Finally.........A Palestinian Contribution To Mankind

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

We can assign any noun-nomenclature that you prefer; other than on that already is taken

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, I have to chuckle at this.

You can't just indiscriminately bomb. That is illegal. You have to know what you are bombing and have good reason to.

(COMMENT)

It is standard practice for the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) (Palestinians) to fire thousand of rockets into Israel as a matter of indiscriminate fire.

Most Respectfully,
R

fire thousand of rockets into Israel​

Interesting statement considering Israel has no border there.

.....other than the border they defend from Islamic terrorists.

Oooooooooo, terrorist!

Is that all you got?

(COMMENT)

We can define the Arab Palestinian character and stature:

Stsirorret: A culture that is a dangerously disruptive influence to regional stability and security, associated with a very poor territory of human development, a non-self supporting people - dependent on international donations, know for their expertise in kidnapping and murder, Olympic Team Massacre, numerous airline hijackings, the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians and a people that instigate and incite violence for political gain that they are incapable of achieving though peaceful means.
​

You can deny the legacy earned of being a barbaric and savagely cruel --- But that changes nothing.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have to go back 40 years?

Must not be an ongoing problem.

 

[Phoenall]

I suggest they didn't care, they wanted to make a point, No one is safe against Israeli aggression, how would they not know that complex housed disabled people, they control all of Gaza, and know where everyone lives

So, yes, then. You believe that Israel knew that this was a home for disabled people and that Israel deliberately targeted it to kill disabled people.

You can't just indiscriminately bomb. That is illegal. You have to know what you are bombing and have good reason to.

So you finally admit that the arab muslims illegal weapons are illegal in all ways, and that they should cease and desist.

The IDF target the launch sites of illegal weapons, the known meeting places of the terrorist groups and the hamas "safe" houses. All these are legal valid targets, and if hamas happens to use a medical centre, school, mosque or hospital from which to fire illegal weapons then they are seen as valid military targets.


WANT TO TRY AGAIN AS YOU HAVE JUST PUT YOUR FOOT IN IT AND SHOWN ONCE AGAIN THAT YOU DONT WANT INTERNATIONAL LAW TO WORK FOR THE JEWS

 

[Phoenall]

They knew exactly what they were aiming at, they even stated they thought sniper fire came from that area

making it a valid military target. Now if you decide to fire on an Israeli hospital you would be guilty of a war crime and should be made to pay the price. Dont you read the Geneva conventions and the UN charter to see what constitutes a valid target, and dont you realize that murdering innocents could see repercussions against islam the world over. What will the refugee's do then when they are turned back and told that muslims are not welcome in the west anymore.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you argue that non-sense all the time.

fire thousand of rockets into Israel

Interesting statement considering Israel has no border there.

(COMMENT)

Every nation that transit into and out of Israel recognizes the need for travel documents when crossing a border control point. While tourist visa is not required for US citizens fin cases of stays not greater than 90 days. All diplomats must present their credentials to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or attain their Diplomatic Visa from the Israeli Consulate when traveling to Israel.

When this is done, this is recognition of "Statehood." Essentially, when Palestinians present their travel documents at the border checkpoint, that is a physical manifestation of a border within the realm of reality.

However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.

But, I choose to think YOUR CHALLENGE is merely a pro-Palestinian Ploy. Every Palestinian (West Bank or Gaza) and every Regional State, knows without question where the border for Israeli Sovereignty and Independence is currently locate.

Most Respectfully,
R

However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.​

So, the Palestinians cannot be in violation of any international law. International terrorism is out too. That is good to know.

No occupation? I don't see where that is true.

Najd was a Palestinian farm village whose existence predated the Ottoman Empire. Najd was attacked and occupied by Zionist/Israeli troops before the 1948 war. The People were expelled into Gaza. The Israeli settlement of Sderot was built on Najd land.

I can find no evidence that Israel has ever legally acquired that land.

BTW, it is illegal to annex occupied territory.

WRONG as they are illegals living on Israeli land and so any action they take is illegal and terrorism. International law applies to individuals as well as nations so they are still in existence, and the arab muslims are in breach of them constantly.

Then it cant be muslim can it, and must be Jewish. You forget that arab muslim troops invaded Israel before the 1948 war as well. This means that coupled with International laws the Jews owned the village and the arab's were illegal immigrants.

Then you are once again ignoring INTERNATIONAL LAWS and INTERNATIONAL TREATIES


Unless it is being done by arab muslims, then it is perfectly legal as INTERNATIONAL LAW of 1923 says it is. But hold on the same law gives the Jews the same rights so it must be legal for them as well.



Now were is the international treaty or international law that gives the land to the arab muslims ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

We can assign any noun-nomenclature that you prefer; other than on that already is taken

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, I have to chuckle at this.

(COMMENT)

It is standard practice for the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) (Palestinians) to fire thousand of rockets into Israel as a matter of indiscriminate fire.

Most Respectfully,
R

fire thousand of rockets into Israel​

Interesting statement considering Israel has no border there.

.....other than the border they defend from Islamic terrorists.

