Galloway Won't Go Away

[Just the Facts]

Where do you get this BS? Hamas hasn't fired a single rocket at Israel since they declared a ceasefire:

From an Israeli News source

So? Somebody did. They got rockets, parts, and fuel from somewhere. Which was the point. Nobody cares that Hamas "doesn't take credit" lol for rockets fired.

This is from January 18th:

Sunday sees Palestinian gunmen fire at least 15 rockets, three mortar shells from Gaza. Rockets land in Sderot, Kiryat Gat, Ashkelon, Ashdod and western Negev kibbutzim. Man moderately injured, Woman lightly wounded by shrapnel, several people suffers shock, building damaged.
2 hurt as rocket hits Ashdod house - Israel News, Ynetnews

And this from May 7. ....today! Huh! They still have rockets, spare parts and fuel to this very day.

A Kassam rocket fired by terrorists in the Gaza Strip hit the Eshkol region in the western Negev on Thursday morning.
Kassam fired from Gaza Strip hits Eshkol region; none hurt, no damage | Israel | Jerusalem Post

 

[Just the Facts]

Hamas would have an easier time enforcing the law and arresting people who fire missiles at Israel IF ISRAEL HADN'T KILLED MOST OF THEIR POLICE OFFICERS!!!!!! Read my previous post.

Funny, the loss of police officers didn't seem to hinder their ability to go around executing Fatah guys. Hmmm. Maybe Israel didn't kill most of their police officers and maybe the presence of police officers had nothing to do with rockets being fired. Except maybe for the ones being fired by police. Maybe if Israel hadn't KILLED MOST OF THEIR POLICE OFFICERS there would have been more rockets fired? Maybe maybe maybe. I don't like maybes. I like facts.

For example, you claim: "Hamas was caught in a tunneling operation into Israel."

Like that's a fact. BS! That's what Israel claims. Israel makes a lot of claims, and frequently its misinformation. I find this claim highly doubtful.

These are the kinds of statements that lead me to split my sides laughing when you claim objectivity.

So let me get this straight. Gazans fire rockets for FIVE MONTHS at Israeli CIVILIANS, and Israel is expected to (and for the most part did) turn the other cheek and just take it.

But one little border skirmish with Hamas gunmen (and they were gunmen, no one denies that, whether the tunnel was defensive or not) and that's reason enough for Hamas to go ApeShyte with rockets. Uh huh. Why didn't Hamas just turn the other cheek and take it the way Israel did for five months before that? Not to mention the years and years before the ceasefire.

 

[Just the Facts]

You have proof of their firing positions right? You and yours have been know to pass along inaccurate data on more than one occasion.

Read and learn:

Numbers Game


Halevi has a list of 171 people the PCHR defines as civilians that he claims he can prove are actually combatants affiliated with Hamas or other terrorist groups. His contention is based on a simple principle: When fighters die, they leave a paper trail. Martyrdom posters, photographs of funerals, articles celebrating heroes' exploits, lists of payments to families - these sources help disprove that a particular fatality was a civilian as opposed to a fighter. As for fatalities among "non-combatant" police officers, Halevi says, type one of the names into a Google search and up pops a web site with photos showing the Gaza cop sporting a martyr's headband and M-16.


They have ways of knowing.

Hamas is lying according to Israel because they use the Internationally recognized Red Crosses definition of who is and isn't a civilian.

So no. Hamas is lying according to Israel because Israel has demonstable facts that prove Hamas is lying. Plain and simple.

 

[darkbeaver]

This is the usual gnashing of teeth when the end is near. The lies pour forth out of Israelis like sewage from a pipe, a never ending stream of obcenities to human ears.

 

[Colpy]

what does this all have to do with galloway?????

 

[darkbeaver]

What do you have to do with Israel?

 

[MHz]

They have ways of knowing.

LOL, look at your handle and then look at your answer. LOL

Proof, where is it? They want a pass on condemnation for bombing a UN School that they announced would be a safe-zone then they better be able to offer up some proof. So far anything resembling proof is absent, just as they offered no proof for the Nov attack that killed 6 and injured just as many. Had it been 6 IDF killed and 6 injured some for of retribution would have followed.

Oh yes as part of the cease-fire agreement from June19-Dec19, '08 had to do with opening up the blockade, as pointed out they failed to do so....no comment on the fact that they were in constant violation of the crease-fire.

