History my friend!!!
FACTS!!!
Israeli's could never have realized Zion by their self.
The Western Christian powers forced it on the Arabs, Before 1879 there were only a hand full of Jews in Palestine.

It was 47 years ago, Sept. 17, 1948, when Jewish terrorists assassinated Count Folke Bernadotte of Sweden as he sought to bring peace to the Middle East. His three-car convoy had been stopped at a small improvised roadblock in Jewish-controlled West Jerusalem when two gunmen began shooting out the tires of the cars and a third gunman thrust a Schmeisser automatic pistol through the open back window of Bernadotte's Chrysler. The 54-year-old diplomat, sitting on the right in the back, was hit by six bullets and died instantly. A French officer sitting next to Bernadotte was killed accidentally.

The assassins were members of Lehi (Lohamei Herut Israel—Fighters for the Freedom of Israel), better known as the Stern Gang. Its three leaders had decided a week earlier to have Bernadotte killed because they believed he was partial to the Arabs. One of those leaders was Yitzhak Shamir, who in 1983 would become prime minister of Israel.1

Bernadotte had been chosen the United Nations mediator for Palestine four months earlier in what was the U.N.'s first serious attempt at peacemaking in the post-World War II world. As a hero of the war, when his mediation efforts on behalf of the International Red Cross saved 20,000 persons, including thousands of Jews, from Nazi concentration camps, Bernadotte seemed a natural choice for the post.2 The terms of the mediator's mandate were to "promote a peaceful adjustment of the future situation in Palestine" and to allow him to mediate beyond the terms of the Partition Plan.3

It had been only on Nov. 29, 1947 that the U.N. General Assembly had voted to partition Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. Yet, as had been widely predicted, that action had led to war. Fighting intensified after elements of five Arab armies moved into Palestine the day after Israel proclaimed its establishment on May 14, 1948. Bernadotte's first action had been to arrange a truce, which lasted from June 11 to July 9.

During the lull, Bernadotte had put forward his first proposal for solving the conflict. Instead, it was to seal his fate. Bernadotte's transgression, in the view of Jewish zealots, was to include in his June 28 proposal the suggestion that Jerusalem be placed under Jordanian rule, since all the area around the city was designated for the Arab state.4

The U.N. partition plan had declared Jerusalem an international city that was to be ruled by neither Arab nor Jew. But the Jewish terrorists, including Shamir and Menachem Begin, the leader of the largest terrorist group, Irgun Zvai Leumi—National Military Organization, also known by the Hebrew acronym "Etzel"—had rejected partition and claimed all of Palestine and Jordan for the Jewish state. These Jewish extremists were horrified at Bernadotte's suggestion.

A person of bias can spread propaganda and he can justify in his own mind everything that has happened in the last few days or years, but you cant escape the reality of history. Unless you begin destroying books and rewrite a lie.

By July Sternists were already threatening Bernadotte's assassination. New York Times columnist C.L. Sulzberger reported meeting with two Stern members on July 24, who stated: "We intend to kill Bernadotte and any other uniformed United Nations observers who come to Jerusalem." Asked why, "They replied that their organization was determined to seize all of Jerusalem for the state of Israel and would brook no interference by any national or international body."5

Since Bernadotte's first set of proposals had caused criticism from all parties, he spent the rest of the summer working up new proposals, which he finally finished on Sept. 16. Unknown publicly was the fact that in his new suggestions Bernadotte dropped his idea of turning over Jerusalem to Jordan and instead reverted to the partition plan's designation of it as an international city.6 Thus when Shamir's gunmen cut down Bernadotte the next day, they were unaware that he no longer was advocating giving Jerusalem to the Arabs.

The assassination brought an official condemnation from the Israeli government and promises of quick arrests. However, no one was ever brought to trial nor was there any nationwide outcry against the assassination.7 None of Lehi's leaders or the actual gunmen were ever caught, although they were early known to Israel's leaders.8

Israel's obvious reluctance to prosecute the assassins brought the first U.N. Security Council criticism of the new country. On Oct. 19, 1948, the council unanimously passed a resolution expressing its "concern" that Israel had "to date submitted no report to the Security Council or the Acting Mediator regarding the progress of the investigation into the assassination."9 An official inquiry by Sweden produced a report in 1950 that charged Israel's investigation had been so negligent that "doubt must exist as to whether the Israeli authorities really tried to bring the inquiry to a positive result." 10

Israel later admitted the laxity of its investigation and in 1950 paid the United Nations $54,628 in indemnity for Bernadotte's murder.11

The assassination and Israel's failure to punish the culprits struck a hard blow against the fledgling United Nations. The first secretary-general, Trygve Lie, said: "If the Great Powers accepted that this situation in the Middle East could best be settled by leaving the forces concerned to fight it out amongst themselves, it was quite clear that they would be tacitly admitting that the Security Council and the United Nations was a useless instrument in attempting to preserve peace."12 To Secretary of State George Marshall, Lie had written on May 15, 1948 that Egypt had warned him it was about to send troops beyond its borders and against the Jewish state in Palestine, saying: "My primary concern is for the future usefulness of the United Nations and its Security Council...I must do everything to prevent this, otherwise the Security Council will have...created a precedent for any nation to take aggressive action in direct contravention to the Charter of the United Nations." 13

