Forum Topic

A survey: Your views on the right of Israel to exist free from the fear of attack by Hamas

Y/N1) Israel is a democratic state. (As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the other 192 member states of the United Nations. The State of Israel was formally established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, and was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state on 11 May 1949). 2) As such it has the right to exist and defend itself from attack by those who do not recognise this UN resolution.3) Hamas is a terrorist organisation that is proscribed by the UK, supported by the theocratic dictatorship of Iran and has a Charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel and its Jewish citizens.4) Hamas has NO democratic mandate to rule Gaza or carry out attacks in that territory's name.5) In October 2023 Hamas invaded Israel.6) Hamas still holds women, children and the elderly as hostages from that attack as well as corpses of those it murdered.7) Hamas is using these hostages as bargaining chips as Israel moves in to obliterate both the organisation and whoever remains of its leadership. Please participate Messrs Ainsworth, Carter, Brigo and MSs Bond, Holliday and Carter.

John Hawkes ● 518d36 Comments

Y

Lucille Grant ● 518d

Yes from me.John you can ask the obvious question but the likelihood of getting an answer from the forum members you ask is remote.

Robert Wheeler ● 518d

Mr Hawkes, you have posed what in polling terms is described as a “closed question”. This is a waste of time.I suggest that you have completely ignored the rights of the Palestinian people. Nick

Nicholas Evans ● 518d

My experience, too, is that contributors to the Forum who are critical of Israel are generally reluctant to answer questions of this kind - either because they don’t have an answer, or because they do but are afraid to reveal it for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism.Everyone would like the bloodshed and destruction to stop. Israel has accepted the American proposal for a 60 day ceasefire but Hamas have rejected it because they want Israel to call a permanent halt to their campaign and withdraw from Gaza. So in addition to John’s questions, my question would be: Do you think that Israel should accept Hamas’s terms even if this means leaving Hamas in control of Gaza?Any answers?

Steven Rose ● 518d

I don't think anyone on the forum is 'completely ignoring the rights of the Palestinian people', not even Mr Hawkes. You could pose an equally closed question as to that just as he has done here with regard to Israel and its right to exist.

Lucille Grant ● 518d

Havnt avoided ths various threads on this subject it seems to me if some of the greatest political brains of the last century have failed to find a solution it's highly unlikely that a small insignificant forum in Putney is will come up with the answers.The circular arguments on this forum simply prove that any solution from those actually involved in the issue are extremely difficult to find.

Andy Pike ● 518d

Exactly, Andy.

Lucille Grant ● 518d

Mr Evans'I suggest that you have completely ignored the rights of the Palestinian people'.Then let me add a further question - Y/N ?8) Palestinians have a right to live in and govern Gaza and the West Bank as their homeland providing these territories are not used as bases for terrorist organisations intent on the annihilation of Israel and its Jewish citizens.NOTE - This was Israel's position, as detailed below, but which Hamas is and always has been, intent on wrecking because of its racist and genocidal attitude towards the Jews.'In 2005, Israel disengaged from the Gaza Strip by dismantling all 21 Israeli settlements there. As part of this process, four Israeli settlements in the West Bank were dismantled as well. The disengagement was executed unilaterally: Israeli authorities did not coordinate with the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) to facilitate an orderly transfer of administrative power following the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from the Gaza Strip.Proposed by Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon in 2003 and adopted by the Cabinet in 2004, the strategy was officially approved by the Knesset as the Disengagement Plan Implementation Law in June 2004. A deadline was issued for August 15, 2005, after which the IDF began evicting all Israeli settlers who were refusing to accept government compensation packages in exchange for voluntarily vacating their homes in the Gaza Strip. By September 12, all Israeli residential buildings in the territory had been demolished and the 8,000+ Israeli settlers who inhabited them had been removed. The dismantlement of the four West Bank settlements was completed ten days later'.

