Israel does not target civilians?

[Phoenall]

Hmmm. The "United for Israel" website. Very neutral site. Way to go Hoss. You don't ever disappoint.

Not to mention Gatestone.

Why not mention Gatestone? The latest series of islamic terrorist attacks aimed at Israelis is identified in the Gatestone article.

The fawning praise for the Pal'istanian terrorists has continued from the Islamic terrorist syndicate headed by Abbas. The contrast in cultural / societal behavior that separates the cult of islamic fascism from Western based values could not be clearer.

In typical fashion, Abbas and various other islamic terrorists / Pal'istanian welfare cheats rattle on with overwrought cliche's and slogans about the "Zionist occupier" and how the Pal'istinians are the eternal victims (and they are - of their own incompetence and ineptitudes). But that's old news. The islamic terrorist end-game is to drive the Jews into the sea, and they say so in any number of pronouncements spoken and written. In essence, the only victimization "Pal'istinians" endure today, under the internal autonomy Israel has granted them within their zones, are fruits of "Pal'istinian" violence: specifically, violence directed at Israel, Israelis, and Jews generally. Nor is the world at large unaware of that.


Palestinian Messaging About Violence: Blame Israel, but Keep Control

As two weeks of stabbings and violent demonstrations in and around Jerusalem continue, along with sporadic mass breaches of the Gaza border, official Palestinian statements and media commentary are sending a dual message. Generally speaking, neither Palestinian Authority (PA) nor Hamas messages call for more violence in their own territory -- although Hamas does call for more murder of Jews in Jerusalem. But neither Palestinian government repudiates the violence; both praise its Palestinian perpetrators; and both blame Israel rather than their own people for it.

Occupiers always have problems with security.

It comes with the territory.

I see the issue you have. As a good muhammedan, you're confused by the term "occupier" as it applies to disputed territory. And yes, Israel, as does the world, has issues with security as it relates to Islamic terrorism.

How many more dead Pal'istanians will there be during this intifada-lite?

There doesn't seem to be any confusion legally. Perhaps you are somewhat confused or have a case of cognitive dissonance.

"INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS, ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL IN THE OCCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY"
​

Recalling in particular relevant United Nations resolutions affirming that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development as well as those demanding the complete cessation of settlement activities..............................Gravely concerned at the commencement and continuation of construction by Israel, the occupying Power, of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, which is in departure from the Armistice Line of 1949 (Green Line) and which has involved the confiscation and destruction of Palestinian land and resources, the disruption of the lives of thousands of protected civilians and the de facto annexation of large areas of territory, and underlining the unanimous opposition by the international community to the construction of that wall........"

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf

But it seems that you have a problem with keeping on topic and not going of at a tangent when you are being shown up as a complete idiot on message boards. No one is disputing that the disputed land is occupied by Israel are they, and that the separation barrier is questionable. But this thread is about Israel targeting civilians, which has not been proven and never will.

 

[jillian]

Israelis or Jews do not consider non jews as human so they are not even considered civilian.

So Bibi is not lying , although Jews lie al the time, but in his mind he is telling the truth.

The only life that matters is a jew life, religious jew not as much as an atheist jew.

that's false, anti-Semite loon.

but if you're going to put your munitions in civilian locations (which the hamas terrorists do) Israel isn't going to not respond to terrorism because terrorists violate the Geneva conventions by doing that.

now why don't you go blow yourself up

 

[Hollie]

Hmmm. The "United for Israel" website. Very neutral site. Way to go Hoss. You don't ever disappoint.

Not to mention Gatestone.

Why not mention Gatestone? The latest series of islamic terrorist attacks aimed at Israelis is identified in the Gatestone article.

The fawning praise for the Pal'istanian terrorists has continued from the Islamic terrorist syndicate headed by Abbas. The contrast in cultural / societal behavior that separates the cult of islamic fascism from Western based values could not be clearer.

