Druze teen faces jail over refusing to serve in Israeli army

[Billo_Really]

No, that is because they want to protect the people of Israel.

You've been brainwashed to hate Israel, loiny. You have no real idea about the thoughts and feelings of Israelis. You don't know how we're raised and educated

You're raised to think it's okay using 9 year olds for human shields?

You're raised to think it's okay to shoot tear gas at people harvesting olives?

You're raised to think it's okay to shoot at people fishing and farming?

Is that how you were raised?

 

[Lipush]

you make a flase statement then pretend to ask an honest question.

Is there a correct way to even answer that?

Does it matter what I say? you don't even care. You make hateful statement but never stick around to hear a response.

So let me tell you to fuck off this time, billy.

you're waste of fresh posts.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

You are the one who needs help with whatever mental problem you have. This is the Middle East forum, and you are obsessed with one kid who refused military service and people are dying all over the Middle East. Look at all the posts on what is really an insignificant thread given what is happening elsewhere. The only reason you have brought this up is because it happens to involved Israel. If 50 young men in one day refused to serve in the Iranian Army, we wouldn't have heard a peep out of you.

I started a thread about an Israeli who has been unlawfully imprisoned for being a conscientious objector.

This is The Middle East Forum.

Israel is in the Middle East.

Do you have anything to say about the thread topic, Hossfly?

He wasn't unlawfully anything, Sherri. Cut the nonsense.

It's obligation of any citizen to serve in the army.

Refusal of ideology and conscience is not uncommon, but it IS punishable by jail. This young man is an example. He refused to obey the law, he is now held responsible. That is how it is.

I knew of a friend who believed the IDF system wronged her. She was ready to be sent to prison for her struggle. And she did. She took responsibility for both deed and punishment with grace.

That how it works here.

So all your useless posts are pretty much pointless.

Being a lawyer, you are the first who needs to learn to respect the law.

Yes, he has been unlawfully imprisoned.

Israel has obligations under international treaties she violates with this young man's detention.

Noone made Israel sign these treaties, she voluntarily signed these treaties.

There is the basic problem that he has been denied a proceeding to address his conscientious objector claim, preceding his ordered 20 day detention.

And once he is detained for a second period after this 20 days, his detention will be in direct violation of UN orders, his continuing detention will be arbitrary and violate other provisions of treaties Israel is bound by under her treaty obligations.

 

[Billo_Really]

you make a flase statement then pretend to ask an honest question.

Is there a correct way to even answer that?

Does it matter what I say? you don't even care. You make hateful statement but never stick around to hear a response.

So let me tell you to fuck off this time, billy.

you're waste of fresh posts.

Um, earth to Lipbush,

none of those were statements; they were all questions.

Questions, you refused to answer.

 

[Kondor3]

Who died and left you as God Almighty?

I don't know if you've ever read them, but this websites' rules specifically state trying to change the subject of the thread, is prohibited.

I have no idea what any of that has to do with some Druze kid being prosecuted for draft-dodging in Israel, nor related sidebars pertaining to consistency of treatment between Druze and Jew and the like, nor related sidebars pertaining to international law and rights, or what your hypocritical admonishments have to do with that, nor where you get your pretended authority to play Topic Cop when you feel like it, then to flip and shit on threads and people, when you feel like it, and then go whining to the Mods when somebody calls you on it.

Perhaps you should range up and down a few of the threads that your pal Sherri launches and haunts, and count-up the number of times during any given 10- or 100-page sequence, in which he-she-it suddenly bursts-out with a complete non sequitur - oftentimes of a religious nature that belongs in the Religion Forum - a regular USMB Tourettes Syndrome Folk Festival - two shows a day.

And then we'll all sit back and wait for you to play Self-Appointed Content Moderator and Snitch, to drag her back on-topic again, as frequently and as energetically as you do, with the same range of profanity and obscenity, directed at folks who do not share your views on Israel-Palestine, as may be seen in the following example from this very thread...

You are the one who needs help with whatever mental problem you have. This is the Middle East forum, and you are obsessed with one kid who refused military service and people are dying all over the Middle East. Look at all the posts on what is really an insignificant thread given what is happening elsewhere. The only reason you have brought this up is because it happens to involved Israel. If 50 young men in one day refused to serve in the Iranian Army, we wouldn't have heard a peep out of you.

God-dammit, stop hijacking threads you fucking bitch!

Ain't happenin', though, given your own penchant for jumping into threads to shit on them, curse and abuse your colleagues (especially the women-folk, apparently), pick fights for the sake of picking fights, range off-topic far and wide and often, routinely construct straw-men and put words into people's mouths, and then play the innocent, rules-abiding colleague who has a right to admonish others in such a context. Fucking hypocrite.

Whether it's the Druze-Kid Draft-Dodger topic here, or other aspects of the Israeli-Arab struggle, or 'most anything else I've ever seen you post on, your modus operandi doesn't change much from thread to thread, or topic to topic, and your Self-Appointed Topical Relevance Demigod behaviors are laughable, when they manifest.

 

[Lipush]

you make a flase statement then pretend to ask an honest question.

Is there a correct way to even answer that?

