Chronicle of Palestinian terrorism

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

This doesn't answer my question.

I see you keep raising this point.

Remember: The nationals of an occupying power, Israeli citizens, are specifically excluded from "civilian" status by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

(OBSERVATION)

This is not true in the context in which you are trying to apply it. If they are not participating in the conflict, they are off-limits to engage.

(COMMENT)

Specify the point and the clause you want to apply.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, what do you think "excluding nationals of the Occupying Power" means?

(COMMENT)

What article of the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949 are you invoking?

And how are you invoking it?

I can pretty much guarantee you that there in no international law, convention, or treaty that endorses the right of the Palestinians to launch attacks against non-combatants.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore; et al,

This doesn't answer my question.

I see you keep raising this point.


(OBSERVATION)

This is not true in the context in which you are trying to apply it. If they are not participating in the conflict, they are off-limits to engage.

(COMMENT)

Specify the point and the clause you want to apply.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, what do you think "excluding nationals of the Occupying Power" means?

(COMMENT)

What article of the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949 are you invoking?

And how are you invoking it?

I can pretty much guarantee you that there in no international law, convention, or treaty that endorses the right of the Palestinians to launch attacks against non-combatants.

Most Respectfully,
R

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary - Art. 4. Part I : General provisions

[p.45] ARTICLE 4 [ Link ] . -- DEFINITION OF PROTECTED PERSONS

</title> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/xsp/.ibmxspres/.mini/css/@Da&@Ib&2Tfxsp.css&2TfxspLTR.css.css"> <script type="text/javascript" src="/xsp/.ibmxspres/dojoroot-1.6.1/dojo/dojo.js" djConfig="locale: 'fr-ch'"></script> <script type=

Even when the definition of protected persons is set out in this way, it may seem rather complicated. Nevertheless, disregarding points of detail, it will be seen that there are two main classes of protected person: (1) ' enemy nationals ' within the national territory of each of the Parties to the conflict and (2) ' the whole population ' of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power).

 

[Peterf]

What the hell was it then? Are you on crack?

Marines are a legitimate military target.

sorry, but killing Marines ain't terrorism.

Unless a state in engaged in war killing marines is just as much an act of terror as killing boy scouts. Do you think that the Muslim army officer killing soldiers at Ft Hood was not a terrorist?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You are reading the law ass-backwards.

This doesn't answer my question.

OK, what do you think "excluding nationals of the Occupying Power" means?

(COMMENT)

What article of the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949 are you invoking?

And how are you invoking it?

I can pretty much guarantee you that there in no international law, convention, or treaty that endorses the right of the Palestinians to launch attacks against non-combatants.

Most Respectfully,
R

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary - Art. 4. Part I : General provisions

[p.45] ARTICLE 4 [ Link ] . -- DEFINITION OF PROTECTED PERSONS

</title> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/xsp/.ibmxspres/.mini/css/@Da&@Ib&2Tfxsp.css&2TfxspLTR.css.css"> <script type="text/javascript" src="/xsp/.ibmxspres/dojoroot-1.6.1/dojo/dojo.js" djConfig="locale: 'fr-ch'"></script> <script type=

Even when the definition of protected persons is set out in this way, it may seem rather complicated. Nevertheless, disregarding points of detail, it will be seen that there are two main classes of protected person: (1) ' enemy nationals ' within the national territory of each of the Parties to the conflict and (2) ' the whole population ' of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power).

(COMMENT)

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

• Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

• The Occupying Power is Israel.
• The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
• The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

PARAGRAPH 4. -- PERSONS PROTECTED BY OTHER CONVENTIONS

Members of resistance movements must fulfil certain stated conditions before they can be regarded as prisoners of war. If members of a resistance movement who have fallen in to enemy hands do not fulfil those conditions, they must be considered to be protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention. That does not mean that they cannot be punished for their acts, but the trial and sentence must take place in accordance with the provisions of Article 64 and the Articles which follow it.

