Palestinians signed to join Rome Statute.

PF Tinmore, et al,

The link is "redirected" not "rejected."

P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

Israel is not a "state sponsor of terrorism." However, the State of Palestine supports several terrorist organizations, to include the:
Whatever you may think of John Aschcroft [United States Attorney General (2001 - 2005)], doesn't change the fact that he fought against terrorists and the use of terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
toastman, et al,

I'm not sure of the point he is making.

toastman said:
What does Israel have to do with financing terrorism ?

It is money that is given to Palestinians that is used to finance terrorism. Hamas = terrorist organization. No matter how hard you try to cover it up, or call it name calling, it won't change this fact.
Click to expand...
(THOUGHT)'

It may be in connection to the
Eight Area Men Plead Guilty to Federal Racketeering Charges Involving Conspiracy to Transfer Cash and Checks to the Palestinian Territories
which was a big DOJ case started during the Ashcroft tenure.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore said:
Phoenall said:
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't be foolish. My personal favorites are S/RES/1373 (2001) which includes "inciting terrorism" and United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. You might want to also look at A/RES/2/110 Measures to be taken against propaganda and the inciters of a new war, as in the HAMAS Covenant Policy, the Palestinian National Charter and the calls for other Palestinian Violence.

Terrorism is a class of violence. You don't investigate terrorism by the individual illegal action the organization takes to promote terror in a population. The Palestinians that participated in the Olympic Massacre, hijacked airliners, pirated ships, conducted suicide bombings, attacked school buses full of children, kidnapping and murder, and engaged in indiscriminate rocket fire as a policy inciting terrorism --- were not charged with "terrorism" --- but the individual offenses.

P F Tinmore said:
Phoenall said:
Yes there is and it is embodied in the UN charter
Click to expand...
Please quote the part that you are referencing.
Click to expand...
(OBSERVATION)

Links to: Security Council Resolutions and Records of Meetings
The text in brackets is not the title of the resolution. It reflects the content and is provided for reference only.

S/RES/2133 (2014) S/PV.7101
27 January 2014 [Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts]

S/RES/2129 (2013) S/PV.7086
17 December 2013 [Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts]

S/RES/2083 (2012)
S/RES/2082 (2012) S/PV.6890
17 December 2012 [Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts]

S/RES/1963 (2010) S/PV.6459
20 December 2010 [on extension of the mandate of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) as special political mission under the policy guidance of Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC)]

S/RES/1904 (2009)
17 December 2009 [on authorizing the establishment of an Office of an Ombudsperson for an initial period of 18 months to assist the 1267 Committee in its consideration of delisting requests; directing the 1267 Committee to grant humanitarian exemptions expeditiously and transparently; and streamlining the listing process of names of individuals and entities onto the Consolidated List.]

S/RES/1822 (2008)
30 June 2008 [on directing 1267 Committee to conduct a review of all names on the Consolidated List by 30 June 2010 and followed by regular reviews; making accessible publicly releasable reasons for the listing of individuals and entities and extending the mandate of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team for a further period of 18 months]

S/RES/1810 (2008)
25 April 2008 [on extending mandate of the 1540 Committee for a further three years until 25 April 2011]

S/RES/1805 (2008)
20 March 2008 [on extending mandate of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) until 31 December 2010]

S/RES/1787 (2007)
10 December 2007 [on extension of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) mandate]

S/RES/1735 (2006)
22 December 2006 [on reviewing the measures imposed resolution 1267 (1999) with a view to their further strengthening in 18 months; providing cover sheet for listing submissions, extending consideration period for exemption requests under resolution 1452 (2002), and extending the mandate of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team for a further period of 18 months]

S/RES/1732 (2006)
21 December 2006 [on taking note with interest of the best practices and methods contained in the report of the Informal Working Group on General Issues of sanctions (S/2006/997) and requesting subsidiary bodies to take note as well.]

S/RES/1730 (2006)
19 December 2006 [on establishment of a focal point within the Secretariat to receive de-listing requests and directs the relevant sanctions committees to revise their guidelines accordingly]

S/RES/1699 (2006)
8 August 2006 [on requesting the Secretary-General to take the necessary steps to increase cooperation between the United Nations and Interpol]

S/RES/1673 (2006)
27 April 2006 [on extending mandate of the 1540 Committee for a further two years]

S/RES/1631 (2005)
17 October 2005 [on cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in maintaining international peace and security]

S/RES/1625 (2005)
14 September 2005 [Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts]

S/RES/1624 (2005)
14 September 2005 [on prohibition of incitement to commit terrorist acts]

S/RES/1618 (2005)
4 August 2005 [on condemnation of terrorist attacks in Iraq]

S/RES/1617 (2005)
29 July 2005 [on reviewing the measures imposed by resolution 1267 (1999) with a view to their further strengthening in 17 months; providing definition of “associated with”, calling for submission of checklist, and requesting the Secretary-General to extend the mandate of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team for 17 months]

