Palestine Today

[RoccoR]

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

BTW, their terror propaganda flopped.

(COMMENT)

What "terror propaganda" flopped?

You didn't read my post.

Ramallah, March 10, 2020—UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) recanted allegations that Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP) “provides any financial or material support to any terrorist organisation” in a statement on their website. DCIP reached a settlement in its defamation case against UKLFI on Monday.​

(COMMENT)

I don't think you read into the meaning. The judgment was not based on the fact that the PFLP was not a terrorist group, the judgment was based on the connection between the funding from the DCI-P and the PFLP. While the funding may have made it to the PFLP, through an intermediary, the claim of a direct connection between the two is not proven.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[watchingfromafar]

Israel was founded on terrorism, they started it even before 1947 and continue to murder without recourse; even today.

Facts are fact are facts

Before I get banned, I’ll leave you Isrealitis to yourselves; but should you respond to this post I will be forced to respond.
-

 

[toastman]

Israel was founded on terrorism, they started it even before 1947 and continue to murder without recourse; even today.

Facts are fact are facts

Before I get banned, I’ll leave you Isrealitis to yourselves; but should you respond to this post I will be forced to respond.
-

Define terrorism and explain how Israel is partaking in it today

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israel was founded on terrorism, they started it even before 1947 and continue to murder without recourse; even today.

Facts are fact are facts

Before I get banned, I’ll leave you Isrealitis to yourselves; but should you respond to this post I will be forced to respond.
-

Define terrorism and explain how Israel is partaking in it today

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[toastman]

Israel was founded on terrorism, they started it even before 1947 and continue to murder without recourse; even today.

Facts are fact are facts

Before I get banned, I’ll leave you Isrealitis to yourselves; but should you respond to this post I will be forced to respond.
-

Define terrorism and explain how Israel is partaking in it today

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

 

[RoccoR]

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

Well, what "P F Tinmore" is saying is, deceptively correct. There is no one single law that, from an international law perspective, defines "terrorism." But there ARE "19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts" created since the early 1960's.

This nonsense that there "is no international law definition for terrorism" is legal wrangling, worthy of an Arab Palestinian but not the rest of us.

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

(COMMENT)
We know, for instance, that what the Gazans are doing along the Gaza Strip and Israelis border are acts of terrorism under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (1997). So, if you violate (as the Arab Palestinians do on a near-daily basis) the convention, you ARE a terrorist be international definition.

Article 2
1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
​

2. Any person also commits an offence if that person attempts to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

3.Any person also commits an offence if that person:

a.Participates as an accomplice in an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

b.Organizes or directs others to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

c.In any other way contributes to the commission of one or more offences as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such contribution shall be intentional and either be made with the aim of furthering the general criminal activity or purpose of the group or be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the offence or offences concerned.
​

We know, for instance, that the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, through groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in illicit activities such as drug trafficking or gun running; is a violation of the "1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism."

​

This application of the "5th-grade name calling" description is nothing more than the Arab Palestinian trying to make such activities that are encompassed in the 19 Conventions as inconsequential. We all know (that would be everyone except the mentally deficient Arab Palestinian) that the collective disbursal of "explosive or other lethal device" (explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage) is more than just "5th grade name calling." We know this instinctively as reasonable adults. We do not have to reach back to 1938 and the working definition of "acts of terrorism" [Article 1§2 • Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism (1938)] to make that determination. As Hercule Perot would say, the little gray cells are working.

So when are friend P F Tinmore comes back with this "name-calling" slapstick (humorously embarrassing), we can just move-on knowing that --- it means he has no legitimate comeback at all.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Well, what "P F Tinmore" is saying is, deceptively correct. There is no one single law that, from an international law perspective, defines "terrorism." But there ARE "19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts" created since the early 1960's.

This nonsense that there "is no international law definition for terrorism" is legal wrangling, worthy of an Arab Palestinian but not the rest of us.

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

(COMMENT)
We know, for instance, that what the Gazans are doing along the Gaza Strip and Israelis border are acts of terrorism under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (1997). So, if you violate (as the Arab Palestinians do on a near-daily basis) the convention, you ARE a terrorist be international definition.

