Well to be fair it is hard to disprove what you say because you simply deny anything that contradicts what you say.
As I recall I started my involvement in this discussion by talking about DNA and you responded with a report showing 80% of Ashkenazi Jews had a DNA link to the region but you declined to accept that the report also said 80% of Asians and Europeans also had the same gene and 70% of Palestinians also carry the gene which shows a connection to the region as far back as 3000 years.
I also notice that you did not mention all the other enthnic Jewish groups just the ones from the German area.
What your report really shows is that the Jews in Israel today are those that left the region for upwards of a millenium and that those Palestinians that you keep claiming don't exist are infact the decendants of those who stayed in the region and converted to Islam at some point in the past.
I would argue that based on that information alone Palestinians are the true inhabitants of the region based on both history, dna and continuous occupation where as those Jews that have moved there since are nothing more than European colonisers whos ancestors once lived in the region thousands of years ago but abandoned the region for whatever reason.
I think you read the wrong report. I gave a
link in
my post #1061.
Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populationsshare a common pool of Y chromosome biallelic haplotypes:
In summary, the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago. The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
I also said, multiple times in fact, thay if we go far enough in time we all end up somewhere in southern Africa. The DNA disproved the ones who were saying that the Jews did not originate from that area.
But DNA has nothing to do with states and societies but with individual's paternal and maternal lineage. We are not discussing individuals here, we are discussing states and societies. You do not seem to have viewed the clip I posted of Hamas' interior minister [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3-GBsGmE54"]Fathi Hammad[/ame].
As far as legal arguements go I would suggest that the legal borders of Israel stop at the 1947 demarcation lines and everything outside that is land taken in conquest which is not legally binding under article 2 paragraph 4 of the 1945 UN charter...
I'm glad you brought that up, because it was the Arab countries who violated the UN charter by attacking Israel.
Also, the legal borders do not stop at the 1947 demarcation lines.
Art VI - 11 of the Security Council DOCUMENT S/1302/REV.1 1/ (3 April 1949) states:
The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement, and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
The agreement about the borders is between Israel and the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom, not between Israel and the Palestinians.
Now we could also get into a discussion on the whole ethnic clensing thing and I am sure you would push the case that Palestinians were not forced off their lands despite evidence to the contrary and just for the sake of argument I will accept it (even though I don't) the fact is that international law allows for the right of refugees to return once the area is secure, not only does Israel refuse this they have colonised the area so they can't return.
That's not the whole truth.
UNGA Resolution 194 III 11 states:
Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compsensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for the loss or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.
That's from 1948. We all know how many times Israel was attacked (suicide bombers, killings, rockets) by "Palestinians" until this day. So we can clearly state that "live at peace with their neighbours" is highly unlikely. May I also point to the fact that it is not only the responsibility of Israel but also the attacking states since "Governments and authorities" is written in plural. Another fact is that international law only speek about the refugees and not their descendants. One other thing, UNRWA does give assistence to the refugees and their descendants but only those that register at certain points and live at certain camps, so not every Palestinian refugee.
Now lets be honest I can go on and on about Israels crimes and you will respond with a long winded mostly irrelevant response that amounts to "No" so I will cut to the chase...
So you can avoid the shelling of civilian homes in Israel, which is a crime against humanity or what about the suicide bombers?
Have you ever considered that the reason that people do not like Israel is that people like you make such poor cases in their defense people like myself can find so many holes in your story that even those who once supported you now think where there is smoke there is fire?
That's your opnion. I give facts. Read this post again, it is based on facts for which I gave references.
But no matter how you look at it in the end I don't like Israel because it is a nation that has done nothing positive for the world and instead brought suffering and misery to millions for no good reason other than ideological nonsense and an over inflated sense of entitlement.
You must be kidding, right? Look
here.
Or what about
this : The story of an eight-month-old Palestinian child with a hole in her heart. This Palestinian baby, born with a hole in her heart, received medical treatment from an Israeli charity.
In closing I would suggest that my very limited exposure to Palestinians show me a very resilient and amazing adaptive people, my limited exposure to Israelis is mixed on one hand I have met some that show me peace is possible yet I have met others that made me think kindly of Hamas but in the end I can honestly say if Israel were to evaporate tomorrow I would not shed a tear.
The problem is religion, as I have said from in the beginning. If it wasn't about religion there wouldn't be Shahid (muslim martyr) and streets wouldn't be named after someone killing chuildren. If it wasn't about religion then the second intifada wouldn't be called the Al-Aqsa Intifada. If it wasn't about religion then Hamas would not quote the qur'an for killing Jews. (Sahih Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176: Narrated by 'Abdullah bin 'Umar). If it wasn't about religion there would already be peace.
read this
book.
This is the same country that has flatly refused and continued to flout 224 (at last count) binding resolutions (many of them regarding War Crimes), of the UN Security Council plus almost innumerable resolutions of the UN General Assembly most of which are regarding Crimes against Humanity.
From wikipedia. The last one is from 2009 (your number 224 and counting.....stops?). No resolutions for the last 4 years? Have you read the reolutions? Because according to your quote it seems that Israel never complies while in fact they do. Why don't you mention the resolutions against Israel's enemies that are
not complied? (Hezbollah , Iran). Did it occur to you that those resolutions come
after Israel retaliates after an attack? Right of self defense.
Let's take resolution 1322. From Wikipedia:
The Council deplored the visit by Ariel Sharon to the Temple Mount (referred to in the Resolution by its Arab name Al-Haram Al-Sharif)
Why is a Jew not allowed to visit his most holy site in Judaism? What about freedom of religion? What would happen if Muslims were not allowed to go to Mekka? Funny that that site blocks all peace agreements between Israel en "Palestine". You know why? Because it is about religion. Muslims want to control the Temple Mount. They already have the key (literally) to the most holy site of Christianity and destroyed the Hindu one.