But, as author Kati Marton has observed: "If the United Nations spoke with 'considerable authority' early that summer, by fall its voice was barely above a whisper in Palestine. Unwilling or unable to enforce its own decisions, the U.N. [United Nations Organization, as it was generally called in 1948] became for many Israelis in Ben- Gurion's memorable putdown, 'UNO, schmuno.'" She also observed: "So muted was the world body's reaction, so lacking in any real sanctions against the Jewish state for its failure to pursue the murderers of the United Nations' mediator, that for Israel, 'world opinion' became an empty phrase."14

Indeed, the ideal of the U.N. acting as the world's peacemaker and peacekeeper was badly wounded with Bernadotte's death in Jerusalem. After this display of weakness, other nations did not hesitate to thumb their noses at the U.N. when it suited their purposes. The Serbian successor to the former Yugoslavian government is only the latest in a long list of countries that have contributed to the weakening of the world body that celebrates its 50th anniversary this year.

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0995/9509083.htm

None of that supports your racist lie.

so you and your family gave all your land holdings back to the indians

fact is this country including land owned by your family was free reign for the indian when your family reinstates their land to that status then you can try to tell others how they should return land to those it may have been taken from

live what you preach

I am entitled to my opinion and rights to free speech spidey, by law and the rules of this site. As long as I dont make personal attacks against other posters such as you have just done.
My Posts are linked and they are accurate.
If you disagree with them that is your rite.
But in the same manner you must allow me mine.

What??

Does this have something to do with fair treatment of Palestinians?
My family never used terrorism to obtain land from anyone.
Did yours?

May I make a suggestion?

If you cant discuss this subject without bringing your emotions into it then dont.

Simply because the Moderators allow you to get away with racist propaganda doesn't make it right. The moderators should be ashamed of allowing racist propaganda from remaining in the forums.

Just so you and the "moderators" know, YOU CANNOT HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT A FACT. You can't! It makes no sense to look at this: "The newly created United Nations approved the UN Partition Plan (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181) on November 29, 1947, dividing the country into two states, one Arab and one Jewish. Jerusalem was to be designated an international city – a corpus separatum – administered by the UN to avoid conflict over its status.[51] The Jewish community accepted the plan,[52] but the Arab League and Arab Higher Committee rejected it.[53] On December 1, 1947 the Arab Higher Committee proclaimed a 3-day strike, and Arab bands began attacking Jewish targets. Civil war began with the Jews initially on the defensive but gradually moving into offence. The Palestinian-Arab economy collapsed and 250,000 Palestinian-Arabs fled or were expelled.[54]" and say "It's okay for Fanta to say that the Israelis rejected the plan, that's his opinion". You can't have opinions about objective facts. Israel accepted the plan regardless of what you or the moderators want to imagine.

your government ussed terror and murder to drive the indian away

this is the exact same thing you are saying isreal is doing

Take it up with them.
Tell them how unfair they are, but you have no rite to call me names.

Okay.
So I condemn them for it. They dont do it now so I have stopped it. (well someone did)

The Cherokee here are sole owners of their land. They coexist, they self govern themselves, their borders arent closed and ringed by Military or police, they are allowed to come and go freely (as well as goods), and they can even come into my city to enjoy the same things that I can.

For this they dont attack us and we dont attack them. We coexist in a peaceful and coherent atmosphere.

I have asked spidey.
Perhaps soon we will all know if this is acceptable behavior or not.

I find it interesting that by this definition of WMD, we actually found qualifying weapons in Iraq. If we use this definition, then Bush was right.

Fanta is NOT a racist.

Shhh,,
I appreciate it winx , but the problem has been corrected.

so if the indian put a bomb or fired a missle into the white house they would be justified

and yes they nearly stopped after the indian was nearly anilated to the point of extinction

and isreal is fighting back in self defense when the arab picks enough fights and isreal drives them to the point that the united states drove the indian then it will be ok

oh yeah and no the united states did not stop check out where mount rushmore is

Since what was originally about the difficulty of bringing EITHER SIDE before a court for war crimes has once again degenerated into a history lesson. Here's something about the creation of the State of Israel. Written by an Israeli historian.







GUESS WHAT?









It's not exactly Israeli friendly reading.


..............................................................


A Third Grade Textbook Has Lessons for All
by Rami G. Khouri Released: 28 Jul 2007


BEIRUT -- Here's a little event that may have big implications. The Israeli education ministry has approved a textbook for Arab third graders in Israel that for the first time describes the 1948 war that gave birth to the state of Israel as a “catastrophe” for the indigenous Palestinians and their society. The Palestinians have always referred to 1948 as their nakba, or catastrophic national shattering, dispersal, exile, occupation and disenfranchisement.

