IOF soldiers raid southern Gaza

[P F Tinmore]

KHAN YOUNIS, (PIC)-- Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers.

Security sources told the PIC reporter that six bulldozers advanced into eastern Khuza’a town, east of Khan Younis city, and started bulldozing cultivated land lots.

They said that the soldiers fired at nearby citizens’ houses and land while reconnaissance planes flew over the area during the incursion.

IOF soldiers raid southern Gaza

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

 

[Lipush]

There is no such thing as an IOF in Israel.

 

[georgephillip]

There is no such thing as an IOF in Israel.

How about Gaza?

"Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers."

How would you react to HAMAS bulldozers leveling your house and garden?

ErrorPage

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

KHAN YOUNIS, (PIC)-- Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers.

Security sources told the PIC reporter that six bulldozers advanced into eastern Khuza’a town, east of Khan Younis city, and started bulldozing cultivated land lots.

They said that the soldiers fired at nearby citizens’ houses and land while reconnaissance planes flew over the area during the incursion.

IOF soldiers raid southern Gaza

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

I doubt whether Israel would go into Gaza and do that. I need a link from an unbiased site please.

 

[Connery]

Moved to proper forum

 

[Lipush]

There is no such thing as an IOF in Israel.

How about Gaza?

"Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers."

How would you react to HAMAS bulldozers leveling your house and garden?

ErrorPage

They launch rockets.

Do they expect us to give them prizes?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've made a mistake.

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

(COMMENT)

This is incorrect. There is a prima facie case (for a much less grave an infraction) here, but it is NOT for "genocide." Such over exaggerations cast a shadow on your content.

Article 6 - Genocide

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.​

SOURCE: Rome Statutes, International Criminal Court

My experience has been that there is something more to the story than is being told.

While there might be the possibility of a minor "war crime infraction" (Part II - Article 8, RS-ICC), I'll wait for the rest of the story; or assume (reasonable man assumption), that the IDF had some sort of reason for the action. Security Forces just don't wake-up and decide to run track vehicle exercises in the Gaza Strip for fun and frolic. No, they don't do that. I'm betting (while I admit I don't know) that there was some catalyst or provocation for the action.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[irosie91]

Gee Tinnie is admitted that Iran attempted genocide upon Israel in 2006---
the barrage of tens of thousands of nail bombs over Northern Israel touched off
fires that destroyed thousands of dunams of cultivated
farmland. While it is true that the bombs missed the kids who were stored in
shelters------according to tinnie it was GENOCIDE by Iran anyway
I am impressed Mr. tin is growing a brain

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've made a mistake.

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

(COMMENT)

This is incorrect. There is a prima facie case (for a much less grave an infraction) here, but it is NOT for "genocide." Such over exaggerations cast a shadow on your content.

Article 6 - Genocide

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.​

SOURCE: Rome Statutes, International Criminal Court

My experience has been that there is something more to the story than is being told.

While there might be the possibility of a minor "war crime infraction" (Part II - Article 8, RS-ICC), I'll wait for the rest of the story; or assume (reasonable man assumption), that the IDF had some sort of reason for the action. Security Forces just don't wake-up and decide to run track vehicle exercises in the Gaza Strip for fun and frolic. No, they don't do that. I'm betting (while I admit I don't know) that there was some catalyst or provocation for the action.

Most Respectfully,
R

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

Genocide Watch

 

[irosie91]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've made a mistake.

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

(COMMENT)

This is incorrect. There is a prima facie case (for a much less grave an infraction) here, but it is NOT for "genocide." Such over exaggerations cast a shadow on your content.

Article 6 - Genocide

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.​

SOURCE: Rome Statutes, International Criminal Court

My experience has been that there is something more to the story than is being told.

