Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

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

I did not even see a question except the one I answered.

Was Israel attacked from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.?

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered. Violation of Article 68, GCIV: See Posting #14437:

Nabi Saleh dedicates weekly demonstration to 16 year old ...
https://nabisalehsolidarity.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/nabi-saleh-dedicates-weekly...Jan 25, 2013 · 18 January 2013
Nabi Saleh on Friday, 18 January dedicated its weekly demonstration against Israel occupation and apartheid to martyr Samir Awad from Budrus, the 16 year old boy killed by the IOF earlier in the week. *** Israeli Army Shoots Dead 16 Year Old Palestinian in Budrus by Popular Struggle Coordination Committee: 18 January…​

Holy Israeli hooey, Batman.

You ducked the question.

(COMMENT)

◈ You cannot ask about an external attacks (International Armed Conflict) if you cannot recognize the parameters of your own "State of Palestine. (You cannot ask about "Alpha" and THEN object to the answer relative to "true domain.")

◈ IF you are considering the entirety of the territory as the relevant domain, as in the territory formerly under the Palestine Order in Council, THEN, from that perspective, it internal security it becomes domestic criminal activity and not an "attack" from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.

◈ IF you are applying the term perspective of "liberation" THEN you have to identify both the country establishing the occupation" and the territory to that which is "occupied." IF you identify the State of Israel as the Occupying Power THEN the recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.

◈ IF you consider the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip as the State of Palestine, THEN the question becomes, when was that territory declared independent by the inhabitants?​

The political-military organization (Pol-Mil) that was given to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people since 1974 (Robat - League of Arab States) was the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), headed by Yasser Arafat, at the time. The PLO was a coalition of various anti-Israeli, nationalistic groups that were unified by their opposition to Israel and by their common aspirations for a Palestinian homeland. The various
factions that comprise the PLO gave the liberation movement a shaky and tenuous reputation in stability because of continuing disputes over strategy and tactics to be used in seeking their common objectives. They still argue about this today. What is amazing is that the PLO Negotiation Affairs Department hold to the political stance that the "State of Palestine" is based on pre-June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital.

While the PLO came into existence in 1967 • 1968, it did not come to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people until 1974. And the State of Israel already had control of entire West Bank, including Jerusalem for the previous seven years. And, without prejudice to the Arab Palestinian People, was no universal "Arab Palestinian" people (with the PLO as the sole legitimate representative) until 1974. The previous sovereign of the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, was the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan which cut all ties with and abandon the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem in 1988.

The Ramallah Government for the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world (Article 22 LoN Covenant).

........View attachment 285081
Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

 

[Hollie]

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

I did not even see a question except the one I answered.

Was Israel attacked from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.?

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered. Violation of Article 68, GCIV: See Posting #14437:

Nabi Saleh dedicates weekly demonstration to 16 year old ...
https://nabisalehsolidarity.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/nabi-saleh-dedicates-weekly...Jan 25, 2013 · 18 January 2013
Nabi Saleh on Friday, 18 January dedicated its weekly demonstration against Israel occupation and apartheid to martyr Samir Awad from Budrus, the 16 year old boy killed by the IOF earlier in the week. *** Israeli Army Shoots Dead 16 Year Old Palestinian in Budrus by Popular Struggle Coordination Committee: 18 January…​

Holy Israeli hooey, Batman.

You ducked the question.

(COMMENT)

◈ You cannot ask about an external attacks (International Armed Conflict) if you cannot recognize the parameters of your own "State of Palestine. (You cannot ask about "Alpha" and THEN object to the answer relative to "true domain.")

◈ IF you are considering the entirety of the territory as the relevant domain, as in the territory formerly under the Palestine Order in Council, THEN, from that perspective, it internal security it becomes domestic criminal activity and not an "attack" from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.

◈ IF you are applying the term perspective of "liberation" THEN you have to identify both the country establishing the occupation" and the territory to that which is "occupied." IF you identify the State of Israel as the Occupying Power THEN the recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.

◈ IF you consider the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip as the State of Palestine, THEN the question becomes, when was that territory declared independent by the inhabitants?​

The political-military organization (Pol-Mil) that was given to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people since 1974 (Robat - League of Arab States) was the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), headed by Yasser Arafat, at the time. The PLO was a coalition of various anti-Israeli, nationalistic groups that were unified by their opposition to Israel and by their common aspirations for a Palestinian homeland. The various
factions that comprise the PLO gave the liberation movement a shaky and tenuous reputation in stability because of continuing disputes over strategy and tactics to be used in seeking their common objectives. They still argue about this today. What is amazing is that the PLO Negotiation Affairs Department hold to the political stance that the "State of Palestine" is based on pre-June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital.