In typical fashion, Abbas and various other islamic terrorists / Pal'istanian welfare cheats rattle on with overwrought cliche's and slogans about the "Zionist occupier" and how the Pal'istinians are the eternal victims (and they are - of their own incompetence and ineptitudes). But that's old news. The islamic terrorist end-game is to drive the Jews into the sea, and they say so in any number of pronouncements spoken and written. In essence, the only victimization "Pal'istinians" endure today, under the internal autonomy Israel has granted them within their zones, are fruits of "Pal'istinian" violence: specifically, violence directed at Israel, Israelis, and Jews generally. Nor is the world at large unaware of that.


Palestinian Messaging About Violence: Blame Israel, but Keep Control

As two weeks of stabbings and violent demonstrations in and around Jerusalem continue, along with sporadic mass breaches of the Gaza border, official Palestinian statements and media commentary are sending a dual message. Generally speaking, neither Palestinian Authority (PA) nor Hamas messages call for more violence in their own territory -- although Hamas does call for more murder of Jews in Jerusalem. But neither Palestinian government repudiates the violence; both praise its Palestinian perpetrators; and both blame Israel rather than their own people for it.

Occupiers always have problems with security.

It comes with the territory.

I see the issue you have. As a good muhammedan, you're confused by the term "occupier" as it applies to disputed territory. And yes, Israel, as does the world, has issues with security as it relates to Islamic terrorism.

How many more dead Pal'istanians will there be during this intifada-lite?

There doesn't seem to be any confusion legally. Perhaps you are somewhat confused or have a case of cognitive dissonance.

"INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS, ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL IN THE OCCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY"
​

Recalling in particular relevant United Nations resolutions affirming that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development as well as those demanding the complete cessation of settlement activities..............................Gravely concerned at the commencement and continuation of construction by Israel, the occupying Power, of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, which is in departure from the Armistice Line of 1949 (Green Line) and which has involved the confiscation and destruction of Palestinian land and resources, the disruption of the lives of thousands of protected civilians and the de facto annexation of large areas of territory, and underlining the unanimous opposition by the international community to the construction of that wall........"

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf

That's fine that the ICJ issues an opinion.

There are counter opinions regarding the disputed territories.That's why they're called disputed territories.

 

[montelatici]

What counter opinion would that be, do you have a source other than an Israeli/Jewish/Zionist opinion?

 

[Hollie]

What counter opinion would that be, do you have a source other than an Israeli/Jewish/Zionist opinion?

What counter opinion would that be, do you have a source other than an Israeli/Jewish/Zionist opinion?

You can do a search and find there are quite a number of disputed territories. There are differing opinions offered for those.

Why do you presume that cutting and pasting an opinion from the ICJ holds any merit?

 

[Hossfly]

What counter opinion would that be, do you have a source other than an Israeli/Jewish/Zionist opinion?

What counter opinion would that be, do you have a source other than an Israeli/Jewish/Zionist opinion?

You can do a search and find there are quite a number of disputed territories. There are differing opinions offered for those.

Why do you presume that cutting and pasting an opinion from the ICJ holds any merit?

I've been doing a search and I can't find Palestine on any maps. Palestine appears to be a country without any land mass. Therefore I conclude that Israel can't target civilians of a non-existant country.

 

[montelatici]

Only the Israelis call the Palestinian territories "disputed territories" even the U.S. class them the occupied territories officially and formally. You cannot provide any source other than Israeli that calls them "disputed territories".

The ICJ opinion confirms the UN's position and makes it settled International Law. Of course, from your question, it appears you do not have much familiarity with law in general and international law in particular. There is always time to learn. Your assertions might be better received if you provided source material. Yes, that annoying cutting and pasting that many of us learned to do at university when we took course in Harvard referencing in order to make our papers acceptable for university level work.

 

[Hollie]

Only the Israelis call the Palestinian territories "disputed territories" even the U.S. class them the occupied territories officially and formally. You cannot provide any source other than Israeli that calls them "disputed territories".

