All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[P F Tinmore]

#FacebookWeNeedToTalk Global Petition Delivery​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Hope Warrior: the video series​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Mission failed: How Israel’s anti-BDS app went belly-up

Canadian academic and activist Michael Bueckert spent five years tracking an app used by Israel’s ‘troll army.’ He tells +972 about its activities — ranging from the sinister to the cringeworthy.

www.972mag.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestinian teacher reinstated after UK Israel lobby attacks​

A Palestinian lecturer and high-profile activist was told on Thursday that her teaching position at Sheffield Hallam University had been reinstated.

The announcement comes a week after the UK university had suspended Shahd Abusalama’s classes amid a smear campaign by supporters of Israel.

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/nora-barrows-friedman/palestinian-teacher-reinstated-after-uk-israel-lobby-attacks?fbclid=IwAR3GsQaSYLxv5jrFNV9hj5VK_migYkji8cVXp-jmJKfjnKkfc_BhK7Whn0A

"Victory for free speech!" interview with Shahd Abusalama​

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Hostile Palestinian connection to any 1948 event?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

REF: Posting 4229

(COMMENT)
.
You post a stream of Facebook-derived videos and short commentaries. I've been to Yemen. It does not take much to generate this kind of crowd. It is not like these people have employment opportunities. These kinds of events are festive occasions. And when you say "Tens of Thousands, you are talking about less than 10 thousand on a very good day.

Do you have anything to contribute?

You do realize that demonstrations organized by anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian rabble-rousers do not have a clear understanding of what it is the Arab Palestinians are demonstrating against. I do not think that the pro-Palestinians and anti-Israelis in the territory can articulate an actual case of Article 6. - Genocide → Article 7 Crimes Against Humanity → War Crimes, or a Crime of Aggression.

Furthermore, the "Nakba" (no Elements of the Offense) is not an international crime. Israel came about through the determination of the Israeli people, and with the original intent behind the Recommendation adopted by the General Assembly. It is my understanding that the Arab League initiated the conflict in 1948 causing a political adaptation that culminated in the outcomes we see today. And I figure that there are very few actual refugees remaining in the territories. Since the events of 2014, I have seen very few demonstrators in either the Gaza (HAMAS) incitements or the Ramallah (2012 - Palestinian) that have been permanent residents of Israeli and that were victims of some sort of misfeasance/malfeasance perpetrated against them.

When I ask for a specific international incident where the Arab Palestinian was victimized, I simply do not get a response that has any foundation. Almost all the crimes articulated that indict the Israelis are based on "emotion" and NOT "law." (The Arab Palestinians weep for themselves very well.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is my understanding that the Arab League initiated the conflict in 1948 causing a political adaptation that culminated in the outcomes we see today.

It was 6 months into the Nakba before the Arab armies intervened.

 

[P F Tinmore]

When I ask for a specific international incident where the Arab Palestinian was victimized, I simply do not get a response that has any foundation.

Annexation is a crime. It is an act of aggression.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Hostile Palestinian connection to any 1948 event?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Annexation of territory that the Hashemite Kingdom "abandoned" is not a crime.

Annexation is a crime. It is an act of aggression.

(COMMENT)
.
I think you have made a mistake...

Annexation of the territory is a geopolitical action. Now there might be a case for:

Article 8 (2) (e) (xii). Elements of Crimes, Rome Statutes​

War crime of destroying or seizing the enemy’s property​

Seizing property from an owner and annexation of territory are two entirely different discussions. Even the seizer of the enemy's property MUST: "Conduct took place in the context of and was associated with an armed conflict, NOT of an international character."

SO! I ask again for an example.
The arguments that might be raised:

◈ IF you say the conflict is of an "international character," THEN that entails that there is a sovereign State of Israel.​

​

◈ IF you say that you are fighting off an "invasion," THEN that means the entirety of the territory, formerly under the Mandate, is all one political subdivision. THUS even the "destroying and seizure crimes are NOT applicable.​

​

Depending on how this question is answered, the answer will have other ramifications on other issues.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Hostile Palestinian connection to any 1948 event?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Annexation of territory that the Hashemite Kingdom "abandoned" is not a crime.


(COMMENT)
.
I think you have made a mistake...

Annexation of the territory is a geopolitical action. Now there might be a case for:

Article 8 (2) (e) (xii). Elements of Crimes, Rome Statutes​

War crime of destroying or seizing the enemy’s property​

Seizing property from an owner and annexation of territory are two entirely different discussions. Even the seizer of the enemy's property MUST: "Conduct took place in the context of and was associated with an armed conflict, NOT of an international character."

SO! I ask again for an example.
The arguments that might be raised:

◈ IF you say the conflict is of an "international character," THEN that entails that there is a sovereign State of Israel.​

​

◈ IF you say that you are fighting off an "invasion," THEN that means the entirety of the territory, formerly under the Mandate, is all one political subdivision. THUS even the "destroying and seizure crimes are NOT applicable.​

​

Depending on how this question is answered, the answer will have other ramifications on other issues.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Annexation” is acquiring territory by force and is a flagrant violation of international law. As such it can have no effect on the legal status of the territory, which remains de jure occupied.

