I will not Bow!

[Phoenall]

There ya go again! BDS is not defensive.It's another provocation. I'm inclined to believe that you are just another two-bit tinhorn warmonger.

Almost forgot. I support peace thru superior firepower. How 'bout them apples?

Good point.

The Palestine side promotes peace, justice, and equality in compliance with international law.

The Israeli side promotes death and ethnic cleansing in violation of international law.

That tells us something.

If Palestine promotes peace in compliance with international law then let them put down their weapons and denounce all acts of belligerence.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

I think you need to read further. Nobody in the world, except Britain and Pakistan (???), recognized this annexation.

This begs a question. If this land was Jordan's and it was conquered by Israel in 1967, why is it called "occupied Palestinian territory?"

If the land was Jordan's and they don't seem to be asking for it back, why should anyone give to the Pals? Are they claiming the land as Jordanians? Apparently not, so wassup?

Because Jordan occupied Palestinian land. They attempted to annex it but failed.

Israel won the occupation of Palestinian land in 1967.

So you finally admitted that Israel won the war in 1967. They win in 1948 too.

 

[GibsonSG]

I think you need to read further. Nobody in the world, except Britain and Pakistan (???), recognized this annexation.

This begs a question. If this land was Jordan's and it was conquered by Israel in 1967, why is it called "occupied Palestinian territory?"

If the land was Jordan's and they don't seem to be asking for it back, why should anyone give to the Pals? Are they claiming the land as Jordanians? Apparently not, so wassup?

Because Jordan occupied Palestinian land. They attempted to annex it but failed.

Israel won the occupation of Palestinian land in 1967.

To the victor go the spoils. Tough luck for you and your pedophile sharia friends. Or are you giving your land back to the indians?

 

[P F Tinmore]

So when did Israel declare war on islam and Palestine ?

provide a link from a credible source that details the declaration of war.

My link is the UN archives were the arab league declares war on the Jews on behalf of Palestine and that it has never been fully rescinded


So it is the Palestinians war and only the Palestinians can stop it.............

And the Palestinians started the war when they went to Europe and attacked the Zionists.

Oh, wait...

Clear one thing up for me, why did the US die in 1913 like it says on your headstone?

A little off topic but since you ask.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RmtLvy8icQ]G Edward Griffin: Speech The Creature From Jekyll Island - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Hossfly]

So in effect you are saying that new born Israeli children are valid targets for the Palestinians, and that the Palestinians can use illegal weapons to target Israeli children.

Sums up your evil mind perfectly and shows that you support genocide and mass murder in the name of islam

Tinmore is not a Muslim, but he doesn't realize that he's a useful tool for them. Not too bright.

I don't view children as legitimate targets and the Palestinians do not either. I don't recall any Palestinian attack that targeted children.

Children are the responsibility of their parents. They should not have them in Israel's war zone.

Tinmore, you can't be serious! But then again, you believe in the Easter groundhog.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, I'm quite clear on the matter.

Please read this carefully.

The west Bank was not Jordan.

(OBSERVATION)

From the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom Website:

• (Jordan - History - The Tragedy of Palestine of the Two Banks)

As a result of the war, many Palestinian Arabs from the Jordanian-controlled areas found that union with Jordan was of vital importance to the preservation of Arab control over the “West Bank” territories which had not fallen to the Israelis. Consequently, in December 1948, a group of Palestinian leaders and notables from the West Bank convened a historic conference in Jericho, where they called for King Abdullah to take immediate steps to unite the two banks of the Jordan into a single state under his leadership.

On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan now included nearly one and a half million people, more than half a million of whom were refugees evicted from Jewish-occupied Palestine. All automatically became citizens of Jordan, a right that had first been offered in December 1949 to all Palestinians who wished to claim it. Although the Arab League opposed this plan, and no other Arab government followed Jordan’s lead, the Hashemite Kingdom offered the possibility of normal life for many people who would have otherwise remained stateless refugees.