Under a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas in June 2008, Israel agreed to lift its blockade. However, Israel mostly maintained it. By August 2008, Israel was still allowing in very few goods.[12] At Egypt's request, Israel did not always respond to Palestinian cease fire violations by closing the border.[13]

[edit] Blockade agreements

The Palestinians who negotiated the 2008 cease-fire believed that the commerce in Gaza was to be restored to the levels preceding Israel's withdrawal in 2005 and Hamas's electoral victory. [14][15] Israeli policy tied the easing of the blockade on success in reducing rocket fire[16]. Israel permitted a 20% increase in goods trucked into Gaza in the pre-lull period, up from 70 to 90 truckloads a day.[14], including not only humanitarian supplies but also clothes, shoes, refrigerators, and construction materials.[17] Fuel supplies increased from 55MW worth to 65MW worth.[17] BBC News reported in 11 November that Gaza was then receiving only 28% of the amount of goods traded before the Hamas takeover.[17]
Over the one month period from 4 November to 8 December, about 700 truck loads of goods went into Gaza, about 1/40th of what would have gone through without the blockade.[15][18]

The 2007–2009 blockade of the Gaza Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MHz]

what does this all have to do with galloway?????

In the connect the dots thing the connection at this very moment is they have both been associated as being a terrorist or in support of a terrorist. Galloway is the most recent so the reasons are clearer. Be interesting to see how fast/slow the process is. How much of a threat was he considered to be if he was doing the speech from a video feed shortly after.
Hamas was made a terrorist state as soon as the votes were counted. Obviously they had never had the power to order anything since this was their birth as being the Gov.
Were they made terrorists based on speeches made while on the campaign trail? Hardly any campaign promise is kept in any country in the world that allows them to be made. In the West it is window dressing sold to the public with their own money. lol The sad part is, no matter knowing the past record we act surprised each and every time they break one, and that is the only reaction and that is as far as correct goes. (and one wonders why real progress is never made).

Hamas threating Israel with violence makes them a terrorist.
Israel threatening Iran with violence makes them a terrorist.

See how easy that is?

 

[darkbeaver]

If Galloway isn't free to speak in my country then neither am I. It's very simple, by keeping Galloway out they keep us in, we are not free to leave.

 

[Amatullaah]

darkbeaver, if you're really that concerned about free speech, then you should be more concerned about a segment of Canadians always having to watch what they say for fear that the simplest ambiguous comment will have them locked away, than what a non-national can or cannot say in Canada.

I think that if the courts reject Galloway's claims, then they are in fact acknowledging that anyway who gives aid to the Palestinians in Gaza through Hamas (which is how a lot of aid there is processed) is a financial supporter of "terrorism". This could open up the possibility of many Canadians being prosecuted by whomever simply for giving money to aid charities working in Gaza (that do have to go through Hamas). It would also illuminate Canada's stance on the Palestinians for good; not only would Parliament be against them, but so would the federal Canadian judicial system would be as well. This would obiously tilt Canada from being a "neutral" observer and commentator on the situation in Palestine to being one that is, without shame, pro-Israel. Therefore Canada should expect the same treatment that the US gets from Palestinians as a whole, if the courts rule against Galloway.

 

[darkbeaver]

darkbeaver, if you're really that concerned about free speech, then you should be more concerned about a segment of Canadians always having to watch what they say for fear that the simplest ambiguous comment will have them locked away, than what a non-national can or cannot say in Canada.

I think that if the courts reject Galloway's claims, then they are in fact acknowledging that anyway who gives aid to the Palestinians in Gaza through Hamas (which is how a lot of aid there is processed) is a financial supporter of "terrorism". This could open up the possibility of many Canadians being prosecuted by whomever simply for giving money to aid charities working in Gaza (that do have to go through Hamas). It would also illuminate Canada's stance on the Palestinians for good; not only would Parliament be against them, but so would the federal Canadian judicial system would be as well. This would obiously tilt Canada from being a "neutral" observer and commentator on the situation in Palestine to being one that is, without shame, pro-Israel. Therefore Canada should expect the same treatment that the US gets from Palestinians as a whole, if the courts rule against Galloway.

