Originally Posted by VDKMS:
The majority of the Egyptians want to abide by the accords with Israel.

I doubt it. The parliament election result says another thing.

The motherland of the Palestinians doesn't excist anymore.

It means that they had a motherland but somebody occupied it.

They lived for centuries in the Ottoman Empire and never asked for their own motherland.

They didn't need to ask their motherland because they were living there.

Egypt is at a crossroad. They either go the Islamic way (anti Israel) or the secular way (upholding the accords with Israel). With the former they will lose a lot of money (tourists will stay away, the flow of US billions of $ will stop and the army and air force will have to scramble to get their US products operational - and the Generals are very well aware of that), with the latter they will prosper.

Don't judge about ME people just with dollar, euro, .... .As I living with them and I know them, they do something that seem strange for west.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

It's not all about right or wrong, because those things change with time (history!). When the British invaded Australia it was right at that time just as the Belgians were doing in the Congo was right at that time. Nowadays those two things are looked at as wrong.

You are confusing the legal and moral values, the legality may change, morality does not. No,.. it was just as wrong at that time, but it was regarded as acceptable, and there were no international conventions forbidding it.

Originally Posted by senojekips

You are confusing the legal and moral values, the legality may change, morality does not. No,.. it was just as wrong at that time, but it was regarded as acceptable, and there were no international conventions forbidding it.

Morality is based off the society who creates it, it's all a piece of perception, hence why there are so many different views from around the globe on this topic.

You have dozens of mindset's all vying for different notions of what is right or wrong or best for the region.

Originally Posted by Yossarian

Morality is based off the society who creates it, it's all a piece of perception, hence why there are so many different views from around the globe on this topic.

Like VD, you are confusing acceptability (legality) with morality.

I dunno who said it, but it is a recognised principle relating to Ethics. "Legality is temporal whereas morality is eternal", or words to that effect.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Like VD, you are confusing acceptability (legality) with morality.

I dunno who said it, but it is a recognised principle relating to Ethics. "Legality is temporal whereas morality is eternal", or words to that effect.

Lest we forget, that even terms of legality are like all human ideas, maluable to the situation.

Originally Posted by Yossarian

Lest we forget, that even terms of legality are like all human ideas, maluable to the situation.

Exactly, hence the fact that the wealthy can buy legality. The Legality of an action is determined by one's power (wealth).

This is not so with morality.

Originally Posted by hamidreza

I doubt it. The parliament election result says another thing.

Parliament elections were not about accords with Israel. A poll put a minor majority in favor of the accords with Israel.

It means that they had a motherland but somebody occupied it.

The "motherland" have had different names, one of them was The Kingdom of Israel, none was Palestine. Others were Seleucid Empire, Roman Empire, Palmyrene Empire and many others.

They didn't need to ask their motherland because they were living there.

They lived there but didn't rule and didn't mind. Jews did.

Don't judge about ME people just with dollar, euro, .... .As I living with them and I know them, they do something that seem strange for west.

When ME people come to us we respect their culture, when we go to the ME they do not respect our culture. When ME people come to us they are allowed to build houses of worship when our people go to the ME they are not allowed to do that. Muslims are allowed to build mosques in Israel, jews are not allowed to build synagogues in muslim countries.
Muslims are commanded to pray five times each day, ever wondered why?

Originally Posted by VDKMS

The "motherland" have had different names, one of them was The Kingdom of Israel, none was Palestine. Others were Seleucid Empire, Roman Empire, Palmyrene Empire and many others.

It was certaily the motherland of the Palestinians, but none of the others they, like the Jews, were merely temporary occupiers who came and went.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

They lived there but didn't rule and didn't mind. Jews did.

Which means absolutely nothing. The Ottomans and others also ruled it , and similarly have no claim or connection to the land whatsoever.

Originally Posted by senojekips

It was certaily the motherland of the Palestinians, but none of the others they, like the Jews, were merely temporary occupiers who came and went.

Surely this is only true if you accept the bibles claim of the exodus?

Personally I do not accept that and believe that Judaism is indigenous to the area however it was one of many religions in region as part of the Canaanite empire.

Which is why I suspect that if you were to follow the DNA path of Jews with traceable ancestry in the region back as far as possible you will find common links with Palestinians who can do the same in other words at their root they are the same people following different religions.

However this does not justify or excuse the "foreign" Jewish invasion of the region post 1800s and most recently since WW2, in my opinion they are little more than colonists.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Surely this is only true if you accept the bibles claim of the exodus?

Or the DNA evidence that most Ashkenazi Jews were Khazars who came from Asia Minor, Whatever, they were certainly not indigenous to the area.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Personally I do not accept that and believe that Judaism is indigenous to the area however it was one of many religions in region as part of the Canaanite empire.

Which is why I suspect that if you were to follow the DNA path of Jews with traceable ancestry in the region back as far as possible you will find common links with Palestinians who can do the same in other words at their root they are the same people following different religions.

If you ask a dozen Rabbinical scholars how one determines who is a Jew and who is not, you will get a hundred different answers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convers...ew.3F.22_issue

One thing that is coming out, is that Jews per se, are not who they thought they were. The Ashkenazim are predominantly Khazar proselytes and similarly the Sephardim are North African Bedouin proselytes. The funny thing being that a great number of these people do not recognise proselytes as being of the true faith.

Originally Posted by MontyB

However this does not justify or excuse the "foreign" Jewish invasion of the region post 1800s and most recently since WW2, in my opinion they are little more than colonists.