S/RES/1611 (2005)
7 July 2005 [on condemnation of terrorist attacks in London]

S/RES/1566 (2004)
8 October 2004 [on creation of working group to consider measures against individuals, groups and entities other than Al-Qaida/Taliban]

S/RES/1540 (2004)
28 April 2004 [Under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, obliges States to refrain from supporting by any means non-State actors from developing, acquiring, manufacturing, possessing, transporting, transferring or using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their delivery systems]

S/RES/1535(2004)
26 March 2004 [on creation of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED)]

S/RES/1530(2004)
11 March 2004 [on the bomb attacks in Madrid, Spain, on 11 March 2004]

S/RES/1526(2004)
30 July 2004 [on further improving the implementation of resolution 1267 (1999), strengthening the mandate of the 1267 Committee and requesting the Secretary-General to appoint an Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team for 18 months (paras 1, 3, 6 & 7)]

S/RES/1516(2003)
20 November 2003 [on the bomb attacks in Istanbul, Turkey, on 15 November 2003 and 20 November 2003]

S/RES/1465(2003)
13 February 2003 [on the bomb attack in Bogota, Colombia]

S/RES/1456(2003)
20 January 2003 [on high-level meeting of the Security Council on combating terrorism]

S/RES/1455(2003)
17 January 2003 [on improving implementation of measures imposed by resolution 1267 (1999]

S/RES/1452(2002)
20 December 2002 [on implementation of measures imposed by resolution 1267 (1999)]

S/RES/1450(2002)
13 December 2002 [on condemning the terrorist bomb attack, in Kikambala, Kenya, and the attempted missile attack on the airline departing Mombasa, Kenya, 28 November 2002]

S/RES/1440(2002)
24 October 2002 [on condemning the act of taking hostages in Moscow, Russian Federation, on 23 October 2002]

S/RES/1438(2002)
14 October 2002 [on the bomb attacks in Bali, Indonesia]

S/RES/1377(2001)
12 November 2001 [on the adoption of declaration on the global effort to combat terrorism]

S/RES/1373(2001)
28 September 2001 [on international cooperation to combat threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts]

S/RES/1368(2001)
12 September 2001 [condemning the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania, United States of America]

S/RES/1363(2001)
30 July 2001 [on the establishment of a mechanism to monitor the implementation of measures imposed by resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1333 (2000)]

S/RES/1333(2000)
19 December 2000 [on measures against the Taliban]

S/RES/1269(1999)
19 October 1999 [on international cooperation in the fight against terrorism]

S/RES/1267(1999)
15 October 1999 [on measures against the Taliban]

S/RES/1214(1998)
8 December 1998 [on the situation in Afghanistan]

S/RES/1189(1998)
13 August 1998 [on the terrorist bomb attacks of 7 Aug. 1998 in Kenya and Tanzania]

S/RES/1054(1996)
26 April 1996 [on sanctions against the Sudan in connection with non-compliance with Security Council resolution 1044 (1996) demanding extradition to Ethiopia of the three suspects wanted in connection with assassination attempt on President Mubarak of Egypt]

S/RES/1044(1996)
31 January 1996 [calling upon the Sudan to extradite to Ethiopia the three suspects wanted in connection with the assassination attempt against President Mubarak of Egypt]

S/RES/731(1992)
19 November 1992 [on the destruction of Pan American flight 103 and Union des transports aériens flights 772]

S/RES/748(1992)
31 March 1992 [on sanctions against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya]

S/RES/687(1991)
3 April 1991 [on restoration of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Kuwait]

S/RES/635(1989)
9 June 1989 [on marking of plastic or sheet explosives for the purpose of detection] ​

(COMMENT)

The idea that you further here, is --- in itself --- an attempt to suggest that the Palestinian has some sort of legal right to conduct such actions and measures that coerce and further fear and terror in support of their political agenda. It is a form of propaganda, in whatsoever country conducted, which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
How about just listing the ones that condemn Palestinian terrorism?
Click to expand...




Changing the rules as you go along because your POV has been found to be wrong. Suffice it to say that terrorism is illegal under International law and any state can take action against terrorism. So the Palestinians being known and proven terrorists are screwed until they give it up.
Click to expand...
I am not changing any rules. I am just trying to clear the smoke that is blown on this issue. Terrorism is not illegal because there is no agreed definition. Basically terrorism is political name calling.

Terrorism from 45:30 to 49:05

Click to expand...




The legislation has been produced on here for you by many posters, and they all show that the Palestinians are terrorists. Also since singing to all the many UN charters they have then proceeded to breach them. Now they have tried to use the ICC against Israel when they know it is doomed to failure, or they are so stupid they don't realise that the ICC applies to them more than it applies to Israel.
Lets just say that the laws in existence dealing with terrorism in many nations are now being applied to the actions of the palestinians and the nations are declaring the Palestinians as terrorists under their laws. Does not need an internationally agreed definition just a personal definition, the same as the right of return in unenforceable in law much to the annoyance of team Palestine.
 
