Eva Bartlett on Gaza in Crisis - An Eyewitness Report

[theliq]

A good report on Israel's war crimes in Gaza by somebody who was there.

When was the court case then, as I have seen no mention of Israel being charged with war crimes. Not even being charged with littering. Using emotive terms does not help you one little bit, it just shows how desperate you are getting when your video shows less than 100 people turning up to listen to some islamonazi ***** spout her lies

It shows total ZIONIST FILTH TOTALLY....Israelis/Zionists have become completely DEGENERATES.......but then when were they not.....? NEVER and their history proves it

 

[theliq]

Mohamed Tinmore at his Jew hate campaign? Who woulda thunk it?

So the Jews don't HATE ?......YOU ARE A IDIOT,

 

[theliq]

Mohamed Tinmore at his Jew hate campaign? Who woulda thunk it?

Shame you have such a BIG MOUTH .....Yet again like your Zionista Mates on here ..A SMALL PEA BRAIN

 

[theliq]

Eloy,

I have to chuckle here.

I have heard of Hamas but not Islamic Resistance Movement/Palestine Islamic Jihad. You say they are all the same. Why complicate your posts by including all instead of the one that everyone is familiar with?

(COMMENT)

The Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) are to different organizations but concentrated in the same area, the Gaza Strip. Both HAMAS and the PIJ have assets in the West Bank, as do other High Value Targets. I'll try to make it more clear for you in the future. I just did not want to be accused of talking down to you.

C31 was not mentioned in your post.

(COMMENT)

I did mention C3I to you in the context that HAMAS, PIJ and other Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters have a portion dedicated to C3I. That makes Hostile C3I a type of HVT.

AP I, art. 51(5)(b) could be made simpler with a mention of the Geneva Conventions.

(COMMENT)

The Article 51 of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention (having to do with compelling Protected Persons into labor of service) is completely different from the Article 51 of Additional Protocol I (having to do with a broad range of protections). They are simply not the same thing. And the are pro-Arab Palestinians who would capitalize on the opportunity to criticize me for the error.

If HoAP means what you say then apart from informers in the pay of Israelis this would describe all Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

In the set of "All Arab Palestinians" there are at least two subsets:

• Those that are not hostile.
• Those that are hostile.
​

I make a distinction between the two subsets and give the benefit of the doubt to some Arab Palestinians that they are reasonable and not hostile.

If the Israelis are murdering Hamas leaders then this is an illegal provocation likely to cause sme firecrackers into Israel which, in turn, gives the Israelis an excuse for full scale pulverizing defenseless Gaza civilian neighborhoods as a collective punishment and a message to other Arab neighbors. This is morally inexcusable.

(COMMENT)

Yes, well, of the defendants that were prosecuted and convicted of Major Crimes insist they are not guilty of the felonious activity. ('C'est la vie')

Both the HAMAS and the PIJ, as well as several other Palestinian Organizations, are designated terrorist organizations. The leadership of any organizations that open hostilities with Israel by means that, in any other nation, would be considered acts of war, are HVTs. Additionally, when these organizations operate inside the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (including Jerusalem) :

§ Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life and invoke fear and chaos in the public;​

• Appear to be intended
• 
  [*](i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
  [*](ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
  [*](iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping and murder, bombings, assaults and attacks on innocent civilians, hijackings and piracy, indiscriminate rocket fire, or activities solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, --- or conductiong espionage, or serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power;​
• Engage in Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence that has an origin the transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.

Any fugitive from justice for violations of the aforementioned, or any of the offenses elaborated in the 19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts. When these HVTs are leaders that are involved in open conflict, then Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rules apply; to include the ones previously cited. (See Posting #33 and #36, supra)

Any Day is a Good Day to Catch a Terrorist.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

Your last sentence should read Any Day is a Good Day to CATCH ZIONIST TERRORIST FILTH...methinks Rocco....The most Violent people on Earth are the FILTHY ZIONISTS...they taught ISIS everything they know

 

[P F Tinmore]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

 

[Hollie]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

Yes. Munich. 1972.

 

[P F Tinmore]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

Yes. Munich. 1972.

So, you want to start history in the middle?

 

[Hollie]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

Yes. Munich. 1972.

So, you want to start history in the middle?

Nice dodge™

It seems that as usual, you want an exception for your Islamic terrorist heroes.

 

[Hollie]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

Yes. Munich. 1972.

So, you want to start history in the middle?

Nice dodge™

It seems that as usual, you want an exception for your Islamic terrorist heroes.

