Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I guess I misses that one where it says that the guy was planting bombs under the fence?!?!
That's good of them... To allow protest in neighbouring territory that isn't theirs!
Wow really? So, IDF went and spoke to the guy and then, as a "last resort" decided to use a tank to blow the crap out of him? Seriously?
And you aren't wrong about the "special rules for Israel"... Any other country using tank artillery against civilians would be condemned by the world, potentially invaded by the US and allied forces! So yes, you are right, "special rules for Israel".
Any other country using tank artillery against civilians would be condemned by the world, potentially invaded by the US
Any other country firing unguided rockets against civilians would be condemned by the world, potentially invaded by the US, instead we send the Palestinians money.
How fucked up is that?
How fucked up is that that you wander off topic with unrelated comments...
The topic was targeting civilians. Did you miss it? Here>>>>>>> using tank artillery against civilians
Do you see it now?
The topic was the killing of a Palestinian BEFORE the protests by use of tank artillery...
Now, perhaps keep up or piss off!
No, the topic was how can people who target civilians not get condemned.
I agree, we should condemn the Palestinians who do that.
Maybe your Palestinian terrorists...err...farmers should farm further away from the border, eh?
What proof could I possibly offer
What proof could I possibly offer
Well, proof of your argument would be a start. Don't you think?
Any other country using tank artillery against civilians would be condemned by the world, potentially invaded by the US
Any other country firing unguided rockets against civilians would be condemned by the world, potentially invaded by the US, instead we send the Palestinians money.
How fucked up is that?
How fucked up is that that you wander off topic with unrelated comments...
The topic was targeting civilians. Did you miss it? Here>>>>>>> using tank artillery against civilians
Do you see it now?
The topic was the killing of a Palestinian BEFORE the protests by use of tank artillery...
Now, perhaps keep up or piss off!
No, the topic was how can people who target civilians not get condemned.
I agree, we should condemn the Palestinians who do that.
Maybe your Palestinian terrorists...err...farmers should farm further away from the border, eh?
As I said maybe you should try and keep up!
Either join in the conversation or not... Oh, maybe YOU have some proof of the farmer who was blow to shit by tank artillery was actually planting a bomb? No one else has been able to come up with that one!
Ah, wait, maybe we should just accept the word of the zionists, is that the answer?
What proof could I possibly offer
Well, proof of your argument would be a start. Don't you think?
(COMMENT)And in the meantime, are you going to condemn the violence and the incitement to violence committed against Israel? I suspect you will not. I suspect you, like others here, feel that Arabs have the right to "resist" while Jews do not have the right to defend themselves. I suspect that you hold double standards with respect to use of force -- one set of rules for Israel and one for others. You are just more careful than others to reveal it.
As you well know, I have always condemned the Hamas regime for many things, including violence.
However, yes, the Palestinians DO have a right to resist. Hell, if they didn't Israel would be much larger than it is already! Legally or otherwise!
As you well know, I have said that Israel has the right to defend itself. No double standards from me on that one!
The issues I have are the excessive use of force by Israel. Something that you will not accept.
And you accuse me of double standards!
Both you and I know that there is such an imbalance of 'forces' yet you consider that tanks are an acceptable answer to stones and slingshots... Want to discuss double standards?
How fucked up is that that you wander off topic with unrelated comments...
The topic was targeting civilians. Did you miss it? Here>>>>>>> using tank artillery against civilians
Do you see it now?
The topic was the killing of a Palestinian BEFORE the protests by use of tank artillery...
Now, perhaps keep up or piss off!
No, the topic was how can people who target civilians not get condemned.
I agree, we should condemn the Palestinians who do that.
Maybe your Palestinian terrorists...err...farmers should farm further away from the border, eh?
As I said maybe you should try and keep up!
Either join in the conversation or not... Oh, maybe YOU have some proof of the farmer who was blow to shit by tank artillery was actually planting a bomb? No one else has been able to come up with that one!
