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.
Ah. So that is your standard for international law concerning the use of lethal force? That no use of lethal force may be used without video proof of surveillance with evidence of lethal weapons and of the escalating deterrents? And that standard for each individual death doesn't seem...well, just the smallest bit ridiculous to you?
I know, let's look at your "last resort".... What, to you, is "last resort"?
You can bitch and bleat as much as you like... No one, including you, has been able to show any proof that the farmer killed the day before the march, by tank shelling, was attempting anything!
Team Israel quoting international law, Geneva Conventions, international 'standards' as some kind of defense has to be the biggest joke of the year...
In your rush to condemn the Joooooos, you fail to realize that the "farmer" had been observed performing suspicious activity, on two occasions, at night. Farming is not generally done under cover of darkness. Additionally, you fail to realize that the actions of the farmer were done in the context of imminent riots and attempts to breach israeli border areas announced by Hamas. In that context, getting anywhere near a military zone, at night, is the definition of poor judgement.
I tend to agree that holding Israel to standards of international law and Geneva Convention standards is reasonable. I see nothing to suggest any breach of those standards.
I also agree that Team Islamic Terrorist Huggers make no pretense that holding islamic terrorists to standards of international law and Geneva Convention protocols makes a lot of sense. Islamic terrorists are allowed an exception to all standards of moral and ethical behavior because you choose to allow that.
Wow, you know, it's not rocket science...
In your rush to try and be clever you simply bleat like a bitch...
Post something to support your statement and stop wasting bandwidth!
No reason to get snippy. I presented you a logical progression of events, one of which was a case to be made for "farming" of cover of darkness was suspicious in the context of a planned act of war (attempting to breach border controls) by an entity sworn to destroy Israel.
Your failure to support your argument is not my heartache.
Wrong...
I have supported my argument with links, you have supported your argument with nothing but bullshit...
(COMMENT)The DOP was not a treaty defining borders.
The armistice lines around the West Bank and Gaza ran through Palestine.
RE: Israeli forces shoot unarmed protesters from across Gaza security fence, killing at least 15
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
Irrelevant. This is subterfuge → as an attempt to discredit the response.
I preface this response with the observation that the Arab Palestinians, as a member of the international community (2012 Observer Status) do not follow, and have not followed for half a century, the
(COMMENT)The DOP was not a treaty defining borders.
The armistice lines around the West Bank and Gaza ran through Palestine.
Agreed, the Declaration of Principles (DOP) does not define what a border is. A border need not be defined, it is a near self-evident perimeter. The DOP is a Solemn Proclamation that takes into consideration the Customary Law (principles of international law relating to friendly relations and co-operation among States); the first of which is about the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence.
Second: Immediately prior to the of the UN General Assembly Resolution which accords to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations (UN), without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the "Palestine was treated as an entity" (A/RES/67/19) and (Legal Memorandum related to A/RES/67/19). The UN decided (A/RES/43/177) that effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" (PLO). And, prior to the 1988 designation, that portion of territory that was not self-governing, territory to which the first Order in Council applied and that defined Palestine, "Legal Entity" the government of which was an agency of the UN. (See Memorandum "A" → A/AC.21/UK/42 25 February 1948 → The Legal Meaning of the "Termination of the Mandate").
When "YOU" say that the Armistice Lines (dissolved in 1979 and 1994 respectively) "ran through Palestine" → noting the emphasis on the word "through." "YOU" are saying that the Armistice Lines ran through the territory formerly known as "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine." (See: ✪ Palestine Order in LoN Council - 10 August 1922)
After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine continued to be a legal entity but for the immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for the non-self-governing portion means "United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine."
YOUR statement is entirely incorrect and inaccurate. The Armistice Lines were drawn independently of the perimeter of the territory former under the Mandate of Palestine or the United Nations Commission acting as the Government of Palestine. Historical Lines are just Historical Lines.
Most Respectfully,
R
You are trying to smokescreen the issue. Whether there was a Mandate or not does not matter. It was just an appointed administration that had no affect on the territory. Funny that you do not use mandated territory for Syria or Jordan."YOU" are saying that the Armistice Lines ran through the territory formerly known as "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies,
BREAKING NEWS: Palestinian Journalist Fatally Shot While Covering Gaza Protest
Gaza protests: More unarmed Palestinians killed and wounded
They are protesting the right to attack Israel at its border with impunity? Dumbasses.'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
Speaking to RT, David Keyes, Benjamin Netanyahu's foreign media spokesperson, said the 'Great Return' protests staged by Palestinians along the security border fence separating the enclave from the Israeli-held territory are the "opposite of peaceful protests."
"The aim of this event is to swarm into Israel and overwhelm it, and it's a part of a long track record by Hamas of waging war against Israel, launching tens of thousands of missiles, conducting suicide bombings against cafes, against civilians and in buses," Keys charged. He went on to argue that Israel essentially bears no responsibility for the deaths of 17 people and the injuries of hundreds more during the Friday clashes, as it only fought back against Hamas, which has been de facto in control of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas is, consequently, the one with the ability to rein in the violence, by demanding that its supporters stay clear of the border fence, Keys argued
No Hamas spokesbeards were near the border area for comment as they were safely ensconced in their luxury condos, far from the conflict, leaving the slovenly minions to inhale toxic smoke and fumes.That is one of the things they are protesting, dumbfuck.'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
Israel?They are protesting the right to attack Israel at its border with impunity? Dumbasses.'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
Speaking to RT, David Keyes, Benjamin Netanyahu's foreign media spokesperson, said the 'Great Return' protests staged by Palestinians along the security border fence separating the enclave from the Israeli-held territory are the "opposite of peaceful protests."
