Palestine Today

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Not enough information of a specific event or activity about the home or resident.

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, What am I dodging?

You are still dodging my post.

v/r
R

How can somebody at home be an aggressor?

(COMMENT)

These are not real questions. They have no context.

• Who is in what home?
• Where is that home?
  
• What parties are involved?
• What activities are happening in the home?
• What external police or security event lead to the home being under investigation?

In general, all things being otherwise legal, a person in a residential dwelling is not normally considered the aggressor. But the meaning of aggressor in your question is dubious. I suspect it is designed to be impossible to answer.

If you are talking about evictions (displaced people), that is not a case related to "aggressor" activity. That is another matter entirely. That is usually sparked by some political action or event.

There are cases (1948 War) in which there is a matter of rear areas from extremely vulnerable but hostile residents (you don't wait for them to attack, you move them). Israeli rear area security must counteract the adverse effects on logistics and communications lines from Arab Palestinians that remain behind.

Your six-word question is not a question, but some sort of word game.

Most Respectfully,
R

All that for a one liner question. How about just an answer?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I'll give a straight-up answer if you give a straight-up question.

Your six-word question is not a question, but some sort of word game.

All that for a one liner question. How about just an answer?

(COMMENT)

As I said, the term "aggressor" and the venue of "home" in your question are not compatible with the definition of one or the other. (I think you mean "threat.")

In the 1948 War, the Arab League, representing the Arab Palestinians, attacked first. (A/RES/29/3314 - Definition of Aggression )

The question requires more explanation than the trick you are using.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I'll give a straight-up answer if you give a straight-up question.

Your six-word question is not a question, but some sort of word game.

All that for a one liner question. How about just an answer?

(COMMENT)

As I said, the term "aggressor" and the venue of "home" in your question are not compatible with the definition of one or the other. (I think you mean "threat.")

In the 1948 War, the Arab League, representing the Arab Palestinians, attacked first. (A/RES/29/3314 - Definition of Aggression )

The question requires more explanation than the trick you are using.

Most Respectfully,
R

Jeese, Rocco, simple question. How can you attack someone from your home? How is that physically possible?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rashida Tlaib, the first Palestinian and Muslim congresswomem speaks

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Jeese, Rocco, simple question. How can you attack someone from your home? How is that physically possible?

(COMMENT)

Different question.

Answer: By using a weapon from the home, which has a reach beyond the home.

Example: Any Arab Palestinian that by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and wilfully, provides or collects funds with the intention and knowledge that they are to be used, in full or in part, to carry out an act intended to harm the Occupying Power, is such an attack carried from the home.

And then it goes on from there. → If the home is used as a safe haven or as cover and concealment support, a facility to support terrorist acts.

Families that recieves financial gain by sending family members to participate in a terrorist act is essentially profit for hire.

In 1948, the Arab Leaders new that Arab Palestinian Residents would pose a fifth columnist threat. And, of course, we don't want to forget to comply with Customary and International Humanitarian Law:

​

Without context, you may think you wrote a question when you really didn't. And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Most Respectfully,
R​

 

[Hollie]

 

[Shusha]

And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Of course. His base position is that the Arab Palestinians have no requirement to follow international law or refrain from illegal violence because Arab Palestinians are "right" (or "home") and therefore the laws do not apply to them. This is especially true in the shadow of his second position which is that the Jewish people have no rights in law (not to life, let alone to self-determination or return) because their mere presence is "wrong".

 

[USAF 2023]

And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Of course. His base position is that the Arab Palestinians have no requirement to follow international law or refrain from illegal violence because Arab Palestinians are "right" (or "home") and therefore the laws do not apply to them. This is especially true in the shadow of his second position which is that the Jewish people have no rights in law (not to life, let alone to self-determination or return) because their mere presence is "wrong".

