Palestine Today

[RoccoR]

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

It is a rigged question.

Foreign troops attacking the locals. How is that not an invasion?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis were not the foreign troops and the territory was not sovereign Arab Palestinian.

I know that you like to think this way, because it fits your scenario, BUT once again, the Arab Palestinians:

◈ Had NO sovereignty invaded.

◈ Were NOT a party to the conflict as either a waring party or a political entity under siege.​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

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

(POINT)

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Technically we are discussing "Acts of Aggression" (political terminology) or "nuisance per se" (international legal terminology):

✦ (political terminology)

"Aggression" is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

✦ (international legal terminology)

"nuisance per se" is an act, occupation, or structure that is a nuisance at all times and under any circumstances, regardless of its location
or surroundings; acts that are denounced as illegal by law, when perpetration of them invades rights of others. From
an evidentiary point of view once a nuisance per se is established by proof, it becomes a nuisance as a matter of
law.​

I recommend that you either go all one way or all the other way; but not mix and match (propaganda manipulation). The reason you never see it put in this fashion is that the initial assault by the Forces of the Arab League (May 1948) would come under the heading of "nuisance per se" placing them unequivocally outside the law. The international political body nor the international courts want to make such a commitment. They would rather it be held in abeyance pending further investigation (now in its seventh decade).


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

This is true, as far as it goes.

Rocco, most stone throwing is, despite bad outcomes, the result of angry kids...not terrorism, right?

But if the intent is to terrorize a particular group of people...then it becomes terrorism doesn’t it? So if Palestinians do it for that reason and Jews do it for that reason,they are the same, yes?

(COMMENT)

The "stone-throwing" is NOT an "act of terrorism" (in and by itself). It is a "criminal act" that results in the support, facilitates of terrorist activity; or encouraging terrorist activities.

Stone-throwing is also used as a means to incite further violence. In some cases, "stone-throwing" is an action that is specifically designed to be a media event contrived and choreographed for maximum presentation for a propaganda effect of exaggerated events.

Remember, "stone-throwing" is against International Humanitarian Law. It is not justified action or response to enforcement of law and order by any force construed to be an "Occupying Power."

₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪​

I have noticed that the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians movements like to portray the Arab Palestinian as victims using "stone-throwing" against a foreign oppressor as a lawful sign of displeasure. Conditioning the statement as if the act were legal and the Israeli response against the assault is illegal. Such an interpretation is 180º out of phase with the truth.


Most Respectfully,
R

Remember, "stone-throwing" is against International Humanitarian Law.

Bullshit! It is a time honored means of resisting oppression.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

(POINT)

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Technically we are discussing "Acts of Aggression" (political terminology) or "nuisance per se" (international legal terminology):

✦ (political terminology)

"Aggression" is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

✦ (international legal terminology)

"nuisance per se" is an act, occupation, or structure that is a nuisance at all times and under any circumstances, regardless of its location
or surroundings; acts that are denounced as illegal by law, when perpetration of them invades rights of others. From
an evidentiary point of view once a nuisance per se is established by proof, it becomes a nuisance as a matter of
law.​

I recommend that you either go all one way or all the other way; but not mix and match (propaganda manipulation). The reason you never see it put in this fashion is that the initial assault by the Forces of the Arab League (May 1948) would come under the heading of "nuisance per se" placing them unequivocally outside the law. The international political body nor the international courts want to make such a commitment. They would rather it be held in abeyance pending further investigation (now in its seventh decade).


Most Respectfully,
R

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Foreigners went to Palestine, drove the people out at the point of a gun and stole their land.

What is complex?

 

[USAF 2023]

My point, of course, is that the only Palestinians who are shot are terrorists and then only when it is not possible to subdue them without putting others in danger. You, of course, are only capable of seeing this situation in racist terms.

That isn’t true. Non terrorists have been shot, though to be fair, compared to many, the IDF is exceedingly careful of civilian casualties.

How many homes of Jewish terrorists have been bulldozed? I will wait.

Oh...and enlighten me on all this supposed racism because I am not seeing it.

Besides Baruch Goldstein, how many Jewish terrorists have there been?

If stone throwers are terrorists then the ones that have lobbed stones at Palestinians, including one that killed a Palestinian mother; the ones that kidnapped an Arab boy, poured gasoline on him and burned him alive; the ones that firebombed a house in Duma killing most of the family inside. If you consider non lethal assaults and property destruction to be terrorism then there are more examples.

Did any Jewish terrorist homes get bulldozed?

Very conveniently, you seem to “forget “ the above was in response to the three Israeli boys kidnapped by Hamas and murdered

When you say something like that, it implies that that some how excuses it or justifies it.

It does not matter one bit what was in response to. The boy that was murdered did nothing to deserve it.

