Not in the eyes of much of the world. Not in the eyes of most Europeans. Not in the eyes of the United Nations. Not in the eyes of international law.

Whilst we're at it then. Why is it that the death of Israeli citizens at the hands of people who are so outgunned and hemmed in they have to resort to their own bodies as delivery systems, considered a crime of staggering proportion, yet the Palestinian civilians are simply collateral damage or an unfortunate incident.?

Does nobody find it worrying that the state of Israel is given tacit ( and in the case of America overt) permission to engage in political murder within the borders of a country it is occupying ? I use occupying because that is what it is. Thats what it has been termed by the international community. That is it's legal status.

The current Interfada(?) started in direct response to the shooting of a Palestinian child who died in the arms of his Father. That was a crime. The deaths of Israeli toddlers in settlements is also a crime. The difference is that one is politically motivated murder and the other is state sponsored murder. You only have to take a look at the death toll on either side to see which one is truly terrifying.

And.....I do not understand, why the very fact that these people have to resort to such.....personally costly methods to drive home their point, leads to them being seen as somehow less credible, almost inhuman....Less credible? They have nothing left to throw at their enemy but their own bones strapped with explosives. If the French resistance had engaged in suicide bombing against their occupiers I wonder how we would write that tale now?

Because the Palestinians are targeting women and children specifically and it was they who INITIATED the violence in the first place. Israel does everything they can to avoid harming innocent women and children but it's tough when the terrorist surround themselves with women and children and thus are responsible for any harm that comes to them.

The Palestinian people never owned that land in the history of the planet earth. They were squatters. And whatever European nations think is irrelevant. If you try to steal from someone, and you get robbed by them, you have no right to complain. If you try to kill someone and they kill you instead, you also have no right (or ability) to complain.

In 1967 the nations around Israel attacked them without provocation and Israel would have been entirely within their rights to take all of the land from all of the countries who attacked. But Israel was far too kind and only took small pieces of land as a buffer from the scumbag cowardly terrorist who target and murder women and children.

It's disgusting how the terrorists who blow up women and children, or who send them surround themselves with Palestinian women and children so when retribution comes they can point to those who they put in danger and say, "Look at what monsters Israelis are!!". What a crock of shit.

If I were in charge of Israel, there would be no more Arafat, and no more fighting within less than a year. I'd let the Palestinian people know if they made even one more attack (whether it is a rock thrown thrown at a soldier or a suicide bomb in a shopping center), I'd give them 1 week to evacuate the entire area into surrounding nations before I rolled in with tanks, jets, rockets, helicoptors, and soldiers and killed every single living thing remaining. And I'd let every single surrounding Arab nation know if they got involved, they would also be destroyed and thier land taken. No more fighting.

The Palestinians don't want peace. They just want dead Jews. And that would end now. I'd give them the choice to live in peace (stop all attacks now and forever) or rest in peace (when they are destroyed)

Anyone who supports the Palestinians is a Jew hating supporter of terrorism.

Every single thing Israel has ever done was justified, reasonable, and warranted retaliation for the attacks of their cowardly terrorist neighbors other than trying to bargain with scumbags like Arafat.

You mean Mohammed al-Dura?

Then there are a hell of a lot of Jew hating supporters of terrorism amongst the British and European Jewish communities

What's the difference? In this context - don't point me to a dictionary.

You may believe that but in fact, at the monent, Iraq is Bush's bitch.

Not that I support the Palestinians (nor the Israelis), but your comment begs the question... how is it that you classify the Palestinians as squatters; but somehow a bunch of English dudes floating across the ocean in the late 1400s, planting some flags on North America and said "this is ours now" are NOT just squatters? Would you argue that we don't own this land, that the native americans have legal claim to it? If not, then why?

I do indeed. That page is interesting. I have read other stuff that I found more convincing though.

Radar needs a refresher course on property rights. He believes that because the Palestinians had no State they had no rights. That is crap. Individual rights exist outside the state. This is where his atheism gets in the way of his libertarianism. Radar is a Statist.

You mean sadist?

It stings more when you call a libbytarian a statist.

I dont understand what atheism has to do with it....I am an atheist. I find it helps me see the world more clearly not less....

How does an absolute belief in an unprovable concept make you see things more clearly?

The American Indians had no claim at all to the land because even in their own culture they didn't recognize land ownership, but supposing they did, they lost a war. To the victor goes the spoils. In my opinion, they shouldn't have even gotten reservations. They should live, work, and be subject to the same laws as everyone else without being handed a check when they turn 18.

Nobody said they had no rights, but they had no ownership at all of the property. The property has been in the hands of several empires (British, Ottoman, Roman, Egyptian, etc.) but was never owned by the people who were staying on it. And until Israel started building there weren't even many squatters.

I'm not a statist in your wettest or my driest dreams. I'm not a statist by any stretch of the rational mind. And my atheism doesn't get in the way of anything or have anything to do with the subject of property rights.

Being an atheist doesn't have anything to do with it. That's just griff's poor attempt to try to insult me. And apparantly atheism doesn't make you see more clearly because you are trying to justify terrorism and calling those who defend themselves and their property the monsters.

It's not your lack of religion that's the problem, it's your warped value system.