Even U.S. Media now reports that Israel broke truce with attack on Hamas leader.

[RoccoR]

Urbanguerrilla, et al,

In part, I agree that when people generally hear the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" they don't have a clear understanding, and thus --- using the word becomes meaningless. That is why I usually accompany my explanations with an excerpt from the appropriate subject matter document.

@fanger, et al,

Wow, I can't believe you said this with a straight face. (You must have been laughing!)

Condemning also in the strongest terms the incitement of terrorist acts and repudiating attempts at the justification or glorification (apologie) of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts,​

I believe there is a prima facie case that the UNHRC is furthering the terrorist cause in word, actions and deeds, by jumping to the aid of a general population that has actively rendered assistance, participates in, and incites the development of terrorism. While the UNHRC believe that their mission is of the highest order, they diminishes the cause of Human Rights by rewarding (aiding and abetting) a general population that actively supports terrorist goals and objectives.

Most Respectfully,
R

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

(COMMENT)

Of course fear is a component. If you discharge your weapon in the line-of-duty and the shooting review board ask, I recommend you start by saying: "I was in fear for my life."

But in the beginning, I thought of terrorism in terms of the actual actions and deeds taken.

• The Munich massacre was an attack during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, on 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team, who were taken hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian group Black September.

• Leon Klinghoffer was a disabled American, wheelchair bound, appliance manufacturer who was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985.

• Navy Diver, Robert Stethem, beaten, shot in the head, body out of the plane onto the ramp, June 14, 1985 on Flight 847 that was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists and Islamic Jihad shortly after take off from Athens. The hijackers were seeking the release of 700 Shi'ite Muslims from Israeli custody.

Terrorism, in 90% of the discussions here in the USMB, is a developmental definition. Probably one of the very best developed definitions I've seen is the one used by the European Union:

Article 1​

Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:

- seriously intimidating a population, or​

- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or

- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,

shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:

(a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;​

(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;

(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;

(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;

(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).​

2. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.​

Article 2

Offences relating to a terrorist group​

1. For the purposes of this Framework Decision, "terrorist group" shall mean: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. "Structured group" shall mean a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership or a developed structure.

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional acts are punishable:

(a) directing a terrorist group;​

(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.​

Article 3

Offences linked to terrorist activities​

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that terrorist-linked offences include the following acts:

(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);​

(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);

(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).​

Article 4

Inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting​

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that inciting or aiding or abetting an offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3 is made punishable.​

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i), is made punishable.​

Now there are just a whole slew of concepts and principles here, and these are just the first four Articles, but the theory behind "terrorism" is not as simple as "just being terrified." So in that regard, you are quite intuitive; much more so than I was nearly four decades ago when I was first learning the true meanings.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[jillian]

So, neg rep me oh wait!

no wonder losers like you, tin head and sunni ijit like the new board.

 

[Crystalclear]

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

Of course the word isn't meaningless, since most of the civilized world officially recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organisation.

 

[Crystalclear]

the UNHRC is not jumping to the defense of a designated terrorist organization.
It is defending the Human rights of the civilians in Gaza attacked by Israel in violation of the Geneva convention, a War crime, and condoning a war crime is also a crime
"
"Ever(y) rocket and mortar fired into Israel is a crime, a direct attack on the sovereign integrity of the State of Israel and threatens the safety of its citizens"
what about "rocket and mortar fired into" occupied Palestine


Most Respectfully, see you in court

So, according to you Israel is not allowed to fight back when being attacked by Hamas? Israel should just do nothing and watch Israeli citizens being killed by rockets and mortars fired by Hamas?

 

[aris2chat]

Noooope.
The MEDIA usual reports relay over rating, 'Ceasefire broken, Israel airstrike on Gaza' is the usual report for Israel retaliation against the Hamas assaults..CNN/BBC/EL JAZEERA Are well known for that.

BREAKING Hamas Breaks Ceasefire for Eleventh Time IDF Retaliates

 

[P F Tinmore]

fanger, Phoenall, et al,

Hmmm,

Recently, HAMAS Sheikh Saleh Arouri admitted to the kidnapping and murder of three students.

