Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[RoccoR]

Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

100% WRONG!!!

According to the IVGC.

See Posting #11240 for the truth as to what it says.

v/r
R

 

[Ecocertifmrl]

Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

100% WRONG!!!

According to the IVGC.

See Posting #11240 for the truth as to what it says.

v/r
R

AAAARGGHH

 

[Ecocertifmrl]

These peoples are Jordanians and Egyptians. There is no "Arab Palestinian".

That is an argument I can find merit in. That is - the argument that Jordan is the state for the Arab Palestinian people.

Firstly because they don't even know what it would look like

They haven't taken the steps necessary for self-determination and sovereignty. Yes, I agree with that as well.

and secondly because it would create another dangerous Islamic regime.

They haven't the ability to "live peacefully with their neighbors". Yes, I agree this is another valid argument.

So then why are we debating, sir?

She's a LADY.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

These peoples are Jordanians and Egyptians. There is no "Arab Palestinian".

That is an argument I can find merit in. That is - the argument that Jordan is the state for the Arab Palestinian people.

Firstly because they don't even know what it would look like

They haven't taken the steps necessary for self-determination and sovereignty. Yes, I agree with that as well.

and secondly because it would create another dangerous Islamic regime.

They haven't the ability to "live peacefully with their neighbors". Yes, I agree this is another valid argument.

So then why are we debating, sir?

She's a LADY.

Oh...I wrongly assumed a gender. Bleh.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Penal legislation. V. Penalties. Death penalty
ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

How does Article 68 apply to an illegal occupation? Or to put it another way, an occupation that violates virtually all tenets of a legal occupation.

 

[P F Tinmore]

This insistence that the Arab Palestinians have some "right" to violence is simply WRONG!!! The question is, where do you get the notion that you, or any other Arab Palestinians have the "right" to peddle your propaganda that you have some legal authority to "commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power" --- OR --- the authority to incite others to violence based on this notion?

Are you saying that all self defense is illegal?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

There is no such statute that defines an Occupation as either "legal" or "illegal." A territory is either occupied, or is not occupied. Occupation is a state of being for any given territory.

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Penal legislation. V. Penalties. Death penalty
ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

How does Article 68 apply to an illegal occupation? Or to put it another way, an occupation that violates virtually all tenets of a legal occupation.

(COMMENT)

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

√ Annex to the Convention: Regulations respecting the laws and customs of war on land - Section III : Military authority over the territory of the hostile state - Regulations: Article 43. •

Art. 43. 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 Israelis are trying with all the measures in their power to contain the hatred and violence born in the predominately Arab Palestinian territory. The fact that the Arab Palestinians are erupting in the territory only means that the Israeli's need to apply additional measures (under the law) until such time as "far as possible," public order and safety are restored.

Note, that the law take into account the attitude of the Arab Palestinians and their absolute prevention of public order and safety; purposely promoting violence.

BUT (and I say again), there is no international statute that outline what constitutes a legal or illegal occupation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I did not say anything at all. I repeated the law.

This insistence that the Arab Palestinians have some "right" to violence is simply WRONG!!! The question is, where do you get the notion that you, or any other Arab Palestinians have the "right" to peddle your propaganda that you have some legal authority to "commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power" --- OR --- the authority to incite others to violence based on this notion?

Are you saying that all self-defense is illegal?

(COMMENT)

You either OBEY the Law, → or → you are a criminal that is punishable under the law.

​

• Self-defense is a case-by-case determination.
  
• If the police walk by on patrol, attempting to restore safety, law, and order, to the extent it is possible, and you spontaneously start throwing rocks at the police; that IS NOT self-defense.
• I the "Right of Return" Marchers attempt to take some action to breach the border, that IS NOT self-defense.
• If you attempt to use an explosives or other lethal devices against various defined public places with intent to kill or cause serious bodily injury, or with intent to cause extensive destruction of the public place; that IS NOT self-defense.

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

If you attempt to harm or kill any Israeli, or any member enforcing the occupation, THEN that is ILLEGAL.

