Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Did I say that? No! You are trying to challenge my discussion by suggesting I lied...

First, a cartoon like handbook, written on the 8th Grade Level, is not the same as the authority documents I presented.

So they used fake information. .

(COMMENT)

The handbook is not written to singularly support the discussion we are having. Make no mistake, the 8th Grade Handbook is accurate as far as it goes; but is not intended to be used to support those that ARE suspected of, or engaged in, activities hostile to the security of the State (Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence). Such individual persons or groups shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) as would, if exercised in the favor of to the security of State of Israel. This is spelled out in Article 5, GCIV.

The general opinion is that convention does not forbid fighting without an official uniform. However, if the combatant (or partisan) does not comply with the provisions of Articles 1, 2 or 3 of the 1907 Hague Regulation, this same combatant (or partisan) cannot claim any of the protections of The Hague Regulation or that of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

There is a big difference between:

• "inhabitants of a territory which HAS NOT BEEN occupied" (Article 2, Hague Regulation)
​

And that of:

• Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters that operate in the shadows, from densely populated areas, addressed by the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) which specifically reaffirmed the distinction between "lawful" and "unlawful" combatants, where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.​

The level at which the discussion has ascended certainly is much different from that of the handbook.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Did I say that? No! You are trying to challenge my discussion by suggesting I lied...

First, a cartoon like handbook, written on the 8th Grade Level, is not the same as the authority documents I presented.

So they used fake information. .

(COMMENT)

The handbook is not written to singularly support the discussion we are having. Make no mistake, the 8th Grade Handbook is accurate as far as it goes; but is not intended to be used to support those that ARE suspected of, or engaged in, activities hostile to the security of the State (Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence). Such individual persons or groups shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) as would, if exercised in the favor of to the security of State of Israel. This is spelled out in Article 5, GCIV.

The general opinion is that convention does not forbid fighting without an official uniform. However, if the combatant (or partisan) does not comply with the provisions of Articles 1, 2 or 3 of the 1907 Hague Regulation, this same combatant (or partisan) cannot claim any of the protections of The Hague Regulation or that of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

There is a big difference between:

• "inhabitants of a territory which HAS NOT BEEN occupied" (Article 2, Hague Regulation)
​

And that of:

• Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters that operate in the shadows, from densely populated areas, addressed by the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) which specifically reaffirmed the distinction between "lawful" and "unlawful" combatants, where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.​

The level at which the discussion has ascended certainly is much different from that of the handbook.

Most Respectfully,
R

My post was in response to the question of Israel's violations.

If you like, we could discuss The Palestinian's piddly little violations in response to Israel's massive violations.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is just camoflage in the dilution of the question.

Are Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) criminally accountable for:

• Offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power?
• Guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offenses which have caused the death of one or more persons?
​

The answer is yes! Of course they are. There is an entire section on how the detain and administer punish in the Geneva Convention.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

AND the idea you submit that: "This "occupation" can only be defined by its true activities. Settler colonialism." These ideas are completely separate and independent. There are many example in which one can point-out an OCCUPATION absent COLONIALISM and vise-versa.

The civilian population of an occupied territory owes no allegiance to the occupying power. As we will see in detail later, it cannot be forced to fight its own country, be involved in any way with the armed forces or give military assistance to the occupying power.

(COMMENT)

I do not see or recall any Israeli effort to conscript Arab Palestinians of the West Bank for the purpose of combating HoAP. Can you point to the involuntary service for me?

Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour, family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their private property is protected.

(COMMENT)

I have not heard of the IDF, Border Police, or Security Services shaking-down Arab Palestinians for money, jewry or other precious assets. I really don't see major or minor proterties taken outside those necessary for a security advantage.

Collective penalties, measures of intimidation, terrorism and hostage-taking are prohibited.

(COMMENT)

I've not seen a violation of this. This is a protocol for the Palestinian Government that supports and praises
Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters.

Each State has a duty to defend itself, it citizenry and sovereign integrity and independence. Israel has all three and the burden of responsibility. The Arab Palestinians have not yet reach the ability to protect anything of consequence.

