Israeli Apartheid

[RoccoR]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→. P F Tinmore, et al,

Report finds Israel commits crime of apartheid to Palestinians | ABC News​

(COMMENT)

Amnesty International (AI) ⁜→ It has been 45 years ago (nearly half-century) since The Nobel Peace Prize (1977) was awarded to Amnesty International, a worldwide Human Rights (HR) Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). The complexion of Amnesty International has changed considerably from the days of the Baby Boomer (the offspring of the Greatest Generation) would never repeat the mistakes of humanity in the past and begin a new round of persecutions focused on the Jews (yet once again). The themes and ghosts of the Axis Powers are casting shadows once more.

Amnesty calls Israel an 'apartheid state'; Palestinians welcome, Israelis cry 'anti-semitism'​

(COMMENT)

So, I take it that a significant number of Arab-Israelis are complaining about being victims of "apartheid." This is intersting. I cannot see in the report where the Arab-Israelis are treated to inhumanly, that a significant number want to be governed either by the Ramallah Regime or the Gaza Regime.

Amnesty Intl. Report finds Israel guilty of enforcing 'apartheid' on Palestinians: Saleh Hijazi​

(COMMENT)

This is where there is a BIG difference between the Baby Boomer and the Generation of today. They would have told the "whole" truth in the definition.

BUT FIRST: Let us remember that: when reading the explanation of how they get to the conclusion that it is "Apartheid" it is important to note , how to read and apply the international criminal law:

PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW. (Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)​

Article 22​

Nullum crimen sine lege​

​

1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court.​

​

2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.​

​

3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute.​

Now read the excerpt from the report found on Page 48

"There are two main differences between the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute. First, the Rome Statute explicitly requires the existence of “an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”33 While the Apartheid Convention does not expressly use the term “institutionalized regime” in the manner in which the Rome Statute does, a similar requirement can be gleaned from its definition of of apartheid. Among other things, the convention describes the crime of apartheid as including “similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa,”34 which indisputably involved institutionalized racial oppression and domination. The definition also specifically includes “legislative measures”,35 clearly an “institutionalized” measure, among the “inhuman acts” constituting offences of apartheid.36 Thus, for the proscribed acts listed under both the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute to amount to the crime of apartheid, they must be committed to (create or) maintain an “institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”​

---

31. Paragraph 1 of the Rome Statute lists types of acts that constitute crimes against humanity.​

32. Rome Statute, Article 7(2)(h).​

33. Rome Statute, Article 7(2)(h).​

34. Apartheid Convention, Article II, chapeau.​

35. Apartheid Convention, Article II(c).​

36. Apartheid Convention, Article I(1). 37. Under the Rome Statute, the actus reus includes the requirement that the inhumane acts are perpetrated “in the context” of a regime of oppression and domination.​

I specifically included the footnotes because I wanted to make it abundantly clear that they intentionally left out a KEY PRINCIPLE of the Statute - to be strictly construed. I believe that the Amnesty International, either intentionally or unintentionally, left-out this key principle. WHY? (RHTORICAL) Because once you remove the allegation that it is prosecutable offense, then a huge bite is taken out of the Report. The title goes from:

ISRAEL’S APARTHEID AGAINST PALESTINIANS
CRUEL SYSTEM OF DOMINATION AND
CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
- TO -
ISRAEL’S APARTHEID AGAINST PALESTINIANS
CRUEL SYSTEM OF DOMINATION AND
CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY​

What we see here today is NOT Nobel Level work.

Just My Observation,
From reading the report...

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

Amnesty calls Israel an 'apartheid state'; Palestinians welcome, Israelis cry 'anti-semitism'​

Tinmore's " claim" is that the Israelis cry " Anti Semitism " in defense of their " treatment " of the Palestinians


[IMG alt="P F Tinmore"]https://www.usmessageboard.com/data/avatars/m/21/21837.jpg?1624683826[/IMG]

P F Tinmore​

Diamond Member​

JoinedDec 6, 2009Messages65,904Reaction score3,138Points1,815

• Mar 25, 2022
• Add bookmark
• #229

ILOVEISRAEL said:
Please tell us what they did to keep pissing people off. Making excuses for the Holocaust? Still have nothing to say about No Israelis in Palestine or not allowing Israelis at the Western Wall?? Thank you for exposing yourself for the.racist Antisemitic Ignorant Moron that you are

ILOVEISRAEL said:
Please tell us what they did to keep pissing people off. Making excuses for the Holocaust?

Good question. They manage to piss people off wherever they go.

This obviously is HIS Post. NOTHING about Israel or his Apartheid Approval of forbidding JEWS at the Western Wall if they had their way
Reminds me of his claim that HASIDIC JEWS don't believe Israel has the right to exist which is a lie. Does it make sense to anyone that the most religious Sect of the Jewish Religion would deny the Historical History??