Article 2
1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
​

2. Any person also commits an offence if that person attempts to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

3.Any person also commits an offence if that person:

a.Participates as an accomplice in an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

b.Organizes or directs others to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

c.In any other way contributes to the commission of one or more offences as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such contribution shall be intentional and either be made with the aim of furthering the general criminal activity or purpose of the group or be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the offence or offences concerned.
​

We know, for instance, that the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, through groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in illicit activities such as drug trafficking or gun running; is a violation of the "1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism."

​

This application of the "5th-grade name calling" description is nothing more than the Arab Palestinian trying to make such activities that are encompassed in the 19 Conventions as inconsequential. We all know (that would be everyone except the mentally deficient Arab Palestinian) that the collective disbursal of "explosive or other lethal device" (explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage) is more than just "5th grade name calling." We know this instinctively as reasonable adults. We do not have to reach back to 1938 and the working definition of "acts of terrorism" [Article 1§2 • Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism (1938)] to make that determination. As Hercule Perot would say, the little gray cells are working.

So when are friend P F Tinmore comes back with this "name-calling" slapstick (humorously embarrassing), we can just move-on knowing that --- it means he has no legitimate comeback at all.


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

 

[P F Tinmore]

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.

SOP for Israel.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[toastman]

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

Well, what "P F Tinmore" is saying is, deceptively correct. There is no one single law that, from an international law perspective, defines "terrorism." But there ARE "19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts" created since the early 1960's.

This nonsense that there "is no international law definition for terrorism" is legal wrangling, worthy of an Arab Palestinian but not the rest of us.

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

(COMMENT)
We know, for instance, that what the Gazans are doing along the Gaza Strip and Israelis border are acts of terrorism under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (1997). So, if you violate (as the Arab Palestinians do on a near-daily basis) the convention, you ARE a terrorist be international definition.

Article 2
1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
​

2. Any person also commits an offence if that person attempts to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

3.Any person also commits an offence if that person:

a.Participates as an accomplice in an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

b.Organizes or directs others to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

c.In any other way contributes to the commission of one or more offences as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such contribution shall be intentional and either be made with the aim of furthering the general criminal activity or purpose of the group or be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the offence or offences concerned.
​

We know, for instance, that the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, through groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in illicit activities such as drug trafficking or gun running; is a violation of the "1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism."

​

This application of the "5th-grade name calling" description is nothing more than the Arab Palestinian trying to make such activities that are encompassed in the 19 Conventions as inconsequential. We all know (that would be everyone except the mentally deficient Arab Palestinian) that the collective disbursal of "explosive or other lethal device" (explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage) is more than just "5th grade name calling." We know this instinctively as reasonable adults. We do not have to reach back to 1938 and the working definition of "acts of terrorism" [Article 1§2 • Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism (1938)] to make that determination. As Hercule Perot would say, the little gray cells are working.

So when are friend P F Tinmore comes back with this "name-calling" slapstick (humorously embarrassing), we can just move-on knowing that --- it means he has no legitimate comeback at all.


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

Yet you’re still scared to tell us what the definition of terrrorism is.

Just like you’re scared to tell us how exactly the Palestinians are ‘defending themselves’....

 

[toastman]

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.

SOP for Israel.

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.

SOP for Israel.

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.

SOP for Israel.

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.

SOP for Israel.

the definition Rocco just gave applies to what the Palestinians do.

They attack Israelis with the intent of causing terror and bodily harm to civilians, in order to achieve a political and/or religious goal.

There is no way around that Tinmore. It is why we see the Palestinians celebrating and handing out candy when Israelis are murdered...

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Well, what "P F Tinmore" is saying is, deceptively correct. There is no one single law that, from an international law perspective, defines "terrorism." But there ARE "19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts" created since the early 1960's.

This nonsense that there "is no international law definition for terrorism" is legal wrangling, worthy of an Arab Palestinian but not the rest of us.

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

(COMMENT)
We know, for instance, that what the Gazans are doing along the Gaza Strip and Israelis border are acts of terrorism under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (1997). So, if you violate (as the Arab Palestinians do on a near-daily basis) the convention, you ARE a terrorist be international definition.