Canada has never been a neutral observer, we have always been a wharehouse of materiel and cannon foder for the banking empire in its various stages. The boasts of neutrality were obviously base empty national sentiment. It made us feel good, it still does.
Canadas policy on the Palestinians is imposed by international consensus that means it's Israeli policy. Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghanis Pakistanis, Hatians, Congolese, Sudanese Canadas list of betrayed nations is just as long as that of the coalition of dogs. Children will spit on our flag someday and we will be remembered as simple minded cowards. Canadas rich and powerful long ago decided to join the internationalist movement and rape the planet and its people without mercy.
The tilt already happened about twenty years ago, we just kept lying to ourselves as we wallowed in our past supposed glories and allowed facsist rule to creep in under deregulation. We have no shame now and our children are born into a lie and our elders die in discrace. What can I tell you, I think the world is in for a very hard couple of decades of destruction and war, I wish everybody good luck, except the bankers of course who should be forever unemployed.
Canada no longer exists, sure there's a flag and some soil and some trees and hockey but the rest is horse****.:smile:

 

[wulfie68]

I think that if the courts reject Galloway's claims, then they are in fact acknowledging that anyway who gives aid to the Palestinians in Gaza through Hamas (which is how a lot of aid there is processed) is a financial supporter of "terrorism".

That is exactly how the law is. Hamas has been deemed a terrorist organization by the Canadian gov't thus anyone giving Hamas any financial aid is, by definition, guilty of providing financial support to terrorism. Galloway can posture all he likes but his suit has no standing under Canadian law.

This could open up the possibility of many Canadians being prosecuted by whomever simply for giving money to aid charities working in Gaza (that do have to go through Hamas).

They would be prosecuted by the Crown, not by whomever, but yes, giving money to Hamas is a crime, just as giving money to the Tamil Tigers is.

It would also illuminate Canada's stance on the Palestinians for good; not only would Parliament be against them, but so would the federal Canadian judicial system would be as well. This would obiously tilt Canada from being a "neutral" observer and commentator on the situation in Palestine to being one that is, without shame, pro-Israel. Therefore Canada should expect the same treatment that the US gets from Palestinians as a whole, if the courts rule against Galloway.

This is where you get lost in or carried away by rhetoric. Canada has repeatedly condemned Hamas because of its stance that state of Israel has no right to exist. My understanding is the political reality has set in with Hamas to a degree but they refuse to officially soften their stance. As long as they continue with a stated objective of the obliteration of another country, nothing will change here and I suspect in numerous other nations. Its not a case of Canada (or other countries) being anti-Palestinian: once the PLO said it was willing to find a peace with Israel, it opened the doors to aid as well as increased diplomacy. If Palestinians truly desire a peaceful solution then they need to get that message across to Hamas and other groups as well.

 

[MHz]

That is exactly how the law is. Hamas has been deemed a terrorist organization by the Canadian gov't thus anyone giving Hamas any financial aid is, by definition, guilty of providing financial support to terrorism. Galloway can posture all he likes but his suit has no standing under Canadian law.

You hope, you don't have a clue how the courts will rule.

This is where you get lost in or carried away by rhetoric. Canada has repeatedly condemned Hamas because of its stance that state of Israel has no right to exist. My understanding is the political reality has set in with Hamas to a degree but they refuse to officially soften their stance. As long as they continue with a stated objective of the obliteration of another country, nothing will change here and I suspect in numerous other nations. Its not a case of Canada (or other countries) being anti-Palestinian: once the PLO said it was willing to find a peace with Israel, it opened the doors to aid as well as increased diplomacy. If Palestinians truly desire a peaceful solution then they need to get that message across to Hamas and other groups as well.

Since Canada was one of the 33 Countries that voted to steal Palestinian land (when Arabs had already indicated it would not work out peacefully) even thought the actual document reads as being quite 'fair' none of that has been followed in terms of the respect of the people living there. Being chased off your land rather than being paid the going rate is a breech of that document, that is just the 1st breech, there are many more, some Canada even encourages even though the document we voted on says just the opposite. Taking that to the recommended court could very well have the Jews being asked to leave the area. Hamas has entered into several cease-fires, they even offered to start another one as soon as the Dec 19 date arrived. (rejected by Israel cause their bombing campaign has just been approved, they especially were proud of the declare safe-zones and then wait till they were full before bombing them. During the 6 month truce the borders remained closed solely at the will of Israel, those same borders were to have been opened a breech of the cease-fire agreement that was continuous and solely Israel's doing. Before Hamas, if Israel had been faithful to the agreement they signed Hamas would not have ran or been elected.

You want to blame Hamas for killing some collaborators? Guess what, if you lived in Canada and we were successfully invaded and you accepted that conquest while some Canadians went underground so the fight would continue you might just be killed for not-resisting. If you passed info along that was damaging to those in the under-ground you would be killed, without a doubt.

