All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[Hollie]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC External Interference
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think this might very well trigger a backlash against the ICC.

ICC rules it has jurisdiction over war crimes in the Palestinian territories

Did you know that Israel is not a signatory to the ICC Cult?
Do you think that Yahya Sinwar, Khalid Mashal or Ismail Haniya will provide direct testimony?

Did you know that Israel is not a signatory to the ICC Cult?

Sure, but it doesn't matter. The crimes are taking place in Palestine where the court does have jurisdiction.

(CONTRADICTION)

◈ On the one-hand, the ICC supports the notion that:

✦ The UNGA Resolution 67/19 recognising Palestine as a State, in its paragraph 1 states that the UNGA: “Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967”.​

◈ On the other-hand, the ICC supports the notion that:

✦ The UNGA, in its Resolution 67/19 (29 November 2012) upgraded Palestine from “observer entity” to “non-member observer State ”.​

(FINE POINT of DISTINCTION)

It stated that “ruling on the territorial scope of its jurisdiction, the Chamber is neither adjudicating a border dispute under international law nor prejudging the question of any future borders. The Chamber’s ruling is for the sole purpose of defining the Court’s territorial jurisdiction”

(THE DOUBLE EDGE OF THE SWORD)

The Prosecutor states that war crimes were committed by:

​

◈ The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) as well as ​

◈ Members of Hamas and Palestinian Armed Groups (“PAGs”). ​

At this time it appears that the crimes targeted by the Prosecution are:

◈ Wilful killings, torture, inhuman treatment or serious injury to body or health;​

◈ Intentionally attacking objects or persons using the emblems of the Geneva Conventions;​

◈ Intentionally attacking civilians and civilian objectives or using protected persons as shields;​

◈ Depriving protected persons of the right to a fair trial;​

◈ Outrages to personal dignity; and​

◈ Transfer by occupying Power of its own population into occupied territory.​

(COMMENT)

I think the intention of the Prosecutor, although thinly vailed, is to make it appear (plausible denial) that both parties to the conflict are being investigated. This is to avoid the allegation that the Prosecutor is engaged in the wrongful use of legal authority with the intent to inflict harms on the Israels (a party to the conflict). The Prosecutor knows damn well that any specific members of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) and the various Palestinian Armed Groups (“PAGs”) will be hard to identify.

✪ (IMO) This is equivalent to an attempt to bankrupt Israel and plunder its wealth. This would not be the first time judicial authority would be focused upon the Jewish People. It is an effort to destroy the most highly developed nation within the Middle East North African (MENA) Region. It is an attempt to afford the Arab Palestinians a windfall profit and to weaken, if not overrun, Israel with penalties for it defense against Arab Aggression since 1948. It supports the Hamas belief that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances, and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. HAMAS considers null and void:

◈ The Balfour Declaration, ​

◈ The British Mandate Document, t​

◈ The UN Palestine Partition Resolution, ​

◈ and whatever resolutions and measures that derive from them or are similar to them.​

HAMAS → considers the establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people

The significance of the date, 14 July 2014, is the complaint lodged by Palestine at the UN is, in regard, since 7 July 2014 launch of "Operation Strong Cliff" then Operation Protective Edge, Israel. The Arab Palestinians alleged that the Occupying Power brutally attacked the territories. What went unsaid is that since the first of the year (2014) the Hostile Arab Palestinians launched 450 rockets into Israel. About 250 (out of the 450 rockets) were launched in the three weeks prior to the decision to activate Operation Protective Edge.

It will be interesting to see how Israel will respond to the Jurisdictional Decision.

Most Respectfully,
R

It will be interesting to see how Israel will respond to the Jurisdictional Decision.

Bibi is out playing the anti-Semite card.

Israel and its lackeys in the US are saying that the court does not have jurisdiction. However, the prosecutor says it does and a panel if judges just ruled that it does.

I hope they post videos of the proceedings. This will be interesting.

You hope they post videos? I'm assuming that means you will litter the forum with more youtube videos.

It will be fun watching Israel's shysters bob and weave.