So, let's start earlier. Tell us about the Islamist invasion of the area you falsely identify as your invented "country of Pal'istan". At what point in time did the Islamists become your invented "Pal'istanians"

 

[RoccoR]

theliq, et al,

No, I don't think I said that at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Even your speaker (Eve Bartlett) understands that you are just attempting to justify continued violence with Israel by claiming that they cannot see the border between Israel and Gaza.

WHY do the Palestinians think they are under siege?

Israel is defending its settler colonial project.

(COMMENT)

No matter what you might think of the acquisition process, the REALITY is that the Gaza Strip is what it is.

The after that you don't recognize the reality of a real-world situation is (I don't know what) ...

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco......Are you telling me now that Israel uses no Violence towards the Palestinians !!!!!!!!You have become a "Coal Fire Man" regrettably

(COMMENT)

There is a great deal of difference between the expression of hostility the Arab Palestinian projects (the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force [Article 68, GCIV; Article 2(4), UN Ch] --- and --- the Israel behavior response to provocation of such unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the Arab Palestinian.

In fact, Eve Bartlett's little panel completely ignores the consequences of Arab Palestinian provocative behaviors and exaggerates the Arab Palestinian sense of self (as a people and culture) that makes it difficult to get along with the Israelis. The goal of discipline, through military response, is teaching appropriate behaviors. The Arab Palestinian people need to be taught that their actions have consequences. Consequences can be either positive or negative. In the case of Arab Palestinians, threats do not have much teaching value and sometimes have unintended consequences. For example, Arab Palestinian threats have generated unwarranted scrutiny to avoid the Arab Palestinians associated with such threats; singling them out for special security criteria do to the demonstrated threat.

I noticed that the issue of proportionality was discussed at length. But the panel did not discuss to the same extent that the determining factor is in the assessment: What is the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated?

Excerpt From:
U.S. Forces: Challenges Ahead
Author: Colin L. Powell, United States Army (Ret.)
Winter 1992/93

Decisive means and results are always to be preferred, even if they are not always possible. We should always be skeptical when so-called experts suggest that all a particular crisis calls for is a little surgical bombing or a limited attack. When the "surgery" is over and the desired result is not obtained, a new set of experts then comes forward with talk of just a little escalation—more bombs, more men and women, more force. History has not been kind to this approach to war-making. In fact this approach has been tragic—both for the men and women who are called upon to implement it and for the nation. This is not to argue that the use of force is restricted to only those occasions where the victory of American arms will be resounding, swift and overwhelming. It is simply to argue that the use of force should be restricted to occasions where it can do some good and where the good will outweigh the loss of lives and other costs that will surely ensue. Wars kill people. That is what makes them different from all other forms of human enterprise.
​

The idea behind the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated" is that the target is not putting more forces at risk. When a military response is required, you must use enough force to positively achieve the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated." Nowhere has this failure of a military force been more evident.

As the International Community became involved and listened more and more to the Arab Palestinians, the protection of life has actually decreased. The Arab Palestinian periodically provokes a military confrontation and the restricted military response does not achieve the goal of a decisive victory, and the Arab Palestinian brings another provocative series of attacks forward, and the Israelis respond again. And so on. This happend :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• First Intifada (1987–1993) - First large-scale Palestinian uprising against Israel in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

• Second Intifada (2000–2005) - Second Palestinian uprising, a period of intensified violence, which began in late September 2000.

• Gaza War (December 2008 - January 2009) -

• Operation Pillar of Defense (November 2012) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip.

• Operation Protective Edge (July–August 2014) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip

The Arab Palestinians are never quite crushed to the point that the conflict is over. That is as much the fault of the International Community and it is anyone's. The International Community, whines like no tomorrow for the Israelis to stop; never letting the Israelis reach the point of crushing the Arab Palestinians to the point that they no longer have the will to continue with the conflict and move into the peaceful nation building mode.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

When a military response is required, you must use enough force to positively achieve the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated." Nowhere has this failure of a military force been more evident.

What goal has Israel achieved by attacking Gaza over, and over, and over again. If they achieved anything, why do they have to keep going back?

Every time Israel bombs the crap out of civilians in Gaza their standing on the world stage goes down and the Palestinians go up.

Israel is going backward. They need to think of a better strategy than duh bomb'em.

Oh, that's right, thinking is the Zionist's short suit.

 

[P F Tinmore]

There is a great deal of difference between the expression of hostility the Arab Palestinian projects (the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force [Article 68, GCIV; Article 2(4), UN Ch] --- and --- the Israel behavior response to provocation of such unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the Arab Palestinian.

Keep shoveling that shit, Rocco.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore,, et al...

Yes, if the Arab Palestinians of Gaza renew infiltration tunnel building or start launching rockets again, then that means Israel did not use enough force to achieve that goal of neutralizing the indirect fire and infiltration.

