pbel,
et al,
I think you are confused.
(COMMENT)
I neither defend or apologize for, the Israeli. They can do that for themselves. However, I do appose Jihadism and Fedayeen action that is tantamount to terrorism.
There are three sets of simultaneous arguments presented by the Arab-Palestinian.
- The first has to do with the establishment of the Palestinian State, which the Palestinian claims by Covenant and Charter to be all of the territory formerly under British Mandate; less the Hashemite Kingdom.
- The second is the deals with settlement establishment inside the Armistice Lines within the Occupied Territories; an Article 49 GCIV and Article 8, Para 2b RS-ICC set of issues.
- Private Property land conversions relative to claims under the right of return, and settlement, reparations, or restitution thereto.
You did not specify and I did not breakout the discussion. I merely lumped them all into one set of disputes that need a negotiated outcome. Remembering, that quoted the axiom that "Nothing can justify terrorism ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts."
It should be noted at this point, that I have, on many - many - occasions, argued (especially with our friend P F Tinmore) that property rights and sovereignty are mutually exclusive. I have never argued that some Arab-Palestinians might have some legitimate claim to land holdings. However, I also advocated for those claims to be settled in litigation, and not armed conflict.
However, the principle challenge you made was the right to spread Jihadist teaching to children.
As a subset of Jihadist and Fedayeen action is the indoctrinate children. And I am critically opposed to the resistance principle that Article 15 curriculum for children should be considered anything but "child abuse." If that makes me "not a neutral observer," then so be it.
Most Respectfully,
R