P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:

images
Click to expand...




Because Israel is not on the US terrorist list,. or is that too hard for you to understand and digest.

And then when you see the argument slipping from your grasp you resort to name calling and personal abuse in the vain hope of salvaging some credibility.
 
RoccoR said:
PF Tinmore, et al,

The link is "redirected" not "rejected."

P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

Israel is not a "state sponsor of terrorism." However, the State of Palestine supports several terrorist organizations, to include the:
Whatever you may think of John Aschcroft [United States Attorney General (2001 - 2005)], doesn't change the fact that he fought against terrorists and the use of terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.

 
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
PF Tinmore, et al,

The link is "redirected" not "rejected."

P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

Israel is not a "state sponsor of terrorism." However, the State of Palestine supports several terrorist organizations, to include the:
Whatever you may think of John Aschcroft [United States Attorney General (2001 - 2005)], doesn't change the fact that he fought against terrorists and the use of terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.

Click to expand...






Now Now why don't you think about this rationally, if they engage in terrorism as defined by most civilised nations then they are surely terrorist by nature. Care to name one Palestinian political party that does not have direct ties to any terrorist group or organisation ?
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not a matter of propaganda. It is more the case that "many Palestinian political parties" have established an associated wing (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that has a history of operating 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;
      • A young woman, Dalia Lamkus was stabbed to death by an individual associated with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization on November 10th.
    • (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
      • On November 17 2014 two Palestinian cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal entered the Kehilat Yaakov Synagogue in Jerusalem at 7am armed with knives, meat cleavers, hatchets and guns, and began opening fire and wildly slashing at the estimated 25 individuals inside.
    • (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
      • Naftali Frankel (16), Gilad Shaar (16), Eyal Yifracah (19) were hitchhiking home from attending yeshiva in Gush Etzion when they disappeared. After a three week search their bodies were found near Halhul, a short drive away from where they wer abducted. This attack is the spark that began Operation Protective Edge.
    • (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;
      • Recent arrests in Jordan and Israel show that Hamas and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza and the West Bank. After Egypt's army destroyed tunnels joining Gaza and Sinai that had been lucrative smuggling paths, Hamas has been cultivating replacements.
    • (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).
      • Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, HAMAS Director, Refugee Affairs Department, argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.
This is what terrorism is all about. And the list does not include the actions that terrorize as the Palestinians engage in indiscriminate rocket fire, and tunnel building to circumvent border controls.

P F Tinmore said:
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

The chronicling of the past practices of criminal behaviors by the Palestinians is not a matter of propaganda. It is quite different from the forms of propaganda which the Palestinians use to provoke or encourage violence as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression. You can not tell me that anyone believes for a moment that the Palestinians had the right to attack the Olympic Village in Munich --- encourage Black September suicide squad attacks on the passenger terminals at Athens airport --- bomb the Pan Am office at Fiumicino airport, Rome, Italy --- seize the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan and murder two American and one Belgian diplomat, --- stage a Fatah Fedayeen terrorists amphibious attack near Nahariya, Israel, --- bombing the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant (not once but twice), --- multiple assassination attempts on the King of Jordan. These are all matters of record and and stand in stark contrast to the defense measures taken against the likes of 4000+ rockets and mortars fired at Israel 2014.

It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not a matter of propaganda. It is more the case that "many Palestinian political parties" have established an associated wing (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that has a history of operating 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;
      • A young woman, Dalia Lamkus was stabbed to death by an individual associated with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization on November 10th.
    • (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
      • On November 17 2014 two Palestinian cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal entered the Kehilat Yaakov Synagogue in Jerusalem at 7am armed with knives, meat cleavers, hatchets and guns, and began opening fire and wildly slashing at the estimated 25 individuals inside.
    • (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
      • Naftali Frankel (16), Gilad Shaar (16), Eyal Yifracah (19) were hitchhiking home from attending yeshiva in Gush Etzion when they disappeared. After a three week search their bodies were found near Halhul, a short drive away from where they wer abducted. This attack is the spark that began Operation Protective Edge.
    • (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;
      • Recent arrests in Jordan and Israel show that Hamas and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza and the West Bank. After Egypt's army destroyed tunnels joining Gaza and Sinai that had been lucrative smuggling paths, Hamas has been cultivating replacements.
    • (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).
      • Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, HAMAS Director, Refugee Affairs Department, argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.
This is what terrorism is all about. And the list does not include the actions that terrorize as the Palestinians engage in indiscriminate rocket fire, and tunnel building to circumvent border controls.