 

[P F Tinmore]

Noura Erakat - Race, Apartheid, and Settler Colonialism​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Everything you wanted to know about Israeli apartheid but were too afraid to ask.​

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→. P F Tinmore, et al,

This could not be anymore biased and slanted against Israel. It starts with a preconceived notion that Israel is in the wrong in everything it does.

Everything you wanted to know about Israeli apartheid but were too afraid to ask.​

(COMMENT)
.
Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) are referenced in the sense that their findings are unchallengeable. Well, I challenge the notion. I do not believe that either HRW or AI addresses the pitfalls and hidden agenda.

◈ The hidden agenda here is for Israel to drop its border.
◈ The hidden intent is to "deconstruct" the ability of Israel to establish "defensible borders" for non-government actors to enter Israel in an unrestricted manner.
◈ Dropping the border controls two-fold effect on Israel:

• Weakens the ability to adequately defend against a coordinated assault by Arab League Forces.
• Sets the condition such that the Arab Palestinians can overrun the demographics in Israel, such that they can deconstruct the Jewish National Home.

All the "apartheid" nonsense, the systematic oppression an emotional appeal, and the ever the old standby claim against Israel denying the Arab Palestinians the civil and political rights afforded them by the convention. The discussion, while it did mention the that in the opinion of AI and HRW, Israel violates Articles 2 and 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) which entered into force: on 23 March 1976. The forum contributors conveniently hide the implications agreed to by the International Community (which was emphasized several times) found in Articles 12, 19, 20, 21, and Article 22 dealing with the restrictions, limitations, and exceptions agreed to:

• protections necessary to protect national security, public order,
• protections necessary to protect the public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others.
• Emphasis on the actions necessary to impose lawful restrictions exercised by the members of the armed forces and of the police in their exercise of this right.
• protections necessary to prevent the open advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

All the other claims and demanded actions are just window dressing. They are mentioned as auxiliary and ancillary attempts on behalf of Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) to achieve a dominant position over the Israelis.

There was one more thing the panel mentioned that is tricky. Although it sounds good and is actually worth it. That is a veiled demand for the "Right of Return" (RoR). I just checked the factbook on the West Bank:

65 years and over: 3.62% (male 48,387/female 56,650) (2020 est.)​

Life expectancy at birth​

total population: 76.38 years​

male: 74.29 years​

female: 78.6 years (2022 est.)​

​

It is possible for some number of Arab Palestinians (West Bank) to still have once lived in Israel. Some survivors might still be around. But I have not seen any evidence of an organized demand by them. And of those possible survivors, how many of them were once Jordanian Citizens? Making them abandon refugees by Jordan. And of the remainder, how many were members of a terrorist organization, or provided material support to the Hostile Arab Palestinians?

NO!

When you crunch the numbers, you will find very very few actual refugees, under current laws, would pass through the vetting process.

REMEMBER: To take advantage of the "Right of Return" you have to have lived in the place you want to return to. ... "4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country" (Article 12).


.Just My Thoughts,

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

REMEMBER: To take advantage of the "Right of Return" you have to have lived in the place you want to return to. ...

Jews who have never been there can "return" after 2000 years. Few, if any, have ancestors who have ever been there.

 

[USAF 2023]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→. P F Tinmore, et al,

This could not be anymore biased and slanted against Israel. It starts with a preconceived notion that Israel is in the wrong in everything it does.


(COMMENT)
.
Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) are referenced in the sense that their findings are unchallengeable. Well, I challenge the notion. I do not believe that either HRW or AI addresses the pitfalls and hidden agenda.

◈ The hidden agenda here is for Israel to drop its border.
◈ The hidden intent is to "deconstruct" the ability of Israel to establish "defensible borders" for non-government actors to enter Israel in an unrestricted manner.
◈ Dropping the border controls two-fold effect on Israel:

• Weakens the ability to adequately defend against a coordinated assault by Arab League Forces.
• Sets the condition such that the Arab Palestinians can overrun the demographics in Israel, such that they can deconstruct the Jewish National Home.

All the "apartheid" nonsense, the systematic oppression an emotional appeal, and the ever the old standby claim against Israel denying the Arab Palestinians the civil and political rights afforded them by the convention. The discussion, while it did mention the that in the opinion of AI and HRW, Israel violates Articles 2 and 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) which entered into force: on 23 March 1976. The forum contributors conveniently hide the implications agreed to by the International Community (which was emphasized several times) found in Articles 12, 19, 20, 21, and Article 22 dealing with the restrictions, limitations, and exceptions agreed to:

• protections necessary to protect national security, public order,
• protections necessary to protect the public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others.
• Emphasis on the actions necessary to impose lawful restrictions exercised by the members of the armed forces and of the police in their exercise of this right.
• protections necessary to prevent the open advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

All the other claims and demanded actions are just window dressing. They are mentioned as auxiliary and ancillary attempts on behalf of Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) to achieve a dominant position over the Israelis.