Does it matter what I say? you don't even care. You make hateful statement but never stick around to hear a response.

So let me tell you to fuck off this time, billy.

you're waste of fresh posts.

Um, earth to Lipbush,

none of those were statements; they were all questions.

Questions, you refused to answer.

What I see are accusations, not questions. You should look at your posts from a different angle and notice yourself how they look to the reader besides you

 

[Lipush]

No, that is because they want to protect the people of Israel.

You've been brainwashed to hate Israel, loiny. You have no real idea about the thoughts and feelings of Israelis. You don't know how we're raised and educated

You're raised to think it's okay using 9 year olds for human shields?

You're raised to think it's okay to shoot tear gas at people harvesting olives?

You're raised to think it's okay to shoot at people fishing and farming?

Is that how you were raised?

Btw, the answers to all those questions is "No".

 

[Kondor3]

"...Yes, he has been unlawfully imprisoned..."

Please cite the international law(s) being violated; a snippet from relevant passage(s) would be most helpful of all.

Not Committee Opinion or Pronouncement, mind you, but actual Treaty or Declaration verbiage.

"...Israel has obligations under international treaties she violates with this young man's detention..."

It is not yet proven that Israel has violated anything.

When the signatories to relevant Treaty and Declaration signed-off on them, the actual verbiage was entirely silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection.

The only thing that has changed so far is that a Committee of the UN Human Rights Commission has - after many years of dancing-around the edges of the problem - taken it upon itself to declare an Explicit Right based upon Implications of the original Treaty and Declaration verbiage; an arbitrary pronouncement which many affected countries do not approve of and which they have not signed off on. This is tantamount to Judicial Activism and may prove both an over-reach of authority and ultimately un-enforceable.

Far better if you research and share details pertaining to an already-resolved case from some World Power or another, which has already been utilized as a Test Case at International Law, and demonstrate for us a bona fide Legal Precedent at-law, within the realm and at the doing and within the jurisdiction of one of the World Court bodies, rather than trying to sell Committee-Level Pseudo-Judicial Activism as ultimately binding.

Otherwise, if you can find no other Test Case for your purpose, it merely looks like - once again - you are trying to hold the Israelis to a standard that nobody else is obliged to hold to.

"...Noone made Israel sign these treaties, she voluntarily signed these treaties..."

Thank you Captain Obvious.

"...There is the basic problem that he has been denied a proceeding to address his conscientious objector claim, preceding his ordered 20 day detention..."

Relevant treaty verbiage is silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection; consequently, it is silent with respect to whether a llegal hearing must be accorded prior-to or during the course of related incarceration.

"...And once he is detained for a second period after this 20 days, his detention will be in direct violation of UN orders, his continuing detention will be arbitrary and violate other provisions of treaties Israel is bound by under her treaty obligations."

Wake us up when they arrest him a second time

Now that the Israel Government has been 'called' on the multiple-arrest issue, pertaining to Natan Blanc...

Rather than arrest the Druze kid 10 times, like they did the Jewish kid, maybe they'll just arrest him once, and keep him in jail for the same length of time as they did the Jewish kid using 10 arrest-sequences...

Tidying-up the legal rationale as they go.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Who died and left you as God Almighty?

I don't know if you've ever read them, but this websites' rules specifically state trying to change the subject of the thread, is prohibited.

I have no idea what any of that has to do with some Druze kid being prosecuted for draft-dodging in Israel, nor related sidebars pertaining to consistency of treatment between Druze and Jew and the like, nor related sidebars pertaining to international law and rights, or what your hypocritical admonishments have to do with that, nor where you get your pretended authority to play Topic Cop when you feel like it, then to flip and shit on threads and people, when you feel like it, and then go whining to the Mods when somebody calls you on it.

Perhaps you should range up and down a few of the threads that your pal Sherri launches and haunts, and count-up the number of times during any given 10- or 100-page sequence, in which he-she-it suddenly bursts-out with a complete non sequitur - oftentimes of a religious nature that belongs in the Religion Forum - a regular USMB Tourettes Syndrome Folk Festival - two shows a day.

And then we'll all sit back and wait for you to play Self-Appointed Content Moderator and Snitch, to drag her back on-topic again, as frequently and as energetically as you do, with the same range of profanity and obscenity, directed at folks who do not share your views on Israel-Palestine, as may be seen in the following example from this very thread...

You are the one who needs help with whatever mental problem you have. This is the Middle East forum, and you are obsessed with one kid who refused military service and people are dying all over the Middle East. Look at all the posts on what is really an insignificant thread given what is happening elsewhere. The only reason you have brought this up is because it happens to involved Israel. If 50 young men in one day refused to serve in the Iranian Army, we wouldn't have heard a peep out of you.

God-dammit, stop hijacking threads you fucking bitch!

Ain't happenin', though, given your own penchant for jumping into threads to shit on them, curse and abuse your colleagues (especially the women-folk, apparently), pick fights for the sake of picking fights, range off-topic far and wide and often, routinely construct straw-men and put words into people's mouths, and then play the innocent, rules-abiding colleague who has a right to admonish others in such a context. Fucking hypocrite.