P F Tinmore said:
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

The chronicling of the past practices of criminal behaviors by the Palestinians is not a matter of propaganda. It is quite different from the forms of propaganda which the Palestinians use to provoke or encourage violence as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression. You can not tell me that anyone believes for a moment that the Palestinians had the right to attack the Olympic Village in Munich --- encourage Black September suicide squad attacks on the passenger terminals at Athens airport --- bomb the Pan Am office at Fiumicino airport, Rome, Italy --- seize the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan and murder two American and one Belgian diplomat, --- stage a Fatah Fedayeen terrorists amphibious attack near Nahariya, Israel, --- bombing the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant (not once but twice), --- multiple assassination attempts on the King of Jordan. These are all matters of record and and stand in stark contrast to the defense measures taken against the likes of 4000+ rockets and mortars fired at Israel 2014.

It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Are you going to list Israel's attacks on Palestinians or are you just going to give the Israeli propaganda version?
 
The Cave of the Patriarchs massacre or Ibrahimi Mosque massacre, also known as the Hebron massacre,[1] was a shooting attack carried out by American-born Israeli Baruch Goldstein, a member of the far-right Israeli Kach movement, who opened fire on unarmed Palestinian Muslims praying inside the Ibrahimi Mosque (or Mosque of Abraham) at theCave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, West Bank. It took place on February 25, 1994, during the overlapping religious holidays of Purim and Ramadan.[2][3] The attack left 29 male worshippers dead and 125 wounded.[4] The attack only ended after Goldstein was overcome and beaten to death by survivors.

The attack set off riots and protests throughout the West Bank, and 19 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli Defense Forces within 48 hours of the massacre.[3] Goldstein was widely denounced in Israel and by Jewish communities in the diaspora,[5] with many attributing his act to insanity.[6] Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin condemned the attack, describing Goldstein as a "degenerate murderer", "a shame on Zionism and an embarrassment to Judaism".[7][8][9] Some Jewish settlers in Hebron laud him as a hero and view his attack and subsequent death as an act of martyrdom.
Cave of the Patriarchs massacre - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

No heads of State took part in a protest against this in which the aftermath of the massacre, which led to the deaths of 26 more Palestinians at the hands of the israeli forces
 
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not a matter of propaganda. It is more the case that "many Palestinian political parties" have established an associated wing (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that has a history of operating 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;
      • A young woman, Dalia Lamkus was stabbed to death by an individual associated with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization on November 10th.
    • (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
      • On November 17 2014 two Palestinian cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal entered the Kehilat Yaakov Synagogue in Jerusalem at 7am armed with knives, meat cleavers, hatchets and guns, and began opening fire and wildly slashing at the estimated 25 individuals inside.
    • (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
      • Naftali Frankel (16), Gilad Shaar (16), Eyal Yifracah (19) were hitchhiking home from attending yeshiva in Gush Etzion when they disappeared. After a three week search their bodies were found near Halhul, a short drive away from where they wer abducted. This attack is the spark that began Operation Protective Edge.
    • (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;
      • Recent arrests in Jordan and Israel show that Hamas and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza and the West Bank. After Egypt's army destroyed tunnels joining Gaza and Sinai that had been lucrative smuggling paths, Hamas has been cultivating replacements.
    • (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).
      • Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, HAMAS Director, Refugee Affairs Department, argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.
This is what terrorism is all about. And the list does not include the actions that terrorize as the Palestinians engage in indiscriminate rocket fire, and tunnel building to circumvent border controls.

P F Tinmore said:
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

The chronicling of the past practices of criminal behaviors by the Palestinians is not a matter of propaganda. It is quite different from the forms of propaganda which the Palestinians use to provoke or encourage violence as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression. You can not tell me that anyone believes for a moment that the Palestinians had the right to attack the Olympic Village in Munich --- encourage Black September suicide squad attacks on the passenger terminals at Athens airport --- bomb the Pan Am office at Fiumicino airport, Rome, Italy --- seize the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan and murder two American and one Belgian diplomat, --- stage a Fatah Fedayeen terrorists amphibious attack near Nahariya, Israel, --- bombing the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant (not once but twice), --- multiple assassination attempts on the King of Jordan. These are all matters of record and and stand in stark contrast to the defense measures taken against the likes of 4000+ rockets and mortars fired at Israel 2014.

It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Are you going to list Israel's attacks on Palestinians or are you just going to give the Israeli propaganda version?
Click to expand...




Attacks or reprisals for terrorism. Fire a rocket indiscriminately and expect to get 20 back, so you cant complain about the response to Palestinian violence and aggression now can you.
 
fanger said:
The Cave of the Patriarchs massacre or Ibrahimi Mosque massacre, also known as the Hebron massacre,[1] was a shooting attack carried out by American-born Israeli Baruch Goldstein, a member of the far-right Israeli Kach movement, who opened fire on unarmed Palestinian Muslims praying inside the Ibrahimi Mosque (or Mosque of Abraham) at theCave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, West Bank. It took place on February 25, 1994, during the overlapping religious holidays of Purim and Ramadan.[2][3] The attack left 29 male worshippers dead and 125 wounded.[4] The attack only ended after Goldstein was overcome and beaten to death by survivors.

