You conveniently omit the fact that the Hebrews got their title for the land by conquering someone else who was then its owner. The Romans just were the next link in the chain of ownership. You got it by conquest; you lost it the same way. Why is the title of one conqueror any more valid than that of any other conqueror?
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Iraqi police fire tear gas as thousands of protests burst into Green Zone, storm Parliament (AP)
from the article: Police probing rightist MK over fake West Bank outpost deal
Not your grandfather's war: What Israel's next military conflict will look like
The outgoing head of the IDF's computers and communications branch outlines the army's approach to cyber warfare and dealing with Hamas and Hezbollah in future confrontations.09:12 30.04.16 | 4 comments