Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come-on.

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

I don't really. It is just that the Palestinians are pikers compared to Israel's terrorism. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Yet Israel throws around the terrorist label like candy at a blossom time parade.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, especially post-1967, have been whiners and crybabies about being on the wrong side of the law. They start a fistfight and whiny when they get thumped. They are offered opportunities to resolve the issues, and turn-them down saying: We have the right to turn-down unfair offers. And as the rekindle the conflict, they cry it is unfair for the Israelis to defend themselves.

Each rocket fired into Israel is just another brick in the wall of evidence of the Arab Palestinians intentionally and programmed policy of launching attacks in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression. And while the two Arab League Nations that actually occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip have made peace with Israel, the Arab Palestinians never have; instead asking that ALL of (what they considered) Palestine be turned over to them (essentially a surrender).

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression. It is unreasonable to assume that Israel should surrender any part of the territory. While it is relatively clear that Israel does not want the West Bank and Gaza Strip, assessing each of them as an economic and parasitic albatross, the Arab League aggressors have used the territory as a gateway for invasions. And while today, about two-thirds of the borders are internationally recognized via treaty, the degree of strategic uncertainty for Israel,
given current political views of the Arab League around it, is in flux. This is just one of the simplified considerations included in the question of "defensible borders."

Most Respectfully,
R

We have the right to turn-down unfair offers.​

Are they required to accept offers that suck?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come-on.

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

I don't really. It is just that the Palestinians are pikers compared to Israel's terrorism. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Yet Israel throws around the terrorist label like candy at a blossom time parade.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, especially post-1967, have been whiners and crybabies about being on the wrong side of the law. They start a fistfight and whiny when they get thumped. They are offered opportunities to resolve the issues, and turn-them down saying: We have the right to turn-down unfair offers. And as the rekindle the conflict, they cry it is unfair for the Israelis to defend themselves.

Each rocket fired into Israel is just another brick in the wall of evidence of the Arab Palestinians intentionally and programmed policy of launching attacks in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression. And while the two Arab League Nations that actually occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip have made peace with Israel, the Arab Palestinians never have; instead asking that ALL of (what they considered) Palestine be turned over to them (essentially a surrender).

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression. It is unreasonable to assume that Israel should surrender any part of the territory. While it is relatively clear that Israel does not want the West Bank and Gaza Strip, assessing each of them as an economic and parasitic albatross, the Arab League aggressors have used the territory as a gateway for invasions. And while today, about two-thirds of the borders are internationally recognized via treaty, the degree of strategic uncertainty for Israel,
given current political views of the Arab League around it, is in flux. This is just one of the simplified considerations included in the question of "defensible borders."

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression.​

The Arabs were fighting Israeli forces in Palestine. How is that aggressive?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come-on.

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

I don't really. It is just that the Palestinians are pikers compared to Israel's terrorism. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Yet Israel throws around the terrorist label like candy at a blossom time parade.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, especially post-1967, have been whiners and crybabies about being on the wrong side of the law. They start a fistfight and whiny when they get thumped. They are offered opportunities to resolve the issues, and turn-them down saying: We have the right to turn-down unfair offers. And as the rekindle the conflict, they cry it is unfair for the Israelis to defend themselves.

Each rocket fired into Israel is just another brick in the wall of evidence of the Arab Palestinians intentionally and programmed policy of launching attacks in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression. And while the two Arab League Nations that actually occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip have made peace with Israel, the Arab Palestinians never have; instead asking that ALL of (what they considered) Palestine be turned over to them (essentially a surrender).

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression. It is unreasonable to assume that Israel should surrender any part of the territory. While it is relatively clear that Israel does not want the West Bank and Gaza Strip, assessing each of them as an economic and parasitic albatross, the Arab League aggressors have used the territory as a gateway for invasions. And while today, about two-thirds of the borders are internationally recognized via treaty, the degree of strategic uncertainty for Israel,
given current political views of the Arab League around it, is in flux. This is just one of the simplified considerations included in the question of "defensible borders."

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression.​

The Arabs were fighting Israeli forces in Palestine. How is that aggressive?

