Rock throwing kids face 20 years in jail. Not even Apartheid South Africa tried this.

[P F Tinmore]

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

 

[Daniyel]

So why do people, time and time again, go to where they get stones thrown at them?

That is a stupid thing to do.

That is a very stupid question but have it your way, it all for the same reason people go to where they get 20 years in prison for throwing rocks, they like it here.

 

[P F Tinmore]

So why do people, time and time again, go to where they get stones thrown at them?

That is a stupid thing to do.

That is a very stupid question but have it your way, it all for the same reason people go to where they get 20 years in prison for throwing rocks, they like it here.

They don't go anywhere. They throw rocks at foreigners who go to them.

 

[Anathema]

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

Indeed, the assholes in Israel are very good at killing people.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

...there have been several cases of serious injuries and even deaths from the attacks.

And if something like that occurs as a result, fine, but to ruin someone's life simply for throwing rocks?

 

[Roadrunner]

...there have been several cases of serious injuries and even deaths from the attacks.

Like duh, Middle Easterners have been stoning people to death since before writing.

Sling hurled rocks should be met with machine gun fire.

 

[Roadrunner]

2 years max is clearly not enough.
We are not talking about kids throwing small gravel, but adult men and teens throwing rocks the size of baseballs. I would say that could even be shown as attempted murder if thrown directly at people.
Thread fail.

They don't THROW them, they HURL them with slings.

A sling hurled rock is a deadly weapon.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

Indeed, the assholes in Israel are very good at killing people.

(COMMENT)

There are very few places in the world where death by blunt force trauma (a severe traumatic episode caused to the body or head with the sudden introduction of a blunt instrument) is not in the family of felony assault (manslaughter - homicide - depraved indifference to life). In fact, in some Islamic States, it is considered a legitimate form of execution (Stoning: a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until death ensues).

• To the Question: What is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners? (P F Tinmore)
  • To the Answer: It is a punishable violation of Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
    • Example: The Fourth Geneva Convention Excerpts

• 
  Article 68: Protected persons (the Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (the Israelis), but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. .... .... ...
  
  The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power (the Israelis) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person (the Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (the Israelis) or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began (1967 - Jordanian Law).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

Indeed, the assholes in Israel are very good at killing people.

And the single digit IQ Palestinians are great at continuously doing things that get them killed, whining about it, then still doing it.

 

[member]

So why do people, time and time again, go to where they get stones thrown at them?

That is a stupid thing to do.

that world [the arab/muslim world] the men, You....tribal leaders, supreme leaders, the terrorists "and the rest...."

ALL cut from the same cloth...............................

.... it's no wonder ..it is what it is (that world)....know what i mean ? i know YOU know what I mean........you piece of cloth.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

Indeed, the assholes in Israel are very good at killing people.

(COMMENT)

There are very few places in the world where death by blunt force trauma (a severe traumatic episode caused to the body or head with the sudden introduction of a blunt instrument) is not in the family of felony assault (manslaughter - homicide - depraved indifference to life). In fact, in some Islamic States, it is considered a legitimate form of execution (Stoning: a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until death ensues).

• To the Question: What is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners? (P F Tinmore)
  • To the Answer: It is a punishable violation of Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
    • Example: The Fourth Geneva Convention Excerpts

• 
  Article 68: Protected persons (the Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (the Israelis), but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. .... .... ...
  
  The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power (the Israelis) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person (the Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (the Israelis) or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began (1967 - Jordanian Law).

Most Respectfully,
R

You keep bringing that up without the background of the responsibilities of an occupying power and how Israel does not fit in that category.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

BTW, what is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners?

Nothing. So long as you're willing to get shot dead for doing it.

Indeed, the assholes in Israel are very good at killing people.

(COMMENT)

There are very few places in the world where death by blunt force trauma (a severe traumatic episode caused to the body or head with the sudden introduction of a blunt instrument) is not in the family of felony assault (manslaughter - homicide - depraved indifference to life). In fact, in some Islamic States, it is considered a legitimate form of execution (Stoning: a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until death ensues).

• To the Question: What is wrong with throwing stones at invading foreigners? (P F Tinmore)
  • To the Answer: It is a punishable violation of Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
    • Example: The Fourth Geneva Convention Excerpts

• 
  Article 68: Protected persons (the Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (the Israelis), but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. .... .... ...
  
  The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power (the Israelis) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person (the Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (the Israelis) or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began (1967 - Jordanian Law).

Most Respectfully,
R

You keep bringing that up without the background of the responsibilities of an occupying power and how Israel does not fit in that category.

your response, as usual, has nothing to do with Rocco's post.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Either the Palestinian State is Occupied, as in the "territory occupied since 1967;" or it is not.

You keep bringing that up without the background of the responsibilities of an occupying power and how Israel does not fit in that category.

(COMMENT)

So, if Israel is not the "Occupying Power," then the State of Palestine is not occupied by Israel and there is no complaint on that score.

