Is Israel held to different or higher standards?

[theliq]

theliq, et al,

It went over my head.

Shusha, et al,

A couple of these issues are really part of a larger discussion; just approached more narrowly.

Some of the things that came up as possible points of discussion:

• the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

(THUMBNAIL BACKGROUND)

• Article # 42 --- The Hague Convention of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

• UN Charter Chapter I --- Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

• UN Charter Chapter VII --- Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective selfdefense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

• The UN Security calls for Member States to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities, including taking steps to:

• Criminalize the financing of terrorism
• Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism
• Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups
• Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists
• Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist acts
• Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and prosecution of those involved in such acts; and
• Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to justice.

• 2. Decides [S/RES/1373 (2001)] also that all States shall:

(a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;​

• Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.

(COMMENT)

I simply don't think that a reasonable person can come to any other conclusion:

• Israel has the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• Israel has the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

Most Respectfully,
R

Fine story Rocco,BUT.......by your appraisal poor Old Israel would be the 1st Country to have any funds Frozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzen.steve

(COMMENT)

I as I see it, the US would not freeze funds on your assumption, nor would it consider it for Israel. basis:

ON THE ONE-HAND, you have: Israel, the highest ranking country for human development for the entire Middle East and Gulf Coast Region:

Israel, which is more than half a century old,has a inherent right to defend and protect its sovereign territorial integrity and political independence from the excesses of radicalized Islamic elements, the same as any other country.

Israel is entitled to inherent right of individual or collective self defense, the same as any other country.

Israel refrains from supporting, active or passive, to entities involved in suicide attacks, shootings, kidnapping, murder, rocket and mortar attacks, airline hijackings and ship piracy, and public international attacks.

Israel is involved in the active suppressing recruitment of members by terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists; thereby reducing the threat to peace by attacks from radicalized Islamic elements and other Hostile Arab Palestinians.
​

ON THE OTHER-HAND, you have Palestine, in terms of human development, it barely ranks above Syria which is in chaos and near open war.

Palestine has a right to defend any territory it maintained the integrity and sovereignty over. Does Palestine have any?

Palestine has an official policy not to recognize its neighbor (one wonders who they are occupied by --- the country with no name).

Palestine has an official policy not to negotiate with the Occupation Power (with no name).

Palestine has a policy not to have peace and to pursue Jihad against the Occupation Power with no name.

Palestine has a policy to target civilians indiscriminately and directly through asymmetric ground force operations, kidnapping, and murder; unarmed civilians.

Palestine will use any and all means, to include the use of humanitarian shipments, border breaching tunneling, and any other avenue to smuggle weapons into the country with the intention of furthering hostile activity.
​

When we talk about the distinctive differences, we are talking differences that have been a part of the Palestinian History, a long time. On of the basic Principles of International Law concerning the Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625) is:

• 
  Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

While not law, it parallels the concepts that peace is the object; and Jihad is not the means to that end.

Most Respectfully,
R

Crikey Rocco I know that you have a short memory but this post of yours I just shake my head at!!!!!!!!!!!

Israel have had Death Squads overseas for 50 years,you don't remember the young Guy shot to death by the Israeli Mossad in Sweden???his only crime???to have the same surname of some terrorist the Israeli Government had on their hit list??????there are many instances of these hit lists being carried out..................Rocco as much as I like you and much of your precise prose,sometimes you leave yourself open to ridicule because everything you attempt to bury the Palestinians with, the Israelis do so much worse,its become a habit with you Guys to make unfactual bias statements because you think you can get away with it.......I think you forget that Tinnie,Monte,Penny,Ogib,Coyote and all are not a pack of imbeciles but very intelligent people.

It is a shame that you try to insult us all the time,with crooked statements that you present as facts.steve

 

[Indeependent]

Actually, I think it's the inability to take shit from people that plays into that.

think what you want. i stand by the belief that if israel was not a largely jewish nation and if many evangelicals didn't feel a religious obligation to support them israel would have a much less favorable standing with many americans.

i guess what i'm saying is right now people like israel because of religion and they don't care about what israel actually does. if you took religion out of it and people just judged israel on its actions israel would not enjoy the support it currently does.