COMMENTARY: GCIV

Art. 64. The penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain in force, with the exception that they may be repealed or suspended by the Occupying Power in cases where they constitute a threat to its security or an obstacle to the application of the present Convention.

Subject to the latter consideration and to the necessity for ensuring the effective administration of justice, the tribunals of the occupied territory shall continue to function in respect of all offences covered by the said laws.

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.

Art. 68. 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 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 and 65 may impose the death penalty against 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.

SOURCE: GCIV Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

NOW!!! What is your point? What do you think it allows?

And don't tell me that the law provides and allows attacks on Israeli civilians not engaged in the conflict by Palestinian Resistance Movements; because it doesn't.

Deadly attacks by the Palestinian Resistance (protected persons or not) is punishable by "DEATH."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You are reading the law ass-backwards.

This doesn't answer my question.


(COMMENT)

What article of the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949 are you invoking?

And how are you invoking it?

I can pretty much guarantee you that there in no international law, convention, or treaty that endorses the right of the Palestinians to launch attacks against non-combatants.

Most Respectfully,
R

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary - Art. 4. Part I : General provisions

[p.45] ARTICLE 4 [ Link ] . -- DEFINITION OF PROTECTED PERSONS

</title> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/xsp/.ibmxspres/.mini/css/@Da&@Ib&2Tfxsp.css&2TfxspLTR.css.css"> <script type="text/javascript" src="/xsp/.ibmxspres/dojoroot-1.6.1/dojo/dojo.js" djConfig="locale: 'fr-ch'"></script> <script type=

(COMMENT)

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

• Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

• The Occupying Power is Israel.
• The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
• The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

PARAGRAPH 4. -- PERSONS PROTECTED BY OTHER CONVENTIONS

Members of resistance movements must fulfil certain stated conditions before they can be regarded as prisoners of war. If members of a resistance movement who have fallen in to enemy hands do not fulfil those conditions, they must be considered to be protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention. That does not mean that they cannot be punished for their acts, but the trial and sentence must take place in accordance with the provisions of Article 64 and the Articles which follow it.

COMMENTARY: GCIV

Art. 64. The penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain in force, with the exception that they may be repealed or suspended by the Occupying Power in cases where they constitute a threat to its security or an obstacle to the application of the present Convention.

Subject to the latter consideration and to the necessity for ensuring the effective administration of justice, the tribunals of the occupied territory shall continue to function in respect of all offences covered by the said laws.

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.

SOURCE: GCIV Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

NOW!!! What is your point? What do you think it allows?

And don't tell me that the law provides and allows attacks on Israeli civilians not engaged in the conflict by Palestinian Resistance Movements; because it doesn't.

Deadly attacks by the Palestinian Resistance (protected persons or not) is punishable by "DEATH."

Most Respectfully,
R

Tinmore always gave me the impression that he actually believes there's an open season on Israeli civilians and they can be hunted down like wild game..

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You are reading the law ass-backwards.

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary - Art. 4. Part I : General provisions

[p.45] ARTICLE 4 [ Link ] . -- DEFINITION OF PROTECTED PERSONS

</title> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/xsp/.ibmxspres/.mini/css/@Da&@Ib&2Tfxsp.css&2TfxspLTR.css.css"> <script type="text/javascript" src="/xsp/.ibmxspres/dojoroot-1.6.1/dojo/dojo.js" djConfig="locale: 'fr-ch'"></script> <script type=

(COMMENT)

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

• Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

• The Occupying Power is Israel.
• The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
• The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

PARAGRAPH 4. -- PERSONS PROTECTED BY OTHER CONVENTIONS

Members of resistance movements must fulfil certain stated conditions before they can be regarded as prisoners of war. If members of a resistance movement who have fallen in to enemy hands do not fulfil those conditions, they must be considered to be protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention. That does not mean that they cannot be punished for their acts, but the trial and sentence must take place in accordance with the provisions of Article 64 and the Articles which follow it.

COMMENTARY: GCIV


SOURCE: GCIV Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

NOW!!! What is your point? What do you think it allows?

