If you don't believe in the Bible, then the Quran is false too. A lot of it is based on the Bible, and Muslims consider Jesus a prophet (though not the son of God).

funny how those Islamic fundamentalists who read theri Koran to the word conveniently ignore the fact that the Koran explicitly says God gave the Jews the Land of Israel!!

Your knowledge of international law is sorely deficient. Prior to 1928 with the Kellogg Briand treaty, international law was the law of conquest. After 1928 the law changed to forbid the acquisition of territory by war. After WWI when the world lost 20million people because some countries wanted to gain territory through war, the world outlawed it. That didn't stop the Nazies but it created the first war crime trials at Nuremberg to punish countries that did. I don't think you want to put yourself in the company of those countries. Your argument is not only a tired one it also is simply wrong.

I am well aware of your Gov't policy that even your own courts dispute. Not a single country in the world calls it disputed territory besides Israel. Your religious and historical connection to the land holds no standing in international law. This is clearly Israel's excuse to violate international law.

Let's make it short & sweet, you're claiming birth in an Arab Land that never had a Government of its very own, nor did it have its own Capital City, rulers, coinage Jews wanted to co-exist with the Arabs, however, the Arab attacks on the settlements, commencing in1920 with the attack on Tel Hai, Arab riots of 1929 & 1936, the slaughter of Jews in Hebron, made that virtually impossible..It's rather hard to be friendly or co-exist when your neighbors only have an interest in shooting at & killing you You had your chance for co-existence, as provided for by the UN Partition Plan, two states side by side, which you rejected in preference to attacking Israel time & again, commencing on 514/48 British Mandate, which the Brits prostituted when they lopped off 77% of the Mandate lands that were destined for a Jewish State and gave them to Emir Abdullah, who was from Saudi Arabia, as payoff for services he rendered to the Brits during WW One I have far older documents, Hebrew & Christian Bibles, and artifacts that prove we were there 2400 years before the Muslims invaded You still haven't answered by questions, how come no mention whatever in the Quran of Palestine, Jerusalem or Al Quds? Believer of not, there should be mention, there isn't

which was swiped from the Native Canadian Indians, pack your bags & leave

You are behind the times The United Nations took over the duties of all the prior authorities If we were to go with what you say, then Jordan must return the 77% of Israel that the British gave them Hamas' Charter specifically calls for the destruction of Israel, Recently they added one more item, calling for world wide attacks on Jews, no matter where they may be One more small item, don't talk about Legalities until the Arabs decide to abide by some of them 1- The first major one that was broken by the Arabs, was the UN Partition Plan, in defiance of the UN Res.181, Five Arab armies combined forces to attack Israel on 5/14/58 2- 1949 Rhodes Armistice Agreement, (Greenline) 1956-Nasser violated it on their behalf, closing the Suez to Israeli shipping, in violation of the International Law, that is so close to your heart 3- 1967 - Syria, Egypt and Jordan combined forces and attacked again 4- 1973- Yom Kippur War, Egypt & Syria attacked

A stricter standard of international law is applied to Israel and a much more lenient one is applied to her neighbours. This is crucial to remember for any argument about international law - Israel is always wrong and the Palestinians are always correct. The future UN resolution declaring the sky green will help to further cement this fact in everyone's mind.

The British gained the territory prior to 1928( in WWI) and could do with it what they wanted. They wrote article 25 into the Palestine Mandate and told the world prior to the Mandate's approval(in a white paper) that article 25 meant specifically that they would not give the entire Mandate to the Jews. In fact the Mandate itself gives no specific borders for a Jewish state only that it be "IN" the Mandate. The Arabs didn't gain territory by war they lost territory by war. What Hamas has to do with international law I have no idea.

The British did not gain any territory. The League of Nations allowed the British to control the Mandate of Palestine and Iraq; the French Lebanon and Syria. Those weren't their lands EVER. Nor could they do what they wanted - because that was covered under INTERNATIONAL LAWS. Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The British violations of the Mandate did not make them legal. The only true statement you made was "What Hamas has to do with international law I have no idea. " Because you have no knowledge whatsoever of what an international law is in the first place. Stop showing us how ignorant you are.