When a military response is required, you must use enough force to positively achieve the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated." Nowhere has this failure of a military force been more evident.

What goal has Israel achieved by attacking Gaza over, and over, and over again. If they achieved anything, why do they have to keep going back?

(COMMENT)

I'm sure there was a formal objectives guide published the commander; I just have never seen it.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, if the Arab Palestinians of Gaza renew infiltration tunnel building or start launching rockets again, then that means Israel did not use enough force to achieve that goal of neutralizing the indirect fire and infiltration.

Should Israel enhance its duh bomb'em strategy.

Israel's military has been pounding on Palestinian civilians for 70 years and has not won yet. The battle is changing from military to intellectual and Israel is finding itself unarmed.

 

[theliq]

theliq, et al,

No, I don't think I said that at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Even your speaker (Eve Bartlett) understands that you are just attempting to justify continued violence with Israel by claiming that they cannot see the border between Israel and Gaza.

WHY do the Palestinians think they are under siege?

Israel is defending its settler colonial project.

(COMMENT)

No matter what you might think of the acquisition process, the REALITY is that the Gaza Strip is what it is.

The after that you don't recognize the reality of a real-world situation is (I don't know what) ...

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco......Are you telling me now that Israel uses no Violence towards the Palestinians !!!!!!!!You have become a "Coal Fire Man" regrettably

(COMMENT)

There is a great deal of difference between the expression of hostility the Arab Palestinian projects (the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force [Article 68, GCIV; Article 2(4), UN Ch] --- and --- the Israel behavior response to provocation of such unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the Arab Palestinian.

In fact, Eve Bartlett's little panel completely ignores the consequences of Arab Palestinian provocative behaviors and exaggerates the Arab Palestinian sense of self (as a people and culture) that makes it difficult to get along with the Israelis. The goal of discipline, through military response, is teaching appropriate behaviors. The Arab Palestinian people need to be taught that their actions have consequences. Consequences can be either positive or negative. In the case of Arab Palestinians, threats do not have much teaching value and sometimes have unintended consequences. For example, Arab Palestinian threats have generated unwarranted scrutiny to avoid the Arab Palestinians associated with such threats; singling them out for special security criteria do to the demonstrated threat.

I noticed that the issue of proportionality was discussed at length. But the panel did not discuss to the same extent that the determining factor is in the assessment: What is the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated?

Excerpt From:
U.S. Forces: Challenges Ahead
Author: Colin L. Powell, United States Army (Ret.)
Winter 1992/93

Decisive means and results are always to be preferred, even if they are not always possible. We should always be skeptical when so-called experts suggest that all a particular crisis calls for is a little surgical bombing or a limited attack. When the "surgery" is over and the desired result is not obtained, a new set of experts then comes forward with talk of just a little escalation—more bombs, more men and women, more force. History has not been kind to this approach to war-making. In fact this approach has been tragic—both for the men and women who are called upon to implement it and for the nation. This is not to argue that the use of force is restricted to only those occasions where the victory of American arms will be resounding, swift and overwhelming. It is simply to argue that the use of force should be restricted to occasions where it can do some good and where the good will outweigh the loss of lives and other costs that will surely ensue. Wars kill people. That is what makes them different from all other forms of human enterprise.
​

The idea behind the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated" is that the target is not putting more forces at risk. When a military response is required, you must use enough force to positively achieve the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated." Nowhere has this failure of a military force been more evident.

As the International Community became involved and listened more and more to the Arab Palestinians, the protection of life has actually decreased. The Arab Palestinian periodically provokes a military confrontation and the restricted military response does not achieve the goal of a decisive victory, and the Arab Palestinian brings another provocative series of attacks forward, and the Israelis respond again. And so on. This happend :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• First Intifada (1987–1993) - First large-scale Palestinian uprising against Israel in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

• Second Intifada (2000–2005) - Second Palestinian uprising, a period of intensified violence, which began in late September 2000.

• Gaza War (December 2008 - January 2009) -

• Operation Pillar of Defense (November 2012) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip.

• Operation Protective Edge (July–August 2014) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip

The Arab Palestinians are never quite crushed to the point that the conflict is over. That is as much the fault of the International Community and it is anyone's. The International Community, whines like no tomorrow for the Israelis to stop; never letting the Israelis reach the point of crushing the Arab Palestinians to the point that they no longer have the will to continue with the conflict and move into the peaceful nation building mode.

