Mr Singer needs to realise that when he attempts to base what he perceives to be a substantive argument on a weak attempt at irony, or should we say a passable attempt at facetiousness, the risk is that he will tie himself into knots, something has magnificently achieved with this article.

The rest it is a rather tired rehash of already discussed and discredited claptrap.

He accuses others of being self serving and then produces this;

“the arrogant presumption that 100% of the West Bank and Gaza is the territory of the Palestinian State - and that Israel has no claim to any part of that territory - continues to plague any efforts to finally resolve sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza - just 5% of former Palestine still remaining unallocated between Arabs and Jews.”

Why can't that just as easily read;

'the arrogant presumption that 100% of Israel is the territory of the Israeli State - and that Palestine has no claim to any part of that territory - continues to plague any efforts to finally resolve sovereignty of Israel'

I mean if the borders are not set for the State of Israel then all of it is up for negotiation no?

This is not his finest work. He is on the odd occasion capable of better.

I invite all to read Abbas' letter. It is reasoned, reasonable, courteous and containing basic and undeniable truths, something sorely missing from Mr Singer's article.

"This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the Western Bank in the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area."

So this statement is or isn't contained in the PLO charter? If it is, then when did it change?

To csteele

1. Trying to turn the issue of sovereignty in the West Bank - where sovereignty still remains unallocated between Arabs and Jews after 64 years of conflict - into an issue of sovereignty in Israel - where sovereignty has been vested in the Jewish state for those 64 years - is nonsensical.

I stand by my statement - the Arab claim to be entitled to sovereignty in 100% of the territory of the West Bank to the exclusion of any claim by the Jews is arrogant.

You obviously follow the PLO and Hamas line that declares as null and void the body of international law giving the Jews the legal right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in former Palestine - including the West Bank.

This is your and their prerogative.

However ignoring this settled international law has been - and will continue to be - the source of continuing suffering for both Jews and Arabs.

When the Arabs give up the law of the jungle and recognise the rule of law - maybe a settlement of the conflict can occur.

2. What are the "basic and undeniable truths" that you refer to in Mr Abbas's letter? Generalising will get you nowhere.

To Prompete

The clause I quoted was article 24 in the 1964 Palestine National Covenant.

At that time the PLO had no apparent interest in claiming sovereignty in the West Bank or Gaza - and made that view crystal clear.

I think it would be fair to conclude that this would have still been the position today - had Jordan not lost the West Bank and Egypt not lost Gaza to Israel in the 6 Day War in 1967.

Suddenly what was OK in 1964 was not OK in 1967.

In the 1968 version of the Covenant - Clause 24 was dropped.

Of course Jordan could have also created a second Palestinian Arab state - in addition to Jordan - in the whole of the West Bank at any time between 1948-1967 when it occupied that territory after expelling all the Jews who had lived there previously.

However the Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank chose to unify the West Bank with Jordan into one territorial entity.

Such a state was also offered in 1937 and 1947 as well - and rejected.

This rejectionist approach also epitomised their refusal to accept offers of more than 90% of the West Bank made by Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008.

Go figure that what they ask for now was first available to them more than 70 years ago - and rejected outright on so many occasions thereafter.

The way they are conducting their affairs at the moment makes it extremely likely that the train is going to leave without them yet again.

Well Mr Singer,

I stand by my statement that the Isreali claim to be entitled to sovereignty in 100% of the territory of the former historical Palestine, excluding the West Bank and Gaza, to the exclusion of any claim by the Palestinians is arrogant.

It seems to beg the question; can Israel really be deemed any more a legitimate state than the Palestinian State if it still doesn't have clearly defined borders? You are the lawyer perhaps you could tell us?

When the Israeli's give up the actions of tyrants and occupiers and recognise the rule of law - maybe a settlement of the conflict can occur.

However ignoring settled international law and UN resolutions has been - and will continue to be - the source of continuing suffering for both Jews and Arabs.

As to Abbas's letter you tell me what part isn't an undeniable truth?

1. You state:

"I stand by my statement that the Isreali claim to be entitled to sovereignty in 100% of the territory of the former historical Palestine, excluding the West Bank and Gaza, to the exclusion of any claim by the Palestinians is arrogant."

My reply:

Israel comprises only 17% of historical Palestine. Jordan comprises 78% and the West Bank and Gaza the remaining 5%.

2. You state:

"It seems to beg the question; can Israel really be deemed any more a legitimate state than the Palestinian State if it still doesn't have clearly defined borders? You are the lawyer perhaps you could tell us?"

My reply:

Both Israel and Palestine have been recognized as legitimate States - Israel in 1948 and Palestine in 2011.

What is required in international law for statehood is effective control of territory - borders are unnecessary.

I believe Palestine does not qualify to be a state because it does not meet all the conditions laid down in the Montevideo Convention 1933.

However the 194 states in UNESCO do not agree with me. So until their decision is reversed or found by a Court to be unlawful - it stands - but they must be prepared to accept the consequences flowing from their decision to achieve the two-state solution outside the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap.

Whilst the Palestinian Arabs have got their state and can no longer claim to be homeless - the rest of the world is suffering as America has suspended its UNESCO dues totalling $260 million until the end of 2013.

What else will flow from the decision to recognize Palestine as a state is for the future to unfold.

3. You state:

"As to Abbas's letter you tell me what part isn't an undeniable truth?"

My reply:

Sorry - you made the general claim. If you care to point out those statements in the letter you claim to be "undeniable truths" I will let you know whether I agree or disagree.