This may be the first ever tangible sign that the Jewish, Zionist Israeli establishment is prepared to move in the direction of acknowledging what happened to the Palestinians in 1948, which is a vital Palestinian demand for any serious peace-making effort to succeed. Israelis in turn would expect a reciprocal Palestinian acknowledgment of Israel's core narrative.

The new textbook states that “The Arabs call the war the Nakba, a war of catastrophe, loss and humiliation, and the Jews call it the Independence war.” It adds that, “some of the Palestinians fled and some were expelled following the War of Independence,” and that “many Arab-owned lands were confiscated.”

Unfortunately, the official textbook for Jewish Israelis in the same grade does not offer this Arab view, but sticks to the Israeli version of 1948 history as a moment of Jewish valor and national rebirth. Yet the new Arabic text may be significant if it reflects an Israeli capacity to become more historically honest, and sensitive to the legitimate political rights of their Palestinian foes.

The facts of the Palestinian Nakba in 1948 are quite well documented now by Israeli, Arab and foreign historians. Something like 750,000 Palestinians (about half the population) was driven out of or fled their Palestinian homes and lands in 1948, for various reasons. Those refugees now number over 4.5 million.

One of the biggest debates on 1948 is about motives, especially the Palestinian view that Zionist leaders and militias implemented a pre-planned ethnic cleansing campaign to systematically drive out the Palestinians in order to make room for a Jewish state. Israelis argue that Arab leaders told the Palestinians to leave so that Arab armies could attack the Jewish forces, or that Jewish attacks on Arabs were only in self-defense.

Much of this debate has been resolved by respected scholars. The most recent and complete treatment of this issue is a book by the Israeli historian and University of Haifa lecturer Ilan Pappe, entitled, appropriately, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2006, One World Publishers, Oxford, UK).

Using mostly Israeli official sources, he methodically recounts the entire process that started in the minds of pre-state Zionist leaders who knew they would have to forcibly expel the Palestinians to create a Jewish state in Palestine -- given that well over 90 percent of the land was Palestinian in the early 20th Century, and by 1948, the Jewish minority in Palestine owned just 5.8 percent of the land. He describes in detail the planning before 1948 -- including files on every Arab village and its inhabitants -- which would allow the Jewish militias in 1947-48 to start attacking, terrorizing and driving out Palestinians as soon as the British mandate ended.

Pappe goes through the details of Plan Dalet, “the blueprint for ethnic cleansing”, and shows how the Israeli forces worked systematically in every part of the land to attack, frighten, and expel the Palestinians, in order to secure the land for Jewish colonies and settlers. The historical details he provides are chilling, and worthy of serious discussion to understand exactly what happened in 1947-48 (because the Jewish Zionist attacks against Arabs started well before the May 1948 end of the British mandate; the first Jewish militia attacks to terrorize the Palestinians into fleeing were in December 1947, against the Palestinian villages of Deir Ayyub and Beit Affa in the central plain).

The main mission to drive out as many Palestinians as possible was formally approved by Jewish Zionist leaders on March 10, 1948. When it ended six months later, he says, some 800,000 Palestinians had been uprooted, 531 villages destroyed, and eleven urban neighborhoods in cities emptied of their inhabitants. Pappe concludes that the plan and its systematic implementation “was a clear-cut case of an ethnic cleansing operation, regarded under international law today as a crime against humanity.”

Many Israelis will challenge Pappe’s account. Such a process should ideally spark an honest, comprehensive analysis that could lead us to an accurate narrative of what happened in 1947-48 -- accurate for both sides, if it is to have meaning for either side.

An Israeli official textbook for Palestinian third graders that fleetingly acknowledges the Palestinian trauma of exile and occupation in 1948 is an intriguing sign of something that remains largely unclear. This something seems worth exploring, and reciprocating, if it indicates a capacity to move towards the elusive shared, accurate, truthful account of Israeli and Palestinian history that must anchor any progress towards a negotiated peace.




http://www.agenceglobal.com/article.asp?id=1329



Ilan Pappe in video dicussing the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Israeli 'Militia'.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4706543509678082810


Ilan Pappe: Israeli Jewish myths and the prospect of American war. An interview

http://www.labournet.net/world/0209/pappe1.html

Seems that 'ethnic cleansing' was planned before the 'birth' of Israel.

You will note in the video that the professor calls the Palestinians 'Indigenous people'!

.................................


Now getting back to the original idea of the post.

Both have broken Geneva Convention and both have committed war crimes. The question is: Will Either be Charged though?

All very fine to to be pro-Israelis or pro-Palestinian but all that doesn't hide the fact that both sides committed what are war crimes.

OOPs!!

A ridiculous arguement.

How about the months of "war crimes" from hamas in lebanon all those months? Are they also going to bring "war crimes" against terrorists too?


BTW...it was the muslims who attacked Israel. Some people need to get that into their brain. Israel was attacked & they pushed their enemies back. There is nothing confusing about that AT ALL! They needed to protect themselves FROM killers & people who breed on hate & terror.