Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border

[Hollie]

It seems the Hamas sponsored border gee-had is still drawing vacant minded Arabs-Moslems to the riots.

I guess the Islamic welfare fraud recipients have nothing else to do.

Israel shoots one man dead on Gaza border

Israeli forces have shot dead one Palestinian man and wounded 42 others who were taking part in protests at the border with Gaza.

Israel said more than 8,000 people were involved in the demonstrations, throwing rocks and explosives.

 

[Billo_Really]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ Billo_Really, et al,

IF you are correct, THEN Customary and Humanitarian Law kick in.

ARTICLE 68 [ ••• Link ••• ] Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

Protected persons [meaning the Arab Palestinians] who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power [your foreign force - Israelis], 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 [ Link ] 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 in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, 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.​

Tell that to the Palestinians perpetuating it.

They are a population under the occupation of a foreign force. They have every right in the world to protest their conditions and resist Israeli aggression.

(COMMENT)

You cannot have your cake --- and --- eat it too. IF the territory is "occupied" as you say, THEN two conditions come into play:

◈ Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) essentially dictates that the Arab Palestinians may not protest in such a way as to:

• Intended to harm the Occupying Power (ie the Israelis),

• Constitute an attempt (by the Arab Palestinians) on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services),

• The Arab Palestinians may not become a grave collective danger to the Israelis,

• The Arab Palestinian Protests may not:

✦ Seriously damage the property of the occupying Israeli Defense Force,
✦ Seriously damage the property of the Israeli Civil Administration,
✦ Seriously damage the property of the Israeli Installations,​

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage in espionage against the occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services),

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage in serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage acts of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons,
​

◈ Article 42, Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907:

• The Territory (in this case the Gaza Strip) is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services).

• The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. IF the occupying force (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) are not in such proximity as to maintain it safety and security obligations,
​

◈ Article 43, Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907:

• The occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, public order and safety,
​

When the pro-Arab Palestinians factions and the Hostile Arab Palestinian insist the term "occupied" is applicable, they do so without understanding the implications.

The biggest implication is that IF the people of the Gaza Strip insist the Gaza Strip is "occupied" THEN it is tantamount to saying that the occupying force (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israeli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) has the obligation to enter the territory and enforce such laws as may be necessary to meet the safety and security obligation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What is with your data dumps? Can't you be more succinct? As far as your protected persons point, the Israelis didn't put these protesters in prison. They gunned them down where they stood. In the 189 fatalities at the hands of Israeli snipers, only 2 were ruled justified. You deliberately murdered 187 people.

 

[Billo_Really]

They're unwanted squatters.

They're not squatting. Israel has no title to that land.

 

[Mindful]

They're unwanted squatters.

They're not squatting. Israel has no title to that land.

Who has, then?

 

[Mindful]

Who owns the West Bank? Israel’s official stand is “We’re thinking, we’re thinking.” The West Bank was part of the Palestine Mandate— the land where the League of Nations proclaimed that the Jewish homeland should be set up (and the United Nations was never authorized to change that decision). In practice it was acquired by Israel in a war of self-defense against Jordan, and not only is that traditionally a legitimate acquisition of territory, but in addition Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway, having acquired the West Bank in an aggressive, not defensive, war.

Quora

 

[Shusha]

As far as your protected persons point, the Israelis didn't put these protesters in prison. They gunned them down where they stood. In the 189 fatalities at the hands of Israeli snipers, only 2 were ruled justified. You deliberately murdered 187 people.

Are you saying that Israel SHOULD be going into Gaza to arrest people? What happened to your frequent comment that Israel has no right to step intoned gaza territory?

And rules justified by whom? What criteria do they use for "justified"?

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ Billo_Really, et al,

IF you are correct, THEN Customary and Humanitarian Law kick in.

ARTICLE 68 [ ••• Link ••• ] Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

Protected persons [meaning the Arab Palestinians] who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power [your foreign force - Israelis], 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 [ Link ] 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 in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, 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.​

Tell that to the Palestinians perpetuating it.

