They were living there for 2,000 fucking years. It wasn't like the people living in Palestine moved in in 70 AD, the were living there before that too. The Jews moved out when the temple was destroyed by the Romans.

No one is given a piece of land. The Israelis don't deserve Israel and the Palestinians don't deserve Palestine. I don't have a problem with anyone living in Palestine, it is just when you kick people out, then that is totally different.

No they don't.

I understand that Lookout. However, if you and your people are facing the world's fourth military superpower and you are restricted in your movements within your own country, you've seen your family members brutalised and humiliated and your grandfather still has a set of keys for the house your family were forced to abandon..you may look to see what you can do. David has become Goliath and the palestinian has discovered an altogether larger sling.

When we devasted Baghdad with Shock and Awe, we killed non combatants. That may not have been our ultimate goal, but it was something our military and politicians were unconcerned about. When Israel sends rockets into a crowded market place, or destroys a house which has been divided up into flats, one of which contains a suspected 'terrorist', they kill non-combatants. This is not a concern to them.

One side in that conflict is imprisoning the other. There is little to no freedom of movement for Palestinians. They are divided from their farms, their workplaces, hospitals, schools...checkpoints are a random and violent affair if you are a Palestinian civilian. Israel can do this because they are a wealthy and militarily powerful. Palestinians have very little to compare with Israel's arsenal.

Strapping on a bomb and targetting civilians is terrorism...in that it creates terror. But all those who have fought with violence against occupation have been considered terrorists at one time or another. The French resistance were considered terrorists by many. The ANC was considered a terrorist group.

Palestinians are creating fear and dismay amongst the ordinary people of Israel, because it's the only way they have to fight back. The Israelis meanwhile are creating terror amongst the ordinary people of Palestine, because they think to terrorise them into submission.

The world is horrified at someone strapping a bomb to themselves and blowing up a schoolbus, but they are not horrified at the death and suffering inflicted on ordinary Palestinians, many of them children, by Israeli terror tactics.

From the Independant:

From B'Tselem (The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories):



The artcile can be accessed here http://www.btselem.org/english/About_BTselem/Index.asp

There are other sides to the story. We are so used to taking our news from that region from the mouths of Israeli Generals and Ministers, we have forgotten that the Palestinians suffer.

Yes, they do.

How?

There is no "occupation". The so-called Palestinian people owned zero land until they were given some at the same time as Israel. The keys those people hold belong to houses build on land they never owned. They were never wronged. Any killing they do, especially when blowing up women and children genuinely IS terrorism and has no legitimate justification.

The world is rightly horrified at seeing children taught to hate Jews more than they love to live. The world should not be horrified at the death and suffering of the so-called Palestinian people because they have brought it upon themselves through their constant attacks and murder. The so-called Palestinians are NOT oppressed or caused to suffer at the hands of Israel.

None of the so-called Palestinians have fought against an Israeli occupation because there is no Israeli occupation for them to fight. They merely want to kill Jews and don't recognize their right to live on the land they have HONESTLY acquired.

Israel doesn't practice terrorism or apartheid. Israel doesn't initiate violence, it only uses violence in its defense. Israel is kind, generous, and peace-loving and isn't interested in conquest and its 6 decades of offering concessions, food, shelter, clothing, etc. to the people who constantly attack them prove this fact.

I still want to know how chinese people can predate china.

Each and every one of those kids died because so-called Palestinian people blew up Jewish men and women and planned attacks against Israel. These people hid among women and children so when Israel retaliated, these women and children would die. In other words, they were killed by the actions of their own people, not Israel.

Every one of those deaths rests squarely on the shoulders of those who attack Israeli Jews. When will those people learn that when you mess with the bull, you get the horns? When will they put the lives of their own women and children above their own desire to murder Jews?

Yes, let's blame the people who used the so-called Palestinian people as human shields, and not the murderers who made them need a shield in the first place.

There were people in America, before there was a U.S.A. There were people in China before there was a nation of China. The Chinese people were still Chinese before there was a China, and the people in America were Americans before we started using the term "Americans" to describe them. It's the same people regardless of what you call them.

