Not hardly, shows you have no idea what the two documents say.
Those are the sections they are in breach of. I even left #55 out so you could claim it wasn't complete. lol Miss that did you?
Sixth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week
- Thread starter earth_as_one
- Start date
Those are the sections they are in breach of. I even left #55 out so you could claim it wasn't complete. lol Miss that did you?
:lol:, Ummm, I think not, evidenced by the very fact that you have not answered the question.
BS, I missed nothing of relevance, you simply cut & pasted the bulk of the 4th Convention, you now claim it was some conscious effort to trick me. It matters not what you left out. The minute I saw that you merely cut & paste a chunk of the Convention, I knew you had no idea what you were posting. Me foregoing the act of pointing out any lapses was made irrelevant, by the mere fact you have no idea what you posted or how it applies.
If you did, you would cite the specific section/s and provide specific event/s, or action/s that they pertain to. Specifically Article 55 (Which you claim now, was a trick, lmao. I actually know why Article 55 was left out by whomever compiled that portion you stole without accreditation, it's almost always purposely left out by those who try and use the 4th Convention, I'll address that later. I don't want to give away all my secrets.) You haven't and I doubt you can. You merely parrot what you find babbled about the net, without any form of critical analysis.
Thank you for proving me correct.
Last edited:
From UN Resolution 194 are 3 points (9,10,11 in the actual agreement), they also seem to be mentioned in the two documents you requested.
In a Wiki article you are also given this sort of 'information', every point they reference has a basis other than the author's opinion and it saves many pages of reading the original documents, if you can even find them locally.
The article doesn't cover the aspect that using Israel's definition and applying it to themselves as refugees (for almost 2,000 years)means they do not have the right to return because they do not wish to live in peace (for starters), shown by the number of refugees there were in the time the homeland was approved (Nov'47) and the year when two nations should have existed Jews were not at peace with the Arabs. (or the other way around, there were more Arabs killed and made refugees between the time of the signing of UN 181 and when Israel declared itself a Nation than Jews being killed or made refugees The first 5 months would have made that clear to anybody. In one year 300 + Arab villages disappeared, the only compensation they got were some dead relatives and some lumps and broken bones from the sticks used by the Israeli Soldiers.
(in part)
The exact meaning and timing of enforcement of the resolution were disputed from the beginning.
Since the late 1960s, Article 11 has increasingly been quoted by those who interpret it as a basis for the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees.
Israel has usually contested this reading, pointing out that the text merely states that the refugees "should be permitted" to return to their homes at the "earliest practicable date" and this recommendation applies only to those "wishing to... live at peace with their neighbors".[2] The one exception was at the Lausanne Conference, 1949, where a Joint Protocol was accepted by the Israeli government and the Arab delegates on May 12, 1949. After Israel had become a member of the United Nations, it offered to repatriate 100,000 refugees. This offer was rejected by the Arabs,[who?] and subsequently withdrawn by Israel.[2] David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, insisted in an interview with the members of the Conciliations Commission that as long as Israel could not count on the dedication of any Arab refugees to remain "at peace with their neighbors" - a consequence, he contended, of the Arab states' unwillingness to remain at peace with the state of Israel - resettlement was not an obligation for his country.[3]
Supporters of this line of reasoning sometimes also raise the question of a large number of displaced Jews — usually quoted between 750,000 and 850,000 — which they argue could potentially qualify as refugees to which Resolution 194 might then be applied.[4][5][6][7][8]
It is estimated that about 4 million Palestinians living in refugee communities scattered mainly in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon could claim a right of return under this article, assuming refugee status is hereditary.[9]
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Resolves that, pending agreement on more detailed arrangements among the Governments and authorities concerned, the freest possible access to Jerusalem by road, rail or air should be accorded to all inhabitants of Palestine; Instructs the Conciliation Commission to report immediately to the Security Council, for appropriate action by that organ, any attempt by any party to impede such access;
- Instructs the Conciliation Commission to seek arrangements among the Governments and authorities concerned which will facilitate the economic development of the area, including arrangements for access to ports and airfields and the use of transportation and communication facilities;
- Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
In a Wiki article you are also given this sort of 'information', every point they reference has a basis other than the author's opinion and it saves many pages of reading the original documents, if you can even find them locally.
