UN map has removed Israel

[Momus--]

It looks like the UN has the same opinion of Israel as the current leader of Iran."

The current leader of Iran has:

Called for Israel's destruction

That the Jewish state should be moved to Europe if the West wants to make up for the Holocaust.

In October that Israel is a "disgraceful blot" that should be "wiped off the map."

Fine, now show me where the UN has ever indicated anything approaching what the new President of Iran is advocating.

All you have is an out of context photograph to support your statement that the UN=Iran on this issue.

If I'm wrong then you should able to provide more evidence that supports your statement. Lets have it.

So to discredit the picture you discredit the source.

The source is relevant when you wrongly claim it is the WSJ rather than an anti-UN activist site with little interest in providing any context that deviates from its agenda.

[Furious]

What is the date of those two photos?

[lasersailor184]

Fine, now show me where the UN has ever indicated anything approaching what the new President of Iran is advocating.

I can do that.






















































See.  The UN has done nothing to stop them.  They are practically giving Iran full play to do what they want.

[Eagler]

when Israel takes out Iran's nuke plant and every islam lovin country jumps her and we side with Israel, what side will the UN take then?

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Momus--
Fine, now show me where the UN has ever indicated anything approaching what the new President of Iran is advocating.

All you have is an out of context photograph to support your statement that the UN=Iran on this issue.

If I'm wrong then you should able to provide more evidence that supports your statement. Lets have it.


The source is relevant when you wrongly claim it is the WSJ rather than an anti-UN activist site with little interest in providing any context that deviates from its agenda.

You seem to be missing the point, I would draw a picture, but you might consider it out of context.

So the video link was still not good enough?

If you are wrong I could care less.
I have no need to prove it one way or the other because they (the UN) held a confrence with a map that did not include israel.


My opinion of the UN has been posted many times on this site.
They are a biased, corrupt, unprofessional and not worthy of US support.

[Krusher]

whoops 2

[Momus--]

Fine Krusher, you can't back up your assertion with anything other than single photograph irrespective of context and irrespective of statements made by the UN Secretary General on the subject.

You claim that the UN has no business in organising a day in memory of the plight of the palestinians yet have no problem with the UN doing the same thing in memory of the Holocaust.

You portray a map as a "UN map" when in fact it is an Arab map dating from the late 1940's.

You falsely claim that you are quoting the WSJ when in fact you are quoting an anti-UN website cited in a partisan Op-Ed piece.

Were the contents of the map that you have such a problem with endorsed by the UN General Assembly or the UN security Council? If not, then you can't claim that it's content represents the collective opinion of the UN anymore than you could claim that statements by John Bolton made on the floor of the UN represent the collective will of the UN.

You made a statement loaded with hyperbole that you can't back up, bottom line.

I'm through debating this with you unless you can give verifiable evidence to support your suggestion that the UN and Iran have a common policy on Israel.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Momus--
Fine Krusher, you can't back up your assertion with anything other than single photograph irrespective of context and irrespective of statements made by the UN Secretary General on the subject.

You claim that the UN has no business in organising a day in memory of the plight of the palestinians yet have no problem with the UN doing the same thing in memory of the Holocaust.

You portray a map as a "UN map" when in fact it is an Arab map dating from the late 1940's.

You falsely claim that you are quoting the WSJ when in fact you are quoting an anti-UN website cited in a partisan Op-Ed piece.

Were the contents of the map that you have such a problem with endorsed by the UN General Assembly or the UN security Council? If not, then you can't claim that it's content represents the collective opinion of the UN anymore than you could claim that statements by John Bolton made on the floor of the UN represent the collective will of the UN.

You made a statement loaded with hyperbole that you can't back up, bottom line.

I'm through debating this with you unless you can give verifiable evidence to support your suggestion that the UN and Iran have a common policy on Israel.

Again, I posted a video link that shows the same thing but you so far have decided to harp on the pictures that are valid but you do not like the source.

I said nothing of the sort. what I said was quote:
"I would have a problem with holocaust memorial day if they put up a map that showed Israel in place of Germany. "

I made a statement that leans heavily towards the bias of the UN.

Its a map the UN was using, the date is of no importance. Who made is again not important, the UN used it.