Umm, the Arab-Moslem invaders from Arab-Moslem countries were the attacking force. Those forces pushed aside the Pal'istanians in your mythical country of Pal'istan in their attempted Jew killing gee-had.

How do you get so much of this so completely wrong?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come-on.

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

I don't really. It is just that the Palestinians are pikers compared to Israel's terrorism. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Yet Israel throws around the terrorist label like candy at a blossom time parade.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, especially post-1967, have been whiners and crybabies about being on the wrong side of the law. They start a fistfight and whiny when they get thumped. They are offered opportunities to resolve the issues, and turn-them down saying: We have the right to turn-down unfair offers. And as the rekindle the conflict, they cry it is unfair for the Israelis to defend themselves.

Each rocket fired into Israel is just another brick in the wall of evidence of the Arab Palestinians intentionally and programmed policy of launching attacks in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression. And while the two Arab League Nations that actually occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip have made peace with Israel, the Arab Palestinians never have; instead asking that ALL of (what they considered) Palestine be turned over to them (essentially a surrender).

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression. It is unreasonable to assume that Israel should surrender any part of the territory. While it is relatively clear that Israel does not want the West Bank and Gaza Strip, assessing each of them as an economic and parasitic albatross, the Arab League aggressors have used the territory as a gateway for invasions. And while today, about two-thirds of the borders are internationally recognized via treaty, the degree of strategic uncertainty for Israel,
given current political views of the Arab League around it, is in flux. This is just one of the simplified considerations included in the question of "defensible borders."

Most Respectfully,
R

We have the right to turn-down unfair offers.​

Are they required to accept offers that suck?

"They" certainly have every intention to leech on to and suck the life out of their own dedicated welfare fraud.

The "country" not of Pal'istan but the country of "Fraud and Misfits".

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come-on.

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

I don't really. It is just that the Palestinians are pikers compared to Israel's terrorism. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

Yet Israel throws around the terrorist label like candy at a blossom time parade.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, especially post-1967, have been whiners and crybabies about being on the wrong side of the law. They start a fistfight and whiny when they get thumped. They are offered opportunities to resolve the issues, and turn-them down saying: We have the right to turn-down unfair offers. And as the rekindle the conflict, they cry it is unfair for the Israelis to defend themselves.

Each rocket fired into Israel is just another brick in the wall of evidence of the Arab Palestinians intentionally and programmed policy of launching attacks in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression. And while the two Arab League Nations that actually occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip have made peace with Israel, the Arab Palestinians never have; instead asking that ALL of (what they considered) Palestine be turned over to them (essentially a surrender).

Israel successfully defended its bid for independence in the face of Arab Aggression. It is unreasonable to assume that Israel should surrender any part of the territory. While it is relatively clear that Israel does not want the West Bank and Gaza Strip, assessing each of them as an economic and parasitic albatross, the Arab League aggressors have used the territory as a gateway for invasions. And while today, about two-thirds of the borders are internationally recognized via treaty, the degree of strategic uncertainty for Israel,
given current political views of the Arab League around it, is in flux. This is just one of the simplified considerations included in the question of "defensible borders."

Most Respectfully,
R

I think it is fairly understood that the invasion of 1948 was initiated by the Arab (the First use of armed force) by a State (the Arab League and irregular Arab Palestinian units) in contravention of the Charter...​

What part of the charter says that it was illegal for the Arab states to enter Palestine?

Link?

So.... your mythical country of Pal'istan was an accomplice that aided and abetted attacking armies waging war?

Such acts carry consequences.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The State of Palestine (West Bank and Gaza Strip) is the hub of several affiliated and associated Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP). The "label" of "Terrorist" is assigned based on the effect of a technique relative to a target.

Attacking techniques such as hijacking, bombing, kidnapping and assassination to assert their demands of Israel, are also real threats to Western world.