The attack set off riots and protests throughout the West Bank, and 19 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli Defense Forces within 48 hours of the massacre.[3] Goldstein was widely denounced in Israel and by Jewish communities in the diaspora,[5] with many attributing his act to insanity.[6] Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin condemned the attack, describing Goldstein as a "degenerate murderer", "a shame on Zionism and an embarrassment to Judaism".[7][8][9] Some Jewish settlers in Hebron laud him as a hero and view his attack and subsequent death as an act of martyrdom.
Cave of the Patriarchs massacre - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

No heads of State took part in a protest against this in which the aftermath of the massacre, which led to the deaths of 26 more Palestinians at the hands of the israeli forces
Click to expand...




How many times have Palestinians done the same thing, and all we get from you is that the Jews deserve it because they defend themselves against Palestinian terrorism.
 
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
PF Tinmore, et al,

The link is "redirected" not "rejected."

P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

Israel is not a "state sponsor of terrorism." However, the State of Palestine supports several terrorist organizations, to include the:
Whatever you may think of John Aschcroft [United States Attorney General (2001 - 2005)], doesn't change the fact that he fought against terrorists and the use of terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.

Click to expand...


What a dumb thing to say. Many countries refer to Hamas as terrorists, because they are. Has nothing to do with propaganda. You're obviously just offended because you are a Hamas supporter.
Stop whining.
 
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not a matter of propaganda. It is more the case that "many Palestinian political parties" have established an associated wing (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that has a history of operating 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;
      • A young woman, Dalia Lamkus was stabbed to death by an individual associated with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization on November 10th.
    • (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
      • On November 17 2014 two Palestinian cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal entered the Kehilat Yaakov Synagogue in Jerusalem at 7am armed with knives, meat cleavers, hatchets and guns, and began opening fire and wildly slashing at the estimated 25 individuals inside.
    • (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
      • Naftali Frankel (16), Gilad Shaar (16), Eyal Yifracah (19) were hitchhiking home from attending yeshiva in Gush Etzion when they disappeared. After a three week search their bodies were found near Halhul, a short drive away from where they wer abducted. This attack is the spark that began Operation Protective Edge.
    • (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;
      • Recent arrests in Jordan and Israel show that Hamas and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza and the West Bank. After Egypt's army destroyed tunnels joining Gaza and Sinai that had been lucrative smuggling paths, Hamas has been cultivating replacements.
    • (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).
      • Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, HAMAS Director, Refugee Affairs Department, argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.
This is what terrorism is all about. And the list does not include the actions that terrorize as the Palestinians engage in indiscriminate rocket fire, and tunnel building to circumvent border controls.

P F Tinmore said:
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

The chronicling of the past practices of criminal behaviors by the Palestinians is not a matter of propaganda. It is quite different from the forms of propaganda which the Palestinians use to provoke or encourage violence as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression. You can not tell me that anyone believes for a moment that the Palestinians had the right to attack the Olympic Village in Munich --- encourage Black September suicide squad attacks on the passenger terminals at Athens airport --- bomb the Pan Am office at Fiumicino airport, Rome, Italy --- seize the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan and murder two American and one Belgian diplomat, --- stage a Fatah Fedayeen terrorists amphibious attack near Nahariya, Israel, --- bombing the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant (not once but twice), --- multiple assassination attempts on the King of Jordan. These are all matters of record and and stand in stark contrast to the defense measures taken against the likes of 4000+ rockets and mortars fired at Israel 2014.

It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Are you going to list Israel's attacks on Palestinians or are you just going to give the Israeli propaganda version?
Click to expand...

Says the king of Palestinian propaganda :lol:
 
Phoenall said:
P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:

images
Click to expand...




Because Israel is not on the US terrorist list,. or is that too hard for you to understand and digest.

And then when you see the argument slipping from your grasp you resort to name calling and personal abuse in the vain hope of salvaging some credibility.
Click to expand...
It just shows the level of the people who run our government. Who in our government do you like? Doesn't our government embarrass you?
 
toastman said:
P F Tinmore said:
RoccoR said:
PF Tinmore, et al,

The link is "redirected" not "rejected."

P F Tinmore said:
Rocco, from your link: Request Rejected

"We have an extensive record in breaking up terrorist financing," Attorney General Ashcroft stated. "Our record on terrorist financing is clear: We will hunt down the suppliers of terrorist blood money, we will shut down these sources, and we will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, swift, certain justice of the United States of America."​

Yet we still give money to Israel???

BTW, isn't Asscroft the dumbfuck who lost an election to a deadman?

In the end he (Ashcroft) ran for Senate re-election, but lost his seat to a dead man: Mel Carnahan, whose widow Jean stepped in as the Democrat candidate when her husband died after the ballot papers had already been printed.

BBC News AMERICAS Profile John Ashcroft​

This is too funny.:lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

Israel is not a "state sponsor of terrorism." However, the State of Palestine supports several terrorist organizations, to include the:
Whatever you may think of John Aschcroft [United States Attorney General (2001 - 2005)], doesn't change the fact that he fought against terrorists and the use of terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.

