Shadow Minister's depiction of the Palestinians and their allies who attacked the military occupiers in and after the Naqba as "terrorists" matches both in spirit and the actual term used the Hun depiction of the European Resistance during the Hun occupation. A perfect match, even down the the Huns' assumption of entitlement.

There's a (slightly muddled) factual history at
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/06/17/top-ten-myths-about-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/

A solution based on justice and international law:

# Dismantle racist state of Israel
# Everyone born in Palestine or forcibly exiled from it be entitled to reside in Palestine
# Foreign settlers required to return to their legal homelands or seek refuge in other countries
# Those entitled to remain in Palestine form a state under majority rule

This could lead to an Islamic state under Sharia "law" which would engulf settlers who refuse to leave. Unfortunate, but couldn't happen to nicer people.

EJ

You do indeed have Hun like properties, but by far worse is the Nazi Hamas government in Gaza that wants to start a second Holocaust, who carelessly fire rockets from amongst their civilians so as to cry victim when their civilians are killed.

Dear Julian,

«A solution based on justice and international law:»

I think that it may help if prior to suggesting a solution, you first tell us what, in your view, is the problem.

It will also help if you can explain what makes the above problem so serious that it warrants the extreme suffering of millions, such as separating families and placing people under Islamic-state conditions.

I also would like to know whether this solution is something that you personally would like to see, or whether it is merely the cold output resulting from feeding a computer with the input "justice".

International law never meant a thing to me anyway, but having read your suggestion I also start doubting the value of 'justice'.

Obama and his mercenary nazis stole Ukraine from Holy Mother Russia.
The Hun Slav destiny is glorified in the Syrian victory and tomorrow Jerusalem.

To correct factless distortions I repeat: Majority rule by the people born there. Foreign overlords out. Like Poland after the Huns and then the Russians finally left. It's called right to self-determination.

I posted the following to the wrong thread. I should have posted it to this thread.

Self-determination is unfair, undemocratic and an instrument of oppression. It has come to mean a nation formed on the basic of a religious, ethnic or racial paradigm. Those who are citizens of the nation but are not of the dominant paradigm are second class citizens. The term, self-determination, was introduced into diplomatic parlance by Woodrow Wilson who wanted the make the world “safe for democracy”. However, Wilson was a racist who apparently thought white Protestants of north European descent were the only peoples capable of democracy. The treatment of the Central powers after WW1 shows his biases. Germany except for the return of Alsace and Lorraine to France and the Polish Corridor remained a national unit and essentially untouched. Self-determination was applied to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and it was broken up to create new states. With the exception of Czechoslovakia the new states went fascist between WW1 and WW2. Part of Wilson’s motivation was probably the hope that the peoples of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire would be so happy with their new status that they would not come to the US and spoil Wilson’s dream of a white, Protestant USA. The subject peoples of the Turkish Empire were not even deemed worthy of self-determination and were given to Britain and France as mandates.

There should be no Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim or Buddhist states. In a democratic country religion or lack of it, ethnicity and race of its citizens should be no business of the government. All should be equal under law, and that law should be civil not religious.