SOURCE: The Tragedy of Palestine

(COMMENT)

Notice that the decision included participation by the "Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank" in the decision to annex. This is called exercising the right of self-determination.

Arab Palestinian revisionist often like to omit the fact that they were part of the process and that they voted for annexation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I think you need to read further. Nobody in the world, except Britain and Pakistan (???), recognized this annexation.

This begs a question. If this land was Jordan's and it was conquered by Israel in 1967, why is it called "occupied Palestinian territory?"

(OBSERVATION)

On July 28, 1988, King Hussein announced the cessation of a $1.3 billion development program for the West Bank, explaining that the measure was designed to allow the PLO more responsibility for the area. Two days later, he formally dissolved Parliament, ending West Bank representation in the legislature. Finally, on July 31 King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank. Accordingly, electoral districts were redrawn to represent East Bank constituencies only. This disengagement decision marks the turning point that launched the current democratic process, and began a new stage in Jordan’s relationship with West Bank Palestinians.

• Click here for His Majesty's Address to the Nation, July 31, 1988

SOURCE: Official History Website

(COMMENT)

It was done this way to pave the way for the PLO to Declare Independence (Nov 88). As you have made a point of in the past, recognition is not the prerequisite for independence and statehood. It is called the "occupied Palestinian territories" (oPt) because that is how the PLO-Negotiation Affairs Department and the International Court of Justice (2004) refer to it; as well as other organizations and agencies.

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
• Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

Citizens of Israel are civilians. Just because Israel is the 'occupying power' in the West Bank, it has nothing to do with it.

Not true. Look it up.

Lol are you saying that when Germany occupied Poland, that the citizens of Germany were not civilians?

Youve brought up the link that shows that citizens of the occupying power are not civilians, but nothing that shows that citizens in Israel proper, where there is no occupation are not civilians. Just another lie to add to my list of bold claims you made that you were wrong about

(COMMENT)

Civilian, not engaged in the conflict, are never legitimate targets, no matter what their nationality or sovereign association; therefore, constant care must be taken when conducting military operations to spare nonmilitary objects and persons, and positive steps must be taken to avoid or minimize any civilian casualties or damage. The principle of proportionality must always be followed, which prohibits an attack when the expected collateral civilian casualties or damage to civilian objects is excessive or disproportionate to the military advantage anticipated by the attack.

Nothing in international law permits the HAMAS Jihadist or PA Fedayeen to internally target civilians, or to indiscriminately fire upon civilian targets. It simply is not allowed legally. There is no such concept of "by any means necessary" in the settlement of territorial disputes. The General Assembly Resolution 34/102 (A/RES/34/102) - Settlement by peaceful means of disputes between States - "Calls upon all States to adhere strictly in their international relations to the principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered." This includes the States of Israel (1948) and Palestine (1988).

• Parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to spare civilian population and property. Adequate precautions shall be taken in this regard before launching an attack. See ICRC - War and international humanitarian law

The International Committee of the Red Cross is regarded as the “guardian” of the Geneva Conventions and the various other treaties that constitute international humanitarian law. It cannot, however, act as either policeman or judge. These functions belong to governments, the parties to international treaties, who are required to prevent and put an end to violation of IHL. They have also an obligation to punish those responsible of what are known as “grave breaches” of IHL or war crimes.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

They don't mention self defense.

Israel hasn't attacked them first in like, forever. Get a grip, dude.

It is still self defense until Israel leaves Palestine.

How is launching rockets indiscrimnately self defence?? How are they defending themselves by doing that?? Do you realize how stupid that sounds??

In fact, not only are they NOT defending themselves, they are inviting more attacks

 

[Phoenall]

I think you need to read further. Nobody in the world, except Britain and Pakistan (???), recognized this annexation.

This begs a question. If this land was Jordan's and it was conquered by Israel in 1967, why is it called "occupied Palestinian territory?"

No-one calls it "occupied territory" except idiots and the uninformed.

Then: if its not occupied territory then its part of Israel and the Palestinians are Citizens or Apartheid? What is your conclusion?

