Boycott Israel

[Boston1]

I think Rocco is being very generous in his explanations here. As is Israel in allowing the Arab Muslims administrative control over some areas of the disputed territories. Even if they are entirely incompetent in either administration or economic management.

Had Israel never allowed such administrative control by the hostile Arabs who remained in the area and enforced the Geneva convention articles concerning the separation and treatment of POWs vs civilians this mess wouldn't exist today.

But our subject demands a mention. Obviously the effort is a failure. Israel has one of the strongest and most diverse economies in the world.

Its the Arab Muslims of the area that have suffered due to several pervading conditions

An absolutely pathetic GDP per capita of the Arab Muslims

VS Israels booming economy

VS everyone else, or at least some of them

How about another

And the final nail in that coffin

These latest few years which clearly show significant and steady growth in Israel's economy

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes, the intent was not let the Armistice lines form the permanent boundary. I agree. But it does not change the fact that Armistice Lines are protected under the Declaration of Principles. It does not undermine the sovereignty if Israel or the integrity of the Nation.

• An Armistice Line does not (repeat) does not affect the integrity of a Nation.

Indeed. Read those armistice agreements again.

(COMMENT)

Relative to our focus (West Bank), the 1949 Armistice Line is defined and totally encapsulate the West Bank; clearly identifying them as Demarcations (alla the Declaration of Principles) until replaced the Treaty which essentially dissolved the Armistice Line with Jordan and replaced it with a permanent international boundary.

Article VI(9): Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.
​

Article 3(2): Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994

The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
​

Yes, I agree there was a difference in the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, but still does not change the fact that the delineation is protected. And for all practical purposed, it has NO impact on the matter of integrity. The War was fought, and the territorial boundaries were established. And the boundaries were established between the parties to the Conflict: Israel 'vs' Egypt and Jordan. The Arab Palestinians did not have a recognized government, or any territorial control.

Article V(5), Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.

The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
​

Article II, Treaty Between Israel and Egypt : 1974

Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
​

And again, the Armistice Line dissolves and is replaced by the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine. Which entirely encapsulates the Gaza Strip.

You can claim what you will, but Armistice Lines are protected by the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

Claim is just merely subterfuge for the Arab Palestinian clinging to some right of insurgency, or some justification for continued hostilities. But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the present:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

< Prev

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes, the intent was not let the Armistice lines form the permanent boundary. I agree. But it does not change the fact that Armistice Lines are protected under the Declaration of Principles. It does not undermine the sovereignty if Israel or the integrity of the Nation.

• An Armistice Line does not (repeat) does not affect the integrity of a Nation.

Indeed. Read those armistice agreements again.

(COMMENT)

Relative to our focus (West Bank), the 1949 Armistice Line is defined and totally encapsulate the West Bank; clearly identifying them as Demarcations (alla the Declaration of Principles) until replaced the Treaty which essentially dissolved the Armistice Line with Jordan and replaced it with a permanent international boundary.

Article VI(9): Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.
​

Article 3(2): Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994

The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
​

Yes, I agree there was a difference in the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, but still does not change the fact that the delineation is protected. And for all practical purposed, it has NO impact on the matter of integrity. The War was fought, and the territorial boundaries were established. And the boundaries were established between the parties to the Conflict: Israel 'vs' Egypt and Jordan. The Arab Palestinians did not have a recognized government, or any territorial control.

Article V(5), Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.

The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
​

Article II, Treaty Between Israel and Egypt : 1974

Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
​

And again, the Armistice Line dissolves and is replaced by the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine. Which entirely encapsulates the Gaza Strip.

You can claim what you will, but Armistice Lines are protected by the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

Claim is just merely subterfuge for the Arab Palestinian clinging to some right of insurgency, or some justification for continued hostilities. But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the present:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

How does the State of Palestine define its territory?​

Let's go to that Israeli propaganda site, PMW. They have a whole piss and moan section called "Denying Israel's Right to Exist."




