International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

abi, please tell me when the French in their resistance to the Nazi's during WWII committed suicide bombings upon civilian targets. Show me where the French rammed vehicles randomly into civilian targets. Please. Tell us when the French sent a few armed resistance fighters into a place of worship to kill a few Germans. Unless you or anyone else can show me otherwise, I am under the impression that the French resistance did their best to target military targets only. As you stated in your OP, snipers shot at guards at the outposts.

That is why it is a huge insult to the French to compare the French resistance during WWII to what the Palestinians do. Any French on this board? And that is also why you did not pursue this line of questioning with me. Because you KNEW that it would not paint the picture you always want to paint.

That it's all the fault of those EVIL JOOS (Zionists).

Illegal settlers are not considered civilians.

Says you. People with a brain? Not so much!

 

[Hollie]

Let's be clear, the Zionists believe that the Palestinians should peacefully accept Jew rule and occupation of the land that prior to the end of WW1 they were, Muslims and Christians, over 90% of population.

No part of the UN designated Jewish partition was attacked by Arab armies in 47-48. Arab armies tried, unsuccessfully, to prevent the Jews from killing and/or expelling non-Jews from their homes within the UN designated Arab partition and international sector. In fact, Jaffa within the Arab sector was attacked and surrendered to the invading Jews before the state of Israel was declared. The Jews had been attacking Arabs within the Arab sector for months prior to the Arab League intervention.

The above is simply a copy and paste of your usual failed arguments. Arab armies crossed the frontier as a part of their announced goal to eliminate the Jews and the Jewish State. Arab colonists / settlers were expelled in the path of the crusading Arabs.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense 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 ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against 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.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

How many Israeli soldiers are there in Gaza?

 

[Indeependent]

The fact that you don't realize how stupid your post is is shocking.

You have added nothing as usual. In your wise mind, what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

You historical knowledge is limited by the sites your mullah allows you to access.

 

[Indeependent]

The fact that you don't realize how stupid your post is is shocking.

You have added nothing as usual. In your wise mind, what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

Let's say i would say that a legitimate form of resistance to occupation is throwing stones, OK? That's what the Palestinians did in the first intifada in 1987. OK, so Barak, Clinton and Arafart met in 2000 to respond to this legitimate form of occupation, OK? Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank and even to divide Jerusalem, the heart and soul of the Jewish People. Now what should be the response to that? "Great, let's get started." Not horrific suicide bombings in pizzerias, busses, and discos. So Netanyahu comes around and says, "Look, the Left reached out to the deranged Palestinians and this is what they do to us. Elect me and I'll give you security, and I'll play games so the Palestinians won't get a fully-fuctioning state because they can't be trusted."

So let me answer you. A legitimate form of resistance is throwing stones. That gets you to the next step which is ACCEPTING A STATE AND PEACE. And if you can't do that, then your first question is moot. OK?

Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank

You people never mention the clunkers.

And now presenting...P F Retard, the man who disagrees with every Arab nation.

 

[Peach]

Resist the Jordanian state that took your property, yes.

 

[RoccoR]

International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you are confused.

abi, please tell me when the French in their resistance to the Nazi's during WWII committed suicide bombings upon civilian targets. Show me where the French rammed vehicles randomly into civilian targets. Please. Tell us when the French sent a few armed resistance fighters into a place of worship to kill a few Germans. Unless you or anyone else can show me otherwise, I am under the impression that the French resistance did their best to target military targets only. As you stated in your OP, snipers shot at guards at the outposts.

That is why it is a huge insult to the French to compare the French resistance during WWII to what the Palestinians do. Any French on this board? And that is also why you did not pursue this line of questioning with me. Because you KNEW that it would not paint the picture you always want to paint.

That it's all the fault of those EVIL JOOS (Zionists).

Illegal settlers are not considered civilians.

(COMMENT)

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

The Settlers are in AREA "C" pursuant to an agreement (Oslo Accords). For the purpose of this Agreement, "the Settlements" means, in the West Bank - the settlements in Area C; and in the Gaza Strip - the Gush Katif and Erez settlement areas, as well as the other settlements in the Gaza Strip.

ARTICLE XXI

Settlement of Differences and Disputes Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.
   
   
2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.
   
   
3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.