Jews have ALWAYS lived in Israel even after the temple was destroyed. There has never been a single day during the last 3,000 years when Jewish people didn't live in Israel.

The land was there before the people were.

People arrived. Decided on a name and voila! There's China.

Or on the other hand...if you want to be pedantic about it and only allow the statement to encompas the time since people arrived, why do you think indigenous Americans sometimes choose to identify themselves as something other than American? Or why does the inuit nation choose to call themselves that rather than...well...Americans or Canadians or whatever part of the area they happen to live in.

They can call themselves Cherokee or Purple gorillas for all I care. I use the term "American" to describe them because they currently live within the borders of the U.S.A..

The fact remains that there were people in what is described as "China" long before it was called "China" and those people looked the same and spoke the same language as they do now.

Israel is the land of the Jews in the same way that China is the land of Chinese people, Italy is the land of the Italian people, Greece is the land of the Greek, etc.

your argument was that 'the people' predated 'the country'. By your statement above, that's simply not correct.

Let's use China as an example. During the history of what we now know as China, there have been other names for the mass of land such as 'Mongolia' during Khans reign, and I think you'll find the language was different. I'm pretty sure Chinese people would not refer to themselves as Mongolian just because that's what China was once called. Things have changed a bit since Khan left the scene too. It's a different place now than it was then. Not the same.

The people who lived in what you now call America didn't speak the same language as you do and they definitely didn't call themselves american did they?

While this statement is true: It certainly does not prove your argument that the people predated the country.

The Chinese people were in China before the country was called China and yes, they did speak CHINESE.

I believe the majority of Chinese people speak either Mandarin or Cantonese. I don't believe there is such a thing as Chinese as a language although you might say that all the languages spoken in China are Chinese...if you were ignorant enough to do so.

Mandarin & Cantonese are dialects of the CHINESE language. I happen to speak 4 languages myself and you would be a fool to challenge me on this.

I live in Australia and I speak English.

Are you a Kung Fu Master? lol

No, but I am a cunning linguist, and a master debater.

I think you are a Kung Fu Master. ;) srsly

You are wrong, Radar.

Before there was a china, there were Han people and Qin people and Sichuan people and Canton people and Hakka people.
Qin Shi Huang Di conquered and united all of what we currently know as china. He personally created the chinese language, from his own Qin language, and standardized a method of writing across all of his empire. The people still continued to speak their own languages, but were forced to learn and write what we now know as chinese. The people still continued to be Han people and Qin people and Hakka people, and many still do to this day, while others have in the intervening centuries grown to identify as chinese.

You are definitely wrong in this case, radar. Maybe a different example would be more apt. They were not chinese on the virtue that they happened to live in what later eventually became china, they were not chinese by virtue of their ethnicity, they were not chinese by virtue of their language, they were not chines by virtue of their identity. They were not chinese.

I give up. To blame the civilians for the Israelis using human shields wins it. You can't argue stupid.

If, lets say, someone used your brother for a human shield to clear out your neighbor's house because he was dealing drugs and guns, it would really be your fault anyway for not noticing your neighbor was a drug dealer. You deserve it. I don't even think UG would back you up on this one.

Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck how many languages you claim to speak, you'd come across just as big a douche in each of them. You reason like a block of cheese.

Radar, you are a Zionist. Why do we expect any kind of rational response from you?

How can you see a list of dead children and lay the blame at the door of their grieving parents, refusing to lay any of the responsibility at the doors of those who killed them? Answer: because the life of twelve year old Palestinian is worth less to you than the life of a twelve year old Israeli. The life of an eighteen month old Palestinian toddler, is worth less to you than the life of an Israeli soldier. The life of a Palestinian is worth less to you than the life of a dog.

If my neighbor was shooting everyone in the neighborhood on a shooting spree for no apparent reason, and I picked up his own child to use as a human shield, there would be no fault in it. If you think there would be, you are part of the problem. If he shoots his own child, he's the monster. If he shoots the neighbors he's the monster. If I seek shelter from his unwarranted killing spree behind his children who he is presumably less likely to shoot at, I am NOT the monster.