The characteristics of a most HoAP Terrorists usually include a campaign that violates the rules of modern warfare, established in acts called the Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions. In the case of the HoAP, we see:

The HoAP (protected persons) commit offense which are solely intended to harm the Israel (Occupying Power); taking action that endanger the life or limb of the occupying forces and administration. The HoAP do represent a grave collective danger (HAMAS,Palestinian Islamic Jihad etc) inflicting seriously damage the property of the Israeli occupying forces and administration and the installations used by them. (Article 68, GCIV)​

We observe that the HoAP apply technique of terrorism to achieve political change (the elimination of the Jewish State) and the establishment of a consecrated Islamic Waqf (HAMAS). While the throw-weight behind an HoAP attacks, sometime even symbolic in nature, they are meant to impress fear; interrupting the tranquility of the day and replacing it with panic, horror, and trepidation. This is used to intimidate the public; and designed to draw the attention the public and media to the political demands and political objective that the HoAP could not achieve through the peaceful means.

Who are the Arab-Moslem terrorists?

What idiot wrote that headline?
Attacking foreign troops is not terrorism.

Flailing your Pom Poms for your islamic terrorist heroes from behind the safety of your keyboard.

I know everyone has to get on board of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.

(COMMENT)

Whether we talk about the Palestinian Terrorist by individual groups like HAMAS, or collectively as in the HoAP, we see the same process over and over again; placing and detonating an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility: with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or 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. ( 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings)

Short Title / Abbreviations: 1997 Terrorist Bombing Convention ​

Date & Place of Adoption: 15 December 1997, New York, USA
Date of Entry into Force: 23 May 2001 (Article 22)

It is not Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign as you claim. It is what it is. The law was not written by Israel, but internationally. It was be an untruth to say that HoAP does not (or has not) a past history of criminal behaviors described in the Terrorist Bombing Convention. Whether we talk about the grenade attack near Rachel's Tomb, the nursery school struck by HAMAS rocket, the over 4000 rocket attacks from Gaza, the kidnapping and murders, the Sbarro restaurant suicide bombing - Maxim restaurant suicide bombing, the Avivim school bus massacre, the public bus planted by Palestinian militants exploded in a bus near Tel Aviv, --- all of these describe the actions prohibited by International Conventions relative to counter-terrorism.

And I haven't even mentioned the Customary and International Humanitarian Law violations, or the Palestinians that have attempted to pervert the course of justice, or inciting violence and supporting terrorism.
“If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be a duck”

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

Most Respectfully,
R

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

 

[Shusha]

The Arabs were fighting Israeli forces in Palestine. How is that aggressive?

Um. Because they were attacking a neighboring independent State with the purpose of destroying its government and murdering its people? Seems pretty aggressive to me.

 

[Shusha]

Are they required to accept offers that suck?

Palestinians and Team Palestine have a strange idea of what "sucks".

*Palestine handed everything they asked for on a silver platter*

Team Palestine: "Ah, man, that sucks!"

Team Israel: "How does that suck?"

Team Palestine: "You are monitoring us so that we can't attack you!"

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The State of Palestine (West Bank and Gaza Strip) is the hub of several affiliated and associated Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP). The "label" of "Terrorist" is assigned based on the effect of a technique relative to a target.

Attacking techniques such as hijacking, bombing, kidnapping and assassination to assert their demands of Israel, are also real threats to Western world.

The characteristics of a most HoAP Terrorists usually include a campaign that violates the rules of modern warfare, established in acts called the Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions. In the case of the HoAP, we see:

The HoAP (protected persons) commit offense which are solely intended to harm the Israel (Occupying Power); taking action that endanger the life or limb of the occupying forces and administration. The HoAP do represent a grave collective danger (HAMAS,Palestinian Islamic Jihad etc) inflicting seriously damage the property of the Israeli occupying forces and administration and the installations used by them. (Article 68, GCIV)​

We observe that the HoAP apply technique of terrorism to achieve political change (the elimination of the Jewish State) and the establishment of a consecrated Islamic Waqf (HAMAS). While the throw-weight behind an HoAP attacks, sometime even symbolic in nature, they are meant to impress fear; interrupting the tranquility of the day and replacing it with panic, horror, and trepidation. This is used to intimidate the public; and designed to draw the attention the public and media to the political demands and political objective that the HoAP could not achieve through the peaceful means.

Who are the Arab-Moslem terrorists?

What idiot wrote that headline?
Attacking foreign troops is not terrorism.

Flailing your Pom Poms for your islamic terrorist heroes from behind the safety of your keyboard.

I know everyone has to get on board of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.

