Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

Why is Gaza sleepless?

 

[Hollie]

Gee-had denied.

IDF: Early Morning Terror Attack Thwarted

The Israeli military said Friday that a Palestinian man was shot and killed in the early morning hours while he attempted to break into a settler home in the West Bank – biblical Judea and Samaria.

www1.cbn.com

JERUSALEM, Israel – The Israeli military said Friday that a Palestinian man was shot and killed in the early morning hours while he attempted to break into a settler home in the West Bank – biblical Judea and Samaria.




There will be a street naming ceremony held by the Islamic terrorist franchises. A Cul de sac - ”Dead Gee-hadee Way”.

 

[Hollie]

I guess the Israeli decision to provide the Pallys with 5,000 doses of vaccine for the Wuhan virus didn’t meet what the Pallys expected as their entitlement.

I suppose there’s no reason to expect the Pallys would spend their welfare money on medicines as opposed to weapons for the gee-had.

Israelâs decision to give 5,000 vaccine doses to Palestinian health workers is wholly inadequate, rights group says

The Palestinian territories are home to just over 5 million people.

www.cnbc.com

Israel’s decision to give 5,000 doses of the coronavirus vaccine to Palestinian frontline health workers is being criticized by Palestinians and rights groups as insufficient and falling short of the country’s obligations.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I guess the Israeli decision to provide the Pallys with 5,000 doses of vaccine for the Wuhan virus didn’t meet what the Pallys expected as their entitlement.

I suppose there’s no reason to expect the Pallys would spend their welfare money on medicines as opposed to weapons for the gee-had.

Israelâs decision to give 5,000 vaccine doses to Palestinian health workers is wholly inadequate, rights group says

The Palestinian territories are home to just over 5 million people.

www.cnbc.com

Israel’s decision to give 5,000 doses of the coronavirus vaccine to Palestinian frontline health workers is being criticized by Palestinians and rights groups as insufficient and falling short of the country’s obligations.

insufficient and falling short of the country’s obligations.

Israel is a country?

 

[Hollie]

I guess the Israeli decision to provide the Pallys with 5,000 doses of vaccine for the Wuhan virus didn’t meet what the Pallys expected as their entitlement.

I suppose there’s no reason to expect the Pallys would spend their welfare money on medicines as opposed to weapons for the gee-had.

Israelâs decision to give 5,000 vaccine doses to Palestinian health workers is wholly inadequate, rights group says

The Palestinian territories are home to just over 5 million people.

www.cnbc.com

Israel’s decision to give 5,000 doses of the coronavirus vaccine to Palestinian frontline health workers is being criticized by Palestinians and rights groups as insufficient and falling short of the country’s obligations.

insufficient and falling short of the country’s obligations.

Israel is a country?

I'm waiting for P F Tinmore to post a youtube video on the matter.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Faith, Abolition, and Socialism w/ Linda Sarsour & Rev. Andrew Wilkes

 

[Hollie]

Faith, Abolition, and Socialism w/ Linda Sarsour & Rev. Andrew Wilkes

Should be a hoot, Are you going? If you check kuffar Priceline.com you can probably find good deals on lodging at a kuffar Holiday Inn Express. Take some video of you and the fine folks doing the fist-pumping ''Death to America'' chant.

 

[Hollie]

I'm crushed, My faith in Islamic terrorism as a noble struggle struggle is dashed.

We should give the Islamic terrorists more welfare money and that will fix things.

Palestine’s First Elections in 15 Years are No Gift to Joe Biden

The calling for elections should not be seen as an attempt at garnering favor in the eyes of the new U.S. president, but quite differently, as a mechanism for Mahmoud Abbas to reassert dominance and ensure his position as the unequivocal leader of the Palestinian Authority.

nationalinterest.org

The calling for elections should not be seen as an attempt at garnering favor in the eyes of the new U.S. president, but quite differently, as a mechanism for Mahmoud Abbas to reassert dominance and ensure his position as the unequivocal leader of the Palestinian Authority.

 

[Hollie]

Different day, same Islamic terrorist misfit.

Who said Palestinians are victims of âa second holocaustâ and Netanyahu is âthe ugly face of Mussolini and Hitlerâ? | PMW Analysis

Possible successor of Abbas, Jibril Rajoub: Israelis are “murderers,” committing “a second holocaust” against the Palestinians

palwatch.org

Who said Palestinians are victims of “a second holocaust” and Netanyahu is “the ugly face of Mussolini and Hitler”?

Nan Jacques Zilberdik and Itamar Marcus | Feb 7, 2021
Possible successor of Abbas, Jibril Rajoub:

• Israelis are “murderers,” committing “a second holocaust” against the Palestinians
• Netanyahu is “the ugly face of Mussolini and Hitler”

PA TV sermon:

• Israel is “avenging its gas ovens” by “attacking” the Palestinian people

One of the PA officials mentioned as a possible successor of PA Chairman Abbas is Jibril Rajoub. Rajoub holds a range of positions in the PA, one of which is Fatah Central Committee Secretary. Palestinian Media Watch has documented that Rajoub is fond of belittling the crimes of the Nazis against the Jews in WWII by comparing Israelis to Nazis.
Thus Rajoub recently referred to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “the ugly face of Mussolini and Hitler.” While he did acknowledge the Holocaust against the Jews and others in WWII, Rajoub claimed that Israel is doing “what happened to them to the Palestinians”:

 

[Hollie]

With the ICC being toothless in terms of any judgement it may come to against Israel, it seems that Facetime before the press is the best they can hope for.