You Made that Part up,

Wrong as it is all over the interweb for all to see, and the source is Turkish

He Praised the event, He never "admitted to the kidnapping and murder of three students". Rocco Made that Part up

(OBSERVATIONs)

Posted in: Middle East Posted: August 21, 2014 The Inquisitr
Link> Hamas Finally Admits To Kidnapping And Killing Israeli Teens

The big reveal occurred Wednesday, when senior Hamas sheikh Saleh Arouri announced at a press conference in Turkey that “Hamas’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, [had] carried out what he described as [the] ‘heroic operation’ with the broader goal of sparking a new Palestinian uprising.” What Hamas had not intended to do, he said, was “ignite [such] a large battle, but Allah has chosen and willed that a large battle would be ignited.”​

By Leonard Greene August 22, 2014 | 3:00am New York Post
Link> Senior Hamas figure admits group kidnapped Israeli teens

Saleh Arouri, a senior Hamas religious figure, told a conference in Turkey Wednesday that the group’s military wing, al-Qassam Brigades, carried out the “heroic operation” with the goal of sparking a new Palestinian uprising.
“It was an operation by your brothers from al-Qassam Brigades,” he told sympathizers in, adding Hamas had hoped to exchange the youths for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.
​

(COMMENT)

​

I didn't make anything up. I try (my very best) not to mislead anyone. Look at the Posting again.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't question your links but the news first came out by Israel, and all the papers followed suit. Unreliable.

That is the basic structure of the media. Every MSM source has its office in Israel. Israel hands them a press release and that is your news. If it is a lie that is your news.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Urbanguerrilla, et al,

In part, I agree that when people generally hear the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" they don't have a clear understanding, and thus --- using the word becomes meaningless. That is why I usually accompany my explanations with an excerpt from the appropriate subject matter document.

@fanger, et al,

Wow, I can't believe you said this with a straight face. (You must have been laughing!)

Condemning also in the strongest terms the incitement of terrorist acts and repudiating attempts at the justification or glorification (apologie) of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts,​

I believe there is a prima facie case that the UNHRC is furthering the terrorist cause in word, actions and deeds, by jumping to the aid of a general population that has actively rendered assistance, participates in, and incites the development of terrorism. While the UNHRC believe that their mission is of the highest order, they diminishes the cause of Human Rights by rewarding (aiding and abetting) a general population that actively supports terrorist goals and objectives.

Most Respectfully,
R

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

(COMMENT)

Of course fear is a component. If you discharge your weapon in the line-of-duty and the shooting review board ask, I recommend you start by saying: "I was in fear for my life."

But in the beginning, I thought of terrorism in terms of the actual actions and deeds taken.

• The Munich massacre was an attack during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, on 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team, who were taken hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian group Black September.

• Leon Klinghoffer was a disabled American, wheelchair bound, appliance manufacturer who was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985.

• Navy Diver, Robert Stethem, beaten, shot in the head, body out of the plane onto the ramp, June 14, 1985 on Flight 847 that was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists and Islamic Jihad shortly after take off from Athens. The hijackers were seeking the release of 700 Shi'ite Muslims from Israeli custody.

Terrorism, in 90% of the discussions here in the USMB, is a developmental definition. Probably one of the very best developed definitions I've seen is the one used by the European Union:

Article 1​

Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:

- seriously intimidating a population, or​

- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or

- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,

shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:

(a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;​

(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;

(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;

(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;

(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
2. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.​

Article 2

Offences relating to a terrorist group​

1. For the purposes of this Framework Decision, "terrorist group" shall mean: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. "Structured group" shall mean a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership or a developed structure.

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional acts are punishable:

(a) directing a terrorist group;​

(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.​

Article 3

Offences linked to terrorist activities​

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that terrorist-linked offences include the following acts:

(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);​

(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);

(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).​

Article 4

Inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that inciting or aiding or abetting an offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3 is made punishable.​

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i), is made punishable.​

Now there are just a whole slew of concepts and principles here, and these are just the first four Articles, but the theory behind "terrorism" is not as simple as "just being terrified." So in that regard, you are quite intuitive; much more so than I was nearly four decades ago when I was first learning the true meanings.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then, of course, there is the Palestinian's legitimate right to self defense.

 

[toastman]

Urbanguerrilla, et al,

In part, I agree that when people generally hear the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" they don't have a clear understanding, and thus --- using the word becomes meaningless. That is why I usually accompany my explanations with an excerpt from the appropriate subject matter document.

