The Ghost of T.

@Cami13428 @GoranS_1 @VerminusM The UN Charter (1945) outlaws acquiring territory by war. The Fourth Geneva Convention: Article 53 prohibits destroying or altering religious property on occupied land.

@Propina__ @GoranS_1 @VerminusM What law says this?

If it's cool for the Turks to convert the Church of Hagia Sophia into a mosque then why is it wrong for Israelis to convert the Al Aqsa mosque into the Third Temple?

@Keith_GadgetUK @VerminusM No. In 2026, conquest doesn't transfer sovereignty under international law. So your 'invasion introduces sovereignty' argument died 80 years ago. Any further questions?

@Propina__ @VerminusM So you acknowledge invasion introduces sovereignty into the invaded country?

@GoranS_1 @Cami13428 @VerminusM You're changing the subject. The question isn't who attacked whom. The question is: does occupying power give you the right to unilaterally change a holy site on occupied land? International law says no.

@Propina__ @Cami13428 @VerminusM At what point did IHL become so off balance that a country that has been attacked multiple times over 78 years, is supposed to return control over the area to the hostile inhabitants that attacked in the first place? What norms demand the attackers get to try again and again?

@Cami13428 @VerminusM Your friend is a p....

@Propina__ @VerminusM What international law?

@Cami13428 @VerminusM Dear Camil; International law is a system of rules, norms, and standards governing relations between sovereign states, international organizations, and sometimes individuals. You're welcome.

@Cami13428 @VerminusM The point is: is there a protected religious site on occupied territory today? Yes. And international law says: don't touch it.

@Propina__ @VerminusM And completely beside the point that you've made. Try harder 🥱

@XY5260162977675 @VerminusM Dersaadet, Islambol, Byzantium, Nova Roma.

@Propina__ @VerminusM Like what, Tsarigrad? Anyway: To which relevance to the occupation of unceded, violently taken indigenous land?

@XY5260162977675 @VerminusM Article 53 prohibits destroying or altering religious property on occupied land. That's the law. Not Jordanian law, not Ottoman law. 21st century international law. Your welcome.

@XY5260162977675 @VerminusM You're confusing historical sovereignty with present legal obligations. International law doesn't require me to name a 'correct legal entity' from the past. It requires the current occupying entity (which is Israel, since 1967) to follow the Fourth Geneva Convention.

@Cami13428 @VerminusM The horrific policy in Canada towards innocent natives isn't long ago.

@Propina__ @VerminusM Ive literally used a modern current day example of your medieval logic in action. Its telling you needed to pivot 🥱

@XY5260162977675 @VerminusM Nothing new. B''cause this has no impact on the status quo. The location remains occupied territory with protected religious status. Your argument distracts from the core of the matter: you are proposing an illegal, violent act at someone else's holy site. Not gonna happen.

@Propina__ @VerminusM OK, the Kingdom of Jordan gave up its claims of sovereignty over Jerusalem in 1988. Now what?

@XY5260162977675 @VerminusM Officially, yes. For centuries, other names were also used by the (local) population.

@Propina__ @VerminusM Constantinople became Istanbul on 30 March 1930.

@MaxNordau There are still many topics that need to be thoroughly investigated.

This didn’t happen fyi, someone needs to check on Turkish media

@Cami13428 @VerminusM The fact is that Medieval events must be judged in the context of that era. Fortunately, Indigenous children are not buried in the gardens of residential schools nowadays. share.google/GnbAbz5iIu9ELW…

@Propina__ @VerminusM There has never existed a law of conquest. Winners just took their winnings. Look at modern day Ukraine, according to your logic Russian conquest of their land is illegal. Yet they still have it. Nothing has changed, you just justify the one that suits your bias.

@Cami13428 @VerminusM No, I'm not claiming that. The laws of warfare, norms, and values ​​have changed over the centuries. I understand that evolution proceeds slowly in some communities, but times change. The UN, for example, did not yet exist back then.

@Propina__ @VerminusM Figures 😂

@Cami13428 @VerminusM No.

@Propina__ @VerminusM So youre saying all jews have to do is conquer the west bank and they can convert it. You won't have complain?

@AlexiosKomnin0s @VerminusM I have to admit that I'm meeting a down-to-earth Greek with great self-insight for the first time.

@Propina__ @VerminusM I can’t be bothered with such crap mate, I’m not 12.

@AlexiosKomnin0s @VerminusM History has its ups and downs. The Greeks have a genuine trauma from the many historical defeats. At least you're reasonable, I have to give you credit for that..

@Propina__ @VerminusM We’re both colonies buddy, don’t you worry about that.

@AlexiosKomnin0s @VerminusM Under the Ottomans, the Greeks at least had dignity and pride. Now (EU member) it's merely a German-Dutch colony which is considered a burden.

@Propina__ @VerminusM Yea I know, your conquests were a blessing, no bloodshed involved, you knocked on the door and they opened. Anyway, I’m not supporting Israel but I’m consistent with my views. Muslims only remember human rights when they talk about Israel. It’s the hypocrisy that I can’t stand.

@AlexiosKomnin0s @VerminusM Actually, it is absurd to compare Istanbul with Jerusalem. Turks are proud people who have brought order and peace to the regions where they ruled for centuries. It's impossible to make a comparison with Jews who, as it were, control an area in the context of 'Wiedergutmachung'.

@Propina__ @VerminusM “Special role” whatever. The occupation of the West Bank is also illegal according to the UN but as you can see it means nothing in reality. Force drives change. It was the same then and it is the same now albeit with a veil of international law paraphernalia.