Most Respectfully,
R

When did you lose your right eye Rocco because lately a lot of you prose is one eyed (getting embolden because of the Trumpo victory,I know you realise that Bullshit is unsustainable,friend....then what.......Reality of course....did you know that in September 2016 the US and Israel had an agreement where the US will give Israel..$38 Billion(US Taxpayers Money) in Aid(Weaponary) over the next 10 years.steve

 

[theliq]

This is a "Whining Session." It is a panel of people that want to cry about the suffer they endured after they provoke a military conflict.

By going to Europe and attacking the Zionists?

Yes. Munich. 1972.

So, you want to start history in the middle?

Nice dodge™

It seems that as usual, you want an exception for your Islamic terrorist heroes.

So, let's start earlier. Tell us about the Islamist invasion of the area you falsely identify as your invented "country of Pal'istan". At what point in time did the Islamists become your invented "Pal'istanians"

Non Islamist until 690AD....the Palestinians had been in Palestine long,long before that......SO YOUR INACCURATE POINT IS.......LYING AGAIN.....Hollie why do Zionist LIE SO MUCH....is it that they have a Low IQ or just a part of the Rabid indoctorination sic of this Terrorist Cult Organization ????steve

 

[Hollie]

Yes, if the Arab Palestinians of Gaza renew infiltration tunnel building or start launching rockets again, then that means Israel did not use enough force to achieve that goal of neutralizing the indirect fire and infiltration.

Should Israel enhance its duh bomb'em strategy.

Israel's military has been pounding on Palestinian civilians for 70 years and has not won yet. The battle is changing from military to intellectual and Israel is finding itself unarmed.

There's nothing "intellectual" about Islamic terrorism. You shouldn't be be surprised by Israeli retaliation to acts if war committed by Islamic terrorists. I find those who don't find a holy mandate in bludgeoning others to be far less dangerous to the world than those who worship a desert Arab who justified acts of evil and created a solid basis for loss of a moral compass that might otherwise stop someone from doing something if not for that push of 'it's Allah's will'.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, if the Arab Palestinians of Gaza renew infiltration tunnel building or start launching rockets again, then that means Israel did not use enough force to achieve that goal of neutralizing the indirect fire and infiltration.

Should Israel enhance its duh bomb'em strategy.

Israel's military has been pounding on Palestinian civilians for 70 years and has not won yet. The battle is changing from military to intellectual and Israel is finding itself unarmed.

There's nothing "intellectual" about Islamic terrorism. You shouldn't be be surprised by Israeli retaliation to acts if war committed by Islamic terrorists. I find those who don't find a holy mandate in bludgeoning others to be far less dangerous to the world than those who worship a desert Arab who justified acts of evil and created a solid basis for loss of a moral compass that might otherwise stop someone from doing something if not for that push of 'it's Allah's will'.

Are you still pimping that terrorist propaganda crap?

 

[Hollie]

Yes, if the Arab Palestinians of Gaza renew infiltration tunnel building or start launching rockets again, then that means Israel did not use enough force to achieve that goal of neutralizing the indirect fire and infiltration.

Should Israel enhance its duh bomb'em strategy.

Israel's military has been pounding on Palestinian civilians for 70 years and has not won yet. The battle is changing from military to intellectual and Israel is finding itself unarmed.

There's nothing "intellectual" about Islamic terrorism. You shouldn't be be surprised by Israeli retaliation to acts if war committed by Islamic terrorists. I find those who don't find a holy mandate in bludgeoning others to be far less dangerous to the world than those who worship a desert Arab who justified acts of evil and created a solid basis for loss of a moral compass that might otherwise stop someone from doing something if not for that push of 'it's Allah's will'.

Are you still pimping that terrorist propaganda crap?

Nice dodge™

 

[RoccoR]

theliq, et al,

Preparedness and the maintenance of technical advances are not inconsistent with the policy understood by all the Regional Players. Several Regional Countries receive military aid of direct support from either the US or Russia. Preparedness against the anti-Israeli forces, which have demonstrated their threat potential in the past, is exactly why the US needs to ensure the Israeli defense capabilities are up to the task.

The 10 Year plan is "old news."

theliq, et al,

No, I don't think I said that at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Even your speaker (Eve Bartlett) understands that you are just attempting to justify continued violence with Israel by claiming that they cannot see the border between Israel and Gaza.

WHY do the Palestinians think they are under siege?

Israel is defending its settler colonial project.

(COMMENT)

No matter what you might think of the acquisition process, the REALITY is that the Gaza Strip is what it is.

The after that you don't recognize the reality of a real-world situation is (I don't know what) ...

