once more showing your neutured brain is having a problem with reality You are a sad little sorry figure - grow up

history reference - as you muts have noticed there are all over EDIT links on there - where any body - can add their own history ops into it by signing in Now Learn Facts from Historians - NOT from self posting Wiki

murder Jews and the Infidel all over the world Remember one thing in history: It is not the loser of a war who sets the demands - never - but for the Victor of the war to MAKE DEMANDS Remember Germany ? It was the Allies that set the rule not Germany - and they were under a Martial Plan disarmed Now that's what should have happened in the Middle East - The Arabs lost 3 wars they led against Israel - They should have been administered under a strict Martial Law of disarming - and Peace would have set in at once.

the majority of Palestinians voted for Hamas which calls for the destruction of Israel - how is Israel supposed to react ? We don't want to hurt let alone kill 'innocent' Palestinians - we would like to help them develop an economy - it's in both our interests. Stop Kassams, stop trying suicide attacks (they are much more difficult now) and get rid of Hamas and 'silly' ideas about 48 or 67 borders. You know about 48 and 67 .. Get real and we can find peace! Michael

Palestine (Hebrew: ארץ ישראל Eretz Israel, Arabic: فلسطين Filastīn or Falastīn, see also Land of Israel) is one of many HISTORICAL names for the region between the Mediterranean Sea and the banks of the Jordan River, plus various adjoining lands to the east and south. Many different definitions of the region have been used in the past three millennia. The term "Palestine" comes from the word Philistine, the name of an ethnic group which lived in the southern coast of the region. The Hebrew name פלשת (Pəléšeth or P(e)léshet, translated Philistia in English) is used in the Bible to denote the coastal region inhabited by the Philistines.

Legally Judea and Samaria (ancient historical Jewish land) are unassigned territories of the British Mandate - not "occupied territories." There is nothing in international law that requires a Palestinian State between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean - not even the UN Partition Resolution of Nov. 29, 1947.(study the partition plan) Resolutions 242 and 338, which call for NEGOTIATIONS ONLY on a "withdrawal from territories" (not "withdrawal from THE territories" - recognize the intentional wording of only saying TERRITORIES) captured in 1967, are similarly "recommendations." These resolutions were drawn up under the UN Charter's Clause VI, which deals with NON - MANDATORY RECOMMENDATIONS - I REPEAT - NON - MANDATORY RECOMMENDATIONS ---- as opposed to Clause VII resolutions, "which are mandatory, and which deal with a threat to world peace, such as those taken against Iraq." Yet even those under VII - mandatory - have little or any effect - since the UN has legally never such power - the UN has never real power since they are only an organization that has no Sovereign Power - as we saw in Iraq - The UN never had the strength to ever enforce any of the 17 resolutions against Iraq under clause VII. What does that tell YOU ? All Resolutions considering Israel are always falling in this term under Charter Clause VI - Only ever Recommendations. Charter VI - is ALWAYS only recommendations - NOT Law. I REPEAT: Charter VI - is ALWAYS only recommendations - NOT Law. In general the UN is not a body that legally can enforce any laws. Constitutional Law of any Sovereign State - ALWAYS over rules legally any UN trial to want to set laws. ALSO: Israel White Paper – Israel's Legal Rights to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza http://www.israelwhitepaper.org/ "According to international law," "Israel has full right to try to populate the entire Land of Israel with dense Jewish settlement, and thus actualize the principles set by the League of Nations in the original Mandate Charter of San Remo in 1920. The most relevant fact is, the Arabs cannot make no demands under any of ALL for the simple reason: ........The fact that the Arab states did not accept the Partition Plan, voids the recommendation of any legal basis............. Arabs refused ALL and any of the Partition plan then - so legally that was off the table then - since they chose to attack Israel instead - but suddenly now want to reverse to the times of the Partition Plan ? Legally this is off the table for the Arabs and cannot be reversed. The only real issue left for Arabs who were the losers in all wars - is trying to negotiate with the party Israel that was the victor. A victor legally sets normally the setting of possible negotiations - and not the loser. Example: When Germany lost the war W.W.II - It was NOT Germany who was legally able to set the arguments or demands. If YOU cannot Fatom - Law and what the UN can do and not - then I suggest you get in touch with the ASSER institute - the arbitrator on international law. file for arbitration Here is their website and address - keep us posted how your ARBITRATION goes: http://www.asser.nl/index.htm info@asser.nl

To Ellen, Southsea Get real! Do you expect any sane person to feel sorry for "hungry" Palestinians? Do you ever ask yourself why in the world they should be hungry when their leaders have received billions of dollars in aid from donors all over the world in past years? There are only two explanations for this: Their leaders (under Arafat, and even today) are socking away the money in their own accounts, AND the money has been mostly used to fund terror and suicide attacks, kassams, and ammunition, not to feed the Pal. people. SO SAD BUT TRUE

Accept the fact that the situation you are in is because of wars that you started and lost. Accept Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State. Dismantle and disarm all terror groups including Hamas, Al Aska Matyrs Brigade and Islamic Jihad. Accept that there will be no return for refugees who left during the wars of extermination that you started and LOST. Accept the 67 borders with modifications for the large settlement blocks Accept that Jerusalem will never be divided again Allow Jews to pray at their holiest site, The Temple Mount. Stop firing qassams for no other reason then to terrorize innocent civillians. Stop sending your children strapped with bombs to blow up Buses, restaurants, schools, discos, etc. etc. Teach your children to love life instead of glorifying of death. Teach your children to accept the rights of other religions and ethnic groups to live in peace in the Middle East. Then Surprise, Surprise. You will have peace with "such" people.