John Hawkes ● 517d

Mr Rose'contributors to the Forum who are critical of Israel are generally reluctant to answer questions of this kind - either because they don’t have an answer, or because they do but are afraid to reveal it for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism'.I am not sure how declaring the right of Israel to exist, even if they are critical of its political actions, and deploring the actions of a proscribed terrorist group Hamas  that declares an aim of annihilating Israel and its Jewish citizens would lead them to be accused of anti-Semitism. Unless of course they are unhappy to reveal where they appear on the anti-Israel spectrum -'anti-Zionist:anti-Israeli:anti-Jewish Israeli citizen: anti-semite'

John Hawkes ● 517d

Mr Hawkes. An interesting question, particularly as from what Mr Google tells me there is no rigorous definition of "a democracy". However, this might be a good description (lifted from the interwebs): "Modern democracy typically includes free and fair elections, separation of powers, and checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power by any single entity." Although I believe there's been a dispute concerning attempts at changing the balance of power between the judiciary and government in Israel, I doubt that would change its status, and, frankly, the UK (with a hereditary head of state) and the US (currently many challenges to executive orders in the judiciary) have there own limits or challenges to democracy; although, I think they're still considered democracies? Hence, on that basis, 'Y'es, Israel is a democracy. Of course, that doesn't mean democracies always act correctly or legally. Many would say that Blair's and parliament's ratification of his support of Bush's war in Iraq, and the US's activities in Vietnam were dubious, if not necessarily illegal.

Michael Ixer ● 517d

Mr Pike' any solution from those actually involved in the issue are extremely difficult to find'.The issues are simple.1) Israel believes it has the right to exist peacefully in the region as does the UN.2) Israel acknowledged however reluctantly the right of Palestinians to reside in and govern Gaza and the West Bank.3) Hamas has a declared intention of annihilating Israel and its Jewish citizens.4) Israel reserves the right to defend itself against attacks.5) Israel demands recognition of its right to exist from Hamas and other militant Palestinian and Arab groups or countries.It seems obvious to me that by Palestinians acknowledging points 1), 4) and 5) and rescinding point 3) then the problem would be solved by those involved.

John Hawkes ● 517d

Mr Ixer'Y'es, Israel is a democracy'.Thank you for your judicious review of this and your considered conclusion.All be it you are just stating the ble*ding obvious as no sensible person doubted the fact.What is your conclusion regarding Gaza, considered by many to be a failed rogue state run by unelected psychopathic Palestinian terrorists ?As regards 'Blair's and parliament's ratification of his support of Bush's war in Iraq', how can this be considered illegal when our sovereign Parliament, as you make clear, ratified it ?

John Hawkes ● 517d

For those that suspect the BBC is wholly supportive of Palestine and anti-pathetic to Israel this makes an interesting read.Look at the mistakes it has made or untruths it has published."When will the BBC admit it has an Israel problem"?https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-will-the-bbc-admit-it-has-an-israel-problem/It also begs the question as to why the BBC has an Arabic Service run by Arabs who are quite naturally biased.'BBC Arabic made more than 80 corrections in the first five months of the war – averaging one every other day, including calling Hamas ‘the resistance’ and describing Israeli civilians as combatants. This is not occasional bias. It is systemic rot'.Does it have a BBC Israeli service run by Jews ?

