the Jews would ever want to capture that place and prevent it from being looted, destroyed or used as a military asset.

The second item to come under attack was the Registry of Deeds so the Palestinians' claim to their homes were now moot.

This is the collection of bogus deeds that were invalidated by the British prior to 1948. Just because they are all collected in one place now, doesn’t make them any more valid. So, gaining control of them prevented them from being used later by unscrupulous persons. If the Palestinians did not flee, but ratified their statehood, then those deeds might have become legit. But that didn’t happen, they abandoned their homes. They feared being treated the same way they treated the Jews. Their chickens had come home to roost.

BTW, RavenHawk, you claim that Palestinians had "no right" to be in Mandated Palestine,

while never explaining how the Israeli's *did* have the right to be in Mandated Palestine.

Well, if you weren’t so busy refusing to read the rest; you would have known that I have explained it. But my claim isn’t really that the Palestinian had no right to be there, it just couldn’t usurp the Jew’s right. The Jew purchased the land legally, most indigenous non-Jew peoples had not. That is the key. Who could prove their right rather than just claim? Squatters claim, legal owners prove. To be brutally honest, it is my belief that most absentee owners were dead, didn’t care, or were incapable of legally transferring ownership. Either way, doesn’t matter, after the British declared Palestine as unorganized territory, all claims but authenticated deeds were considered abandoned lands. If the Palestinians had declared statehood alongside Israel, this problem would have gone away. Thank you al-Husseini!

BTW, again, RavenHawk, some Palestinian homes dated back to the time of Christ.

The Jews then in the House of Juda, had no problem with the various peoples that lived with them,

it was only the mad-dog Zionists from Europe who had a very short history in the Levant that

did the religious cleansing dirty to the Palestinians.

For one, one was not Palestinian if they lived in the time of Christ. Plus, that family had to survive intact from the Romans, Byzantines, Crusaders, Seljuks, Ottomans, and many others. And I would think that those were the few that could present a legitimate deed and are now citizens of Israel. The Palestinian has just as short history as Ashkenazi Jews. Prior to 1922, there were no Palestinians. If you were indigenous then you were known as a member of your tribe or village. In the beginning the Zionists were more than willing to live side-by-side with the Muslim but it turned out that Pogroms followed at the hands of the mad-dog Islamists. Too many realized that Islam would not treat the Jew as equals, only as subordinates. The Jew survived the attempts of ethnic cleansing and has shown they have the right to be there. The Palestinian has reneged on their right so many times that they have actually forfeited it.

[RavenHawk]

You have too much for me to address totally, RH. So let me respond to your rebuking of UN law

which prohibits any nation from gaining land as the result of an act of war:

Cain killed Abel, too. Does this mean we should abandon laws prohibiting murder?

I’m not rebuking UN law; the UN has no force with the teeth to enforce their resolutions. And as far as the resolutions, RoofGardener has explained them clearly. Cain killing Abel, came long before the Ten Commandments. At this point, GOD does not command that “Thou Shall Not Kill”, he only punishes Cain with exile. We can only assume that there were laws against murder at that time. And I don’t think that a moral commandment of GOD could be compared to an arbitrary resolution by an inept and corrupt organization.

You appear to be a person that adheres to the word of God...? I think?! If so, then....

I don’t know if I *adhere* to GOD’s word but I believe in his divinity and his son.

"Thou Shalt Not Kill"

"Thou Shalt Not Steal"

So much for your lawless world

The Ten Commandments are more to remind us that we live in a lawless world. We all break at least one Commandment once every day.

So what is your point?

[Yamato]

The double-standard is that Muslims can mistreat Jews and any other non-Muslims and it is ok but be critical of that and one has committed a capital offense.

No it's the double standard that anyone can mistreat Jews and get away with it by making it someone else's problem as the solution for it. But instead of fighting for their rights in the battlefield where it belonged, post-war Germany for starters obviously, they go somewhere else and continue to play the "anti-Semitism" card because if you don't identify with Israel you're "a self-hating Jew"? Nonsense. Stop insulting people by implying they think it's okay to mistreat Jews. We're not mistreating Jews in the US. Nobody that I've ever seen on this forum has ever advocated that people do. Get this insulting Zionist straw out of here.

[RavenHawk]

No it's the double standard that anyone can mistreat Jews and get away with it by making it someone else's problem as the solution for it.

You are always getting away with it, and it’s all your problem.

But instead of fighting for their rights in the battlefield where it belonged,

And where is that battlefield? Right now, it’s in their backyard.

post-war Germany for starters obviously, they go somewhere else and continue to play the "anti-Semitism"

Sounds like you are making excuses to spread your hate. They went someplace else because they’ve been chased away from most other places and where they went provided an opportunity to be able to protect themselves without relying on anyone else.

card because if you don't identify with Israel you're "a self-hating Jew"?

That’s incorrect. You don’t have to identify with Israel, but one can do it without hatred. But for whatever reason, the Jew has the stigma of being a hated race for no good reason but perhaps jealousy. So what is your reason?

Nonsense. Stop insulting people by implying they think it's okay to mistreat Jews.

Except I’m not insulting you. Time and time again, in your writings, you have proved your hatred of the Jew. It doesn’t take long to know your position.

We're not mistreating Jews in the US. Nobody that I've ever seen on this forum has ever advocated that people do. Get this insulting Zionist straw out of here.

Yes, they are mistreated here too. It’s just that mistreatment is rare; just a few months ago we had a racist tag a Jewish deli and the community rallied around the owner. It is frowned upon here. Racism exists here but most people don’t use theirs as a weapon. You use the written word to wield yours. You have every right to do so, but if you do, it’s not insulting you to call you on it.

