That's not a fact. I did not reverse my original opinion on the matter.
Yes, you did. I provided the dialogue verbatim between us that clearly demonstrated your bias-fueled reversal of your opinion. Oddly, you are the only one here who does not understand that you have done this.
Wrong. Here is what the record shows
The record shows that I did not reverse my original opinion on the matter.
: If I went to town and had sex with a woman, but first told her that I was German when in fact I was American, and she soon learned that I was American, should I go to jail for that?
: I DON'T SEE WHY SOMEONE SHOULD GO TO JAIL FOR THAT.
: Neither do I. Such a thing would certainly indicate racism.
A court in Jerusalem has made international legal history by jailing Sabbar Kashur, a 30-year-old delivery man from East Jerusalem, for 18 months.
He was convicted of "rape by deception" following a criminal trial that has drawn criticism from across Israel.
The court heard accusations that Mr Kashur misled the woman, whose identity has not been disclosed, by introducing himself with the traditionally Jewish name during a chance encounter on a street in central Jerusalem in 2008.
After striking up a conversation, the two went into a top-floor room of a nearby office-block and engaged in a sexual encounter, after which Mr Kashur left before the woman had a chance to get dressed. It was only later that she discovered Mr Kashur's true racial background, lawyers said.
oralloy replied: SO IN OTHER WORDS THE ISRAELI PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING OUT AGAINST WHAT THEY SEE AS AN INJUSTICE. GOOD FOR THEM!
I've highlighted the segments that show the reversal of your position when a jew was involved.
I have no bias other than my preference for truth and reality.
Maybe, but certainly not when it comes to Israel. See above.
Indeed they are. Israel has the right to live in peace, and the Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and anyone else are all required to make peace with Israel in exchange for Israel handing over that land.
The Israeli regime did not own that land to begin with; it is an occupier.
VIOLATIONS OF U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
: Laws Violated: Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (which are legally binding on member-nations U.N. Charter, Article 25 (1945); a few sample resolutions - 54, 111, 233, 234, 236, 248, 250, 252, 256, 262, 267, 270, 280, 285, 298, 313, 316, 468, 476, etc.
ILLEGAL TO TAKE LAND BY FORCE & CLAIM SOVEREIGNTY
: Laws Violated: U.N. Charter, Article 2(4) (1945); Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations…, Principle 1 (1970).
Israeli Actions: In violation of the UN Partition Plan, Israel took an extra 15% of the land in 1948, and then, following the 1967 war, Israel confiscated East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.
In 1980, Israel passed the "Jerusalem Law", stating that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel", thereby formalising its annexation of East Jerusalem.
In response, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 478 in 1980, declaring the law "null and void". The illegal Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem violates several principles under international law, which outlines that an occupying power does not have sovereignty in the territory it occupies.
The international community officially regards East Jerusalem as occupied territory.
Moreover, no country in the world recognises Jerusalem as Israel's capital, with the exception of the US and Russia, the latter which announced its recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and East Jerusalem as "the capital of the future Palestinian state."
So, as you can now see, the Israeli regime is in violation of International Law, the Geneva Conventions, and other bodies.
I have no objection to following international law (which again requires everyone to make peace with Israel in exchange for Israel giving up that land).
I hope the above makes clear to you that occupied territory is not something that the occupier can use as a bargaining tool.
Israel can simply annex East Jerusalem (since the Palestinians are unwilling to make peace) and then it will no longer be occupied.
No. This is one of the laws that the Israeli regime made up that is in direct contravention of International Laws and Geneva Conventions, as I have shown you above.