Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods
So apparently a billion people want Jews dead? Did you not take into consideration that each of these people are individual human beings with their own identities or are you assuming that Muslims aren't human beings and should not be treated as such?
Oxymoron wrote:First Tax plan, now Jerusalem. Trump is the greatest President in my lifetime!
4 more years 4 more years
Atlantis wrote:The lunatic has actually done it.
The Americans understand very well that this senseless gestures could cause bloodshed in the ME. The state department has advised all embassies in the region to avoid non-essential travel in the coming weeks.
He is deliberately and without any need poking into a wasps' nest. What is he trying to achieve? A showdown with Iran?
Rich wrote:The Senate voted 90-0 to recognise Jerusalem as capital.
noir wrote:History in making. Trump knows something that is not reported in MSM
Oxymoron wrote:As a libertarian that is very ironic thing to say.
Igor Antunov wrote:Russia did the same recently.
Only people who will be upset by this will be left-wing anti-semites (Islamist allies-so, entire western establishment) and right wing anti-semites.
Rich wrote:How is he a lunatic? The Senate voted 90-0 to recognise Jerusalem as capital. Trump is showing wisdom and modesty. Why should he contradict the opinion of the unanimous Senate? The American people's view has been made clear.
The idiots are the pathetic fantacists who imagine that Israel will give back Jerusalem. East Jerusalem is surrounded by Jewish settlement blocks. Really if anyone has the slightest respect for the Palestinian Arabs, they should tell them the only way you'll get Jerusalem back is though war.
Its amazing how much importance European Muslim lovers attach to their empty posturing. While you've been engaged in this worthless virtue signalling Israel has been creating facts on the grounds.
Haaretz wrote:Heads of Jerusalem churches deliver last-minute plea to Trump
13 Christian leaders warn of the 'hatred, conflict, violence and suffering' and 'irreparable harm' that a change in US policy on Jerusalem could create
The patriarchs and heads of the main churches in Jerusalem on Wednesday delivered a last-minute plea to US President Donald Trump, urging him not to change US policy toward Jerusalem for fear this could cause “irreparable harm.”
“We have been following, with concern, the reports about the possibility of changing how the United States understands and deals with the status of Jerusalem,” a letter from them Wednesday said.
Trump was giving a speech later Wednesday in which he is expected to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The move has sparked widespread outrage in the Arab and Muslim world, fears of violence and pleas from world leaders to hold back.
“We are certain that such steps will yield increased hatred, conflict, violence and suffering in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, moving us farther from the goal of unity and deeper toward destructive division.
“We ask from you, Mr President, to help us all walk towards more love and a definitive peace, which cannot be reached without Jerusalem being for all.”
The letter goes on, “Our solemn advice and plea is for the US to continue recognizing the present international status of Jerusalem. Any sudden changes would cause irreparable harm.”
The letter is signed by the heads of the Greek, Syrian, Armenian, Ethiopian and Coptic Orthodox patriarchates, the Latin church, the Franciscan Order, the Greek-Melkite-Catholic patriarchate, the Maronites, the Episcopal Church, the Armenian and Syrian Catholic churches and the Evangelical Lutherans.
Haaretz wrote:On the other hand, the lack of official recognition is not tantamount to a boycott of Jerusalem as the seat of Israel’s government. Foreign ambassadors come to the president’s residence in the capital to present their credentials when they take up their positions. And, more generally, foreign officials regularly visit Jerusalem to meet and work with their Israeli counterparts.
So how did Jerusalem go from hosting 16 embassies to zero? The first blow occurred after the Yom Kippur War, when Ivory Coast, Zaire and Kenya all severed relations with Israel following a meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement in Algiers in September 1973. Though all three eventually restored relations with Israel – Zaire in 1981, Ivory Coast in 1986 and Kenya in 1988 – ultimately, their reopened legations were based in the Tel Aviv area.
The remaining 13 states shuttered their Jerusalem embassies in 1980, following the Knesset’s passage of the Basic Law on Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel, which stated that the city would remain the “complete and united capital of Israel.” Though the law did not substantially change the situation that had existed on the ground since Israel had reunited the divided city in June 1967, expanding its boundaries by a factor of three, the UN Security Council perceived the move as a provocation and condemned it as a violation of international law. Security Council Resolution 478 in August 1980 called upon member states to remove their diplomatic missions from Jerusalem.
Although both Costa Rica and El Salvador brought their embassies back to West Jerusalem for a spell, beginning in 1984, by 2006 they had once again left the city. (Bolivia broke off relations with Israel altogether in 2009.)
In the meantime, Israel continued to take demonstrative steps to strengthen its hold on an undivided Jerusalem, expanding the 1980 Basic Law with a 2014 law requiring that any decision to withdraw from part of Jerusalem (or the Golan Heights) be approved by a Knesset super-majority of 80 members, as well as a public referendum on the question.
From the UN’s point of view, Jerusalem remains corpus separatum, a “bubble” that doesn’t belong to any state. When this was initially proposed as part of the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine, it was intended to be the city’s permanent status – an international city holy to three major religions and accessible to all of the world’s citizens. Israel’s pre-state government accepted the plan, but the Palestinians did not.
When the War of Independence ended in 1949, the armistice agreements left Jordan in control of the city’s eastern neighborhoods and Israel those of the west. A short time later, the two countries officially annexed the sections they occupied, with Israel declaring in 1950 that Jerusalem was its eternal capital and an inseparable part of the state.
In his 2001 book “Jerusalem: The Contested City,” political scientist Menachem Klein described negotiations that went on between Israel and Jordan prior to 1950, in which they attempted to agree on a plan for the division of the city. For Israel, the top priority was to have access to the Western Wall in the Old City, as well as safe passage to the Hebrew University campus on Mount Scopus. To those ends, at one point it offered to cede to Jordan largely Arab-populated neighborhoods in the city’s south, including the German Colony, Katamon, Baka and even Kibbutz Ramat Rachel. This was intended to give the Jordanians territorial contiguity in its eastern and southern parts.
Though the two countries got as far as drafting an agreement on Jerusalem in December 1949, they never signed it. A few months later, negotiations stalled over these issues and also the status of the Negev and the Latrun area between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
If the United States does go ahead this week with its reported plan to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, vehement opposition can be anticipated among the Palestinians and the Muslim world in general, but also from the world community, which has maintained a consensus on this issue for nearly 70 years.
Nonetheless, the difference between vocal opposition and a more militant response may well depend on the precise phrasing of the U.S. announcement, and the implications it has for the future. When it comes to Jerusalem, the changing of a light bulb in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the type of mundane task with the potential to explode into a new religious war.
Though it hardly threatened international hostilities, a 1952 case in Jerusalem District Court provided some evidence of how complex the implications of the city’s contested legal situation can be. In a 2011 paper, legal scholar Prof. Ruth Lapidot described the case of a driver employed by the Belgian Consulate in West Jerusalem, hitting and killing a local resident, one Mr. Shababo. When Shababo’s family filed a civil case against the driver and the consulate in the district court, the defense claimed that Israel’s courts had no jurisdiction in the matter – not because the driver, Roger Heilen, had diplomatic immunity, but because the accident had taken place in Jerusalem, which the international community did not recognize as being under Israeli sovereignty. The court dismissed the claim.
The sheepdog meets its master, the sapper who retu[…]
If only I cited tweets from New Jersey-based vegan[…]
Is it possible to be a right-wing Marxist? I've be[…]
Have you revised your precious views on this? ;)[…]