I will not Bow!

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I agree, that you tend to twist and distort the intent of the Armistice Line.

Will you ever stop distorting facts towards delusion? What Recognized borders, and recognized by whom?

Provide a link, and again a sanity certificate.

It seems that you need to provide one with your calls for borders, I said boundaries which are a different thing all together. But here goes for evidence of the new borders of Israel

Israel's borders under international law & according to the Bible

The 1949 Green Line

The Arab countries refused to sign a permanent peace treaty with Israel, and so the UN arranged a series of ceasefires. UN GA Resolution 194 called for cessation of hostilities and return of refugees. Security Council Resolution 62 called for implementation of armistice (truce/ceasefire) agreements that would lead to permanent peace and as a result Israel's borders were re-established along the so-called "Green Line". This demarcation or armistice line, drawn up under the auspices of UN mediator Ralph Bunche, largely reflected the ceasefire lines of 1949 (Fig 5) and as such represented interim borders for Israel.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

Here is my link. Where is yours?

(COMMENT)

As may be usual, only half the story is told. For all intense and purposes, Armistice Lines are handled exactly the same as other lines of demarcation. The only difference is the temporal nature and termination on a Peace Accord. In terms of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the Armistice Line has all the characteristics of a border, until such time as a Peace Accord makes it obsolete.

There are two important aspects to keep in mind in terms of the universal recognition of the delineation and demarcation of both Israel and Palestine (each as States).

FIRST: The international view:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

SOURCE: Declaration of Principles

SECOND: The Palestinian View:

Key Facts

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
  .
• A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
  .
• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

SOURCE: PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[rhodescholar]

Annexation, eviction and expulsion is the only way for the Iraelis to cut the Gordian Knot and to overcome your own much-vaunted threat of long-term population demographics pressure, if the Israelis want the West Bank and Gaza, or if they find themselves with a one-state solution on their hands.

Israel's mistake was not expelling them in '67 when they could have. Now, unless they do an Azerbijian and deport them all and say: "FU!" to the world, they would have significant fallout to deal with. Sadly, since the hypocritical scum like what permeates these threads, the UN, world media, etc, holds jews to a different standard that anyone else, Israel would face some economically challenging times. Azerbijian did for a few years after expelling its muslims, endured a few years of sanctions, and then everything went smoothly. Israel should take note.

The Jews have waited for 2000 years to re-take the Holy Land and Jerusalem, and they've paid the price with their blood.If you think they are going to give any of that up, you're just plain, flat-out wrong.

Many of us with long military experience would be on the next flight over to ensure Israel exacts ten times the blood of the arab muslim filthy invaders the moment our assistance is requested. People I knew went in '73 when a worldwide call was issued for able-bodied, and I will gladly step back into uniform to fifty-cal a few thousand ragheads coming over the redlines...

The Jews won't do (1)... too inhumane, and too much like what was done to them by Euro-Trash, and too much like what the Arab-Muslims threatened to do to them. The Jews are better than that.

Correction: the arab muslims have tried to do so, multiple times.

Negotiations will not work. Peace talks will not work. (2) is going to prove to be the only answer that leaves Israel intact,defensible and sustainable, and without future threat from inside its borders.

Agreed, but it is doubtful that they'd leave willingly, and the insane, racist intolerance of the arab muslim is why perpetual war with them is inevitable.

One of these days, once this very same thing is making the headlines, I'll remind you of this exchange. Peoples are expelled all the time.

Yes, but the jew-hating **** filth permeating this forum isn't interested in facts - only keeping the focus on what the jews do.

 

[rhodescholar]

This would work fine in a best-case scenario. But don't you think that the world is obsessed with the Palestinians, in a way that they aren't with the Kurds or Chechens or Cypriots?

Correction, they are obsessed with the jews, and fixate on what they do to a level of insanity. If it were jews living alongside pidgeons in israel the jew-hating shit would still be all over the Israelis for the treatment of them, it would make no difference.