I can understand your position as one derived from insensate Jew hatreds but why do you believe ''Israel's shysters bob and weave? Firstly, I will suppose you're a righteous follower of Arab-Moslem propaganda intended to denigrate the "hook-nosed shyster Jews''. Your language is stereotypical of those associated with an identifiable politico -religious ideology. Secondly, my experience is that the ICC has an inherent bias and will tend to focus on the 2014 scuffle between Israel and the Islamic terrorist attackers, primarily attached to Hamas. Remember that the scuffle started with the capture and killing of three Israeli teenagers. That the ICC can self-determine it has authority makes their ''jurisdiction'' questionable.

Are you readying your youtube video collection?

What's with the Jew hatred shtick? Have you played all of your anti-Semite cards?

Good question. What's with your Jew hatred schtick? You're left to cut and paste the anti-Semitic canards you steal from the PA Facebook page

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC External Interference
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think this is N "ad hominem" attack on the character of the legal counsel, as opposed to the defense they have not even presented.

It will be fun watching Israel's shysters bob and weave.

(COMMENT)

Of course, I am a lawman, not a barrister. But I think there is ample cause to examine the competence of the ICC.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

However, the prosecutor says it does and a panel if judges just ruled that it does.

Let's see them enforce it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC External Interference
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think this is N "ad hominem" attack on the character of the legal counsel, as opposed to the defense they have not even presented.

It will be fun watching Israel's shysters bob and weave.

(COMMENT)

Of course, I am a lawman, not a barrister. But I think there is ample cause to examine the competence of the ICC.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course, I am a lawman, not a barrister.

I can tell.

Do you question the competence of the Holy Land Five court? I would think not.

 

[Hollie]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC External Interference
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think this is N "ad hominem" attack on the character of the legal counsel, as opposed to the defense they have not even presented.

It will be fun watching Israel's shysters bob and weave.

(COMMENT)

Of course, I am a lawman, not a barrister. But I think there is ample cause to examine the competence of the ICC.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course, I am a lawman, not a barrister.

I can tell.

Do you question the competence of the Holy Land Five court? I would think not.

As you obviously and falsely attempt to compare the two entities, it's not surprising you don't see the error in doing so.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I Ruling
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think you will find it surprising at many of the points he illuminates.

I can tell.
Do you question the competence of the Holy Land Five court? I would think not.

(COMMENT)

You do not have to listen to my layman's opinion. But I have a lot in common with the Dissenting Opinion written by Judge Péter Kovács (ICC-01/18-143-Anx1 05-02-2021 154/163 EC PT); he is one of the three Pre-Trial Chamber I Judges. While I am not as elegant or knowledgeable as he, and he speaks of many more questions about the ruling than I, many of the things he says are very similar to the issues I (and others) have raised in this forum. I think that Péter Kovács offer an opportunity (Primer if you will) for and Israeli Defense Team the issues the Prosecution is very on.

◈ I share the view that the Chamber’s competence is grounded in article 19(3) of the Statute.​

​

◈ First Issue (‘whether Palestine can be considered “[t]he State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred” within the meaning of article 12(2)(a) of the Statute’2). I note that the way the Majority Decision frames the First Issue is different from the way it was originally formulated in the Request.3In any case, I agree neither with the conclusion, nor with the Majority’s reasoning and analysis in reaching such a conclusion.​

​

◈ Regarding the second issue (the geographical scope of the Court’s jurisdiction), again, I agree neither with the Majority’s conclusion nor with its reasoning. ​

​

◈ I find neither the Majority’s approach nor its reasoning appropriate answering the question before this Chamber, and in my view, they have no legal basis in the Rome Statute, and even less so, in public international law.​

​

◈ In her arguments, the Prosecutor does not rely on positive (existing and binding) international law applicable vis-à-vista question of Palestinerelating to statehood and borders de lege lata, which is likely due to the scarcity or absence of such type of instruments. Instead, the Prosecutor refers to statements from soft law documents that are certainly favorable to Palestinians but are nevertheless non-binding.​

​

◈ Of course, the Prosecutor does not state that a recommendation is binding. However, in the Palestinian situation, she apparently does not deem it important to distinguish what is binding from what is only a recommendation, a suggestion, or an opinion. ​

​

◈ The resolutions adopted by the Security Council and the General Assembly subsequently to resolution 67/19 far from prove a fait accompli, but rather present a reserved attitude vis-à-vis the actual status of Palestine’s statehood, despite the General Assembly’s undeniable sympathy towards the Palestinian situation.​

Evidently - the question as to whether or not The West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza can be considered hic et nunc (in 2020-2021) ‘the territory of the State’ according to well-established notions of public international law → is NOT settled yet. And in the 154 pages this becomes a problem for the Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

 

[Hollie]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I Ruling
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

BLUF: I think you will find it surprising at many of the points he illuminates.