Because I'm a Zionist and Zionists give intelligent, thoughtful, well-reasoned, articulate, truthful, and rational responses while anti-Zionists attempt to justify murder, falsely claim to be victims when they are predators, and otherwise spread stupidity and lies about Israel.

The life of a 12 year old so-called Palestinian or that of a toddler is worth as much as the life of any other 12 year old. I think it's a tragedy that the so-called Palestinian people don't value the lives of their children and place them in harm's way and endanger them by attacking Israel and then hiding amongst them. It's a shame that they want to kill Jews more than they love their children and that they raise their children to strap bombs to themselves and kill Jews.

The one who killed them is not the guy who fired the missile in response to a terrorist act. The one who killed them is the terrorist who endangered them by hiding amongst them.

In L.A. a year or two ago, a guy shot up a bunch of cops and came outside holding his 1 year old baby in front of himself as a human shield. He was the aggressor. He attacked the police. And he endangered his baby by using her as a human shield. The baby was killed and the death of that baby did not rest on the shoulders of the police who were trying to take this murderer out, it rests on the shoulders of the guy who started shooting at police in the first place. In this example, if the police used his child as a human shield, they would not be endangering his child, but if the murderer uses the child he would.

I am not wrong. Han is a form of Chinese. In fact it's called "Han Chinese".

The following is from a wikipedia article...

Feel free to read more at...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_language

I think you just blew my mind Radar. The fact that its his own child doesn't make it acceptable for you to put it at risk by using it as a shield. What an outrageous statement to make. I am appalled.

Radar, I speak Chinese. And I know for certain that how ever many thousand years ago, there WAS no chinese identity of any sort, before Qin Shi Huang Di unified china. As I already said, if you could have been bothered to read, before Qin Shi Huang Di commanded a unified writing style for all of his domain, not only did each former nation-state have its own independent language, but its own completely different identity and culture. We aren't talking, like, an athens-sparta kind of difference, where they were separate but still both greek... we're talking, like, the difference between brazil and italy. Possibly some common linguistic roots way back there somewhere, but... utterly separate cultures. Then, imagine some dictator took over both italy and brazil, and decreed that they had to write the same way, even if they didnt say everything the same way. Hundreds of years later, portugese and italian would become part of the same language family, rather than separate languages, right?

Look, you are not going to win this one, radar. All the historical evidence is against you. Before there was a china, there absolutely were NO chinese. Only long after Qin Shi Huang Di unified what is now china were there any chinese people.

Simply picking out one word from my entire post and saying, nolookthatischinese, is both intellectually dishonest and just plain stupid.

Don't try looking for logic Ibram. You're talking to a man who deems it acceptable to use children as human shields.

Yeah, but only if their parents are dicks. Sins of the father and all that.

WARNING:
Israeli and (white) American children: not OK for human shield use.

And "the Jews" do not currently live within the borders of Israel. Some do, but being Israeli and being Jewish are not the same thing. Also, there are plenty of people who live within the current borders of Israel, and have done so since before Israel, and are not Jewish. So I don't know how your "lived in what became the USA = American" applies to Israel.
They were many different nations until they were conquered. Once the empire was consolidated, they became Chinese. If the empire hadn't held, they would be many nations.

Israel is the land of the Jews in the same way that Europe is the land of the Christians. They appeared somewhere else, gained political power there, and spread throughout the world. But American Christians have no claim on Rome.

So if I ban guns and Radar revolts I get to use his children as body shields? Nice...

But anyways, Radar, I want you to answer these questions with zero bullshit.

1) Your argument for Israel becoming a state is because their was an Israeli state 2,000 years ago and the Jews should return to their home. Now, the Lakota People of Minnesota and North and South Dakota had been living in that area for long time, I haven't seen any dates of when they moved in. But in the late 1700s and early 1800s white settlers moved in and either killed them or forced them to live in reservations. Now, you are saying that Israel should get its state back after 2,000 years, why aren't you fighting for a Lakota state of only losing their land of 250 years? Remember, like the Jews, the Lakota people have been living in this area when it has been under foreign occupation as well. For example, I am good friends with someone of Lakota decent and he goes to my school.