Ah, wait, maybe we should just accept the word of the zionists, is that the answer?
You should post the video of him peacefully farming well away from the fence before the shell killed him.
I'll wait.
RE: Israeli forces shoot unarmed protesters from across Gaza security fence, killing at least 15
※→ Humanity, et al,
The "right to resist" is not the issue. The issue is about directing actual "violence" directed against the "Occupying Power."
(COMMENT)And in the meantime, are you going to condemn the violence and the incitement to violence committed against Israel? I suspect you will not. I suspect you, like others here, feel that Arabs have the right to "resist" while Jews do not have the right to defend themselves. I suspect that you hold double standards with respect to use of force -- one set of rules for Israel and one for others. You are just more careful than others to reveal it.
As you well know, I have always condemned the Hamas regime for many things, including violence.
However, yes, the Palestinians DO have a right to resist. Hell, if they didn't Israel would be much larger than it is already! Legally or otherwise!
As you well know, I have said that Israel has the right to defend itself. No double standards from me on that one!
The issues I have are the excessive use of force by Israel. Something that you will not accept.
And you accuse me of double standards!
Both you and I know that there is such an imbalance of 'forces' yet you consider that tanks are an acceptable answer to stones and slingshots... Want to discuss double standards?
I would like to remind you if the obligations under the International Human Rights Law/
※ Article 68 ※ Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Protected persons (Arab Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), 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 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 (Israel) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person (Arab Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (Israel) 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.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
※ Article 75 ※ Fundamental Guarantees Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)This is what is meant by the "Rule of Law." What the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) must understand, is that if they commit an act, that would be a crime in any other reasonable circumstance, that it would also be a crime in the occupied territories. There is a consequence to thei ractions and they are obliged to pay it.
1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 [ Link ] of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.
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:
(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;
(i) murder;
(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
(iii) corporal punishment; and
(iv) mutilation;
(c) the taking of hostages;
(d) collective punishments; and
(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.
Most Respectfully,
R
I bet anything you they got the idea and name for the march from Left wing Islamist loving groups here in the US.The Most Telling Images from Friday’s March of Return Redux.
Extreme violence, attempts to infiltrate Israel by breaching the security fence, child abuse, overt antisemitism, hatred of the US, and clear propaganda. The palestinian so-called “March of Return” had it all. Peaceful protests? Not so much.
The following images from the violent “protest” say it all.
The Most Telling Images from Friday’s March of Return Redux
In the same paragraph where it states that Hamas is a farmers union , and that You get the best yield by plowing under military fences - EXCLUSIVELY AT NIGHT.RE: Israeli forces shoot unarmed protesters from across Gaza security fence, killing at least 15
※→ Humanity, et al,
The "right to resist" is not the issue. The issue is about directing actual "violence" directed against the "Occupying Power."
(COMMENT)And in the meantime, are you going to condemn the violence and the incitement to violence committed against Israel? I suspect you will not. I suspect you, like others here, feel that Arabs have the right to "resist" while Jews do not have the right to defend themselves. I suspect that you hold double standards with respect to use of force -- one set of rules for Israel and one for others. You are just more careful than others to reveal it.
As you well know, I have always condemned the Hamas regime for many things, including violence.
However, yes, the Palestinians DO have a right to resist. Hell, if they didn't Israel would be much larger than it is already! Legally or otherwise!
As you well know, I have said that Israel has the right to defend itself. No double standards from me on that one!
The issues I have are the excessive use of force by Israel. Something that you will not accept.
And you accuse me of double standards!
Both you and I know that there is such an imbalance of 'forces' yet you consider that tanks are an acceptable answer to stones and slingshots... Want to discuss double standards?