They are a population under the occupation of a foreign force. They have every right in the world to protest their conditions and resist Israeli aggression.

(COMMENT)

You cannot have your cake --- and --- eat it too. IF the territory is "occupied" as you say, THEN two conditions come into play:

◈ Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) essentially dictates that the Arab Palestinians may not protest in such a way as to:

• Intended to harm the Occupying Power (ie the Israelis),

• Constitute an attempt (by the Arab Palestinians) on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services),

• The Arab Palestinians may not become a grave collective danger to the Israelis,

• The Arab Palestinian Protests may not:

✦ Seriously damage the property of the occupying Israeli Defense Force,
✦ Seriously damage the property of the Israeli Civil Administration,
✦ Seriously damage the property of the Israeli Installations,​

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage in espionage against the occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services),

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage in serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,

• The Arab Palestinians may not engage acts of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons,
​

◈ Article 42, Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907:

• The Territory (in this case the Gaza Strip) is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services).

• The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. IF the occupying force (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) are not in such proximity as to maintain it safety and security obligations,
​

◈ Article 43, Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907:

• The occupying forces (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, public order and safety,
​

When the pro-Arab Palestinians factions and the Hostile Arab Palestinian insist the term "occupied" is applicable, they do so without understanding the implications.

The biggest implication is that IF the people of the Gaza Strip insist the Gaza Strip is "occupied" THEN it is tantamount to saying that the occupying force (the Israeli Defense Force) or administration (Israeli Civil Authorities and National Police and Security Services) has the obligation to enter the territory and enforce such laws as may be necessary to meet the safety and security obligation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What is with your data dumps? Can't you be more succinct? As far as your protected persons point, the Israelis didn't put these protesters in prison. They gunned them down where they stood. In the 189 fatalities at the hands of Israeli snipers, only 2 were ruled justified. You deliberately murdered 187 people.

Why do you deny the intent of the Islamic border riots (to “rip the hearts out of the Jews”), and the right of the Israelis to protect themselves?

Hamas has a graduated pay scale for the vacant-minded wannabe border crashes who took one for the cause. Who are you to define how the wannabes make a few bucks?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who owns the West Bank? Israel’s official stand is “We’re thinking, we’re thinking.” The West Bank was part of the Palestine Mandate— the land where the League of Nations proclaimed that the Jewish homeland should be set up (and the United Nations was never authorized to change that decision). In practice it was acquired by Israel in a war of self-defense against Jordan, and not only is that traditionally a legitimate acquisition of territory, but in addition Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway, having acquired the West Bank in an aggressive, not defensive, war.

Quora

but in addition Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

Ziologic.

 

[P F Tinmore]

As far as your protected persons point, the Israelis didn't put these protesters in prison. They gunned them down where they stood. In the 189 fatalities at the hands of Israeli snipers, only 2 were ruled justified. You deliberately murdered 187 people.

Are you saying that Israel SHOULD be going into Gaza to arrest people? What happened to your frequent comment that Israel has no right to step intoned gaza territory?

And rules justified by whom? What criteria do they use for "justified"?

Article 68 requires police response not a military response.

 

[Hollie]

As far as your protected persons point, the Israelis didn't put these protesters in prison. They gunned them down where they stood. In the 189 fatalities at the hands of Israeli snipers, only 2 were ruled justified. You deliberately murdered 187 people.

Are you saying that Israel SHOULD be going into Gaza to arrest people? What happened to your frequent comment that Israel has no right to step intoned gaza territory?

And rules justified by whom? What criteria do they use for "justified"?

Article 68 requires police response not a military response.

I guess the Israeli police can rely on you to direct traffic when they enter the Islamic terrorist enclave to arrest islsmic terrorists.

 

[RoccoR]

"RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, we've all heard this whining before.