While there might be the possibility of a minor "war crime infraction" (Part II - Article 8, RS-ICC), I'll wait for the rest of the story; or assume (reasonable man assumption), that the IDF had some sort of reason for the action. Security Forces just don't wake-up and decide to run track vehicle exercises in the Gaza Strip for fun and frolic. No, they don't do that. I'm betting (while I admit I don't know) that there was some catalyst or provocation for the action.

Most Respectfully,
R

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

Genocide Watch

Oh gee-----now Mr. Tin is admitting that 60 years of boycotts imposed on Israel
by the meccaists amounts to GENOCIDE This thread waxes interesting

Starvation siege is a fave technique of meccaists-------they murdered more than a
million biafran children in 1971 that way and ----there are historians who seem to
believe it was one of the genocide techniques used on "kaffiriin" thruout north
africa during the "glorious age of pig conquest"----populations were forced into
wastelands or sometimes onto Islands-----and STARVED TO DEATH for the glory
of 'isa/allah'

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a fallacy based on an argument founded on emotion and literary sensationalization.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

(COMMENT)

This is propaganda. It is pro-Palestinian nonsense. It is not based on law or exigencies.

If anything, it better fits a case under 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression (Article 3), if it were not justified under a past practice and history of criminal behaviors on the part of the Palestinians. Such past practices, criminal history, coupled with threats and demonstrated intent, require security quarantine to protect the sovereign integrity of the state and the people of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a fallacy based on an argument founded on emotion and literary sensationalization.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

(COMMENT)

This is propaganda. It is pro-Palestinian nonsense. It is not based on law or exigencies.

If anything, it better fits a case under 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression (Article 3), if it were not justified under a past practice and history of criminal behaviors on the part of the Palestinians. Such past practices, criminal history, coupled with threats and demonstrated intent, require security quarantine to protect the sovereign integrity of the state and the people of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for the link.

More Israeli violations.

 

[Roudy]

KHAN YOUNIS, (PIC)-- Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers.

Security sources told the PIC reporter that six bulldozers advanced into eastern Khuza’a town, east of Khan Younis city, and started bulldozing cultivated land lots.

They said that the soldiers fired at nearby citizens’ houses and land while reconnaissance planes flew over the area during the incursion.

IOF soldiers raid southern Gaza

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

Bullshit propaganda source.

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a fallacy based on an argument founded on emotion and literary sensationalization.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

(COMMENT)

This is propaganda. It is pro-Palestinian nonsense. It is not based on law or exigencies.

If anything, it better fits a case under 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression (Article 3), if it were not justified under a past practice and history of criminal behaviors on the part of the Palestinians. Such past practices, criminal history, coupled with threats and demonstrated intent, require security quarantine to protect the sovereign integrity of the state and the people of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Tinmore keeps thinking Palestinians should commit terrorism with no consequences. I wonder why. Maybe because he's such a bigtime Hamas terrorist supporter.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You still need to practice your victory dance; not that you are ever going to get to do it.

This is a fallacy based on an argument founded on emotion and literary sensationalization.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group's physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

(COMMENT)

This is propaganda. It is pro-Palestinian nonsense. It is not based on law or exigencies.

If anything, it better fits a case under 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression (Article 3), if it were not justified under a past practice and history of criminal behaviors on the part of the Palestinians. Such past practices, criminal history, coupled with threats and demonstrated intent, require security quarantine to protect the sovereign integrity of the state and the people of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for the link.

More Israeli violations.

(COMMENT)

You cannot selectively enforce bits and pieces of the law. You have to look at the entirety of the situation and the entirety of the applicable laws, and the entirety of the belligerent actions.

I am not saying that the Palestinian is wrong. In some cases, they may have a very valid cause of action; both on civil matters (International Court of Justice stuff) and that of a criminal nature (International Criminal Court stuff).

What I am saying, this that there are non-violent methodologies involved, military exigencies, and security countermeasures to evaluate and prioritize; relative to a proper and coherent judgment. What you are doing here is spot sensationalization, not making a point that is both sound and valid (in which your premise is true but you conclusion is based on imperfect and incomplete knowledge).

