Israeli Man Sentenced To Life In Prison For Murder Of Palestinian Teen

[Phoenall]

Different laws in place as he was not at war with Israel

Yes different laws for different classes of citizen.

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Jewish terrorists have long gotten lenient treatment and still do - why such outrage? Their homes should be destroyed like any other terrorist murderer.

Because INTERNATIONAL LAW dictates that it does not work that way. Don't like it then change International laws.


How many times have you had this explained and still you want to treat the Jews differently to the rest of the world. This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst.

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled. The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.


You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

 

[Phoenall]

2014 kidnapping and murder of Israeli teenagers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hussam Qawasmeh was sentenced to three life terms in prison for the murders as well as a compensation payment of $63,000 to the victims' families.

Yes, he was caught, convicted and sentenced.

I gave a quick perusal of that wiki page just before I replied and man is it ever full of stuff! Like that he was the mastermind, but the actual perps have yet to be found.

Some murders are particularly brutal. In my mind, burning a child to death is one of the more horrific ways of killing someone. That is what made this particular crime stand out. What sort of person could stand there and set someone on fire and watch them die? You're making this about Israeli's vs. Palestinians rather than the horrific nature of the crime itself.

.

On the former part here, I totally agree. Yet the latter part that I put in bold is you putting words into my mouth. I am not making it that at all. I was just making an observation:

And, just as an fyi - I've never claimed neutrality.

So you have had me fooled. Now the truth comes out? Palestine from the river to the sea? Is that you?

There is a huge amount of space between rabid-pro-Israel and rabid-pro-Palestinian.

Palestine from river to sea? No. I've made my positions clear many times. I'm pro-both depending on the area being discussed - but I'm not neutral or impartial. I don't think anyone here is.

Are you pro International law when it works in the Jews/Israel's favour or are you anti ?

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

 

[Phoenall]

Different laws in place as he was not at war with Israel

Yes different laws for different classes of citizen.

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Palestinians are convicted and jailed routinely for even throwing rocks.

Jordanian law in practise as commanded by the Geneva conventions. Just not as far as imposing the death penalty for such actions as dictated by Jordanian law.

I don't think that is true anymore - somewhere this was discussed and dismissed, I'll have to find the conversation.

Dismissed by you because you do not want Israel to be covered by IHL to their advantage. Read the Geneva conventions.

 

[Coyote]

2014 kidnapping and murder of Israeli teenagers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hussam Qawasmeh was sentenced to three life terms in prison for the murders as well as a compensation payment of $63,000 to the victims' families.

Yes, he was caught, convicted and sentenced.

I gave a quick perusal of that wiki page just before I replied and man is it ever full of stuff! Like that he was the mastermind, but the actual perps have yet to be found.

Some murders are particularly brutal. In my mind, burning a child to death is one of the more horrific ways of killing someone. That is what made this particular crime stand out. What sort of person could stand there and set someone on fire and watch them die? You're making this about Israeli's vs. Palestinians rather than the horrific nature of the crime itself.

.

On the former part here, I totally agree. Yet the latter part that I put in bold is you putting words into my mouth. I am not making it that at all. I was just making an observation:

And, just as an fyi - I've never claimed neutrality.

So you have had me fooled. Now the truth comes out? Palestine from the river to the sea? Is that you?

There is a huge amount of space between rabid-pro-Israel and rabid-pro-Palestinian.

Palestine from river to sea? No. I've made my positions clear many times. I'm pro-both depending on the area being discussed - but I'm not neutral or impartial. I don't think anyone here is.

Are you pro International law when it works in the Jews/Israel's favour or are you anti ?

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

 

[Coyote]

Yes different laws for different classes of citizen.

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Palestinians are convicted and jailed routinely for even throwing rocks.

Jordanian law in practise as commanded by the Geneva conventions. Just not as far as imposing the death penalty for such actions as dictated by Jordanian law.

I don't think that is true anymore - somewhere this was discussed and dismissed, I'll have to find the conversation.

Dismissed by you because you do not want Israel to be covered by IHL to their advantage. Read the Geneva conventions.

You're trying to simplify what is in reality a complicated jurisdictional situation.

 

[Coyote]

Yes different laws for different classes of citizen.

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Jewish terrorists have long gotten lenient treatment and still do - why such outrage? Their homes should be destroyed like any other terrorist murderer.

Because INTERNATIONAL LAW dictates that it does not work that way. Don't like it then change International laws.


How many times have you had this explained and still you want to treat the Jews differently to the rest of the world. This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst.

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

Sure you do. When it's a Jewish terrorist you go around Robin Hoods barn trying to prove he was justified in committing terrorism.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled.