You mean if Christians saw Jews through revisionist history eyes the way YOU want them to see Jews.

how hard is "if religion wasn't a part of it" for you to understand?

Pretty difficult seeing as how religion started LONG before atheism and is still going quite strong.
The issue is that YOU have difficulties dealing with reality in terms of Israel.
Jews and Christians have far more in common in terms of being civilized than ANYBODY has in common with Islam.
In fact, the ONLY reason the US doesn't blow most of Islam off the face of the Middle Eastern map is OIL.

Christians do not see Christianity as a race or culture, its a religious belief, same as Judaism, and in that respect , few Jews live in Israel, and those that do are not getting along with the secular community, and really none of them seem to like Christians.

Only Christians who proselytize.
And the fact is, Muslims countries deal far more harshly with Christians who proselytize than ANY other nations.

 

[Indeependent]

theliq, et al,

It went over my head.

Shusha, et al,

A couple of these issues are really part of a larger discussion; just approached more narrowly.

Some of the things that came up as possible points of discussion:

• the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

(THUMBNAIL BACKGROUND)

• Article # 42 --- The Hague Convention of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

• UN Charter Chapter I --- Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

• UN Charter Chapter VII --- Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective selfdefense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

• The UN Security calls for Member States to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities, including taking steps to:

• Criminalize the financing of terrorism
• Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism
• Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups
• Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists
• Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist acts
• Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and prosecution of those involved in such acts; and
• Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to justice.

• 2. Decides [S/RES/1373 (2001)] also that all States shall:

(a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;​

• Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.

(COMMENT)

I simply don't think that a reasonable person can come to any other conclusion:

• Israel has the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• Israel has the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

Most Respectfully,
R

Fine story Rocco,BUT.......by your appraisal poor Old Israel would be the 1st Country to have any funds Frozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzen.steve

(COMMENT)

I as I see it, the US would not freeze funds on your assumption, nor would it consider it for Israel. basis:

ON THE ONE-HAND, you have: Israel, the highest ranking country for human development for the entire Middle East and Gulf Coast Region:

Israel, which is more than half a century old,has a inherent right to defend and protect its sovereign territorial integrity and political independence from the excesses of radicalized Islamic elements, the same as any other country.

Israel is entitled to inherent right of individual or collective self defense, the same as any other country.

Israel refrains from supporting, active or passive, to entities involved in suicide attacks, shootings, kidnapping, murder, rocket and mortar attacks, airline hijackings and ship piracy, and public international attacks.

Israel is involved in the active suppressing recruitment of members by terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists; thereby reducing the threat to peace by attacks from radicalized Islamic elements and other Hostile Arab Palestinians.
​

ON THE OTHER-HAND, you have Palestine, in terms of human development, it barely ranks above Syria which is in chaos and near open war.

Palestine has a right to defend any territory it maintained the integrity and sovereignty over. Does Palestine have any?

Palestine has an official policy not to recognize its neighbor (one wonders who they are occupied by --- the country with no name).

Palestine has an official policy not to negotiate with the Occupation Power (with no name).

Palestine has a policy not to have peace and to pursue Jihad against the Occupation Power with no name.

Palestine has a policy to target civilians indiscriminately and directly through asymmetric ground force operations, kidnapping, and murder; unarmed civilians.

Palestine will use any and all means, to include the use of humanitarian shipments, border breaching tunneling, and any other avenue to smuggle weapons into the country with the intention of furthering hostile activity.
​

When we talk about the distinctive differences, we are talking differences that have been a part of the Palestinian History, a long time. On of the basic Principles of International Law concerning the Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625) is:

• 
  Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

While not law, it parallels the concepts that peace is the object; and Jihad is not the means to that end.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco as much as I like you and much of your precise prose,sometimes you leave yourself open to ridicule because everything you attempt to bury the Palestinians with, the Israelis do so much worse

And you expect to be taken seriously?
Heck, based on the Gaza Retaliation news coverage, even CNN and the BBC think you're nuts.