The Israeli Occupying Power with the authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power
and the authorities of the occupied territory. This is intended to prevent national authorities from being put under pressure to make concessions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken its legal rights.

(COMMENT)

Yes, this is 100% correct. You just don't make an agreement; that would preclude most Peace Treaties.

Individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations of the civilian

population from occupied territory are prohibited. The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

(COMMENT)

I have not observed this since the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) went into force.

After effective occupation of territory, members of the territory’s armed forces who have not surrendered, organized resistance movements and genuine national liberation movements may resist the occupation.

(COMMENT)

It may, and it must live with both the legal, economic and physical consequence of that decision.

Indirect support for the resistance movement, such as providing information or non-military supplies, does not constitute taking a direct part in hostilities. Those so engaged are civilians and therefore protected against attack.

(COMMENT)

A person is guilty of espionage, or of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offense which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offense were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The words "duty of allegiance" constitute an acknowledgment of the fundamental principle according to which the occupation does not sever the bond existing between the inhabitants and the conquered State. Protected persons must nevertheless obey legitimate orders issued by the Occupying Power. (See COMMENTARY OF 1958)
​

As legitimate State authority has now passed into the hands of the occupying power, the latter must take all measures in its power to restore and ensure, as far as possible, law and order and public safety. As a rule, the occupying power must allow the territory to be administered as before. It must respect the laws in force in the territory before
occupation unless it is absolutely prevented from doing so.

(COMMENT)

In many cases, the law (Jordanian and Egyptian) are many times more restrictive that Israeli law. How were the Arab Palestinians in Black September treated? How long do Egyptian protestors like the Muslim Brotherhood last in Egypt.

I can go on with each and every point you make, but I think you understand that you must give a little more thought to you position, then to just cut and paste an high-pocket training guide for Sergeants to train their squads.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

 

[Hossfly]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

 

[MJB12741]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power

Israel claims that it does not occupy Palestine.

Do those rules apply to settler colonialism?

Or the attack phase before a proper occupation.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

 

[Hossfly]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

Explain "Law free zone", Tinmore.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is just camoflage in the dilution of the question.

Are Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) criminally accountable for:

• Offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power?
• Guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offenses which have caused the death of one or more persons?
​

The answer is yes! Of course they are. There is an entire section on how the detain and administer punish in the Geneva Convention.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

AND the idea you submit that: "This "occupation" can only be defined by its true activities. Settler colonialism." These ideas are completely separate and independent. There are many example in which one can point-out an OCCUPATION absent COLONIALISM and vise-versa.

The civilian population of an occupied territory owes no allegiance to the occupying power. As we will see in detail later, it cannot be forced to fight its own country, be involved in any way with the armed forces or give military assistance to the occupying power.

(COMMENT)

I do not see or recall any Israeli effort to conscript Arab Palestinians of the West Bank for the purpose of combating HoAP. Can you point to the involuntary service for me?

Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour, family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their private property is protected.

(COMMENT)

I have not heard of the IDF, Border Police, or Security Services shaking-down Arab Palestinians for money, jewry or other precious assets. I really don't see major or minor proterties taken outside those necessary for a security advantage.

Collective penalties, measures of intimidation, terrorism and hostage-taking are prohibited.

(COMMENT)

I've not seen a violation of this. This is a protocol for the Palestinian Government that supports and praises
Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters.

Each State has a duty to defend itself, it citizenry and sovereign integrity and independence. Israel has all three and the burden of responsibility. The Arab Palestinians have not yet reach the ability to protect anything of consequence.

The Israeli Occupying Power with the authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power
and the authorities of the occupied territory. This is intended to prevent national authorities from being put under pressure to make concessions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken its legal rights.

(COMMENT)

Yes, this is 100% correct. You just don't make an agreement; that would preclude most Peace Treaties.

Individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations of the civilian

population from occupied territory are prohibited. The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

(COMMENT)

I have not observed this since the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) went into force.

After effective occupation of territory, members of the territory’s armed forces who have not surrendered, organized resistance movements and genuine national liberation movements may resist the occupation.

(COMMENT)

It may, and it must live with both the legal, economic and physical consequence of that decision.