@fanger, et al,

Wow, I can't believe you said this with a straight face. (You must have been laughing!)

Condemning also in the strongest terms the incitement of terrorist acts and repudiating attempts at the justification or glorification (apologie) of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts,​

I believe there is a prima facie case that the UNHRC is furthering the terrorist cause in word, actions and deeds, by jumping to the aid of a general population that has actively rendered assistance, participates in, and incites the development of terrorism. While the UNHRC believe that their mission is of the highest order, they diminishes the cause of Human Rights by rewarding (aiding and abetting) a general population that actively supports terrorist goals and objectives.

Most Respectfully,
R

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

(COMMENT)

Of course fear is a component. If you discharge your weapon in the line-of-duty and the shooting review board ask, I recommend you start by saying: "I was in fear for my life."

But in the beginning, I thought of terrorism in terms of the actual actions and deeds taken.

• The Munich massacre was an attack during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, on 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team, who were taken hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian group Black September.

• Leon Klinghoffer was a disabled American, wheelchair bound, appliance manufacturer who was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985.

• Navy Diver, Robert Stethem, beaten, shot in the head, body out of the plane onto the ramp, June 14, 1985 on Flight 847 that was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists and Islamic Jihad shortly after take off from Athens. The hijackers were seeking the release of 700 Shi'ite Muslims from Israeli custody.

Terrorism, in 90% of the discussions here in the USMB, is a developmental definition. Probably one of the very best developed definitions I've seen is the one used by the European Union:

Article 1​

Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:

- seriously intimidating a population, or​

- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or

- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,

shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:

(a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;​

(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;

(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;

(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;

(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
2. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.​

Article 2

Offences relating to a terrorist group​

1. For the purposes of this Framework Decision, "terrorist group" shall mean: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. "Structured group" shall mean a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership or a developed structure.

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional acts are punishable:

(a) directing a terrorist group;​

(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.​

Article 3

Offences linked to terrorist activities​

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that terrorist-linked offences include the following acts:

(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);​

(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);

(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).​

Article 4

Inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that inciting or aiding or abetting an offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3 is made punishable.​

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i), is made punishable.​

Now there are just a whole slew of concepts and principles here, and these are just the first four Articles, but the theory behind "terrorism" is not as simple as "just being terrified." So in that regard, you are quite intuitive; much more so than I was nearly four decades ago when I was first learning the true meanings.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then, of course, there is the Palestinian's legitimate right to self defense.

Give me three specific examples of Palestinians having defended themselves ..

 

[P F Tinmore]

Urbanguerrilla, et al,

In part, I agree that when people generally hear the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" they don't have a clear understanding, and thus --- using the word becomes meaningless. That is why I usually accompany my explanations with an excerpt from the appropriate subject matter document.

@fanger, et al,

Wow, I can't believe you said this with a straight face. (You must have been laughing!)

Condemning also in the strongest terms the incitement of terrorist acts and repudiating attempts at the justification or glorification (apologie) of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts,​

I believe there is a prima facie case that the UNHRC is furthering the terrorist cause in word, actions and deeds, by jumping to the aid of a general population that has actively rendered assistance, participates in, and incites the development of terrorism. While the UNHRC believe that their mission is of the highest order, they diminishes the cause of Human Rights by rewarding (aiding and abetting) a general population that actively supports terrorist goals and objectives.

Most Respectfully,
R

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

(COMMENT)

Of course fear is a component. If you discharge your weapon in the line-of-duty and the shooting review board ask, I recommend you start by saying: "I was in fear for my life."

But in the beginning, I thought of terrorism in terms of the actual actions and deeds taken.

• The Munich massacre was an attack during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, on 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team, who were taken hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian group Black September.

• Leon Klinghoffer was a disabled American, wheelchair bound, appliance manufacturer who was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985.

• Navy Diver, Robert Stethem, beaten, shot in the head, body out of the plane onto the ramp, June 14, 1985 on Flight 847 that was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists and Islamic Jihad shortly after take off from Athens. The hijackers were seeking the release of 700 Shi'ite Muslims from Israeli custody.