You cannot claim that Israel is not the Occupying Power on one hand --- and then --- on the other hand, claim to be part of the Resistance to Israeli Occupation. Either Israel is the Occupation Power --- or it is not an Occupation Power. You cannot have it both ways.

Please understand the ramifications of your answer.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Either the Palestinian State is Occupied, as in the "territory occupied since 1967;" or it is not.

You keep bringing that up without the background of the responsibilities of an occupying power and how Israel does not fit in that category.

(COMMENT)

So, if Israel is not the "Occupying Power," then the State of Palestine is not occupied by Israel and there is no complaint on that score.

You cannot claim that Israel is not the Occupying Power on one hand --- and then --- on the other hand, claim to be part of the Resistance to Israeli Occupation. Either Israel is the Occupation Power --- or it is not an Occupation Power. You cannot have it both ways.

Please understand the ramifications of your answer.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have to look at the different phases of aggression.

Invading power. Yes.

Colonial power. Yes.

Occupying power. A little sometimes.

 

[toastman]

A stone has become a fire bomb, hey IDF men , just say they shot a fire bomb at you.

No you incompetent moron. Palestinian throw fire bombs

 

[Daniyel]

So now they are literally supporting violence and involvement of kids..hm..something is very wrong with this people.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, this is merely a pro-Palestinian stance, for which they refuse to take through the agreed upon dispute process.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Either the Palestinian State is Occupied, as in the "territory occupied since 1967;" or it is not.

You keep bringing that up without the background of the responsibilities of an occupying power and how Israel does not fit in that category.

(COMMENT)

So, if Israel is not the "Occupying Power," then the State of Palestine is not occupied by Israel and there is no complaint on that score.

You cannot claim that Israel is not the Occupying Power on one hand --- and then --- on the other hand, claim to be part of the Resistance to Israeli Occupation. Either Israel is the Occupation Power --- or it is not an Occupation Power. You cannot have it both ways.

Please understand the ramifications of your answer.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have to look at the different phases of aggression.

Invading power. Yes.

Colonial power. Yes.

Occupying power. A little sometimes.

(COMMENT)

Acts of Aggression are defined by A/RES/3314(XXIX) 14 December 1974 --- Definition of Aggression. It is important to note that the codification comes seven (7) years after the Six-Day War [ex post facto application ("after the facts")]. It is also just as important to remember that the codification came during the periods in which the West Bank was Israeli Occupied Jordanian Territory and the Israeli Occupation of the Egyptian Military Governorship of Gaza.

• Question of: Invading power.
  • Israel did not invade and occupy Palestinian Territory in 1967. The Arab Palestinian has no real cause of action against the Israeli relative to the establishment of the occupation.
    • West Bank was Jordanian Territory
    • Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship
• Question of: Colonial power.
  • In 1979 the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace. (Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel)
  • In 1994, the international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967. (The Treaty of Peace between the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan)
    
  • Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (sole representatives of the Palestinian People) negotiated certain arrangements pertaining to Area "C" [includes all Israeli settlements (cities, towns, and villages)] in the Oslo Accords [Oslo I (1993); Oslo II (1995)].
    • In order to guarantee public order and internal security for the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Council shall establish a strong police force as set out in Article XIV below. Israel shall continue to carry the responsibility for defense against external threats, including the responsibility for protecting the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, and for defense against external threats from the sea and from the air, as well as the responsibility for overall security of Israelis and Settlements, for the purpose of safeguarding their internal security and public order, and will have all the powers to take the steps necessary to meet this responsibility.
• Question of: Occupying power.
  • Occupation may be defined as the effective control of a foreign territory by hostile armed forces. This definition derives from Article 42 of the Hague Regulations of 1907, which states that “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”
    • The Gaza Strip occupation ended in 2005.
    • Area "C" of the West Bank is "Occupied" under the permanent status of negotiations pursuant to the Oslo Accords.
    • Areas "A" and "B" area questionable, as current law does not delineate such circumstances. An argument can be made that Israel has some measure of effective control in Area "B."

There is an argument to be made as to whether or not the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) represents a true hostile armed forces. The argument is based on the fact that Israeli Occupation is NOT founded on the subjugation of the Palestinian people, or exerting domination and exploitation that constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation. On the contrary, the IDF and Israeli Occupation is based on the suppression of Hostile Arab Palestinians the have declared Jihad against Israeli sovereignty; threatening the peace through the use of force and harboring terrorist and insurgents that target Israeli citizens.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

The Israelis will soon make raising one's voice at a Jew a crime punishable by prison time.



Ministers okay bill jailing stone throwers for 20 years

Read more: Ministers okay bill jailing stone throwers for 20 years | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/ministers-okay-bill-jailing-stone-throwers-for-20-years/#ixzz3Hv7KAgaa
Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook

So you think attempted murder should not be punished because in is ISLAMONAZI TERRORISTS taking part ?

 

[Phoenall]

Meh. I'd have sentenced them to DEATH, on the spot, sans trial; so they're getting off pretty easy as I see it.

Typical of child killers.

So how would you deal with attempted murder then ?