The article doesn't cover the aspect that using Israel's definition and applying it to themselves as refugees (for almost 2,000 years)means they do not have the right to return because they do not wish to live in peace (for starters), shown by the number of refugees there were in the time the homeland was approved (Nov'47) and the year when two nations should have existed Jews were not at peace with the Arabs. (or the other way around, there were more Arabs killed and made refugees between the time of the signing of UN 181 and when Israel declared itself a Nation than Jews being killed or made refugees The first 5 months would have made that clear to anybody. In one year 300 + Arab villages disappeared, the only compensation they got were some dead relatives and some lumps and broken bones from the sticks used by the Israeli Soldiers.
(in part)
The exact meaning and timing of enforcement of the resolution were disputed from the beginning.
Since the late 1960s, Article 11 has increasingly been quoted by those who interpret it as a basis for the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees.
Israel has usually contested this reading, pointing out that the text merely states that the refugees "should be permitted" to return to their homes at the "earliest practicable date" and this recommendation applies only to those "wishing to... live at peace with their neighbors".[2] The one exception was at the Lausanne Conference, 1949, where a Joint Protocol was accepted by the Israeli government and the Arab delegates on May 12, 1949. After Israel had become a member of the United Nations, it offered to repatriate 100,000 refugees. This offer was rejected by the Arabs,[who?] and subsequently withdrawn by Israel.[2] David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, insisted in an interview with the members of the Conciliations Commission that as long as Israel could not count on the dedication of any Arab refugees to remain "at peace with their neighbors" - a consequence, he contended, of the Arab states' unwillingness to remain at peace with the state of Israel - resettlement was not an obligation for his country.[3]
Supporters of this line of reasoning sometimes also raise the question of a large number of displaced Jews — usually quoted between 750,000 and 850,000 — which they argue could potentially qualify as refugees to which Resolution 194 might then be applied.[4][5][6][7][8]
It is estimated that about 4 million Palestinians living in refugee communities scattered mainly in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon could claim a right of return under this article, assuming refugee status is hereditary.[9]
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited:
I requested the sections of the 4th Geneva Convention that you and eao keep touting that Israel is in breach of. Making is Israel responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
To which you said you did. Once you were proven to have actually failed to do so. You made up a story about how you tricked me with the omission of Article 55.
Again you failed, now you supply a UN resolution. I do not and will not accept or acknowledge UN resolutions. I can not understand why you, someone who has chastised the UN, would be so hypocritical and two faced, as to use the UN in one breath and condemn them in another.
Which is it, the UN is infallible, or they are not?
That's great, it still doesn't answer my question. What sections of the 4th Geneva Convention are Israel in specific breach of?
Your point? Wikipedia is a member contribution shyte hole. Even my 17 year old son knows that and proved it to his classmates in an debate, by manipulating a wiki article.
Well that was objective...:roll:
The Jews were at war with the Arabs?
Yes, now there's an accurate statement and I bet you can;t even grasp how the context of that statement is historically inaccurate and misleading.
One accurate report of information. But no reference as to why. I bet you don't know why, nor would you accept the historically documented reason why.
And rightly so. Something you people ignore.
A number that is a complete fallacy. Less then 1 million "Palestinians" left the area in 47/48. Descendants are not refugees.
The law dictionary links were posted by Petros in another thread, it's about 700 mb lol
Actually I missed it until it was posted, I just didn't go back to fix it. You aren't that important lol
Yes because that is what defines a blockade. You should at least have used the argument that Israel can define what items come under restriction which is only countered by Gaza gets to decide how much they need of a commodity they need. The blockade also stops personal packages from being 'mailed in' or otherwise allowed in. All of that was in that tiny bit from the two documents. You could have commented on any of that but it is irrelevant material apparently, by your standards.
As explained above no big plot
I posted the title of both documents, there are many websites that carry accurate copies
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Art. 55. To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.
The Occupying Power may not requisition foodstuffs, articles or medical supplies available in the occupied territory, except for use by the occupation forces and administration personnel, and then only if the requirements of the civilian population have been taken into account. Subject to the provisions of other international Conventions, the Occupying Power shall make arrangements to ensure that fair value is paid for any requisitioned goods.
The Protecting Power shall, at any time, be at liberty to verify the state of the food and medical supplies in occupied territories, except where temporary restrictions are made necessary by imperative military requirements.
How many gallons of wine am I going to need to catch up with you.
I 'tricked' you by leaving out Article 55 from a post I never made. lol
You can lol all you want, but you can't answer the question. Thank you for proving me right.
That's not the context you insinuated a minute ago...:lol:...nice back peddling once you get caught looking like a tit.
Never claimed to be.
How can I formulate an argument to a position you haven't made. All you did was copy & pasted something from wiki. You never made any statement of relevance, because you don't know where or what the relevance is. This is because you haven't formulated an opinion, you were spoon fed one on the net.