While the PLO came into existence in 1967 • 1968, it did not come to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people until 1974. And the State of Israel already had control of entire West Bank, including Jerusalem for the previous seven years. And, without prejudice to the Arab Palestinian People, was no universal "Arab Palestinian" people (with the PLO as the sole legitimate representative) until 1974. The previous sovereign of the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, was the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan which cut all ties with and abandon the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem in 1988.

The Ramallah Government for the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world (Article 22 LoN Covenant).

........View attachment 285081
Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

That’s a slogan you dump into various threads but you’re never able to actually explain Israel attacking anyone or stealing anything.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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

I did not even see a question except the one I answered.

Was Israel attacked from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.?

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered. Violation of Article 68, GCIV: See Posting #14437:

Nabi Saleh dedicates weekly demonstration to 16 year old ...
https://nabisalehsolidarity.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/nabi-saleh-dedicates-weekly...Jan 25, 2013 · 18 January 2013
Nabi Saleh on Friday, 18 January dedicated its weekly demonstration against Israel occupation and apartheid to martyr Samir Awad from Budrus, the 16 year old boy killed by the IOF earlier in the week. *** Israeli Army Shoots Dead 16 Year Old Palestinian in Budrus by Popular Struggle Coordination Committee: 18 January…​

Holy Israeli hooey, Batman.

You ducked the question.

(COMMENT)

◈ You cannot ask about an external attacks (International Armed Conflict) if you cannot recognize the parameters of your own "State of Palestine. (You cannot ask about "Alpha" and THEN object to the answer relative to "true domain.")

◈ IF you are considering the entirety of the territory as the relevant domain, as in the territory formerly under the Palestine Order in Council, THEN, from that perspective, it internal security it becomes domestic criminal activity and not an "attack" from Bi'lin, Nabi Saleh, or Budrus, etc.

◈ IF you are applying the term perspective of "liberation" THEN you have to identify both the country establishing the occupation" and the territory to that which is "occupied." IF you identify the State of Israel as the Occupying Power THEN the recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.

◈ IF you consider the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip as the State of Palestine, THEN the question becomes, when was that territory declared independent by the inhabitants?​

The political-military organization (Pol-Mil) that was given to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people since 1974 (Robat - League of Arab States) was the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), headed by Yasser Arafat, at the time. The PLO was a coalition of various anti-Israeli, nationalistic groups that were unified by their opposition to Israel and by their common aspirations for a Palestinian homeland. The various
factions that comprise the PLO gave the liberation movement a shaky and tenuous reputation in stability because of continuing disputes over strategy and tactics to be used in seeking their common objectives. They still argue about this today. What is amazing is that the PLO Negotiation Affairs Department hold to the political stance that the "State of Palestine" is based on pre-June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital.

While the PLO came into existence in 1967 • 1968, it did not come to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people until 1974. And the State of Israel already had control of entire West Bank, including Jerusalem for the previous seven years. And, without prejudice to the Arab Palestinian People, was no universal "Arab Palestinian" people (with the PLO as the sole legitimate representative) until 1974. The previous sovereign of the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, was the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan which cut all ties with and abandon the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem in 1988.

The Ramallah Government for the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world (Article 22 LoN Covenant).

........View attachment 285081
Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

Palestinians didn't own any stuff.

 

[RoccoR]

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

IF you had sincerely read it, you would THEN have understood that when the Arab Palestinians (normally the protected persons) attack Israelis in the West Bank, Jerusalem, the Arab Palestinians are acting as criminal activists in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL as cited).

Article 51(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I and Article 13(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides that Arab Palestinians "take a direct part in hostilities” (involving acts of violence) loose their status as a "protected person." (Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack)

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis never loose their "Right to Self-Defense." Arab Palestinians have the "Right" to exercise the Dispute Resolution Process [Article XV • 1993 Binding Declaration of Principles (DoP)]. Arab Palestinians that threaten or attempt to use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Violence must never be employed as a means of settling international disputes when a non-violent process is available.

The allegations that the Israelis are violating the DoP ("attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff") has not been tested through the Dispute Resolution process. The Arab Palestinian jump right to the posture that Jihad and the armed resistance is "the right and real method" for what they consider to be the Liberation of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians intend to use all the political and diplomatic tools available to them in order to supplement the Liberation Movement.

What does Posting 14440 have to do with the inflamatory actions of the Arab Palestinians and the misrepresentation of the facts? EVERYTHING

...........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

IF you had sincerely read it, you would THEN have understood that when the Arab Palestinians (normally the protected persons) attack Israelis in the West Bank, Jerusalem, the Arab Palestinians are acting as criminal activists in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL as cited).

Article 51(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I and Article 13(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides that Arab Palestinians "take a direct part in hostilities” (involving acts of violence) loose their status as a "protected person." (Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack)

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis never loose their "Right to Self-Defense." Arab Palestinians have the "Right" to exercise the Dispute Resolution Process [Article XV • 1993 Binding Declaration of Principles (DoP)]. Arab Palestinians that threaten or attempt to use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Violence must never be employed as a means of settling international disputes when a non-violent process is available.