2) Igoring a larger state of Palestine, the people living in Palestine have been living in that area and have owned property there for over 3,000 years (Jews living in Palestine are considered Palestinians), do you not believe in a human right of owning property? Those people have owned land whether they were under foreign control or not, and you are justifying the forced movement of over 4 million refugees. How can this be with your strong libertarian influences. I, and I'm sure you wouldn't either, would not give up my house so the Lakota people could move back in, why should the Palestinian people give up their personal property for people that have not lived there for 2,000 years (assuming most Jews immigrated, which is highly true)?

3) You have justified Israel's actions with the thought that a few bad apples can spoil the whole bunch. A very few amount of Palestinians (less than 1 in 1,000) have resorted to terrorist like actions and many Palestinians look down upon these actions but have zero means of stopping them. Now, are you willing to say it is OK for you to be bombed (this includes everyone you love) because of the actions of Bush and the neo-cons or are you going to stop them yourself? The choice is yours.

Man, you need a history lesson.

I wouldn't be putting the child at risk by using him as a human shield. His father would be putting him at risk if he kept shooting my direction while I was holding his child.

Historical evidence proves that the language spoken by the Han Chinese (before the unification of all the kingdoms of China) was mandarin Chinese. Anything you say to the contrary is false. So knock yourself out if you want.

You are hardly in a position to judge the logic of others or even to discuss logic. As an anti-Zionist, you are immune to logic and reason and have no ability to grasp reality or truth.

Dude, that is fucking idiotic.

No it isn't. If someone is shooting at me, HE is the person doing the endangering. HE is the one with the gun. If I pick up his kid and use him as a shield, HE should stop shooting at me. If he shoots at me while I'm holding his kid HE is the person endangering his kid, not me.

It's fucking idiotic to say I am the bad guy when someone else is killing and I'm trying not to die.

No human being with an ounce of sense would use an inocent child to protect them from harm.

What if you believe he is unlikely to shoot any child, and none of his are available? Are you justified in picking up the child of an innocent bystander to hide behind?

Well, he definitely thinks he's a kung fu master, but I think he's more of a troglodyte myself.

Thoughts anyone?

I vote troglodyte with a hint of proto-Neanderthal.

I think that's pretty accurate Merc. Nice work.

But that's not the end of the story. After that, the Lakota people indoctrinated their children in hate and taught them to attack the white settlers with terror and assymetrical tactics.

Watch out...Admin is here!

False. My argument for Israel becoming a state AGAIN has nothing to do with it being a state earlier, though having a small portion of the land that was historically the homeland of the Jews is cool. My argument for Israel becoming a state was that the rightful owners (the U.K.) GAVE the land to the Jews to build a new homeland in a portion of their historical one.


This is unrelated to my reasons for supporting the legitimate state of Israel. But even so, the Indians did not ever own land. Indians didn't even believe land could be owned. They thought of land as a living organism that belonged to whatever god they happened to believe in.

Land can't be stolen from those who never owned it.

The so-called Palestinian people did not live there for 3,000 years and most certainly NEVER owned any of the land. If I build a house on your land without your knowledge and live there for 40 years, I don't have any legitimate claim to your land. Also, your laughable claim that the Jews had moved away for 2,000 years is entirely false.

I certainly support private property ownership. In fact, private property ownership is the foundation of all human rights.

Your 1 in a thousand numbers are ridiculous. The overwhelming majority of so-called Palestinian people support the murder of Jews, and deny the right of Israel to exist. The number who been involved in planning, assisting, or carrying out attacks against Israeli Jews is closer to 2-5% than 1%.

The percentage is irrelevant though. Those who don't take part in the attacks shelter, and protect those who do. This makes them just as guilty as those doing it. The so-called Palestinian people are endangering their own people by hiding among them after attacking Jews.

Israel is fully capable of killing each and every single Muslim in the middle-east without any help from America. The only reason Israel doesn't do this is because they aren't interested in conquest, in taking what others have, in killing Muslims, or in doing anything other than living in peace on their own honestly acquired land (all of the land they hold). Israel will do whatever it takes for this to happen, whether they are extending a hand of friendship or a gun to put a bullet through those who would destroy them.