Article 2
1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
​

2. Any person also commits an offence if that person attempts to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

3.Any person also commits an offence if that person:

a.Participates as an accomplice in an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

b.Organizes or directs others to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

c.In any other way contributes to the commission of one or more offences as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such contribution shall be intentional and either be made with the aim of furthering the general criminal activity or purpose of the group or be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the offence or offences concerned.
​

We know, for instance, that the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, through groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in illicit activities such as drug trafficking or gun running; is a violation of the "1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism."

​

This application of the "5th-grade name calling" description is nothing more than the Arab Palestinian trying to make such activities that are encompassed in the 19 Conventions as inconsequential. We all know (that would be everyone except the mentally deficient Arab Palestinian) that the collective disbursal of "explosive or other lethal device" (explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage) is more than just "5th grade name calling." We know this instinctively as reasonable adults. We do not have to reach back to 1938 and the working definition of "acts of terrorism" [Article 1§2 • Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism (1938)] to make that determination. As Hercule Perot would say, the little gray cells are working.

So when are friend P F Tinmore comes back with this "name-calling" slapstick (humorously embarrassing), we can just move-on knowing that --- it means he has no legitimate comeback at all.


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

Yet you’re still scared to tell us what the definition of terrrorism is.

Just like you’re scared to tell us how exactly the Palestinians are ‘defending themselves’....

The international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[35][36] In this regard, Angus Martyn, briefing the Australian parliament, stated,

The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term floundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination.[37]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism#cite_note-Martyn-37

Terrorism - Wikipedia

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[toastman]

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

Well, what "P F Tinmore" is saying is, deceptively correct. There is no one single law that, from an international law perspective, defines "terrorism." But there ARE "19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts" created since the early 1960's.

This nonsense that there "is no international law definition for terrorism" is legal wrangling, worthy of an Arab Palestinian but not the rest of us.

There is no international law definition for terrorism.

It is just a 5th grade name calling thing.

But there is a definition . And it absolutely applies to what the Palestinians do. This is why they will NEVER get what they want ...

(COMMENT)
We know, for instance, that what the Gazans are doing along the Gaza Strip and Israelis border are acts of terrorism under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (1997). So, if you violate (as the Arab Palestinians do on a near-daily basis) the convention, you ARE a terrorist be international definition.

Article 2
1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:

a.With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or

b.With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
​

2. Any person also commits an offence if that person attempts to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

3.Any person also commits an offence if that person:

a.Participates as an accomplice in an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

b.Organizes or directs others to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article; or

c.In any other way contributes to the commission of one or more offences as set forth in paragraph 1 or 2 of the present article by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such contribution shall be intentional and either be made with the aim of furthering the general criminal activity or purpose of the group or be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the offence or offences concerned.
​

We know, for instance, that the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, through groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in illicit activities such as drug trafficking or gun running; is a violation of the "1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism."

​

This application of the "5th-grade name calling" description is nothing more than the Arab Palestinian trying to make such activities that are encompassed in the 19 Conventions as inconsequential. We all know (that would be everyone except the mentally deficient Arab Palestinian) that the collective disbursal of "explosive or other lethal device" (explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage) is more than just "5th grade name calling." We know this instinctively as reasonable adults. We do not have to reach back to 1938 and the working definition of "acts of terrorism" [Article 1§2 • Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism (1938)] to make that determination. As Hercule Perot would say, the little gray cells are working.

So when are friend P F Tinmore comes back with this "name-calling" slapstick (humorously embarrassing), we can just move-on knowing that --- it means he has no legitimate comeback at all.


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

Yet you’re still scared to tell us what the definition of terrrorism is.

Just like you’re scared to tell us how exactly the Palestinians are ‘defending themselves’....

The international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[35][36] In this regard, Angus Martyn, briefing the Australian parliament, stated,

The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term floundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination.[37]​

Terrorism - Wikipedia

From your Link:
Terrorism is, in the broadest sense, the use of intentional violence for political or religious purposes.

Thanks for proving my point

 

[RoccoR]

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

Oh, I see you are just chock-full of original thoughts.

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

(COMMENT)

Israel is no more a terrorist-supporting country than any of the Allied Command has been since the end of WWII. Just because the entire world did not line-up behind this half-assed → half-century-long → phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory, does not mean they the analogy "coal mine calling the kettle black" as relevant - or - even affording a view of the whole circle of reasons why the conflict still rages today.