 

[toastman]

Will you ever stop distorting facts towards delusion? What Recognized borders, and recognized by whom?

Provide a link, and again a sanity certificate.

It seems that you need to provide one with your calls for borders, I said boundaries which are a different thing all together. But here goes for evidence of the new borders of Israel

Israel's borders under international law & according to the Bible

The 1949 Green Line

The Arab countries refused to sign a permanent peace treaty with Israel, and so the UN arranged a series of ceasefires. UN GA Resolution 194 called for cessation of hostilities and return of refugees. Security Council Resolution 62 called for implementation of armistice (truce/ceasefire) agreements that would lead to permanent peace and as a result Israel's borders were re-established along the so-called "Green Line". This demarcation or armistice line, drawn up under the auspices of UN mediator Ralph Bunche, largely reflected the ceasefire lines of 1949 (Fig 5) and as such represented interim borders for Israel.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

Here is my link. Where is yours?

And now Israel has an internationally recognized permanent border with Egypt. So whats your point?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I agree, that you tend to twist and distort the intent of the Armistice Line.

It seems that you need to provide one with your calls for borders, I said boundaries which are a different thing all together. But here goes for evidence of the new borders of Israel

Israel's borders under international law & according to the Bible

The 1949 Green Line

The Arab countries refused to sign a permanent peace treaty with Israel, and so the UN arranged a series of ceasefires. UN GA Resolution 194 called for cessation of hostilities and return of refugees. Security Council Resolution 62 called for implementation of armistice (truce/ceasefire) agreements that would lead to permanent peace and as a result Israel's borders were re-established along the so-called "Green Line". This demarcation or armistice line, drawn up under the auspices of UN mediator Ralph Bunche, largely reflected the ceasefire lines of 1949 (Fig 5) and as such represented interim borders for Israel.

Here is my link. Where is yours?

(COMMENT)

As may be usual, only half the story is told. For all intense and purposes, Armistice Lines are handled exactly the same as other lines of demarcation. The only difference is the temporal nature and termination on a Peace Accord. In terms of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the Armistice Line has all the characteristics of a border, until such time as a Peace Accord makes it obsolete.

There are two important aspects to keep in mind in terms of the universal recognition of the delineation and demarcation of both Israel and Palestine (each as States).

FIRST: The international view:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

SOURCE: Declaration of Principles

SECOND: The Palestinian View:

Key Facts

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
  .
• A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
  .
• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

SOURCE: PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD)

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestinian, and other maps of Palestine in the ME, do not show the non border armistice lines.

 

[Kondor3]

"...This would work fine in a best-case scenario. But don't you think that the world is obsessed with the Palestinians, in a way that they aren't with the Kurds or Chechens or Cypriots?"

Only because the Arabs keep raggin' the rest of the world about it, and it's probably safe to venture a guess that most of the rest of the world is tired of listening to it after 66 years. The Arabs-Muslims lack the power to stop Israel. The rest of the world won't lift a finger to stop Israel. If the Israelis reach the conclusion that it's time to expel the Palestinians there will be nothing substantive to bar their way. They may be under a boycott or two here and there for a couple of years after the fact but, in truth, the world will be glad for the peace and quiet, and it has a very short memory. It the Israelis decide to Go-for-the-Gold in this context, they'll probably get away with it - easily. And they've got the backbone to go it alone.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Palestinian, and other maps of Palestine in the ME, do not show the non border armistice lines..."

Now, all you've got to do is to make those operative in the Real World, and you're all set.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I agree, that you tend to twist and distort the intent of the Armistice Line.

Here is my link. Where is yours?

(COMMENT)

As may be usual, only half the story is told. For all intense and purposes, Armistice Lines are handled exactly the same as other lines of demarcation. The only difference is the temporal nature and termination on a Peace Accord. In terms of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the Armistice Line has all the characteristics of a border, until such time as a Peace Accord makes it obsolete.

There are two important aspects to keep in mind in terms of the universal recognition of the delineation and demarcation of both Israel and Palestine (each as States).