As far as I can tell they are correct. Every time that I have asked you to prove otherwise, you have danced around the answer.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes, the intent was not let the Armistice lines form the permanent boundary. I agree. But it does not change the fact that Armistice Lines are protected under the Declaration of Principles. It does not undermine the sovereignty if Israel or the integrity of the Nation.

• An Armistice Line does not (repeat) does not affect the integrity of a Nation.

Indeed. Read those armistice agreements again.

(COMMENT)

Relative to our focus (West Bank), the 1949 Armistice Line is defined and totally encapsulate the West Bank; clearly identifying them as Demarcations (alla the Declaration of Principles) until replaced the Treaty which essentially dissolved the Armistice Line with Jordan and replaced it with a permanent international boundary.

Article VI(9): Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.
​

Article 3(2): Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994

The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
​

Yes, I agree there was a difference in the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, but still does not change the fact that the delineation is protected. And for all practical purposed, it has NO impact on the matter of integrity. The War was fought, and the territorial boundaries were established. And the boundaries were established between the parties to the Conflict: Israel 'vs' Egypt and Jordan. The Arab Palestinians did not have a recognized government, or any territorial control.

Article V(5), Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.

The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
​

Article II, Treaty Between Israel and Egypt : 1974

Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
​

And again, the Armistice Line dissolves and is replaced by the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine. Which entirely encapsulates the Gaza Strip.

You can claim what you will, but Armistice Lines are protected by the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

Claim is just merely subterfuge for the Arab Palestinian clinging to some right of insurgency, or some justification for continued hostilities. But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the present:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Yes, yes, the intent was not let the Armistice lines form the permanent boundary. I agree. But it does not change the fact that Armistice Lines are protected under the Declaration of Principles. It does not undermine the sovereignty if Israel or the integrity of the Nation.​

Actually they were specifically not to be any kind of boundary at all.

That said, they did not disrupt Palestine's international boundaries at all.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes, the intent was not let the Armistice lines form the permanent boundary. I agree. But it does not change the fact that Armistice Lines are protected under the Declaration of Principles. It does not undermine the sovereignty if Israel or the integrity of the Nation.

• An Armistice Line does not (repeat) does not affect the integrity of a Nation.

Indeed. Read those armistice agreements again.

(COMMENT)

Relative to our focus (West Bank), the 1949 Armistice Line is defined and totally encapsulate the West Bank; clearly identifying them as Demarcations (alla the Declaration of Principles) until replaced the Treaty which essentially dissolved the Armistice Line with Jordan and replaced it with a permanent international boundary.

Article VI(9): Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.
​

Article 3(2): Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994

The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
​

Yes, I agree there was a difference in the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, but still does not change the fact that the delineation is protected. And for all practical purposed, it has NO impact on the matter of integrity. The War was fought, and the territorial boundaries were established. And the boundaries were established between the parties to the Conflict: Israel 'vs' Egypt and Jordan. The Arab Palestinians did not have a recognized government, or any territorial control.

Article V(5), Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.

The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
​

Article II, Treaty Between Israel and Egypt : 1974

Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
​

And again, the Armistice Line dissolves and is replaced by the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine. Which entirely encapsulates the Gaza Strip.

You can claim what you will, but Armistice Lines are protected by the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

Claim is just merely subterfuge for the Arab Palestinian clinging to some right of insurgency, or some justification for continued hostilities. But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the present:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?​

You keep jumping back into Israeli propaganda territory no matter how many times I post this.

The exercise of sovereignty is not the issue. It is the right to sovereignty. The people in non self governing territories have the right to sovereignty.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, this is so sad.

Independence and sovereignty are extraordinary intangible assets that intrinsically tied together. A nation cannot have sovereignty (right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference) without independence (the attribute of a nation that is autonomous).

How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

You keep jumping back into Israeli propaganda territory no matter how many times I post this.

