I am trying to explain - and you are not listening - that by and large those who would later want to be called Israelis left what would later be called Israel about the year 1300 and had abandoned that land.

Giving them a "right" to return in 1922, or 1947, or later, dispossessed those by then on that land, and it was imposed by no government having the right to do so. It is an invasion, it is based on theocratic arguments and it is not justified.

It is however, there, so the only thing to be done now is (like in Ireland) surrender in part and try to reach an agreement. You cannot do that without understanding why the displaced population feel aggrieved, and displacing them further will not help that feeling go away.

If the UN recognises the state of Palestine it might be the first step towards peace, and towards Palestine and Israel accepting the existence of each other.


You based your argument solely on a form of words - and when I pointed out that words were not actions, you then based a fresh argument on actions - actions that no government validly countenanced and from 1917/22 onwards no ruler had valid power to countenance.