Indirect support for the resistance movement, such as providing information or non-military supplies, does not constitute taking a direct part in hostilities. Those so engaged are civilians and therefore protected against attack.

(COMMENT)

A person is guilty of espionage, or of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offense which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offense were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The words "duty of allegiance" constitute an acknowledgment of the fundamental principle according to which the occupation does not sever the bond existing between the inhabitants and the conquered State. Protected persons must nevertheless obey legitimate orders issued by the Occupying Power. (See COMMENTARY OF 1958)
​

As legitimate State authority has now passed into the hands of the occupying power, the latter must take all measures in its power to restore and ensure, as far as possible, law and order and public safety. As a rule, the occupying power must allow the territory to be administered as before. It must respect the laws in force in the territory before
occupation unless it is absolutely prevented from doing so.

(COMMENT)

In many cases, the law (Jordanian and Egyptian) are many times more restrictive that Israeli law. How were the Arab Palestinians in Black September treated? How long do Egyptian protestors like the Muslim Brotherhood last in Egypt.

I can go on with each and every point you make, but I think you understand that you must give a little more thought to you position, then to just cut and paste an high-pocket training guide for Sergeants to train their squads.

Most Respectfully,
R

Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour, family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their private property is protected.
(COMMENT)

I have not heard of the IDF, Border Police, or Security Services shaking-down Arab Palestinians for money, jewry or other precious assets. I really don't see major or minor proterties taken outside those necessary for a security advantage.​

Of course not. Israeli propaganda would not report such things.

The destruction of property and the theft of land is the most common. Israel has stolen things like farm equipment and solar panels. Israel even stole sewing machines, cloth, and finished clothing from a girl's orphanage. But destruction of private property is Israel's main gig.

 

[Hollie]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

Courts and due process are not concepts that Islamic terrorists need to concern themselves with.

Gaza: Hamas killed and tortured, says Amnesty

Gaza: Hamas killed and tortured, says Amnesty - BBC News

Hamas forces in the Gaza Strip committed serious human rights abuses including abductions, torture and extra-judicial killings of Palestinian civilians in 2014, a report says.

And yes, according to our friend P F Tinmore: "Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour, family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their private property is protected."

 

[P F Tinmore]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

Courts and due process are not concepts that Islamic terrorists need to concern themselves with.

Gaza: Hamas killed and tortured, says Amnesty

Gaza: Hamas killed and tortured, says Amnesty - BBC News

Hamas forces in the Gaza Strip committed serious human rights abuses including abductions, torture and extra-judicial killings of Palestinian civilians in 2014, a report says.

And yes, according to our friend P F Tinmore: "Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour, family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their private property is protected."

And the illegal government in the West Bank is worse. And Israel is worse yet.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There are no significant violations

My post was in response to the question of Israel's violations.

If you like, we could discuss The Palestinian's piddly little violations in response to Israel's massive violations.

(COMMENT)

Since 1950, when the Fourth Geneva Convention went into effect as binding, almost every single military engagement was a causal effect of the depraved indifference to human life by the radical and irrational Arab League leaders and the uncontrollable Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters they invented as proxy warriors opposing any Western Influences.

This horrific and barbaric comparisons of Arab Palestinian causality numbers, and the presentation of the children is contrived to incite emotions and fool outside observers.

The casual connection between the huge difference between the numbers of Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) is based in the fact that it is part of the Horrific and Barbaric HoAP leadership which intentionally placed Launch Sites and other C3I targets in the vicinity densely populated areas. For the HoAP this strategy is a WIN-WIN. If the Launch Site is not brought under counter-fire the HoAP win; it becomes a reusable site. If the Launch Site is answered by counter-fire in a densely populated area, the HoAP win again; and get to parade the dead before the cameras and media.

Like a gambling casino in Las Vegas, at the end of the day, the House wins.

On the smaller scale, in comparison the the millions and millions of dollars the Casino makes, it is largely supported by the smaller players that loose a couple thousands at a time. So it is with the impact of a few number of small time -- but very notable -- terrorist attack. Whether it is the Palestinian attacker stabbing just a few random Israelis, or a few Palestinian terrorists that purposefully their cars into lethal weapons. Of course there is the ever famous attack on the soft target like the family ambushed by Palestinian gunmen as they drove with their four children down the street. Or when two Palestinian terrorists opened fire in the popular Sarona Market in Tel Aviv.