Again, you supplied nothing of relevance to the acts of Israel. The post you are discussing now, was about the war in Bosnia. Try to keep up.
Funny, until I punched a giant hole in your BS, that is exactly what you claimed it to be...:lol:
Your point? You haven't supplied us with the specifics yet, because you can't. And you won't because you can't find someone else's opinion that makes any specific reference.
In other words, i just punched a huge hole in your theory. I'm looking forward to more back peddling now.
Wow, you can cut and paste. Now can you answer the question that you've been avoiding for three pages now.
What section/s of the 4th Geneva Convention, is Israel in breach and what are they specifically?
I don't drink, but given the incoherent and obfuscated posts you've been making, I think you've had more wine then I've consumed in the last 20 years.
Oh really?
And just because I love proving people like you to be the stupid shytes you are, here you go...
Was your reply when I dismissed this post for the crap it is.
Thanx again for giving me the opportunity to prove you are as vacuous as the rest of the bigots, and don't even have a remedial or cursory knowledge of the facts. You only possess and parrot what limited opinions you can scrape off the net.
That was just the section on putting up military checkpoints on something called a border.
Consider these facts.
(in part)
The United Nations Human Rights Council passed three resolutions on Wednesday condemning Israel over its policies related to what it called Palestinian and Syrian territories, but the United States voted against them all.
One resolution on "grave human rights violations" by Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the Palestinian territories - which was passed by 31 votes to 9, with 7 abstentions in the 47-member Council - demanded that Israel end its occupation of Palestinian land occupied since 1967.
It also demanded that Israel stop what it called targeting of Palestinian civilians and systematic destruction of their cultural heritage, halt all military operations across Palestinian land and lift its blockade of Gaza.
Another resolution called on Israel to stop building all settlements and move to withdrawing those now there, was passed by 45 votes with the EU supporting it and only the United States opposing.
The third condemned Israel for what it called systematic violation of the rights of the people of the Golan Heights. The United States voted no, while 15 countries, including EU members, abstained.
Not infallible, the enforcer Nations should not be policy directors.
Read the little numbers before the big paragraphs.
You did't say the shoe didn't fit.
That makes the Jews the bad neighbors, they were told to get along by UN181. (and a lot of other ones.
You mean white-man treaty double speak.
To agree to the 100,00 returning would mean the other 600,000 would have no claim to being a refugee. Simple as that.
"you people' is that some sort of 'apartheid' inner circle thing?
The UN documents dictate what does and does not apply to his country. Jews were to show that they could live in peace with the Arab civilians, they had their military beating and killing civilians in the middle of the night. People should no be penalized for some sporadic attempts at fighting back. Did Jewish civilians have a choice in what the military did to them in WWII?
That would include the children born too the original number, which is given in the article BTW. lol
Last edited:
Okay I'm back from making my rounds to the local churches to get my wine, where did you go? All I see is your 'look here' emoti, one of your favorites I notice. Shirley Bear must have left the building after giving the 'later' sign. lol
That's just awesome. Can you answer the question yet?
What have I told you about the UN?
That's pretty funny, so you can't answer the question then?
Of course not. But that wasn't the intent of the context. You see, this is where you and I differ. I use critical thought, I understand things like intent, context, syntax and so on. You wouldn't recognize any of those if they smashed you in the face.
Did you miss the question mark?<< Not that you would be able to understand the context of the question.
The quote you are answering here, has nothing to do with the First Nations. And no, more like agenda driven boobs, that haven't a clue what it is their arguing, can't answer simple questions or supply facts to opinions they parrot.
100,000 would have been a starting point. The Arabs chose war instead.
No, it's an encompassing of the ignorant bigots like yourself.
Not supported by the facts. And don't start posting your massacre cut and pastes again. There were and are atrocities committed by both sides. You're just to ignorant to know that.
I know that, I'm not as dumb as you. The point you were to stupid to grasp is, descendants aren't refugees.
Unlike you, I have a life, I went to do some work on my hunting camp.
Ummm, that's my favourite because it's a "You're a loser" smiley and it suits the likes of you.
I see you're still having an issue with the English language.
Either or, it still exemplars a serious deficiency in mhz' comprehension skills. Of which I feel no surprise.
It is a classic sign of a hypocrit, demanding good conduct in others while they have them over a barrel.
Widescreen and wireless net?
That's a lovely, if not confusingly mangled sentiment, but it has nothing to do with what you quoted.
It's hard to type on my cell while hanging treestands and clearing brush. Even if I actually had enough respect for you to care enough to do so out side my down time, lol.