"The aim of this event is to swarm into Israel and overwhelm it, and it's a part of a long track record by Hamas of waging war against Israel, launching tens of thousands of missiles, conducting suicide bombings against cafes, against civilians and in buses," Keys charged. He went on to argue that Israel essentially bears no responsibility for the deaths of 17 people and the injuries of hundreds more during the Friday clashes, as it only fought back against Hamas, which has been de facto in control of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas is, consequently, the one with the ability to rein in the violence, by demanding that its supporters stay clear of the border fence, Keys argued
No Hamas spokesbeards were near the border area for comment as they were safely ensconced in their luxury condos, far from the conflict, leaving the slovenly minions to inhale toxic smoke and fumes.That is one of the things they are protesting, dumbfuck.'There would be no killings if Hamas told protesters to stay away from border'– Israeli PM spokesman
BREAKING NEWS: Palestinian Journalist Fatally Shot While Covering Gaza Protest
Report: Gaza journalist killed during border protest was Hamas member
Report: Gaza journalist killed during protest was Hamas member
I know, let's look at your "last resort".... What, to you, is "last resort"?
You can bitch and bleat as much as you like... No one, including you, has been able to show any proof that the farmer killed the day before the march, by tank shelling, was attempting anything!
Team Israel quoting international law, Geneva Conventions, international 'standards' as some kind of defense has to be the biggest joke of the year...
In your rush to condemn the Joooooos, you fail to realize that the "farmer" had been observed performing suspicious activity, on two occasions, at night. Farming is not generally done under cover of darkness. Additionally, you fail to realize that the actions of the farmer were done in the context of imminent riots and attempts to breach israeli border areas announced by Hamas. In that context, getting anywhere near a military zone, at night, is the definition of poor judgement.
I tend to agree that holding Israel to standards of international law and Geneva Convention standards is reasonable. I see nothing to suggest any breach of those standards.
I also agree that Team Islamic Terrorist Huggers make no pretense that holding islamic terrorists to standards of international law and Geneva Convention protocols makes a lot of sense. Islamic terrorists are allowed an exception to all standards of moral and ethical behavior because you choose to allow that.
Wow, you know, it's not rocket science...
In your rush to try and be clever you simply bleat like a bitch...
Post something to support your statement and stop wasting bandwidth!
No reason to get snippy. I presented you a logical progression of events, one of which was a case to be made for "farming" of cover of darkness was suspicious in the context of a planned act of war (attempting to breach border controls) by an entity sworn to destroy Israel.
Your failure to support your argument is not my heartache.
Wrong...
I have supported my argument with links, you have supported your argument with nothing but bullshit...
Well, actually, you supported nothing.
Support your claim that the "farmer" was, under cover of darkness, actually farming.
What corroboration can you offer? What link have you presented to support your claim that the "farmer" was attending to his fields, under cover of darkness.
I saw nothing that that you presented.
(COMMENT)You are trying to smokescreen the issue. Whether there was a Mandate or not does not matter. It was just an appointed administration that had no affect on the territory. Funny that you do not use mandated territory for Syria or Jordan."YOU" are saying that the Armistice Lines ran through the territory formerly known as "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies,
(COMMENT)That said: the armistice lines ran between Palestine and its surrounding countries except for the West Bank and Gaza where they ran through Palestine. The Mandate left Palestine the year before so why mention it? There was no mention of the Mandate at all in the armistice agreements.
I know, let's look at your "last resort".... What, to you, is "last resort"?
You can bitch and bleat as much as you like... No one, including you, has been able to show any proof that the farmer killed the day before the march, by tank shelling, was attempting anything!
as I will remain unmoved. You have revealed yourself, and I see you.As you well know, I have condemned Palestinian violence in the past.
Your strident denial that violence has occurred
You have been presented with media reports, statements by the IDF, photographic evidence, videos, statements made by the government of Gaza and there is ample further material available for anyone who spends a fraction of a minute researching the events.
Your strident denial that violence has occurred
I would love for you to show me where I have denied any violence Shusha!
It's ok, I will wait!
The continued insistence that these are "farmers" and "peaceful protesters" is ludicrious.
Your strident denial that violence has occurred
I would love for you to show me where I have denied any violence Shusha!
It's ok, I will wait!
You have been denying violence by omission since the start of the thread. If you don't deny it -- why won't you condemn it?
I have been presented with a lot of things Shusha, except the one single thing I have asked for. I call that deflection.
I have been presented with a lot of things Shusha, except the one single thing I have asked for. I call that deflection.
Not so, you have been provided with media reports with include IDF spokesman quotes concerning the incident in question.
I spoke of ONE farmer Shusha, not "farmers", you remember, the one who was shelled by a tank BEFORE the marches?
Not a single Team Israel member has been able to show anything that says he was planting a bomb under the fence!
The media report I posted stated that witnesses came forward and said that he was working his land. The IDF did not comment!
The army said that the “two suspects approached the perimeter fence… and engaged in suspicious behavior on the ground alongside it. In response, an IDF unit fired at them with a tank.” Source
The army said that the “two suspects approached the perimeter fence… and engaged in suspicious behavior on the ground alongside it. In response, an IDF unit fired at them with a tank.”