It is part of Palestine that is occupied by Israeli forces under the remit of the Geneva Conventions. It is not part of Israel so is not classified by anyone other than idiots as apartheid.

 

[toastman]

So in effect you are saying that new born Israeli children are valid targets for the Palestinians, and that the Palestinians can use illegal weapons to target Israeli children.

Sums up your evil mind perfectly and shows that you support genocide and mass murder in the name of islam

Tinmore is not a Muslim, but he doesn't realize that he's a useful tool for them. Not too bright.

I don't view children as legitimate targets and the Palestinians do not either. I don't recall any Palestinian attack that targeted children.

Children are the responsibility of their parents. They should not have them in Israel's war zone.

A war zone implies there is a war. A war requires two belligerents.

If you ever want your credibility to make some sort of a remarkable comeback, stop making crap up.

 

[Phoenall]

So in effect you are saying that new born Israeli children are valid targets for the Palestinians, and that the Palestinians can use illegal weapons to target Israeli children.

Sums up your evil mind perfectly and shows that you support genocide and mass murder in the name of islam

Tinmore is not a Muslim, but he doesn't realize that he's a useful tool for them. Not too bright.

I don't view children as legitimate targets and the Palestinians do not either. I don't recall any Palestinian attack that targeted children.

Children are the responsibility of their parents. They should not have them in Israel's war zone.

That is not what they are admitting

https://www.kintera.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=hsJPK0PIJpH&b=689705&ct=4356675

Iran-Backed Gaza Terrorist Group Admits to Deliberately Targeting Israeli School Children with Qassam Rockets.


By the same token Palestinians should not have children in their war zone either, yet they rely on them as weapons carriers and human shields. So if they get shot then the blame lies with the Palestinians and not the Israelis.

 

[Phoenall]

"Terrorist" is third grade, political name calling.

The Palestinians do not fit the definition of terrorists.

In what way don't they fit the definition of terrorist, as stated here by the UN

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them

They don't mention self defense.

Read the definition again from the UN, it does not matter if it is self defence or aggression the Palestinians are guilty of terrorist acts for POLITICAL PURPOSES. So will you join in with all the civilised people of the world in condemning the terrorism coming from Palestine ?

 

[Phoenall]

It is Israel's war. Only Israel can stop it.

So when did Israel declare war on islam and Palestine ?

provide a link from a credible source that details the declaration of war.

My link is the UN archives were the arab league declares war on the Jews on behalf of Palestine and that it has never been fully rescinded


So it is the Palestinians war and only the Palestinians can stop it.............

And the Palestinians started the war when they went to Europe and attacked the Zionists.

Oh, wait...

No they started the war when they attacked the Jews in medina back in 627 C.E., and the war has raged ever since with mass murders and genocides of the Jews over the last 1400 years.

 

[Phoenall]

They don't mention self defense.

Israel hasn't attacked them first in like, forever. Get a grip, dude.

It is still self defense until Israel leaves Palestine.

Still does not excuse terrorism and targeting civilians, mainly children. That makes it a capital offence and if the last ruling nation had execution as the penalty for these acts then Israel ,is within its rights to execute any armed Palestinians out of uniform.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel is the occupying power. What difference does location make?

A lot actually as it is against International Law to wage war on civilians, just as it is against International law to commit terrorist acts on civilians. It does not matter that the country is occupying the land, any attacks on civilians will just tighten the noose as defined in the Geneva conventions.

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).

</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=

What else you got?

The rest of the Geneva conventions that state Israel is within its rights to enforce martial law on the west bank, until such time as the belligerence has ceased for a period of 12 months. And no Israeli civilians in Israel proper can be targeted for attack by illegal weapons. Time for the UN to stop appeasing islam and tell them to leave or support the next resolution declaring war on all terrorist groups.

 

[Hossfly]

Israel hasn't attacked them first in like, forever. Get a grip, dude.

It is still self defense until Israel leaves Palestine.