 

[RoccoR]

theliq, et al,

Yes, everyone uses that "Sweden Incident." Yes, that was a screw-up.

theliq, et al,

It went over my head.

Shusha, et al,

A couple of these issues are really part of a larger discussion; just approached more narrowly.

Some of the things that came up as possible points of discussion:

• the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

(THUMBNAIL BACKGROUND)

• Article # 42 --- The Hague Convention of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

• UN Charter Chapter I --- Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

• UN Charter Chapter VII --- Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective selfdefense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

• The UN Security calls for Member States to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities, including taking steps to:

• Criminalize the financing of terrorism
• Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism
• Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups
• Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists
• Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist acts
• Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and prosecution of those involved in such acts; and
• Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to justice.

• 2. Decides [S/RES/1373 (2001)] also that all States shall:

(a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;​

• Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.

(COMMENT)

I simply don't think that a reasonable person can come to any other conclusion:

• Israel has the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• Israel has the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

Most Respectfully,
R

Fine story Rocco,BUT.......by your appraisal poor Old Israel would be the 1st Country to have any funds Frozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzen.steve

(COMMENT)

I as I see it, the US would not freeze funds on your assumption, nor would it consider it for Israel. basis:

ON THE ONE-HAND, you have: Israel, the highest ranking country for human development for the entire Middle East and Gulf Coast Region:

Israel, which is more than half a century old,has a inherent right to defend and protect its sovereign territorial integrity and political independence from the excesses of radicalized Islamic elements, the same as any other country.

Israel is entitled to inherent right of individual or collective self defense, the same as any other country.

Israel refrains from supporting, active or passive, to entities involved in suicide attacks, shootings, kidnapping, murder, rocket and mortar attacks, airline hijackings and ship piracy, and public international attacks.

Israel is involved in the active suppressing recruitment of members by terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists; thereby reducing the threat to peace by attacks from radicalized Islamic elements and other Hostile Arab Palestinians.
​

ON THE OTHER-HAND, you have Palestine, in terms of human development, it barely ranks above Syria which is in chaos and near open war.

Palestine has a right to defend any territory it maintained the integrity and sovereignty over. Does Palestine have any?

Palestine has an official policy not to recognize its neighbor (one wonders who they are occupied by --- the country with no name).

Palestine has an official policy not to negotiate with the Occupation Power (with no name).

Palestine has a policy not to have peace and to pursue Jihad against the Occupation Power with no name.

Palestine has a policy to target civilians indiscriminately and directly through asymmetric ground force operations, kidnapping, and murder; unarmed civilians.

Palestine will use any and all means, to include the use of humanitarian shipments, border breaching tunneling, and any other avenue to smuggle weapons into the country with the intention of furthering hostile activity.
​

When we talk about the distinctive differences, we are talking differences that have been a part of the Palestinian History, a long time. On of the basic Principles of International Law concerning the Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625) is:

• 
  Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

While not law, it parallels the concepts that peace is the object; and Jihad is not the means to that end.

Most Respectfully,
R

Crikey Rocco I know that you have a short memory but this post of yours I just shake my head at!!!!!!!!!!!

Israel have had Death Squads overseas for 50 years,you don't remember the young Guy shot to death by the Israeli Mossad in Sweden???his only crime???to have the same surname of some terrorist the Israeli Government had on their hit list??????there are many instances of these hit lists being carried out..................Rocco as much as I like you and much of your precise prose,sometimes you leave yourself open to ridicule because everything you attempt to bury the Palestinians with, the Israelis do so much worse,its become a habit with you Guys to make unfactual bias statements because you think you can get away with it.......I think you forget that Tinnie,Monte,Penny,Ogib,Coyote and all are not a pack of imbeciles but very intelligent people.

It is a shame that you try to insult us all the time,with crooked statements that you present as facts.steve

(COMMENT)

It is almost unheard of --- for a A Major Post-WWII Power, that did not conduct covert or clandestine intelligence or sanction operation, as well a special military operations.

Do you want to compare records: Israel 'vs' Palestinians (Heroic Freedom Fighters)

You forgot to mention that the Palestinians they were after participated in the Munich Olympic Attack in 1972.
Yes, there was a mistake.