Terrorism, in 90% of the discussions here in the USMB, is a developmental definition. Probably one of the very best developed definitions I've seen is the one used by the European Union:

Article 1​

Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:

- seriously intimidating a population, or​

- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or

- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,

shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:

(a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;​

(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;

(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;

(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;

(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
2. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.​

Article 2

Offences relating to a terrorist group​

1. For the purposes of this Framework Decision, "terrorist group" shall mean: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. "Structured group" shall mean a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership or a developed structure.

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional acts are punishable:

(a) directing a terrorist group;​

(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.​

Article 3

Offences linked to terrorist activities​

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that terrorist-linked offences include the following acts:

(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);​

(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);

(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).​

Article 4

Inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that inciting or aiding or abetting an offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3 is made punishable.​

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i), is made punishable.​

Now there are just a whole slew of concepts and principles here, and these are just the first four Articles, but the theory behind "terrorism" is not as simple as "just being terrified." So in that regard, you are quite intuitive; much more so than I was nearly four decades ago when I was first learning the true meanings.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then, of course, there is the Palestinian's legitimate right to self defense.

Give me three specific examples of Palestinians having defended themselves ..

Anything that opposes the occupation and colonization of Palestine.

 

[toastman]

Urbanguerrilla, et al,

In part, I agree that when people generally hear the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" they don't have a clear understanding, and thus --- using the word becomes meaningless. That is why I usually accompany my explanations with an excerpt from the appropriate subject matter document.

@fanger, et al,

Wow, I can't believe you said this with a straight face. (You must have been laughing!)

Condemning also in the strongest terms the incitement of terrorist acts and repudiating attempts at the justification or glorification (apologie) of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts,​

I believe there is a prima facie case that the UNHRC is furthering the terrorist cause in word, actions and deeds, by jumping to the aid of a general population that has actively rendered assistance, participates in, and incites the development of terrorism. While the UNHRC believe that their mission is of the highest order, they diminishes the cause of Human Rights by rewarding (aiding and abetting) a general population that actively supports terrorist goals and objectives.

Most Respectfully,
R

The word "terrorist" is meaningless, do you really believe the Gazan civilians weren't terrorised by the Israeli bombers?

You know they were.

(COMMENT)

Of course fear is a component. If you discharge your weapon in the line-of-duty and the shooting review board ask, I recommend you start by saying: "I was in fear for my life."

But in the beginning, I thought of terrorism in terms of the actual actions and deeds taken.

• The Munich massacre was an attack during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany, on 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team, who were taken hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian group Black September.

• Leon Klinghoffer was a disabled American, wheelchair bound, appliance manufacturer who was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985.

• Navy Diver, Robert Stethem, beaten, shot in the head, body out of the plane onto the ramp, June 14, 1985 on Flight 847 that was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists and Islamic Jihad shortly after take off from Athens. The hijackers were seeking the release of 700 Shi'ite Muslims from Israeli custody.

Terrorism, in 90% of the discussions here in the USMB, is a developmental definition. Probably one of the very best developed definitions I've seen is the one used by the European Union:

Article 1​

Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:

- seriously intimidating a population, or​

- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or

- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,

shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:

(a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;​

(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;

(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;

(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;

(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
2. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of altering the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.​

Article 2

Offences relating to a terrorist group​

1. For the purposes of this Framework Decision, "terrorist group" shall mean: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. "Structured group" shall mean a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership or a developed structure.

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional acts are punishable:

(a) directing a terrorist group;​

(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.​

Article 3

Offences linked to terrorist activities​

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that terrorist-linked offences include the following acts:

(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);​

(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);

(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).​

Article 4

Inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that inciting or aiding or abetting an offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3 is made punishable.​

2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i), is made punishable.​

Now there are just a whole slew of concepts and principles here, and these are just the first four Articles, but the theory behind "terrorism" is not as simple as "just being terrified." So in that regard, you are quite intuitive; much more so than I was nearly four decades ago when I was first learning the true meanings.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then, of course, there is the Palestinian's legitimate right to self defense.

Give me three specific examples of Palestinians having defended themselves ..

Anything that opposes the occupation and colonization of Palestine.

You didn't answer my question. Give me three specific examples of Palestinians doing such..

 

[docmauser1]

That is the basic structure of the media. Every MSM source has its office in Israel.

