Why does it support Israel if Palestine was not well developed in the 19th century? Doesnt that suggest that Jews did not maintain the land at that time or in the recent prior period either? If the land wasnt well maintained, as Twain learned, doesnt that just mean no one was doing a particularly great job at improving the land for some amount of time? If that is true, how does it benefit Israel to say so? Maybe Israelis could do a far better job improving the land in many places on earth, that does not give Israel the right to take such land, does it? The argument is, it seems to me, not significant. If Israel has some right to land outside its pre-1967 border, the argument needs to be based on something other than merely saying that Israel is better able to improve the land. Many people can use my money better than me, that does not give them the right to take it, does it? Isnt the counter argument basically what Raskolnikov thought before he killed the old woman?
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Magnitude-5.8 earthquake shakes New Zealand's Christchurch (AP)
from the article: Dershowitz lays into J Street in AIPAC conference dust-up