I take it you're still unable to answer the question?
I was thinking more along the laptop route.
It has to do with their quote. A refugee to that land must be willing to live peacefully with their 'new neighbors'. Spoken by some 'newcomers' claiming that they are refugees and then they destroyed hundreds of Arab villages in the first 5 months, and made 100,000's homeless and in exile or in the grave.
The question of the fine-print and loop-holes that are subtly drafted into agreements and contract with the hopes that the 'client' as for clarity before signing. UN 181 proves 33 countries have no intention of supporting the documents they signed and their created Nation is the worst behaved in any Nations first 60 years of being. That question?
[FONT=Verdana,Arial]A UN report released on 24 March, mentioned an announcement that "Israel has approved the entrance of a limited amount of reconstruction items to be used for the completion of a UN housing project and a UN sewage treatment plant."
However, the subsequent UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Weekly Protection of Civilians report said that during the week "UNRWA received a shipment of 25 tonnes of cement (half a truckload) via Kerem Shalom for the construction/ up?grading of a UN pumping station in southern Gaza."
The report continued: "The imported cement, however, represents only a small portion of the construction materials needed to complete a number of other UN projects, which are pending due to the lack of construction materials."
The Jerusalem Post said the "supplies will cross into the Strip over the coming week via Kerem Shalom," and quoted government officials as saying the shipment was a one-time gesture and that the country’s policy of siege "remained the same and that as long as St.-Sgt. Gilad Schalit [sic] was being held in Gaza."
Print[/FONT]
UN: Israeli materials shipment to Gaza well below needs :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-1]
Gilad Shalit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
They could have got him back, it is their choice that he is still in detention.
When the west refused to accept train-loads of Jews in the early stages of WWII look what happened.
What is the purpose of all the civilians held in Israel in prisons and how many are there with no charges?
It has to do with their quote. A refugee to that land must be willing to live peacefully with their 'new neighbors'. Spoken by some 'newcomers' claiming that they are refugees and then they destroyed hundreds of Arab villages in the first 5 months, and made 100,000's homeless and in exile or in the grave.
The question of the fine-print and loop-holes that are subtly drafted into agreements and contract with the hopes that the 'client' as for clarity before signing. UN 181 proves 33 countries have no intention of supporting the documents they signed and their created Nation is the worst behaved in any Nations first 60 years of being. That question?
[FONT=Verdana,Arial]A UN report released on 24 March, mentioned an announcement that "Israel has approved the entrance of a limited amount of reconstruction items to be used for the completion of a UN housing project and a UN sewage treatment plant."
However, the subsequent UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Weekly Protection of Civilians report said that during the week "UNRWA received a shipment of 25 tonnes of cement (half a truckload) via Kerem Shalom for the construction/ up?grading of a UN pumping station in southern Gaza."
The report continued: "The imported cement, however, represents only a small portion of the construction materials needed to complete a number of other UN projects, which are pending due to the lack of construction materials."
The Jerusalem Post said the "supplies will cross into the Strip over the coming week via Kerem Shalom," and quoted government officials as saying the shipment was a one-time gesture and that the country’s policy of siege "remained the same and that as long as St.-Sgt. Gilad Schalit [sic] was being held in Gaza."
Print[/FONT]
UN: Israeli materials shipment to Gaza well below needs :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-1]
Gilad Shalit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
They could have got him back, it is their choice that he is still in detention.
When the west refused to accept train-loads of Jews in the early stages of WWII look what happened.
What is the purpose of all the civilians held in Israel in prisons and how many are there with no charges?
I guess me being wiser and using far more critical thought, if not simple commonsense, then you. Dragging a laptop into the bush, when planning on doing some recon, clearing and hanging, just didn't seem to be that smart.
But i can see why you'd be confused there.
Yep, and a chance at peace was offered, the Palestinians chose war, Israel didn't.
That statement is supercilious and complete provable to be nothing more then a moronic attempt at hate mongering.
Nope.
When did the railway cross the Atlantic?
So, in summary, you can't answer the question. Thank you for proving you just parrot what you read on the net. Never actually examining what it is that you are spoon fed, to see if it's true or not.
Because let's face it, it was a simple question, you can't answer it, you have tried your hardest to ignore it, deviate the conversation and more or less fluff it off.
That's just awesome...:lol:
Anyways, I'm taking my son and his buddy fishing, I'd take my laptop, or even consider using my cell to keep in touch with you. But quite frankly, you're a waste of time when I actually seek to discuss topics, why the hell would I want to detract from something far more intellectually stimulating then you? That said, picking dog shyte out of my boots fits that description as well.