[Yamato]

You are always getting away with it, and it's all your problem.

And where is that battlefield? Right now, it's in their backyard.

Sounds like you are making excuses to spread your hate. They went someplace else because they've been chased away from most other places and where they went provided an opportunity to be able to protect themselves without relying on anyone else.

That's incorrect. You don't have to identify with Israel, but one can do it without hatred. But for whatever reason, the Jew has the stigma of being a hated race for no good reason but perhaps jealousy. So what is your reason?

Except I'm not insulting you. Time and time again, in your writings, you have proved your hatred of the Jew. It doesn't take long to know your position.

Yes, they are mistreated here too. It's just that mistreatment is rare; just a few months ago we had a racist tag a Jewish deli and the community rallied around the owner. It is frowned upon here. Racism exists here but most people don't use theirs as a weapon. You use the written word to wield yours. You have every right to do so, but if you do, it's not insulting you to call you on it.

Foul. Quote my hatred of the Jews please. Grab these times and times again and show them to me now. You're a basket case of misinterpretation if you're not outright insulting people on a regular basis.

If people are being mistreated here, that's our job to remedy. We're not responsible for your foreign entitlement complex over Israel. Jews as a group are probably one of the most successful and prosperous groups in the nation. There's other groups of people in the US who have it far worse off.

I hate oppression and tyranny and I'm not going to pull any punches about it. You put that in the bank and cash it. You defenders of tyranny are liberty's bane.

[RavenHawk]

Foul. Quote my hatred of the Jews please. Grab these times and times again and show them to me now. You're a basket case of misinterpretation if you're not outright insulting people on a regular basis.

You’re the last one that should call foul. You continuously insult people if they disagree with you. Don’t feel the victim when others shove it right back in your face.

I’m just counting the topics that you started. Of the last 16 threads you’ve initiated, 12 deals with Israel/Palestine and 11 of those are negative to one degree or the other toward Israel. Of the other 4, not one of them discusses the oppression of Islam on non Muslims or any other kind of oppression.

*Pro-Palestinian activists leave ‘eviction’..

*'Israel's War on Africans'

*The UNHCR: Stateless People

What's in Egypt's proposed 2014 Constitution?

Violence in Iraq Highest in Five Years

*The Threat of Israel's WMD Arsenals

*The Bottom Line of Israel Palestine

*Iran's President: We'll Never Build Nuke

U.S. Ready to Ease Iran Sanctions

US to Slash Aid to Egypt

*Gaza gets rare cement

*Israel is Missing Something: Israelis

*Israeli MDs Harvesting Human Organs

*West Bank Swears in its New Prime Minister

**Nigeria's Igbo Jews: 'Lost tribe' of Israel?

*The "Hilltop Youth"

There is one of two reasons for this. There are no good stories about Israel but I find that very hard to believe, or you hate Israel and only embellish the bad stories whether they are actual or fabricated.

If people are being mistreated here, that's our job to remedy. We're not responsible for your foreign entitlement complex over Israel. Jews as a group are probably one of the most successful and prosperous groups in the nation.

Really? Our place to remedy? So that you don’t get confused, I don’t agree with your terminology of “foreign entitlement complex”. That is a tangent, I’m not agreeing, however if we are not responsible for Israel then neither are we responsible to remedy the problems of the Palestinians.

There's other groups of people in the US who have it far worse off.

Yes there are and as I am fond of saying, mainly because types like you fail to comprehend. In this world of 7 billion, it is physically impossible to make everyone happy. In order to make someone happy requires that someone else suffers. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t try to accommodate everyone but there are times that you have to analyze the situation and determine if the course of action to cause the least misery is to meddle in nature or just let nature run its course. I believe that the best thing to happen is to let those tribes referred to as Palestinian disperse back into the other Arab populations. Not every upstart subculture is destined to survive.

I hate oppression and tyranny and I'm not going to pull any punches about it. You put that in the bank and cash it. You defenders of tyranny are liberty's bane.

Somehow, most people don’t believe you and my first point in this post has a lot to do with it. You come across as dishonest because for someone that says he hates oppression and tyranny, only seems fixated on Israel. I’m not the one that is liberty’s bane! Cha-ching!!!

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

I've listened to vehement anti Zionist tirades for a couple of years here Earl and the arguments stay the same.

That is because the issues never get settled. Israel had two resolutions from the UN telling them to get out of the occupied

lands of 1967. It never gets fulfilled.

BTW, I think that Israel's illegal occupation of Golan is bad, but at least any Syrians displaced from there had a Syria to go to.

But the Palestinians are stateless.

Bottom line is that two very diverse opinions of who is right and who is wrong exists and no one is budging on their position for any reason.

I noticed that, yes, nobody budges at all.

I did not simply fall in love with Palestinian people, nor do I hate Jewish people.

I look at the situation and know clearly who is in the wrong. It's very simple Obey the LAW, both God's and UN's

It is a fantasy of the left in this country that Israel will simply give up someday - or be forced into capitulation by some magical set of circumstances and then vacate all the land they have been building on for 70 years. When pondered soberly only one conclusion makes any sense - only war and total annihilation of one or the other group will ever solve this kind of hatred. But if dreaming anti Zionist dreams makes it easier for you to sleep then I guess it's a good thing.

I have a funny feeling you are right. Right or wrong, Israel will always be backed by the West. Unless that changes, yes, it will be war. People in the West eventually came around to supporting the boycott of South Africa until Apartheid was ended, and those people in control are white people. So I guess it is possible that Western people will finally see things the way they really are in the ME and boycott Israel.