The exercise of sovereignty is not the issue. It is the right to sovereignty. The people in non self governing territories have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Just as the UN Palestine Commission helped the Jewish People attain their sovereignty by first establishing independence over Israel; that presented by exhibiting control over the territory. Conversely --- it is the very rejection and lack of cooperation with the UN Palestine Commission that was key to Hostile Arab not being able to attaining independence and sovereignty. The Mandatory gave the Hostile Arab Palestinian plenty of notice by issuing the Memorandum of the Successor Government (Feb 1948) which the UK established that Palestine was a "legal entity" but it is not a sovereign state.

The concepts of independence and sovereignty is not a "silver platter" special on the menu that the Arab Palestinian can say: Oh, I want one of them. These concepts are about sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence. And they apply equally to the Jewish People and the Arab Palestinian; and the protection against the use of threats and force in order to subvert the territorial integrity and political independence. That means, the Arab Palestinian (which did not cooperate with the UNPC) must refrain in their use the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Israel (which did cooperate with the UNPC).

Odd --- the people that cooperated with the UNPC - achieved independence and sovereignty; while at the same time, the people that did not cooperate with the UNPC --- DID NOT --- acquire independence and sovereignty.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the presented:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Boston1]

I'll commend you for the effort Rocco but I don't think Tinmore is able to follow the conversation.

Great responses though, very informative

Thanks

 

[Shusha]

The concepts of independence and sovereignty is not a "silver platter" special on the menu that the Arab Palestinian can say: Oh, I want one of them.

BEST. LINE. EVER.

 

[Shusha]

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

I'm pretty sure Tin's consistent argument is that there are no boundaries between Palestine and Israel. Its all Palestine. Israel has no right to exist. But he can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

I'm pretty sure Tin's consistent argument is that there are no boundaries between Palestine and Israel. Its all Palestine. Israel has no right to exist. But he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Indeed, and that is the question that Rocco has been dancing around.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, this is so sad.

Independence and sovereignty are extraordinary intangible assets that intrinsically tied together. A nation cannot have sovereignty (right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference) without independence (the attribute of a nation that is autonomous).

How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

You keep jumping back into Israeli propaganda territory no matter how many times I post this.

The exercise of sovereignty is not the issue. It is the right to sovereignty. The people in non self governing territories have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Just as the UN Palestine Commission helped the Jewish People attain their sovereignty by first establishing independence over Israel; that presented by exhibiting control over the territory. Conversely --- it is the very rejection and lack of cooperation with the UN Palestine Commission that was key to Hostile Arab not being able to attaining independence and sovereignty. The Mandatory gave the Hostile Arab Palestinian plenty of notice by issuing the Memorandum of the Successor Government (Feb 1948) which the UK established that Palestine was a "legal entity" but it is not a sovereign state.

The concepts of independence and sovereignty is not a "silver platter" special on the menu that the Arab Palestinian can say: Oh, I want one of them. These concepts are about sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence. And they apply equally to the Jewish People and the Arab Palestinian; and the protection against the use of threats and force in order to subvert the territorial integrity and political independence. That means, the Arab Palestinian (which did not cooperate with the UNPC) must refrain in their use the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Israel (which did cooperate with the UNPC).

Odd --- the people that cooperated with the UNPC - achieved independence and sovereignty; while at the same time, the people that did not cooperate with the UNPC --- DID NOT --- acquire independence and sovereignty.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the presented:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are still dancing around the question.

 

[Shusha]

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

I'm pretty sure Tin's consistent argument is that there are no boundaries between Palestine and Israel. Its all Palestine. Israel has no right to exist. But he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Indeed, and that is the question that Rocco has been dancing around.

I'm pretty sure that puts you in a bit of a bind, though, Tin. I mean, if you support human rights, including the right to self-determination, you have to apply it to all peoples, don't you? And yet you seem to be saying that in a defined territory, or this defined territory, there can be only one people who have the right to self determination and there is no moral or legal way to split the territory into two (or more) parts to suit the legal and moral rights of BOTH peoples.

