"AND YOU HAVE CONSISTENTLY DENIED THAT JEWS HAVE A RIGHT TO THE HOMELAND ESTABLISHED IN 1921."
Perhaps you might point out where I have ever made such a statement - my argument lies in location of that homeland; what should happen to the Palestinians legitimately (disputed by you) living there; whether it includes the occupied territories, whether the Israelis have a right to extend it, as they appear to be doing, and the inhuman treatment consistently and over a long period meted out to those who have no part in this argument and who are just trying to live their lives and feed themselves and their families
I have no great understanding of or interest in the present political dispute surrounding the Jewish Homeland other than it should in no way impinge on the lives of those not actually involved in any debates taking place in its maintenance; I was brought up in a family that totally supported a Jewish homeland following the horrific events of WW2 - that remains my position.
My prime interest in this topic is a humanitarian one - an aspect you and your friends here have either ignored or wheedled out of by either supporting or denying the acts of vicious militaristic suppression - including behaviour that can be described as war crimes and abuses of human rights.
"Repeating, since you have that comprehension problem:"
Please don't talk down to me - you really aren't good enough at it.
Your bullying and hectoring and your overuse of the word "liar" is somewhat reminiscent of the old black-and-white Prisoner-of-War 'Colditz Story' type films - any minute I expect to receive "Ve haf ways of making you talk" - stop it, you jumped up little no-mark.
Keith;
"Jim supported every Palestinian crime without question.
Once again you are deliberately distorting what I have said to cover your own unconditional (to the point of fanaticism) support of Israeli atrocities and war crimes.
I have described the Palestinian response to Israeli aggression in pursuit of its territorial aims as "inevitable" in the circumstances - a weak, poorly armed and equipped people facing a highly trained, well equipped army (to the point of nuclear capability).
I believe that, should the Palestinians cease resistance to the Israeli juggernaut they are as likely to find themselves subject to the "rather good treatment" that the Bedouin families have had bestowed on them - ie living next to a toxic rubbish dump.
If you have any examples of my saying otherwise - please put them up.
Incidentally - apart from the US and other countries pursuing a policy of political and economic self-interest (openly admitted by the US) that is the view taken by the United Nations, UNESCO and other international bodies - and sympathetic responses to specific cases of atrocities have come from - Israeli enquiries - where else?
"He has just acknowledged again, without criticism, the taking of innocent "hostages" (his word) for use as human shields by Hamas."
No he has not - he has, from the beginning, questioned whether these are hostages and pointed out that Hamas is not a force parachuted in from Mars but made up of Palestinians living in the areas they have defended. That both sides have put the lives of civilians at risk in the conflict is beyond question, but it is the vastly superior Israeli military who have chosen the battlegrounds and deliberately targetted built-up areas.   
If you care to make the effort to read some of the links you have been given you will find that Israel has been found to have used hostages as human shields throughout their incursion into Gaza.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/23/gaza-human-shields-claim
http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/jul09/Rana_Human_Shields_update_report_Englsih_july_2009.pdf
"I only put Israel's case on any issue AFTER Jim had exclusively put the Palestinian case."
You have been unconditionally supporting the Israeli case as early as your attempts to excuse the murder of aid workers - before I ever became involved in these discussions - want be to jog your memory?
Jim Carroll