The OLDER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

[watchingfromafar]

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

I correct that statement. They cannot be “disqualified” from statehood but sanctions could be placed on them until they treat the Palestinians as one of their own. And if possible, assuming some of the original Palestinians survived after their villages were destroyed the land is returned to the Palestinians. Correction: the land should be returned; period.

And the name "Israel" changed to "Palestine"

I am sure other reasons and conditions could be implemented in some form of “sanctions”.

To begin with the USA could stop giving them $billions in US tax dollars

 

[Shusha]

I correct that statement. They cannot be “disqualified” from statehood but sanctions could be placed on them until they treat the Palestinians as one of their own. And if possible, assuming some of the original Palestinians survived after their villages were destroyed the land is returned to the Palestinians. Correction: the land should be returned; period.

Please elaborate what you mean by "the land should be returned", presumably to the "Palestinians".

What do you mean by that? What would that look like? Would there be Jewish self-determination?

 

[rylah]

What's up to debate, 3500 continuous years of Jewish presence in their land,

They never had a homeland. This is a fact so stop lying to yourself.

I have my proof--- rylah, where is yours?
​

Is the land of “Israel” their true ancient homeland?

Promised Land
“Moses went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the promised land of Israel spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty, according to Talmudic legend on 7 Adar, his 120th birthday exactly.

Moab is the historical name for a mountainous strip of land in modern-day Jordan running along the eastern shore of the Dead Sea. In ancient times, it was home to the kingdom of the Moabites, a people often in conflict with their Israelite neighbors to the west.

The Moabites were a historical people, whose existence is attested to by numerous archeological findings, most notably the Mesha Stele, which describes the Moabite victory over an unnamed son of King Omri of Israel. Their capital was Dibon, located next to the modern Jordanian town of Dhiban.”
Moab - New World Encyclopedia

From there they moved to Egypt

(Gen 42:25 KJV) Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:

(Gen 45:20 KJV) Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.

(Gen 45:21 KJV) And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.

(Gen 47:1 KJV) Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.

(Gen 47:3 KJV) And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.

Again I ask--I have my proof--- rylah, where is yours?​

It's pretty funny how You use verses from the Bible to prove Israel didn't exist as a nation, kinda self defeating in the first place. Don't You think?

The proof is in the pudding - the nations recognized the territory under the mandate as the historical Jewish Homeland.

Beyond that, the Judean desert is still called so until this day even by Arabs, for a reason, should I explain this "on fingers" for You?

 

[Shusha]

It's pretty funny how You use verses from the Bible to prove Israel didn't exist as a nation, kinda self defeating in the first place. Don't You think?

Thank you. Pretty funny to be using an historical, ancient, cultural document specific to the Jewish people and to that territory and written in Hebrew as proof that that specific culture did not exist in that place and at that time.

 

[rylah]

It's pretty funny how You use verses from the Bible to prove Israel didn't exist as a nation, kinda self defeating in the first place. Don't You think?

Thank you. Pretty funny to be using an historical, ancient, cultural document specific to the Jewish people and to that territory and written in Hebrew as proof that that specific culture did not exist in that place and at that time.

I'd even go as far as claiming that not one archeological finding about peoples of pre - Roman era in this land, can be confirmed without the history written in the Jewish Bible.

In most cases archeologists go to the Torah in the 1st place, to even slightly understand what they've found, and who it talks about. There's simply no other extensive source (on that level) about the history, and people in this land.

 

[Shusha]

It's pretty funny how You use verses from the Bible to prove Israel didn't exist as a nation, kinda self defeating in the first place. Don't You think?

Thank you. Pretty funny to be using an historical, ancient, cultural document specific to the Jewish people and to that territory and written in Hebrew as proof that that specific culture did not exist in that place and at that time.

I'd even go as far as claiming that not one archeological finding about peoples of pre - Roman era in this land, can be confirmed without the history written in the Jewish Bible.