I can tell.
Do you question the competence of the Holy Land Five court? I would think not.

(COMMENT)

You do not have to listen to my layman's opinion. But I have a lot in common with the Dissenting Opinion written by Judge Péter Kovács (ICC-01/18-143-Anx1 05-02-2021 154/163 EC PT); he is one of the three Pre-Trial Chamber I Judges. While I am not as elegant or knowledgeable as he, and he speaks of many more questions about the ruling than I, many of the things he says are very similar to the issues I (and others) have raised in this forum. I think that Péter Kovács offer an opportunity (Primer if you will) for and Israeli Defense Team the issues the Prosecution is very on.

◈ I share the view that the Chamber’s competence is grounded in article 19(3) of the Statute.​

​

◈ First Issue (‘whether Palestine can be considered “[t]he State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred” within the meaning of article 12(2)(a) of the Statute’2). I note that the way the Majority Decision frames the First Issue is different from the way it was originally formulated in the Request.3In any case, I agree neither with the conclusion, nor with the Majority’s reasoning and analysis in reaching such a conclusion.​

​

◈ Regarding the second issue (the geographical scope of the Court’s jurisdiction), again, I agree neither with the Majority’s conclusion nor with its reasoning. ​

​

◈ I find neither the Majority’s approach nor its reasoning appropriate answering the question before this Chamber, and in my view, they have no legal basis in the Rome Statute, and even less so, in public international law.​

​

◈ In her arguments, the Prosecutor does not rely on positive (existing and binding) international law applicable vis-à-vista question of Palestinerelating to statehood and borders de lege lata, which is likely due to the scarcity or absence of such type of instruments. Instead, the Prosecutor refers to statements from soft law documents that are certainly favorable to Palestinians but are nevertheless non-binding.​

​

◈ Of course, the Prosecutor does not state that a recommendation is binding. However, in the Palestinian situation, she apparently does not deem it important to distinguish what is binding from what is only a recommendation, a suggestion, or an opinion. ​

​

◈ The resolutions adopted by the Security Council and the General Assembly subsequently to resolution 67/19 far from prove a fait accompli, but rather present a reserved attitude vis-à-vis the actual status of Palestine’s statehood, despite the General Assembly’s undeniable sympathy towards the Palestinian situation.​

Evidently - the question as to whether or not The West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza can be considered hic et nunc (in 2020-2021) ‘the territory of the State’ according to well-established notions of public international law → is NOT settled yet. And in the 154 pages this becomes a problem for the Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

I would agree that Judge Péter Kovács lays out some very basic elements that call into question the authority of the ICC with the last three bullet points in particular suggesting the ICC could be viewed as overstepping.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Black Lives Matter leader Alicia Garza pulls out of pro-Israel gala

Falic family of settlement funders is to co-chair the Shmuley Boteach event.

electronicintifada.net

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach bragged that Black Lives Matter leader Alicia Garza would attend his virtual event, but she has decided against participating.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

Oslo is dead, remember?

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

Palestinian Authority Slammed for Suppressing Dissent, Widespread Corruption

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[rylah]

During the dark ages it was the Church accusing Jews for the Black Plague.
Today it's people like Martin in the media indulging in the same racist blood libels.

Usual Pallywood propaganda,
she couldn't even bring herself to do a simple google search
on what the Israeli minister of health actually said before misquoting him,
because she believes Israelis simply must be wrong, or worse she's intentionally lying.

While strangely, even the UN went out of their way to praise Israel.

COVID-19: UN envoy hails strong Israel-Palestine cooperation

Nickolay Mladenov, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, has praised the coordination between the Israeli and Palestine authorities in reacting to the COVID-19 pandemic.

news.un.org

.

 

[Hollie]