The ICJ opinion confirms the UN's position and makes it settled International Law. Of course, from your question, it appears you do not have much familiarity with law in general and international law in particular. There is always time to learn. Your assertions might be better received if you provided source material. Yes, that annoying cutting and pasting that many of us learned to do at university when we took course in Harvard referencing in order to make our papers acceptable for university level work.

You should learn to actually read the source material you obviously don't understand.

As with General Assembly Resolutions (which the ICJ provides juidication on request), the IJC's decisions are also nonbinding. As merely the bully arm of the prejudices and injustices given false respectability by the UN General Assembly, particularly in regards to the shameful unmitigated bias against Israel and, often, the US, neither body deserves nor has earned the right to cast judgments upon Israel (or the US).

Neither the UN General Assembly nor the IJC have aurthority to take make decisions or implement actions detrimental to any nation's right to defend/protect itself.


Their singular preoccupation with Israel while the majority of the accusing nations themselves are guilty of horrible injustices merely demonstrate their lack of credibility and the farcical and hypocritical nature of their behavior.

"The UN's discrimination against Israel is not a minor infraction, nor a parochial nuisance of interest solely to those concerned with equal rights of the Jewish people and the Jewish state. Instead, the world body's obsession with censuring Israel at every turn directly affects all citizens of the world, for it constitutes (1) a severe violation of the equality principles guaranteed by the UN Charter and underlying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and (2) a significant obstacle to the UN's ability to carry out its proper mandate.None of this means Israel should be above the law. Every country, including every democracy, commits human rights violations, and states should be held to account accordingly, both domestically and internationally. Yet Israel does have the right to be treated equally under the law.2 It is legitimate for the UN to criticize Israel, but not when UN bodies do so unfairly, selectively, massively, sometimes exclusively, and always obsessively."

See remainder of this review at: UN, Israel & Anti-Semitism - UN Watch

 

[montelatici]

UN Watch is an Israeli propaganda NGO.

Alfred Moses, a Zionist Jew, is the chairman of UN Watch. I said any non-Zionist/Israeli/Jewish sources. Plus, the piece doesn't support your position that anyone outside of the Israelis (and Zionist supporters) considers the Palestinian territories anything but occupied territories.

ICJ decisions become settled international law. Countries can disregard the law, but it is settled law.

 

[Billo_Really]

that's false, anti-Semite loon.

but if you're going to put your munitions in civilian locations (which the hamas terrorists do) Israel isn't going to not respond to terrorism because terrorists violate the Geneva conventions by doing that.

now why don't you go blow yourself up

Saying they can't have munitions, is like saying they don't have a right to defend themselves. Is that what you're saying? Are you saying they don't have a right to defend themselves? Answer the question, you fucking psychotic bitch!

As for the munitions themselves, the target must be of military necessity. If the civilian casualty is greater than the military gain, then it cannot be targeted.

 

[Hollie]

UN Watch is an Israeli propaganda NGO.

Alfred Moses, a Zionist Jew, is the chairman of UN Watch. I said any non-Zionist/Israeli/Jewish sources. Plus, the piece doesn't support your position that anyone outside of the Israelis (and Zionist supporters) considers the Palestinian territories anything but occupied territories.

ICJ decisions become settled international law. Countries can disregard the law, but it is settled law.

You forgot to append "...... because I say so" to your settled law absurdity.

As you agree, the ICJ is nothing more than an advisory entity with no arm of enforcement. As pointed out, the UN and the ICJ long ago lost credibility. I mean how cool is it the KSA, Iran and other Islamist nations are rotated on the Human Rights Council?

I agree that your settled law meme is a meaningless term.

 

[Hollie]

UN Watch is an Israeli propaganda NGO.

Alfred Moses, a Zionist Jew, is the chairman of UN Watch. I said any non-Zionist/Israeli/Jewish sources. Plus, the piece doesn't support your position that anyone outside of the Israelis (and Zionist supporters) considers the Palestinian territories anything but occupied territories.

