Thomas,
You're becoming funnier and funnier....
You said, "I already did post that evidence to you. Can't you read?
Message 17059549;
Well, that was on a different thread that I do not read, so NO I did not see it and read it. And if you posted the link on this thread, I apologize I missed it. Either way, I can read and because it is obviously on a different thread, I did not see it.
In response to it, I will address it, specifically UN Resolution 242. It reads...
U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 242
NOVEMBER 22, 1967
The Security Council,
Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,
Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,
1. Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
2. Affirms further the necessity
(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;
3. Requests the Secretary General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;
4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
-------------------------------------------------------
Thomas, lets start here, by examining this part, "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force. This text focus is on the Arab states to make peace, which Israel, not the other way around. Lets look at US Ambassador Goldberg's statement about it (one of the authors of it, I might add!):
"It calls for respect and acknowledgement of the sovereignty of every state in the area. Since Israel never denied the sovereignty of its neighboring countries, the language obviously requires those countries to acknowledge Israel's sovereignty."
[Arthur Goldberg, "The Meaning of 242," The Jerusalem Post, June 10, 1977.]
Benjamin Netanyahu, in his book, A Durable Peace, pgs. 315-317, explains the situation quite well, so I will quote him....
"It took twelve years for Egypt to comply with the Security Council resolution. In explicitly refusing to make peace with Israel, other Arab states flout the dictates of Resolution 242 to this day. Yet with unsurpassed hypocrisy, they reverse causality yet again and claim that it is Israel that is in violation of a resolution which they themselves have yet to make the slightest gesture of compliance."...
Eugene Rostow, who was the U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs when the American administration took the initiative to draft the resolution, confirms the position of the authors:
"Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 ... rest on two principles. [First,] Israel may administer the territory until its Arab neighbors make peace. And [second,] when peace is made, Israel should withdraw to "secure and recognized borders," which need not be the same as the Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949."
So Tommy, why would Israel give back any land without first the acknowledgement of Israel as a nation, meaning the revision of the PLO charter, the halting of all terrorism, all neighboring Arab states recognizing and fully agreeing to the Resolution and acknowledgement, etc.?
The Arab states needed to move first, not the Israelis. They did not, and still do not. So again, this is another example of saying something they truly didn't mean (lip service). (Can it be another example of why my opinion is that we have to think twice when the Arab nations say they will acknowledge Israel as a nation? They say it, but never do it!} And from history we also see, even if they do it, they'll find an excuse to break it down the road. They even publish a PLO Phased Plan saying they will do so. "Get whatever we can get, and then we will use that to get the rest!" Again, a Jihad of deception!
[http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=16601701&s=jihad]
Please understand, you want us to believe in the side who are violent, murdering people who will do anything, including killing themselves for their cause. They kill innocent victims without one shred of remorse. By no stretch of the imagination, they are the worst terrorists in the world. And they train their kids to do the same. They use their innocent children as human shields and throw them out in the front line, so if they are killed, they could say how bad the Israelis are. They hold these kids up as heroes after they do this to them. Their sick! These are a people we should just bestow trust in?
Thomas, while you weren't home, someone came into to your house blew it up with your whole family in it, then went on to each one of your relatives in it, and did the same, would you trust that person when they decided to talk peace? You know the answer to that as well as I.
Hence, the example you give is NO example of acknowledging Israel as a nation, when they did not act upon doing so and the pre-conditions that would have allowed Israel to give back any land. Tommy, if you say something, but fail to act on it, your statement is useless. Just like this
acknowledgement. The verbal suggestion of an acknowledgment came with no action. If the Arabs want a Palestinian nation, acknowledge Israel as a nation, revise your PLO charter (and maps), halt ALL terrorism and I am sure Israel will comply with returning the occupied territories. (But most of us know returning the occupied territories will never be enough. Again, IMO, it will be a temporary appeasement until they decide the want all of Israel back, not just the territories they lost when they attacked Israel in 1967 for no reason. The PLO Phased Plan is more than sufficient evidence of this.)
And Thomas, you need to do a bit more research when posting the information you do. Such a weak piece of evidence to a request makes your position weaker than it already is, which can't get much weaker! But then again, all you have to work with is what you have to work with. So maybe I can't blame you when this is the best you come up with. It's better than when you come up with no defense, I suppose!
God Bless,
IGIT |