The allegations that the Israelis are violating the DoP ("attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff") has not been tested through the Dispute Resolution process. The Arab Palestinian jump right to the posture that Jihad and the armed resistance is "the right and real method" for what they consider to be the Liberation of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians intend to use all the political and diplomatic tools available to them in order to supplement the Liberation Movement.

What does Posting 14440 have to do with the inflamatory actions of the Arab Palestinians and the misrepresentation of the facts? EVERYTHING

...........View attachment 285179
Most Respectfully,
R

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

 

[RoccoR]

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

IF I understand you correctly in this question, THEN you are talking about (NOT an "attack" but rather) a General Exceptions to the "Knock-and-Announce" Rule as an entry method.

◈ Exigency: Exigent Circumstances or Emergency. (Case of Eminent Danger)

◈ Permission: Execution of a "No-Knock" Warrant Granted by a Magistrate of Judge.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would create an unreasonable risk to their safety or to the safety of the building occupants.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would give the suspects an opportunity:

○ For the potential felons to escape.

○ To destroy critical evidence,

○ For the "Knock and Announce" to be acknowledged by fire (Case of Eminent Danger)

○ Give time to established an armed defense to resist entry, (Case of Eminent Danger)​

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

(COMMENT)

You are misrepresenting the facts. You asked a very different question:

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.
How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?
Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

I want you to know that every day - somewhere in the US, a "No Knock" entry is affected.

...........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

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

IF you had sincerely read it, you would THEN have understood that when the Arab Palestinians (normally the protected persons) attack Israelis in the West Bank, Jerusalem, the Arab Palestinians are acting as criminal activists in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL as cited).

Article 51(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I and Article 13(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides that Arab Palestinians "take a direct part in hostilities” (involving acts of violence) loose their status as a "protected person." (Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack)

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all of that happy horseshit have to do with Israel attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis never loose their "Right to Self-Defense." Arab Palestinians have the "Right" to exercise the Dispute Resolution Process [Article XV • 1993 Binding Declaration of Principles (DoP)]. Arab Palestinians that threaten or attempt to use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Violence must never be employed as a means of settling international disputes when a non-violent process is available.

The allegations that the Israelis are violating the DoP ("attacking the Palestinians and stealing their stuff") has not been tested through the Dispute Resolution process. The Arab Palestinian jump right to the posture that Jihad and the armed resistance is "the right and real method" for what they consider to be the Liberation of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians intend to use all the political and diplomatic tools available to them in order to supplement the Liberation Movement.

What does Posting 14440 have to do with the inflamatory actions of the Arab Palestinians and the misrepresentation of the facts? EVERYTHING

...........View attachment 285179
Most Respectfully,
R

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

How many Arab-Moslem villages are located at the israeli border fence?

 

[Hollie]

Palestinians riot on Gaza border; 48 said wounded
4,000 Palestinians take part in weekly demonstrations, with hundreds throwing rocks and explosives at IDF troops

Palestinians riot on Gaza border; 48 said wounded

By TOI STAFF18 Oct 2019, 7:43 pm


Peaceful Arabs-Moslems in their peaceful villages living peacefully.

I guess the isrseli border fence is to protect the peaceful Arabs-Moslems.

That must be it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

IF I understand you correctly in this question, THEN you are talking about (NOT an "attack" but rather) a General Exceptions to the "Knock-and-Announce" Rule as an entry method.

◈ Exigency: Exigent Circumstances or Emergency. (Case of Eminent Danger)

◈ Permission: Execution of a "No-Knock" Warrant Granted by a Magistrate of Judge.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would create an unreasonable risk to their safety or to the safety of the building occupants.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would give the suspects an opportunity:

○ For the potential felons to escape.

○ To destroy critical evidence,

○ For the "Knock and Announce" to be acknowledged by fire (Case of Eminent Danger)

○ Give time to established an armed defense to resist entry, (Case of Eminent Danger)​

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

(COMMENT)

You are misrepresenting the facts. You asked a very different question:

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.
How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?
Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

I want you to know that every day - somewhere in the US, a "No Knock" entry is affected.

...........View attachment 285195
Most Respectfully,
R

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

What is ambiguous? You have always danced around this question.

 

[Ropey]

The GCC is now in Gaza. Hamas is being 'reordered.'

It comes. Why?

In Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Gaza, Iranian forces and terrorist proxies are attempting to surround Israel with increasingly advanced weaponry, preparing for the next large-scale conflict against the Jewish state.

When this is over, there will be very few militias and no Sunni working with Shia... against Sunni.

 

[Hollie]

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

IF I understand you correctly in this question, THEN you are talking about (NOT an "attack" but rather) a General Exceptions to the "Knock-and-Announce" Rule as an entry method.