In other words, you are putting territorial integrity over human rights to self-determination. You don't see that as problematic?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, this is so sad.

Independence and sovereignty are extraordinary intangible assets that intrinsically tied together. A nation cannot have sovereignty (right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference) without independence (the attribute of a nation that is autonomous).

How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

You keep jumping back into Israeli propaganda territory no matter how many times I post this.

The exercise of sovereignty is not the issue. It is the right to sovereignty. The people in non self governing territories have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Just as the UN Palestine Commission helped the Jewish People attain their sovereignty by first establishing independence over Israel; that presented by exhibiting control over the territory. Conversely --- it is the very rejection and lack of cooperation with the UN Palestine Commission that was key to Hostile Arab not being able to attaining independence and sovereignty. The Mandatory gave the Hostile Arab Palestinian plenty of notice by issuing the Memorandum of the Successor Government (Feb 1948) which the UK established that Palestine was a "legal entity" but it is not a sovereign state.

The concepts of independence and sovereignty is not a "silver platter" special on the menu that the Arab Palestinian can say: Oh, I want one of them. These concepts are about sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence. And they apply equally to the Jewish People and the Arab Palestinian; and the protection against the use of threats and force in order to subvert the territorial integrity and political independence. That means, the Arab Palestinian (which did not cooperate with the UNPC) must refrain in their use the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Israel (which did cooperate with the UNPC).

Odd --- the people that cooperated with the UNPC - achieved independence and sovereignty; while at the same time, the people that did not cooperate with the UNPC --- DID NOT --- acquire independence and sovereignty.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the presented:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Independence and sovereignty are extraordinary intangible assets that intrinsically tied together. A nation cannot have sovereignty (right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference) without independence (the attribute of a nation that is autonomous).​

From the Montevideo Conference:

ARTICLE 4

States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, this is so sad.

Independence and sovereignty are extraordinary intangible assets that intrinsically tied together. A nation cannot have sovereignty (right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference) without independence (the attribute of a nation that is autonomous).

How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

You keep jumping back into Israeli propaganda territory no matter how many times I post this.

The exercise of sovereignty is not the issue. It is the right to sovereignty. The people in non self governing territories have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Just as the UN Palestine Commission helped the Jewish People attain their sovereignty by first establishing independence over Israel; that presented by exhibiting control over the territory. Conversely --- it is the very rejection and lack of cooperation with the UN Palestine Commission that was key to Hostile Arab not being able to attaining independence and sovereignty. The Mandatory gave the Hostile Arab Palestinian plenty of notice by issuing the Memorandum of the Successor Government (Feb 1948) which the UK established that Palestine was a "legal entity" but it is not a sovereign state.

The concepts of independence and sovereignty is not a "silver platter" special on the menu that the Arab Palestinian can say: Oh, I want one of them. These concepts are about sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence. And they apply equally to the Jewish People and the Arab Palestinian; and the protection against the use of threats and force in order to subvert the territorial integrity and political independence. That means, the Arab Palestinian (which did not cooperate with the UNPC) must refrain in their use the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Israel (which did cooperate with the UNPC).

Odd --- the people that cooperated with the UNPC - achieved independence and sovereignty; while at the same time, the people that did not cooperate with the UNPC --- DID NOT --- acquire independence and sovereignty.

(THE QUESTIONs OF PALESTINE)

But, it does not address or answer the basic question of the presented:

• How does the State of Palestine define its territory?
• How can it claim territory for which it never controlled and maintained sovereignty over?

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

These concepts are about sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence. And they apply equally to the Jewish People and the Arab Palestinian; and the protection against the use of threats and force in order to subvert the territorial integrity and political independence.​

Links?

 

[MaryL]

WHY would I want to boycott Israel?

So you won't be complicit in the atrocities Israel commits.

By buying Israeli products or services, you are supporting Israel. By supporting Israel, you are complicit in the crimes Israel commits.

