BJ: "Closing straits of Tiran was an ACT OF WAR." Then Israel had to invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter when that announcement was made. Did she, BEN? Here is the flaw in your argument: Israel stated that it would *REGARD* the closing of the Straits of Tiran as "An act of war". Well, she gets to decide that? How convenient... Listen good: Q: Is boarding or sinking of a ship by a foreign country an "armed attack" under Article 51? A: Yes. Q: So Nasser's announcement of the closure of the Straits of Tiran was an "act of war"? A: No. Q: Why not? A: Because no Israeli ship was ever actually intercepted in the Straits of Tiran. The "Act of War" is the INTERCEPTION, BEN. Take off your zionist glasses for a second and look at the USA's announcement of a blockade of Cuba in 1962; by your argument that meant the USA started a war with Castro the moment the announcement was made. Correct, BEN, or are we going to see some more of your pro-Israeli hypocrisy?
Fear of rioting, disorder at Temple Mount prompt restrictions on Muslim worshiper (Haaretz)
from the article: Fayad: No point in goodwill gestures without negotiations