Click to expand...


What a dumb thing to say. Many countries refer to Hamas as terrorists, because they are. Has nothing to do with propaganda. You're obviously just offended because you are a Hamas supporter.
Stop whining.
Click to expand...

What a dumb thing to say. Many countries refer to Hamas as terrorists,...​

How many countries are there and how many designate Hamas as terrorists?
 
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not a matter of propaganda. It is more the case that "many Palestinian political parties" have established an associated wing (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that has a history of operating 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;
      • A young woman, Dalia Lamkus was stabbed to death by an individual associated with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization on November 10th.
    • (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
      • On November 17 2014 two Palestinian cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal entered the Kehilat Yaakov Synagogue in Jerusalem at 7am armed with knives, meat cleavers, hatchets and guns, and began opening fire and wildly slashing at the estimated 25 individuals inside.
    • (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
      • Naftali Frankel (16), Gilad Shaar (16), Eyal Yifracah (19) were hitchhiking home from attending yeshiva in Gush Etzion when they disappeared. After a three week search their bodies were found near Halhul, a short drive away from where they wer abducted. This attack is the spark that began Operation Protective Edge.
    • (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;
      • Recent arrests in Jordan and Israel show that Hamas and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza and the West Bank. After Egypt's army destroyed tunnels joining Gaza and Sinai that had been lucrative smuggling paths, Hamas has been cultivating replacements.
    • (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).
      • Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, HAMAS Director, Refugee Affairs Department, argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.
This is what terrorism is all about. And the list does not include the actions that terrorize as the Palestinians engage in indiscriminate rocket fire, and tunnel building to circumvent border controls.

P F Tinmore said:
Indeed, how many Palestinian political parties are not called terrorists by the lying sacks of shit in Israel. Name some.

Terrorist is an Israel propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

The chronicling of the past practices of criminal behaviors by the Palestinians is not a matter of propaganda. It is quite different from the forms of propaganda which the Palestinians use to provoke or encourage violence as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression. You can not tell me that anyone believes for a moment that the Palestinians had the right to attack the Olympic Village in Munich --- encourage Black September suicide squad attacks on the passenger terminals at Athens airport --- bomb the Pan Am office at Fiumicino airport, Rome, Italy --- seize the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan and murder two American and one Belgian diplomat, --- stage a Fatah Fedayeen terrorists amphibious attack near Nahariya, Israel, --- bombing the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant (not once but twice), --- multiple assassination attempts on the King of Jordan. These are all matters of record and and stand in stark contrast to the defense measures taken against the likes of 4000+ rockets and mortars fired at Israel 2014.

It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
The Palestinians have the right to resist occupation and colonization.

Israel's propagandists always leave that part out.
 
Just a few countries. U.S. puppets, Australia, Canada,,Israel, Japan, New Zealand and the great democracies of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. The EU designated Hamas as a terrorist group from 2003 to 2014. In December 2014, the General Court of the European Union annulled the decision.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

No, they don't leave that part out. They interpret it the same way as does the Geneva Convention.

P F Tinmore said:
The Palestinians have the right to resist occupation and colonization.

Israel's propagandists always leave that part out.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

It is you that forgets the part that counts.

[URL='https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=AE2D398352C5B028C12563CD002D6B5C' said:
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.[/URL]]

  • ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

    Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.
    The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
    The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
    In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
Click to expand...
The Palestinian "right to resist" is tempered with the associated criminal penalties when the Palestinian intends to harm the Occupying Power:
The issue of colonization is an attempt to imply that the General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 --- Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (as in the settlements and jurisdiction). When, in fact, the issues are a matter of agreements that the PLO agreed; this divided authority in the 1993/1995 Oslo accords.


But there’s another potential challenge to the ICC’s jurisdiction over Israelis, stemming from the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords. Politically, Oslo may be dead, but neither Israel nor the PA has abrogated the Accords. Oslo II’s partition of the West Bank into Areas A (full Palestinian control), B (Palestinian civil control and joint Palestinian-Israeli security control), and C (full Israeli civil and security control, except over Palestinians) still orders daily life in the territories. Area C includes the settlements, their environs, and roadways.

Under Oslo II, “Israel has sole criminal jurisdiction over … offenses committed in the Territories by Israelis.” (Annex IV, art. 1(2)). Palestine does have criminal jurisdiction over Palestinians and non-Israelis in Areas A and B. (Israel has full criminal jurisdiction over Area C.) But crimes committed by Israelis in Palestinian territory are, under Oslo, solely Israel’s to investigate and try. To see why that might matter, we must go back to ICC basics.

The United States has always objected to the idea that the ICC could prosecute conduct by nationals of non-member states: treaties bind only their parties. The response to this objection is that the ICC is merely exercising jurisdiction that its member states could exercise on their own. It is axiomatic that states have jurisdiction over conduct on their own territory. If a U.S. national commits a crime in another state’s territory, the United States has no complaint if that state puts the perpetrator on trial in its own courts. In effect, states that join the ICC delegate that function to the Court.