In that same time period, before the Palestinians attempted to assassinate the King of Jordan (twice) the heroic freedom fighters conducted the first mass aircraft hijackings the so-called Dawson's Field hijackings, when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine seized control of two American planes and one Swiss airliner, all bound from Europe to the United States, to punish the United States for supporting Israel. The Pan Am, TWA andSwissair planes were blown up on the ground in Jordan and Egypt.

And of course you remember the Achille Lauro hijacking, brave Palestinians rolled a wheel-chair bound American overboard.
​

I am quite sure, but you might go ahead and ask , if I personally attack "Tinnie,Monte,Penny,Ogib,Coyote," or otherwise directly insult them. If I did, you probably saw an apology from me. I attack ideas and mis information.

Yes you can nearly blame any country that has a voice in regional political-military matters that count for past mistakes. And most countries have made mistakes; just as most of the significant leaders have made mistakes.

I will make this comment. Israel hunts Nazi War Criminals and Terrorist. Yeah, they made a mistake. But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[theliq]

theliq, et al,

Yes, everyone uses that "Sweden Incident." Yes, that was a screw-up.

theliq, et al,

It went over my head.

Shusha, et al,

A couple of these issues are really part of a larger discussion; just approached more narrowly.

Some of the things that came up as possible points of discussion:

• the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

(THUMBNAIL BACKGROUND)

• Article # 42 --- The Hague Convention of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

• UN Charter Chapter I --- Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

• UN Charter Chapter VII --- Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective selfdefense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

• The UN Security calls for Member States to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities, including taking steps to:

• Criminalize the financing of terrorism
• Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism
• Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups
• Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists
• Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist acts
• Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and prosecution of those involved in such acts; and
• Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to justice.

• 2. Decides [S/RES/1373 (2001)] also that all States shall:

(a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;​

• Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.

(COMMENT)

I simply don't think that a reasonable person can come to any other conclusion:

• Israel has the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• Israel has the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

Most Respectfully,
R

Fine story Rocco,BUT.......by your appraisal poor Old Israel would be the 1st Country to have any funds Frozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzen.steve

(COMMENT)

I as I see it, the US would not freeze funds on your assumption, nor would it consider it for Israel. basis:

ON THE ONE-HAND, you have: Israel, the highest ranking country for human development for the entire Middle East and Gulf Coast Region:

Israel, which is more than half a century old,has a inherent right to defend and protect its sovereign territorial integrity and political independence from the excesses of radicalized Islamic elements, the same as any other country.

Israel is entitled to inherent right of individual or collective self defense, the same as any other country.

Israel refrains from supporting, active or passive, to entities involved in suicide attacks, shootings, kidnapping, murder, rocket and mortar attacks, airline hijackings and ship piracy, and public international attacks.

Israel is involved in the active suppressing recruitment of members by terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists; thereby reducing the threat to peace by attacks from radicalized Islamic elements and other Hostile Arab Palestinians.
​

ON THE OTHER-HAND, you have Palestine, in terms of human development, it barely ranks above Syria which is in chaos and near open war.

Palestine has a right to defend any territory it maintained the integrity and sovereignty over. Does Palestine have any?

Palestine has an official policy not to recognize its neighbor (one wonders who they are occupied by --- the country with no name).

Palestine has an official policy not to negotiate with the Occupation Power (with no name).

Palestine has a policy not to have peace and to pursue Jihad against the Occupation Power with no name.

Palestine has a policy to target civilians indiscriminately and directly through asymmetric ground force operations, kidnapping, and murder; unarmed civilians.

Palestine will use any and all means, to include the use of humanitarian shipments, border breaching tunneling, and any other avenue to smuggle weapons into the country with the intention of furthering hostile activity.
​

When we talk about the distinctive differences, we are talking differences that have been a part of the Palestinian History, a long time. On of the basic Principles of International Law concerning the Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625) is:

• 
  Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

While not law, it parallels the concepts that peace is the object; and Jihad is not the means to that end.

Most Respectfully,
R

Crikey Rocco I know that you have a short memory but this post of yours I just shake my head at!!!!!!!!!!!