To understand why someone would want to boycott these corporations (like SodaStream, Agrexco, etc), here are a few facts about the occupation:

-The Israeli authorities have maintained their air, land and sea blockade of Gaza, effectively imposing collective punishment on all 1.8m inhabitants.

-Israeli authorities control Palestinian imports and exports.

-They are building illegal Jewish-only settlements in Palestinian territories.

-In 2014, over 2,300 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces. 39 Israelis were killed.​

-Palestinian children are routinely tortured and killed in Israeli prisons.​

Boycotting can best be summed up this way...

Why boycott?

Boycotts enable consumers to:

1. Not be complicit in the practices of unethical corporations through supporting them financially.

2. Large scale boycotts can stop corporations engaging in unethical practices altogether.​

And finally, although this is just a rumor, I've heard boycotting Israel, makes you more attractive to the opposite sex.

First of all, I doubt I am complicit in helping anyone hurt a flea, let alone atrocities. Arabs, Palestinians and Muslims, umm, they aren't looking like poor victim morally untouchables as the OP supposes. 9/11 made my mind up on Arab- Palestinian- Muslim a long time ago. Yes, they are all connected.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, I've answered that a number of times

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

I'm pretty sure Tin's consistent argument is that there are no boundaries between Palestine and Israel. Its all Palestine. Israel has no right to exist. But he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Indeed, and that is the question that Rocco has been dancing around.

(COMMENT)

There are no Treaties and no Armistice Agreement between Israel and the Arab Palestine of the West Bank. The existing Treaty between Israel and Jordan establishes an international recognized boundary between Israel and Jordan:

Annex I (a) Jordan-Israel International Boundary Delimitation And Demarcation

2. The boundary is delimited as follows:

1. Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers
   
   A. The boundary Line shall follow the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers.
   B. The boundary line shall follow natural changes (accretion or erosion) in the course of the rivers unless otherwise agreed. Artificial changes in or of the course of the rivers shall not affect the location of the boundary unless otherwise agreed. No artificial changes may be made except by agreement between both Parties.
   C. In the event of a future sudden natural change in or of the course of the rivers (avulsion or cutting of new bed) the Joint Boundary Commission (Article 3 below) shall meet as soon as possible, to decide on necessary measures, which may include physical restoration of the prior location of the river course.
   D. The boundary line in the two rivers is shown on the 1/10,000 orthophoto maps dated 1994 (Appendix III attached to this Annex).
   E. Adjustment to the boundary line in any of the rivers due to natural changes (accretion or erosion) shall be carried out whenever it is deemed necessary by the Boundary Commission or once every five years.
   F. The lines defining the special Baqura/Naharayim area are shown on the 1:10,000 orthophoto map (Appendix IV attached to this Annex).
   G.
   The orthophoto maps and image maps showing the line separating Jordan from the territory that came under Israeli Military government control in 1967 shall have that line indicated in a different presentation and the legend shall carry on it the following disclaimer:
   
   "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”
   
   
   
2. Dead Sea and Salt Pans
   The boundary line is shown on the 1:50,000 image maps (2 sheets Appendix II attached to the Annex). The list of geographic and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates of this boundary line shall be based on Israel Jordan Boundary Datum (IJBD 1994) and, when completed and agreed upon by both parties, this list of coordinates shall be binding and take precedence over the maps as to the location of the boundary line in the Dead Sea and the salt pans.
   
