Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

no more "theirs" than "theirs" ..... philistines and their ilk were as nomadic as the 12 tribes

Between 700 and 800 thousand Arabs were refugees from the area in the 1948 war and another 300 thousand were refugees in the 1967 war. The current total of refugees and their descendants is exceeds 4 million.

IF Palestinians were not a people and did not have homes, where did the more than a million refugees come from. This nomadic Palestinian nonsense is just one more Israeli myth and lie.

The Palestinian right of return was specifiied in UN resolution 194 which 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 compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236, passed on 22 November 1974 declared the right of return to be an "inalienable right".


In June 1948, the Israeli government stated its position, which was reiterated in a letter to the United Nations on 2 August 1949, that in its view a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem must be sought, not through the return of the refugees to Israel, but through the resettlement of the Palestinian Arab refugee population in other states.

In 1948 the Israeli levelled Palestinian villages to prevet the return of refugees.

They passed the Absentee Property Law allowing the state to confiscate land belonging to people not present in Israel and gave the land to illegal settlers.

funny anomaly .... while the pen is mightier than the sword, the weight of words is one of the best cures for insomnia

.

"they passed the (blah blah) law (blah blah) and gave the land to illegal settlers."

If they passed a law, how can the settlers be illegal? Or are you confusing fact and opinion again?

.

Any law passed by Israel is illegal.The settlements are illegal by International Law as the land belongs to the Palestinians.

The consensus view of the international community is that the building of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this. This view is largely based on UN Security council resolutions, including resolutions 446, 452, 465, 471 and 476 which find the settlements to be illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention. The legal arm of the UN, the International Court of Justice, has found the settlements to be illegal under international law

In November 2006 Peace Now acquired a report (which it claims was leaked from the Israeli Government's Civil Administration) that indicates that as much as 40 percent of the settlement land that Israel plans to retain in the West Bank is privately owned by Palestinians. Peace Now further claims that this is a violation of Israeli law.

The Spiegel report, commissioned by the Israeli Defense Ministry, also details a large amount of land theft by Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The report reveals that some settlements deemed legal by Israel are in part, and sometimes in large part, effectively illegal outposts, and that large portions of veteran Israeli settlements, including Ofra, Elon Moreh and Beit El were built on private Palestinian land.

The recent use of the Absentee Property Law to "transfer, sell or lease any real estate property" in East Jerusalem owned by Palestinians who live elsewhere (usually in the West Bank) without compensation has been criticized both inside and outside of Israel.

for goodnes sake, did you not learn how to precis in your primary school?
clearly not, which is a shame, as your posts then might be worth reading

and instead of just accepting "your" party line at face value, just occasionally at least, you might care to question it .... that's the good thing about freedom of expression which is noticeably absent in the likes of saudi, iran, uae etc - i'm sure that equally applies in jordan, syria etc

as Gausie or someone has already said, all you do is cut and paste the latest diahhrea ..... it would even be good manners to quote the attribution as one does in a book or serious essay

i could have cut and pasted the whole article (!!!!), but this headliune will suffice ....

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, escalated pressure on the Palestinian leadership on Thursday with a call for the immediate launch of face-to-face peace talks.


now of course hayseed and his merry men of blinkered vision, will rant that it is just a ploy ..... it may well be, but at least it appears to be in the right direction

He has to say that after his visit to the US. Who would he have face to face talks with? The Palestinian Authority is not a legitimate body. It was just set up as an interim organisation for 5 years in 1999.

Hamas won't accept face to face talks until settlement is stopped. Without Hamas involved there can be no talks. Fatah is discredited in Palestine and the PA is losing ground. It is a waste of time and just a smoke screen. Israel builds and builds on stolen land. They are expansionist. While no one stops them, they may as well build. It means that if they have to give ground then they have plenty to give.

It is a ploy as is the supposed easing of the Gaza blockade and intended to gain time with the US and allow more building. It will come to nothing.

of course hamas won't attend talks any more than will hezbollah ..... the very last thing those lunatics want is peace in the region, for it would do far more than just wreck their cash-cow of the smuggling tunnels

meanwhile, the pair of them will posture and pretend altruism on behalf of the poor innocent philistines

and of course, meanwhile hayseed et al spew out toxic vomit as if it were a fountain of champagne rather than close to being a font of all evil (a bit de trop i know, but its cadence was good)

Hezbollah has nothing to do with the Palestinian talks. It was formed as a result of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. They are more of a Muslim faction and anti-Jewish. They are the extremists. Hamas is mild compared to them. You could never talk to them. They only recognise Jews who lived in the area prior to 1948 and they have said that they will accept them living there in the future. They want the rest to return to the countries where they came from.

It is possible to talk to Hamas, but they are always excluded. This will turn out to be a mistake. Hamas are likely to be the government in Gaza and even in the West Bank at some stage. They are more streetwise than the PA and Fatah. Talks will have to be with Hamas at some stage. Israel knows that and it is why they killed a Hamas leader in Dubai. The overall leader of Hamas lives in Syria for safety.

try 1 word instead of 6! ...... try thinking and forming a (your own) balanced view - e.g. both sides are pretty evil, but yes for there to be peace, they will have to talk sooner or later

the rabid bastards on both sides of the divide in ireland eventually did that, and much as one might loathe various individuals, at least there is now effective peace there

Ireland is not settled at all. I expect there to be rebewed vionce there. It is mostly peaceful at the moment. At some stage the Republicans will realise that power sharing has got them nothing. There is not going to be a united Ireland in our lifetimes and probably not for generations to come. Once that sinks in the 'troubles' will start again. The current agreement started by John Major is another political con.

no doubt the streets of wolverhampton will also run with blood within the next 5 years - as predicted by Beloved Enoch

you really are such a total and utter wally!

Took your time getting there Richard, but in the end you did!

Having been on the end of a few instances of lazy / sensationalised journalism, I rarely bother to read any newspaper / internet article in depth, nor accept at face value what is written. More often than not a journalist will be tasked with covering a story which has already been an exclusive for another paper, precis that already written, make a few phone calls to verify a few statements and publish the resulting article, thus perpetuating the orignal errors / untruths until it becomes fact. Anyone who continually posts articles without having first hand knowledge of the truth is quite frankly an arse.

That's an interesting point of view. However much of the information about Israel comes from people on the ground, such as the UN, the EU, Aid Aagencies, Red Cross and many others. It is easy to dismiss it all as journa;lism, but most of it is not. And it is not just second hand reported findings of these agencies. You can read the first hand reports from people who were there.

For instance you can read the actual testimonies from Israeli soldiers who were forced to commit acrocities. This is not journalism.

Breaking the Silence is an organization of veteran Israeli soldiers that collects testimonies of soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories during the Second Intifadah.

http://www.shovrimshtika.org/testimonies_group_e.asp

Very heavy topic.