Whether it's the Druze-Kid Draft-Dodger topic here, or other aspects of the Israeli-Arab struggle, or 'most anything else I've ever seen you post on, your modus operandi doesn't change much from thread to thread, or topic to topic, and your Self-Appointed Topical Relevance Demigod behaviors as laughable, when they manifest.

Off-topic posts may be edited, trashed, deleted, or moved to an appropriate forum as per administrator & moderator discretion at any time within any forum and/or sub forum.*

http://www.usmessageboard.com/annou...48-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html#post6790048

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

"...Yes, he has been unlawfully imprisoned..."

Please cite the international law(s) being violated; a snippet from relevant passage(s) would be most helpful of all. Not Committee Opinion or Pronouncement, mind you, but actual Treaty or Declaration verbiage.

"...Israel has obligations under international treaties she violates with this young man's detention..."

It is not yet proven that Israel has violated anything.

When the signatories to relevant Treaty and Declaration signed-off on them, the actual verbiage was entirely silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection.

The only thing that has changed so far is that a Committee of the UN Human Rights Commission has - after many years of dancing-around the edges of the problem - taken it upon itself to declare an Explicit Right based upon Implications of the original Treaty and Declaration verbiage; an arbitrary pronouncement which many affected countries do not approve of and which they have not signed off on. This is tantamount to Judicial Activism and may prove both an over-reach of authority and ultimately un-enforceable.

Far better if you research and share details pertaining to an already-resolved case from some World Power or another, which has already been utilized as a Test Case at International Law, and demonstrate for us a bona fide Legal Precedent at-law, within the realm and at the doing and within the jurisdiction of one of the World Court bodies, rather than trying to sell Committee-Level Pseudo-Judicial Activism as ultimately binding.

Otherwise, if you can find no other Test Case for your purpose, it merely looks like - once again - you are trying to hold the Israelis to a standard that nobody else is obliged to hold to.


Thank you Captain Obvious.

"...There is the basic problem that he has been denied a proceeding to address his conscientious objector claim, preceding his ordered 20 day detention..."

Relevant treaty verbiage is silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection; consequently, it is silent with respect to whether a llegal hearing must be accorded prior-to or during the course of related incarceration.

"...And once he is detained for a second period after this 20 days, his detention will be in direct violation of UN orders, his continuing detention will be arbitrary and violate other provisions of treaties Israel is bound by under her treaty obligations."

Wake us up when they arrest him a second time.

I already addressed the provisions of international law Israel is violating in multiple posts.

Learn to read English.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Yes, he has been unlawfully imprisoned..."

Please cite the international law(s) being violated; a snippet from relevant passage(s) would be most helpful of all. Not Committee Opinion or Pronouncement, mind you, but actual Treaty or Declaration verbiage.


It is not yet proven that Israel has violated anything.

When the signatories to relevant Treaty and Declaration signed-off on them, the actual verbiage was entirely silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection.

The only thing that has changed so far is that a Committee of the UN Human Rights Commission has - after many years of dancing-around the edges of the problem - taken it upon itself to declare an Explicit Right based upon Implications of the original Treaty and Declaration verbiage; an arbitrary pronouncement which many affected countries do not approve of and which they have not signed off on. This is tantamount to Judicial Activism and may prove both an over-reach of authority and ultimately un-enforceable.

Far better if you research and share details pertaining to an already-resolved case from some World Power or another, which has already been utilized as a Test Case at International Law, and demonstrate for us a bona fide Legal Precedent at-law, within the realm and at the doing and within the jurisdiction of one of the World Court bodies, rather than trying to sell Committee-Level Pseudo-Judicial Activism as ultimately binding.

Otherwise, if you can find no other Test Case for your purpose, it merely looks like - once again - you are trying to hold the Israelis to a standard that nobody else is obliged to hold to.


Thank you Captain Obvious.


Relevant treaty verbiage is silent with respect to both Conscription and Conscientious Objection; consequently, it is silent with respect to whether a llegal hearing must be accorded prior-to or during the course of related incarceration.

"...And once he is detained for a second period after this 20 days, his detention will be in direct violation of UN orders, his continuing detention will be arbitrary and violate other provisions of treaties Israel is bound by under her treaty obligations."

Wake us up when they arrest him a second time.

I already addressed the provisions of international law Israel is violating in multiple posts.

Learn to read English.

Show us the explicit language in such Treaty or Declaration verbiage that speaks to the issues of Conscription and Conscientious Objection, please.

All we've seen from you so far is Interpretation, based upon Implicit verbiage.

Follow your own advice - learn to read English (I'm sure you do just fine with Farsi).

 

[Billo_Really]

What I see are accusations, not questions.

That's all on you and has nothing to do with me.

How you choose to react to my posts, is about you, not about me.

You should look at your posts from a different angle and notice yourself how they look to the reader besides you

I don't need to look at my own posts from a different angle, I know exactly what my intent was. Those were all questions.

You need to stop seeing what you want to see and start seeing things as they are.

 

[Billo_Really]

Btw, the answers to all those questions is "No".

Then why no outrage towards those vicious and inhuman acts of violence?