Not once has the Palestinians taken the Settlement Issue to Dispute Resolution Process. The Arab Palestinians keep complaining about the Settlements, but privately know that they are Subject to the Permanent Status of Negotiations. The Arab Palestinians will not sit down with the Israelis.

It is what it is. REMEMBER: Every time you speak of "Illegal Settlement," know that it is under the signature of the Palestinians and sanctioned by the Palestinians. It has been this way for more than twenty years. The first step the Arab Palestinians should have taken (20 years ago) was to the dispute resolution process.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense 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 ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against 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.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

How many Israeli soldiers are there in Gaza?

How many Israeli military are used to blockade Gaza and maintain the occupation, pursuant to the determination of the International Court of Justice?

"26. Israel maintains that following the 2005 disengagement, it is no longer an occupying power in Gaza as it does not exercise effective control over the area.

27. However, the prevalent view within the international community is that Israel remains an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. In general, this view is based on the scope and degree of control that Israel has retained over the territory of Gaza following the 2005 disengagement – including, inter alia, Israel’s exercise of control over border crossings, the territorial sea adjacent to the Gaza Strip, and the airspace of Gaza; its periodic military incursions within Gaza; its enforcement of no-go areas within Gaza near the border where Israeli settlements used to be; and its regulation of the local monetary market based on the Israeli currency and control of taxes and customs duties. The retention of such competences by Israel over the territory of Gaza even after the 2005 disengagement overall supports the conclusion that the authority retained by Israel amounts to effective control.

28. Although it no longer maintains a military presence in Gaza, Israel has not only shown the ability to conduct incursions into Gaza at will, but also expressly reserved the right to do so as required by military necessity. This consideration is potentially significant considering that there is support in international case law for the conclusion that it is not a prerequisite that a State maintain continuous presence in a territory in order to qualify as an occupying power. In particular, the ICTY has held that the law of occupation would also apply to areas where a state possesses “the capacity to send troops within a reasonable time to make the authority of the occupying power felt.” In this respect, it is also noted that the geographic proximity of the Gaza Strip to Israel potentially facilitates the ability of Israel to exercise effective control over the territory, despite the lack of a continuous military presence.

29. Overall, there is a reasonable basis upon which to conclude that Israel continues to be an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. The Office has therefore proceeded on the basis that the situation in Gaza can be considered within the framework of an international armed conflict in view of the continuing military occupation by Israel."

Opinio Juris » Blog Archive The OTP Concludes Israel Is Still Occupying Gaza - Opinio Juris

 

[P F Tinmore]

Even when the definition of protected persons is set out in this way, it may seem rather complicated. Nevertheless, disregarding points of detail, it will be seen that there are two main classes of protected person: (1) ' enemy nationals ' within the national territory of each of the Parties to the conflict and (2) ' the whole population ' of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power).

Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Geneva Convention (IV) on Civilians, 1949 - 4 - - Commentary of 1958

I'm lost, are the occupiers legitimate targets for those resisting occupation or fighting for their freedom?

That is an interesting question. Israel is such a bastard on the world stage that it is hard to wrap legalities around it. Israel does have military control over Palestine but it is an illegal occupation. There are rules of occupation with limits and obligations on the occupying power. Israel violates virtually all of them. Does that mean that Israel does not fit into the definition of an occupying power?

Settlers are a necessary, integral, and active part of the occupation. Without the settlers, Israel would be no more than an office in Tel Aviv, if that. That is probably why nationals of an occupying power are not considered "civilians" by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Question: Is it illegal to fire a rocket into an illegal settlement built on a destroyed Palestinian village?

 

[Indeependent]

6,000 Jews also died in the War of Independence.

OMG, like a Nazi whining about the German deaths. Scary.

5 Arab armies invaded Israel. What does that have to do with the Nazis?

Not true.

Not true on FuckTheJews.Islam.

 

[Shusha]

Answer the question, abi. When the goal has been achieved -- is there an Israel or not?

So (we are on this thread), in you mind, there is no legitimate resistance to occupation? Please be clear. And make sure you feel the same way of how the Europeans resisted the Nazi occupation.

And as you deny the existence of this brutal occupation that has spanned decades, don't forget, by a vote of 14-0, with the US abstaining, the world declared that these colonies were flagrant violations of international law. In other words, the whole world outside of zionism. You can go on and on with your word games and feigning ignorance, but people are losing their homes. This is sadly happening in the name of the Jewish people which stinks because the Jewish people are not demolishing homes and building racial colonies, the zionists are doing this.