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

In over a 100 years, the Arab Palestinians have not been able to take responsibility for their future and destiny in any fashion. They always need a responsible adult to look after their interests. They are not capable of making a decision on their own behalf.

but in addition, Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

(COMMENT)

Between April 1950 "elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine. (SOURCE LINK) The decisions made in April 1950 by the Arab Palestinians, became known as the "Unification of the Two Banks." In the 38 years that followed the Arab Palestinians did not fight the annexation. On the contrary, the Arab Palestinians attempted to expand their control and forcibly bring down the Hashemite Kingdom. In the Seven decades since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab Palestinians had always claimed they were unable to establish their own self-governing institution.

There is a great difference between the reality of an actual establishment of control and the theoretical establishment of a self-governing institution.

Even the Gaza and Ramallah Governments (such as they are) which have been unable, totally incapable of bringing any kind of semblance of a honest government forward, has spent much of their time end fighting among themselves and being a disintegrated state where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government never had the necessary leadership to function properly.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

"RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, we've all heard this whining before.

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

In over a 100 years, the Arab Palestinians have not been able to take responsibility for their future and destiny in any fashion. They always need a responsible adult to look after their interests. They are not capable of making a decision on their own behalf.

but in addition, Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

(COMMENT)

Between April 1950 "elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine. (SOURCE LINK) The decisions made in April 1950 by the Arab Palestinians, became known as the "Unification of the Two Banks." In the 38 years that followed the Arab Palestinians did not fight the annexation. On the contrary, the Arab Palestinians attempted to expand their control and forcibly bring down the Hashemite Kingdom. In the Seven decades since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab Palestinians had always claimed they were unable to establish their own self-governing institution.

There is a great difference between the reality of an actual establishment of control and the theoretical establishment of a self-governing institution.

Even the Gaza and Ramallah Governments (such as they are) which have been unable, totally incapable of bringing any kind of semblance of a honest government forward, has spent much of their time end fighting among themselves and being a disintegrated state where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government never had the necessary leadership to function properly.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

Stupid post.

What decisions can they make while under military occupation?

 

[Sixties Fan]

"RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, we've all heard this whining before.

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

In over a 100 years, the Arab Palestinians have not been able to take responsibility for their future and destiny in any fashion. They always need a responsible adult to look after their interests. They are not capable of making a decision on their own behalf.

but in addition, Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

(COMMENT)

Between April 1950 "elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine. (SOURCE LINK) The decisions made in April 1950 by the Arab Palestinians, became known as the "Unification of the Two Banks." In the 38 years that followed the Arab Palestinians did not fight the annexation. On the contrary, the Arab Palestinians attempted to expand their control and forcibly bring down the Hashemite Kingdom. In the Seven decades since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab Palestinians had always claimed they were unable to establish their own self-governing institution.

There is a great difference between the reality of an actual establishment of control and the theoretical establishment of a self-governing institution.

Even the Gaza and Ramallah Governments (such as they are) which have been unable, totally incapable of bringing any kind of semblance of a honest government forward, has spent much of their time end fighting among themselves and being a disintegrated state where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government never had the necessary leadership to function properly.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

Stupid post.

What decisions can they make while under military occupation?

The only military occupation the Palestinians are under are their own military.

What? You are still not aware that Hamas and and other factions in Gaza have militaries, with weapons, uniforms and the whole thing which other militaries have?

But of course neither Israel nor Egypt (remember Egypt? ) will allow them to have planes and other nasty things to hit both countries with.

Remember the Muslim Brotherhood? Hamas is an offshoot of it.
And "normal" Muslims do not like the aggression and need to take over other Muslims territories, which Hamas is also into.

Hamas can make the decision to do away with the Charter for the destruction of Israel and CHOOSE PEACE.

Two very simple words, any government like Hamas .....and PLO....should eventually come to....

That is if only Qatar, the UN, EU and others stop drowning Gaza with money to build weapons and fire them at Israel.


Decision 1 : Good for all in Gaza....and areas A and B as well.


CHOOSE PEACE !!!!

 

[Sixties Fan]

Israeli soldier shares the disturbing truth at the EU Parliament

 

[P F Tinmore]

"RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, we've all heard this whining before.