   
3. Wadi Araba/Emek Ha’arava
   
   A. The boundary line is shown on the 1:20,000 orthophoto maps sheets, Appendix I attached to this Annex).
   B. The land boundary shall be demarcated, under a joint boundary demarcation procedure, by boundary pillars which will be jointly located, erected, measured and documented on the basis of the boundary shown in the 1/20,000 orthophoto maps referred to in Article 2-C-(1) above. Between each two adjacent boundary pillars the boundary line shall follow a straight line.
   C. The boundary pillars shall be defined in a list of geographic and UTM coordinates based on a joint boundary datum (IJBD 94) to be agreed upon by the Joint Team of Experts appointed by the two parties (hereinafter the JTE) using joint Global Positioning System (GPS) Measurements. The list of coordinates shall be prepared, signed and approved by both Parties as soon as possible and no later than 9 months after this Treaty enters into force and shall become part of this Annex. This list of geographic and UTM coordinates when completed and agreed upon by both Parties shall be binding and shall take precedence over the maps as to the location of the boundary line of this sector.
   D. The boundary pillars shall be maintained by both Parties in accordance with a procedure to be agreed upon. The coordinates in Article 2-C-(3) above shall be used to reconstruct boundary pillars in case they are damaged, destroyed or displaced.
   E. The line defining the Al-Ghamr/Zofar area is shown on the Wadi Araba/Emek Ha'arava orthophoto map (Appendix V attached to this Annex).

1. The Gulf of Aqaba
   The Parties shall act in accordance with Article 3.7 of the Treaty.

Although the Treaty acknowledges the West Bank, moving east from the coast line of the Mediterranean Sea, there is no other internationally recognized boundary until you reach the Israeli-Jordan boundary. This is with the exception of the Oslo Accords; which establishes Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C".

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Billo_Really]

First of all, I doubt I am complicit in helping anyone hurt a flea, let alone atrocities. Arabs, Palestinians and Muslims, umm, they aren't looking like poor victim morally untouchables as the OP supposes. 9/11 made my mind up on Arab- Palestinian- Muslim a long time ago. Yes, they are all connected.

Of coarse you're complicit; you're defending Israel.

Anyone defending Israel has blood on their hands.

BTW, the Palestinian's ARE victims.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, I've answered that a number of times

It would be very interesting to determine what you think are the boundaries of the State of Palestine versus the State of Israel.

I'm pretty sure Tin's consistent argument is that there are no boundaries between Palestine and Israel. Its all Palestine. Israel has no right to exist. But he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Indeed, and that is the question that Rocco has been dancing around.

(COMMENT)

There are no Treaties and no Armistice Agreement between Israel and the Arab Palestine of the West Bank. The existing Treaty between Israel and Jordan establishes an international recognized boundary between Israel and Jordan:

Annex I (a) Jordan-Israel International Boundary Delimitation And Demarcation

2. The boundary is delimited as follows:

1. Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers
   
   A. The boundary Line shall follow the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers.
   B. The boundary line shall follow natural changes (accretion or erosion) in the course of the rivers unless otherwise agreed. Artificial changes in or of the course of the rivers shall not affect the location of the boundary unless otherwise agreed. No artificial changes may be made except by agreement between both Parties.
   C. In the event of a future sudden natural change in or of the course of the rivers (avulsion or cutting of new bed) the Joint Boundary Commission (Article 3 below) shall meet as soon as possible, to decide on necessary measures, which may include physical restoration of the prior location of the river course.
   D. The boundary line in the two rivers is shown on the 1/10,000 orthophoto maps dated 1994 (Appendix III attached to this Annex).
   E. Adjustment to the boundary line in any of the rivers due to natural changes (accretion or erosion) shall be carried out whenever it is deemed necessary by the Boundary Commission or once every five years.
   F. The lines defining the special Baqura/Naharayim area are shown on the 1:10,000 orthophoto map (Appendix IV attached to this Annex).
   G.
   The orthophoto maps and image maps showing the line separating Jordan from the territory that came under Israeli Military government control in 1967 shall have that line indicated in a different presentation and the legend shall carry on it the following disclaimer:
   
   "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”
   
   
   
2. Dead Sea and Salt Pans
   The boundary line is shown on the 1:50,000 image maps (2 sheets Appendix II attached to the Annex). The list of geographic and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates of this boundary line shall be based on Israel Jordan Boundary Datum (IJBD 1994) and, when completed and agreed upon by both parties, this list of coordinates shall be binding and take precedence over the maps as to the location of the boundary line in the Dead Sea and the salt pans.
   
