I've already found two holes in prosecution's argument, however.

"My client, the Children of Israel, entered into this covenant with the Defendant in good faith. They were assured, in writing, that in exchange for their exclusive worship of Him, they would be designated His chosen people and, as such, would enjoy His divine protection and guidance for eternity," said Marvin Sachs, the Manhattan attorney bringing the suit on behalf of the Israelites. "Yet, practically from the moment this covenant was signed, the Defendant has exhibited a blatant and willful disregard for its terms."

I submit the Bible as evidence that Israel has often breached the Covenant and that its continued existance is by the grace of God.

Furthermore, it states that the plaintiff will become more numerous than the dust thereof. This has not occurred, either, assuming, of course, that the world contains more than 14 million particles of dust."

Ah, but that's not the Israelites, but the descendents of Abraham, including Ishmael and others. Add them up . . .

"We have yet to determine whether the Jews are arguing for the Covenant of Abraham, which covers homeland and birthright issues, the Davidic Covenant, under which they say they were guaranteed a Messiah, or some combination of the two," Harrigan said. "But one thing is clear: Standard assumptions for any legal contract in this district specifically state that the Defendant is not responsible for acts of God."

Continued Harrigan: "I must also point out that the plaintiff has been given a homeland and offered at least one viable Messiah. If the plaintiff chooses not to accept them for whatever reason, it demonstrates that no meeting of the minds was truly possible and that they acted in bad faith, and the covenant is therefore rendered null and void."

Case dismissed.

Hat tip to Justine.