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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6227)	4/26/2004 3:08:55 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6945

Remember as you read this that Hamas' program, openly declared, is to kill or drive out every Jew from the Mideast. In reality, Hamas has declared that it would make peace with Israel if Israel would leave the West Bank and Gaza. And of course, you're statement is a clever lie. Hamas might state that goal somewhere (they probably don't), but that is not what the Palestinian masses support. They support the idea that Hamas is fighting the occupation. Tom

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6227)	4/26/2004 3:21:19 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 6945

Trying to bamboozle with legal-ese: Message 20060294 Since the Palestinians have been denied statehood, Israel gets to steal their land? That's cute. -g- Of course, when Israel feels the legal argument is not in its favor, like in the Suez crisis of 1956 and 1967, then Israel simply launches a military strike to simplify matters. Tom

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6227)	4/26/2004 3:23:11 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 6945

That's one reason, aside from US patronage, that UN Resolution 242 spoke of returning territories, but with borders to be settled by negotiation. Obviously if the resolution meant that Israel should give it all back, there would be no borders to negotiate, everything would go back to the status quo ante. Actually, there is only one reason that UN 242 spoke of negotiating borders. Only one reason. The 1967 borders separated some communities from their land. The idea was to compensate for this by a small swap of equal amounts of land. Tom