Peace would exist tomorrow if the so-called Palestinians would just stop killing Jews. The problem is they aren't interested in peace. They are only interested in killing Jews and wiping Israel off the map which will NEVER happen. Israel will be around even after America is gone.

You know, the only thing Jewish Israelis ever did was whine more than anyone else who ever had their country invaded. They whined and whined till the rest of the world got together and decided to give them something to shut them up, and now they're still fucking whining.

When will they be happy? Never.

I'm sorry, but I'm just sick and tired of people trying to excuse Israels actions in the middle east and call everyone else the bad guys.

Chosen people my arse. They're just people like everyone else.

So the arabs that were booted out NEVER built houses with their own money, on land they were given from the UK, legally and with the knowledge of the UK government?

Oh, and while we're at it, the Diaspora never happened. In fact, when Israel was founded, the Israelis didn't move in on hundreds of boats and planes like we've seen in pictures... they came out of their caves and rose from the mud they'd been hiding in.

Unless it's Palestinians, then their 'ownership' is not a right

So you're saying that of the five or so million folks living in Israel, 125,000-250,000 of them are fighting Israel? Jesus, why aren't they winning!?

Here we get to your "If I use your child for a human shield, you're not allowed to get mad" argument.

Because it's the chosen land. Chosen by the UN.

Yes, what crazy people for claiming that those who strap bombs to themselves and blow up women and children are bad guys. Merely because the nations around them don't recognize their right to exist and have promised to murder them all and drive them into the ocean, they think they are bad guys.

They asked for a country (no whining necessary, though they had plenty to whine about nearly being wiped out by Nazis) and the U.N. did the right thing with the U.K. and gave them some of their historical homeland back.

You ask when they will be happy. The answer is when they can walk around their streets without fear of being blown to bits every day. When they can know that the countries around theirs recognize their right to exist and stop trying to destroy them. When they can go about their business without having to look over their shoulder.

That doesn't seem like too much to ask for.

Fuck that shit, the people who live in Palestine should be deciding what is happening to their homeland, whether they own it or not, not a country thousands of miles away. That is the whole point of the American Revolution, freedom from oppression, and then you justify the oppressive actions of colonization later on just because it works in your interests, bullshit. The people that were living in Palestine should have decided what happened, not the British.

Just because they didn't own land in the European way doesn't mean they didn't have a right to live there. The fact is that people were living there for thousands of years and we kicked them out, whether the fit your bullshit definition of "owning" land or not, they still lived there.

And your views are wrong, just because some American Indians didn't believe that land could be owned doesn't mean all of them didn't. There were cultures much different than the plain Indian culture, which only occurred after European settlers came to North America by the way.


Oh really, then where did they come from?

Lets look at genetics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palesti...al_populations


What is your definition of owning land? And please back up your analogy, I'm calling bullshit on it. Show me where Palestinians built houses on land without someone's knowledge.

A lot of Jews living in that area moved away when the temple was destroyed, but no, not all of them moved away. Yet, most of the Jews or Christians converted to Islam, hence why Muslims were and are the majority from the 12th century to today.

Look at the second graph down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palesti...y_demographics

Then why are justifying the action of kicking people out of their homes that they privately owned. You can say the British owned Palestine all you want but the fact is that individual Palestinians owned individual land and houses before Israel was created.

This is controversial. I've heard that the majority of Palestinians want peace but can not do it with Israel pressing down on them. I can't find my source to back mine up but whatever. And just because they elected Hamas does not mean they support their views, Hamas was basically the only choice they had considering how corrupt and run down Fatah was.

How so? If you are talking about hospitals and schools that is a load of shit. Hamas and them run hospitals, schools, etc so you can't expect Palestinians to just avoid those places.

I call bullshit on this. I guarantee that most Palestinians will be happy with a one-state solution, something Israel hasn't considered either. Also, just focusing on physical violence is very biased in this situation. Israel can hurt Palestinians without physical violence while Palestinians can not. Israel can punish Palestinians by flipping a switch, so directly comparing those two is very flawed.

