Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Sour grapes, talking points, and name calling.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ongoing Nakba: Sheikh Jarrah, Gaza, and Historic Palestine

 

[P F Tinmore]

Dr. Hanan Ashrawi: ‘Two State Solution is Dead, Israel Destroyed It...Palestine Will Not Surrender!’​

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

How Palestinian resistance defeated Israel with Ali Abunimah & Jon Elmer |​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israel lobby's war on ethnic studies with Robin D. G. Kelley and Lara Kiswani​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Abby Martin talks about Gaza, Palestine, Israel, BDS, and her film: Gaza Fights For Freedom​

 

[P F Tinmore]

The US-Israeli Occupation of Palestine with Rania Khalek​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Finkelstein: Gaza assault a disaster for Israel, while Palestine solidarity is revived​

 

[P F Tinmore]

I Will Not Yield My Values: Fired AP Journalist Emily Wilder Speaks Out After Right-Wing Smears​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Hundreds Of Ex-Biden Staffers Publicly Call On Him To Free Palestinians​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli Soldier calls himself a 'Terrorist' when Interviewed.​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israel is bombing Gaza, while extremists ethnically cleanse Palestinians. Ali Abunimah and Rania Khalek join Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté, and Anya Parampil to discuss the colonial violence - and indigenous resistance.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Anti-Israeli Rhetoric
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

PREFACE: I doubt very seriously that any of the commentators and panelists mentioned are looking at the situation objectively.

BLUF: No nation of any consequence is going to continually allow rocket and mortar attacks (now in the thousands) to go unanswered. No nation of any consequence is going to even remotely suggest that they are not permitted to protect their borders or safeguard their citizens. No nation of any consequence is going to even hint at the suggestion that they do not have the right to self-defense from hostile external entities.

Israel is bombing Gaza, while extremists ethnically cleanse Palestinians. Ali Abunimah and Rania Khalek join Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté, and Anya Parampil to discuss the colonial violence - and indigenous resistance.

(THE OBVIOUS)

It is obvious that in each and every significant conflict exchange since the Oslo Accords was initiated by one or another ot the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) Factions.

(COMMENT)

In this segment of the "Grey Zone" (which is depicted as credible news and investigative journalism) starts out in the opening sentence (by Aaron Mate • aaronmate@protonmail.com, holder of the 2019 Izzy Award and a former producer at Al Jazeera English): "this latest Israeli Attack on Gaza."

(OBSERVATION #1)

Between 10 May and 20 May of this year (2021), over 4300 Rockets were fired at Israeli Civilian Population Centers.

Name a single member of the top 25 Developed nations of the world which would find it acceptable?

◈ In 2020 between 23 and 24 February a barrage 90 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 12 November a barrage 190 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 5 May a barrage 200 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 4 May a barrage 250 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ During the year 2018 over 330 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers in 15 separate attacks.​

Since January 2018, over 35 separate rocket or mortar attacks were launched against Israeli Population Centers. Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council would have tolerated that (China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States)? Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council would have allowed a barrage of over 4000 rockets to go unanswered without a significant neutralization operation?

(OBSERVATION #2)

Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council consider border protection and security an "apartheid" measure? Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council consider customs and immigration an "apartheid" measure?

(OBSERVATION #3)

There is no international law against Israeli self-defense.

But there is a number of international laws against HoAP attacks on Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Anti-Israeli Rhetoric
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Israeli Soldier calls himself a 'Terrorist' when Interviewed.​

(MUSE)

I can only wonder what the motivation was here... Was he paid? Did he want his 15 minutes of fame? Was he ticked-off at the IDF for something? What is the rest of the story?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Anti-Israeli Rhetoric
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

PREFACE: I doubt very seriously that any of the commentators and panelists mentioned are looking at the situation objectively.

BLUF: No nation of any consequence is going to continually allow rocket and mortar attacks (now in the thousands) to go unanswered. No nation of any consequence is going to even remotely suggest that they are not permitted to protect their borders or safeguard their citizens. No nation of any consequence is going to even hint at the suggestion that they do not have the right to self-defense from hostile external entities.

Israel is bombing Gaza, while extremists ethnically cleanse Palestinians. Ali Abunimah and Rania Khalek join Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté, and Anya Parampil to discuss the colonial violence - and indigenous resistance.

(THE OBVIOUS)

It is obvious that in each and every significant conflict exchange since the Oslo Accords was initiated by one or another ot the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) Factions.

(COMMENT)

In this segment of the "Grey Zone" (which is depicted as credible news and investigative journalism) starts out in the opening sentence (by Aaron Mate • aaronmate@protonmail.com, holder of the 2019 Izzy Award and a former producer at Al Jazeera English): "this latest Israeli Attack on Gaza."

(OBSERVATION #1)

Between 10 May and 20 May of this year (2021), over 4300 Rockets were fired at Israeli Civilian Population Centers.

Name a single member of the top 25 Developed nations of the world which would find it acceptable?

◈ In 2020 between 23 and 24 February a barrage 90 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 12 November a barrage 190 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 5 May a barrage 200 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ In 2019 on 4 May a barrage 250 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers.​

◈ During the year 2018 over 330 rockets were fired at Israeli Population Centers in 15 separate attacks.​

Since January 2018, over 35 separate rocket or mortar attacks were launched against Israeli Population Centers. Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council would have tolerated that (China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States)? Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council would have allowed a barrage of over 4000 rockets to go unanswered without a significant neutralization operation?

(OBSERVATION #2)

Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council consider border protection and security an "apartheid" measure? Which of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council consider customs and immigration an "apartheid" measure?

(OBSERVATION #3)

There is no international law against Israeli self-defense.

But there is a number of international laws against HoAP attacks on Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Israelis pretend to be intelligent. Why are they stuck on duh bomb'em. That doesn't work. Try something new.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Anti-Israeli Rhetoric
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Israelis pretend to be intelligent. Why are they stuck on duh bomb'em. That doesn't work. Try something new.

(COMMENT)

When you are fighting a fire, and the water you pump onto the fire is not doing the job, you call for more hoses and lay more water onto the fire. When you fight a fire, and you don't completely extinguish it, or it will flare-up after a time - and you'll have to come back and fight the fire again. You must completely extinguish it and make sure the potential for the flare-up is eliminated.

The same is true with terrorist-supporting populations and governments. The rule of "proportionality" says:

Rule 14. Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited.​

​

IF the threat from the terrorist, the terrorist-supporting populations and governments keep recurring, obviously the level of the combat response is not enough to attain a "concrete and direct military advantage" necessary to eliminate the hostile combat threat (objective anticipated) → AND you simply see (as you say) "That doesn't work. Try something new." THAT is when you increase the level of effort (twice as long and twice as hard) to silence the threat.

✪ The concrete and direct military advantage anticipated is: 1) suppress the current threat, and 2) eliminate the will to fight and silence that which will continue the struggle.

One thing is for sure: Israel cannot be accused of excessive use of force. WHY? (RHETORICAL) Because the threat keeps re immerging from the hostile force. The concrete and direct military advantage was never achieved.

(SIDEBAR)

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict has continued for all these many years because the Israelis have been so heavily criticized for the combat force that they did apply.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]