Who is doing that?

The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.

No. They aren't judged under Jordanian law because Jordan has relininquished all claim to the territory. Your brain is consumed by gibberish. Let's move on.

You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

Link please.

 

[Phoenall]

I gave a quick perusal of that wiki page just before I replied and man is it ever full of stuff! Like that he was the mastermind, but the actual perps have yet to be found.

.

On the former part here, I totally agree. Yet the latter part that I put in bold is you putting words into my mouth. I am not making it that at all. I was just making an observation:

So you have had me fooled. Now the truth comes out? Palestine from the river to the sea? Is that you?

There is a huge amount of space between rabid-pro-Israel and rabid-pro-Palestinian.

Palestine from river to sea? No. I've made my positions clear many times. I'm pro-both depending on the area being discussed - but I'm not neutral or impartial. I don't think anyone here is.

Are you pro International law when it works in the Jews/Israel's favour or are you anti ?

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

Irrelevant as Jordan was still in control of the west bank until July 1988 and so their legal system was the one used under INTERNATIONAL LAW. The P.A. can not change the law to suit their POV or needs, so Israel applies the law that was in place in June 1967as demanded by the Geneva conventions.

 

[Phoenall]

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Palestinians are convicted and jailed routinely for even throwing rocks.

Jordanian law in practise as commanded by the Geneva conventions. Just not as far as imposing the death penalty for such actions as dictated by Jordanian law.

I don't think that is true anymore - somewhere this was discussed and dismissed, I'll have to find the conversation.

Dismissed by you because you do not want Israel to be covered by IHL to their advantage. Read the Geneva conventions.

You're trying to simplify what is in reality a complicated jurisdictional situation.

Because it is that simple. The Geneva conventions state that the law in place the day that the occupation starts is the law that will be applied. It does not say that the law can change when the owners give up the land and hand it to the inhabitants

 

[Phoenall]

Considering mass murdering Palestinians get set free and Jewish killers don't, that should even the scale. The family's home won't be destroyed. Next.

Jewish terrorists have long gotten lenient treatment and still do - why such outrage? Their homes should be destroyed like any other terrorist murderer.

Because INTERNATIONAL LAW dictates that it does not work that way. Don't like it then change International laws.


How many times have you had this explained and still you want to treat the Jews differently to the rest of the world. This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst.

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

Sure you do. When it's a Jewish terrorist you go around Robin Hoods barn trying to prove he was justified in committing terrorism.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled.

Who is doing that?

The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.

No. They aren't judged under Jordanian law because Jordan has relininquished all claim to the territory. Your brain is consumed by gibberish. Let's move on.

You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

Link please.

No I condemn them out of hand, once it is shown that it was a Jewish terrorist attack. Responding to Palestinians attacks is not terrorism

YOU when you demand the same laws apply to Jewish criminals as apply to Palestinian terrorists, when international law says that different laws apply.

IRRELEVANT as this does not alter the Geneva conventions. Show were it says that because Jordan gave up the west bank that the Israelis then had to apply a non existent nations laws. Or did you forget that little fact that Jordan gave up the land before the P.A. had been formed and formulated a set of laws ?



Read your posts when you attack the Jews for defending against islamonazi attacks

 

[docmauser1]

You're trying to simplify what is in reality a complicated jurisdictional situation.

Shouldn't that palistanian terrorist maniac then be just shot as per the geneva convention?

 

[Coyote]

You're trying to simplify what is in reality a complicated jurisdictional situation.

Shouldn't that palistanian terrorist maniac then be just shot as per the geneva convention?

Read what I said above.

 

[Coyote]

There is a huge amount of space between rabid-pro-Israel and rabid-pro-Palestinian.

Palestine from river to sea? No. I've made my positions clear many times. I'm pro-both depending on the area being discussed - but I'm not neutral or impartial. I don't think anyone here is.

Are you pro International law when it works in the Jews/Israel's favour or are you anti ?

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

Irrelevant as Jordan was still in control of the west bank until July 1988 and so their legal system was the one used under INTERNATIONAL LAW. The P.A. can not change the law to suit their POV or needs, so Israel applies the law that was in place in June 1967as demanded by the Geneva conventions.

I'll go by what Rocco said, not by what you say.

 

[Coyote]

Jewish terrorists have long gotten lenient treatment and still do - why such outrage? Their homes should be destroyed like any other terrorist murderer.

Because INTERNATIONAL LAW dictates that it does not work that way. Don't like it then change International laws.


How many times have you had this explained and still you want to treat the Jews differently to the rest of the world. This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst.