So Hamas has entered into cease-fire agreements and it could also be argued that they have kept to them better than Israel has when does the name tag get lifted?

Israel will have it in place until every last Palestinian is dead.

 

[Amatullaah]

wulfie68, I don't think you understand what I was saying. The evidence that is used against Galloway in the claim that he financially supports "terrorists" is that he helped a convoy deliver goods and commodities to Gaza, including some cash which he gave to Hamas to give the Palestinians in need. All aid organizations that work in Gaza have to do the same, if not adhere to a similar procedure, whereby they coordinate or apply to work in Gaza through Hamas since they are the ones in control. This includes the UN and the Red Cross (or Crescent), who, while claim not to be involved with Hamas, still have to work within the regulations it sets down and alongside personnel to get materials goods into the territory. Therefore, anyone who donates to any of these organizations could be brought up for prosecution on charges of providing material/financial support to a terrorist organization.

I followed that with the speculation that if the courts here rule against Galloway, Palestinians will finally see that Canada will persecute anyone who support them in anyway if they have to work with people in charge of the land they live in are considered illegitimate by the Canadian judicial system. This of course hinges on whether the leaders belong to a group on the Canadian terrorist organizations list, but that of course is purely political.

darkbeaver, see you can freely post stuff like that, but if you're a Muslim in Canada, then you know a post like that is noted by the authorities through spiderbots. So that's "free speech" for you.

 

[darkbeaver]

That is exactly how the law is. Hamas has been deemed a terrorist organization by the Canadian gov't thus anyone giving Hamas any financial aid is, by definition, guilty of providing financial support to terrorism. Galloway can posture all he likes but his suit has no standing under Canadian law.




They would be prosecuted by the Crown, not by whomever, but yes, giving money to Hamas is a crime, just as giving money to the Tamil Tigers is.



This is where you get lost in or carried away by rhetoric. Canada has repeatedly condemned Hamas because of its stance that state of Israel has no right to exist. My understanding is the political reality has set in with Hamas to a degree but they refuse to officially soften their stance. As long as they continue with a stated objective of the obliteration of another country, nothing will change here and I suspect in numerous other nations. Its not a case of Canada (or other countries) being anti-Palestinian: once the PLO said it was willing to find a peace with Israel, it opened the doors to aid as well as increased diplomacy. If Palestinians truly desire a peaceful solution then they need to get that message across to Hamas and other groups as well.

Maybe Canada has been misinformed by its forigne owned media and its compromized politicians.
Israel has no right to exist it had a chance to exist but it has chosen greed and brutality so it must live or die by its own bloody hands. Israel will be made to groan under the weight of sixty years of war reparations.

 

[earth_as_one]

I believe Galloway is going to argue that he never gave a dime to Hamas. What he did was deliver money as well as fire trucks, ambulances, food, clothing medicine... to Hamas on behalf of a registered British charity. That makes Galloway about as guilty as the postman.

Funny, the loss of police officers didn't seem to hinder their ability to go around executing Fatah guys. Hmmm. Maybe Israel didn't kill most of their police officers and maybe the presence of police officers had nothing to do with rockets being fired. Except maybe for the ones being fired by police. Maybe if Israel hadn't KILLED MOST OF THEIR POLICE OFFICERS there would have been more rockets fired? Maybe maybe maybe. I don't like maybes. I like facts.

I'd like to straighten a few facts you have wrong.

According to international laws, treaties and conventions, police officers are civilians, unless they are involved in the fighting. I've never seen any proof that Gaza police are more likely to moonlight as militants than other occupations. Hamas's military wing qualifies as a terrorist organization because of their war crimes, just like their Israeli counterparts.

These are the kinds of statements that lead me to split my sides laughing when you claim objectivity.

So let me get this straight. Gazans fire rockets for FIVE MONTHS at Israeli CIVILIANS, and Israel is expected to (and for the most part did) turn the other cheek and just take it.

I've never said that. Israel has eyes in the sky. If they see people launching rockets or mortars at Israel, they have a legal right to defend themselves.

But Israel has no legal right to deliberately attack civilians. People not involved in the fighting (99% of Gaza's population including most police officers) are called civilians not militants and are protected by international laws, treaties and conventions. Deliberately attacking civilians is a war crime.

Israel also has no right to use chemical weapons against civilian targets. Yet another war crime.