And don't tell me that the law provides and allows attacks on Israeli civilians not engaged in the conflict by Palestinian Resistance Movements; because it doesn't.

Deadly attacks by the Palestinian Resistance (protected persons or not) is punishable by "DEATH."

Most Respectfully,
R

Tinmore always gave me the impression that he actually believes there's an open season on Israeli civilians and they can be hunted down like wild game..

That's exactly it ! But when Israelis return fire, it's terrorism !!

 

[georgephillip]

650,000 Jews and 1.35 million Arabs lived between the River and the sea in 1948 Mandate Palestine. Why not a vote to decide the issue of self determination instead of an imperial decree?

how about just giving 2/3 of Palestine to the Arabs and 1/3 to the Jews??????

instead they gave the Jews 60%...while they barely made up 35% of the population.

Early Zionists begged from every Royal table they could find, including the Russian Tsar, the German Kaiser, and Ottoman Turks. They struck gold in England when HRM decided to back a Jewish homeland in Palestine several years after the Royal Navy began switching from coal to oil to power its fleets.

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, “a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'

"Storrs’ analogy was no accident. Ireland was where the English invented the tactic of divide and conquer, and where the devastating effectiveness of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between the colonial rulers and the colonized made it a template for worldwide imperial rule."

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF

 

[georgephillip]

"Returning to Gaza, after Israel’s 1967 conquests, its torture took new forms.

"Merely to mention one of innumerable examples, immediately before the outbreak of the Intifada in Gaza in December 1987, a Palestinian girl was shot and killed in a schoolyard by a resident of a nearby Jewish settlement.

"Like other 'unpeople,'” to borrow Orwell’s phrase, her name — Intissar al-Atar — is unknown in the civilized world, her fate as well.

"The murderer was one of the several thousand Israelis settlers brought to Gaza in violation of international law and protected by a huge army presence, taking over much of the land and scarce water of the Strip and living 'lavishly in twenty-two settlements in the midst of 1.4 million destitute Palestinians,' as Raz describes the crime.

"The murderer of the schoolgirl, Shimon Yifrah, was arrested, but quickly released on bail when the Court determined that 'the offense is not severe enough' to warrant detention.

"The judge commented that Yifrah only intended to shock the girl by firing his gun at her in a schoolyard, not to kill her, so 'this is not a case of a criminal person who has to be punished, deterred, and taught a lesson by imprisoning him.'

"Yifrah was given a 7-month suspended sentence, while settlers in the courtroom broke out in song and dance.

"And the usual silence reigned.

"After all, it is routine."

Violence and Dignity: Reflections on the Middle East (2013 Edward Said Lecture)

Since the abd Georgie Boy has become a devout Dhimmi, he will never tell you of Arab atrocities, not even when they are committed on Black people and he doesn't care that this is routine Since we are talking about after 1967 when Israel got control of the territories and had to administer them, the Israelis built schools, hospitals and clinics for the Arabs, put in infrastructure, gave inoculations against infectious diseases that were never given before, increased the life expectancy of these Arabs and gave them one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East. Perhaps Georgie Boy can explain to us why the Egyptians and Jordanians didn't do this for the "Palestinians."

"And so it is.

"As Yifrah was freed, the Israeli press reported that an army patrol fired into the yard of a school for young boys in one of the miserable refugee camps, wounding five children, allegedly intending only 'to shock them.'

There were no charges, and the event again attracted no attention.

"It was just another episode in the program of 'illiteracy as punishment,' the Israeli press reported, including the closing of schools, use of gas bombs, beating of students with rifle butts, barring of medical aid for victims; and beyond the schools a reign of more severe brutality, becoming even more savage during the Intifada, under the orders of Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, an admired dove, who informed a Peace Now delegation at the peak of the brutality that he was pleased with the meaningless US-PLO dialogue that had just been initiated, “low-level discussions” that avoid any serious issue and grant Israel 'at least a year' to resolve the problems by force.

"'The inhabitants of the territories are subject to harsh military and economic pressure,' Rabin explained, and 'In the end, they will be broken,' abandoning their hopes for a life of dignity."