Falsely my butt, I stated the article came form a link in the opinionjournal, a wsj site. Your desire to smoke the issue because you do not like the site is besides the point. The fact that you describe it as an Anti-UN web site speaks for itself. If you don't like the message attack the messenger.

You must be kidding this has nothing to do with my original post, you attempt at that smoke screen is a waste of both of our time.

And you carefully ignored the unacceptable comments made by the leader of Iran while asking for proof of an opinion.

I have no intentions proving a pov.

Did the UN use a map at a UN function that referenced Palestine and ignored Israel.. the answer is yes.

[Nashwan]

"I would have a problem with holocaust memorial day if they put up a map that showed Israel in place of Germany. "

Has Israel ever been where Germany is? Not to my knowledge.

Has Palestine been where Israel is? Yes.

This whole fuss is about a map that shows "Palestine"? It might be news to you, but in early 1948 there was no Israel, but there was a Palestine.

I can't believe that people are taking issue with a 1948 map not showing a country that didn't exist in early 1948.

[straffo]

As the US is part of the UN  don't you think your blind hate olf the UN  make you shot your own foot ?.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Has Palestine been where Israel is? Yes.

Since 1948, Israel rules in the territory.

Before 1918 - 1948, Britain administered the region.

1517 - 1918 territory ruled by Ottoman Turks

1187 - 1516 Ruled from Cairo

1099 -1187 Kingdom of Jeruselem

1071 - 1099 Bagdhad

969 - 1071 Egypt

750 - 969, Bagdhad

661 - 750 Damascus

330 - 661 Byzantine

-63 - 330 Rome

-165 - 63 Maccabees

-333 - -165 Greek

-539 - -333 Persians

-586 - -539 Babylon

-721 - -586 Assyria

-928 division of Isreal and Judah

-965 - -928 King Solomon

-1250 Isrealite defaet Canaanites.

Until Gaza / West Bank of modern times there seems to have never been a country of Palestine.

[Nashwan]

Before 1918 - 1948, Britain administered the region.

Which was called?

Until Gaza / West Bank of modern times there seems to have never been a country of Palestine.

If I can quote the first line from the first British report on the Mandate:

"When General Allenby's army swept over Palestine, in a campaign as brilliant and decisive as any recorded in history, it occupied a country exhausted by war."

The modern attempts to remove the word "Palestine" from history seem rather Orwellian to me. Just how far it's gone can be seen by someone expressing outrage at a 1948 map not having Israel on it, and indeed claiming that Israel has been "removed" from it.

[Debonair]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Since 1948, Israel rules in the territory.

Before 1918 - 1948, Britain administered the region.

1517 - 1918 territory ruled by Ottoman Turks

1187 - 1516 Ruled from Cairo

1099 -1187 Kingdom of Jeruselem

1071 - 1099 Bagdhad

969 - 1071 Egypt

750 - 969, Bagdhad

661 - 750 Damascus

330 - 661 Byzantine

-63 - 330 Rome

-165 - 63 Maccabees

-333 - -165 Greek

-539 - -333 Persians

-586 - -539 Babylon

-721 - -586 Assyria

-928 division of Isreal and Judah

-965 - -928 King Solomon

-1250 Isrealite defaet Canaanites.

Until Gaza / West Bank of modern times there seems to have never been a country of Palestine.

Hey you left Alamut off your list.  That may still be dangerous, you never know...

[lasersailor184]

Has Palestine been where Israel is? Yes.

This whole fuss is about a map that shows "Palestine"? It might be news to you, but in early 1948 there was no Israel, but there was a Palestine.

Palestine is a geographical area.  Not a description of a people.


It is only recently that people have taken to calling the muslims from that area Palestinians, when they are closer to being Jordanians.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Which was called?

If I can quote the first line from the first British report on the Mandate:

"When General Allenby's army swept over Palestine, in a campaign as brilliant and decisive as any recorded in history, it occupied a country exhausted by war."

The modern attempts to remove the word "Palestine" from history seem rather Orwellian to me. Just how far it's gone can be seen by someone expressing outrage at a 1948 map not having Israel on it, and indeed claiming that Israel has been "removed" from it.

Just because a region is called Kurdistan the moniker does not make it a country.

Palestine was never a country until a few years ago.