(COMMENT)

Whether we talk about the Palestinian Terrorist by individual groups like HAMAS, or collectively as in the HoAP, we see the same process over and over again; placing and detonating an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility: with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or 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. ( 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings)

Short Title / Abbreviations: 1997 Terrorist Bombing Convention ​

Date & Place of Adoption: 15 December 1997, New York, USA
Date of Entry into Force: 23 May 2001 (Article 22)

It is not Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign as you claim. It is what it is. The law was not written by Israel, but internationally. It was be an untruth to say that HoAP does not (or has not) a past history of criminal behaviors described in the Terrorist Bombing Convention. Whether we talk about the grenade attack near Rachel's Tomb, the nursery school struck by HAMAS rocket, the over 4000 rocket attacks from Gaza, the kidnapping and murders, the Sbarro restaurant suicide bombing - Maxim restaurant suicide bombing, the Avivim school bus massacre, the public bus planted by Palestinian militants exploded in a bus near Tel Aviv, --- all of these describe the actions prohibited by International Conventions relative to counter-terrorism.

And I haven't even mentioned the Customary and International Humanitarian Law violations, or the Palestinians that have attempted to pervert the course of justice, or inciting violence and supporting terrorism.
“If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be a duck”

BUT, please --- don't pretend that the Arab Palestinians have clean hands. In fact, the Palestinians haven't had clean hands since the time Haj Amin al Husseini was the Mufti of Jerusalem; inciting hatred and violence at every opportunity.

Most Respectfully,
R

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

Just guessing here, but I suspect Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan would also represent islam as being.... wait for it.....
The Religion of Peace™

Consider sending Jordan a Google link to "Black September". Let us know what you hear back.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes... We've seen this before, where the Arab Palestinians plead with governmental institutions to pressure a rewrite of history to fit their view.

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

(COMMENT)

There is no way, under the reasonable man concept, can productive and frank exchange on this topic happen with the Arab Community.

The Arab Community has their own definitions and program (The Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) that do not include the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (or a number of other conventions). See: UN Security Council --- Counter-terrorism Committee

It is very important to understand that The Arab Convention For The Suppression Of Terrorism League of Arab States April 1998 cannot back-peddle or regroup. Back in 1998, shortly after the First World Trade Center Arab Bombing (February 1993), the Arab League began to craft their own Convention.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 1998 version

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.
​

Under Arab unique law (which our friend P F Tinmore operates) The Hostile Arab Palestinians do not have to recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention or the International Convention on the Suppression of terrorist Bombing. They believe, and have always believed, as Radical Islamist, they are above the law.

Article 2 of the Arab Convention is really interesting. It makes it virtually impossible to challenge an Arab Terrorist Group as terrorist under Arab Law.

It is one of the reasons that Arabs in general are intrinsically tied to terrorism; the poster child if you will. This is why that when an Arab League State claims to be involved in the suppression of terrorism, or will suppress terrorism, they cannot be held accountable because that pledge means absolutely nothing. (100% empty words.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes... We've seen this before, where the Arab Palestinians plead with governmental institutions to pressure a rewrite of history to fit their view.

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

(COMMENT)

There is no way, under the reasonable man concept, can productive and frank exchange on this topic happen with the Arab Community.

The Arab Community has their own definitions and program (The Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) that do not include the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (or a number of other conventions). See: UN Security Council --- Counter-terrorism Committee

It is very important to understand that The Arab Convention For The Suppression Of Terrorism League of Arab States April 1998 cannot back-peddle or regroup. Back in 1998, shortly after the First World Trade Center Arab Bombing (February 1993), the Arab League began to craft their own Convention.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 1998 version

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.
​

Under Arab unique law (which our friend P F Tinmore operates) The Hostile Arab Palestinians do not have to recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention or the International Convention on the Suppression of terrorist Bombing. They believe, and have always believed, as Radical Islamist, they are above the law.

Article 2 of the Arab Convention is really interesting. It makes it virtually impossible to challenge an Arab Terrorist Group as terrorist under Arab Law.

It is one of the reasons that Arabs in general are intrinsically tied to terrorism; the poster child if you will. This is why that when an Arab League State claims to be involved in the suppression of terrorism, or will suppress terrorism, they cannot be held accountable because that pledge means absolutely nothing. (100% empty words.)