Last edited:
Well I wasn't suggesting you take it in the Cat when you are clearing brush, a netbook weighs about 1lb. Something to do late at night or when normal chores are on hold due to the weather or whatever.
Do you have googleearth on your computer? If you do I'll send you the location of my backyard lol Even if you don't like me the terrian will have you drooling. Various people post some pics of the general area, that should be true for your neck of the woods also.
Remember ants don't like being pissed on any more than people. lol
I never know where you are posting from and I hope you spend lots of time out there if for no other reason than I won't be reading any posts. lol It is not important enough for a cash donation to keep you there longer.
See an article about a massacre and Israel is not involved.
Former IAEA chief: Iraq war killed ?a million innocent civilians?
By Patrick Martin
3 April 2010
The former head of the UN’s chief nuclear agency, Mohammed ElBaradei, said in an interview with the British newspaper Guardian Wednesday that those who launched the war in Iraq were responsible for killing a million innocent people and could be held accountable under international law. He was clearly referring to US President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and their top military and security aides.
Do you have googleearth on your computer? If you do I'll send you the location of my backyard lol Even if you don't like me the terrian will have you drooling. Various people post some pics of the general area, that should be true for your neck of the woods also.
Remember ants don't like being pissed on any more than people. lol
I never know where you are posting from and I hope you spend lots of time out there if for no other reason than I won't be reading any posts. lol It is not important enough for a cash donation to keep you there longer.
See an article about a massacre and Israel is not involved.
Former IAEA chief: Iraq war killed ?a million innocent civilians?
By Patrick Martin
3 April 2010
The former head of the UN’s chief nuclear agency, Mohammed ElBaradei, said in an interview with the British newspaper Guardian Wednesday that those who launched the war in Iraq were responsible for killing a million innocent people and could be held accountable under international law. He was clearly referring to US President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and their top military and security aides.
Not all Gazans experience starvation. Some probably have, but most Gazans do suffer some degree of malnutrition and do suffer cruelly as a result of ongoing Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Its a fact that many malnourished Gaza children have stunted growth and developmental problems. People have died of easily treated diseases exacerbated by malnutrition, shortages of medicine and medical services and inadequate shelter. Israel denies 40% of all applications to leave Gaza for medical treatment. Many people die from lack of medical care or waiting for their applications to be approved.
2007 News Report
Half of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza malnourished - Middle East, World - The Independent
June 2010 Poll
Poll: 10% of Palestinian children have lasting malnutrition effects - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
Few western news sources give accurate information regarding this conflict. Instead our news is guilty of minimizing and/or ignoring the suffering, while parroting Israeli propaganda and twisting facts. We are being deceived regarding Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Its easy to spot the propaganda. Its everywhere. The next time you read a story about Israel and the plight of the Gaza people, consider who they quote. Western news usually just reference Israeli opinions or pro-Israeli sources. They rarely reference Palestinian opinions or pro-Palestinian sources . Most Canadians hear one side of the story, most of the time. Right now, some limited information about Israel's ongoing crimes against humanity is making it on to our news.
This news clip accurately summarizes the current state of the ongoing Gaza humanitarian catastrophe:
YouTube - Israel's Gaza PR offensive
I am aware of the source. From my research, I judge the information to be relatively accurate as per every report I've read from international humanitarian organizations which have investigated Israel's record regarding non-Jews who have the misfortune of living on what is now Israel and the occupied territories.
Here is a summary of Amnesty International's annual report regarding Israel and the Occupied Territories which supports the statements made in the above news clip:
Amnesty International 2010 Annual Report
Israel and the Occupied Territories:
http://thereport.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf
Another good source of information about this conflict not reported by western media is the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict as submitted by Justice Richard Goldstone and his team:
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict
If you want to see how the suffering, injustice, oppression, war crimes and crimes against humanity suffered by the Palestinian people has progressed over the last few years, here are previous AI Annual Reports:
2008
Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories | Amnesty International Report 2009
2007
Amnesty International Report 2008 •
2006
Amnesty International Report 2007 • Israel and the Occupied Territories
and so on.
Anyone who supports what Israeli does to these people is either willfully ignorant or callous. Shame on anyone who support Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity...
Tell why are all the howls of dersion regarding Gaza are directed at Israel? Eygpt seems be considered a fair & courteous neighbour, even though they have a closed border with Gaza & have active efforts to stop Palestinian tunnelling. Seems to me Eygpt is as guilty of what Israel is being accused of if not more so seeing as the Palestinians are the Eygptian's "brethern"