Originally posted by Riwka
Ok - You mean we should build the security fence more quickly.
That is true.

But this topic is of last week's terror attacks against London - this is not linked the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Rebekka

No I don't.

I think you(country) should agree to go along with the guidelines set out by the International Community in 1947 (Resolution 181) or they should be invaded and the rule should be forced upon them.

The wall should be pulled down.

The Israeli war criminals should be brought to justice.

Can't have one rule for one (Iraq) and one for another (Israel), the World won't work that way.

Originally posted by Odium
I think you(country) should agree to go along with the guidelines set out by the International Community in 1947 (Resolution 181) or they should be invaded and the rule should be forced upon them.

America backs Israel,
America would defend Israel if she is invaded

Originally posted by infinite
America backs Israel,
America would defend Israel if she is invaded

America also backs alot of countries. If, for example, the British/Australians invaded Israel and restored the Israeli nation to a lawful setting, I doubt the Americans would retaliate against Britain and Australia.

Originally posted by Odium

I think you(country) should agree to go along with the guidelines set out by the International Community in 1947 (Resolution 181) or they should be invaded and the rule should be forced upon them.


Can't have one rule for one (Iraq) and one for another (Israel), the World won't work that way.

You are running offtopic..... but here is something old - which I think is new for you:


There's no comparison between Iraq's refusal to comply with UN security council resolutions and Israel's refusal to do so

WHY?


The UN distinguishes between two sorts of Security Council resolution. Those passed under


Chapter Six deal with the peaceful resolution of disputes and entitle the council to make non-binding recommendations.


Those under

Chapter Seven give the council broad powers to take action, including warlike action, to deal with “threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression”.


Resolutions under Chapter Seven, binding on all UN members, were used against Iraq.


None of the resolutions relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict comes under Chapter Seven

- and put it simply:

It is impossible to break non-binding recommendations


Rebekka



[edit on 13-7-2005 by Riwka]

Riwka, that is solely because the United States veto's anything even resembling resolutions that fall under the chapter 7 definition!

Originally posted by subz
Riwka, that is solely because the United States veto's anything even resembling resolutions that fall under the chapter 7 definition!

Well said

Completely true subz

Well .......

G'd bless America

But:

It was the Arab world which rejected 1947 resolution 181 and started the first war against Israel ......

BTW: ......Do You know "the history of Israel in a nutshell"?

They declared war.
We won.
Let's eat.


...ok - could we go back to the topic now?


Rebekka

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Riwka]

No they did not at all.

Irgun did not disarm, which broke U.N. Resolution 181.

They attacked.

Topic guys. The arguement that is flying around now isn't even in the right part of the world. Don't make me Mapquest how far it is between the UK and Israel.

Quote: "Topic guys. The argument that is flying around now isn't even in the right part of the world. Don't make me Mapquest how far it is between the UK and Israel."

That is NOT the Point! "GLOBAL JIHAD". "GLOBAL" War on Terror! Yes they ARE trying to turn London & New York & Washington into the INSANITY that is going on in "Israel/Palestine"! That IS the Point!

Scotland Yard just announced the Identities of the 4 "SUICIDE Bombers" (Drum Roll Please): (Dis-Enfranchised Moslem) British Citizens of Pakistani Decent! This is what is called a “Sleeper Cell” that was Activated! This is not a MOVIE kids – this is REALLY HAPPENING!

Lindsey Germail is 4th bomb suspect. (female name) 4th bomber was a Jamacian-born Briton

Lindsay I think. Definitely male, Afro Caribbean. Had been renting the house in Aylesbury for 3 months with his female partner

(BBC Radio)

Originally posted by CTID56092
Lindsay I think. Definitely male, Afro Caribbean. Had been renting the house in Aylesbury for 3 months with his female partner

(BBC Radio)

Thanks for that

ill check the news stations in a bit

im glad a date has been put on this thread,

i got chills everytime i read the title

Anyone know if he was a Muslim as well?

I've yet to hear anything on that.

It'll indeed be a slap in the fact to a lot of people if he isn't.

i think he is a muslim, im not sure....

the details of him are unknown to the media, i believe

I'm really shocked...

That guy, Lindsey Germaine (which should/would be Germaine) first, from my understanding lives where I used to and where my folks still have a house, Aylesbury. I will look into it and find out if he visited the Mosque in that area.

I am really shocked by that.