Most Respectfully,
R

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.​

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes... We've seen this before, where the Arab Palestinians plead with governmental institutions to pressure a rewrite of history to fit their view.

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

(COMMENT)

There is no way, under the reasonable man concept, can productive and frank exchange on this topic happen with the Arab Community.

The Arab Community has their own definitions and program (The Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) that do not include the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (or a number of other conventions). See: UN Security Council --- Counter-terrorism Committee

It is very important to understand that The Arab Convention For The Suppression Of Terrorism League of Arab States April 1998 cannot back-peddle or regroup. Back in 1998, shortly after the First World Trade Center Arab Bombing (February 1993), the Arab League began to craft their own Convention.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 1998 version

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.
​

Under Arab unique law (which our friend P F Tinmore operates) The Hostile Arab Palestinians do not have to recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention or the International Convention on the Suppression of terrorist Bombing. They believe, and have always believed, as Radical Islamist, they are above the law.

Article 2 of the Arab Convention is really interesting. It makes it virtually impossible to challenge an Arab Terrorist Group as terrorist under Arab Law.

It is one of the reasons that Arabs in general are intrinsically tied to terrorism; the poster child if you will. This is why that when an Arab League State claims to be involved in the suppression of terrorism, or will suppress terrorism, they cannot be held accountable because that pledge means absolutely nothing. (100% empty words.)

Most Respectfully,
R

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.​

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

The Hamas Charter, as a function of retrograde Islamist ideology, concerns itself with exterminating Jews. Those attributes are not addressed in the principles of the UN.

Your perceived entitlement to acts of Islamic terrorism as fulfillment of an ancient theocratic code is met with a much stronger and more resilient purpose. Nearly seven decades of a useless gee-had. Your Arab-Moslem terrorist heroes are less relevant now than ever before.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes... We've seen this before, where the Arab Palestinians plead with governmental institutions to pressure a rewrite of history to fit their view.

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

(COMMENT)

There is no way, under the reasonable man concept, can productive and frank exchange on this topic happen with the Arab Community.

The Arab Community has their own definitions and program (The Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) that do not include the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (or a number of other conventions). See: UN Security Council --- Counter-terrorism Committee

It is very important to understand that The Arab Convention For The Suppression Of Terrorism League of Arab States April 1998 cannot back-peddle or regroup. Back in 1998, shortly after the First World Trade Center Arab Bombing (February 1993), the Arab League began to craft their own Convention.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 1998 version

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.
​

Under Arab unique law (which our friend P F Tinmore operates) The Hostile Arab Palestinians do not have to recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention or the International Convention on the Suppression of terrorist Bombing. They believe, and have always believed, as Radical Islamist, they are above the law.

Article 2 of the Arab Convention is really interesting. It makes it virtually impossible to challenge an Arab Terrorist Group as terrorist under Arab Law.

It is one of the reasons that Arabs in general are intrinsically tied to terrorism; the poster child if you will. This is why that when an Arab League State claims to be involved in the suppression of terrorism, or will suppress terrorism, they cannot be held accountable because that pledge means absolutely nothing. (100% empty words.)

Most Respectfully,
R

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.​

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

The Hamas Charter, as a function of retrograde Islamist ideology, concerns itself with exterminating Jews. Those attributes are not addressed in the principles of the UN.

Your perceived entitlement to acts of Islamic terrorism as fulfillment of an ancient theocratic code is met with a much stronger and more resilient purpose. Nearly seven decades of a useless gee-had. Your Arab-Moslem terrorist heroes are less relevant now than ever before.

Deflection.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes... We've seen this before, where the Arab Palestinians plead with governmental institutions to pressure a rewrite of history to fit their view.

Textbook Withdrawn after Referencing Palestinian Resistance as ‘Terrorists’

The International School of Choueifat (ISC) in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have been forced to withdraw textbooks which describe the Palestinian resistance as ‘terrorists’, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported yesterday.

The school confirmed to Doha News that the book was a Grade 9 history text entitled Technology, War and Independence, by Oxford University Press.

