Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Middle East Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (555)	1/18/2002 1:09:35 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 6945

Sure, but Israel has reneged on virtually every agreement it has ever signed. Go back to the formal UN recognition of Israel. Israel agreed to the terms, which included specific requirements, such as the refugees' right of return. Israel never made even a token gesture at carrying this out. Israel is armed to the teeth, and using its arms (F-16 fighter jets, tanks, Apache attack helicoptors, etc) on civilians on a regular basis for the purpose of taking land away from them. Why is it bad if the Palestinians acquire arms to try to defend themselves from this encroachment? Tom

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (555)	1/18/2002 2:01:03 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6945

So, you are offended by parties which renege on agreements. How about this? cactus48.com <<< "The [Lausanne] conference officially opened on 27 April 1949. On 12 May the [UN's] Palestine Conciliation ,Committee reaped its only success when it induced the parties to sign a joint protocol on the framework for a comprehensive peace. . Israel for the first time accepted the principle of repatriation [of the Arab refugees] and the internationalization of Jerusalem. . .[but] they did so as a mere exercise in public relations aimed at strengthening Israel's international image...Walter Eytan, the head of the Israeli delegation, [stated]..'My main purpose was to begin to undermine the protocol of 12 May, which we had signed only under duress of our struggle for admission to the U.N. Refusal to sign would...have immediately been reported to the Secretary-General and the various governments.'" Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe, "The Making of the Arab-Israel Conflict, 1947-1951." "The Preamble of this resolution of admission included a safeguarding clause as follows: 'Recalling its resolution of 29 November 1947 (on partition) and 11 December 1948 (on reparation and compensation), and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hocPolitical Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions, the General Assembly...decides to admit Israel into membership in the United Nations.' "Here, it must be observed, is a condition and an undertaking to implement the resolutions mentioned. There was no question of such implementation being conditioned on the conclusion of peace on Israeli terms as the Israelis later claimed to justify their non-compliance." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest." >>> Tom