UN then took control Arabs are alway referring to International law, which they ignore, Idea, now, do you get the idea? I've been on the Temple Mount, I doubt if you have

As most of the world's population isn't Jewish,Christian or Muslim.appealing to the Torah isn't going to cut much ice on the international stage.The only thing that binds the whole world is International Law. If,as I also believe,the true position regarding ownership of the old Palestine Mandate territory is being misrepresented,Israel should do as Chaim #40 says,present the proof and annex Judea and Samaria. I'm amazed that Israel's government hasn't mobilized lawyers and spokesmen to throw the true legal position back into the faces of those who misrepresent it.Has Israel run out of lawyers? THREE CHEERS FOR ISRAEL!!!

regardless of the above arguments there are many generations of Jews born on that land who know no other country than Israel. The land has been reclaimed by Jews and no Arab can take it away from them.

You are correct in saying that Biblical proofs mean nothing to the world. However, they mean everything to G-D, and we better figure out who we are trying to please considering that the world could not care less about Israel. The Bible is our deed to the land, and it is a shame that so many Jews refuse to go there because they are embarrassed, unsure of themselves, too ignorant, too "sophisticated" or just don't care. And so we end up with the world's goyim trying to overrule the G-D of Israel. And we wonder why Israel is in such a mess.

#64 John. Opposition to Israeli ownership of Judea and Samaria is 100% politics and doesn't have a thing to do with law. Countless international law experts have incontrovertibly proven Israel legally owns our more than 3,500 year old heartland of Judea and Samaria. Even Eugene Rostow, author of U.N. Resolution 242 admitted so. Legally, there is no issue at all. That is also why nobody in the entire P.A. has the courage to publicly debate MK Danny Ayalon on the issue. Deep inside, even the terrorist P.A. knows this land belongs to Jews.

faiths. Check the numbers, but that was the case at least five years ago.

So, either you are Jordanian, Israeli or refugee. Can't be all three simultaneously. Did you opt to accept Israeli citizenship when Jerusalem was unified? Then you are Israeli, and we expect you to remain loyal to Israel. That entails giving up your so-called "refugee" status. What you have not explained is why you still even qualify as a "refugee."

Israel's courts say nothing of the sort. They have never referred to Israel as an "occupying power," and I defy you to contradict this point. What they do acknowledge is that the West Bank is non-sovereign territory. Its Arab residents, in case you are unaware, are Jordanian citizens. Israel's presence in the West Bank is fully legal under all tenets of Israeli and international law. Please do your best to recall that Israel acquired Judea and Samaria in the course of fighting a defensive war against Jordan. It is Israel's to keep, settle and even annex. The instant that Israel annexes Judea and Samaria -- that's coming, by the way -- it will become part of the State of Israel. At that point, all of its Jordanian citizens will be repatriated. Here's a suggestion: try looking past the fact that Israel and its government are largely Jewish. Step away from your anti-Semitism long enough to understand that Israel has always respected international law as concerns the governance of NON-SOVEREIGN TERRITORY. Can you do that, John? Are you smart enough? Capable enough?

my grandfather fought in Palestine in WW1. Troops from Britain, Australia and New Zealand most certainly DID gain territory in Palestine by pushing back the Turks. Its easy to verify this by doing a bit of googling.

Madam did you read what I wrote in #15. I am quoting from a June 5,2005 ruling on the Israeli disengagement from the Gaza strip. {look at the quote marks}They said exactly what I quoted. Even Nicolas Rostow, Eugene Rostow's son, admits exactly what I put in #15.

Squatters and thieves is what you are, nothing divine or chosen about that.

The Gaza Strip is not the West Bank, dear. Haven't you heard? Besides, Israel has left the Strip. (Whether we will need to go back in or not remains to be seen, and is largely dependent upon whether the terrorist denizens in the Strip can learn to stop firing missiles at Israeli civilians, plot to kidnap Israelis and generally refrain from a whole host of violent behaviors. Nicolas Rostow is not Eugene Rostow. Do you think exactly the way your father does (or did), or are you at all capable of independent thought?