Neither did the three boys that were murdered. Why didn’t you mention them ? Because Jewish lives do not matter

 

[RoccoR]

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

You cannot believe it. I understand. But the law is totally opposed to your concept of "right and wrong (AKA: The Rule of Law).

Remember, "stone-throwing" is against International Humanitarian Law.

Bullshit! It is a time honored means of resisting oppression.

(COMMENT)

I have copied Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention more than two-dozen times for you. It does not matter how you wrap it, or paint it, the fact is that YOU are wrong in two ways:

◈ By furthering the notion that such actions as "stone-throwing" are legal ("time-honored") is a form of encouragement of those that prone to such actions.

◈ By furthering the notion that "stone-throwing" (solely intended to harm the Occupying Power) is not illegal, you are abandoning Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in favor of an afront to Article 43 Hague Regulation on matters of public order and safety.

Your encouragement of such harmful acts of defiance is understood, given the irrational, emotional and lack of intellectual development of the Arab Palestinian community. But that does not mean that it is any less improper or illegal to conduct intentional offenses which can cause serious injury or death.

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Foreigners went to Palestine, drove the people out at the point of a gun and stole their land.

What is complex?

(COMMENT)

Because your perspective is missing bits of key information.

◈ "Foreigners went to Palestine" → the bits missing are:

✦ Foreign Forces went to Palestine as a part of the greater effort to defeat the Ottoman Empire in the course of combating the Axis Powers in the Great War (World War One - WWI).​

◈ "drove the people out at the point of a gun" → the bits missing are:

✦ It is generally the case that major conflicts throughout history have an unintended consequence of creating genuine refugees and displaced persons.​

◈ "stole their land" → the bits missing are:

✦ The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounces all rights to the territories situated outside the frontier of Turkey.

✦ The territories and islands released by Treaty to the Allied Powers.

✦ The future of the renounced territories and islands to be settled by the parties concerned.​

Your attempt to simplify the issues on the "Question of Palestine" does not come even remotely close to the key issues in hand.

REMEMBER: The 1967 Six-Day War started when the Arab League Forces renounced the Armistice Agreement and evicted the UN Emergency Force (Sinai Desert) between Egypt and Israel. The 1967 Six-Day War was not a separate war of its own, but the renewed engagement of enemy forces precipitated by the 1948 Israeli War of Independence. The 1967 Six-Day War was concluded in stages, with the first in 1979 with the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel. The second stage was marked by the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed in October 1994.

(EPILOG)

How has the Hostile Arab Palestinian worked for them, and helped them accomplish their goal?

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

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

You cannot believe it. I understand. But the law is totally opposed to your concept of "right and wrong (AKA: The Rule of Law).

Remember, "stone-throwing" is against International Humanitarian Law.

Bullshit! It is a time honored means of resisting oppression.

(COMMENT)

I have copied Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention more than two-dozen times for you. It does not matter how you wrap it, or paint it, the fact is that YOU are wrong in two ways:

◈ By furthering the notion that such actions as "stone-throwing" are legal ("time-honored") is a form of encouragement of those that prone to such actions.

◈ By furthering the notion that "stone-throwing" (solely intended to harm the Occupying Power) is not illegal, you are abandoning Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in favor of an afront to Article 43 Hague Regulation on matters of public order and safety.

Your encouragement of such harmful acts of defiance is understood, given the irrational, emotional and lack of intellectual development of the Arab Palestinian community. But that does not mean that it is any less improper or illegal to conduct intentional offenses which can cause serious injury or death.

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Foreigners went to Palestine, drove the people out at the point of a gun and stole their land.

What is complex?

(COMMENT)

Because your perspective is missing bits of key information.

◈ "Foreigners went to Palestine" → the bits missing are:

✦ Foreign Forces went to Palestine as a part of the greater effort to defeat the Ottoman Empire in the course of combating the Axis Powers in the Great War (World War One - WWI).​

◈ "drove the people out at the point of a gun" → the bits missing are:

✦ It is generally the case that major conflicts throughout history have an unintended consequence of creating genuine refugees and displaced persons.​

◈ "stole their land" → the bits missing are:

✦ The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounces all rights to the territories situated outside the frontier of Turkey.

✦ The territories and islands released by Treaty to the Allied Powers.

✦ The future of the renounced territories and islands to be settled by the parties concerned.​

Your attempt to simplify the issues on the "Question of Palestine" does not come even remotely close to the key issues in hand.

REMEMBER: The 1967 Six-Day War started when the Arab League Forces renounced the Armistice Agreement and evicted the UN Emergency Force (Sinai Desert) between Egypt and Israel. The 1967 Six-Day War was not a separate war of its own, but the renewed engagement of enemy forces precipitated by the 1948 Israeli War of Independence. The 1967 Six-Day War was concluded in stages, with the first in 1979 with the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel. The second stage was marked by the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed in October 1994.