Israel have had Death Squads overseas for 50 years,you don't remember the young Guy shot to death by the Israeli Mossad in Sweden???his only crime???to have the same surname of some terrorist the Israeli Government had on their hit list??????there are many instances of these hit lists being carried out..................Rocco as much as I like you and much of your precise prose,sometimes you leave yourself open to ridicule because everything you attempt to bury the Palestinians with, the Israelis do so much worse,its become a habit with you Guys to make unfactual bias statements because you think you can get away with it.......I think you forget that Tinnie,Monte,Penny,Ogib,Coyote and all are not a pack of imbeciles but very intelligent people.

It is a shame that you try to insult us all the time,with crooked statements that you present as facts.steve

(COMMENT)

It is almost unheard of --- for a A Major Post-WWII Power, that did not conduct covert or clandestine intelligence or sanction operation, as well a special military operations.

Do you want to compare records: Israel 'vs' Palestinians (Heroic Freedom Fighters)

You forgot to mention that the Palestinians they were after participated in the Munich Olympic Attack in 1972.
Yes, there was a mistake.

In that same time period, before the Palestinians attempted to assassinate the King of Jordan (twice) the heroic freedom fighters conducted the first mass aircraft hijackings the so-called Dawson's Field hijackings, when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine seized control of two American planes and one Swiss airliner, all bound from Europe to the United States, to punish the United States for supporting Israel. The Pan Am, TWA andSwissair planes were blown up on the ground in Jordan and Egypt.

And of course you remember the Achille Lauro hijacking, brave Palestinians rolled a wheel-chair bound American overboard.
​

I am quite sure, but you might go ahead and ask , if I personally attack "Tinnie,Monte,Penny,Ogib,Coyote," or otherwise directly insult them. If I did, you probably saw an apology from me. I attack ideas and mis information.

Yes you can nearly blame any country that has a voice in regional political-military matters that count for past mistakes. And most countries have made mistakes; just as most of the significant leaders have made mistakes.

I will make this comment. Israel hunts Nazi War Criminals and Terrorist. Yeah, they made a mistake. But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

Most Respectfully,
R

I really like you Rocco,I'll leave it at that...steve

 

[theliq]

theliq, et al,

It went over my head.

Shusha, et al,

A couple of these issues are really part of a larger discussion; just approached more narrowly.

Some of the things that came up as possible points of discussion:

• the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

(THUMBNAIL BACKGROUND)

• Article # 42 --- The Hague Convention of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

• UN Charter Chapter I --- Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

• UN Charter Chapter VII --- Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective selfdefense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

• The UN Security calls for Member States to implement a number of measures intended to enhance their legal and institutional ability to counter terrorist activities, including taking steps to:

• Criminalize the financing of terrorism
• Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism
• Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups
• Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists
• Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist acts
• Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and prosecution of those involved in such acts; and
• Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to justice.

• 2. Decides [S/RES/1373 (2001)] also that all States shall:

(a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;​

• Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.

(COMMENT)

I simply don't think that a reasonable person can come to any other conclusion:

• Israel has the right to defend one's national integrity and citizens
• Israel has the right to prevent an enemy from gaining weapons (ie. a naval blockade)

Most Respectfully,
R

Fine story Rocco,BUT.......by your appraisal poor Old Israel would be the 1st Country to have any funds Frozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzen.steve

(COMMENT)

I as I see it, the US would not freeze funds on your assumption, nor would it consider it for Israel. basis:

ON THE ONE-HAND, you have: Israel, the highest ranking country for human development for the entire Middle East and Gulf Coast Region:

Israel, which is more than half a century old,has a inherent right to defend and protect its sovereign territorial integrity and political independence from the excesses of radicalized Islamic elements, the same as any other country.

Israel is entitled to inherent right of individual or collective self defense, the same as any other country.

Israel refrains from supporting, active or passive, to entities involved in suicide attacks, shootings, kidnapping, murder, rocket and mortar attacks, airline hijackings and ship piracy, and public international attacks.