◈ Exigency: Exigent Circumstances or Emergency. (Case of Eminent Danger)

◈ Permission: Execution of a "No-Knock" Warrant Granted by a Magistrate of Judge.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would create an unreasonable risk to their safety or to the safety of the building occupants.

✦ Border Police, and Counterintelligence / Security Service (construed to be performing police type duties) may execute a "No Knock" entry IF doing so would give the suspects an opportunity:

○ For the potential felons to escape.

○ To destroy critical evidence,

○ For the "Knock and Announce" to be acknowledged by fire (Case of Eminent Danger)

○ Give time to established an armed defense to resist entry, (Case of Eminent Danger)​

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

(COMMENT)

You are misrepresenting the facts. You asked a very different question:

The most important part, Rocco, always goes right over your head.
How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?
Then you respond with a data dump of irrelevance.

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

I want you to know that every day - somewhere in the US, a "No Knock" entry is affected.

...........View attachment 285195
Most Respectfully,
R

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

What is ambiguous? You have always danced around this question.

The above cut and paste is another of the tactics that does nothing to respond as a coherent post.

 

[Hollie]

A peaceful Pal’istanian with a knife.



Israeli forces fatally shoot Palestinian man at West Bank checkpoint

Israeli forces shot and killed a Palestinian man at a checkpoint near the occupied West Bank city of Tulkarem, the Palestinian news agency Wafa reported on Friday.

Citing the Palestinian Ministry of Health, the news agency said the man was in his mid-20s.

He has not yet been identified.






Israel's defence ministry said in a statement that Israeli forces opened fire after the Palestinian man charged the checkpoint wielding a knife.

 

[RoccoR]

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

Non-sense! In every question you have asked, my response has always been with a straight-forward and honest answer.

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

What is ambiguous? You have always danced around this question.

(COMMENT)

IF you ask a sound and valid question, I will THEN respond with a forthright and honest answer.

Be unambiguous with your question.

◈ IF you mean "arrest" or "search and seizure" incidents THEN say so...

◈ IF you have a question about anti-Occupation activities, insurgencies, or any asymmetric actions along or across the border, THEN say so.

◈ IF you have a question about the use of explosives and other lethal devices in, into, or 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, THEN say so.

◈ IF you have a question about Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons or Protected Persons under the geneva Convention, THEN say so.​

But don't play bait and switch, asking questions about "attacks" when you are asking questions about Article 43 public order and safety; and/or domestic law.

..........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Non-sense! In every question you have asked, my response has always been with a straight-forward and honest answer.

You have a long history of asking ambiguous questions or changing the context (as you have done here) after I have answered the question.

What is ambiguous? You have always danced around this question.

(COMMENT)

IF you ask a sound and valid question, I will THEN respond with a forthright and honest answer.

Be unambiguous with your question.

◈ IF you mean "arrest" or "search and seizure" incidents THEN say so...

◈ IF you have a question about anti-Occupation activities, insurgencies, or any asymmetric actions along or across the border, THEN say so.

◈ IF you have a question about the use of explosives and other lethal devices in, into, or 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, THEN say so.

◈ IF you have a question about Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons or Protected Persons under the geneva Convention, THEN say so.​

But don't play bait and switch, asking questions about "attacks" when you are asking questions about Article 43 public order and safety; and/or domestic law.

..........View attachment 285215
Most Respectfully,
R

Still ducking the question, I see.

 

[RoccoR]

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

State the question (clear and concisely) that you think I did not answer?

Still ducking the question, I see.

...........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

State the question (clear and concisely) that you think I did not answer?

Still ducking the question, I see.

...........View attachment 285220
Most Respectfully,
R

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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

State the question (clear and concisely) that you think I did not answer?

Still ducking the question, I see.

...........View attachment 285220
Most Respectfully,
R

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

When they're at home, they aren't attacking anyone.

Maybe they should stay home more?

 

[Hollie]

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

State the question (clear and concisely) that you think I did not answer?

Still ducking the question, I see.

...........View attachment 285220
Most Respectfully,
R

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

It seems there are a lot of those peaceful Arab-Moslem villages adjacent to the Israeli border.

 

[RoccoR]

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

OK They cannot. What you mistake for an attacks are really contrued to be police functions. You are misusing the word "attack."

v/r R

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

 

[RoccoR]

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

OK. That is a layman opinion.

They (as Hostile Arab Palestinians) could also be Jihadist, Fedayeen Activist, Hostile Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Followers, and Asymmetric Fighters using the residents as a safehouse, or a base for any number of other criminal activities.

Again, you are misusing "attack" in this case.

v/r
R

How can the Palestinians "attack" anyone while at home in their own village?

When they're at home, they aren't attacking anyone.

Maybe they should stay home more?[/QUOTE]