"The recognition of this new country called "Palestine" by Google - and anyone espousing the same viewpoint - requires them to identify the precise location and area of the land that such country encompasses."

Well, "Israel" is designated on Google maps even though it's continually expanding, so I'm sure Google's cartographers will have already developed the expertise to deal with what's left of Palestine.

Ah, the Singer is at it again, trying to chip away at what's left of the Palestinians who are under brutal Israeli occupation and blockade.

The Singer believes implicitly in the slogan 'Never give a sucker an even break!' Even when the Israelis are all over the West Bank with their military forces and are still building settlements and taking Palestinian homes and building Jew-only roads, that is not enough for him.

Enough is never enough for the Israelis and their misguided supporters. Why, Israel is now bombing Syria as well and who knows where they will venture next with their American arms.

No one and no nation in the Middle East is safe from the Jewish imperial scourge!

Dear David Singer,

For once I agree with you. Only states that have full diplomatic recognition by most other states should be designated as states by Google.

The UN resolution recognised Palestine as a non-member state. It did not admit Palestine into the UN as a member. Those states who voted for the resolution did not in general send ambassadors or other diplomatic representatives to Palestine as they should if they really regarded Palestine as a state.

Perhaps instead of constantly disputing as we usually do, we should rather concentrate on what we do agree on:

As binary google users cannot count beyond 2 anyway, Singer, myself and those people called 'Palestinians' all agree that Palestine is a fiction and the world-map should only include two areas:

"Israel" and "Not-Israel".

The slight and only difference is that:
- In Singer's map, the only area coloured "Not-Israel" would be the U.S.A;
- In my map, the area coloured as Israel would be exactly enclosed by its 1949-1967 borders;
- In the so-called-Palestinian's maps and their supporters', the "Israel" area would be invisible (Hocus Pocus! how did the Jews manage to do it again?!?).

So who said that we don't agree?

Next project would be to title all books as either "Bible" or "Not-Bible". We could then save librarians so much work!

David Singer has exceeded himself this time. His repeated appeals to subject Palestine to laws, declarations, resolutions etc made exclusively by foreigners have now expanded into calls for its pedople's right to self-determination to be denied because they don’t have defined boundaries. Here’s some news for this nitpicking lawyer: racist Israel doesn’t have defined boundaries. It doesn’t have a constitution at all, nor do the mythical “Jewish people”. People of Jewish ancestry have many homelands. Like the rest of us. In all these Jewish homelands (like Australia for example) Jews share equal rights with every other citizen. The Zionist grabbers have specifically excluded adopting a constitution for Israel because if they did so they would have to define a national boundary, and an outfit considering itself to have a right to endless piecemeal expansion is not about to set limits to it.

So the absence of a defined boundary, according to Mr Singer, means no right to exist as a nation. Well there are excellent moral reasons to deny racist Israel the right to exist as a nation, but if Mr Singer wants to add lack of a defined boundary as a legalistic reason for a state not to exist then his claim is applicable to Israel.

Dear Julian,

It's just slightly off-topic, but you stated: <<People of Jewish ancestry have many homelands. Like the rest of us. In all these Jewish homelands (like Australia for example) Jews share equal rights with every other citizen.>>

I am now anxious to learn how you then relate to Rehctub in another current thread: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5773&page=0#161490

Aren't people entitled then to have (or create) their own space where they can be assured for example that their movements will not be translated (by CCTV cameras) into electric signals during the Sabbath in contravention with their faith?

What good are "equal rights" for people who need a completely different set of rights?