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco......Are you telling me now that Israel uses no Violence towards the Palestinians !!!!!!!!You have become a "Coal Fire Man" regrettably

(COMMENT)

There is a great deal of difference between the expression of hostility the Arab Palestinian projects (the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force [Article 68, GCIV; Article 2(4), UN Ch] --- and --- the Israel behavior response to provocation of such unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the Arab Palestinian.

In fact, Eve Bartlett's little panel completely ignores the consequences of Arab Palestinian provocative behaviors and exaggerates the Arab Palestinian sense of self (as a people and culture) that makes it difficult to get along with the Israelis. The goal of discipline, through military response, is teaching appropriate behaviors. The Arab Palestinian people need to be taught that their actions have consequences. Consequences can be either positive or negative. In the case of Arab Palestinians, threats do not have much teaching value and sometimes have unintended consequences. For example, Arab Palestinian threats have generated unwarranted scrutiny to avoid the Arab Palestinians associated with such threats; singling them out for special security criteria do to the demonstrated threat.

I noticed that the issue of proportionality was discussed at length. But the panel did not discuss to the same extent that the determining factor is in the assessment: What is the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated?

Excerpt From:
U.S. Forces: Challenges Ahead
Author: Colin L. Powell, United States Army (Ret.)
Winter 1992/93

Decisive means and results are always to be preferred, even if they are not always possible. We should always be skeptical when so-called experts suggest that all a particular crisis calls for is a little surgical bombing or a limited attack. When the "surgery" is over and the desired result is not obtained, a new set of experts then comes forward with talk of just a little escalation—more bombs, more men and women, more force. History has not been kind to this approach to war-making. In fact this approach has been tragic—both for the men and women who are called upon to implement it and for the nation. This is not to argue that the use of force is restricted to only those occasions where the victory of American arms will be resounding, swift and overwhelming. It is simply to argue that the use of force should be restricted to occasions where it can do some good and where the good will outweigh the loss of lives and other costs that will surely ensue. Wars kill people. That is what makes them different from all other forms of human enterprise.
​

The idea behind the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated" is that the target is not putting more forces at risk. When a military response is required, you must use enough force to positively achieve the "concrete and direct military advantage anticipated." Nowhere has this failure of a military force been more evident.

As the International Community became involved and listened more and more to the Arab Palestinians, the protection of life has actually decreased. The Arab Palestinian periodically provokes a military confrontation and the restricted military response does not achieve the goal of a decisive victory, and the Arab Palestinian brings another provocative series of attacks forward, and the Israelis respond again. And so on. This happend :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• First Intifada (1987–1993) - First large-scale Palestinian uprising against Israel in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

• Second Intifada (2000–2005) - Second Palestinian uprising, a period of intensified violence, which began in late September 2000.

• Gaza War (December 2008 - January 2009) -

• Operation Pillar of Defense (November 2012) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip.

• Operation Protective Edge (July–August 2014) - Military offensive on the Gaza Strip

The Arab Palestinians are never quite crushed to the point that the conflict is over. That is as much the fault of the International Community and it is anyone's. The International Community, whines like no tomorrow for the Israelis to stop; never letting the Israelis reach the point of crushing the Arab Palestinians to the point that they no longer have the will to continue with the conflict and move into the peaceful nation building mode.

Most Respectfully,
R

When did you lose your right eye Rocco because lately a lot of you prose is one eyed (getting embolden because of the Trumpo victory,I know you realise that Bullshit is unsustainable,friend....then what.......Reality of course....did you know that in September 2016 the US and Israel had an agreement where the US will give Israel..$38 Billion(US Taxpayers Money) in Aid(Weaponary) over the next 10 years.steve

(COMMENT)

Whether or not the status quo is "unsustainable" was not the issue. The current US position on Israel dates back to the JCSM 373-67 (Joints Chiefs of Staff Meme to the POTUS); as adjusted to meet the changing threat and political environment. The JCSM Memo marked the first driver (JUN 1967) on the position that the US would maintain up until the 21st Century. But that is not the real issue.

The Elephant in the Room is based in the knowledge that the Arab Palestinians show no signs that they are going to approach the Peace from the goal that:

• Israel be dismantled and replaced with a tyrannical Arab Majority,
• Weaken Israel to the point that the Arab Palestinian can defeat them.
.........---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..........
​

(“Allahu Akbar! [God is great]” and “Mawt lil-Yahud! [Death to the Jews]”)

Excerpt Paragraph 2, JCSM 373-67 29 JUN 67​

​

There is nothing new with these chants. But the UN and the various International Court Systems (by their actions or lack of) have given the appearance of granting undue advantage to the Arab Palestinian that has shaken the faith (much like the Dreyfus affair) that justice can be obtained for either the Jew or the Jewish Nation.

Most Respectfully,
R