FIRST: The international view:



SECOND: The Palestinian View:

Key Facts

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
  .
• A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
  .
• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

SOURCE: PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD)

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestinian, and other maps of Palestine in the ME, do not show the non border armistice lines.

How can you show that disgusting map, without Israel on it?

 

[Billo_Really]

So even though the history books say that the cause of the Hebron massacre was the pamphlets distributed by the grand mufti were instrumental in the attacks on Jews you still believe the BLOOD LIBEL was the real reason

The Hebron massacre refers to the killing of sixty-seven Jews (including 23 college students) on 24 August 1929 in Hebron, then part of Mandatory Palestine, by Arabs incited to violence by false rumors that Jews were massacring Arabs in Jerusalem and seizing control of Muslim holy places.
1929 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're like a little parrot! A little, dumbass parrot. Reciting things you don't even understand.

"...oh, maybe I'll use BIG RED WORDS, that'll look impressive!"​

That same link you provided also states that Zionists went down to the Wailing Wall declaring it "theirs". Do you not realize that proves they were "seizing control of Muslim holy places"? And that was the flashpoint of the riot.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Do you not realize that proves they were "seizing control of Muslim holy places"? And that was the flashpoint of the riot."

Which were stupidly and intentionally built on top of seized Jewish holy places.

What goes around comes around.

It's the Muslims turn in the barrel.

Enjoy.

 

[Billo_Really]

Which were stupidly and intentionally built on top of seized Jewish holy places.

What goes around comes around.

It's the Muslims turn in the barrel.

Enjoy.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say, since the Wailing Wall happens to also be a "Jewish holy place".

 

[Kondor3]

Which were stupidly and intentionally built on top of seized Jewish holy places.

What goes around comes around.

It's the Muslims turn in the barrel.

Enjoy.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say, since the Wailing Wall happens to also be a "Jewish holy place".

No, bright boy, I was inferring that the Muslim Holy Places you were talking about were the Dome of the Rock and the al Aqsa Mosque, built atop the Temple Mount, on top of the ruins of the Jewish Holy Places...

 

[MHunterB]

What's pretty stupid is Billo claiming that Jews declaring the Western Wall as 'theirs' had or could have any relation to 'seizing Muslim holy places' - the Wall was never in any way 'holy' to Muslims.

OTOH, many times during the Ottoman control of Israel, Jews were not allowed to enter the Jewish holy sites - and when Jordan illegally seized East Jerusalem, they ethnically cleansed the Jews from their homes in EJ AND denied all Jews (not just Israelis) any access to the Wall OR any other Jewish holy site under Jordanian control.

And there's also a small matter of the 28,000 grave markers removed from the historic Mt of Olives cemetery - and used as paving stones by the Jordanians.

Then there's the Muslim attacks on Jewish sites which are also allegedly holy to Muslims - like the Tomb of the Patriarchs.

 

[Billo_Really]

What's pretty stupid is Billo claiming that Jews declaring the Western Wall as 'theirs' had or could have any relation to 'seizing Muslim holy places' - the Wall was never in any way 'holy' to Muslims.

OTOH, many times during the Ottoman control of Israel, Jews were not allowed to enter the Jewish holy sites - and when Jordan illegally seized East Jerusalem, they ethnically cleansed the Jews from their homes in EJ AND denied all Jews (not just Israelis) any access to the Wall OR any other Jewish holy site under Jordanian control.

And there's also a small matter of the 28,000 grave markers removed from the historic Mt of Olives cemetery - and used as paving stones by the Jordanians.

Then there's the Muslim attacks on Jewish sites which are also allegedly holy to Muslims - like the Tomb of the Patriarchs.

According to racist pricks like you, muslims have no land, no humanity, no history, no reason to live and no holy places.

As human beings go, you're pretty fucked!

 

[Billo_Really]

No, bright boy, I was inferring that the Muslim Holy Places you were talking about were the Dome of the Rock and the al Aqsa Mosque, built atop the Temple Mount, on top of the ruins of the Jewish Holy Places...