Violence and Dignity: Reflections on the Middle East (2013 Edward Said Lecture)

 

[abu afak]

650,000 Jews and 1.35 million Arabs lived between the River and the sea in 1948 Mandate Palestine. Why not a vote to decide the issue of self determination instead of an imperial decree?

how about just giving 2/3 of Palestine to the Arabs and 1/3 to the Jews??????

instead they gave the Jews 60%...while they barely made up 35% of the population.

[]Early Zionists begged from every Royal table they could find, including the Russian Tsar, the German Kaiser, and Ottoman Turks. They struck gold in England when HRM decided to back a Jewish homeland in Palestine several years after the Royal Navy began switching from coal to oil to power its fleets.[/B]

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, &#8220;a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'

"Storrs&#8217; analogy was no accident. Ireland was where the English invented the tactic of divide and conquer, and where the devastating effectiveness of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between the colonial rulers and the colonized made it a template for worldwide imperial rule."

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF

The Jews got 55% of Lesser Palestine ... The 23% that was left over that is ..... after the Arabs got 77% of Greater Palestine/The British Mandate.
IOW, Arabs got 87% of the British Mandate.

And Half of the Jews 55% was the Thought-Useless/Near-Empty Negev Desert thrown in to make Israel Viable.
So 35% of the population got 27.5% of the Usable Land.
Ooops

And of course, and again, Jews were a Majority in the land that was to become Israel.

see my:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/105824-myth-1-israel-is-stolen-land.html

--

 

[Hossfly]

"Returning to Gaza, after Israel’s 1967 conquests, its torture took new forms.

"Merely to mention one of innumerable examples, immediately before the outbreak of the Intifada in Gaza in December 1987, a Palestinian girl was shot and killed in a schoolyard by a resident of a nearby Jewish settlement.

"Like other 'unpeople,'” to borrow Orwell’s phrase, her name — Intissar al-Atar — is unknown in the civilized world, her fate as well.

"The murderer was one of the several thousand Israelis settlers brought to Gaza in violation of international law and protected by a huge army presence, taking over much of the land and scarce water of the Strip and living 'lavishly in twenty-two settlements in the midst of 1.4 million destitute Palestinians,' as Raz describes the crime.

"The murderer of the schoolgirl, Shimon Yifrah, was arrested, but quickly released on bail when the Court determined that 'the offense is not severe enough' to warrant detention.

"The judge commented that Yifrah only intended to shock the girl by firing his gun at her in a schoolyard, not to kill her, so 'this is not a case of a criminal person who has to be punished, deterred, and taught a lesson by imprisoning him.'

"Yifrah was given a 7-month suspended sentence, while settlers in the courtroom broke out in song and dance.

"And the usual silence reigned.

"After all, it is routine."

Violence and Dignity: Reflections on the Middle East (2013 Edward Said Lecture)

Since the abd Georgie Boy has become a devout Dhimmi, he will never tell you of Arab atrocities, not even when they are committed on Black people and he doesn't care that this is routine Since we are talking about after 1967 when Israel got control of the territories and had to administer them, the Israelis built schools, hospitals and clinics for the Arabs, put in infrastructure, gave inoculations against infectious diseases that were never given before, increased the life expectancy of these Arabs and gave them one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East. Perhaps Georgie Boy can explain to us why the Egyptians and Jordanians didn't do this for the "Palestinians."

"And so it is.

"As Yifrah was freed, the Israeli press reported that an army patrol fired into the yard of a school for young boys in one of the miserable refugee camps, wounding five children, allegedly intending only 'to shock them.'

There were no charges, and the event again attracted no attention.

"It was just another episode in the program of 'illiteracy as punishment,' the Israeli press reported, including the closing of schools, use of gas bombs, beating of students with rifle butts, barring of medical aid for victims; and beyond the schools a reign of more severe brutality, becoming even more savage during the Intifada, under the orders of Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, an admired dove, who informed a Peace Now delegation at the peak of the brutality that he was pleased with the meaningless US-PLO dialogue that had just been initiated, “low-level discussions” that avoid any serious issue and grant Israel 'at least a year' to resolve the problems by force.