   
3. Wadi Araba/Emek Ha’arava
   
   A. The boundary line is shown on the 1:20,000 orthophoto maps sheets, Appendix I attached to this Annex).
   B. The land boundary shall be demarcated, under a joint boundary demarcation procedure, by boundary pillars which will be jointly located, erected, measured and documented on the basis of the boundary shown in the 1/20,000 orthophoto maps referred to in Article 2-C-(1) above. Between each two adjacent boundary pillars the boundary line shall follow a straight line.
   C. The boundary pillars shall be defined in a list of geographic and UTM coordinates based on a joint boundary datum (IJBD 94) to be agreed upon by the Joint Team of Experts appointed by the two parties (hereinafter the JTE) using joint Global Positioning System (GPS) Measurements. The list of coordinates shall be prepared, signed and approved by both Parties as soon as possible and no later than 9 months after this Treaty enters into force and shall become part of this Annex. This list of geographic and UTM coordinates when completed and agreed upon by both Parties shall be binding and shall take precedence over the maps as to the location of the boundary line of this sector.
   D. The boundary pillars shall be maintained by both Parties in accordance with a procedure to be agreed upon. The coordinates in Article 2-C-(3) above shall be used to reconstruct boundary pillars in case they are damaged, destroyed or displaced.
   E. The line defining the Al-Ghamr/Zofar area is shown on the Wadi Araba/Emek Ha'arava orthophoto map (Appendix V attached to this Annex).

1. The Gulf of Aqaba
   The Parties shall act in accordance with Article 3.7 of the Treaty.

Although the Treaty acknowledges the West Bank, moving east from the coast line of the Mediterranean Sea, there is no other internationally recognized boundary until you reach the Israeli-Jordan boundary. This is with the exception of the Oslo Accords; which establishes Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C".

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course that still leaves the question as to when Israel acquired the territory that it is claiming a border.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Of course, I've answer that just as often.

Of course that still leaves the question as to when Israel acquired the territory that it is claiming a border.

(COMMENT)
There are multiple phases to this.

• The Jewish Agency and Provisional Government cooperated with the UNSCOP and the UNPC.
• The UNSCOP submitted recommendation to the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly adopted a recommendation and establish the Step Preparatory to Independence (SPTI).
• The Jewish Agency and Provisional Government cooperated with the UNPC and complete the essential SPTI.
• In coordination with the Successor Government, on the UK withdraw from the territory under Mandate, The Provisional Government declared Independence IAW the Recommendation.
• The Arab League forces attacked from all the adjacent Arab States. Israeli forces first repulse and pursue Arab Forces, assuming more territory as the Arab Forces withdraw and escape.
• The UN Helps negotiate Armistice Agreements.

This is the end of the first phase.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Of course, I've answer that just as often.

Of course that still leaves the question as to when Israel acquired the territory that it is claiming a border.

(COMMENT)
There are multiple phases to this.

• The Jewish Agency and Provisional Government cooperated with the UNSCOP and the UNPC.
• The UNSCOP submitted recommendation to the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly adopted a recommendation and establish the Step Preparatory to Independence (SPTI).
• The Jewish Agency and Provisional Government cooperated with the UNPC and complete the essential SPTI.
• In coordination with the Successor Government, on the UK withdraw from the territory under Mandate, The Provisional Government declared Independence IAW the Recommendation.
• The Arab League forces attacked from all the adjacent Arab States. Israeli forces first repulse and pursue Arab Forces, assuming more territory as the Arab Forces withdraw and escape.
• The UN Helps negotiate Armistice Agreements.

This is the end of the first phase.

Most Respectfully,
R

There are a few things missing from your list.

• Who gave land to Israel?
• Whose land was given to Israel?
• Specifically what land was given? (borders/map)