All copies of the book were removed and students were reimbursed for costs incurred, the ministry said, adding that the school was warned to seek approval before using any book.

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/textbook-withdrawn-referencing-palestinian-resistance-terrorists/

(COMMENT)

There is no way, under the reasonable man concept, can productive and frank exchange on this topic happen with the Arab Community.

The Arab Community has their own definitions and program (The Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) that do not include the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (or a number of other conventions). See: UN Security Council --- Counter-terrorism Committee

It is very important to understand that The Arab Convention For The Suppression Of Terrorism League of Arab States April 1998 cannot back-peddle or regroup. Back in 1998, shortly after the First World Trade Center Arab Bombing (February 1993), the Arab League began to craft their own Convention.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 1998 version

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.
​

Under Arab unique law (which our friend P F Tinmore operates) The Hostile Arab Palestinians do not have to recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention or the International Convention on the Suppression of terrorist Bombing. They believe, and have always believed, as Radical Islamist, they are above the law.

Article 2 of the Arab Convention is really interesting. It makes it virtually impossible to challenge an Arab Terrorist Group as terrorist under Arab Law.

It is one of the reasons that Arabs in general are intrinsically tied to terrorism; the poster child if you will. This is why that when an Arab League State claims to be involved in the suppression of terrorism, or will suppress terrorism, they cannot be held accountable because that pledge means absolutely nothing. (100% empty words.)

Most Respectfully,
R

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.​

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

The Hamas Charter, as a function of retrograde Islamist ideology, concerns itself with exterminating Jews. Those attributes are not addressed in the principles of the UN.

Your perceived entitlement to acts of Islamic terrorism as fulfillment of an ancient theocratic code is met with a much stronger and more resilient purpose. Nearly seven decades of a useless gee-had. Your Arab-Moslem terrorist heroes are less relevant now than ever before.

Deflection.

Resigning after you have been fired makes you weak and ineffectual.

 

[Hollie]

Who are the Arab-Moslem Death Cultists?

MEMRI: Hamas Sermon from the Gaza Strip: Our Doctrine Entails Exterminating the Jews

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It must be remembered that the first two Articles of the Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Cairo Declaration) are written such that the Arab Palestinians cannot be accused of terrorism IF the Jihadis, Insurgents, Rebels, Fedayeen, Radical Islamic Followers, and other Arab Asymmetric Warfare Operators (AAWO) CLAIM to be conducting activities, by whatever means they find necessary, against foreign occupation to further for liberation and self-determination. This set the AAWO outside the criticism of UN Charter --- Chapter 1 --- Article 2(3) directing all international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

In the words of Peace, security and stability will not be achieved unless the occupation ends . We will together continue with you our national, political and legal struggle. (Excerpts Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Speeches, October 14, 2015)

(IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

We often hear about what is legal, and what is not legal; as well as the nature of the Belligerent Occupation.

​

There is no exemption under international law, for Palestinians who take part in hostilities against the Israeli Occupation. When the Arab Palestinians initiate hostilities, they become a combatant. No matter how obscure the Arab Convention may make it, they are subject to consequences as a belligerent.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

(QUICK REFERENCE)

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Article 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, 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. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power 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.
​

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Article 75 [ Link ] -- Fundamental guarantees

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;
​

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

(c) the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.​

(COMMENT)

What I find to interesting is that lengths to which the Arab Palestinian will go to in order to justify their kidnapping and murder, and other violence to the directed against the life, health, or physical well-being of Civilians which are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

I though it was kind of interesting that the Arab Convention did not cover terrorist "Bombing" (most of the activity by Palestinian Terrorist) or the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea (which is applicable to the Israeli Blockade). But then, it is merely subterfuge to make it appear like the Arab League supports international counter-terrorism activity. But any one that looks at the Palestinians that participated in the Munich Olympic Massacre, or the Beach Attack that killed the niece Senator Abraham Ribicoff, or the piracy of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in which a wheelchair bound American was killed, or when Palestinians hijacked TWA Flight 741, or when the Palestinians killed Americans at a Paris Restaurant, or any number of other Palestinian attacks directed solely at non-combatant civilians. The does not count the thousands of rockets launched, deadly infiltrations, or the kidnap and Murder of civilians.