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

In over a 100 years, the Arab Palestinians have not been able to take responsibility for their future and destiny in any fashion. They always need a responsible adult to look after their interests. They are not capable of making a decision on their own behalf.

but in addition, Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

(COMMENT)

Between April 1950 "elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine. (SOURCE LINK) The decisions made in April 1950 by the Arab Palestinians, became known as the "Unification of the Two Banks." In the 38 years that followed the Arab Palestinians did not fight the annexation. On the contrary, the Arab Palestinians attempted to expand their control and forcibly bring down the Hashemite Kingdom. In the Seven decades since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab Palestinians had always claimed they were unable to establish their own self-governing institution.

There is a great difference between the reality of an actual establishment of control and the theoretical establishment of a self-governing institution.

Even the Gaza and Ramallah Governments (such as they are) which have been unable, totally incapable of bringing any kind of semblance of a honest government forward, has spent much of their time end fighting among themselves and being a disintegrated state where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government never had the necessary leadership to function properly.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

Stupid post.

What decisions can they make while under military occupation?

The only military occupation the Palestinians are under are their own military.

What? You are still not aware that Hamas and and other factions in Gaza have militaries, with weapons, uniforms and the whole thing which other militaries have?

But of course neither Israel nor Egypt (remember Egypt? ) will allow them to have planes and other nasty things to hit both countries with.

Remember the Muslim Brotherhood? Hamas is an offshoot of it.
And "normal" Muslims do not like the aggression and need to take over other Muslims territories, which Hamas is also into.

Hamas can make the decision to do away with the Charter for the destruction of Israel and CHOOSE PEACE.

Two very simple words, any government like Hamas .....and PLO....should eventually come to....

That is if only Qatar, the UN, EU and others stop drowning Gaza with money to build weapons and fire them at Israel.


Decision 1 : Good for all in Gaza....and areas A and B as well.


CHOOSE PEACE !!!!

 

[Hollie]

"RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, we've all heard this whining before.

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

In over a 100 years, the Arab Palestinians have not been able to take responsibility for their future and destiny in any fashion. They always need a responsible adult to look after their interests. They are not capable of making a decision on their own behalf.

but in addition, Jordan has renounced its claim to the West Bank. Jordan never had a legitimate claim anyway,

How can Jordan renounce a claim to something they never had?

(COMMENT)

Between April 1950 "elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine. (SOURCE LINK) The decisions made in April 1950 by the Arab Palestinians, became known as the "Unification of the Two Banks." In the 38 years that followed the Arab Palestinians did not fight the annexation. On the contrary, the Arab Palestinians attempted to expand their control and forcibly bring down the Hashemite Kingdom. In the Seven decades since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab Palestinians had always claimed they were unable to establish their own self-governing institution.

There is a great difference between the reality of an actual establishment of control and the theoretical establishment of a self-governing institution.

Even the Gaza and Ramallah Governments (such as they are) which have been unable, totally incapable of bringing any kind of semblance of a honest government forward, has spent much of their time end fighting among themselves and being a disintegrated state where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government never had the necessary leadership to function properly.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab Palestinians make decisions and then when the outcome and consequences are not to their liking, the make a complaint saying that they were (somehow) at a disadvantage.

Stupid post.

What decisions can they make while under military occupation?

The only military occupation the Palestinians are under are their own military.

What? You are still not aware that Hamas and and other factions in Gaza have militaries, with weapons, uniforms and the whole thing which other militaries have?

But of course neither Israel nor Egypt (remember Egypt? ) will allow them to have planes and other nasty things to hit both countries with.

Remember the Muslim Brotherhood? Hamas is an offshoot of it.
And "normal" Muslims do not like the aggression and need to take over other Muslims territories, which Hamas is also into.

Hamas can make the decision to do away with the Charter for the destruction of Israel and CHOOSE PEACE.

Two very simple words, any government like Hamas .....and PLO....should eventually come to....

That is if only Qatar, the UN, EU and others stop drowning Gaza with money to build weapons and fire them at Israel.


Decision 1 : Good for all in Gaza....and areas A and B as well.


CHOOSE PEACE !!!!