"'The inhabitants of the territories are subject to harsh military and economic pressure,' Rabin explained, and 'In the end, they will be broken,' abandoning their hopes for a life of dignity."

Violence and Dignity: Reflections on the Middle East (2013 Edward Said Lecture)

Since Edward Said is an Arab, he speaks out for his people (even if he isn't telling the truth many times). How about you speak out about what your people are going through at the hands of the Arabs on the forums available to you? Is it because it is more important for you to diss the Jews and Israel than to condemn what is happening to Black people? Would you show some outrage if you saw one of the Arabs eating a Black person's heart like was shown in Syria by a rebel, or if a Black person was captured by an Arab and his captors held up the man's liver like the Palestinians did of a captured Israeli soldier? What would it take for you to show some outrage regarding what is happening to Blacks in the Muslim world???

 

[Hoffstra]

TransJordan was and still mostly is a desert wasteland.

It became a seperate Protectorate from Palestine, in 1923.

Its highly dishonest for right-wing Zionists to now claim that they should have got ALL of Palestine in 1947, because Jordan was part of Palestine for a mighty 2 years in the early 1920s.

But what should we expect from Neo-Zionists, but lies and deceit?

The slogan for the Mossad used to be "By deception make war".

Neo-Zionists live by this creed, every day.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

The Occupying Power is Israel.
The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

Does Israeli law apply outside of Israel?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Strange.

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

The Occupying Power is Israel.
The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

Does Israeli law apply outside of Israel?

(COMMENT)

By its nature, an "Occupation Force" exercises a form of "extraterritorial jurisdiction." If you are asking if Israeli Citizens are subject to Israeli Law --- that would be the wrong question.

Israeli Forces (as the Occupation Force) are subject to Israeli Law and have a responsibility to refrain from abusing Israeli citizens and extend all the protections they would normally be accorded otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Strange.

The exclusion has to do with the very first question, when applying this law.

Who is protected from whom?

In this case, the law is applicable in the following way (in our application):

The Occupying Power is Israel.
The Protected Persons are Palestinian.
The clause says that the Israelis must extend the law of the "protected person" under the GCIV to the non-combatant Palestinian.

It excludes the citizens of the Occupation Power (other Israelis) because they are covered by the laws of their own country (Israel).

Does Israeli law apply outside of Israel?

(COMMENT)

By its nature, an "Occupation Force" exercises a form of "extraterritorial jurisdiction." If you are asking if Israeli Citizens are subject to Israeli Law --- that would be the wrong question.

Israeli Forces (as the Occupation Force) are subject to Israeli Law and have a responsibility to refrain from abusing Israeli citizens and extend all the protections they would normally be accorded otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

Just a thought:

It seems that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine would be outside the purview of international law, but what Israel does inside Palestine would be subject to international law.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are half right.

Strange.

Does Israeli law apply outside of Israel?

(COMMENT)

By its nature, an "Occupation Force" exercises a form of "extraterritorial jurisdiction." If you are asking if Israeli Citizens are subject to Israeli Law --- that would be the wrong question.

Israeli Forces (as the Occupation Force) are subject to Israeli Law and have a responsibility to refrain from abusing Israeli citizens and extend all the protections they would normally be accorded otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

Just a thought:

It seems that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine would be outside the purview of international law, but what Israel does inside Palestine would be subject to international law.

(COMMENT)

The Occupation Force has to follow both sets of laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indofred]

see my:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/105824-myth-1-israel-is-stolen-land.html [/b]

--

I always like the "Stolen land is a myth" stuff as the Israeli lot always quote how they've been there for 3,000 years and it's their place.