John Hawkes ● 517d

I agree with Andy that the Israel-Palestine situation is virtually impossible to resolve, at least not to the satisfaction of both sides. The problem is that Zionism and Arab nationalism, having lain dormant for centuries, emerged at the same time around the beginning of the last century, with the result that both groups lay claim to the same piece of land. The situation was made worse by the Holocaust, which made the creation of a homeland where Jews would be free from persecution a necessity.It is also true that our debates on the Forum are not going to change the situation on the ground. It is unlikely that Hamas, even assuming they can get internet coverage in their tunnels, any more than Netanyahu's cabinet log on to Putney Forum.That does not mean that it is pointless to discuss the conflict. But it is no good if only our transmitters are working with the receivers disconnected. People have to be prepared to listen to arguments from the other side and if necessary to answer questions.I don't agree with Nicholas' view that John Hawkes' questions are a 'waste of time' because they 'exclude the rights of the Palestinian people'. A question cannot include or exclude anybody's rights. If Nicholas doesn't feel that a simple yes or no to the questions is adequate, there is nothing to stop him posting a more nuanced answer.I can understand why people, seeing the dreadful situation in Gaza, criticise Israel. But I am disappointed that those same critics are reluctant to answer important questions, such as, 'Do you support Israel's right to eliminate the threat from Hamas, and if you disagree with their campaign in Gaza, how do you suggest they eliminate the threat?'I think there are two reasons for a reluctance to answer questions of this kind. One is that some people have somewhat unthinkingly adopted a pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli position and don't actually have an answer. When pressed, they come out with statements like, 'Of course I disapprove of the atrocity of October 7, but that doesn't give Israel the right to kill so many innocent people etc.' But there are others who don't actually agree with Israel's right to exist but are afraid to speak out for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism.   

Steven Rose ● 517d

https://theconversation.com/israel-at-75-how-inept-british-intelligence-failed-to-contain-jewish-independence-groups-205326

Philippa Bond ● 516d

Philippa is an excellent example of someone who won't answer any of the questions directly, in particular the one which asks whether Israel has a right to exist, but prefers instead to post a link. The phrase 'willing to wound but afraid to strike' comes to mind.

Steven Rose ● 516d

Ms Bond'https://theconversation.com/israel-at-75-how-inept-british-intelligence-failed-to-contain-jewish-independence-groups-205326.I assume you have read this.Would you provide the rest of us with a 2/3 sentence precis so that we have more time to get on with our lives ?

John Hawkes ● 516d

Mr Rose'Philippa is an excellent example of someone who won't answer any of the questions directly, in particular the one which asks whether Israel has a right to exist, but prefers instead to post a link. The phrase 'willing to wound but afraid to strike' comes to mind.'Ms Bond fits the description I gave of Mr Brigo.The irritating kid at the fringes of a playground fight who won't actually actually join in but stands and makes provoking comments of little relevance to keep stirring the pot.

John Hawkes ● 516d

I have read the  article, which appears to claim that Britain was responsible in some way for the creation of Israel. In fact Britain restricted the immigration of Jews to Palestine during the war and abstained when the UN voted in 1947 to create a Jewish homeland.

Steven Rose ● 516d

Mr RoseYou write ' I can understand why people, seeing the dreadful situation in Gaza, criticise Israel. But I am disappointed that those same critics are reluctant to answer important questions, such as, 'Do you support Israel's right to eliminate the threat from Hamas, and if you disagree with their campaign in Gaza, how do you suggest they eliminate the threat?'I believe you are too generous in your acceptance of understanding why some people 'seeing the dreadful situation in Gaza, criticise Israel'.Most, be they at the UN or in leafy West Putney, are not criticising Israel for the often extreme measures it has had to take following the attack by Hamas in October 2023.Their appearing to support the Palestinians simply for its supposed defensive stance against unwarranted attack by Israel, (even as they attempt to annihilate Israel and its Jewish citizens), and then further criticising Israel for its genuine defensive actions against a proven invasion, is just gaslighting cover for their anti-Israel beliefs.'Do you support Israel's right to eliminate the threat from Hamas, and if you disagree with their campaign in Gaza, how do you suggest they eliminate the threat?'The answer to the first question is obviously 'NO'.And as they do not see Hamas' campaign in Gaza as a threat, they do not see a need to eliminate it.Just as I am sure in the UK in WWII many did not see Nazi Germany as a threat, or if they did assumed Chamberlainite negotiation was all that was necessary to avert it rather than Churchillian fighting resistance.I think Israel is right to adopt the the latter approach as fascist, racist opponents such as Hamas will not be appeased by talk as annihilation of their enemy is their only goal.'I think there are two reasons for a reluctance to answer questions of this kind. One is that some people have somewhat unthinkingly adopted a pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli position and don't actually have an answer. When pressed, they come out with statements like, 'Of course I disapprove of the atrocity of October 7, but that doesn't give Israel the right to kill so many innocent people etc.' But there are others who don't actually agree with Israel's right to exist but are afraid to speak out for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism'.Your description of both groups of people is probably correct. But with all of the anti-Israel commentators on this site I detect no fear of them being wary of the accusation of anti-semitism.And for some the description could well be right.