ICJ decisions become settled international law. Countries can disregard the law, but it is settled law.

Nothing in your comments refutes the biases that have become typical UN prattle. Your whining about UN Watch does nothing but allow you the opportunity to promote your own biases.

Nothing in your cutting and pasting offers anything more than your opinion of the ICJ' s opinion.

 

[Billo_Really]

Nothing in your comments refutes the biases that have become typical UN prattle. Your whining about UN Watch does nothing but allow you the opportunity to promote your own biases.

Nothing in your cutting and pasting offers anything more than your opinion of the ICJ' s opinion.

It cannot be disputed these territories were seized during the '67 war. And since they were seized during a war, that makes them "occupied" and nothing can change the status of that until the "occupation" ends.

Now, WTF does that have to do with the OP and the deliberate targeting of civilians by the Israeli's?

 

[Hollie]

Nothing in your comments refutes the biases that have become typical UN prattle. Your whining about UN Watch does nothing but allow you the opportunity to promote your own biases.

Nothing in your cutting and pasting offers anything more than your opinion of the ICJ' s opinion.

It cannot be disputed these territories were seized during the '67 war. And since they were seized during a war, that makes them "occupied" and nothing can change the status of that until the "occupation" ends.

Now, WTF does that have to do with the OP and the deliberate targeting of civilians by the Israeli's?

What deliberate targeting of civilians by the Israelis would that be?

 

[montelatici]

It is almost as if you intend to make yourself ignorant of the facts. I mean stating:

" the ICJ is nothing more than an advisory entity with no arm of enforcement."

makes you look so ridiculous, when their is an Article of the Charter of the United Nations that addresses the very matter. Do some research before blurting out nonsense.

ICJ decisions become settled law and the decision becomes precedent for future cases. Per Article 94 of the Charter of the United Nations. You can continue to stamp your feet and claim the United Nations has no authority, but only you and few other misguided partisans or countries, e.g. North Korea believe that.

For your edification here is Article 94 of the Charter of the United Nations.

"Article 94
1. Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.

2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment."

Charter of the United Nations | International Court of Justice

 

[Hollie]

It is almost as if you intend to make yourself ignorant of the facts. I mean stating:

" the ICJ is nothing more than an advisory entity with no arm of enforcement."

makes you look so ridiculous, when their is an Article of the Charter of the United Nations that addresses the very matter. Do some research before blurting out nonsense.

ICJ decisions become settled law and the decision becomes precedent for future cases. Per Article 94 of the Charter of the United Nations. You can continue to stamp your feet and claim the United Nations has no authority, but only you and few other misguided partisans or countries, e.g. North Korea believe that.

For your edification here is Article 94 of the Charter of the United Nations.

"Article 94
1. Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.

2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment."

Charter of the United Nations | International Court of Justice

Security Council resolutions are non-binding. I pointed that out to you previously.

So, your cut and paste does nothing more than reiterate what I've already instructed you on, that the ICJ does nothing more than offer advisory opinions.

I'm glad you agree.

 

[montelatici]

"Security Council resolutions are non-binding. I pointed that out to you previously."

What?????? You are digging such a deep hole. Your strongest supporters are cringing.

Pursuant to Article 25 of the Charter Security Council Resolutions are binding on all members of the United Nations.

 

[fanger]

Hollie doesn't see things as being right or wrong, but as pro Israel or not

 

[Hollie]

Hollie doesn't see things as being right or wrong, but as pro Israel or not

Why don't you address the fact that Israel takes measures to warn civilians prior to operations targeting Islamic terrorists.

 

[montelatici]

Hollie doesn't see things as being right or wrong, but as pro Israel or not

Why don't you address the fact that Israel takes measures to warn civilians prior to operations targeting Islamic terrorists.

I think you should research matters before making statements. It is all Israeli propaganda designed to motivate "useful idiots". This is what actually happens.