Israel is involved in the active suppressing recruitment of members by terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists; thereby reducing the threat to peace by attacks from radicalized Islamic elements and other Hostile Arab Palestinians.
​

ON THE OTHER-HAND, you have Palestine, in terms of human development, it barely ranks above Syria which is in chaos and near open war.

Palestine has a right to defend any territory it maintained the integrity and sovereignty over. Does Palestine have any?

Palestine has an official policy not to recognize its neighbor (one wonders who they are occupied by --- the country with no name).

Palestine has an official policy not to negotiate with the Occupation Power (with no name).

Palestine has a policy not to have peace and to pursue Jihad against the Occupation Power with no name.

Palestine has a policy to target civilians indiscriminately and directly through asymmetric ground force operations, kidnapping, and murder; unarmed civilians.

Palestine will use any and all means, to include the use of humanitarian shipments, border breaching tunneling, and any other avenue to smuggle weapons into the country with the intention of furthering hostile activity.
​

When we talk about the distinctive differences, we are talking differences that have been a part of the Palestinian History, a long time. On of the basic Principles of International Law concerning the Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625) is:

• 
  Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

While not law, it parallels the concepts that peace is the object; and Jihad is not the means to that end.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco as much as I like you and much of your precise prose,sometimes you leave yourself open to ridicule because everything you attempt to bury the Palestinians with, the Israelis do so much worse

And you expect to be taken seriously?
Heck, based on the Gaza Retaliation news coverage, even CNN and the BBC think you're nuts.

LOL steve

 

[Vikrant]

i don't think nearly as many americans would have a favorable opinion of israel if religion were not part of the equation for them.

When Wall Street talks, politicians listen.
And Wall Street LOVES Israel; even the evil Liberals on Wall Street.

... and America pays the price for Wall Street's illicit love affair with Israel.

Wall Street's only love affair is with itself.
As far as Israel is concerned...Winning!

Israel is winning at the expense of America.

 

[ogibillm]

But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

Most Respectfully,
R

and yet they've killed far more civilians than the Palestinians

 

[Roudy]

If Israel was held to different standards, the rest of the world probably would have done something to stop their settlements by now and taken control of Gaza and the West Bank away from them.

How's the world doing with Boko Harem? How'd it do 1/3 of all Cambodians were slaughtered? How's the world doing in Yemen? Chad?

<insert sound of crickets here>

The world only focuses on that tiny strip of sand for only one reason - Gods chosen people are living there and it's been the center of the world for the past 3,000 years because of it.

Yup. Religious madness.

It's survival. After being persecuted and killed for being Jewish they are finally back in their religious, cultural, and ancestral homeland, only to face a new breed of Islamic Nazis trying to once again kill them because of their faith. If they don't defend themselves and hit back hard, Muslims will commit a second Holocaust on the Jews, this time in their own holy land. Do you understand what never again means? The Jews for the first time in history are not laying down and letting barbarian savages slaughter them at will. They are fighting back, bravely, brilliantly, and ethically.

 

[Roudy]

But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

Most Respectfully,
R

and yet they've killed far more civilians than the Palestinians

And yet the Germans alone lost about 9 million, about 4 million of them were civilians. But that didn't make the Nazis right.

 

[theliq]

But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

Most Respectfully,
R

and yet they've killed far more civilians than the Palestinians

YOU MEAN PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS ...get it right

 

[Lipush]

Yes.

As to answer the thread's question

 

[RoccoR]

theliq, ogibillm, et al,

This doesn't make any sense.

But they certainly don't intentionally target innocent civilians; not on the order the Palestinians have.

and yet they've killed far more civilians than the Palestinians

YOU MEAN PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS ...get it right

(COMMENT)

There is a difference between the intentional targeting of civilians as targets (a practice of HAMAS) 'vs' and the inadvertent deaths of civilians during a tactical engagement where HAMAS purposely chose a "densely populated area to fight from or the purposely chose not to remove civilians from a potential battlefield.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

If Israel was held to different standards, the rest of the world probably would have done something to stop their settlements by now and taken control of Gaza and the West Bank away from them.