1. Israel is civilized. And hostile journos can hate Israel safely.
2. Even hostile journos like to enjoy the israeli amenities after a hard day's lying.
3. The schmucky UN employees, that choose Israel to skedaddle to, if their "humanitarian" peace-loving asses feel the heat, are there for an occupational chat about how poor 'n robbed palistanians look in their palatial abodes.
4. Obsession with Israel and jews keeps the media there too.
5. Normal journos know the environs, the schmucky palistanians, and enjoy the relaxing assignment.
6. Etc..
   

   Israel hands them a press release and that is your news.

   Indeed, nothing less, nothing more. Lying like a pornstar is a palistanian occupation, of course.

   If it is a lie that is your news.

   Blessed Benny Morris noted that, "The Palestinian Authority (PA) has emerged as a virtual kingdom of mendacity, where every official, from President Arafat down, spends his days lying to a succession of western journalists. The reporters routinely give the lies credence equal to or greater than what they hear from straight, or far less mendacious, Israeli officials. One day Arafat charges that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) uses uranium-tipped shells against Palestinian civilians. The next day it’s poison gas. Then, for lack of independent corroboration, the charges simply vanish – and the Palestinians go on to the next lie, again garnering headlines in western and Arab newspapers."
   Altogether, if the palistanian "cause" is true, why must palistanians lie?

 

[montelatici]

Hahaha. You are soo wrong AGAIN there Phoney, its a wonder you don't choke trying to eat breakfast.

US law DOES apply outside the US if the US law says so. As does UK law and any other law that is passed.
They may have issues enforcing it, but that is a separate issue.

When do you hope to graduate high school? Better get to your remedial classes. Now run along boy.

Then you will be able to show were US or UK law has applied outside of the national boundaries of these nations, a simple one will do like showing were an American civilian who has a permit to carry a gun can carry a gun in the UK. Even simple motoring laws are unenforceable outside of the nation they apply in.

Maybe you should think about taking remedial classes as I am fully conversant with UK law and know that it over rules US law in the UK, IN FACT US LAW DOES NOT APPLY IN THE UK AT ALL

fanger, et al,

Read it slowly.

Rule 14. Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited.

Customary IHL - Rule 14. Proportionality in Attack
(bolded the part Rocco left out)

(COMMENT)

What is "prohibited?" It is the "civilian losses" versus the "Anticipated military advantage." This is a variation on the Hand Rule (B ≤ pL). The simplest explanation is:

"Our boy (Justice Learned Hand) basically said that a entity’s duty (and therefore negligence) could be comprised of the following elements: the probability that harm will occur (P), the amount of injury from the harm done (L), and the burden or cost of adequate precautions taken to prevent such an injury from happening (B). Assigning liability depends on whether the burden/cost of avoiding future injuries is less than the damage caused from the probability of such injuries. B < PL." (The Hand Rule)
​

This is really a first year contract law concept. The best book on this is called the
Economic Analysis of Law Hardcover – February 7, 2007 by Judge Richard A. Posner (Author) United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago
Amazon.com: Economic Analysis of Law (9780735563544): Richard A. Posner: Books

​

If the IDF has an expectation that the strike will result in the saving of Israeli life and property, and that is greater than the potential of collateral casualties and damage, then the strike is NOT prohibited. That is how it works.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

"If the IDF has an expectation that the strike will result in the saving of Israeli life and property, and that is greater than the potential of collateral casualties and damage, then the strike is NOT prohibited. That is how it works.'

I'm afraid not.

That is the basic structure of the media. Every MSM source has its office in Israel.

1. Israel is civilized. And hostile journos can hate Israel safely.
2. Even hostile journos like to enjoy the israeli amenities after a hard day's lying.
3. The schmucky UN employees, that choose Israel to skedaddle to, if their "humanitarian" peace-loving asses feel the heat, are there for an occupational chat about how poor 'n robbed palistanians look in their palatial abodes.
4. Obsession with Israel and jews keeps the media there too.
5. Normal journos know the environs, the schmucky palistanians, and enjoy the relaxing assignment.
6. Etc..
   

   Israel hands them a press release and that is your news.

   Indeed, nothing less, nothing more. Lying like a pornstar is a palistanian occupation, of course.

   If it is a lie that is your news.

