International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

[Shusha]

Living on stolen land is an act.

You got a link to a law which states that someone just being present is equivalent to "taking an active part in hostilities"? I would very much like to see that.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Living on stolen land is an act.

You got a link to a law which states that someone just being present is equivalent to "taking an active part in hostilities"? I would very much like to see that.

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

 

[RoccoR]

International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

This is just an excuse to get out of the agreement.

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

Any agreement that violates the rights of the people is void.

(COMMENT)

How does it violate any rights. It was witnessed by the international community. Just because the Arab Palestinians screwed it up, does not mean it is invalid.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

This is just an excuse to get out of the agreement.

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

Any agreement that violates the rights of the people is void.

(COMMENT)

How does it violate any rights. It was witnessed by the international community. Just because the Arab Palestinians screwed it up, does not mean it is invalid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Now you are just shoveling shit.

I am correct.

 

[Shusha]

Living on stolen land is an act.

So First Nations peoples are free to murder any non-native person because any non-native person being present is an "act of hostility"? Seriously?

 

[Shusha]

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

 

[Shusha]

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You people never mention the clunkers.

No, you do come up in conversation from time to time, du svag gammal antisemit.

 

[Hollie]

International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

This is just an excuse to get out of the agreement.

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

Any agreement that violates the rights of the people is void.

(COMMENT)

How does it violate any rights. It was witnessed by the international community. Just because the Arab Palestinians screwed it up, does not mean it is invalid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Now you are just shoveling shit.

I am correct.

“.... because I say so”.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

5 Arab armies invaded Israel. What does that have to do with the Nazis?

The British started the actual war after an obviously insane Ben-Gurion marched into Palestine behind the British and French armies and declared independence for the zionists on another's land.

It is Jewish land, not "another's land." And if you are Jewish, as you claim to be (though I doubt it), you should be able to understand that.

 

[sakinago]

There’s shooting at nazis...then there’s hacking up innocent civilians with axes, praising and holding child murderers up as hero’s, bombing buses and crowded streets, indiscriminately lobbing rockets at civilians, as well as those who try to justify all of this as resistance. There’s no excuse for purposefully going after civilians

This is why I began this thread. What is acceptable? What would you do growing up under a brutal occupation as a second class citizen in your own homeland?

NON OF THAT. It’s that simple. I don’t even have to get into whether or not Israel has a right to exist. There is zero excuse for that behavior.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

What! ALL people, who are not engaged in hostilities are protected in one way or another. If not under the Geneva Convention, then Domestic Law.

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also, link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

(COMMENT)

What gets me, is that you have the nerve "put themselves at risk." There, yet again, is an example of how the Arab Palestinian hold themselves as free to engage in hostilities against non-combatants. Violence is the preferred method utilized by the Arab Palestinians to resolve differences.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

What! ALL people, who are not engaged in hostilities are protected in one way or another. If not under the Geneva Convention, then Domestic Law.

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also, link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

(COMMENT)

What gets me, is that you have the nerve "put themselves at risk." There, yet again, is an example of how the Arab Palestinian hold themselves as free to engage in hostilities against non-combatants. Violence is the preferred method utilized by the Arab Palestinians to resolve differences.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually international law is preferred. However the world leaders, not the people, are sitting around with their thumb up their ass. BDS is the only peace movement seeking a just peace.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

What! ALL people, who are not engaged in hostilities are protected in one way or another. If not under the Geneva Convention, then Domestic Law.

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

It is illegal to live in occupied territory.

Link?

Also, link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

(COMMENT)

What gets me, is that you have the nerve "put themselves at risk." There, yet again, is an example of how the Arab Palestinian hold themselves as free to engage in hostilities against non-combatants. Violence is the preferred method utilized by the Arab Palestinians to resolve differences.

Most Respectfully,
R

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

Everything not on Israeli land is illegal.

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

What! ALL people, who are not engaged in hostilities are protected in one way or another. If not under the Geneva Convention, then Domestic Law.

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

Link?