John Hawkes ● 516d

Mr Rose''I think there are two reasons for a reluctance to answer questions of this kind. One is that some people have somewhat unthinkingly adopted a pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli position and don't actually have an answer. When pressed, they come out with statements like, 'Of course I disapprove of the atrocity of October 7, but that doesn't give Israel the right to kill so many innocent people etc.' But there are others who don't actually agree with Israel's right to exist but are afraid to speak out for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism''.It has just occurred to me that the unwavering support for Palestinians and hatred of Israel amongst the West Putney set and others is actually a expression of imperialist guilt yet also patronising racial prejudice.They believe that these brown people are somewhat under developed and childlike because of previous treatment by whites and who, as part of the white man's burden, need mollycoddling and the excusing of their behaviour.They secretly think that "they do not know any better" and are incapable of any other form of living than fighting.Hence unlike the Israelis they are not capable of developing  a vibrant and economically thriving society and for such their white 'protectors' have to find an excuse.And this is because they have been treated so badly by white  colonialists in the past.The same excuse as is often used to explain the chaos and underdevelopment in Africa.

John Hawkes ● 515d

Not just the BBC finding it difficult to handle a balanced commentary on the Middle East conflict rather than just slagging off Israel.Read what Morgan said about the conflict and his response to a Jewish 'guest' on his TV show and then what he previously wrote about alleged 'atrocities' by British troops in Iraq.The guest's response is apt and true."Why can’t Piers Morgan handle the truth about Israel"?https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-cant-piers-morgan-handle-the-truth-about-israel/"Defence of fake images in pursuit of a “good story” is, of course, old ground for Morgan. He was dismissed from his role as editor of the Daily Mirror in 2004, following the publication of photographs that purportedly showed British soldiers abusing Iraqi detainees in Abu Ghraib. The images were later determined to be staged and not taken in Iraq. Morgan stood by their publication and refused to issue an apology on the basis there was no firm evidence that they were fake, though the newspaper did, acknowledging that it had been the victim of a “calculated and malicious hoax” and expressing deep regret for the reputational damage caused to the British Army. Morgan’s defence of his decision to publish those fake pictures stemmed from his opposition to the Iraq war in a disgraceful example of “the ends justify the means”.

John Hawkes ● 515d

At last the grown ups are beginning to show a sense of reality regarding the Middle East conflict.Well done Starmer.From today's Guardian.'A planned conference in New York this month that supporters of Palestine had hoped would push western governments to recognise a Palestinian state has weakened its ambition and will instead hope to agree on steps towards recognition, diplomats have said.The change to the aims of the conference, due to be held between 17 and 20 June, marks a retreat from an earlier vision that it would mark a joint declaration of recognition of Palestine as a state by a large group of countries, including permanent UN security council members France and the UK.Emmanuel Macron, the French president and a co-sponsor of the three-day conference with Saudi Arabia event, has declared recognition of Palestine as “a moral duty and political requirement”, but French officials briefing their Israeli counterparts this week reassured them the conference will not be the moment for recognition.That is now seen as a prize that will emerge from other measures, including a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the release of Israeli hostages, reform of the Palestinian Authority, economic reconstruction and a definitive end to Hamas’s rule in Gaza'.I fear this move by Macron that will not go down well in West Putney nor with the masked, balaclavered, Kalashnikov toting Palestinian bully boys.I wonder how the latter group will react to the impositions and obligations placed upon them ?

John Hawkes ● 514d

Your echo chamber must be deafening you.

Philippa Bond ● 514d

Ms Bond'Your echo chamber must be deafening you'.And you also as you seem to read my posts.It's simply a pity you don't have the ability to counter them with rational argument and rely on childish and ineffective attempts at put-downs.