UN Facilities are protected, especially when they shelter civilians trying to find safety during war. Israel's deliberate attack on UN schools, hospitals and aid distribution centers are war crimes.

During war time, no country has the right to attack medics and ambulance drivers. Israel's deliberate attacks against these people are war crimes.

Israel has no right to collectively punish 1.4 million innocent civilians with disease and malnutrition. That action is called a crime against humanity.

But one little border skirmish with Hamas gunmen (and they were gunmen, no one denies that, whether the tunnel was defensive or not) and that's reason enough for Hamas to go ApeShyte with rockets. Uh huh. Why didn't Hamas just turn the other cheek and take it the way Israel did for five months before that? Not to mention the years and years before the ceasefire.

You are right, it was a minor border skirmish. Hamas's response didn't kill anyone and afterward, they offered to resume the ceasefire agreement with Israel.

Remember back in 2006 when Hezbollah attacked "armed militants" on disputed land? That attack was also a minor border skirmish which killed about the same number of "armed militants". Would you describe Israel bombing Lebanon from one end to the other including Beirut airport and over a thousand civilians in response as going apeShyte?

During that five month "lull" as you describe it, from June 2008 until November 2008, Israel continued to shoot at Gaza farmers and fisherman inside Gaza territory. A few were severely and permanently injured. Israel also continued their low level sonic booms and other forms of harassment.

During that lull, Israel admits Hamas never fired a single rocket at Israel. Hamas even arrested those who violated the terms of their ceasefire agreement with Israel. No they weren't 100% successful at stopping the rockets, but they made progress. The number of rockets and mortars fired into Israel went from hundreds per month before the ceasefire, to 12 in July, 11 in August, 4 in September and 2 in October.

Its pretty obvious from this chart when Hamas stopped firing rockets at Israel and began arresting people who did:

Its also obvious when Israel broke the ceasefire and Hamas resumed their rocket attacks.

Can you tell from this chart, when Israel lifted their economic blockade in response to Hamas's success at reducing the rocket and mortar attacks to nearly 0?

The above chart suggests that Israel rewarded Hamas's efforts to end the rocket attacks by tightening their Gaza blockade and reducing the amount of humanitarian aid entering Gaza... in violation of their ceasefire agreement.

The IDF's November 5, 2008 "election day" raid into Gaza was a deliberate ceasefire violation. At least Hamas can claim that rockets fired at Israel were the actions of criminals acting in defiance. Israel's leaders planned this military operation.

Whether or not the people Israel killed were armed or not is beside the point as far as the ceasefire agreement was concerned. I suggest you read the terms:
2008 Israel–Hamas ceasefire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When one side deliberately violates a ceasefire agreement, that agreement no longer exists. Hamas fired off a volley of rockets in response to Israel's ceasefire violation. Then they offered to return to the same ceasefire agreement repeatedly. Each offer was ignored until a few days before Israel's December 27, 2008 attack. A few days before the attack, Israel indicated a willingness to return to a ceasefire. But their actions were just a ruse to launch a surprise attack on civilian targets in Gaza.

 

[darkbeaver]

wulfie68, I don't think you understand what I was saying. The evidence that is used against Galloway in the claim that he financially supports "terrorists" is that he helped a convoy deliver goods and commodities to Gaza, including some cash which he gave to Hamas to give the Palestinians in need. All aid organizations that work in Gaza have to do the same, if not adhere to a similar procedure, whereby they coordinate or apply to work in Gaza through Hamas since they are the ones in control. This includes the UN and the Red Cross (or Crescent), who, while claim not to be involved with Hamas, still have to work within the regulations it sets down and alongside personnel to get materials goods into the territory. Therefore, anyone who donates to any of these organizations could be brought up for prosecution on charges of providing material/financial support to a terrorist organization.

I followed that with the speculation that if the courts here rule against Galloway, Palestinians will finally see that Canada will persecute anyone who support them in anyway if they have to work with people in charge of the land they live in are considered illegitimate by the Canadian judicial system. This of course hinges on whether the leaders belong to a group on the Canadian terrorist organizations list, but that of course is purely political.

darkbeaver, see you can freely post stuff like that, but if you're a Muslim in Canada, then you know a post like that is noted by the authorities through spiderbots. So that's "free speech" for you.