(EPILOG)

How has the Hostile Arab Palestinian worked for them, and helped them accomplish their goal?

View attachment 293737
​

Most Respectfully,
R

What could be worse then stating ( as he did in one of my posts) that Israel initiated the 67 War?

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

You cannot believe it. I understand. But the law is totally opposed to your concept of "right and wrong (AKA: The Rule of Law).

Remember, "stone-throwing" is against International Humanitarian Law.

Bullshit! It is a time honored means of resisting oppression.

(COMMENT)

I have copied Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention more than two-dozen times for you. It does not matter how you wrap it, or paint it, the fact is that YOU are wrong in two ways:

◈ By furthering the notion that such actions as "stone-throwing" are legal ("time-honored") is a form of encouragement of those that prone to such actions.

◈ By furthering the notion that "stone-throwing" (solely intended to harm the Occupying Power) is not illegal, you are abandoning Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in favor of an afront to Article 43 Hague Regulation on matters of public order and safety.

Your encouragement of such harmful acts of defiance is understood, given the irrational, emotional and lack of intellectual development of the Arab Palestinian community. But that does not mean that it is any less improper or illegal to conduct intentional offenses which can cause serious injury or death.

You are attempting to use a "layman's term" (invade) and apply it to a complex question.

Foreigners went to Palestine, drove the people out at the point of a gun and stole their land.

What is complex?

(COMMENT)

Because your perspective is missing bits of key information.

◈ "Foreigners went to Palestine" → the bits missing are:

✦ Foreign Forces went to Palestine as a part of the greater effort to defeat the Ottoman Empire in the course of combating the Axis Powers in the Great War (World War One - WWI).​

◈ "drove the people out at the point of a gun" → the bits missing are:

✦ It is generally the case that major conflicts throughout history have an unintended consequence of creating genuine refugees and displaced persons.​

◈ "stole their land" → the bits missing are:

✦ The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounces all rights to the territories situated outside the frontier of Turkey.

✦ The territories and islands released by Treaty to the Allied Powers.

✦ The future of the renounced territories and islands to be settled by the parties concerned.​

Your attempt to simplify the issues on the "Question of Palestine" does not come even remotely close to the key issues in hand.

REMEMBER: The 1967 Six-Day War started when the Arab League Forces renounced the Armistice Agreement and evicted the UN Emergency Force (Sinai Desert) between Egypt and Israel. The 1967 Six-Day War was not a separate war of its own, but the renewed engagement of enemy forces precipitated by the 1948 Israeli War of Independence. The 1967 Six-Day War was concluded in stages, with the first in 1979 with the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel. The second stage was marked by the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed in October 1994.

(EPILOG)

How has the Hostile Arab Palestinian worked for them, and helped them accomplish their goal?

View attachment 293737
​

Most Respectfully,
R

in favor of an afront to Article 43 Hague Regulation on matters of public order and safety.

There you go again with another false premise. Israel has never been about public order and safety. It has always been about ethnic cleansing and land theft.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestinian elderly Fadel Hamdan from Jab'a village in central West Bank was assaulted and beaten up by Zionist Israeli settlers while he was trying to prevent them from stealing his olives !

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Now this cute little girl can hug her dad after 11 months of prison in Israeli occupation jails.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Ethnic Cleansing Started Before the War—500+ Palestinian towns and villages were depopulated by Zionist forces in the Nakba (1947-49). Nearly half were depopulated before Arab military forces entered the conflict.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli occupation forces arrest a Palestinian girl during a protest staged by a group of youths in Jerusalem in solidarity with the Palestinian prisoner Samer al-Arabeed who was severely tortured by Israeli interrogators and is currently in a coma in an Israeli hospital.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestinian chef Joudie Kalla to attend Palestine Expo 2019

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[toomuchtime_]

And now her parents will train her to be a terrorist in the hope she will be killed in a terror attack against Jews so that the can collect the a pension from the PA's martyr fund. It appears that among Palestinians raising children is consider a cash crop.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

No goons with guns.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Now this cute little girl can hug her dad after 11 months of prison in Israeli occupation jails.

To you, all Palestinian Arabs are victims and all Israeli Jews are criminals and thieves. You're so extreme that you don't even recognize israel proper. You are completely and 100% one-sided. I don't even know what dog you have in this fight since you claim to be from Scandinavian descent. It seems you spend all your time scouring the bowels of the Internet, in order to put up images to portray Israel and its citizens in the worst light possible. My grandparents and other relatives were forced to leave Europe after WW2, and they had no place to go to besides Israel. They were denied visas to America at that time. Besides that, every nook and cranny in Israel is filled with Jewish history. In fact, most of the Arab names of cities and towns were taken from Jewish names and then Arabicized.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Life Under Occupation.

Israeli occupation soldier detain number of Palestinian youths after raiding Dair Netham village .