While the Arabs can use the color or law to alter the scope and nature of the crime, it cannot really change this pattern of criminal behaviors, or the fact that the general citizenry are taught as children --- these types of acts are rewarded in the next life. You can make any claim you want, but the planks that reveal the Palestinian intention the conduct a widespread and systematic program of attacks directed against the Israeli population is obvious (and even boasted by Palestinian Officials).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It must be remembered that the first two Articles of the Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Cairo Declaration) are written such that the Arab Palestinians cannot be accused of terrorism IF the Jihadis, Insurgents, Rebels, Fedayeen, Radical Islamic Followers, and other Arab Asymmetric Warfare Operators (AAWO) CLAIM to be conducting activities, by whatever means they find necessary, against foreign occupation to further for liberation and self-determination. This set the AAWO outside the criticism of UN Charter --- Chapter 1 --- Article 2(3) directing all international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

In the words of Peace, security and stability will not be achieved unless the occupation ends . We will together continue with you our national, political and legal struggle. (Excerpts Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Speeches, October 14, 2015)

(IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

We often hear about what is legal, and what is not legal; as well as the nature of the Belligerent Occupation.

View attachment 93148
​

There is no exemption under international law, for Palestinians who take part in hostilities against the Israeli Occupation. When the Arab Palestinians initiate hostilities, they become a combatant. No matter how obscure the Arab Convention may make it, they are subject to consequences as a belligerent.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

(QUICK REFERENCE)

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Article 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, 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. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power 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.
​

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Article 75 [ Link ] -- Fundamental guarantees

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;
​

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

(c) the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.​

(COMMENT)

What I find to interesting is that lengths to which the Arab Palestinian will go to in order to justify their kidnapping and murder, and other violence to the directed against the life, health, or physical well-being of Civilians which are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

I though it was kind of interesting that the Arab Convention did not cover terrorist "Bombing" (most of the activity by Palestinian Terrorist) or the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea (which is applicable to the Israeli Blockade). But then, it is merely subterfuge to make it appear like the Arab League supports international counter-terrorism activity. But any one that looks at the Palestinians that participated in the Munich Olympic Massacre, or the Beach Attack that killed the niece Senator Abraham Ribicoff, or the piracy of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in which a wheelchair bound American was killed, or when Palestinians hijacked TWA Flight 741, or when the Palestinians killed Americans at a Paris Restaurant, or any number of other Palestinian attacks directed solely at non-combatant civilians. The does not count the thousands of rockets launched, deadly infiltrations, or the kidnap and Murder of civilians.

While the Arabs can use the color or law to alter the scope and nature of the crime, it cannot really change this pattern of criminal behaviors, or the fact that the general citizenry are taught as children --- these types of acts are rewarded in the next life. You can make any claim you want, but the planks that reveal the Palestinian intention the conduct a widespread and systematic program of attacks directed against the Israeli population is obvious (and even boasted by Palestinian Officials).

Most Respectfully,
R

directing all international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.​

Such as?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It must be remembered that the first two Articles of the Arab Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Cairo Declaration) are written such that the Arab Palestinians cannot be accused of terrorism IF the Jihadis, Insurgents, Rebels, Fedayeen, Radical Islamic Followers, and other Arab Asymmetric Warfare Operators (AAWO) CLAIM to be conducting activities, by whatever means they find necessary, against foreign occupation to further for liberation and self-determination. This set the AAWO outside the criticism of UN Charter --- Chapter 1 --- Article 2(3) directing all international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

In the words of Peace, security and stability will not be achieved unless the occupation ends . We will together continue with you our national, political and legal struggle. (Excerpts Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Speeches, October 14, 2015)

(IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

We often hear about what is legal, and what is not legal; as well as the nature of the Belligerent Occupation.

View attachment 93148
​

There is no exemption under international law, for Palestinians who take part in hostilities against the Israeli Occupation. When the Arab Palestinians initiate hostilities, they become a combatant. No matter how obscure the Arab Convention may make it, they are subject to consequences as a belligerent.

Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions. ---- 2011 version.

What part of this goes against international law or UN resolutions?