If they have no Rights in Law then they have no reason to follow “ International Law”. Funny how he picks and chooses ; What he “ agrees” with
Regarding U.N. Resolutions he constantly spouts but what he doesn’t agree with all of a sudden there is quiet

 

[Shusha]

And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Of course. His base position is that the Arab Palestinians have no requirement to follow international law or refrain from illegal violence because Arab Palestinians are "right" (or "home") and therefore the laws do not apply to them. This is especially true in the shadow of his second position which is that the Jewish people have no rights in law (not to life, let alone to self-determination or return) because their mere presence is "wrong".

If they have no Rights in Law then they have no reason to follow “ International Law”. Funny how he picks and chooses ; What he “ agrees” with
Regarding U.N. Resolutions he constantly spouts but what he doesn’t agree with all of a sudden there is quiet

Tell me about it. He ignores a lot of my posts because he doesn't want to reveal his hypocrisy even though it's obvious to all of us.

 

[USAF 2023]

And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Of course. His base position is that the Arab Palestinians have no requirement to follow international law or refrain from illegal violence because Arab Palestinians are "right" (or "home") and therefore the laws do not apply to them. This is especially true in the shadow of his second position which is that the Jewish people have no rights in law (not to life, let alone to self-determination or return) because their mere presence is "wrong".

If they have no Rights in Law then they have no reason to follow “ International Law”. Funny how he picks and chooses ; What he “ agrees” with
Regarding U.N. Resolutions he constantly spouts but what he doesn’t agree with all of a sudden there is quiet

Tell me about it. He ignores a lot of my posts because he doesn't want to reveal his hypocrisy even though it's obvious to all of us.

I have mentioned several times that the PA just RECENTLY announced the Jews had NO Rights to the Western Wall and of course there is no response. This is only ONE small example. Why should he be taken seriously ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Jeese, Rocco, simple question. How can you attack someone from your home? How is that physically possible?

(COMMENT)

Different question.

Answer: By using a weapon from the home, which has a reach beyond the home.

Example: Any Arab Palestinian that by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and wilfully, provides or collects funds with the intention and knowledge that they are to be used, in full or in part, to carry out an act intended to harm the Occupying Power, is such an attack carried from the home.

And then it goes on from there. → If the home is used as a safe haven or as cover and concealment support, a facility to support terrorist acts.

Families that recieves financial gain by sending family members to participate in a terrorist act is essentially profit for hire.

In 1948, the Arab Leaders new that Arab Palestinian Residents would pose a fifth columnist threat. And, of course, we don't want to forget to comply with Customary and International Humanitarian Law:

View attachment 227337
​

Without context, you may think you wrote a question when you really didn't. And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Most Respectfully,
R​

Now you are being silly.

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Jeese, Rocco, simple question. How can you attack someone from your home? How is that physically possible?

(COMMENT)

Different question.

Answer: By using a weapon from the home, which has a reach beyond the home.

Example: Any Arab Palestinian that by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and wilfully, provides or collects funds with the intention and knowledge that they are to be used, in full or in part, to carry out an act intended to harm the Occupying Power, is such an attack carried from the home.

And then it goes on from there. → If the home is used as a safe haven or as cover and concealment support, a facility to support terrorist acts.

Families that recieves financial gain by sending family members to participate in a terrorist act is essentially profit for hire.

In 1948, the Arab Leaders new that Arab Palestinian Residents would pose a fifth columnist threat. And, of course, we don't want to forget to comply with Customary and International Humanitarian Law:

View attachment 227337
​

Without context, you may think you wrote a question when you really didn't. And I suspect that no matter what answer I attempted to offer, you would find an objection to.

Most Respectfully,
R​

Now you are being silly.

Nice deflection.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rashida Tlaib Will WIN: What Will She Do In Congress?

 

[Hollie]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rashida Tlaib, Activist, Attorney, and Congressional Candidate in Michigan | MAKERS

 

[Hollie]

 

[P F Tinmore]

"I Heart Hamas: And Other Things I'm Afraid to Tell You." Interview With Jennifer Jajeh

 

[P F Tinmore]

Fatin Jarara, Don't Tour Apartheid Israel Press Conference

 

[P F Tinmore]

“Administrative Detention Order of Khalida Jarrar Confirmed”