(WHAT MAKES THE ARAB PALESTINIAN A TERRORIST CULTURE)

In accordance with (IAW) the 'principles of international law’ - not merely jus ad bellum - (the right to use force in a struggle for liberation and self-determination) but also jus in bello - that is → avoidance of the use of force against civilians as required by humanitarian legal principles. Under S/RES/1373 a person who observes humanitarian law principles with respect to mean by which objectives may be achieved in a conflict would be committing acts of terrorism within the meaning of the resolution if they target were civilian or utilizing the presence of civilians to render certain Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) immune from legitimate retaliatory military operations pursuant to any armed conflicts.

The use of civilians by designated HoAP terrorist groups to move forward towards a known demarcation, setup and release airborne explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage, and then file complaints that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) fired on such persons is actual evidence of an intent by the HoAP to use civilians to shield such operations. It would not be the IDF that is the terrorist, but rather the HoAP as the terrorist; pursuant to Article 5 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute, and including crimes against humanity as referred to in Article 7, ICC.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Oh, I see you are just chock-full of original thoughts.

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

(COMMENT)

Israel is no more a terrorist-supporting country than any of the Allied Command has been since the end of WWII. Just because the entire world did not line-up behind this half-assed → half-century-long → phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory, does not mean they the analogy "coal mine calling the kettle black" as relevant - or - even affording a view of the whole circle of reasons why the conflict still rages today.

(WHAT MAKES THE ARAB PALESTINIAN A TERRORIST CULTURE)

In accordance with (IAW) the 'principles of international law’ - not merely jus ad bellum - (the right to use force in a struggle for liberation and self-determination) but also jus in bello - that is → avoidance of the use of force against civilians as required by humanitarian legal principles. Under S/RES/1373 a person who observes humanitarian law principles with respect to mean by which objectives may be achieved in a conflict would be committing acts of terrorism within the meaning of the resolution if they target were civilian or utilizing the presence of civilians to render certain Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) immune from legitimate retaliatory military operations pursuant to any armed conflicts.

The use of civilians by designated HoAP terrorist groups to move forward towards a known demarcation, setup and release airborne explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage, and then file complaints that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) fired on such persons is actual evidence of an intent by the HoAP to use civilians to shield such operations. It would not be the IDF that is the terrorist, but rather the HoAP as the terrorist; pursuant to Article 5 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute, and including crimes against humanity as referred to in Article 7, ICC.


Most Respectfully,
R

You surely view this conflict through Israel's lens.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler colonial project. Settler colonial projects are aggressive by nature. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians did not leave their homes and properties because Israel said please.

The Palestinians have the right to resist this aggression and to return to their homes and properties.

The use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination is not terrorism.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Oh, I see you are just chock-full of original thoughts.

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

(COMMENT)

Israel is no more a terrorist-supporting country than any of the Allied Command has been since the end of WWII. Just because the entire world did not line-up behind this half-assed → half-century-long → phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory, does not mean they the analogy "coal mine calling the kettle black" as relevant - or - even affording a view of the whole circle of reasons why the conflict still rages today.

(WHAT MAKES THE ARAB PALESTINIAN A TERRORIST CULTURE)

In accordance with (IAW) the 'principles of international law’ - not merely jus ad bellum - (the right to use force in a struggle for liberation and self-determination) but also jus in bello - that is → avoidance of the use of force against civilians as required by humanitarian legal principles. Under S/RES/1373 a person who observes humanitarian law principles with respect to mean by which objectives may be achieved in a conflict would be committing acts of terrorism within the meaning of the resolution if they target were civilian or utilizing the presence of civilians to render certain Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) immune from legitimate retaliatory military operations pursuant to any armed conflicts.

The use of civilians by designated HoAP terrorist groups to move forward towards a known demarcation, setup and release airborne explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage, and then file complaints that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) fired on such persons is actual evidence of an intent by the HoAP to use civilians to shield such operations. It would not be the IDF that is the terrorist, but rather the HoAP as the terrorist; pursuant to Article 5 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute, and including crimes against humanity as referred to in Article 7, ICC.


Most Respectfully,
R

phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory,

Your clunker of the day.

