How?

You mean the Israelis would have just pushed all the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip into surrounding regions?

Well, I got thumbed down a bit but I still have no idea what Val or the King of Jordan meant.

The Middle East is an oil rich region. In the calculus of US government planners, it’s best to keep a bit of instability in the region but not too much stability. If there is too much stability in the region, robust democracies may emerge. The US government doesn’t want that. It wants an unimpeded flow of oil. Democratic governments, working together, might lend the USA unfavourable terms. Insteas, it’s divide and conquer. That way you can get maximum cooperation from people you do not trust. Israel, slap bang in the region, has an important role to play in introducing the necessary instability. The USA could end Israeli imperialism tomorrow if it wanted, just like Bill Clinton told the Indonesian regime in the late 90s that it wasn’t going to supply further arms to them if they continued their repression and terror in East Timor.

Just because you throw the racist card around does not make you correct. You want to go to that level to get your point across fine.

I don’t need to engage with someone so one sided and staring down a tunnel that they can’t see reality. Good luck and good night .

So, we can all take it you can’t back up your claim about arafat, and instead can merely cut and paste from a zionist website that quotes people who agree with you. OOOOH, such good debating skills! Before shooting your mouth off next time, please do your homework.

Well, israel considers itself a state and it REFUSES to define its borders. Palestine is also marked on many ancient maps, referred to as the land of palestine. Best way to look at it, if there was never a place called palestine, how come theres such a thing as a palestinian.

Too true . Good question even Arafat said the Arabs were not Palestinians . It was only 15 years after the state of Israel was created that any Arab referred to himself as a Palestinian prior to that the term Palestinian was used to describe a sabra Jew.

John. The term palestinian referrs to geography, not ethnicity, race or religion. Can you supply evidence please that “only 15 years after the state of Israel was created that any Arab referred to himself as a Palestinian.” Also, can you supply a reputable source please for the claim that arafat said the arabs weren’t palestinian. Haven’t heard it before and I’m sure you wouldn’t make sucha claim without being able to back it up……thanks

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.

That’s pretty clear, isn’t it? It’s even more specific than Golda Meir’s statement. It reaffirms what I have written on this subject. And it is hardly the only such statement of its kind. Arafat himself made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along these lines as late as 1993. It demonstrates conclusively that the Palestinian nationhood argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel.

In fact, on the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here’s what he said: “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”

“There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today… No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough”.

- Joseph Farah, “Myths of the Middle East” -

Let us hear what other Arabs have said:

“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. ‘Palestine’ is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it”.

- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -

“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not”.

- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -

“It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria”.

- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -

Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:

“The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years”.

Still waiting for your credible source for that Arafat quote John. While we’re all waiting here’s a quote for YOU from none other than the Oxford English dictionary:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Palestinian?q=palestinian

Palestinian

noun

a member of the native Arab population of the region of Palestine (including the modern state of Israel).

Funny how theres no such thing as a palestinian, but they’re defined in the Oxford English Dictionary isn’t it? Oh, let me guess, they’re all big ol’ anti-semites in Oxford. LOL!!

Think you need to read you facts Gaza has not been occupied for YEARS

And the reason it’s called disputed is because Palestine has never existed as sovereign independent territories . There was no occupation in the West Bank or Gaza while Jordan and Egypt occupied it . Yet when Israel did after it was attacked in the 67 war it was described as an occupation. But you can not have an occupation on land which is not belonging to a sovereign state which Palestine has never ever been

Israel should obey international law and withdraw militarily from all the territory it occupied in the Six Day’s War in 1967 as mandated by UN Security Council resolution 242, a resolution that even the US Government supported at the time.

Paul . Seriously how one sided are you and you accuse the journal.ie of bias.

What about Hamas refusing to recognise Israel’s right to exist even within the 67 borders

Paul,

As a result of the 6-Day War in 1967 – which the Israelis didn’t initiate it – Israel ended up in occupation of three distinctive territories:
- the Sinai Peninsula
- The Gaza Strip
- The West Bank

Israel has relinquished control of the first two of these – Sinai and Gaza. In both situations, the result has been a deterioration of the security situation in southern Israel. Egypt is unable or unwilling to enforce its writ in the Sinai and Hamas sometimes either attacks Israel from Gaza, allows other militants to do it or at least is unable to prevent them.

That’s not to argue that Israel has a right to remain in occupation of the West Bank but given that the most densely populated part of Israel lies only a few kms range from the West Bank, you can see how nervous they would be allowing it to fall under the control of militants.