Why won't you simply answer the question, abi?

When the goal is achieved -- will there be an Israel or not?

Shall I help you out? I'm pretty sure your answer is NO. (You can correct me if I'm wrong, but the very fact you refuse to answer this simple question asked three times on this thread and at least as many on another, speaks the answer. It also speak to the fact that you are reluctant to provide the answer because you know it is morally abhorrent).

The answer to your OP question is quite simple, then. The use of violence to intentionally destroy a State is not legal.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense 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 ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against 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.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

How many Israeli soldiers are there in Gaza?

How many Israeli military are used to blockade Gaza and maintain the occupation, pursuant to the determination of the International Court of Justice?

"26. Israel maintains that following the 2005 disengagement, it is no longer an occupying power in Gaza as it does not exercise effective control over the area.

27. However, the prevalent view within the international community is that Israel remains an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. In general, this view is based on the scope and degree of control that Israel has retained over the territory of Gaza following the 2005 disengagement – including, inter alia, Israel’s exercise of control over border crossings, the territorial sea adjacent to the Gaza Strip, and the airspace of Gaza; its periodic military incursions within Gaza; its enforcement of no-go areas within Gaza near the border where Israeli settlements used to be; and its regulation of the local monetary market based on the Israeli currency and control of taxes and customs duties. The retention of such competences by Israel over the territory of Gaza even after the 2005 disengagement overall supports the conclusion that the authority retained by Israel amounts to effective control.

28. Although it no longer maintains a military presence in Gaza, Israel has not only shown the ability to conduct incursions into Gaza at will, but also expressly reserved the right to do so as required by military necessity. This consideration is potentially significant considering that there is support in international case law for the conclusion that it is not a prerequisite that a State maintain continuous presence in a territory in order to qualify as an occupying power. In particular, the ICTY has held that the law of occupation would also apply to areas where a state possesses “the capacity to send troops within a reasonable time to make the authority of the occupying power felt.” In this respect, it is also noted that the geographic proximity of the Gaza Strip to Israel potentially facilitates the ability of Israel to exercise effective control over the territory, despite the lack of a continuous military presence.

29. Overall, there is a reasonable basis upon which to conclude that Israel continues to be an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. The Office has therefore proceeded on the basis that the situation in Gaza can be considered within the framework of an international armed conflict in view of the continuing military occupation by Israel."

Opinio Juris » Blog Archive The OTP Concludes Israel Is Still Occupying Gaza - Opinio Juris

Utter and complete bullshit!

Have a nice day!

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

Any agreement that violates the rights of the people is void.

 

[montelatici]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense 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 ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against 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.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

How many Israeli soldiers are there in Gaza?

How many Israeli military are used to blockade Gaza and maintain the occupation, pursuant to the determination of the International Court of Justice?

"26. Israel maintains that following the 2005 disengagement, it is no longer an occupying power in Gaza as it does not exercise effective control over the area.

27. However, the prevalent view within the international community is that Israel remains an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. In general, this view is based on the scope and degree of control that Israel has retained over the territory of Gaza following the 2005 disengagement – including, inter alia, Israel’s exercise of control over border crossings, the territorial sea adjacent to the Gaza Strip, and the airspace of Gaza; its periodic military incursions within Gaza; its enforcement of no-go areas within Gaza near the border where Israeli settlements used to be; and its regulation of the local monetary market based on the Israeli currency and control of taxes and customs duties. The retention of such competences by Israel over the territory of Gaza even after the 2005 disengagement overall supports the conclusion that the authority retained by Israel amounts to effective control.

28. Although it no longer maintains a military presence in Gaza, Israel has not only shown the ability to conduct incursions into Gaza at will, but also expressly reserved the right to do so as required by military necessity. This consideration is potentially significant considering that there is support in international case law for the conclusion that it is not a prerequisite that a State maintain continuous presence in a territory in order to qualify as an occupying power. In particular, the ICTY has held that the law of occupation would also apply to areas where a state possesses “the capacity to send troops within a reasonable time to make the authority of the occupying power felt.” In this respect, it is also noted that the geographic proximity of the Gaza Strip to Israel potentially facilitates the ability of Israel to exercise effective control over the territory, despite the lack of a continuous military presence.