Resolution 446 affirms "once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem". Tomis Kapitan reports that: In the eyes of the world community, its [Israel's] presence there [in the Occupied Territories] is subject to international law dealing with belligerent occupancy, specifically, the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949... Allowing for measures of military necessity, the Convention forbids alterations of the legal system, forcible transfer or deportation of the resident population, and resettlement by the occupying power of its own civilian population within the occupied territory. Israel has violated these provisions, but contested their application on the grounds that the West Bank (in particular) is "disputed" or "unallocated" rather than the occupied territory of a nation that is party to the Geneva Convention.[2] Israels argument (first made by Moshe Dayan in a speech to the UN in 1977) is that neither the West Bank nor Gaza were the territory of a "High Contracting Power" at the time they were occupied by Israel and that therefore the Convention does not apply.[4] [5] Israel's position has not been accepted by the International Committee of the Red Cross, nor has it been endorsed by the other High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 1 of the Convention states that "The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances" (emphasis added).[6] [7] On 15 July 1999 a conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention met at the United Nations headquarters in Geneva. It ruled that the Convention did apply in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem.[8] In 2001, at a one-day conference of High Contracting Parties, 114 countries adopted a three-page declaration re-affirming that the terms of the Convention applied to the Palestinian territories.

Wikipedia not good enough for you? of course not, nothing that challenges your extremist ideas will be will it? What sources do you suggest i use? oh let me guess....Israeli ones right?

Israel bombard palestinian civilian areas because 'terror' organizations are bombarding israeli civilian areas. So Israel use the exact same method that the arab terrorists. Then if 1 + 1 = 2 So Tashal = Islamic Djihad = Terror organization Some will say that Tshal is not targeting civilians which is the fondamental difernece between the two sides... But when you bombard an area which is not a desert you can expect consequences ( = murder of civilians like a 'a 54-year-old Palestinian farmer '). No ?

Arabs: Facts: of the Geneva 4th Convention: PA and PLO do not constitute a state as defined by the law and applicable to international law because both entities lack a defined territory with a permanent population controlled by a government that has the capacity to enter into foreign relations. 'Palestine' is an amorphous entity whose status remains a question. The drafters of the Fourth Geneva Convention failed to anticipate and account for an international armed conflict involving; Nonstate Entities, or by that matter terrorist factions And, while the uniqueness of the situation is recognized by all, the situation is utterly outside the Convention's scope. There is simply no legal argument that can create an accommodation for a Nonstate Actor, or Terrorist Actor, in a Convention restricted by the fundamental international law doctrine of sovereign rights-- only states can be bound to treaties, and belligerent occupation rules only apply vis-a-vis the territory of another sovereign state. The elimination of incorrect assumptions about Fourth Geneva Convention Applicability is ultimately crucial, to making progress toward the achievement of political and legal resolution in the Middle East conflict. Now the Final Proof that the PA/PLO has no coverage under the Fourth Geneva Convention: It shows that actually Switzerland in 1989 already refused the PLO to become a member of the 4th Geneva Convention, as they were not a Sovereign State. On June 21, 1989, the Swiss Federal Council in Geneva received a letter from the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations stating: to adhere to the Four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. On September 13, 1989, the Swiss Federal Council decided that it could not accept the PA/PLO's request, to a valid accession "due to the uncertainty within the international community as to the existence of a State of Palestine." Now get your facts into order

The Hebrew name פלשת (Pəléšeth or P(e)léshet, translated Philistia in English) is used in the Bible to denote the coastal region inhabited by the Philistines. Even modern day Palesinians don't pretend there's a connection. The name was reintroduced by the British during the mandate. Please talk seriously .. Mike P.S. You are I believe, a Palestinian and I have NO problem with that but don't play games ... they don't solve problems as seen by the PLO and Hamas right now.

do with me Simply ....... any website that has open links for people to EDIT themselves entries ... is NOT a serious source Since anyone can post in there - Their own idea of history. There are plenty of real Historian in the UK archives that have been source in the links I had posted

yourself in proper recognized Historian lessons from the UK archives - from US archives - But don't thrive on Arab historic lies from your leaders

I realize we must read the text, Gabby, but next time try to intone sarcasm or incredulity into my remarks. I imagine you live a humorless life. Better you than I.