Sending a few Qassam missiles into downtown Tel Aviv or Jerusalem would be like shootng fish in a barrel.

@ John. As israel merely disengaged gaza and did not relinquish effective control of the airspace maritime area or export/import routes or infrastructure, they are, under international law, still considered an occupier. Oh, and Israel and its apologists are the only ones referring to the occupied territories as ‘disputed’. Despute as they might, it does not change the principle of ‘no title by conflict’ which applies to occupation of land during and post wartime. UNSCR242s preamble clearly states that territory seized during conflict cannot be retained or disputed. Israels occupation under international law is referred to as a belligerent occupation, that’s why the territories are referred to by the UN, the ICRC and everybody else except the people occupying it as ‘occupied’.

This link has the Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar saying the Gaza is no longer under Israeli occupation – thereby flatly contradicting the UN.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=252254

A: It is not up to hamas whether or not gaza is considered occupied, it is up to the terms of reference as defined under international law. And the guy whos thought to be in control of a tinderbox like gaza is hardly going to say ‘guess what, israel is still in control’

B: Have you got another source for that other than the jerusalem post?

That hotbed of Zionist hysteria, Ma’an News has reported it too.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=449619

#JustSaying

Fair enough, you can quote the politician cos we all know how honest they are. I’ll stick to the terms of the hague regulations and geneva convention which apply in this instance and prove occupation of Gaza.

This conflicts with the last paragraph of the article and also with my understanding of the sequence of events.

Sorry should have said your comment is in line with my understanding not in conflict with it.

Nor would there ever have been a picture of an Israeli home destroyed or a injured Israeli.
Pictures and headlines set a tone and should be more reflective of the reality.

Both the picture and headline are not telling the full true story.

How about referring to both sides as terrorists!

I agree. AP is just lies and spin from the Rotschilds and the zionists. I can’t believe The Journal pays for this shite. All stories from AP should come with a disclaimer. Its the one thing that puts me off The Journal is your constant repeating of AP propoganda.

Well John, theres 14 palestinians dead and one israeli seriously injured. So, despite certain elements who consider one seriously wounded israeli to be more headline worthy than 14 dead muslims, I reckon most morally well adjusted people would find the focus of the headline correct.

Yes Hamas won a domestic elections. And killed off Fatah opposition and has refused an election since

How very democratic of them.

The persecution of Christians,increased sharia and Islamisation of an area which was more secular. The increased second class treatment of woman and it’s open calls for Israel’s destruction is just a slice of how “democratic” Hamas is

Paul,

It seems that the people firing the missiles aren’t members of Hamas. They’re from Gazan-based groups over which Hamas has little or no control.

Ciaran: Yes, I know and the article makes that clear. But The article doesn’t give the name of the military wing of Hamas called the Izz Ad-Din Al Qassam brigade so people are left with the impression that Hamas politicians are militants, that their organizations are one and the same, rather than separate, as they are. US and Israeli politicians would be delighted with the many impressions left by AP.

Ah Paul it’s an article on a history lesson. Hamas’s political wing has nothing to do with the article.

Sure why don’t the journalists start telling us about random Israeli ultra Orthodox parties which call for the legalisation of cannabis while they are at it.

Or is that too much “western” propaganda for you

Sinn Fein and IRA are two different organisations by name only, how many members of Sinn Fein were in the IRA

John: D’uh. Hamas is the political wing. Izz Ad-Din Al-Qassam brigade is the military wing.

And seeing as Hamas was not involved. What on EARTH has their political wing got to do with it ??

Hamas IS the political wing. Their military wing, the Ad-Din Al-Qassam brigades weren’t involved in the rocket attacks on Israel.

Oh my gosh . Seriously man. How can you accuse anyone of propaganda when you don’t even read the article.

Hamas was not involved this time . It was a terrorist group also active within Gaza but it wasn’t Hamas.

So talking about Hamas or its political wing is pointless and irrelevant.

Paul,

With all due respect, I don’t see how anyone could form that impression from this article. Yes, there is a tendency in people’s minds to lump all the militants into one but I don’t think this article contributes to that. The only mention of Hamas is where the article says they’ve condemned the Israeli retaliations but that they’re keeping out of the exchanges.

Hamas is a political party. It is not a militia.

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

Now just wait a minute John. they don’t have the time, sure its only the afternoon, surely they’re at work contributing to the economy that has unraveled on us like a ball of shite

I hear that english trouble maker and his daughter plus his herd of sheep are in Galway for Custers last stand.

