Closure of Al-Aqsa mosque for first time by IOF terrorists

[gipper]

You wouldn’t mind a “ War of Aggression “ if Iran had the Nuclear Weapon and used it on Israel

Oh yes I would. I’m not a dumb Zionist supremacist mass murderer like you.

If Bibi nukes Iran, do you still support him?

 

[USAF 2023]

Oh yes I would. I’m not a dumb Zionist supremacist mass murderer like you.

If Bibi nukes Iran, do you still support him?

You just HOPE he would do it . That would give all the Arab Countries to declare War, wouldn’t it ?

 

[gipper]

You just HOPE he would do it . That would give all the Arab Countries to declare War, wouldn’t it ?

No. Wrong again. You are a typical Zionist. You accuse others of exactly what you are guilty of.

Can you honestly answer the question?

 

[USAF 2023]

No. Wrong again. You are a typical Zionist. You accuse others of exactly what you are guilty of.

Can you honestly answer the question?

You want me to answer the question? I’m going to make this a VERY EASY GUESS . If that did happen we would be on our way to WW 111

 

[Shusha]

You already lost your argument after I informed you that Israel has multiple-times restricted access to Muslims.

Yet you haven't provided any instances of this nor the circumstances. Tell me again how the very few closures of the Temple Mount are not related to security.

A de facto border, and doesn't change the fact that JORDAN was in control of those holy sites and solely administered the entire territory.

I am very careful with using accurate language. Here's why. When people start using incorrect terminology, that incorrect terminology tends to become embedded in the discourse. Over time it creeps into, not only popular knowledge, but into legal documents and advisory opinions. While remaining inaccurate. So no. While Jordan illegally exercised control over the territory to the 1949 Armistice Line, it was never a border. And still isn't.

Please define Israels "original Mandate borders".

The borders of the original Mandate for Palestine. The borders demarking the boundaries between the Mandate and Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. You aren't disputing those, are you?

No - they had till 1988 , it's Israel that NEVER had a legal claim

Israel's claim is literally written into the Mandate. What is the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan's legal claim to the territory west of the river? What document gives rise to this legal claim? British recognition of independence clearly identified Trans-Jordan as a distinct and separate territory from the rest of the Mandate.

MANDATE FOR PALESTINE
Article 25
In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18.

ARTICLE 25 OF THE PALESTINE MANDATE MEMORANDUM BY THE BRITISH REPRESENTATIVE
16 September 1922

The following provisions for the Mandate for Palestine are not applicable to the territory known as Transjordan, which comprises all territory lying to the east of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian frontier.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE TRANSJORDAN EMIRATE
20 February 1928

Article 2
The powers of legislation and of administration entrusted to His Britannic Majesty as Mandatory for Palestine shall be exercised in that part of the area under Mandate known as Trans-Jordan by His Highness the Amir through such constitutional government as is defined and determined in the Organic Law of Trans-Jordan and any amendment thereof made with the approval of His Britannic Majesty.

Throughout the remaining clauses of this Agreement the word "Palestine," unless otherwise defined, shall mean that portion of the area under Mandate which lies to the west of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian frontier.

TREATY OF ALLIANCE BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY IN RESPECT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND HIS HIGHNESS THE AMIR OF TRANSJORDAN
22 March 1946

Article 1.
His Majesty the King recognizes Trans-Jordan as a fully independent State and His Highness The Amir as the sovereign thereof.

No - I never mentioned "discriminatory" - only that Israels restrictions towards Muslims to access their holy-sites in in breach of the Jordan-Israeli peace-treaty of October 26, 1994, - where Israel is to guarantee that Muslims can access their holy-sites.

What are you even arguing about? Israel has Jordanian-recognized sovereignty over the Temple Mount (which includes security control) and both parties have agreed to provide freedom of access to places of religious significance.

TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN THE STATE OF ISREAEL AND THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN
26 October 1994

Article 2.1. They recognise and will respect each other's sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence.

Article 3.1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and coordinates specified therein.

Article 9.1. 1. Each Party will provide freedom of access to places of religious and historical significance.

Obviously you are confused again - mixing up the above mentioned treaty, with:
Jordan renounced its administrative and legal claims to the West Bank on 31.st July 1988. It never stated that the West-Bank is returned to Israel,

The Peace Treaty recognized the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Israel within the Mandate-defined boundaries, as shown above. So, yeah, all claims to the territory ceded in favor of and recognized as Israel.

but ceding its claim to the PLO, being the ONLY legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. And Jordan supports an independent Palestinian State in the borders before the six-day war of 1967.

Nope. Not "ceding its claim to the PLO". As much as an Address to the Nation can be considered a legal document (hint, it can't), Jordan said they would respect the wishes of the Arab Palestinian people to secede. This is not the same as ceding territory or renouncing claim to territory. The language is (translated from Arabic): ...we respect the wish of the PLO, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, to secede from us as an independent Palestinian state.

And Jordan can "support" anything it wants, that doesn't make it a legal reality.

And that's why Israel has NO legal claim towards the West-Bank nor East-Jerusalem, nor the Golan Heights nor Lebanon nor Gaza - NEVER had.

East Jerusalem has been under Israeli military occupation, though it is considered occupied Palestinian territory under international law. !!!!

No, it isn't occupied territory under "international law". "International law" has never opined on the matter of an international boundary between the State of Israel and a future State of Palestine. Nor can "international law" create such a boundary. All the legal documentation says that boundary will be established in negotiations and subsequent treaties.