Such a waste of time.

https://www.israelhayom.com/2021/02/08/6-steps-biden-should-take-to-hold-the-icc-palestinian-leaders-accountable/

In a video statement released by his office, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blasted the decision. "The ICC has again proved that it is a political body – not a judicial institution," he said. "The ICC ignores the real war crimes and instead pursues the State of Israel, a state with a strong democratic government that sanctifies the rule of law, and is not a member of the ICC."

He went on: "In this decision, the ICC violated the right of democracies to defend themselves against terrorism and played into the hands of those who undermine efforts to expand the circle of peace. We will continue to protect our citizens and soldiers in every way from legal persecution. … When the ICC investigates Israel for fake war crimes, this is pure anti-Semitism."

 

[Hollie]

It seems disease can have a nullifying affect on Pally Islamic terrorism. That, along with an immediate and devastating response to Islamic terrorist attacks tends to put the had in the gee-had.

Corona, normalization, Biden have Palestinian terror on the run

Last Friday, Meir Amit ITIC director and IDF Col. (res.) Reuven Ehrlich passed away suddenly at the age of 75.

m.jpost.com

A combination of the coronavirus, the Israeli-Arab normalization wave and the election of US President Joe Biden have put Palestinian terror at a low point during the recent era, an annual intelligence center report said on Thursday.

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center report said that the coronavirus had reduced operational capabilities, readiness and motivation for terror groups in both the West Bank and Gaza, with an especially dramatic drop in rocket fire from Hamas.

 

[Mindful]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

 

[P F Tinmore]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

 

[Hollie]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why is the ICC granting statehood for Pal’istan when you have advised that Pal’istan is already a state?

Could you please email the ICC and advise them of your “Treaty of Lausanne” argument? Be sure to cc us on that email.

 

[Mindful]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why ask me such a stupid question?

You’re obviously triggered about something, or you wouldn’t keep giving me funnies.

It’s okay, I’m aware of your presence. Not that it makes any difference.

 

[P F Tinmore]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why is the ICC granting statehood for Pal’istan when you have advised that Pal’istan is already a state?

Could you please email the ICC and advise them of your “Treaty of Lausanne” argument? Be sure to cc us on that email.

The ICC cannot make states. It can only recognize states that already exist.

 

[Hollie]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why is the ICC granting statehood for Pal’istan when you have advised that Pal’istan is already a state?

Could you please email the ICC and advise them of your “Treaty of Lausanne” argument? Be sure to cc us on that email.

The ICC cannot make states. It can only recognize states that already exist.

Apparently, the ICC refers to Pal territories. Haven’t you emailed your Treaty of Lausanne conspiracy theory to set the ICC straight about the “country of Pal’istan”?

 

[P F Tinmore]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why is the ICC granting statehood for Pal’istan when you have advised that Pal’istan is already a state?

Could you please email the ICC and advise them of your “Treaty of Lausanne” argument? Be sure to cc us on that email.

The ICC cannot make states. It can only recognize states that already exist.

Apparently, the ICC refers to Pal territories. Haven’t you emailed your Treaty of Lausanne conspiracy theory to set the ICC straight about the “country of Pal’istan”?

One step at a time.

 

[Hollie]

• The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority, because the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, makes no provision for this criminal court to recognize new states.
• The International Criminal Court is not a real court in any meaningful sense of that word. Unlike real courts, which have statutes and common law to interpret, the International Criminal Court just makes it up. As the dissenting judge so aptly pointed out, the Palestine decision is not based on existing law. It is based on pure politics.
• The Palestinians — both in the West Bank and Gaza — who have refused to negotiate in good faith and have used terrorism as their primary claim to recognition, have been rewarded for their violence by this decision.
• The real victims of such selective prosecution are the citizens of these third world countries whose leaders are killing and maiming them.
• All in all, the International Criminal Court decision on Palestine is a setback for a single standard of human rights. It is a victory for terrorism and an unwillingness to negotiate peace. And it is a strong argument against the United States and Israel joining this biased "court," and giving it any legitimacy.

Is Palestine a State?

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel, without any compromise, and without any recognized boundaries. They also did it without any legal authority,

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

The highly politicized International Criminal Court just declared statehood for Palestinians. They did it without any negotiation with Israel,

When did Israel get the authority to be the arbiter for statehood?

Why is the ICC granting statehood for Pal’istan when you have advised that Pal’istan is already a state?

Could you please email the ICC and advise them of your “Treaty of Lausanne” argument? Be sure to cc us on that email.

The ICC cannot make states. It can only recognize states that already exist.

Apparently, the ICC refers to Pal territories. Haven’t you emailed your Treaty of Lausanne conspiracy theory to set the ICC straight about the “country of Pal’istan”?

One step at a time.

I guess step one would be to have the ICC actually define it’s role as having any authority over the matter. Step two and your assignment of statehood to Pal’istan per the Treaty of Lausanne seem to be obvious steps.