Fergal,

I’m not trying to pick a fight here. I’d just like to know what you mean when you talk about “occupied land”. Do you mean the West Bank or all of what’s generally (not universally, I know) internationally-recognised as the State of Israel?

Also, what do you think would be the best solution to the situation?

We can keep this civil, eh? :-)

Ciaran: It’s perfectly clear that the entire Arab league, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah accept a two state solution based on the pre-1967 borders. The Arab league have been pushing for a 2 state solution since 1976.

The Likudniks that govern Israel and their international supporters seek to distract from this central fact with talk of Hamas’, Herbollah’s and Iran’s alleged refusal to recognize Israel’s “right to exist”.

Could Paul please show some evidence seeing as its ” perfectly” clear.
The Arab league still runs by the three R’s

The UN General Assembly has supported a 2 state solution based on the pre-1967 borders since the mid-1970s. The Arab League has also supported this since that time. The US has vetoed UN Security Council resolutions supporting a 2 state solution since 1976.

What are the 3 Rs? Reduce, reuse and recycle?

Sorry my slip.
Not 3 r’S
3 NO’s

How can they accept a 2 state when they completely refuse to recognise Israel’s right to exist 67 borders or not.

And you may like to remember they are not in fact borders.Its the 49 armistace lines drawn to stop the Arabs from destroying the newly formed state of Israel. Which they tried to do repeatidly including 67 when Israel took over the West Bank,Gaza and Sinai. Gaza and the Sinai have been returned in the hope of peace. Maybe if the Arabs made genuine attempts for peace there would be.But when you have Palestinian Presidents stating the 2 state solution is in fact a 2 stage solution.How can anyone expect Israel to go into a corner it would never be able to get out of .Many of the Hills in the West Bank are high enough that if rockets were to be fired Tel Aviv,Jerusalem and Ben Gurion airport could easily be hit.

. Clearly you have never been there as to try and create an international border along those lines IS/WAS/Going to be next to impossible.

The Khartoum Resolution containing the 3 Nos (No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it) was adopted by the Arab League immediately after the 6 Days War in 1967. The 3 Nos only applied to the mid 1970s. Thereafter, the Arab League supported a two state solution, with its implicit recognition of Israel. In 2007, the Israeli government met with an official delegation of the Arab League.

Hi Paul,

That’s strange. I can access it with no difficulty. I can send you the text on Facebook if you like..

Okay, I got in now.

Your link:

http://www.tebyan.net/News/Analyses/2008/2/12/61300.html

I was using my Apple ITouch mobile device yesterday and it was telling me that there were too many redirects. Today, I use my laptop and I can get in.

I did a google translate of what appears to be a section of Ahmadinejad’s Le Monde interview from February 2008 (where’s Part 1?).

I don’t read French so according to the Google translate I get as follows for the relevant section:

___________________________

Why the Palestinian people have to accept the occupation? Why should it agree to be lost part of its territory? This is not because the United Nations recognized [Israel] that gives legitimacy to this acknowledgment. A people falsified, invented [the Israeli people] will not last, he must leave the territory. It’s not because everyone says something wrong it becomes right.

________________________

It’s perfectly clear that by ‘territory’ Ahmadinejad means the West Bank and the Golan Heights. He wants the Israeli military to withdraw from those territories. He probably wants the Israeli settlements to be removed as well, as do I . Israel set up those settlements without international permission and in contravention of the intent of UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. By ‘territory’ Ahmadinejad also means the Gaza strip where there is still a de facto Israel occupation; Israel still controls Gaza’s airspace and adjacent sea. Israel launches arbitrary attacks against its people like the one it launched without provocation last Friday. Arbitrary attacks that kill civilians. A blockade remains in place. The UN investigated at the start of last year and found that despite Israel relaxing the blockade in the wake of the Gaza Flotilla incident in the summer of 2010, they found that there had been no improvement in the lives of the Gazan people.

As for Ahmadinejad’s comments about the Israeli people being a people falsified or invented, this is no more controversial than US Presidential Republican candidate Newt Gingrich’s comment that the Palestinians are an invented people.