Oooooooooo, terrorist!

Is that all you got?

(COMMENT)

We can define the Arab Palestinian character and stature:

Stsirorret: A culture that is a dangerously disruptive influence to regional stability and security, associated with a very poor territory of human development, a non-self supporting people - dependent on international donations, know for their expertise in kidnapping and murder, Olympic Team Massacre, numerous airline hijackings, the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians and a people that instigate and incite violence for political gain that they are incapable of achieving though peaceful means.
​

You can deny the legacy earned of being a barbaric and savagely cruel --- But that changes nothing.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have to go back 40 years?

Must not be an ongoing problem.

Didnt you just go back 1000 years in a wasted attempt at deflection

 

[Phoenall]

Israel responsible for Gaza strikes on UN schools and shelters, inquiry finds
israel was responsible for striking seven United Nations sites used as civilian shelters during the 2014 Gaza war in which 44 Palestinians died and 227 others were injured, an inquiry ordered by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon has concluded.

Releasing the report on Monday, Ban condemned the attacks “as a matter of the utmost gravity” and said “those who looked to them for protection and who sought and were granted shelter there had their hopes and trust denied”.

Ban insisted that UN locations were “inviolable”.

The issue is particularly sensitive as the locations of all UN buildings – including schools used as shelters – are routinely provided to the Israeli military and updated in times of conflict.
Israel responsible for Gaza strikes on UN schools and shelters, inquiry finds

LATER RESCINDED AND ALTERED TO READ ISRAEL STRUCK AT WEAPONS SITES IN SCHOOL GROUNDS CAUSING MINIMAL DAMAGE TO THE SCHOOLS

 

[Phoenall]

A disabled people's home is a valid target for israeli thugs and their apologists

No an illegal weapons launch site or a building used for any military purpose is a valid target for any nations armed forces. Even the arab muslims have this right, but they cant target a school, hospital or any other civilian building just because it gets them propaganda value.

 

[Phoenall]

There was no military benefit from bombing the disabled peoples home

SAYS WHO as if there wasnt then it would not have been targeted

 

[Phoenall]

Blah, blah, blah. I've read about some of those "attacks" on schools. A bunch of poor innocent refugees lined up for tea and cookies and they get shelled by the evil Israeli (read: Jews). And then you find out that every single person who died in that particular shelling is a male between the ages of 15 and 40. Hmmmmm.

Couldn't possibly have been a valid military objective.

Its the same BS posted everywhere. Evil Israelis (read: Jews) just like killing people so they can take over the world. Blah. Blah. Standard anti-semitic crap. And the Palestinians are just poor innocents lined up for tea and cookies.

every single person who died in that particular shelling is a male between the ages of 15 and 40.​

What does that have to do with anything?

According to profiling this made them all potential terrorists in the pay of hamas

 

[Phoenall]

Rockets are indiscriminate by nature, when someone gives them controllable munitions, their fire will become more accurate,

And this makes them illegal and a war crime to use, so time to start arresting the arab muslims, start with the delagation in the UN

 

[Phoenall]

Dead lslamo's are worth the propaganda, right?

What, all six million? 1.5 million, a jewish finger nail?

That is what they have said themselves in the letter to the UN. Proving that they do not want peace just the genocide of the Jews and the destruction of Israel.

It was hamas that said this not the Jews

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, I have to chuckle at this.

You can't just indiscriminately bomb. That is illegal. You have to know what you are bombing and have good reason to.

(COMMENT)

It is standard practice for the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) (Palestinians) to fire thousand of rockets into Israel as a matter of indiscriminate fire.

Most Respectfully,
R

fire thousand of rockets into Israel​

Interesting statement considering Israel has no border there.

ACCORDING TO WHICH HATE SITE THIS TIME. There is a ceasefire line that acts as a border in such circumstances, and the UN has stated that the rockets are illegal and a war crime.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, I have to chuckle at this.

You can't just indiscriminately bomb. That is illegal. You have to know what you are bombing and have good reason to.

(COMMENT)

It is standard practice for the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) (Palestinians) to fire thousand of rockets into Israel as a matter of indiscriminate fire.

Most Respectfully,
R

fire thousand of rockets into Israel​

Interesting statement considering Israel has no border there.

.....other than the border they defend from Islamic terrorists.

Oooooooooo, terrorist!

Is that all you got?

More than you have as the nations in the area see hamas as a terrorist group, and also see the arab mulsims calling themselves palestinians as terrorists.


What do you have other than islamonazi propaganda and BLOOD LIBELS

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It does not matter what you can find. But first, the entire question is moot. Israel is interested in defensible borders, not the incorporation of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. As an adjunct, Israel want to contain a viable and demonstrable threat posed by Hostile Arab Palestinians. The release of containment is detrimental to regional security.

I can find no evidence that Israel has ever legally acquired that land.

BTW, it is illegal to annex occupied territory.

(COMMENT)

Legal - Illegal makes no difference.

Sovereignty and Independence have nothing to do with "legal or Illegal."