That is the LAW talking, not me.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

Self-determination and self-defense are not interchangeable legal concepts.

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

There is no such statute that defines an Occupation as either "legal" or "illegal." A territory is either occupied, or is not occupied. Occupation is a state of being for any given territory.

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Penal legislation. V. Penalties. Death penalty
ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

How does Article 68 apply to an illegal occupation? Or to put it another way, an occupation that violates virtually all tenets of a legal occupation.

(COMMENT)

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

√ Annex to the Convention: Regulations respecting the laws and customs of war on land - Section III : Military authority over the territory of the hostile state - Regulations: Article 43. •

Art. 43. 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 Israelis are trying with all the measures in their power to contain the hatred and violence born in the predominately Arab Palestinian territory. The fact that the Arab Palestinians are erupting in the territory only means that the Israeli's need to apply additional measures (under the law) until such time as "far as possible," public order and safety are restored.

Note, that the law take into account the attitude of the Arab Palestinians and their absolute prevention of public order and safety; purposely promoting violence.

BUT (and I say again), there is no international statute that outline what constitutes a legal or illegal occupation.

Most Respectfully,
R

BUT (and I say again), there is no international statute that outline what constitutes a legal or illegal occupation.

It is true that a temporary occupation until public order and safety are restored is legal. However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. Israel's settler colonial project has nothing to do with restoring public order and safety.

I don't believe that there are any laws that specifically address settler colonialism, however, the processes involved do run afoul of international law. It is these illegal processes that the Palestinians fight against and it is their right to do so.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Good interview, thanks.

The same shit that Israel is shoveling now.

 

[Shusha]

\
However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. [/quote[

List the obligations and restrictions and demonstrate how Israel violates them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

\
However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. [/quote[

List the obligations and restrictions and demonstrate how Israel violates them.

Oh jeese, and you pretend to be knowledgeable on this subject. Do your own homework.

 

[Hollie]

This is why peace is impossible with the fake people who claim they are “palestinians.” All they want to do is murder Jews and destroy Israel. An official of the Palestinian Authority said this. He works right under PA leader Abbas.

Palestinian Arab Official Admits "Killing Israelis is not Terror, it's Legitimate"

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am sure that you are skirting around the issue here just a bit. In the broad sense (and up and until 2015) and legally attributable, the UN (UNSC+UNGA) and the EU consider the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip to be occupied. Although that is becoming ever more a revisited question given the continued inability for the principal belligerents to re-open (meaningful) negotiations. Some outside observers even question the reality of a stable and formal government in Palestine, given the factional end-fighting and the inability to peacefully change administrations over the government after elections.

There are many who put forth the question if the Arab Palestinians ever had sovereign control over any parts of the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip; with the possible exception of territory designed as Area "A."

SIDEBAR ISSUE: If the Arab Palestinians never established Sovereign Control, who or what is actually being "occupied." Some suggest that on 1 August 1967, the Israel came into effective control over the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip as Terra Nullius [in international law, a territory over which Jordan (the prior sovereign) has expressly or implicitly relinquished sovereignty]. By law, is it:

• Occupied Palestinian Territory?
• Occupied Territory Terra Nullius?​

Given that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) did not yet make a Declaration of Independence, the question becomes, is Palestine a true sovereign state? Or is it a territory that failed to achieve independence?

It is true that a temporary occupation until public order and safety are restored is legal. However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. Israel's settler colonial project has nothing to do with restoring public order and safety.

I don't believe that there are any laws that specifically address settler colonialism, however, the processes involved do run afoul of international law. It is these illegal processes that the Palestinians fight against and it is their right to do so.

(COMMENT)

As it appears that you are a bit confused on the use of the word "illegal" and what laws are involved with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and the associated occupation.

If you are going to talk about, what is "legal" or "illegal," it is important that you select the appropriate law to discuss. Otherwise, the discussion and your words become unsupportive to your cause.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Sixties Fan]

Israeli tolerance made it possible for an Arab terrorist to murder Ari Fuld. The Arab murderer even stopped and ordered falafel at a local Israeli stand frequented by both Arabs and Jews before his attack. Jews who enter Arab villages are lynched.