Then you, again, base your conclusions on false premise.

Trustees do not acquire territory or sovereignty.

 

[toastman]

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

Oh, I see you are just chock-full of original thoughts.

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

(COMMENT)

Israel is no more a terrorist-supporting country than any of the Allied Command has been since the end of WWII. Just because the entire world did not line-up behind this half-assed → half-century-long → phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory, does not mean they the analogy "coal mine calling the kettle black" as relevant - or - even affording a view of the whole circle of reasons why the conflict still rages today.

(WHAT MAKES THE ARAB PALESTINIAN A TERRORIST CULTURE)

In accordance with (IAW) the 'principles of international law’ - not merely jus ad bellum - (the right to use force in a struggle for liberation and self-determination) but also jus in bello - that is → avoidance of the use of force against civilians as required by humanitarian legal principles. Under S/RES/1373 a person who observes humanitarian law principles with respect to mean by which objectives may be achieved in a conflict would be committing acts of terrorism within the meaning of the resolution if they target were civilian or utilizing the presence of civilians to render certain Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) immune from legitimate retaliatory military operations pursuant to any armed conflicts.

The use of civilians by designated HoAP terrorist groups to move forward towards a known demarcation, setup and release airborne explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage, and then file complaints that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) fired on such persons is actual evidence of an intent by the HoAP to use civilians to shield such operations. It would not be the IDF that is the terrorist, but rather the HoAP as the terrorist; pursuant to Article 5 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute, and including crimes against humanity as referred to in Article 7, ICC.


Most Respectfully,
R

You surely view this conflict through Israel's lens.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler colonial project. Settler colonial projects are aggressive by nature. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians did not leave their homes and properties because Israel said please.

The Palestinians have the right to resist this aggression and to return to their homes and properties.

The use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination is not terrorism.

Interesting. Now if only you could tell us how what the Palestinians are doing is considered ‘resisting’

 

[USAF 2023]

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

Oh, I see you are just chock-full of original thoughts.

Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Chickenfeed compared to Israel's crimes.

(COMMENT)

Israel is no more a terrorist-supporting country than any of the Allied Command has been since the end of WWII. Just because the entire world did not line-up behind this half-assed → half-century-long → phony cause for a conflict to assume control over trustee territory, does not mean they the analogy "coal mine calling the kettle black" as relevant - or - even affording a view of the whole circle of reasons why the conflict still rages today.

(WHAT MAKES THE ARAB PALESTINIAN A TERRORIST CULTURE)

In accordance with (IAW) the 'principles of international law’ - not merely jus ad bellum - (the right to use force in a struggle for liberation and self-determination) but also jus in bello - that is → avoidance of the use of force against civilians as required by humanitarian legal principles. Under S/RES/1373 a person who observes humanitarian law principles with respect to mean by which objectives may be achieved in a conflict would be committing acts of terrorism within the meaning of the resolution if they target were civilian or utilizing the presence of civilians to render certain Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) immune from legitimate retaliatory military operations pursuant to any armed conflicts.

The use of civilians by designated HoAP terrorist groups to move forward towards a known demarcation, setup and release airborne explosive or incendiary weapon or device that is designed, or has the capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury or substantial material damage, and then file complaints that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) fired on such persons is actual evidence of an intent by the HoAP to use civilians to shield such operations. It would not be the IDF that is the terrorist, but rather the HoAP as the terrorist; pursuant to Article 5 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute, and including crimes against humanity as referred to in Article 7, ICC.


Most Respectfully,
R

You surely view this conflict through Israel's lens.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler colonial project. Settler colonial projects are aggressive by nature. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians did not leave their homes and properties because Israel said please.

The Palestinians have the right to resist this aggression and to return to their homes and properties.

The use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination is not terrorism.

The victory march will continue until the Palestinian flag flies in Jerusalem and in all of Palestine. Yasser Arafat Quotes - InspyreApp | Inspyre

Actually, according to " International Law" they don't

Abbas Statement

"We call for the establishment of a system that would guarantee an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital on the 1967 borders."

Notice it states JERUSALEM ? Doesn't say E. Jerusalem or Israel's right to their Religious Sites ( Jewish Quarter) which is SUPPOSED to be protected under " International Law"