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

Sure you do. When it's a Jewish terrorist you go around Robin Hoods barn trying to prove he was justified in committing terrorism.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled.

Who is doing that?

The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.

No. They aren't judged under Jordanian law because Jordan has relininquished all claim to the territory. Your brain is consumed by gibberish. Let's move on.

You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

Link please.

No I condemn them out of hand, once it is shown that it was a Jewish terrorist attack. Responding to Palestinians attacks is not terrorism

So, when an Israeli burns a Palestinian kid to death in revenge for a kidnapping of 3 Israeli kids (by other people) - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

When Irgun bombs a crowded civilian market place - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

How far are you going to stretch this?

YOU when you demand the same laws apply to Jewish criminals as apply to Palestinian terrorists, when international law says that different laws apply.

No, I say that the same laws should apply in the same region - Jewish terrorists should be treated the same as Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank.

Interesting distinction you make - "Jewish criminals" vs "Palestinian terrorists". You can't bring yourself to say what they are - Jewish terrorists.

IRRELEVANT as this does not alter the Geneva conventions. Show were it says that because Jordan gave up the west bank that the Israelis then had to apply a non existent nations laws. Or did you forget that little fact that Jordan gave up the land before the P.A. had been formed and formulated a set of laws ?

Totally relevant.

Read your posts when you attack the Jews for defending against islamonazi attacks

So you can't come up with a link where I defend terrorism? Ok. Admit you're a liar than.

 

[Phoenall]

Are you pro International law when it works in the Jews/Israel's favour or are you anti ?

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

Irrelevant as Jordan was still in control of the west bank until July 1988 and so their legal system was the one used under INTERNATIONAL LAW. The P.A. can not change the law to suit their POV or needs, so Israel applies the law that was in place in June 1967as demanded by the Geneva conventions.

I'll go by what Rocco said, not by what you say.

He says the same thing as I do if you read his posts. the jurisdiction does not end when the nation gives up the land. If it did then under International law Israel would be the next legal owner.
But while we are on the subject who granted the land to the arab muslims ?

 

[Coyote]

You have to be far more specific then that in order for me to give an accurate answer, and your grip on international law is not always accurate as it applies to Palestinians and Israel. I think Rocco straightened that out.

I will say I support Israel's right to defend itself, it's right to exist, and the right of it's citizens to access shared holy sites.

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

Irrelevant as Jordan was still in control of the west bank until July 1988 and so their legal system was the one used under INTERNATIONAL LAW. The P.A. can not change the law to suit their POV or needs, so Israel applies the law that was in place in June 1967as demanded by the Geneva conventions.

I'll go by what Rocco said, not by what you say.

He says the same thing as I do if you read his posts. the jurisdiction does not end when the nation gives up the land. If it did then under International law Israel would be the next legal owner.
But while we are on the subject who granted the land to the arab muslims ?

I read it.

It only applies to death penalty cases.

Also, this is what RoccoR said in the link I posted - which tells me that jurisdictional issues are extremely complicated and it doesn't appear to fall under international law.

Normally, this level of understanding would be adequate for 99% of the territories that would be placed in "Occupation." However, there is a trick of fate here, and it would probably take an ICC Ruling to resolve it.
On 31 July 1988, HM King Hussein announced that all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank were terminated.
• Jordan relinquishes all legal ties:
∆ The West Bank is not covered by Jordanian Law.
∆ In the matter of Law and Order --- West Bank is solely under the responsibility of Israel.
On 15 November 1988, the Palestine National Council announced their Declaration of Independence.In November '88, when the PNC claims authority, the State of Palestine did not have a Criminal Code.
Then, in 1995, the Oslo Accords come into effect. And that further complicate the Legal System. There are:

• Full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority --- or Area "A"
• Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control --- or Area "B"
• Full Israeli civil and security control --- or Area "C"
Then, there is the newly developing Palestinian Penal Code, with a new Death Penalty Code.

 

[Phoenall]

Because INTERNATIONAL LAW dictates that it does not work that way. Don't like it then change International laws.


How many times have you had this explained and still you want to treat the Jews differently to the rest of the world. This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst.

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

Sure you do. When it's a Jewish terrorist you go around Robin Hoods barn trying to prove he was justified in committing terrorism.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled.

Who is doing that?

The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.

No. They aren't judged under Jordanian law because Jordan has relininquished all claim to the territory. Your brain is consumed by gibberish. Let's move on.

You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

Link please.