 

[USAF 2023]

Yet you haven't provided any instances of this nor the circumstances. Tell me again how the very few closures of the Temple Mount are not related to security.

I am very careful with using accurate language. Here's why. When people start using incorrect terminology, that incorrect terminology tends to become embedded in the discourse. Over time it creeps into, not only popular knowledge, but into legal documents and advisory opinions. While remaining inaccurate. So no. While Jordan illegally exercised control over the territory to the 1949 Armistice Line, it was never a border. And still isn't.

The borders of the original Mandate for Palestine. The borders demarking the boundaries between the Mandate and Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. You aren't disputing those, are you?

Israel's claim is literally written into the Mandate. What is the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan's legal claim to the territory west of the river? What document gives rise to this legal claim? British recognition of independence clearly identified Trans-Jordan as a distinct and separate territory from the rest of the Mandate.

MANDATE FOR PALESTINE
Article 25
In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18.

ARTICLE 25 OF THE PALESTINE MANDATE MEMORANDUM BY THE BRITISH REPRESENTATIVE
16 September 1922

The following provisions for the Mandate for Palestine are not applicable to the territory known as Transjordan, which comprises all territory lying to the east of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian frontier.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE TRANSJORDAN EMIRATE
20 February 1928

Article 2
The powers of legislation and of administration entrusted to His Britannic Majesty as Mandatory for Palestine shall be exercised in that part of the area under Mandate known as Trans-Jordan by His Highness the Amir through such constitutional government as is defined and determined in the Organic Law of Trans-Jordan and any amendment thereof made with the approval of His Britannic Majesty.

Throughout the remaining clauses of this Agreement the word "Palestine," unless otherwise defined, shall mean that portion of the area under Mandate which lies to the west of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian frontier.

TREATY OF ALLIANCE BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY IN RESPECT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND HIS HIGHNESS THE AMIR OF TRANSJORDAN
22 March 1946

Article 1.
His Majesty the King recognizes Trans-Jordan as a fully independent State and His Highness The Amir as the sovereign thereof.


What are you even arguing about? Israel has Jordanian-recognized sovereignty over the Temple Mount (which includes security control) and both parties have agreed to provide freedom of access to places of religious significance.

TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN THE STATE OF ISREAEL AND THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN
26 October 1994

Article 2.1. They recognise and will respect each other's sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence.

Article 3.1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and coordinates specified therein.

Article 9.1. 1. Each Party will provide freedom of access to places of religious and historical significance.

The Peace Treaty recognized the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Israel within the Mandate-defined boundaries, as shown above. So, yeah, all claims to the territory ceded in favor of and recognized as Israel.

Nope. Not "ceding its claim to the PLO". As much as an Address to the Nation can be considered a legal document (hint, it can't), Jordan said they would respect the wishes of the Arab Palestinian people to secede. This is not the same as ceding territory or renouncing claim to territory. The language is (translated from Arabic): ...we respect the wish of the PLO, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, to secede from us as an independent Palestinian state.

And Jordan can "support" anything it wants, that doesn't make it a legal reality.

No, it isn't occupied territory under "international law". "International law" has never opined on the matter of an international boundary between the State of Israel and a future State of Palestine. Nor can "international law" create such a boundary. All the legal documentation says that boundary will be established in negotiations and subsequent treaties.

This is a question I have asked before, If the 48 Boundaries weren’t “ real boundaries “ what would they have been? The Arabs had one idea;Israel had another

 

[Shusha]

This is a question I have asked before, If the 48 Boundaries weren’t “ real boundaries “ what would they have been? The Arabs had one idea;Israel had another

I'm not sure what you mean by the "48 Boundaries".

 

[Kruska]

This is a question I have asked before, If the 48 Boundaries weren’t “ real boundaries “ what would they have been? The Arabs had one idea;Israel had another

There were only the boundaries of the British Mandated Palestine in 1948.

And solely the British/Zionist government wanted to introduce "conditions" intended to lead to the establishment of a Jewish National Home - not a Jewish State.!! - in reference to the 1947 UN Partition plan. Which was NEVER accepted by Egypt, and the Arabs, (Palestinian representatives had been excluded).

The 1947 UN Partition plan - was solely "enthusiastically" only accepted by the Zionist Leadership, aside from radical Zionist factions opposing it - (since it did not reflect Greater Israel). The Zionist leadership however saw it as the precursor to establish an own Jewish State.

 

[Shusha]

There were only the boundaries of the British Mandated Palestine in 1948.

Exactly. The boundaries of British Mandate Palestine were created in various agreements in the early 1920s. No boundaries were created or changed in 1948, so the terminology "48 Boundaries" is inaccurate.

 

[Kruska]

Exactly. The boundaries of British Mandate Palestine were created in various agreements in the early 1920s. No boundaries were created or changed in 1948, so the terminology "48 Boundaries" is inaccurate.

NO, they are NOT "inaccurate" - the boundaries of 1948 are EXACT and PRECISE - and they did not behold a Jewish State nor a Palestinian State. However the Zionists were ABSOLUTELY aware of, that the British Mandate was to end on May 14th 1948.

 

[Shusha]

NO, they are NOT "inaccurate" - the boundaries of 1948 are EXACT and PRECISE - and they did not behold a Jewish State nor a Palestinian State. However the Zionists were ABSOLUTELY aware of, that the British Mandate was to end on May 14th 1948.

Dude. Settle down. I said the TERMINOLOGY is inaccurate. The boundaries of the Mandate for Palestine are EXACT and PRECISE. We agree. Sheesh.