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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (237463)	6/16/2005 1:49:18 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572886

Israel was not formed from thin air. Treaties were signed and land was passed through the UN to its government from the UK. You may not agree with the actions that were taken but they are legal and binding documents even if the Bible is not. UN resolutions are not "legal and binding", they are just UN resolutions. They may be somehow legal, depending on your definition, but they aren't "binding" unless the UN enforces them. Case in point, the UN passed (in 1967) a resolution (I think it's 242) demanding Israel's withdrawal from the land occupied in the 1967 borders to clear and defensible borders, and there hasn't been much "binding" on that resolution in the past 38 years. You can't have the 1947 UN resolution establishing Israel be "legal and binding", while the 1967 UN resolution mandating Israel's withdrawal from the occuppied territories be a mere "best effort recommended action".

To: tejek who wrote (237463)	6/16/2005 4:33:46 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572886

Re: Israel was not formed from thin air. Treaties were signed and land was passed through the UN to its government from the UK. But those "treaties" were as flimsy as the one between Indians and Dutchmen that recorded the "sale of Manhattan". In 1948, most of the world outside Europe and North America was still made up of colonies belonging to European empires --especially the Arab world. So much for Woodrow Wilson's pet principle of "self-determination"! The creation of Israel was not a matter of right, it was an act of might --of colonial might, that is. Reminder: The Sale of Manhattan De verkoop van Manhattan The story of how the Dutch bought Manhattan was popularized by nineteenth-century American historians and artists who depicted a scene in which Dutchmen in black Calvinist attire dealt with Native Americans dressed up like nineteenth-century Plains Indians. All that is really known about this event is from a letter written by Pieter Schagen, a Dutch West India Company official. In 1626 Schagen wrote the directors of the company that Governor Peter Minuit had purchased the island from the Indians in exchange for goods worth sixty Dutch guilders. Later, historians somehow calculated that sixty seventeenth-century Dutch guilders were worth twenty-four nineteenth-century U.S. dollars, the figure that entered the history books as the "price" for which Manhattan was sold. The actual story is probably more complicated. The Native American tribes at that time were unfamiliar with the European practice of buying and selling land--they simply did not think of land as something that could be sold. Whatever their intention, the Indians' "sale" was to have important consequences, as the Dutch chose the island as the location for their chief settlement in New Netherland. international.loc.gov

To: tejek who wrote (237463)	6/16/2005 12:30:14 PM
From: Elmer Flugum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572886

Did any Arab country sign off on partitioning Palestine to create a "Jewish" state? Isra'El only wants to recognize the U.N. Resolutions that give it someone else's land and neglect any other U.N Resolutions that tell it to get out of lands captured in 1948 and 1967. Message 21422916 Likewise, many Jews only recognize some of the 613 Commandments given to Jews by G-d as a requirement for the re-establishment of ancient Isra'El, yet base their current claims on the promise of this land initially in Canaan times. What is most bizarre are those who claim to be "secular" or "atheist" Jews yet claim the land belongs to them because G-d promised it. I guess for some, their policy is to say and have others believe whatever they say. I wonder if they truly believe it? len