No I condemn them out of hand, once it is shown that it was a Jewish terrorist attack. Responding to Palestinians attacks is not terrorism

So, when an Israeli burns a Palestinian kid to death in revenge for a kidnapping of 3 Israeli kids (by other people) - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

When Irgun bombs a crowded civilian market place - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

How far are you going to stretch this?

YOU when you demand the same laws apply to Jewish criminals as apply to Palestinian terrorists, when international law says that different laws apply.

No, I say that the same laws should apply in the same region - Jewish terrorists should be treated the same as Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank.

Interesting distinction you make - "Jewish criminals" vs "Palestinian terrorists". You can't bring yourself to say what they are - Jewish terrorists.

IRRELEVANT as this does not alter the Geneva conventions. Show were it says that because Jordan gave up the west bank that the Israelis then had to apply a non existent nations laws. Or did you forget that little fact that Jordan gave up the land before the P.A. had been formed and formulated a set of laws ?

Totally relevant.

Read your posts when you attack the Jews for defending against islamonazi attacks

So you can't come up with a link where I defend terrorism? Ok. Admit you're a liar than.

Yes it is, and at the same time cold blooded murder for which they should be sentenced and pay the price

Yes it is when the crowd is a cover for Palestinian terrorist attacks, which if you research the cases you linked was the case in the majority of them. They went too far sometimes and should have been made to pay the price.
How far are you going to stretch it more like. Answer me this when was the last time a Palestinian was arrested, charged, tried in a palestinian court, found guilty and given a life sentence for killing a Jew ?

Then they should both be set free as the Palestinians are doing. and no action taken. Then the IDF can shoot any Palestinian terrorist with impunity.

Because that is what they are, unless you can show that they are the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear. What ideology or religion are the Jews pushing, as we know the muslims are pushing islam

No as it does not work in the period between Jordan giving up the west bank and the P.A. being formed 23 years later. What law governed the occupied territories in that time period ?

No as I have not looked, and I have no intention of looking as the majority of posters have seen you doing it. As in your defence of the tunnels and use of illegal weapons.

 

[Phoenall]

I have been very specific, or do you want examples

An Israeli commits an act of terrorism in Israel and is caught, he is tried in an Israeli court for his crimes and gets 25 years in prison. The maximum allowed under Israeli law. At the same time a Palestinian is caught in the west bank committing an act of terrorism. He is arrested and tried by an Israeli court acting on behalf of the Jordanian legal process. The maximum sentence allowed is execution, but the court puts him in prison for 25 years. Then in line with IHL they demolish the building he lived in because it was used for military/terrorist purposes.


Which is the correct punishment and why ?



By the way Roccor says exactly the same thing I do if you read his posts.

I knew we had discussed it before, and you are not entirely correct: Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Jordan relinquished all claims to West Bank, Israel is responsible for law and order in conjuction with the PA. There is no reason why a Jewish terrorist in the West Bank should not be treated the same as a Palestinian terrorist under the law.

Irrelevant as Jordan was still in control of the west bank until July 1988 and so their legal system was the one used under INTERNATIONAL LAW. The P.A. can not change the law to suit their POV or needs, so Israel applies the law that was in place in June 1967as demanded by the Geneva conventions.

I'll go by what Rocco said, not by what you say.

He says the same thing as I do if you read his posts. the jurisdiction does not end when the nation gives up the land. If it did then under International law Israel would be the next legal owner.
But while we are on the subject who granted the land to the arab muslims ?

I read it.

It only applies to death penalty cases.

Also, this is what RoccoR said in the link I posted - which tells me that jurisdictional issues are extremely complicated and it doesn't appear to fall under international law.

Normally, this level of understanding would be adequate for 99% of the territories that would be placed in "Occupation." However, there is a trick of fate here, and it would probably take an ICC Ruling to resolve it.
On 31 July 1988, HM King Hussein announced that all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank were terminated.
• Jordan relinquishes all legal ties:
∆ The West Bank is not covered by Jordanian Law.
∆ In the matter of Law and Order --- West Bank is solely under the responsibility of Israel.
On 15 November 1988, the Palestine National Council announced their Declaration of Independence.In November '88, when the PNC claims authority, the State of Palestine did not have a Criminal Code.
Then, in 1995, the Oslo Accords come into effect. And that further complicate the Legal System. There are:

• Full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority --- or Area "A"
• Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control --- or Area "B"
• Full Israeli civil and security control --- or Area "C"
Then, there is the newly developing Palestinian Penal Code, with a new Death Penalty Code.

It is in the Geneva conventions and they make it very clear what laws are applied. What laws were ion force between the giving up of the occupied territories and the forming of the PA in the 23 year period that this took ?