Some U.S. commentators responded that criminal jurisdiction is not something a state can delegate as it chooses. But 122 states from every region of the world have joined the ICC, powerful evidence that customary international law no longer supports the U.S. argument, if it ever did.

The implication for ICC jurisdiction over Israeli crimes in Palestinian territory is clear. The ICC operates on criminal jurisdiction borrowed from its members; but under Oslo II, Palestine has no jurisdiction over Israelis to delegate. Whether this somewhat arcane difficulty is merely a technicality that the Court will ignore remains to be seen.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RoccoR said:
P F Tinmore, et al,

No, they don't leave that part out. They interpret it the same way as does the Geneva Convention.

P F Tinmore said:
The Palestinians have the right to resist occupation and colonization.

Israel's propagandists always leave that part out.
Click to expand...
(COMMENT)

It is you that forgets the part that counts.

[URL='https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=AE2D398352C5B028C12563CD002D6B5C' said:
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.[/URL]]

  • ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

    Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.
    The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
    The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
    In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
Click to expand...
The Palestinian "right to resist" is tempered with the associated criminal penalties when the Palestinian intends to harm the Occupying Power:
Click to expand...
You keep bringing this up like it means something. From your link https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl...t&documentId=6DB876FD94A28530C12563CD0051BEF8
The Occupying Power may, however, subject the population of the occupied territory to provisions which are essential to enable the Occupying Power to fulfil its obligations under the present Convention, to maintain the orderly government of the territory, and to ensure the security of the Occupying Power, of the members and property of the occupying forces or administration, and likewise of the establishments and lines of communication used by them.​

The rules of occupation have benefits, obligations, and restrictions. Israel wants to exercise the benefits while thumbing its nose at the obligations and restrictions. Why should the Palestinians conform to the rules of occupation when Israel refuses to do so?

The issue of colonization is an attempt to imply that the General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 --- Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (as in the settlements and jurisdiction). When, in fact, the issues are a matter of agreements that the PLO agreed; this divided authority in the 1993/1995 Oslo accords.
Click to expand...

The UN recognizes that Palestine is under colonization and has called that to end.

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978

But there’s another potential challenge to the ICC’s jurisdiction over Israelis, stemming from the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords. Politically, Oslo may be dead, but neither Israel nor the PA has abrogated the Accords. Oslo II’s partition of the West Bank into Areas A (full Palestinian control), B (Palestinian civil control and joint Palestinian-Israeli security control), and C (full Israeli civil and security control, except over Palestinians) still orders daily life in the territories. Area C includes the settlements, their environs, and roadways.

Under Oslo II, “Israel has sole criminal jurisdiction over … offenses committed in the Territories by Israelis.” (Annex IV, art. 1(2)). Palestine does have criminal jurisdiction over Palestinians and non-Israelis in Areas A and B. (Israel has full criminal jurisdiction over Area C.) But crimes committed by Israelis in Palestinian territory are, under Oslo, solely Israel’s to investigate and try. To see why that might matter, we must go back to ICC basics.
Click to expand...

Oslo can be considered null and void on several different levels.

A state's consent may be invalidated if there was an erroneous understanding of a fact or situation at the time of conclusion, which formed the "essential basis" of the state's consent. Consent will not be invalidated if the misunderstanding was due to the state's own conduct, or if the truth should have been evident.

Consent will also be invalidated if it was induced by the fraudulent conduct of another party, or by the direct or indirect "corruption" of its representative by another party to the treaty. Coercion of either a representative, or the state itself through the threat or use of force, if used to obtain the consent of that state to a treaty, will invalidate that consent.

A treaty is null and void if it is in violation of a peremptory norm. These norms, unlike other principles of customary law, are recognized as permitting no violations and so cannot be altered through treaty obligations. These are limited to such universally accepted prohibitions as those against the aggressive use of force, genocide and other crimes against humanity, piracy, hostilities directed at civilian population, racial discrimination and apartheid, slavery and torture,[32] meaning that no state can legally assume an obligation to commit or permit such acts.[33]

Treaty - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​

The United States has always objected to the idea that the ICC could prosecute conduct by nationals of non-member states: treaties bind only their parties. The response to this objection is that the ICC is merely exercising jurisdiction that its member states could exercise on their own. It is axiomatic that states have jurisdiction over conduct on their own territory. If a U.S. national commits a crime in another state’s territory, the United States has no complaint if that state puts the perpetrator on trial in its own courts. In effect, states that join the ICC delegate that function to the Court.

Some U.S. commentators responded that criminal jurisdiction is not something a state can delegate as it chooses. But 122 states from every region of the world have joined the ICC, powerful evidence that customary international law no longer supports the U.S. argument, if it ever did.

The implication for ICC jurisdiction over Israeli crimes in Palestinian territory is clear. The ICC operates on criminal jurisdiction borrowed from its members; but under Oslo II, Palestine has no jurisdiction over Israelis to delegate. Whether this somewhat arcane difficulty is merely a technicality that the Court will ignore remains to be seen.