•• It has to do with implied recognition.
•• The sovereignty and independence is proved by the lack of higher incorporation (Israel being the supreme corporate entity).
•• As other international governments recognize the authority of the Government of Israel to regulation Immigration, Customs, import and export taxes, etc, is the acceptance of legality.
•• As the diplomatic community recognizes authority and establishes relations, then that is a form of tacit approval.
​

The lack of recognition sets the conditions and encourages indefinite "occupation" that eventually morphs into either a "dependent territory" or a "protectorate."

The Ostrich Approach (sting their head in the sand) has no effect on reality. Either there is a government in control --- or --- there is no government in control. The claim of imaginary control is the denial of reality.

But there is no indication by Israel that it even wants the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Israel is not trying to annex the West Bank or Gaza Strip. The West Bank and Gaza Strip area cultural and monetary Albatros.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It does not matter what you can find. But first, the entire question is moot. Israel is interested in defensible borders, not the incorporation of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. As an adjunct, Israel want to contain a viable and demonstrable threat posed by Hostile Arab Palestinians. The release of containment is detrimental to regional security.

I can find no evidence that Israel has ever legally acquired that land.

BTW, it is illegal to annex occupied territory.

(COMMENT)

Legal - Illegal makes no difference.

Sovereignty and Independence have nothing to do with "legal or Illegal."

•• It has to do with implied recognition.
•• The sovereignty and independence is proved by the lack of higher incorporation (Israel being the supreme corporate entity).
** As other international governments recognize the authority of the Government of Israel to regulation Immigration, Customs, import and export taxes, etc, is the acceptance of legality.
** As the diplomatic community recognizes authority and establishes relations, then that is a form of tacit approval.
​

The lack of recognition sets the conditions and encourages indefinite "occupation" that eventually morphs into either a "dependent territory" or a "protectorate."

The Ostrich Approach (sting their head in the sand) has no effect on reality. Either there is a government in control --- or --- there is no government in control. The claim of imaginary control is the denial of reality.

But there is no indication by Israel that it even wants the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Israel is not trying to annex the West Bank or Gaza Strip. The West Bank and Gaza Strip area cultural and monetary Albatros.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman.

WOW, did you duck that post.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I said "IF" (Conditional statement).

However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.

No occupation? I don't see where that is true.

(COMMENT)

• The International Community cannot interfere with Domestic Issues. [Article 2(7)]
• If Israel is part of Palestine as "P F Tinmore" and HAMAS Claim, then it is all one country.
• All one country implies any dispute between the people of Israel and the people of the Wes Bank and Gaza Strip is a non-international (domestic nature).
• "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.
​

That would, in point of fact, make Israel a Secessionist State (a State that formally withdraws from the former Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied to establish Sovereignty and Independence over a separate political entity); with people exercising their right of self determination.

That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No, I did not duck that post at all. There is no "smokescreen."

Sovereignty and Independence have nothing to do with "legal or Illegal."

Holy smokescreen, Batman.
WOW, did you duck that post.

(COMMENT)

You implied that "legal" or "Illegal" applied to the question. I said it did not and told you why.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I said "IF" (Conditional statement).

However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.

No occupation? I don't see where that is true.

(COMMENT)

• The International Community cannot interfere with Domestic Issues. [Article 2(7)]
• If Israel is part of Palestine as "P F Tinmore" and HAMAS Claim, then it is all one country.
• All one country implies any dispute between the people of Israel and the people of the Wes Bank and Gaza Strip is a non-international (domestic nature).
• "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.
​

That would, in point of fact, make Israel a Secessionist State (a State that formally withdraws from the former Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied to establish Sovereignty and Independence over a separate political entity); with people exercising their right of self determination.

That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No, I did not duck that post at all. There is no "smokescreen."

Sovereignty and Independence have nothing to do with "legal or Illegal."

Holy smokescreen, Batman.
WOW, did you duck that post.

(COMMENT)

You implied that "legal" or "Illegal" applied to the question. I said it did not and told you why.

Most Respectfully,
R

Legal or illegal is irrelevant to Israel because they never gave a rat's ass about any law. Apparently you do not either.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I said "IF" (Conditional statement).

However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.

No occupation? I don't see where that is true.

(COMMENT)

• The International Community cannot interfere with Domestic Issues. [Article 2(7)]
• If Israel is part of Palestine as "P F Tinmore" and HAMAS Claim, then it is all one country.
• All one country implies any dispute between the people of Israel and the people of the Wes Bank and Gaza Strip is a non-international (domestic nature).
• "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.
​

That would, in point of fact, make Israel a Secessionist State (a State that formally withdraws from the former Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied to establish Sovereignty and Independence over a separate political entity); with people exercising their right of self determination.

That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.

Your ranting is both flawed and irrelevant. Firstly, you make the continued error of suggesting the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters / land grabbers can be described as a native population. Secondly, Israel was never a foreign colonial power. Your befuddlement seems to center around confusing some invention of yours regarding a foreign colonial power (the Brits?), previously at war with Arab squatters.

What war was fought between the British and Arab squatters?