 

[Coyote]

Do you have a problem with Jewish terrorists being treated the same as other terrorists? "This is RACISM and ANTI SEMITISM at its worst."

I'm beginning to think, from several debates - that you support Jewish terrorists. You certainly excuse them often enough, and now you seem to think they should be treated with kid gloves - ie - differently than other terrorists. Which way is it Phoenal - DO you oppose terrorism? DO oppose ALL terrorism or is some of it ok in your odd little mind?

No I don't which is why I advocate that they be treated as harshly as the law allows. But I don't advocate that the law should be torn up and thrown away to appease some stupid hatred that I hold against the persons race.

Sure you do. When it's a Jewish terrorist you go around Robin Hoods barn trying to prove he was justified in committing terrorism.

I support no terrorists, but at the same time don't see how people can come on here and demand that the international laws and state laws be ignored and their vengeance fulfilled.

Who is doing that?

The Jewish terrorists are judged under Jewish law because that is what IHL dictates, they are not judged under Jordanian law unless they are captured in Jordan committing acts of terrorism against Jordanian citizens. The Palestinian terrorists are judged under Jordanian laws because that is what IHL dictates will happen. We have tried to educate you on this thousands of times and because your brain is consumed with Jew hatred you cant take it in.

No. They aren't judged under Jordanian law because Jordan has relininquished all claim to the territory. Your brain is consumed by gibberish. Let's move on.

You seem to justify terrorism done to the Jews because of your inability to think it through and reach a rational conclusion.

Link please.

No I condemn them out of hand, once it is shown that it was a Jewish terrorist attack. Responding to Palestinians attacks is not terrorism

So, when an Israeli burns a Palestinian kid to death in revenge for a kidnapping of 3 Israeli kids (by other people) - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

When Irgun bombs a crowded civilian market place - that is "responding to Palestinian attacks" and not terrorism?

How far are you going to stretch this?

YOU when you demand the same laws apply to Jewish criminals as apply to Palestinian terrorists, when international law says that different laws apply.

No, I say that the same laws should apply in the same region - Jewish terrorists should be treated the same as Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank.

Interesting distinction you make - "Jewish criminals" vs "Palestinian terrorists". You can't bring yourself to say what they are - Jewish terrorists.

IRRELEVANT as this does not alter the Geneva conventions. Show were it says that because Jordan gave up the west bank that the Israelis then had to apply a non existent nations laws. Or did you forget that little fact that Jordan gave up the land before the P.A. had been formed and formulated a set of laws ?

Totally relevant.

Read your posts when you attack the Jews for defending against islamonazi attacks

So you can't come up with a link where I defend terrorism? Ok. Admit you're a liar than.

Yes it is, and at the same time cold blooded murder for which they should be sentenced and pay the price

Yes it is when the crowd is a cover for Palestinian terrorist attacks, which if you research the cases you linked was the case in the majority of them. They went too far sometimes and should have been made to pay the price.

I did research the cases and there is no evidence that that was the case with Irgun- they were trying to frighten the Arabs. See how you're defending them?

How far are you going to stretch it more like. Answer me this when was the last time a Palestinian was arrested, charged, tried in a palestinian court, found guilty and given a life sentence for killing a Jew ?

We all know (and agree) that the Palestinian justice system is a joke, so this is merely a deflection - "see what they do" as a means of justifying it.

Then they should both be set free as the Palestinians are doing. and no action taken. Then the IDF can shoot any Palestinian terrorist with impunity.

Because that is what they are, unless you can show that they are the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear. What ideology or religion are the Jews pushing, as we know the muslims are pushing islam

The Palestinian conflict is not about Islam - it's about territory primarily, religion secondarily. Now you are trying to say there are no Jewish terrorists?

Apparently the Israeli law enforcement considers them terrorists.

No as it does not work in the period between Jordan giving up the west bank and the P.A. being formed 23 years later. What law governed the occupied territories in that time period ?

No as I have not looked, and I have no intention of looking as the majority of posters have seen you doing it. As in your defence of the tunnels and use of illegal weapons.

Ok so you admit you are a liar and you can not come up with any links. No surprise there.

Now, let's move on. Where have I defended tunnels and use of illegal weapons? This should be interesting as I don't even recall discussing tunnels.

 

[Lipush]

At the end of the day, Israel did justice with that scumbag.

Can we ever expect our enemies to do their same thing with their own rotten roots?

Pfft.

 

[docmauser1]

You're trying to simplify what is in reality a complicated jurisdictional situation.

Shouldn't that palistanian terrorist maniac then be just shot as per the geneva convention?

Read what I said above.

Should've been shot.