I do not have an agenda of hate as Mr. Goldwater accused me. nor am i thriving on "arab historic lies" from "my leaders"!!! nor am I palestinian...im british. im simply trying to establish the facts. if wikipedia is no good.....how about info straight from the United Nations website: regarding israeli settlements and resolutions 446 and 465: The building of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory began soon after the 1967 War. That policy has accelerated since the beginning of 1990. The Israeli Government encourages settlers to make their homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem. The establishment of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has been the subject of various resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. For example, in its resolution 446 (1979) the Security Council determined that the Israeli policy and practice of establishing settlements had no legal validity and constituted a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. That position was reaffirmed in Security Council resolution 465 (1980) which determined that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Tenth Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly in February 1999 recommended in an overwhelmingly adopted resolution the convening of a conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, and to ensure its respect in accordance with common article 1. i am pro-peace and I condemn and do not condone the killing of any innocent civilian lies. Many of my freinds are also jewish. suicide bombers will burn in hell, and so will soldiors who shoot civilians.

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/glossarycollapsible.htm

It's easy to spew. It's a lot harder to respond to hard questions, isn't it?

The very 'clever' kids picked up an unexploded shell and carried it to their home. The IDF didn't shoot it at their home, the kids took it to their home. I don't know what about you, but I'd stay miles away from an unexploded shell, I won't even think of touching it. If they are stupid enough to do that than they deserve the Darwin award.

now I gave you also good Muslim addresses - why do you NOT like those who say facts ? Why do you search for organizations that are ONLY having a political agenda - an obvious agenda that suits only YOU You are NOT of original British background - and you obviously have NOT attended high education in the UK either

none of them have any education or in fact want to be educated

That same UN - that wiped Israel off the world map ? Israel wiped off the map at the UN - November 29, 2005 http://www.eyeontheun.org/2005-11-29.asp Stop looking desperate for info - when we gave you info Go as I said to: Sheikh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi, Director, Cultural Institute of the Italian Islamic http://amislam.com Shaykh Palazzi interviewed on FrontPageMagazine http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19444 Write with your questions to him at: info@amislam.com Other real facts: http://tinyurl.com/dl2dm and : Walid Shoebat website - From Hate to Love http://www.shoebat.com/ So what about Wafa Sultan: (a MEMRI clip)... by listening to this - it is in Arabic and subtitled in English. Wafa Sultan, which was interviewed in chain Al-Jazeera in Qatar: She warns the islamist radicals and their idea: Don't miss this and pass along ! http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=null what about Dr. Ali ......... http://www.faithfreedom.org What about Nonie Darwish tells it like it is www.noniedarwish.com http://www.charityadvantage.com/sss/NONIEDARWISH.asp What about Brigitte Gabriel Interview http://www.phyllis-chesler.com/db_video.html Fast Connections: http://tudorproductions.com/media/Duke_Brigitte_interview.wmv http://americancongressfortruth.com/media/Duke_Brigitte_interview.wmv Slow connections: http://tudorproductions.com/media/Duke_Brigitte_interview_s.wmv http://americancongressfortruth.com/media/Duke_Brigitte_interview_s.wmv NOW . don't come back again with other stuff because you cannot stop pushing your agenda

"You are NOT of original British background - and you obviously have NOT attended "high" (your english is crap) education in the UK either " I think you attended "high" education.... and your still high even now! how the hell would you know that? I AM of original british background...Winchester actually. and have attended HIGHER education in the uk also. from CAMBRIDGE university. get a life you sad loser.

advantage of education then - nor of higher one since they teach history differently what you spew around and lets face it - your origins are NOT from the UK - you have foreign origines - look at your name alone You are filled with hate - and cannot bear to be told so - educate yourself Cambridge has not been teaching you much But if you prefer we can have our discourse in Swiss German - Romansch - or French if your prefer I think English is easier on your level You are just ranting and raving with a temper - cool your feet

settle down.

sound like The Left to Lenin - bug in a rug ? If you are so happy with Israel's enemies posting BS - why don't you move to their side

who said i'm "happy with Israel's enemies posting BS"? is that your attempt to stereotype me again? i disagree with those losers 100% but i get just as fed up with you posting 10 times in a row the "ranting and raving with a temper". being excessively aggressive and belligerent adds nothing to the truth of what you say. in fact, those with weak or faulty arguments tend to resort to verbal abuse of their opponent. the facts can speak for themselves, if you let them. it appears, however, that you are looking for a confrontation in these talkbacks. too bad that you discredit those of us who might agree with you (in content) by resorting to the childish tactics of those on the left. don't be like them.

I am not asking for you to ready anything - who cares about your Left Wing posts - really - you really don't interest me one bit - we get loads of your kinds on radio - each time the Left has a free run - thinking they need to tell others how to do their Journalistic work I do my style - if you don't like it - tough ducks - I deal with your kinds for over 40 years