Of course. they always neglect to mention how The kingdom of Davis and Solomon came to be and how it ended; they stole it from the Philistines in battle.
David, known as the brave killer of giants, also had bad habits such as murdering men so he could marry their wife and enslaving his own people.
David's kids were little better as one was a rapist and another, Solomon, taxed the merry crap out of his subjects until they were so pissed off, the 10 northern tribes kicked his son out of the palace andcreated their own kingdom.
The famous kingdom of David the Zionists are trying to claim as their promised land was a place for murder, rape, and generally destroying lives.

Oh, hang on, they've recreated it perfectly.

 

[docmauser1]

Of course. they always neglect to mention how The kingdom of Davis and Solomon came to be and how it ended; they stole it from the Philistines in battle.
David, known as the brave killer of giants, also had bad habits such as murdering men so he could marry their wife and enslaving his own people. David's kids were little better as one was a rapist and another, Solomon, taxed the merry crap out of his subjects until they were so pissed off, the 10 northern tribes kicked his son out of the palace andcreated their own kingdom. The famous kingdom of David the Zionists are trying to claim as their promised land was a place for murder, rape, and generally destroying lives. Oh, hang on, they've recreated it perfectly.

Drivel drama.

 

[georgephillip]

how about just giving 2/3 of Palestine to the Arabs and 1/3 to the Jews??????

instead they gave the Jews 60%...while they barely made up 35% of the population.

[]Early Zionists begged from every Royal table they could find, including the Russian Tsar, the German Kaiser, and Ottoman Turks. They struck gold in England when HRM decided to back a Jewish homeland in Palestine several years after the Royal Navy began switching from coal to oil to power its fleets.[/B]

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, “a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'

"Storrs’ analogy was no accident. Ireland was where the English invented the tactic of divide and conquer, and where the devastating effectiveness of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between the colonial rulers and the colonized made it a template for worldwide imperial rule."

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF

The Jews got 55% of Lesser Palestine ... The 23% that was left over that is ..... after the Arabs got 77% of Greater Palestine/The British Mandate.
IOW, Arabs got 87% of the British Mandate.

And Half of the Jews 55% was the Thought-Useless/Near-Empty Negev Desert thrown in to make Israel Viable.
So 35% of the population got 27.5% of the Usable Land.
Ooops

And of course, and again, Jews were a Majority in the land that was to become Israel.

see my:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/105824-myth-1-israel-is-stolen-land.html

--

Jews living between the River and the sea numbered around 650,000 in 1948 along with approximately 1.35 million non-Jews. Any semblance of self-determination would have required a plebiscite not a UN mandated partition giving Jews a majority of the land.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are half right.

Strange.


(COMMENT)

By its nature, an "Occupation Force" exercises a form of "extraterritorial jurisdiction." If you are asking if Israeli Citizens are subject to Israeli Law --- that would be the wrong question.

Israeli Forces (as the Occupation Force) are subject to Israeli Law and have a responsibility to refrain from abusing Israeli citizens and extend all the protections they would normally be accorded otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

Just a thought:

It seems that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine would be outside the purview of international law, but what Israel does inside Palestine would be subject to international law.

(COMMENT)

The Occupation Force has to follow both sets of laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but Israel is very, very bad at following any law including sometimes their own.

That said.

What I am saying is that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine to defend their country and their people does not fall under international law.

Specifically, nationals of an occupying power are excluded from the protected person (civilian) class.

Things like international terrorism simply do not apply to activities inside their own country.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

That is wrong.

You are half right.

Just a thought:

It seems that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine would be outside the purview of international law, but what Israel does inside Palestine would be subject to international law.

(COMMENT)

The Occupation Force has to follow both sets of laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but Israel is very, very bad at following any law including sometimes their own.

That said.

What I am saying is that what the Palestinians do inside Palestine to defend their country and their people does not fall under international law.

Specifically, nationals of an occupying power are excluded from the protected person (civilian) class.

Things like international terrorism simply do not apply to activities inside their own country.

(COMMENT)

You are either under International Coverage, or you are not. You can't say that Israel is violating some international law (criminal or humanitarian) relative to the West Bank and Gaza, and on the other hand say you are not under international law. It is an all or nothing affair.

Most Respectfully,
R