International law is crystal clear on this matter – annexation is unlawful. Israel’s continued pursuit of this policy further illustrates its cynical disregard for international law. Such policies do not change the legal status of the territory and its inhabitants under international law as occupied nor remove Israel’s responsibilities as the occupying power under international humanitarian law

Israel/OPT: 10 things you need to know about “annexation”

The Israeli authorities must immediately abandon plans to further “annex” territory in the occupied West Bank which breach international laws and exacerbate decades of systematic human rights violations against Palestinians

www.amnesty.org

Then there is the question of the annexation of the territory that Israel conquered, occupied and annexed in 1948.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Then there is the question of the annexation of the territory that Israel conquered, occupied and annexed in 1948.

The international community’s failure to maintain a principled position regarding Israel’s previous illegal annexations of Arab lands since 1948 has enabled Israel to evade the consequences of such illegal and aggressive behavior and undermines the international rules-based order.

Annexation under International Law

Since its inception, Israel has systematically and illegally annexed territory belonging to other States. In 1948, Israel illegally annexed territory that was not allocated to it in the General Assembly Partition Plan Resolution 181, including West Jerusalem. Since 1967, Israel has...

www.mofa.pna.ps

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The international community’s failure to maintain a principled position regarding Israel’s previous illegal annexations of Arab lands since 1948 has enabled Israel to evade the consequences of such illegal and aggressive behavior and undermines the international rules-based order.

Annexation under International Law

Since its inception, Israel has systematically and illegally annexed territory belonging to other States. In 1948, Israel illegally annexed territory that was not allocated to it in the General Assembly Partition Plan Resolution 181, including West Jerusalem. Since 1967, Israel has...

www.mofa.pna.ps

In 1948, Israel illegally annexed territory that was not allocated to it in the General Assembly Partition Plan Resolution 181, including West Jerusalem.

Kicking the shit out of Arab losers, since 1948.

 

[rylah]

Annexation is a crime. It is an act of aggression.

Like Arab supremacists supporting Russia?

 

[rylah]

Then there is the question of the annexation of the territory that Israel conquered, occupied and annexed in 1948.

Israel won nothing in 1948.

It's only a question when you want to avoid serious debate.

Want to juggle those contradictions?

 

[rylah]

Annexation is a crime. It is an act of aggression.

The international community’s failure to maintain a principled position regarding Israel’s previous illegal annexations of Arab lands since 1948 has enabled Israel to evade the consequences of such illegal and aggressive behavior and undermines the international rules-based order.

Annexation under International Law

Since its inception, Israel has systematically and illegally annexed territory belonging to other States. In 1948, Israel illegally annexed territory that was not allocated to it in the General Assembly Partition Plan Resolution 181, including West Jerusalem. Since 1967, Israel has...

www.mofa.pna.ps

What "Arab lands"?

Arab imperialists got a legal title to annex
the entire Middle East, Spain or North Africa?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Hostile Palestinian connection to any 1948 event?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

(COMMENT)
.
Actually, there are several mistakes of fact embedded here. Let us clean them up. We will focus on the West Bank and Jerusalem.

Israel attempted to establish the "Jewish State" they would call "Israel." The formation of the Jewish State was a recommendation of a particular apportionment outlined in A/RES/181(II) and adopted by the General Assembly.

Using the power of Jewish determination, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the institutions necessary for the turn-key State, the National Council for the Independence of the Jewish State, Israel was established 14/15 May 1948. However, the Arab Legion had been already in play for half a year.

On November 30, 1947, the Arab Legion began operations in support of supply convoys to Arab forces around Jerusalem. Glubb tried to distance his force from direct involvement in the fighting–until May 1948, when the Jews of the Etzion Bloc, a group of settlements on the road north of Hebron, attacked Arab reinforcements and supplies destined for Jerusalem. On May 4, a week before the British Palestine Mandate would expire, Arab tanks, armored cars of the Desert Patrol, and riflemen drawn from the Arab locals stormed the four Jewish settlements that comprised the Etzion Bloc. At stake for Glubb, from a military perspective, was a huge British-organized arms convoy bound for Amman.​

SOURCE: By HISTORYNET STAFF GLUBB PASHA AND THE ARAB LEGION 6/12/2006 ​

.In the course of the Arab-Israel War, The Arab Legion/Jordan accepted the:

◈ S/1302/Rev.1. 3 April 1949 ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN JORDAN AND ISRAEL at Rhodes​

shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved.​

The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or claims of either Party relating thereto.​

​

The Jordan-Israeli Peace Treaty (1994) • which was the "Peaceful Settlement" officially ended the conflict.

Technically, the Green Line established by the 1949 Armistice lost practical relevance as a result of the Six-Day War of 1967. Other than for historical value, at the conclusion of the 1994 Treaty, the International boundary between Israel and Jordan was the Jordanian River.

The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either the Armistice or Treaty. The territorial dispute over the territory (formerly sovereign Jordanian) is whether or not the Arab Palestinians have any claim at all, and whether or not the conflict is a Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC) or an Armed conflict at the level of a civil war.

I suspect that no one really wants to make that call.

Most Respectfully,
R