Still does not excuse terrorism and targeting civilians, mainly children. That makes it a capital offence and if the last ruling nation had execution as the penalty for these acts then Israel ,is within its rights to execute any armed Palestinians out of uniform.

Tinmore sez Palestinians don't target children. Is that the cannabis talking?

 

[Phoenall]

He believes the Zionists took over the U.S. in that year.

Well Zionists through AIPAC have taken over the US policies in the ME through this lobby for a foreign power, they contribute more campaign contributions than anyone else, certainly first or second.

All for a foreign power which sabotage efforts of peace by America and clearly against our interests.

America needs to remove this cancer with campaign finance reform.

And still Israel is facing constant attack from the arab muslims. If the Jews did control the USA then they would have had them wipe out the west bank, gaza, Syria, iran and any other nation that threatened Israel. They would have forced the USA into attacking Germany in 1933 when the Nazis came to power, and saved 62 million lives.

Yet the reality is that islam pulls America's strings through its oil control and strategic position. The Saudis are allowed to build serious walls and defences inside the borders of yemen without a whisper being heard, stealing more land from Yemen than Israel has to exist on. Saudi instructs the USA to bomb Iraq and the USA goes in mob handed, all because saddam decided to sell his oil in Euro's and not dollars.
So take your head out of your arse and look at what is really going on out there.

 

[Phoenall]

I think you need to read further. Nobody in the world, except Britain and Pakistan (???), recognized this annexation.

This begs a question. If this land was Jordan's and it was conquered by Israel in 1967, why is it called "occupied Palestinian territory?"

If the land was Jordan's and they don't seem to be asking for it back, why should anyone give to the Pals? Are they claiming the land as Jordanians? Apparently not, so wassup?

Because Jordan occupied Palestinian land. They attempted to annex it but failed.

Israel won the occupation of Palestinian land in 1967.

The Palestinians accepted the annexation and became Jordanian citizens. They were given the vote in the Jordanian elections and had a proportional number of representatives in the Jordan parliament. It did not need any other recognition other than that of the Palestinians free determination which they exercised in full. They were offered a home in Jordan in 1967 after the war if they wanted it. The occupation of the west bank is for the defence of Israel on initially two fronts Jordan and Syria. Now it is reduced to one front and internal terrorism.

Once again the Palestinians miss the chance to miss the chance

 

[RoccoR]

PF Tinmore, et al,

You are absolutely correct, and still entirely wrong in you application.

Israel is the occupying power. What difference does location make?

A lot actually as it is against International Law to wage war on civilians, just as it is against International law to commit terrorist acts on civilians. It does not matter that the country is occupying the land, any attacks on civilians will just tighten the noose as defined in the Geneva conventions.

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).

</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=

What else you got?

(COMMENT)

You citation make a distinction between the "enemy population" (versus Citizens of the country of the Occupation Force) protected under the Geneva Convention from excesses from the Occupation Force. But the citizens from the country of the Occupation Force enjoy the protections of their home country; not occupation law.

Citizens of the country of the Occupation Force are protected by civil laws (both military, local civil and homeland law) and Article 68 of the Geneva Convention.

Again, as you say ... your rebuttal is irrelevant.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

He believes the Zionists took over the U.S. in that year.

Well Zionists through AIPAC have taken over the US policies in the ME through this lobby for a foreign power, they contribute more campaign contributions than anyone else, certainly first or second.

All for a foreign power which sabotage efforts of peace by America and clearly against our interests.

America needs to remove this cancer with campaign finance reform.

Of course they do Pbel

Keep telling yourself that, if it makes you happy, stupid..

 

[pbel]

Well Zionists through AIPAC have taken over the US policies in the ME through this lobby for a foreign power, they contribute more campaign contributions than anyone else, certainly first or second.

All for a foreign power which sabotage efforts of peace by America and clearly against our interests.

America needs to remove this cancer with campaign finance reform.

Of course they do Pbel

Keep telling yourself that, if it makes you happy, stupid..

As Israel keeps backstabbing America as it is today with Obama, it will happen it time as it has happened from time immemorial. Read your history dopey.