I'm already a terrorist, I use cannabis, I'm a dissenter, I'm a socialist and I'm an atheist and I hate capitalists and all thier little doggies, there are little old lady terrorists in my neighbourhood if you don't support the system you are a terrorist.
Terrorist today means that you oppose the wealthy class. Guess what? There are far more terrorists than not, as soon as we realize this the bankers are finished.
Nobody is safe while the heartless hatefull capitalist pigs walk the earth. Muslims are the latest but they are not the last, everyone in opposition to the machine is a terrorist. Nothing that passes here is not noted by them, they even add to the threads.

 

[Colpy]

I'm already a terrorist, I use cannabis, I'm a dissenter, I'm a socialist and I'm an atheist and I hate capitalists and all thier little doggies, there are little old lady terrorists in my neighbourhood if you don't support the system you are a terrorist.
Terrorist today means that you oppose the wealthy class. Guess what? There are far more terrorists than not, as soon as we realize this the bankers are finished.
Nobody is safe while the heartless hatefull capitalist pigs walk the earth. Muslims are the latest but they are not the last, everyone in opposition to the machine is a terrorist. Nothing that passes here is not noted by them, they even add to the threads.

Soooooo, who have you murdered? Who have you tried to control through fear, based on your previous acts of horrendous violence?????

DB, to your credit, you couldn't terrorize a little old lady in a motorized wheelchair..........

You are a holy terror to doobies, however......

 

[darkbeaver]

Soooooo, who have you murdered? Who have you tried to control through fear, based on your previous acts of horrendous violence?????

DB, to your credit, you couldn't terrorize a little old lady in a motorized wheelchair..........

You are a holy terror to doobies, however......

Anyone can terrorize without even knowing it or meaning to. Ideas, change, colour, race, language, culture, the dark, all these terrify with ease. What makes you fear Israels inevitable destruction and me welcome it? Or should I fear its destruction and you welcome it? Constructive destruction, heard of that have you? It's expensive but the price is deemed well worth it by the inventive overclass. Is it, Israel, worth more dead than alive, myths are powerfull investments, this is the age of myth and Israel is the reigning tale, a Camelot for our times.
I know you better now through Mr Galloway.You chained me by the neck and shot me in the head in these threads once, save the sweet talk for the deaf soldier, I'll have no truck with satans own.:lol:

 

[MHz]

The more I read that UN document the more I'm inclined to think Galloway (and Savage) should be taking their plight not only to the host countries courts (although that is still useful) it might be able to find a higher court in Mr. Galloway's case especially because it has Hamas mentioned and Hamas is Palestine basically and Palestine is covered by the UN document, extensively. For instance how many times has this court been used to settle disputes? Savage would be more under the Human Rights angle for freedom to travel without being unjustly barred from entry.
UN General Assembly Resolution 181

November 29, 1947​

Chapter 4: Miscellaneous Provisions

The provisions of chapters 1 and 2 of the declaration shall be under the guarantee of the United Nations, and no modifications shall be made in them without the assent of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Any Member of the United Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the General Assembly any infraction or danger of infraction of any of these stipulations, and the General Assembly may thereupon make such recommendations as it may deem proper in the circumstances.
Any dispute relating to the application or interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.


In a previous heading, under religion, even another party can speak up for Israel of Palestine to the court mentioned above if they see abuse of the UN document.
Meaning Iran is well within their rights to mention the abuse to that specific court, they do not have the right to add more arms to an existing 'illegal conflict' (the UN document does not allow for military action by either side as being an option)
Meaning America is well within their rights to mention the abuse to that specific court, they do not have the right to add more arms to an existing 'illegal conflict'.

No need to debate existence that came into effect already. I don't see anything that says either party has to approve it, no objections it passes. Can you provide proof that an extension was applied for and granted by that court? That would leave the boundaries as the UN wanted them, not as the Jews envisioned them to be. Initially they wanted to whole thing, no West Bank, no Gaza and they wanted all of Jerusalem. They still do. Without the backing of that UN document they have zero right to be there. Since they have messed it up terribly it should be the 33 countries that go in and pick tem up and take them to their own countries wher the local population will most certainly welcome them with open arms and iopen doors. That some will be turfed to the streets is of minor concern to....well anybody other than the ones being moved.

Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in Part III of this Plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in Parts II and III below.

If Canada has declared Hamas an illegal organization should all donations to the people of Gaza be sent to a Canadian Government agency that would then make sure the money got to it's intended targets, defending it with deadly force if need be. Might even be able to bag some Israeli pirates off the coast of Gaza that just killed some fishermen and then sunk their boat. Priacy is a hanging offense and it takes the whole crew not just the Captain.
​