29. Overall, there is a reasonable basis upon which to conclude that Israel continues to be an occupying power in Gaza despite the 2005 disengagement. The Office has therefore proceeded on the basis that the situation in Gaza can be considered within the framework of an international armed conflict in view of the continuing military occupation by Israel."

Opinio Juris » Blog Archive The OTP Concludes Israel Is Still Occupying Gaza - Opinio Juris

Utter and complete bullshit!

Have a nice day!

I see the facts are inconvenient.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

I think you will find that it is the Fourth Geneva Convention (International Humanitarian Law), updated in 1977.

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

That is 19th century domestic law. Do you have something more relevant?

(COMMENT)

It is not domestic law. (Jeesh! I don't know where that came from.) It is the late 20th Century Internatinal Law, bit older than the State of Palestine. It is the Law that was directed to be observed by the Security Council [S/RES/237 (1967) 14 June 1967].

Most Respectfully,
R

1. Calls upon the Government of Israel to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants of the areas where military operations have taken place and to facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of hostilities;

Well that shit is out the window. What else you got?

 

[Shusha]

Question: Is it illegal to fire a rocket into an illegal settlement built on a destroyed Palestinian village?

You've GOT to be kidding me.

GCIV Chapter One Article Three

1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, ... shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

 

[P F Tinmore]

The fact that you don't realize how stupid your post is is shocking.

You have added nothing as usual. In your wise mind, what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

Let's say i would say that a legitimate form of resistance to occupation is throwing stones, OK? That's what the Palestinians did in the first intifada in 1987. OK, so Barak, Clinton and Arafart met in 2000 to respond to this legitimate form of occupation, OK? Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank and even to divide Jerusalem, the heart and soul of the Jewish People. Now what should be the response to that? "Great, let's get started." Not horrific suicide bombings in pizzerias, busses, and discos. So Netanyahu comes around and says, "Look, the Left reached out to the deranged Palestinians and this is what they do to us. Elect me and I'll give you security, and I'll play games so the Palestinians won't get a fully-fuctioning state because they can't be trusted."

So let me answer you. A legitimate form of resistance is throwing stones. That gets you to the next step which is ACCEPTING A STATE AND PEACE. And if you can't do that, then your first question is moot. OK?

Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank

You people never mention the clunkers.

And now presenting...P F Retard, the man who disagrees with every Arab nation.

Is deflection all you have?

 

[Shusha]

Israeli Settlers in AreA "C" are not combatants. In fact, they don't fall under the Geneva Convention at all.

Any agreement that violates the rights of the people is void.

What rights of the people are violated in the signing of a peace treaty?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Question: Is it illegal to fire a rocket into an illegal settlement built on a destroyed Palestinian village?

You've GOT to be kidding me.

GCIV Chapter One Article Three

1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, ... shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

Living on stolen land is an act.

 

[Indeependent]

The fact that you don't realize how stupid your post is is shocking.

You have added nothing as usual. In your wise mind, what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

Let's say i would say that a legitimate form of resistance to occupation is throwing stones, OK? That's what the Palestinians did in the first intifada in 1987. OK, so Barak, Clinton and Arafart met in 2000 to respond to this legitimate form of occupation, OK? Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank and even to divide Jerusalem, the heart and soul of the Jewish People. Now what should be the response to that? "Great, let's get started." Not horrific suicide bombings in pizzerias, busses, and discos. So Netanyahu comes around and says, "Look, the Left reached out to the deranged Palestinians and this is what they do to us. Elect me and I'll give you security, and I'll play games so the Palestinians won't get a fully-fuctioning state because they can't be trusted."

So let me answer you. A legitimate form of resistance is throwing stones. That gets you to the next step which is ACCEPTING A STATE AND PEACE. And if you can't do that, then your first question is moot. OK?

Most reports agree that Barak was willing to give Arafart somewhere between 95 to 97% of the West Bank

You people never mention the clunkers.

And now presenting...P F Retard, the man who disagrees with every Arab nation.

Is deflection all you have?

Is revised history all you have?
Every Arab nation agrees that there was a war and Israel won.
Then there's you in the corner with the tinfoil hat.