I would like to remind you if the obligations under the International Human Rights Law/
※ Article 68 ※ Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Protected persons (Arab Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), 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 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 (Israel) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person (Arab Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (Israel) 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.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
※ Article 75 ※ Fundamental Guarantees Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)This is what is meant by the "Rule of Law." What the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) must understand, is that if they commit an act, that would be a crime in any other reasonable circumstance, that it would also be a crime in the occupied territories. There is a consequence to thei ractions and they are obliged to pay it.
1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 [ Link ] of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.
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:
(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;
(i) murder;
(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
(iii) corporal punishment; and
(iv) mutilation;
(c) the taking of hostages;
(d) collective punishments; and
(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.
Most Respectfully,
R
That is funny...
Quoting Geneva Conventions to support Israel! hahahaha
Where does it say in the Geneva Conventions that its ok to use tanks against civilians?
When planting a bomb one is NO LONGER a civilian.RE: Israeli forces shoot unarmed protesters from across Gaza security fence, killing at least 15
※→ Humanity, et al,
The "right to resist" is not the issue. The issue is about directing actual "violence" directed against the "Occupying Power."
(COMMENT)And in the meantime, are you going to condemn the violence and the incitement to violence committed against Israel? I suspect you will not. I suspect you, like others here, feel that Arabs have the right to "resist" while Jews do not have the right to defend themselves. I suspect that you hold double standards with respect to use of force -- one set of rules for Israel and one for others. You are just more careful than others to reveal it.
As you well know, I have always condemned the Hamas regime for many things, including violence.
However, yes, the Palestinians DO have a right to resist. Hell, if they didn't Israel would be much larger than it is already! Legally or otherwise!
As you well know, I have said that Israel has the right to defend itself. No double standards from me on that one!
The issues I have are the excessive use of force by Israel. Something that you will not accept.
And you accuse me of double standards!
Both you and I know that there is such an imbalance of 'forces' yet you consider that tanks are an acceptable answer to stones and slingshots... Want to discuss double standards?
I would like to remind you if the obligations under the International Human Rights Law/
※ Article 68 ※ Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Protected persons (Arab Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), 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 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 (Israel) in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person (Arab Palestinians) only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power (Israel) 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.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
※ Article 75 ※ Fundamental Guarantees Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)This is what is meant by the "Rule of Law." What the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) must understand, is that if they commit an act, that would be a crime in any other reasonable circumstance, that it would also be a crime in the occupied territories. There is a consequence to thei ractions and they are obliged to pay it.
1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 [ Link ] of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.
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:
(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;
(i) murder;
(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
(iii) corporal punishment; and
(iv) mutilation;
(c) the taking of hostages;
(d) collective punishments; and
(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.
Most Respectfully,
R
That is funny...
Quoting Geneva Conventions to support Israel! hahahaha
Where does it say in the Geneva Conventions that its ok to use tanks against civilians?
(COMMENT)Where does it say in the Geneva Conventions that its ok to use tanks against civilians?
(COMMENT)When planting a bomb one is NO LONGER a civilian.
The topic was targeting civilians. Did you miss it? Here>>>>>>> using tank artillery against civilians
Do you see it now?
The topic was the killing of a Palestinian BEFORE the protests by use of tank artillery...
Now, perhaps keep up or piss off!
No, the topic was how can people who target civilians not get condemned.
I agree, we should condemn the Palestinians who do that.
Maybe your Palestinian terrorists...err...farmers should farm further away from the border, eh?
As I said maybe you should try and keep up!
Either join in the conversation or not... Oh, maybe YOU have some proof of the farmer who was blow to shit by tank artillery was actually planting a bomb? No one else has been able to come up with that one!
Ah, wait, maybe we should just accept the word of the zionists, is that the answer?
You should post the video of him peacefully farming well away from the fence before the shell killed him.
I'll wait.
It's not my responsibility to post anything...
It's yours.
Post a video of the farmer, the day before the march started, planting a bomb under the fence. Post a video of other means being used before the "last resort".
Go on, at least post something that supports yours and others claims that he was planting a bomb.