Asking you what Islam is about, is like asking a Nazi what a Sadre is like.

 

[Kondor3]

No, bright boy, I was inferring that the Muslim Holy Places you were talking about were the Dome of the Rock and the al Aqsa Mosque, built atop the Temple Mount, on top of the ruins of the Jewish Holy Places...

Asking you what Islam is about, is like asking a Nazi what a Sadre is like.

Who gives a rat's ass what Islam is about?

Although, if you are a Western non-Muslim, there's a good chance that I've done (and mastered) more reading on the subject than you, or am at least sufficiently well-versed to deflect such an accusation, easily.

Not that the charge made any sense, in the context in which you served it up.

But why should you shift gears and suddenly begin making sense now, after all this time?

On my end... it is wise to study the ways and beliefs of one's enemy.

 

[Billo_Really]

Who gives a rat's ass what Islam is about?

Obviously you did, since you felt the need to comment on their holy places.

Although, if you are a Western non-Muslim, there's a good chance that I've done (and mastered) more reading on the subject than you, or am at least sufficiently well-versed to deflect such an accusation, easily.

Not that the charge made any sense, in the context in which you served it up.

But why should you shift gears now and suddenly begin making sense?

You "think" you know shit and I "know" you don't!

 

[Kondor3]

Who gives a rat's ass what Islam is about?

Obviously you did, since you felt the need to comment on their holy places...

Commenting that Muslims stole the Holy Places from the Jews in the first place and foolishly and callously built Muslim Holy Places on top of Jewish Holy Places is not the same as understanding (or not understanding) what Islam is all about.

There is a 'disconnect' in here somewhere which you will probably have to address, in order for others to understand you, in this context.

"...You 'think' you know shit and I 'know' you don't!"

I know many things.

I am ignorant about many things.

Like anyone else on the face of the planet.

I have no idea what you are referring to here but I am comforted by the idea that you probably have no idea what you are referring to, either.

 

[Billo_Really]

Commenting that Muslims stole the Holy Places from the Jews in the first place and foolishly and callously built Muslim Holy Places on top of Jewish Holy Places is not the same as understanding (or not understanding) what Islam is all about.

That wasn't my point.

There is a 'disconnect' in here somewhere which you will probably have to address, in order for others to understand you, in this context.

The problem is not with me. But since I have to "dumb down" my point, just so you'll understand it, I'll say it another way...

..."having you comment on muslim holy places, is like interviewing a KKK guy during black history month".

Why would anyone ask a racist, arrogant, narcisstic prick, serious questions about the group he hates and expect an honest answer?

I know many things.

I am ignorant about many things.

Like anyone else on the face of the planet.

I have no idea what you are referring to here but I am comforted by the idea that you probably have no idea what you are referring to, either.

I know what my point was and judging from your response, I know you didn't.

 

[Kondor3]

Commenting that Muslims stole the Holy Places from the Jews in the first place and foolishly and callously built Muslim Holy Places on top of Jewish Holy Places is not the same as understanding (or not understanding) what Islam is all about.

That wasn't my point.

No, but it was mine; the point I was making when I served-up my original comment.

There is a 'disconnect' in here somewhere which you will probably have to address, in order for others to understand you, in this context.

The problem is not with me...

The problem is always with you.

But since I have to 'dumb down' my point, just so you'll understand it, I'll say it another way...

Much of this difficulty could be resolved if you were sober more often.

"...having you comment on muslim holy places, is like interviewing a KKK guy during black history month..."

Thank you for your feedback; although it does not address the accusation that the Muslims stole the Temple Mount from the Jews and foolishly and callously built their bullshit Holy Places on top of the ruins of the Jews earlier and legitimate Holy Places.

"...Why would anyone ask a racist, arrogant, narcisstic prick, serious questions about the group he hates and expect an honest answer?..."

I dunno.

I give up.

Why WOULD pro-Israeli advocates ask you serious questions about the Israelis and expect an honest answer?