Also, link to the law which states that persons committing illegal acts no longer have fundamental human right to life.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

(COMMENT)

What gets me, is that you have the nerve "put themselves at risk." There, yet again, is an example of how the Arab Palestinian hold themselves as free to engage in hostilities against non-combatants. Violence is the preferred method utilized by the Arab Palestinians to resolve differences.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually international law is preferred. However the world leaders, not the people, are sitting around with their thumb up their ass. BDS is the only peace movement seeking a just peace.

BDS is hardly a peace movement. Their tactics of promoting fear and intimidation are characteristics held by many hate groups. Add in a belligerent Islamist mindset with religiously inspired hatred for Jews and the BDS'ers are nothing but predictable.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

What! ALL people, who are not engaged in hostilities are protected in one way or another. If not under the Geneva Convention, then Domestic Law.

P F Tinmore, → You don't actually know if the settlements are illegal or not.

You should know that. It has been the gripe about illegal settlements for decades.

Oh please. You always bail when asked direct questions. Show me the law where it says that persons who live in "occupied territory" renounce their right to life.

They are not "protected persons" so they do put themselves at risk.

(COMMENT)

What gets me, is that you have the nerve "put themselves at risk." There, yet again, is an example of how the Arab Palestinian hold themselves as free to engage in hostilities against non-combatants. Violence is the preferred method utilized by the Arab Palestinians to resolve differences.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually international law is preferred. However the world leaders, not the people, are sitting around with their thumb up their ass. BDS is the only peace movement seeking a just peace.

BDS is hardly a peace movement. Their tactics of promoting fear and intimidation are characteristics held by many hate groups. Add in a belligerent Islamist mindset with religiously inspired hatred for Jews and the BDS'ers are nothing but predictable.

Do you have any links for that crap?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Internationa l law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ sakinago, abi, et al,

I think our friend "sakinago" is correct.

There’s shooting at nazis...then there’s hacking up innocent civilians with axes, praising and holding child murderers up as hero’s, bombing buses and crowded streets, indiscriminately lobbing rockets at civilians, as well as those who try to justify all of this as resistance. There’s no excuse for purposefully going after civilians

This is why I began this thread. What is acceptable? What would you do growing up under a brutal occupation as a second class citizen in your own homeland?

NON OF THAT. It’s that simple. I don’t even have to get into whether or not Israel has a right to exist. There is zero excuse for that behavior.

(COMMENT)

Unacceptable Behavior! What I find interesting and particularly peculiar about the Arab Palestinian is that when herded together, they gradually begin amplifying their tendencies towards violence, the bizarre, (one person noted) the nonsensical, that comes with the incitement of the group → they are empowered to actions that they would never do on their own (Mob Mentality).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

RE: Internationa l law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ sakinago, abi, et al,

I think our friend "sakinago" is correct.

There’s shooting at nazis...then there’s hacking up innocent civilians with axes, praising and holding child murderers up as hero’s, bombing buses and crowded streets, indiscriminately lobbing rockets at civilians, as well as those who try to justify all of this as resistance. There’s no excuse for purposefully going after civilians

This is why I began this thread. What is acceptable? What would you do growing up under a brutal occupation as a second class citizen in your own homeland?

NON OF THAT. It’s that simple. I don’t even have to get into whether or not Israel has a right to exist. There is zero excuse for that behavior.

(COMMENT)

Unacceptable Behavior! What I find interesting and particularly peculiar about the Arab Palestinian is that when herded together, they gradually begin amplifying their tendencies towards violence, the bizarre, (one person noted) the nonsensical, that comes with the incitement of the group → they are empowered to actions that they would never do on their own (Mob Mentality).

Most Respectfully,
R

1. Do you think it is because racially, they are inherently more violent than the the peaceful Jews who wouldn't hurt a fly? Do you think that they are much like the inferior (in your mind) non-whites in South Africa who bombed shopping centers and killed thousands of white civilians prior to the end of Apartheid.

2. Or do you think it might have to do with the fact that the Muslims and Christians were living in relative peace in Palestine before hordes of European Jews occupied the land they were living on and relegated them to the status of untermensch? Like the Europeans did in Rhodesia and South Africa, for example.

In case no. 1 you are a racist p.o.s.
In case no. 2 you are reasonable person.