More of the expected sidestepping and denial.

Why not offer a YouTube video showing Hamas and their silly fashion show parades with the islamic terrorist army (men in ski masks), dressed in military style uniforms? Isn't it strange that your islamic terrorist heroes somehow find uniforms for fashion show parades but they dont wear those uniforms at the border gee-had war they are fighting.

Why don't we see the armed soldiers of your invented "country of Pal'istan" wearing their fasion show uniforms when attacking the israeli border?

Why is the "country of Pal'istan" sending (and paying) civilians to riot at the border gee-had when Hamas has a military (with uniforms), they could muster at the border? In view of the hero status that Hamas and the PA slather on civilians who die while in the service of attacking Jews, one would think that there must be a willingness on the part of the Hamas and PA leadership to lead a military charge at the israeli border.

 

[Hollie]

March of return?

A better title would be "what a bunch of sniveling cowards"



Hamas is sending civilians in Gaza to die
for media coverage, says Abbas’ advisor

by Itamar Marcus

Mahmoud Abbas’ senior advisor has accused Hamas of intentionally sending Palestinians in Gaza to “go and die,” for the sole purpose that Hamas will have stories of dead Palestinians to tell the media.



Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Abbas’ Advisor on Islamic Affairs and Supreme Sharia Judge, delivered a sermon on Friday from the PA headquarters in Ramallah, in the presence of Mahmoud Abbas. He accused Hamas of deliberately encouraging civilians to endanger themselves: “You Palestinians, our people, go and die so that we’ll go to the TV and media with strong declarations.”

Al-Habbash claimed that the Palestinian population are not being fooled by Hamas anymore, and “sides with the PLO.”

Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Abbas’ Advisor on Islamic Affairs and Supreme Sharia Judge:
“The Palestinian people... doesn’t care about those [Hamas] with ‘the emotional stories of heroism,’ those with the slogans of heroism - slogans that when you hear them, you think that the people saying them are inside the Al-Aqsa Mosque after they liberated it. And afterwards you discover that they’re only selling illusions, trading in suffering and blood, trading in victims, [saying]: ‘You Palestinians, our people, go and die so that we’ll go to the TV and media with strong declarations.’ These [Hamas] acts of ‘heroism’ don’t fool anyone anymore. The Palestinian people... sides with the PLO.”
[Official PA TV, April 6, 2018]
Click to view

While Abbas’ advisor was criticizing Hamas for sending Palestinians to their death, Abbas’ Fatah Movement celebrated the participation of an infant in the Gaza demonstrations. Fatah posted a photo of a six-month-old baby who had been placed on a pile of tires. The tires would eventually be burned at the Gaza demonstrations:
Posted text: “A child no older than six months was among the participants in the demonstrations today (Friday) [April 6, 2018] and in the March of Return events on the eastern border of the Gaza Strip”
[Official Fatah Facebook page, April 6, 2018]

 

[Hollie]

After another day of fun and games at the border gee-had, the "Poor, oppressed Pal'istanians" have one question: "what's for lunch"

After Deadly Protests, Gazans Ask: What Was Accomplished?

Image

 

[Hollie]

Do Arabs-Moslems ever bother to ask themselves: “why are we so stupid”?


Hamas leader admits Marches of Return were staged to avert internal crisis


Gaza's terror head Yahya Sinwar says weekly violent marches were used to divert pressure onto Israel and prevent an 'internal explosion' after reconciliation efforts with Fatah were 'sabotaged'; Sinwar also clarifies no ceasefire agreement reached with Israel.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Sadly, it reflects in a very negative manner on the integrity and professionalism of the members of the commission who appear to have worked without the requisite expert and professional military advice so essential to any examination of the military situation in the area of events. It is all the more regrettable that this report will doubtless be interpreted by Hamas and the other terrorist elements involved, as granting a green light to further terror activity against Israel, in the knowledge that the UN Human Rights Council chooses to direct its criticism solely against Israel.

(full article online)

The UN Human Rights Council Report on Israel's Response to the Gaza Border Riots