In most cases archeologists go to the Torah in the 1st place, to even slightly understand what they've found, and who it talks about. There's simply no other extensive source (on that level) about the history, and people in this land.

Exactly. Torah is a beautifully preserved and consistent secondary source which gives us a great deal of insight into an ancient culture. (As well as, obviously, sacred guidance for those of faith). There are very few cultures as ancient as the Jewish culture with this abundance of source material. Which, of course, makes it all the more ridiculous when people argue about "existence".

 

[rylah]

It's pretty funny how You use verses from the Bible to prove Israel didn't exist as a nation, kinda self defeating in the first place. Don't You think?

Thank you. Pretty funny to be using an historical, ancient, cultural document specific to the Jewish people and to that territory and written in Hebrew as proof that that specific culture did not exist in that place and at that time.

I'd even go as far as claiming that not one archeological finding about peoples of pre - Roman era in this land, can be confirmed without the history written in the Jewish Bible.

In most cases archeologists go to the Torah in the 1st place, to even slightly understand what they've found, and who it talks about. There's simply no other extensive source (on that level) about the history, and people in this land.

Exactly. Torah is a beautifully preserved and consistent secondary source which gives us a great deal of insight into an ancient culture. (As well as, obviously, sacred guidance for those of faith). There are very few cultures as ancient as the Jewish culture with this abundance of source material. Which, of course, makes it all the more ridiculous when people argue about "existence".

And that's before we even mention the Gmarah.
One interesting point, and this might be a bit off topic, is that the first commentary by Rashi (lived a 1000 years before modern Israel) talks about the future international accusation towards Israel, that they're are supposedly "land thieves", and what has to be specifically answered in this regard.

Ben Gurion was not far off when he mentioned the Torah as our historical tabo.
He wasn't laughed off, because this is at the heart of many nations' own heritage and identity.
Brits till this day coronate their monarchs on a special throne, at the base of which is a stone, they claim to be the pillar of Jacob.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

 

[rylah]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Are You done with fiction?
That Palestine You're talking about is the Jewish National Home, aka Israel.
There's no part in that land over which the Jewish Nation wasn't vested with sovereignty.

That Israel has even considered allowing any other state inside it's territory is an act of great generosity.

 

[Shusha]

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Current international law? You can't. And no one. Best remember that when discussing Israel.

 

[P F Tinmore]

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Current international law? You can't. And no one. Best remember that when discussing Israel.

The question was how was Palestine removed?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Are You done with fiction?
That Palestine You're talking about is the Jewish National Home, aka Israel.
There's no part in that land over which the Jewish Nation wasn't vested with sovereignty.

That Israel has even considered allowing any other state inside it's territory is an act of great generosity.

Nice deflection.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, rylah, et al,

This is a question of fantasy and illusion.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Current international law? You can't. And no one. Best remember that when discussing Israel.

The question was how was Palestine removed?

(COMMENT)

The question presupposes that there existed an independent and autonomous → self-governing nation called Palestine that lost its statehood. That is simply not the case.

BUT to answer the original question as to:

■ How do you remove statehood? [This should be (to be more politically estute) how is statehood altered, chnaged or dissolved?] As an example:

ψ By Matt Rosenberg Updated January 22, 2018
History of the Former Country of Yugoslavia
With the fall of the Austria-Hungary empire at the end of World War I, the victors threw together a new country which was composed of more than twenty ethnic groups -- Yugoslavia. Just over seventy years later that piecemeal nation disintegrated and war broke out between seven new states.

Following Marshal Tito's death in 1980, factions in Yugoslavia became agitated and demanded more autonomy. It was the fall of the USSR in 1991 that finally broke up the jigsaw puzzle of a state. About 250,000 were killed by wars and "ethnic cleansing" in the new countries of the former Yugoslavia (FRY).

Today, the FRY once consisted of the new contries of:

• Serbia
• Montenegro
• Kosovo
• Solvenia
• Macedonia
• Boznia and Herzegovina

■ Who has that authority? (This question presupposes that there is an authority and protocol instrument for such a question of statehood.)