Most Respectfully,
R
Click to expand...
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

You are absolutely correct. The State of Israel, as the "Occupation Power" has benefits, obligations, and restrictions relative to this matter. However, just as important, it is necessary that the facts and the logic be laid-out in a more comprehensive fashion.

First: At the time that A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 was adopted, the territory and people under question were not Palestinians. The people of the West Bank were Jordanian Citizens and the territory of the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian Territory. The Resolution 33 24 of 29 November 1978, spoke in an ambiguous fashion on purpose. The disparity noted in the Resolution is between (ie "denial to the Palestinian people of their right to self-determination and independence") was not a consequence of the Israeli Occupation, but rather a consequence of the Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented and exercised their right of self-determination to join the Hashemite Kingdom. This Arab Palestinian action culminated in the Annexation of the West Bank. The annexation of the West Bank by the Kingdom remained until the official disengagement in June 1988 (a decade later). Immediately after the release through Jordanian disengagement the Arab Palestinians Declared Independence without external interference by the Israelis. The territorial dispute between the Israelis and Jordanians came seven years later (1995) when the Israelis and Jordanian concluded a Peace Treaty; establishing a international boundary between the two countries.

Second: History has demonstrated --- often enough --- that after an armed conflict there is frequently a recurring condition of "occupation" establish. The Hague Regulations and the Geneva Conventions usually regulate these situations governing such conditions until such time as the return to normalization can be re-established. And again --- often enough --- the nature of an occupation is nonconsensual. But whether an occupation becomes hostile and belligerent is a facet of the stance in which the occupied population assumes. The initial obligation of the Occupying Power is the establishment of law and order through effective control as defined by the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Conventions. The degree to which the absence of consent from the "State whose territory is subject to the Israeli presence" sets the existence of the belligerent or amenable occupation. In the case of the West Bank, the "state" was Jordan and the belligerency was the nature demonstrated historically - to the present time - by the Arab Palestinian. At the initiation of the Occupation, the security containment and effective control was minimal. There was no Security Barriers and very few checkpoints to consider. These escalations occurred in direct response to the maintenance of the effective control in response to hostilities for which the Arab Palestinian was solely accountable.

Third: The degree to which the Arab Palestinian critiques the Administrative manner of the Occupation does not negate the individual liability of the parties to adhere to the requirements set forth. Article 68 is just as strong whether the disruption to the maintenance of peace, law and order requires a heavy exertion of effective control or not. Any Arab Palestinian action taken with the intent to harm the occupation power still has legal consequences. There is no binding treatise that neutralizes that premise. The Arab Palestinian must settle their international disputes by peaceful means; and shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.​

The Oslo Accords are signed by the Arab Palestinian sole representative of the people. Oslo Accords have the intent of extending peace between Israel and the Arab Palestinian People. The include a mutual recognition of of “mutual legitimate and political rights.” If the Oslo Accords were ever obviated --- the adverse impact would not fall on Israel, but would have a grave impact on the Arab Palestinian. Without the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority would not exist. There would be no Area "A" or "B" with any Arab Palestinian Authority --- and the status of the State of Palestine would be in question.

Most Respectfully,
R






​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

How about a simple solution - Part 2

< Previous Thread

Palestinian's aren't the only ones who throw rocks!

Next Thread >

Similar threads

Sayaras
Why racist-Islamicized ICC’s ingrained bias ensures no fair ‘trials’ for Israel - the OIC lobby, Nawaf Salam, Karim Khan etc.
Replies
5
Views
143
Sayaras
Sayaras
Sayaras
It’s about Islamic Bigotry stupid. OIC/ICC/ICJ same “difference” by now
Replies
0
Views
65
Sayaras
Sayaras
T
Republican Senators Threaten International Criminal Court With ‘Severe Sanctions’: ‘Target Israel and We Will Target You’
2
Replies
20
Views
360
sparky
sparky
IM2
Zone1 If You Blacks Would Just Comply....
2
Replies
24
Views
356
el midgetron
el midgetron
Ancient lion
Israeli spy chief ‘threatens’ ICC prosecutor to obstruct justice
Replies
3
Views
100
USAF 2023
USAF 2023

Latest Discussions

IM2
2024
Replies
18
Views
86
TheGreatSatan
TheGreatSatan
RhodyPatriot
In The Zone: 14 Days Til Presidential Debate, And Here's The Only Trick The Dems Have Up Their Sleeve
2 3
Replies
54
Views
195
22lcidw
2
M
Zone1 White Affirmative action is most prominent
2 3
Replies
49
Views
631
Boo Radley
B
M
Zone1 Black Americans are the #1 victims of hate crimes
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
244
Boo Radley
B
skye
American and European dance bands and vocalists from the 1920s 1930s and 1940s.....
201 202 203
Replies
4K
Views
215K
skye
skye
View more…

Forum List

Back
Top