In a dispute of ownership rights IF PRIOR owners got THEIR land STOLEN by a CONQUERING ARMY,and the PRIOR owners got THEIR rightful land back BY ANY MEANS YEARS LATERr--THAT IS JUSTICE (both poetically and MORALLY, not some hokey invented LAW that uses a WRONG timeline to start the issue of the claims of both disputing parties.. Now ROME stole the LAND from the Jews --THE ARABS ttok it from Byzantine contro lcenturies later and SQUATTED on the JEWS' rightful land (JEWS NEVER gave up their claim to it during ROMAN/BYZANTINE "OCCUPATION") for centuries UNTIL the JEWS got it back...THERE is no MORAL issue--this land belongs to its original owners--the JEWS. NOW the MORALISTS can charge that the anvcient ISRAELITES --the ancestors of the Jews-- TOOK the land by conquest from the Canaanites--the ORIGINAL FIRST OWNERS---trouble is the CANAANITES no longer exist/have no descendants to make a Re-claim....UNLESS you believe the ISRAELITES "invented" the whole biblical JOSHUA CONQUEST story as there is no archaelogical proof the Israelites ever conquested the Cannaites-but that means the JEWS are descended from segments of CANNANITE society who dropped their old religion in favour on monotheism and then invented the new religion and bilical stories...SO in that scenario today's JEWS ALWAYS WERE THE RIGHTFUL OWNERS under any MORAL and HISTORICAL standards...but if you believe the JOSHUA CONQUEST stories--then you can in agnst rail MORALLY against the Jewish theives of the land oroiginally -BUT surely not against the HISTORICAL claim of the Jews to the land which stand in PRIORITY to any other Conquistador theives claims --whether EURO (Roman) or ARAB (Islamic Conquest) or any one else -THEY STOLE IT LATER --ergo their case is LOST . YOU must get the timeline CORRECT for a starting point on the land CLAIM. GET it LEFTY PAL-LOVERS? So don't ply the bleeding heart MORAL card...there is none--EITHER everyone was a thief -but then the first theif if existing (as jews are) GETS THE LAND ....OR there never was a first thief (JEWS are Canaanite descendants ) and it its RIGHTFULLY their land from the getgo...EITHER way ARABS lose...This cannot be any clearer. Ant "LAW" that is invented to state otherwise is a FICTIVE DISTORTION of "JUSTICE" . NOW the case of the bleeding heart mORALISTS for the poor NATIVE AMERINDIANS whose land was sTOLEN by cONQUEST of the EUROS from them: MORALLY --why aren't you guys DEMANDING the INDIANS GET OWNERSHIP OF ALL THEIR LAND BACK--they still eXIST --AHA! YOU Can say they gave away claims by TREATIES...THE JEWS NEVER gave away the LAND by any treaties to conquerors... METHINKS the MORAL case is a PRO-PAL P.R. stunt.organized by fuzzy thinking peacenik lefties who are IGNORANT or BLIND asto the FACTS. NOW --this does not mean Israelis/JEWS are not sympathetic to the PAL "PLIGHT" --but IF the PALS admit they really DO NOT HAVE ANY "RIGHT" --to this land--THEN the sympathetic Jews can work out a solution ...mine is to RENT them the land (some of it--not ALL of it as they want) for 1 shekel a year --with some conditions ut on this by the JEWISH LANDLORDS....THEN they can live there in PEACE until GOD cmes down from heaven and decides it once and for all.. HOWEVER- we can't let the EUROS,or THE WORLD mor OBAMA play at being GOD....so ISRAEL?JEWS are the RIGHTFULK LANDLORDS and there should be no MORAL ,HISTORICAL ,NOR LEGAL (that is with JUSTICE) contrary objection to that. JUSTICE is not the equivaklent of "sympathty" on MORAL grounds..JUSTICE in property "rights" devolves to are the original owners OR their descendanrs still living--did they ever relinquish their land by sale or treaties-if not-THEY ARE THE OWNERS --historically,morally,and what should be LEGALLY. Kindergartners understand this-why notsupposedlt intelligent people on the LEFT who write columns in newspapers?
Alleged Jerusalem gay pride parade stabber brought before judge for remand hearing (Haaretz)
from the article: Pins in the Goldstone voodoo doll