(full article online)

Perpetrators with a Victim Mentality

 

[Sixties Fan]

Not surprisingly, the report assigns no responsibility for the situation to Hamas, which has governed the Gaza Strip for a decade, encouraging an endless string of confrontations with Israel and Egypt, which have led to a deepening isolation of Gaza and its people. The Palestinian Authority is mentioned as a major culprit, for its decision to “reduce the monthly payments by $30 million to the area.”; the Government of Israel should “support a conducive environment for economic growth by lifting restrictions on trade and allowing the movement of goods and people, without which the economic situation in Gaza will never improve.”; and the US cuts to the tune of $50 to $60 million per year in aid program, combined with the cuts to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency program.

But not a word about Hamas, possibly because the authors take it for granted that Hamas is the chief culprit in the demise of Gaza’s economy, so there’s no need to mention it.

The only possible reference to Hamas and its disastrous management of the Strip is expressed toward the conclusion of the press release: “Legitimate institutions to govern Gaza in a transparent and efficient manner and reforms to create a positive business environment are also necessary for sustained economic recovery.”

There’s one other reference to Hamas in the following quote from Wes: “The economic and social situation in Gaza has been declining for over a decade but has deteriorated exponentially in recent months and has reached a critical point. Increased frustration is feeding into the increased tensions which have already started spilling over into unrest and setting back the human development of the region’s large youth population.”

This might indicate a possible reference to Hamas’ involvement in driving their economy down to the pits of darkness over the past few months, but who knows, maybe it’s global warming.

(full article online)

World Bank Reports Gaza Economy in Collapse

 

[Shusha]

\
However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. [/quote[

List the obligations and restrictions and demonstrate how Israel violates them.

Oh jeese, and you pretend to be knowledgeable on this subject. Do your own homework.

Oh jeese, you like to make big sweeping statements and then can't back them up.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am sure that you are skirting around the issue here just a bit. In the broad sense (and up and until 2015) and legally attributable, the UN (UNSC+UNGA) and the EU consider the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip to be occupied. Although that is becoming ever more a revisited question given the continued inability for the principal belligerents to re-open (meaningful) negotiations. Some outside observers even question the reality of a stable and formal government in Palestine, given the factional end-fighting and the inability to peacefully change administrations over the government after elections.

There are many who put forth the question if the Arab Palestinians ever had sovereign control over any parts of the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip; with the possible exception of territory designed as Area "A."

SIDEBAR ISSUE: If the Arab Palestinians never established Sovereign Control, who or what is actually being "occupied." Some suggest that on 1 August 1967, the Israel came into effective control over the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip as Terra Nullius [in international law, a territory over which Jordan (the prior sovereign) has expressly or implicitly relinquished sovereignty]. By law, is it:

• Occupied Palestinian Territory?
• Occupied Territory Terra Nullius?​

Given that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) did not yet make a Declaration of Independence, the question becomes, is Palestine a true sovereign state? Or is it a territory that failed to achieve independence?

It is true that a temporary occupation until public order and safety are restored is legal. However, occupying powers have obligations and restrictions. Israel violates virtually all of them. Israel's settler colonial project has nothing to do with restoring public order and safety.

I don't believe that there are any laws that specifically address settler colonialism, however, the processes involved do run afoul of international law. It is these illegal processes that the Palestinians fight against and it is their right to do so.

(COMMENT)

As it appears that you are a bit confused on the use of the word "illegal" and what laws are involved with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and the associated occupation.

If you are going to talk about, what is "legal" or "illegal," it is important that you select the appropriate law to discuss. Otherwise, the discussion and your words become unsupportive to your cause.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "two state solution" is dead. The "peace Process" is dead. (Actually, there never was a peace process.) Palestine remains to be a non self governing territory as Britain said it was when it left Palestine in 1948. Palestine has been occupied since then. The Palestinians have never surrendered or ceded any land to Israel.