And if America was taken over by communists and everything Americans once knew of was destroyed in the 1960s you think the same thing wouldn't happen?

They built houses with their own money on land they never owned. In fact the UK didn't give any land to those people until 1947. The ones who lived on the wrong side of the line had to move out.

Yes, the majority of Jews were not in Israel and came back. But there were always Jews in Israel for every minute of the last 3,000 years. In fact they were the majority for most of those years.


Wrong. They have a right to private property ownership too. Building a house on someone else's property does not grant you ownership. They can also lose land in military disputes as has happened for thousands of years. When they attack Israel and they lose land, they have no valid complaints.


Nice try playing with the numbers. We were talking about the numbers among the so-called Palestinian people who do not live within Israel, but fine if you want to talk about the ones who are in Israel we can do that too.

The population of Israel is 6,426,679. Of that 16% are Muslim (1,028,268) people. I said 2-5% of the so-called Palestinian people actively take part in attacks against Jews (whether it's planning, doing paperwork, buying supplies, recruiting kids and teaching them to hate Jews, etc.) 2% of that number is 20,565. I think this is a fair number.

If it's ok for you to shoot at me because I'm a Zionist, it's equally ok for me to put your child between you and me.


As well they should...and it was the U.K. and the U.N. working together to do the right thing...which they did.

MYTH

“The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel.”

FACT

A common misperception is that all the Jews were forced into the Diaspora by the Romans after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E. and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years.

The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham.

Even after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in the Land of Israel continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa and Caesarea.

The Crusaders massacred many Jews during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis established communities in Safed, Jerusalem and elsewhere during the next 300 years. By the early 19th century — years before the birth of the modern Zionist movement — more than 10,000 Jews lived throughout what is today Israel.1 The 78 years of nation-building, beginning in 1870, culminated in the reestablishment of the Jewish State.

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.

MYTH

“Palestine was always an Arab country.”

FACT

The term "Palestine" is believed to be derived from the Philistines, an Aegean people who, in the 12th Century B.C.E., settled along the Mediterranean coastal plain of what are now Israel and the Gaza Strip. In the second century C.E., after crushing the last Jewish revolt, the Romans first applied the name Palaestina to Judea (the southern portion of what is now called the West Bank) in an attempt to minimize Jewish identification with the land of Israel. The Arabic word "Filastin" is derived from this Latin name.3

The Hebrews entered the Land of Israel about 1300 B.C.E., living under a tribal confederation until being united under the first monarch, King Saul. The second king, David, established Jerusalem as the capital around 1000 B.C.E. David's son, Solomon built the Temple soon thereafter and consolidated the military, administrative and religious functions of the kingdom. The nation was divided under Solomon's son, with the northern kingdom (Israel) lasting until 722 B.C.E., when the Assyrians destroyed it, and the southern kingdom (Judah) surviving until the Babylonian conquest in 586 B.C.E. The Jewish people enjoyed brief periods of sovereignty afterward before most Jews were finally driven from their homeland in 135 C.E.

Jewish independence in the Land of Israel lasted for more than 400 years. This is much longer than Americans have enjoyed independence in what has become known as the United States.4 In fact, if not for foreign conquerors, Israel would be 3,000 years old today.

Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."5

Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:

We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.6

In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."7

The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."8

Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel's capture of the West Bank.

There were Jews living in Israel for the past 3,000 years, but they have no been the majority since before the 5th century BC. Between the 5th and 12th (??) it has been Christians and then Muslims up to this day. So both Christians and Muslims have just as much right to that land as Jews have.

Source (Look at second graph):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palesti...y_demographics


Both these arguments are basically the same so I will combine them.

One question. How would the Palestinians have gotten "ownership" of the land they build their houses on?

And once again, you are foolishly support colonization. The people that live on the land should have control over it, not some country over a thousand miles away.

In answer to your question, to gain ownership of the land, they would have to get a deed issued by the government who controlled the land at the time. Each time a new empire took over, they'd require a new deed.

OK then Radar, if that's how you feel, when are you going to give your back yard back to the indigenous Americans?

That was the point I was making. What was yours???

that the standards which we apply to every other civilised nation don't apply to Israel as they're a special case?