Hi Paul,

1. I find that very hard to believe – for numerous reasons.
(a) The statement from the interviewer that triggers that response is: “Two days ago, you announced that ‘the Zionist entity will fall sooner or later’”. Israeli departure from the West Bank or Golan Heights will not lead to the fall of the “Zionist entity”.
(b) You say he’s referring to three distinct and geographically separate territories. Yet, he uses the singular “territory”. It doesn’t make sense that he would refer to three different territories as one territory.
(c) He asks why should the Palestinians lose part of their territory? For him, the Palestinian territory is from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. If he was only objecting to Israel presence in the West Bank etc., he’d ask why should the Palestinians lose all their territory. The part being “lost” is the part currently occupied by the State of Israel and he’s objecting to this.
(d) In the third sentence, he says that a UN recognition does not confer legitimacy. The UN doesn’t recognise the Israeli presence in the Golan Heights or the West Bank. Hence, he can only be questioning UN recognition of Israel and hence Israel’s right to exist.
(e) In the last sentence, he says that just because everyone says something that’s wrong doesn’t make it right. The “everyone” is the international community. The “wrong” thing is the recognition of the State of Israel. This can’t be a reference to the Israeli presence in the West Bank or the Golan Heights because these are not internationally recognised. Not everyone is saying those are right – at all.

2. In other threads here, I’ve been debating the recent exchanges between Israel and Gaza. The Israelis were provoked. There were almost continuous missile attacks from Gaza for nearly two weeks before the Israelis responded.

3. Two loons don’t make a logic and Newt Gingrich doesn’t speak for me. If the people in Gaza and the West Bank feel a sufficient degree of kinship that they regard themselves as one people, that’s their concern and right and Gingrich’s view should be ignored.

Ciaran: Ahmadinejad and Iran support the Arab League proposed 2 state solution. Even the arch conservative Daily Telegraph reported on it. I gave the link already.

The latest Israeli attack on Gaza was unprovoked.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_2012_Gaza-Israel_clashes

What’s your source for your contention that there were continuous missile attacks from Gaza on Israel for the previous 2 weeks?

Ma’an news do,

You’re quite right. I should have checked first.

Iran’s president has said he wishes to obliterate Israel from the map. How is this is consistent with your claim that they accept a two-state solution?
If the Palestinians accept a two-state solution, why did Arafat reject such a compromise in Camp David when Israeli Prime Minister Barak conceded 91% of the West Bank plus all of East Jerusalem?

@Tom. The israeli propaganda machine purposely mistranslated that quote and carpetbombed the world media with it ever since. He was referring to zionism be wiped from the pages of history which is hardly the same hing. Now, theres enough crap that Ahmadinejad ACTUALLY said about Israel that you can quote, but please don’t regurgitate the lie.

TT, that original translation came from an Iranian state controlled radio station the broadcasts in English.

See here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070927213903/http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=200247

Good heavens, Tom, it is even reported in the arch conservative Daily Telegraph that Iran supports a 2 state solution.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5225705/Irans-President-would-support-two-state-solution-for-Israel.html

@ Ciaran, the phrase ‘wiped off the map’ is an english expression that is not used in Farsi dialect. It is a mistranslation that has been jumped on by the israeli propaganda machine and repeated so often that the average person in the street who does not know its a mistranslation takes it as gospel. It would be laughable if it was not being peddled as one of the many excuses for israel attacking iran. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel : Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that “the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time.”

TT, I posted that link simply to show that contrary to what you said, the purposeful mistranslation you referred to didn’t come from the “Israeli propaganda machine”. It came from Ahmadinejad’s own state broadcaster.

A few days ago, I had a prolonged discussion about this issue, the mistranslation and the ambiguous attitude of the Iranian government to it in this thread:
http://www.thejournal.ie/obama-and-netanyahu-to-discuss-iran-at-talks-today-373940-Mar2012

Also, in relation to that Mahmoud Admadinejad speech, what he meant by Jerusalem was East Jerusalem. One must bear in mind that Iran is a theocratic Republic. In Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s mind, East Jerusalem, that Israel militarily occupied in 1967, is Jerusalem, that is the part of the city that contains the Old Religious City. What Mahmoud Admadinejad was calling for in that speech as he would have in many other speeches was for Israel to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 242, that is, the resolution adopted in 1967 under Chapter 6 of the UN Charter, calling on Israel to withdraw militarily from the lands it has occupied in the 6 Day War, that is, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Gaza strip, the Sinai Desert and the West Bank.

I don’t want to go through THAT debate again. However, I did post a link to an interview with Le Monde where he said that the Israeli people would have to leave Israel. I posted another one where he described the Holocaust as a “myth” that was “fabricated”. The guy has an issue with Jews and Israelis and while I’m not saying it’s a reason for war with Iran, no-one should be risking serious injury jumping through hoops to do quasi-Freudian re-interpretations of what he said. Very often, people do actually mean precisely what they say.

Do you have a translated transcript of that interview?

I mean the Le Monde interview.