There was one more thing the panel mentioned that is tricky. Although it sounds good and is actually worth it. That is a veiled demand for the "Right of Return" (RoR). I just checked the factbook on the West Bank:

65 years and over: 3.62% (male 48,387/female 56,650) (2020 est.)​

Life expectancy at birth​

total population: 76.38 years​

male: 74.29 years​

female: 78.6 years (2022 est.)​

​

It is possible for some number of Arab Palestinians (West Bank) to still have once lived in Israel. Some survivors might still be around. But I have not seen any evidence of an organized demand by them. And of those possible survivors, how many of them were once Jordanian Citizens? Making them abandon refugees by Jordan. And of the remainder, how many were members of a terrorist organization, or provided material support to the Hostile Arab Palestinians?

NO!

When you crunch the numbers, you will find very very few actual refugees, under current laws, would pass through the vetting process.

REMEMBER: To take advantage of the "Right of Return" you have to have lived in the place you want to return to. ... "4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country" (Article 12).


.Just My Thoughts,

Most Respectfully,
R

Why do you even waste time responding? “ Right of Return” with Jews being the minority, having no say in Gov’t, being deprived of their religious sites isn’t going to happen.
Couldn’t stop laughing at his post about how unconcerned Biden was about the Israeli Palestinian Conflict. The man doesn’t even know where he is half the time

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→ ILOVEISRAEL, P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually, the "Right-of-Return" Concept does not apply to the Jews that have never maintained a principal residence in Israel. They have no special right to immigrate to Israel.

(OPENING)
⁜→ P F Tinmore: Please do not confuse the "Law of Return" (LoR) with the "Right of Return" (RoR). They are not the same thing. Not in the least.

◈ FIRST: The LoR is a domestic Immigration Process. The RoR is an International Covenant.​

​

◈ SECOND: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." ​

Why do you even waste time responding?

(COMMENT)
FOR: ILOVEISRAEL

The only reason I respond is to help external observers who might not understand and become confused with the false information (or inaccurate analogies) pro-Arab Palestinians. This becomes especially important when the intention of the rhetorical strategy is an attempt to further the hidden agenda. By using the implication as a false example of (in this specific case) "apartheid" you can imply a double standard. The purpose is generally used to perpetuate the mistaken belief, based on an unsound argument.

This is a very crafty attempt at comparing an eligibility process with a customary right. This type of fallacy has a formal nomenclature. But I have seen the name twisted around in such a way as to imply a directed assault against a party to the discussion. So I do not use it anymore.

BUT, having said all that, I agree that P F Tinmore is a hopelessly lost cause. HE does NOT understand because HE does not want to understand.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→ ILOVEISRAEL, P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually, the "Right-of-Return" Concept does not apply to the Jews that have never maintained a principal residence in Israel. They have no special right to immigrate to Israel.

(OPENING)
⁜→ P F Tinmore: Please do not confuse the "Law of Return" (LoR) with the "Right of Return" (RoR). They are not the same thing. Not in the least.

◈ FIRST: The LoR is a domestic Immigration Process. The RoR is an International Covenant.​

​

◈ SECOND: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." ​

(COMMENT)
FOR: ILOVEISRAEL

The only reason I respond is to help external observers who might not understand and become confused with the false information (or inaccurate analogies) pro-Arab Palestinians. This becomes especially important when the intention of the rhetorical strategy is an attempt to further the hidden agenda. By using the implication as a false example of (in this specific case) "apartheid" you can imply a double standard. The purpose is generally used to perpetuate the mistaken belief, based on an unsound argument.

This is a very crafty attempt at comparing an eligibility process with a customary right. This type of fallacy has a formal nomenclature. But I have seen the name twisted around in such a way as to imply a directed assault against a party to the discussion. So I do not use it anymore.

BUT, having said all that, I agree that P F Tinmore is a hopelessly lost cause. HE does NOT understand because HE does not want to understand.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Readers React: Why Israel can never accept a one-state solution

To the editor: UC Hastings law professor George Bisharat’s piece is an anti-Israel screed cloaked in the garb of democratic progressivism.

www.latimes.com

Second, the great Palestinian intellectual Edward Said argued for the single-state solution, but he never had a good answer to the question of how Jews would fare under Palestinian majority rule.

This is a question he refuses to answer. For this reason alone I find his rants on " Right of Return" amusing

P F Tinmore​

Diamond Member​

JoinedDec 6, 2009Messages66,029Reaction score3,145Points1,815

• Mar 25, 2022
• Add bookmark
• #229

ILOVEISRAEL said:
Please tell us what they did to keep pissing people off. Making excuses for the Holocaust? Still have nothing to say about No Israelis in Palestine or not allowing Israelis at the Western Wall?? Thank you for exposing yourself for the.racist Antisemitic Ignorant Moron that you are

ILOVEISRAEL said:
Please tell us what they did to keep pissing people off. Making excuses for the Holocaust?