AND BE IN BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE PROCESS

Or is this another example of how Jew haters hold Israel to a different standard. Do explain how imposing border controls and missile defences is controlling gaza. There is no international law that says Israel has to allow any goods to or from gaza to cross its air, land or sea. There is no International law that says Israel is not allowed to defend itself from terrorism and military action, as much as you would like to see such a law passed. Always remember that the problems started when the arab muslims refused to give up 1% of the land they had stolen from he Jews that lived there for 4,500 years. And when they found that they could no longer intimidate women and children they resorted to all out violence. Time for the UN to impose its charter on the arab muslims and use force of arms to put down the terrorism and violence.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel should be sanctioned and closely monitored for war crimes. All countries should have higher standards than Israel and most do.

And when none are found what will you do then, make some up and use them as an excuse to wipe out the Jews ?

No nation has a higher standard than Israel, because no nation is looked at more closely. If it was the US then the Palestinians would have been wiped out 60 years ago.

 

[RoccoR]

Penelope, Phoenall, Challenger, INDEEPENDENT, THELIQ , IOLO , et al,

The question of the "higher standard" is a bit different. I think the question should have been a different standard.

Israel should be sanctioned and closely monitored for war crimes. All countries should have higher standards than Israel and most do.

And when none are found what will you do then, make some up and use them as an excuse to wipe out the Jews ?

No nation has a higher standard than Israel, because no nation is looked at more closely. If it was the US then the Palestinians would have been wiped out 60 years ago.

(COMMENT)

One of the oddities of the Middle East and most of the Regional governments, is that (with the exception of Israel) the measure of sovereignty is not demonstrated by the Arab League. This is especially true for the People of Gaza. No representative of any Arab People failed more greatly than the those the preported to be the Arab Representative of the Palestinian people; whether the be the Arab Delegation in the first decade of the Mandate, the Arab League in the Israeli War for Independence, the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole representative,or HAMAS how claims to be a legitimate government. Not one of them in the last century has really even remotely attempted to act in the best interest of the People.

MEETING THE CHALLENGE
The International Commission on Intervention and Sovereignty, "The Responsibility to Protect"

8.31 Throughout its deliberations, the Commission has sought to reconcile two objectives:

• to strengthen, not weaken, the sovereignty of states, and
• to improve the capacity of the international community to react decisively when states are either unable or unwilling to protect their own people.

Reconciling these two objectives is essential. There is no prospect of genuine equality among peoples unless the sovereignty of states is respected and their capacity to protect their own citizens is enhanced. Equally, the very term “international community” will become a travesty unless the community of states can act decisively when large groups of human beings are being massacred or subjected to ethnic cleansing.

8.32 The Commission is optimistic that these dual objectives – enhancing the sovereign capacity of states and improving the ability of the international community to protect people in mortal danger – can be reconciled in practice. Our work reflects the remarkable, even historic, change that has occurred in the practice of states and the Security Council in the past generation. Thanks to this change, no one is prepared to defend the claim that states can do what they wish to their own people, and hide behind the principle of sovereignty in so doing. In the international community, just as there can be no impunity for unwarranted unilateral uses of force, nor can there be impunity for massacre and ethnic cleansing. No one who has
perpetrated such horrors should ever be allowed to sleep easily.
​

THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT: CORE PRINCIPLES

(1) Basic Principles

A. State sovereignty implies responsibility, and the primary responsibility for the protection of its people lies with the state itself.
B. Where a population is suffering serious harm, as a result of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or avert it, the principle of non-intervention yields to the international responsibility to protect.
​

(2) Foundations
The foundations of the responsibility to protect, as a guiding principle for the international
community of states, lie in:

A. obligations inherent in the concept of sovereignty;
B. the responsibility of the Security Council, under Article 24 of the UN Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and security;
​

We often forget that Israel not only holds the sovereignty over its territory, and thereby has the responsibility to protect its people as a sovereign nation from Hostile Palestinian Attacks; BUT, that the Palestinian Government Body (whatever that is today) must not engage in such activity that would increase harm to its citizenry. It is absent this dedication to the protection of its people that the Palestinian Government demonstrates the most that they are not ready for statehood.