ψ The territorial evolution of regional entities can occur either peacefully or through other than peaceful means. It can be the outcome of an internal conflict (revolution), a military victory FRY out of the fall of the Austria-Hungarian Empire from the Great War, or a politicial settlement (1995, Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia signed a peace agreement), of as in the peaceful act of self-determination by the Solevians.​

Remember in the case of the Government of Palestine, the Government formally consisted of High Commissioner, and an all British staff. While the Jewish Agency did provide input to the Office of the High Commissioners, the Arab Higher Committee rejected all invitations to participate in the development of self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, rylah, et al,

This is a question of fantasy and illusion.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Current international law? You can't. And no one. Best remember that when discussing Israel.

The question was how was Palestine removed?

(COMMENT)

The question presupposes that there existed an independent and autonomous → self-governing nation called Palestine that lost its statehood. That is simply not the case.

BUT to answer the original question as to:

■ How do you remove statehood? [This should be (to be more politically estute) how is statehood altered, chnaged or dissolved?] As an example:

ψ By Matt Rosenberg Updated January 22, 2018
History of the Former Country of Yugoslavia
With the fall of the Austria-Hungary empire at the end of World War I, the victors threw together a new country which was composed of more than twenty ethnic groups -- Yugoslavia. Just over seventy years later that piecemeal nation disintegrated and war broke out between seven new states.

Following Marshal Tito's death in 1980, factions in Yugoslavia became agitated and demanded more autonomy. It was the fall of the USSR in 1991 that finally broke up the jigsaw puzzle of a state. About 250,000 were killed by wars and "ethnic cleansing" in the new countries of the former Yugoslavia (FRY).

Today, the FRY once consisted of the new contries of:

• Serbia
• Montenegro
• Kosovo
• Solvenia
• Macedonia
• Boznia and Herzegovina

■ Who has that authority? (This question presupposes that there is an authority and protocol instrument for such a question of statehood.)

ψ The territorial evolution of regional entities can occur either peacefully or through other than peaceful means. It can be the outcome of an internal conflict (revolution), a military victory FRY out of the fall of the Austria-Hungarian Empire from the Great War, or a politicial settlement (1995, Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia signed a peace agreement), of as in the peaceful act of self-determination by the Solevians.​

Remember in the case of the Government of Palestine, the Government formally consisted of High Commissioner, and an all British staff. While the Jewish Agency did provide input to the Office of the High Commissioners, the Arab Higher Committee rejected all invitations to participate in the development of self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

The question presupposes that there existed an independent and autonomous → self-governing nation called Palestine that lost its statehood. That is simply not the case.

This pantload again?

Self governance is the product of self determination, not a prerequisite.

 

[Hollie]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, rylah, et al,

This is a question of fantasy and illusion.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Current international law? You can't. And no one. Best remember that when discussing Israel.

The question was how was Palestine removed?

(COMMENT)

The question presupposes that there existed an independent and autonomous → self-governing nation called Palestine that lost its statehood. That is simply not the case.

BUT to answer the original question as to:

■ How do you remove statehood? [This should be (to be more politically estute) how is statehood altered, chnaged or dissolved?] As an example:

ψ By Matt Rosenberg Updated January 22, 2018
History of the Former Country of Yugoslavia
With the fall of the Austria-Hungary empire at the end of World War I, the victors threw together a new country which was composed of more than twenty ethnic groups -- Yugoslavia. Just over seventy years later that piecemeal nation disintegrated and war broke out between seven new states.

Following Marshal Tito's death in 1980, factions in Yugoslavia became agitated and demanded more autonomy. It was the fall of the USSR in 1991 that finally broke up the jigsaw puzzle of a state. About 250,000 were killed by wars and "ethnic cleansing" in the new countries of the former Yugoslavia (FRY).

