Yeah, I thought you meant the longstanding dispute over Palestinian right of return (which was technically the case, but not directly.) The '48 wars specific explusions are hard to justify even given the practical challenges of distinguishing between Palestinian non/combatants and truly OCCUPYING captured territory with military garrisons. At best, expulsions could only be excused on a temporary basis due to the wars ongoing manpower and material demands; even then temporary internment would be more excusable, and still dubious. Falling back on my preferred occupation model (which happened to be contemporary,) the Western Allies did not expel German civilians when occupying Germany after the war; the Soviets did just that everywhere but Germany itself (imprisoning or summarily murdering all who refused expulsion) and that fit the UN definition of genocide.

Reconciling Islams love/hate relationship with Judaism baffles me on many levels. My Christian perspective (or bias) still sees it as a regression from salvation through grace to salvation through Mosaic law, which would make a kind of sense had such a religion not ALREADY existed for centuries, and a Semitic Mideastern one at that. I have not studied Islamic doctrine extensively, but it every time I see a tenet about banning pork or Friday evening worship I cannot help thinking, Tell me again why Muslims are anything but non-Jewish Jews.... The only difference that comes to mind is the Islamic ban on alcohol; the rest just seems like somebody got a copy of the Tanakh, then swapped each appearance of the names "Ishmael" and "Isaac."

"Non-partisan primeval monotheist" is not a bad description of Abraham, and perhaps a generous one: The narrative says he heard and obeyed Gods command to leave Sumer (or Babylon; same thing, and with the Assyrian interruption/assimilation I am never clear precisely when "Sumer" officially became "Babylon.) It does NOT say he worshipped God EXCLUSIVELY, and the Tanakh records many subsequent instances of Patriarchs and their immediate families practicing polytheism without censure: Explicit MONOTHEISM (and consequent condemnation of polytheism) only emerges with Moses. But through and after that time at least until the Christian era, I am unaware of ANY Islamic doctrine that does more than claim Jewish prophets and doctrine as its own. Though, again, I have not studied it exhaustively.

It depends on how absolutely we mean "represent." Obama represents the US wholly and globally, even though ~40% of Americans do not and never DID support him, and he advocates few of their positions while opposing many. Hamas sadly does dominate Gaza, and Gazans are self-evidently and just as sadly the only ones who can change that. The conflict between Hamas and Fatah is the best evidence for my earlier statement: Completely remove Israel from the equation and nothing changes. Fatah handles Hamas much as Israel once handled both, with the same degree and type of international support, while Hamas stops just short of declaring an Intifada against Fatah. The problem is the terrorists; remove THEM from the equation and the majority of Palestinians could and would be peaceful productive full citizens of whatever state they wished.

Fair points; "historically hostile" then (Jordan DID join TWO wars against Israel, however reluctantly.) But if Begin and Sadat can do it (with many full-body "nudges" from Carter, who REALLY deserved that Peace Prize) anyone can--IF willing. Even Arafat got there (at least publicly...) though it took the disaster of the 2000 summit, and most of Fatah eventually followed, only to have Hamas fill the resulting vacuum for people committed to "war at any price." Since virtually NO Arab nation but the Saudis have found a lasting solution to that problem, it is no surprise a proto-state like Palestine has not; the one proven solution is no more internationally accepted than the status quo.

Well, that whole "remains committed to Israels extinction" thing was kind of a deal breaker, same as it was before Fatah conceded that point. Bibi is as tactful and conciliatory as a ten-pound sledgehammer to the face, but in that case I can hardly blame him paraphrasing Bushs "you are either with us or the terrorists." Fatah cannot ally with Israel AND a group committed to its destruction, and Israel dare not support Fatah when that supports Hamas into the bargain. The enemy of ones enemy may not be ones friend, the but the enemy of ones friend should certainly be ones enemy.