(QUICK REFERENCE)

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Article 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, 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. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power 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.
​

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Article 75 [ Link ] -- Fundamental guarantees

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;
​

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

(c) the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.​

(COMMENT)

What I find to interesting is that lengths to which the Arab Palestinian will go to in order to justify their kidnapping and murder, and other violence to the directed against the life, health, or physical well-being of Civilians which are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

I though it was kind of interesting that the Arab Convention did not cover terrorist "Bombing" (most of the activity by Palestinian Terrorist) or the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea (which is applicable to the Israeli Blockade). But then, it is merely subterfuge to make it appear like the Arab League supports international counter-terrorism activity. But any one that looks at the Palestinians that participated in the Munich Olympic Massacre, or the Beach Attack that killed the niece Senator Abraham Ribicoff, or the piracy of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in which a wheelchair bound American was killed, or when Palestinians hijacked TWA Flight 741, or when the Palestinians killed Americans at a Paris Restaurant, or any number of other Palestinian attacks directed solely at non-combatant civilians. The does not count the thousands of rockets launched, deadly infiltrations, or the kidnap and Murder of civilians.

While the Arabs can use the color or law to alter the scope and nature of the crime, it cannot really change this pattern of criminal behaviors, or the fact that the general citizenry are taught as children --- these types of acts are rewarded in the next life. You can make any claim you want, but the planks that reveal the Palestinian intention the conduct a widespread and systematic program of attacks directed against the Israeli population is obvious (and even boasted by Palestinian Officials).

Most Respectfully,
R

​

Such as?

"...directing all international disputes by peaceful means..."

From the Hamas Charter:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)."



We seem to be on the horns of a dilemma here.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is the thing we have called the "Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR). It states that for every real event (not hypotheticals and excluding that which is buried in deceitfulness or deception) which appears to be characterized by observation, detection or imagery that differ from objective reality, --- has a rational explanation. The Scholar, Diplomat, Statesman, or Leader may not know what the true explanation is, but in this reality there must be one. This is true even if you travers between one reality (the Western culture) to another reality (the culture of the Arab Islamic World).

--- directing all international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. ---

​

​

Such as?

(COMMENT)

While I will admit that, having seen the cream of the crop in the Diplomatic Foreign Service, I suppose that the US will have to leave much of the diplomatic wrangling to a more competent nation. But the entire reason for each nation having a diplomats of their own is to brilliantly develop alternatives when the tradition methonds are found wanting.

The recurring theme, goal and objective in the Charter of the United Nations is the maintenance and safeguarding peace. To that end, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (A/RES/25/2625) fosters that:

• 
  Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered.
  States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
  
  The parties to a dispute have the duty, in the event of failure to reach a solution by any one of the above peaceful means, to continue to seek a settlement of the dispute by other peaceful means agreed upon by them.
  
  States parties to an international dispute, as well as other States shall refrain from any action which may aggravate the Situation so as to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall act in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
  
  International disputes shall be settled on the basis of the Sovereign equality of States and in accordance with the Principle of free choice of means. Recourse to, or acceptance of, a settlement procedure freely agreed to by States with regard to existing or future disputes to which they are parties shall not be regarded as incompatible with sovereign equality.
  
  Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs prejudices or derogates from the applicable provisions of the Charter, in particular those relating to the pacific settlement of international disputes.
  

Now this is diametrically opposed to the Arab Palestinian Policy that

√ Palestinian National Charter:

• The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood.

• The Palestine Liberation Organization, representative of the Palestinian revolutionary forces, is responsible for the Palestinian Arab people's movement in its struggle - to retrieve its homeland, liberate and return to it and exercise the right to self-determination in it - in all military, political, and financial fields and also for whatever may be required by the Palestine case on the inter-Arab and international levels.

• Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase.
​

√ HAMAS Covenant:

• Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.

• The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law).

• There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.
​

Most Respectfully,
R​

 

[Phoenall]

Who are the Palestinians?

Susan Abulhawa

Palestinian Activist Susan Abulhawa Speaks To Philly Justice Coalition and Black Lives Matter

Did you read the comments, here is the first one



"So sick of this lady's bullcrap. She is a Jew hating Muslim propagandist. Palestinians are only being attacked when THEY attack and Palis are ALWAYS the instigators!!"


So you see others call your sources islamonazi propaganda as well.