Good question. They manage to piss people off wherever they go.

Another one of his rants. Nothing to do with Israel

 

[USAF 2023]

Jews would be killed under Palestinian rule, says Bennett

Economy minister stands firm against Netanyahu's statements, saying that leaving Jewish settlement in a Palestinian state will be a retreat from Zionism.

www.haaretz.com

NEVER AGAIN!

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Words of Propaganda
⁜→ ILOVEISRAEL, P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually, the "Right-of-Return" Concept does not apply to the Jews that have never maintained a principal residence in Israel. They have no special right to immigrate to Israel.

(OPENING)
⁜→ P F Tinmore: Please do not confuse the "Law of Return" (LoR) with the "Right of Return" (RoR). They are not the same thing. Not in the least.

◈ FIRST: The LoR is a domestic Immigration Process. The RoR is an International Covenant.​

​

◈ SECOND: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." ​

(COMMENT)
FOR: ILOVEISRAEL

The only reason I respond is to help external observers who might not understand and become confused with the false information (or inaccurate analogies) pro-Arab Palestinians. This becomes especially important when the intention of the rhetorical strategy is an attempt to further the hidden agenda. By using the implication as a false example of (in this specific case) "apartheid" you can imply a double standard. The purpose is generally used to perpetuate the mistaken belief, based on an unsound argument.

This is a very crafty attempt at comparing an eligibility process with a customary right. This type of fallacy has a formal nomenclature. But I have seen the name twisted around in such a way as to imply a directed assault against a party to the discussion. So I do not use it anymore.

BUT, having said all that, I agree that P F Tinmore is a hopelessly lost cause. HE does NOT understand because HE does not want to understand.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

⁜→ P F Tinmore: Please do not confuse the "Law of Return" (LoR) with the "Right of Return" (RoR). They are not the same thing. Not in the least.

◈ FIRST: The LoR is a domestic Immigration Process. The RoR is an International Covenant.◈ SECOND: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

The "Law of Return" is a domestic immigration issue. The "Right of Return" is an international law issue. It has nothing to do with immigration.

Palestinian children are also Palestinians. Palestine is where they belong.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Randa: What Israel's Apartheid Means for Palestinians​

 

[P F Tinmore]

For decades Palestinians have accused Israel of the crime of Apartheid, imposing two different systems on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea: one system that privileges Jews, and another that discriminates against Palestinians.
Now, the rest of the world is catching up. In the past year, the leading global and Israeli human rights groups have joined their Palestinian counterparts in calling Israel an Apartheid state.
From the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, to Palestinian communities inside Israel, this is a look Inside Israeli Apartheid.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Jonathan Cook on "Is it fair to call Israel an Apartheid State?" v2​

 

[USAF 2023]

Jonathan Cook on "Is it fair to call Israel an Apartheid State?" v2​

YAWN…… No Israelis allowed in Palestine

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israeli Apartheid
SUBTOPIC: Is it correct?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

›Jonathan Cook on "Is it fair to call Israel an Apartheid State?" v2​

(COMMENT)

• To the best of my knowledge, there is no Refugee Camps for Palestinians of Gaza or the West Bank in Israel.
• To the best of my knowledge, the West Bank is OUTSIDE Israeli Sovereign Territory. Every nation on the planet has the right and authority to maintain its borders and entry policy.
• To the best of my knowledge, Israel renounced its claim and unilaterally withdrew from Gaza.
• To the best of my knowledge, the Israeli Palestinians have not made the allegation that Israel is an Apartheid state; concerning their population. (Have you heard something different?)
• To the best of my knowledge, the term "diaspora" is uniquely applied to the dispersion of the Jewish people beyond Israel. To my knowledge, there are less than 100,000 people that are displaced Palestinians from the 1948 Conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

Jonathan Cook on "Is it fair to call Israel an Apartheid State?" v2​

 

[USAF 2023]

YAWN…… No Israelis allowed in Palestine

No Jews Allowed in Palestine

Neither Jordan nor Egypt have laws that forbid the sale of land to Jews nor have they made statements that Jews are unwelcome in their respective countries. Meanwhile Palestinians neither permit the s

www.jewishpress.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2012/11/30/palestinians-israel-settlements-arab-countries-refugees/

Please tell us why the Palestinians aren't welcomed in their Country and why THEY are treated like second Class citizens? Better yet, please tell us why those who want to stop Illegal Immigration in this Country are considered RACIST but they aren't? Your Hypocrisy is actually funny

 

[P F Tinmore]

To the best of my knowledge,

You need to get off of Israeli propaganda..