There is much much more to evaluate and consider than just a couple citations in isolation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Roudy]

There is no such thing as an IOF in Israel.

How about Gaza?

"Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers."

How would you react to HAMAS bulldozers leveling your house and garden?

ErrorPage

They launch rockets.

Do they expect us to give them prizes?

Didn't you know? Jews aren't allowed to fight back against the IslamoNazis.

 

[irosie91]

How about Gaza?

"Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning escorting military bulldozers."

How would you react to HAMAS bulldozers leveling your house and garden?

ErrorPage

They launch rockets.

Do they expect us to give them prizes?

Didn't you know? Jews aren't allowed to fight back against the IslamoNazis.

for those who do not know------roudy is not exagerating. SELF DEFENSE
by a jew ----against an assault by a muslim -----is actually a CRIME IN SHARIAH LAW---
generally a capital crime (well----same thing for hindus and christians......
which is why muslims boast of being absolutely FAIR ------ =opportunity beheading)

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You still need to practice your victory dance; not that you are ever going to get to do it.

This is a fallacy based on an argument founded on emotion and literary sensationalization.


(COMMENT)

This is propaganda. It is pro-Palestinian nonsense. It is not based on law or exigencies.

If anything, it better fits a case under 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression (Article 3), if it were not justified under a past practice and history of criminal behaviors on the part of the Palestinians. Such past practices, criminal history, coupled with threats and demonstrated intent, require security quarantine to protect the sovereign integrity of the state and the people of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for the link.

More Israeli violations.

(COMMENT)

You cannot selectively enforce bits and pieces of the law. You have to look at the entirety of the situation and the entirety of the applicable laws, and the entirety of the belligerent actions.

I am not saying that the Palestinian is wrong. In some cases, they may have a very valid cause of action; both on civil matters (International Court of Justice stuff) and that of a criminal nature (International Criminal Court stuff).

What I am saying, this that there are non-violent methodologies involved, military exigencies, and security countermeasures to evaluate and prioritize; relative to a proper and coherent judgment. What you are doing here is spot sensationalization, not making a point that is both sound and valid (in which your premise is true but you conclusion is based on imperfect and incomplete knowledge).

There is much much more to evaluate and consider than just a couple citations in isolation.

Most Respectfully,
R

From your link.

Article 7

Nothing in this Definition, and in particular article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination; nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration.

 

[georgephillip]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've made a mistake.

Destroying food and water sources are illegal acts of genocide.

(COMMENT)

This is incorrect. There is a prima facie case (for a much less grave an infraction) here, but it is NOT for "genocide." Such over exaggerations cast a shadow on your content.

Article 6 - Genocide

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.​

SOURCE: Rome Statutes, International Criminal Court

My experience has been that there is something more to the story than is being told.

While there might be the possibility of a minor "war crime infraction" (Part II - Article 8, RS-ICC), I'll wait for the rest of the story; or assume (reasonable man assumption), that the IDF had some sort of reason for the action. Security Forces just don't wake-up and decide to run track vehicle exercises in the Gaza Strip for fun and frolic. No, they don't do that. I'm betting (while I admit I don't know) that there was some catalyst or provocation for the action.

Most Respectfully,
R

"...Israel voted against the adoption of the Rome Statute but later signed it for a short period. In 2002, the United States and Israel 'unsigned' the Rome Statute, indicating that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, they have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the statute.[27]

"Israel states that it has 'deep sympathy' with the goals of the Court. However, it has concerns that political pressure on the Court would lead it to reinterpret international law or to 'invent new crimes'.

"It cites the inclusion of 'the transfer of parts of the civilian population of an occupying power into occupied territory' as a war crime as an example of this, whilst at the same time disagrees with the exclusion of terrorism and drug trafficking..."

States parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why would you reference an aspect of international law that both the US and Israel have decided to ignore?