John Hawkes ● 514d

As must yours.

Lucille Grant ● 514d

That was in response to Philippa btw.

Lucille Grant ● 514d

Posted by: John HawkesDate/Time: 03/06/25 14:21:00Y/N1) Israel is a democratic state.(As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the other 192 member states of the United Nations. The State of Israel was formally established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, and was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state on 11 May 1949).2) As such it has the right to exist and defend itself from attack by those who do not recognise this UN resolution.3) Hamas is a terrorist organisation that is proscribed by the UK, supported by the theocratic dictatorship of Iran and has a Charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel and its Jewish citizens.4) Hamas has NO democratic mandate to rule Gaza or carry out attacks in that territory's name.5) In October 2023 Hamas invaded Israel.6) Hamas still holds women, children and the elderly as hostages from that attack as well as corpses of those it murdered.7) Hamas is using these hostages as bargaining chips as Israel moves in to obliterate both the organisation and whoever remains of its leadership.Please participate Messrs Ainsworth, Carter, Brigo and MSs Bond, Holliday and Carter.Unsurprisingly still waiting for a response from those named below

John Hawkes ● 513d

I would encourage everyone especially those of the anti-Israel anti-Jewish tendency to watch 'Simon Schama: The Road to Auschwitz' on BBC iPlayer in order to understand why Israel is fearful that what happened in WWII could well happen again and  to put into perspective why its currently acts as it does.And also read - "Anti-Semitism is an early-warning siren for a sickness in society"'Douglas Murray on the scapegoating of Israel, the fascism of Hamas and the moral disintegration of the West'.https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/06/08/anti-semitism-is-an-early-warning-siren-for-a-sickness-in-society/

John Hawkes ● 512d

Still waiting for a response !"Posted by: John HawkesDate/Time: 03/06/25 14:21:00Y/N1) Israel is a democratic state.(As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the other 192 member states of the United Nations. The State of Israel was formally established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, and was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state on 11 May 1949).2) As such it has the right to exist and defend itself from attack by those who do not recognise this UN resolution.3) Hamas is a terrorist organisation that is proscribed by the UK, supported by the theocratic dictatorship of Iran and has a Charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel and its Jewish citizens.4) Hamas has NO democratic mandate to rule Gaza or carry out attacks in that territory's name.5) In October 2023 Hamas invaded Israel.6) Hamas still holds women, children and the elderly as hostages from that attack as well as corpses of those it murdered.7) Hamas is using these hostages as bargaining chips as Israel moves in to obliterate both the organisation and whoever remains of its leadership.Please participate Messrs Ainsworth, Carter, Brigo and MSs Bond, Holliday and Carter".

John Hawkes ● 511d

Re point 4) below."Is Hamas’s grip on Gaza weakening?"https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/hamas-is-losing-its-monopoly-on-gaza/'The emergence of Yasser Abu Shabab and his ‘Popular Forces’ militia in eastern Rafah has become an unexpected fault line in the shifting landscape of Gaza. In recent days, a flurry of claims, counterclaims, and raw facts has begun to seep through the fog of war. Cracks are appearing in Hamas’s once unchallenged grip, and new and uncertain dynamics are taking shape. Where these currents will lead is unclear'.What one might have expected.There is no 'Palestinian' collective and unified political strategy or plan.How could there be when elections are never allowed to take place.Just a series of Islamist tribal factions fighting for power and domination.Anti-Israelism is a cover behind which all hide.------------------------------------------------------------------Posted by: John HawkesDate/Time: 03/06/25 14:21:00Y/N1) Israel is a democratic state.(As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the other 192 member states of the United Nations. The State of Israel was formally established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, and was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state on 11 May 1949).2) As such it has the right to exist and defend itself from attack by those who do not recognise this UN resolution.3) Hamas is a terrorist organisation that is proscribed by the UK, supported by the theocratic dictatorship of Iran and has a Charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel and its Jewish citizens.4) Hamas has NO democratic mandate to rule Gaza or carry out attacks in that territory's name.5) In October 2023 Hamas invaded Israel.6) Hamas still holds women, children and the elderly as hostages from that attack as well as corpses of those it murdered.7) Hamas is using these hostages as bargaining chips as Israel moves in to obliterate both the organisation and whoever remains of its leadership.Please participate Messrs Ainsworth, Carter, Brigo and MSs Bond, Holliday and Carter.-----------------------------------------------------------