The DIFFERENT STANDARD is that the UN does not hold the Palestinians to the same standard as they hold Israel. The Palestinians are allowed, and indeed encourage to take such action that most endangers their population [Violations of Customary and IHL] while holding Israel to every last requirement.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[TheOldSchool]

If Israel was held to different standards, the rest of the world probably would have done something to stop their settlements by now and taken control of Gaza and the West Bank away from them.

AND BE IN BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE PROCESS

Or is this another example of how Jew haters hold Israel to a different standard. Do explain how imposing border controls and missile defences is controlling gaza. There is no international law that says Israel has to allow any goods to or from gaza to cross its air, land or sea. There is no International law that says Israel is not allowed to defend itself from terrorism and military action, as much as you would like to see such a law passed. Always remember that the problems started when the arab muslims refused to give up 1% of the land they had stolen from he Jews that lived there for 4,500 years. And when they found that they could no longer intimidate women and children they resorted to all out violence. Time for the UN to impose its charter on the arab muslims and use force of arms to put down the terrorism and violence.

Your comment about 4,500 years and arabs being asked to give up 1% of their land is laughable. Next you'll be saying it's God's will that Israel belongs to the Jews and that trumps any international law you seem to care so much about, which Israel btw doesn't.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

If Israel was held to different standards, the rest of the world probably would have done something to stop their settlements by now and taken control of Gaza and the West Bank away from them.

AND BE IN BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE PROCESS

Or is this another example of how Jew haters hold Israel to a different standard. Do explain how imposing border controls and missile defences is controlling gaza. There is no international law that says Israel has to allow any goods to or from gaza to cross its air, land or sea. There is no International law that says Israel is not allowed to defend itself from terrorism and military action, as much as you would like to see such a law passed. Always remember that the problems started when the arab muslims refused to give up 1% of the land they had stolen from he Jews that lived there for 4,500 years. And when they found that they could no longer intimidate women and children they resorted to all out violence. Time for the UN to impose its charter on the arab muslims and use force of arms to put down the terrorism and violence.

Your comment about 4,500 years and arabs being asked to give up 1% of their land is laughable. Next you'll be saying it's God's will that Israel belongs to the Jews and that trumps any international law you seem to care so much about, which Israel btw doesn't.

Why is giving up 1% (actually even less than that) so laughable? It's not like the Arabs made such a huge success in the other 99% of the Middle East!

 

[RoccoR]

TheOldSchool, et al,

I agree. You should not use religious beliefs to determine international law settlements. But you will have to help me out here....

Your comment about 4,500 years and arabs being asked to give up 1% of their land is laughable. Next you'll be saying it's God's will that Israel belongs to the Jews and that trumps any international law you seem to care so much about, which Israel btw doesn't.

(QUESTION)

After Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne, when (the Sovereign Power over the territory renounced all rights and titles to the Allied Powers, and future of the territory to be settled by the Allied Powers) does the sovereignty pass to the inhabitance? When do the Arabs of Palestine ever assume governmental control?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indeependent]

If Israel was held to different standards, the rest of the world probably would have done something to stop their settlements by now and taken control of Gaza and the West Bank away from them.

AND BE IN BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE PROCESS

Or is this another example of how Jew haters hold Israel to a different standard. Do explain how imposing border controls and missile defences is controlling gaza. There is no international law that says Israel has to allow any goods to or from gaza to cross its air, land or sea. There is no International law that says Israel is not allowed to defend itself from terrorism and military action, as much as you would like to see such a law passed. Always remember that the problems started when the arab muslims refused to give up 1% of the land they had stolen from he Jews that lived there for 4,500 years. And when they found that they could no longer intimidate women and children they resorted to all out violence. Time for the UN to impose its charter on the arab muslims and use force of arms to put down the terrorism and violence.

Your comment about 4,500 years and arabs being asked to give up 1% of their land is laughable. Next you'll be saying it's God's will that Israel belongs to the Jews and that trumps any international law you seem to care so much about, which Israel btw doesn't.

As though most of the Muslims in the Middle East and their nations are not determined by Islam and the Sword.