VK3AUU

So, direct quotes from tthe 'League of Nations' charter, the 'United Nations' and the 'PLO articles are Zionist BS.'? Hmmm, how do you get that?

Machina is correct. At the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire a varety of 'states' were created; Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, etc all with international recognition. Why is it just the tiny bit of territory called 'Isreal' that should be the the exception and should not have been deliniated as well? With regard to the 'eviction' of peoples from these states, what do you think happened to the tens of thousands of Jews and christians in the newly formed 'non isreal' states? What is happening to Coptic christians and Jews currently resident in Egypt, Irak, jordan, lebanon?

A wrong committed in Egypt doesn't suddenly become a right when it is committed in Israel.

David

This time David Singer is correct!

The KGB-invented idea of being "Palestinian" has brought so much suffering to the people so named. Before being conscripted to that fake "national" cause, they lived peacefully and prospered under Israeli occupation, free to move and do what they wanted. Their suffering began only once they were incited to resist Israel, then came the suspicion and with it the restrictions, the road-blocks, the searches, the arrests, the settlers, the land-confiscations, the demolitions and the inhumane treatment. The KGB is no longer, but they still suffer of that momentum.

Those poor people are still used by the Left as an anti-American whip. Who cares that every action has a reaction and so being a whip hurts just as being the whipped?

Despite the cruelties of the Israeli occupation, most "Palestinians" privately still prefer it over their own cruel and corrupt regime - how much more so over the bloody rule of Hamas, whose leader actually stated: "We are not Palestinians - we are Muslims. There is just one nation and only one nation which should rule Palestine - Muslims, Muslims and Muslims, that's who we are".

Nevertheless, Israel does not owe them its custody. Israel should leave the occupied territories ASAP for its own good, even if it means harsher times for those poor locals, so-called "Palestinians", who fall in the cracks of history.

However you define a "a people" - and I'm sure you can define it to get whatever answer you want - the Palestinians who were expelled from their homes, and those who fled from the fighting and sought to return, were real people.

Nothing Singer has said gives any reason to justify this - and this is what the claimed "right of return" is all about (except that since the evil Singer endorses has continued for over 60 years now, it is in most cases their children and grandchildren).

No doubt Singer can define "a people" in such a way as to make Jews from all over the world "a people" and Palestinians living in Palestine (or their children and grandchildren) not "a people", but, even so, why does that give the former a right to the homes and land of the latter?

This load of BS is nothing new well not to me. I was Deputy Chair for the Arab Council Australia when I was asked if I would debate Jeffrey Jones of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council for SBS TV. The topic was to be the viability of a two state solution Palestine and Israel.

I was foolish enough to think we were going to debate on peace in the Middle East and the various plans put forward. It soon became obvious that Mr Jones wasn't interested in peace he claimed that there is not and never has been a state called Palestine so there was no need for a two state solution.

The debate became heated and though not a Palestinian myself Mr Jones was so irrational and condescending that it irritated me no end.

Finally I asked Mr Jones if it was his viewpoint that there were no official documents in the name of Palestine he confirmed that I was quite correct. I then took out of my attache case to land title deeds for orchids in Jaffa and Haifa respectively they were written in Arabic and in English and on the English side in large capitals was written Mandated Palestine and my father's name and the acreage.

I asked Mr Jones what he considered the documents to be? My question was met with silence and the debate terminated