John Hawkes ● 511d

https://www.btselem.org/topic/freedom_of_movementHere's the start:"Restricting movement is one of the main tools that Israel employs to enforce its regime of occupation over the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories. Israel restricts the movement of Palestinians within the Occupied Territories, between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, into Israel, and abroad. Only Palestinians are restricted in this manner, while settlers and other civilians – Israeli and foreign – are free to travel.p"Gaza has often been referred to as a huge open prison.

Philippa Bond ● 511d

https://www.btselem.org/publications/202210_not_a_vibrant_democracy_this_is_apartheidI think you should check out your Democracy claim (BTW there are many different types of democracy) just for a start.Even settlers who are illegally living in the occupied Palestinian lands are allowed to vote frlom there when Palestinians don't have the same rights."Full political rights: for Jews only, in the entire area""Lesser political rights, if any: for Palestinians only, in the entire area"

Philippa Bond ● 511d

Ms Bond'Even settlers who are illegally living in the occupied Palestinian lands are allowed to vote frlom there when Palestinians don't have the same rights."Full political rights: for Jews only, in the entire area""Lesser political rights, if any: for Palestinians only, in the entire area"Have you forgotten that about 25% of Israeli citizens are Palestinians and they have members in the Knesset ?How come this is regarded as apartheid ?

John Hawkes ● 511d

Ms Bond'Gaza has often been referred to as a huge open prison.'By you I know, but by whom else ?Gaza was once part of Israel in the sense that it came under Israeli control during the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israeli forces captured the territory from Egypt after being invaded by it.1) Before that, Gaza was under British colonial rule and later occupied by Egypt.2) In 2005, Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza, leaving it to be governed by the Palestinian Authority.3) Thus, while Gaza is not currently part of Israel, it has a complex history of control and occupation by Israel.4) After Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005, there was a period of turmoil followed by Hamas governance beginning in 2007.5) It was in January 2006 that the Palestinian territories held what turned out to be their last parliamentary elections. Hamas won a bare plurality of votes (44 percent to the more moderate Fatah party’s 41 percent) but, given the electoral system, a strong majority of seats (74 to 45). Neither party was keen on sharing power. Fighting broke out between the two. When a unity government was finally formed in June 2007, Hamas broke the deal, started murdering Fatah members, and, in the end, took total control of the Gaza Strip. Those who weren’t killed fled to the West Bank, and the territories have remained split ever since.6) 2006 was the last free election.Perhaps Gaza would be ruled by the Palestinians if Hamas put governance and societal development ahead of its declared objective to annihilate Israel and kill all Jews.'Israel restricts the movement of Palestinians within the Occupied Territories, between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, into Israel, and abroad'.Because of the stated attitudes and intentions of some Palestinians towards Israel this is not wholly unreasonable.None the less, there seem to be plenty of Palestinians in London if the turn out for their marches is any indicator

John Hawkes ● 511d

The US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has suggested "Muslim countries" should give up some of their land to create a future Palestinian state.In an interview with the BBC, Huckabee said "Muslim countries have 644 times the amount of land that are controlled by Israel"."So maybe, if there is such a desire for the Palestinian state, there would be someone who would say, we'd like to host it," he said.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd628z2nwyvoNot so outlandish a proposal.Note that prior to partition Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity.'When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose representatives for the Paris (post WWI) Peace Conference they adopted the following resolution - "We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds"Randall Price, 'Fast facts on the Middle East conflict'.This position was endorsed at the UN by the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations in 1947 and a few years later by Ahmed Shuqeiri later chairman of the PLO at the Security Council.

John Hawkes ● 510d