Today, the FRY once consisted of the new contries of:

• Serbia
• Montenegro
• Kosovo
• Solvenia
• Macedonia
• Boznia and Herzegovina

■ Who has that authority? (This question presupposes that there is an authority and protocol instrument for such a question of statehood.)

ψ The territorial evolution of regional entities can occur either peacefully or through other than peaceful means. It can be the outcome of an internal conflict (revolution), a military victory FRY out of the fall of the Austria-Hungarian Empire from the Great War, or a politicial settlement (1995, Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia signed a peace agreement), of as in the peaceful act of self-determination by the Solevians.​

Remember in the case of the Government of Palestine, the Government formally consisted of High Commissioner, and an all British staff. While the Jewish Agency did provide input to the Office of the High Commissioners, the Arab Higher Committee rejected all invitations to participate in the development of self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

The question presupposes that there existed an independent and autonomous → self-governing nation called Palestine that lost its statehood. That is simply not the case.

This pantload again?

Self governance is the product of self determination, not a prerequisite.

Another of your silly one-liners.

 

[rylah]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Are You done with fiction?
That Palestine You're talking about is the Jewish National Home, aka Israel.
There's no part in that land over which the Jewish Nation wasn't vested with sovereignty.

That Israel has even considered allowing any other state inside it's territory is an act of great generosity.

Nice deflection.

9 years, and still can't refute this very simple point.

 

[Hollie]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Are You done with fiction?
That Palestine You're talking about is the Jewish National Home, aka Israel.
There's no part in that land over which the Jewish Nation wasn't vested with sovereignty.

That Israel has even considered allowing any other state inside it's territory is an act of great generosity.

Nice deflection.

9 years, and still can't refute this very simple point.

It’s only a matter of time before he will cut and paste his “Treaty of Lausanne created the Country of Pal’istan”, routine.

 

[Shusha]

Self governance is the product of self determination, not a prerequisite.

But governance is a prerequisite for Statehood.

 

[Sixties Fan]

When FDR wanted to silence the Jews

 

[P F Tinmore]

Having said that, I still reserve the right to judge them on their behavior once they became a country in the modern sense.

Since the beginning of their new-found state they have-----

[1] assassinated foreign leaders

[2] used bombs to blow up busses and people in crowds

[3] murdered man women and children i.e. entire Palestinian villages and then bulldozed the villages to the ground and then built illegal settlements on top of them

[4] IDF snipers shooting Palestinian children while sitting at their UN sponsored classroom desks or walking down the street

In my view that above actions and many others should disqualify them of statehood.

We welcome reasoned discussion on any or all of the above topics. This is not the appropriate thread. I would suggest you find a thread (or start one) and ask some specific questions about specific events.

I do find your comments about disqualifiactions from statehood to be interesting, though I think its rather more a removal of statehood, than a disqualification or prevent of forming statehood at this point, with respect to Israel. Current international legal standards do not have a "removal of statehood" option based on moral principles or guidelines. There is no process by which this can occur. The assumption of an absolute right to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity is the norm. I wonder what such a thing would look like? I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

I wonder how one would achieve this "removal of statehood"? To whom should it apply?

Good questions.

There is a lot of documented evidence that Palestine was a state since 1924 including a trade agreement with the US in 1932. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine's independence, on is own territory that was defined by international borders in 1948. On the other hand, Israel never had a defined territory. Several times the UN has recognized the existence of Palestine and its international borders.

UN membership is not a defining factor. Switzerland did not become a member in the UN until 2004. Nobody said it was not a state before then.

So how do you remove statehood? Who has that authority?

Are You done with fiction?
That Palestine You're talking about is the Jewish National Home, aka Israel.
There's no part in that land over which the Jewish Nation wasn't vested with sovereignty.

That Israel has even considered allowing any other state inside it's territory is an act of great generosity.

Nice deflection.

9 years, and still can't refute this very simple point.

It is you who has never proven your point.