   Blessed Benny Morris noted that, "The Palestinian Authority (PA) has emerged as a virtual kingdom of mendacity, where every official, from President Arafat down, spends his days lying to a succession of western journalists. The reporters routinely give the lies credence equal to or greater than what they hear from straight, or far less mendacious, Israeli officials. One day Arafat charges that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) uses uranium-tipped shells against Palestinian civilians. The next day it’s poison gas. Then, for lack of independent corroboration, the charges simply vanish – and the Palestinians go on to the next lie, again garnering headlines in western and Arab newspapers."
   Altogether, if the palistanian "cause" is true, why must palistanians lie?

Nonsense, from someone that can't spell "Palestinian",

 

[docmauser1]

Nonsense, from someone that can't spell "Palestinian",

Whatevah.

 

[Daniyel]

Hahaha. You are soo wrong AGAIN there Phoney, its a wonder you don't choke trying to eat breakfast.

US law DOES apply outside the US if the US law says so. As does UK law and any other law that is passed.
They may have issues enforcing it, but that is a separate issue.

When do you hope to graduate high school? Better get to your remedial classes. Now run along boy.

Then you will be able to show were US or UK law has applied outside of the national boundaries of these nations, a simple one will do like showing were an American civilian who has a permit to carry a gun can carry a gun in the UK. Even simple motoring laws are unenforceable outside of the nation they apply in.

Maybe you should think about taking remedial classes as I am fully conversant with UK law and know that it over rules US law in the UK, IN FACT US LAW DOES NOT APPLY IN THE UK AT ALL

fanger, et al,

Read it slowly.

Rule 14. Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited.

Customary IHL - Rule 14. Proportionality in Attack
(bolded the part Rocco left out)

(COMMENT)

What is "prohibited?" It is the "civilian losses" versus the "Anticipated military advantage." This is a variation on the Hand Rule (B ≤ pL). The simplest explanation is:

"Our boy (Justice Learned Hand) basically said that a entity’s duty (and therefore negligence) could be comprised of the following elements: the probability that harm will occur (P), the amount of injury from the harm done (L), and the burden or cost of adequate precautions taken to prevent such an injury from happening (B). Assigning liability depends on whether the burden/cost of avoiding future injuries is less than the damage caused from the probability of such injuries. B < PL." (The Hand Rule)
​

This is really a first year contract law concept. The best book on this is called the
Economic Analysis of Law Hardcover – February 7, 2007 by Judge Richard A. Posner (Author) United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago
Amazon.com: Economic Analysis of Law (9780735563544): Richard A. Posner: Books

​

If the IDF has an expectation that the strike will result in the saving of Israeli life and property, and that is greater than the potential of collateral casualties and damage, then the strike is NOT prohibited. That is how it works.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

"If the IDF has an expectation that the strike will result in the saving of Israeli life and property, and that is greater than the potential of collateral casualties and damage, then the strike is NOT prohibited. That is how it works.'

I'm afraid not.

That is the basic structure of the media. Every MSM source has its office in Israel.

1. Israel is civilized. And hostile journos can hate Israel safely.
2. Even hostile journos like to enjoy the israeli amenities after a hard day's lying.
3. The schmucky UN employees, that choose Israel to skedaddle to, if their "humanitarian" peace-loving asses feel the heat, are there for an occupational chat about how poor 'n robbed palistanians look in their palatial abodes.
4. Obsession with Israel and jews keeps the media there too.
5. Normal journos know the environs, the schmucky palistanians, and enjoy the relaxing assignment.
6. Etc..
   

   Israel hands them a press release and that is your news.

   Indeed, nothing less, nothing more. Lying like a pornstar is a palistanian occupation, of course.

   If it is a lie that is your news.

   Blessed Benny Morris noted that, "The Palestinian Authority (PA) has emerged as a virtual kingdom of mendacity, where every official, from President Arafat down, spends his days lying to a succession of western journalists. The reporters routinely give the lies credence equal to or greater than what they hear from straight, or far less mendacious, Israeli officials. One day Arafat charges that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) uses uranium-tipped shells against Palestinian civilians. The next day it’s poison gas. Then, for lack of independent corroboration, the charges simply vanish – and the Palestinians go on to the next lie, again garnering headlines in western and Arab newspapers."
   Altogether, if the palistanian "cause" is true, why must palistanians lie?

Nonsense, from someone that can't spell "Palestinian",

Palistan sound better for a Shari'a state leaking with Islamic terrorists.