Do we still need them, should we still feed them, now they're sixty-four?
The Fuhrer of the world's worst human rights violator and second biggest exporter of state terror really is set on the destruction of Israel: which is the only possible outcome if he refuses to obey the law and enter into peaceful negotiations with its neighbours. If his regime wants it to be Israel v Rest of World, bring it on, Ben.
And how can Jerusalem have been "the capital of the Jewish state for 3,000 years" when the Jewish state was only invented sixty-four years ago? Maybe Israel's war-crazed junta needs so to spend less money (other countries' money, of course, mostly the USA's) on nuclear weapons, landmines, cluster bombs and other indiscriminate weapons banned by civilised nations, and a little more on education, beginning with maths and history.
I am definitely beginning to feel - as I never did when previous Israeli regimes at least pretended to be interested in peace with their neighbours - that the time has come to declare the experiment of setting up "Israel", and allowing its rulers to run it as a "Jewish state" (i.e a racist theocracy, rather than the democracy they pretended to favour) to have failed. Time to send Ben the way of Saddam (whose human rights record, vile though it was, was a hundred times batter than Nothingyahoo's). If any reader can suggest items which can be set to Israel's credit ledger (i.e. things of benefit to mankind which have happened because of the existence of Israel which would not have happened, or would happened later, had Israel never existed) I would love to hear about them. After all, the endless stream of wars, murders, genocide, torture, human rights abuses and the export of arms and terrorists around the world: these are all well-known. But has the existence of Israel facilitated a single positive thing?