John in Christchurch, New Zealand and Gee in Zichron Ya'akov are both right. They are also, in certain minor respects, both wrong. Yes, the ANZAC troops fought bravely and well. No, they did not gain additional territory for what was then Palestine. The Brits acquired additional lands which were never part of Palestine. The entirety of Palestine, which had been part of the Ottoman Empire, was ceded over to Britain following Turkey's loss in World War I. So, you're both right, and you're both wrong. No need to drag out the tape measure, now is there? (Please agree!) That would be much more information than any of us need ..... or want.

The British conquered Palestine in the Sinai and Palestine campaign under Gen. Allenby. In terms of the League of Nations creating the Mandates their power is well described in a quote from Lord Balfour(the same Lord Balfour who wrote the Balfour Declaration) "[the] Mandates were not the creation of the League, and they could not in substance be altered by the League. The League's duties were confined to seeing that the specific and detailed terms of the mandates were in accordance with the decisions taken by the Allied and Associated Powers, and that in carrying out these mandates the Mandatory Powers should be under the supervision—not under the control—of the League. A mandate was a self-imposed limitation by the conquerors on the sovereignty which they exercised over the conquered territory" You don't know history and it is your ignorance not mine that is showing.

Chaim, the policy of every single country in the world but Israel is that your settlements are illegal. They violate Article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention. That was confirmed by the ICJ (the highest Judicial body in the world) in a 2004 ruling with 15 of 15 judges unanimously saying so. Read your own high courts ruling from June 2005 on the Gaza disengagement. Your high court says the West Bank is occupied land and not part of Israel. Eugene Rostow does not say Judea and Sumeria are Israeli land . He says under art 6 of the Mandate they (Jews) have settlement rights. I could pick apart his argument but that is irrelevant because he does not say it is Israeli land. Take your head out of the sand . Do you think that none of the 157 countries that recognize Israel maintain an embassy in Jerusalem by coincidence?.

I have been to Temple Mount. The UN never took control of Palestine, they only made recommendations to the British (as Mandatory) and to the Jewish Agency (referenced in the Mandate). Those recommendations came in the form of UNGA 181. You brought up the US and the indians which precipitated my prior response to your nonsense in#27.

British trooops also fought in Europe, France, Germany, Belgium, etc., did that also mean that they too now became a part of the British Empire Or how about the Yanks that fought in Europe, did that mean the Yanks having fought there could now claim most of Europe as a part of the United States? Try doing some of your own googling, you have a heck of a lot to learn The Brits caused far more harm in the world than good When the English left the countries they had controlled, there were celebrations, nary a tear At one time I was stationed in Beersheva, I would go to the Aussie Cemetery to relax under shade of the trees

At last, the voice of reason. Israel is a sovereign state and its capital is Jerusalem. No one uttered a peep in '48 when Jordan joined the other Arab countries to push Israel into the sea; when they took the Old City of Jerusalem from Israel, banished all its Jewish citizens, and desecrated the Jewish holy places. But after '67, when Jordan again joined its brothers in war against Israel - and this time, lost Jerusalem - oh well, that caused an international uproar that has never abated: Suddenly, the West Bank is "occupied territory!" Well, it's not. It is simply what it has always been - the capital city of Israel. The more we debate this, the more we legitimize the world's need to rewrite our history. Batya Casper www.israelathebook.com

Bibi Netanyahu did not traverse Mahmoud Abas's claim to the UN that Israel was stealing Arab land. He gave a good reply but did not dispute the Arab claim. What he should have said can be found at: Salubrius-HiddenTruth.blogspot.com Scroll down to: MAHMOUD ABBAS’ REQUEST TO THE UN ON SEPTEMBER 23RD AND PM NETANYAHU’S REPLY While the exclusive grant of political rights to the Jews is not explicit in the Mandate [the British did not want to stir up the Arabs] That the Arabs understood it is shown by the arguments the Arabs made in 1947 against Partition that are reprinted in . See Musa Alami, The Future of Palestine.

The detail in the 2005 ruling defines the belliigerent occupation as occurring in the " lands acquired by Israel as a result of the 1967 war." The ruling was issued because of lawsuits from settlers in the Gaza strip. It is obviously irrelevant as to Gaza's current status. Nicolas Rostow is part of the same conservative think tank as his father but that is also irrelevant since he quoted multiple rulings from the Israeli Supreme Court to support the information I provided in an article he wrote on the legality of the settlements.