It is hard to say what the overall impact will be, but I don't think that the Israelis are too concerned anymore by the actions of the Heroic Martyrs that courageously hide behind densely populated areas or come-out only to attack unarmed women and children --- or kidnap and murder teenagers.

I'll tell you right now, you don't want to play that "we are the victim" with me. You have more casualties simply because you put more people in the bullseye. I have absolutely no sympathy what so ever for the most unproductive and cowardly culture in the world.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Did I say that? No! You are trying to challenge my discussion by suggesting I lied...

First, a cartoon like handbook, written on the 8th Grade Level, is not the same as the authority documents I presented.

So they used fake information. .

(COMMENT)

The handbook is not written to singularly support the discussion we are having. Make no mistake, the 8th Grade Handbook is accurate as far as it goes; but is not intended to be used to support those that ARE suspected of, or engaged in, activities hostile to the security of the State (Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence). Such individual persons or groups shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) as would, if exercised in the favor of to the security of State of Israel. This is spelled out in Article 5, GCIV.

The general opinion is that convention does not forbid fighting without an official uniform. However, if the combatant (or partisan) does not comply with the provisions of Articles 1, 2 or 3 of the 1907 Hague Regulation, this same combatant (or partisan) cannot claim any of the protections of The Hague Regulation or that of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

There is a big difference between:

• "inhabitants of a territory which HAS NOT BEEN occupied" (Article 2, Hague Regulation)
​

And that of:

• Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters that operate in the shadows, from densely populated areas, addressed by the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) which specifically reaffirmed the distinction between "lawful" and "unlawful" combatants, where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.​

The level at which the discussion has ascended certainly is much different from that of the handbook.

Most Respectfully,
R

My post was in response to the question of Israel's violations.

If you like, we could discuss The Palestinian's piddly little violations in response to Israel's massive violations.

Pal'istanian Islamic terrorism carries consequences.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Since 1950, when the Fourth Geneva Convention went into effect as binding, almost every single military engagement was a causal effect of the depraved indifference to human life by the radical and irrational Arab League leaders and the uncontrollable Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile, blah, blah, blah...

You act like the Palestinians do not have the right to defend themselves.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Since 1950, when the Fourth Geneva Convention went into effect as binding, almost every single military engagement was a causal effect of the depraved indifference to human life by the radical and irrational Arab League leaders and the uncontrollable Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile, blah, blah, blah...

You act like the Palestinians do not have the right to defend themselves.

I don't know how a Palestinian teen knocking on a stranger's door, and then proceeding to stab a mother in front of her children, can be interpreted to mean defending oneself.

 

[Hollie]

Since 1950, when the Fourth Geneva Convention went into effect as binding, almost every single military engagement was a causal effect of the depraved indifference to human life by the radical and irrational Arab League leaders and the uncontrollable Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile, blah, blah, blah...

You act like the Palestinians do not have the right to defend themselves.

Offensive gee-had is not a defensive measure.

 

[Hossfly]

Don't quibble. The UN and the Security Council have consistently stated the the Geneva Convention applied.

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

Explain "Law free zone", Tinmore.

C'mon P F Tinmore Don't be bashful

 

[P F Tinmore]

Not in my lifetime. Palestine is a law free zone.

What does that mean, "Law free zone?"

Sounds like that means the Palestinians can organize & carry out all the terrorism they want without laws to prevent them.

Must be. I have never seen them in court.

Explain "Law free zone", Tinmore.

C'mon P F Tinmore Don't be bashful

Accusation of international law violations have been flying around for decades.

I don't recall anyone ever going to court.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

EVERYONE, and I mean everyone has a right to defend oneself from harm from the immediate danger of another.

You act like the Palestinians do not have the right to defend themselves.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian has worked hard are being a danger and menace to themselves and to the world community.

In the case related to the entanglement of the Arab Palestinian and the Israelis, the Arab Palestine hobbles themselves each time they strike-out at the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R