Paul,
East Jerusalem was under occupation, Jordanian one, from 1948 till 1967, contrary to international law and in breach of international agreements Jews were not allowed to enter most sacred in Judaism place – the Western Wall. So much so that from people applying for Jordanian visa and bound for Jerusalem Jordanian authorities required proof that they are not Jewish!!!!! Think that Al-Aqsa and Dome of Rock are under Muslim supervision and Muslims have free access to them (limited to all others) and think how for 19 years after the siege of Jerusalem, no Jew was allowed to Jerusalem. All the synagogues were destroyed, some converted into cow sheds, Jewish macevahs (stones from cemeteries) were turned into pavements or – sometimes – public latrines were build from them! And the world kept silent. While when any of mosques gets vandalised in Israel perpetrators are persecuted (and rightly so). Ahmadinajed would like to get rid of Jews from Jerusalem – capital of Israel, both the ancient and present. It is equal to calling for removal of Muslims from Mecca. Just think what would have happened

Paul, I don’t but Google Translate does a pretty good job.

Ciaran: that link you gave for the untranslated Le Monde interview, the tebyan.net page, doesn’t work. I am told that there are too many redirects.

Hi Paul,

(2nd attempt!)

That’s strange. I can access it with no difficulty. I can send you the text on Facebook if you like..

“people like John” ???? Lol

Seriously don’t like facts trip you over or reality while your running around screaming propaganda . No better man to rehash the same old Arab spin than yourself .

I don’t understand your argument – Sinn Féin and the IRA were and are the same.

If we were to extrapolate the AP article to the Northern Ireland situation during the troubles, it would be like calling “Sinn Fein/IRA”, “Sinn Fein”. Even Ian Paisley didn’t go that far. From there, you can hang reports such as “Yesterday afternoon such-and-such pub was bombed. 14 people are confirmed dead. Sinn Fein has claimed responsibility”.

The two people you quoted are both noted liars. Joseph farar is not a reputable historian, he runs worldnetdaily, a publication famous for fabrication. They were most recently caught for this (wiki):

On 6 February 2012, WND published an article claiming that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei offered a justification for a war against Israel, to kill all jews.[10] The quotes in this article are fabricated or use wildly distorted quotations.[11] The writer of the article is Reza Kahlili, an Iranian emigre who claims to have been a former Revolutionary Guard, but in reality someone willing to create and propagate propaganda against Iran. Reza Kahlili has no credibility among the Iranian exile community.[11]

And the other person, walid the alleged former plo member:

Shoebat claims to have been a former PLO militant,[1] responsible for firebombing an Israeli Bank. CNN’s Jerusalem bureau went to great lengths trying to verify Shoebat’s story, carrying out a thorough investigation. However they were unable to locate any PLO[citation needed] or Israeli government records to corroborate his affiliation or participation in any violent acts against Israel. Neither Shoebat nor his business partner provided any proof of his involvement in terrorism, despite repeated requests. The Tel Aviv headquarters of Bank Leumi had no record of a firebombing at its now-demolished Bethlehem branch. Israeli police had no record of the bombing, and the prison where Shoebat says he was held “for a few weeks” for inciting anti-Israel demonstrations says it has no record of him being incarcerated there either.

Any quotes from people not famous for lies and deceit? We’ll wait while you trawl the other israeli propaganda sites. Strangely enough, your quotes both apper on a webpage called ‘palestinian myths’ which is about the “so called palestinians”.

“Where is the Palestinian history,where is their capital,where is their archaeological evidence,lineage,coinage? You cannot argue with history.”

@Naomi Dara Gibson, here’s their coinage:

http://www.amphoracoins.com/itemdetail.asp?type=S&item=1312

http://www.google.ie/search?q=palestinian+coinage&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=wrBcT6exOoHKhAewwNmoBA&ved=0CCIQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=804

Well done on the coins :P
And do you know what the (אי) on the part Hebrew part means? Surely you can find coins from a British Mandate you would know everything written on them? Right?

And are you forgetting an entire generation or of Jewish people who had (and many still possess the papers) Palestinian IDs?

Small point Magdalena. The rockets fired from gaza are not ‘indiscriminately aimed at civilian population’ as they can’t be aimed, they’re homemade and unguided. If you want to look at indiscriminate aiming, try Israels use of white phosphorous over one of the most densely populated areas on earth, a WAR CRIME by the way. But please continue, I always enjoy hearing israels apologists lower their beloved country to the level of the ‘terrorists’ they’re fighting to excuse its actions……