Israel/Palestine events

[Perun]

International Court of Justice: Israel is an occupier of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Israel violates international law with its settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Israel's use of Palestinian natural resources in occupied territories is against international law... and Israel reacts, as usual, with threats and more violance

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

ICJ calls on Israel to ethnically cleanse 700,000 Jews from J&S, almost 80 years after Jordan already cleansed the area.

I wonder if the ICJ president's deep connections with the IRGC are related to that.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/world-court-israeli-presence-in-east-jerusalem-west-bank-is-illegal-and-must-end/

Just a casual reminder international law is a myth.

Edited July 20 by Mighty_Zuk

[sunday]

2 hours ago, Perun said:

International Court of Justice: Israel is an occupier of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Israel violates international law with its settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Israel's use of Palestinian natural resources in occupied territories is against international law... and Israel reacts, as usual, with threats and more violance

 

Now we will see the differences between "international law" and that "rules-based international order".

[Markus Becker]

16 hours ago, sunday said:

Allegedly, at least.

There are videos of Little Ms Angry in action. Had she done that in Syria or Iran she'd be rotting in a grave instead of being a celebrity. But Israel has the rule of law that also protects those who'd like to see it destroyed. 

[Markus Becker]

6 hours ago, Perun said:

International Court of Justice: Israel is an occupier of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Israel violates international law with its settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Israel's use of Palestinian natural resources in occupied territories is against international law... and Israel reacts, as usual, with threats and more violance

 

Article 49 of the GC bans forced population transfers. Like the 1948 ethnic cleansing of Jews from East Jerusalem, Samaria and Judea. Also the post 48 expulsions of Jews from pretty much all Arab countries. 

The post 68 return is one , a return, two purely voluntary and three not involving the territory of a sovereign nation state. 

 

So, not applicable and even if wrongly applied lawfare. 

[sunday]

37 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

There are videos of Little Ms Angry in action. Had she done that in Syria or Iran she'd be rotting in a grave instead of being a celebrity. But Israel has the rule of law that also protects those who'd like to see it destroyed. 

Ok, that is one. There are 674 other ones whose enlistment with Hamas needs to be proved. 

Edited July 20 by sunday

[sunday]

32 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

Article 49 of the GC bans forced population transfers. Like the 1948 ethnic cleansing of Jews from East Jerusalem, Samaria and Judea. Also the post 48 expulsions of Jews from pretty much all Arab countries. 

The post 68 return is one , a return, two purely voluntary and three not involving the territory of a sovereign nation state. 

 

So, not applicable and even if wrongly applied lawfare. 

Looks like you think all the relevant ethnic cleansing here was one sided.

As a counter-example, I give you the Moroccan case, where the Moroccan government did not want to see their Jews depart the country.

Then, on the other side, there is the Nakba.

Quote

The Nakba (Arabic: النَّكْبَة, romanized: an-Nakba, lit. 'the catastrophe') is the ethnic cleansing[1] of Palestinians through their violent displacement and dispossession of land, property, and belongings, along with the destruction of their society and the suppression of their culture, identity, political rights, and national aspirations.[2] The term is used to describe the events of the 1948 Palestine war in Mandatory Palestine as well as the ongoing persecution and displacement of Palestinians by Israel.[3] As a whole, it covers the fracturing of Palestinian society and the long-running rejection of the right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants.[4][5]

 

Edited July 20 by sunday

[Perun]

18 minutes ago, sunday said:

Looks like you think all the relevant ethnic cleansing here was one sided.

As a counter-example, I give you the Moroccan case, where the Moroccan government did not want to see their Jews depart the country.

Then, on the other side, there is the Nakba.

 

And still going on, in country which supposed to be democracy

[Mighty_Zuk]

1 hour ago, Markus Becker said:

Article 49 of the GC bans forced population transfers. Like the 1948 ethnic cleansing of Jews from East Jerusalem, Samaria and Judea. Also the post 48 expulsions of Jews from pretty much all Arab countries. 

The post 68 return is one , a return, two purely voluntary and three not involving the territory of a sovereign nation state. 

 

So, not applicable and even if wrongly applied lawfare. 

Surprisingly one of the judges rejected the conclusions and argued that Israel is the direct and natural inheritor of the British Mandate of Palestine, whose declared goal was to encourage Jewish migration and settlement across its entire territory of modern Israel and Jordan.

[Markus Becker]

16 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Surprisingly one of the judges rejected the conclusions and argued that Israel is the direct and natural inheritor of the British Mandate of Palestine, whose declared goal was to encourage Jewish migration and settlement across its entire territory of modern Israel and Jordan.

At least one putting law and history above politics. 

[Markus Becker]

1 hour ago, sunday said:

Ok, that is one. There are 674 other ones whose enlistment with Hamas needs to be proved. 

Or with any of the many other Palestinian terrorist groups. Or we could just wait for, well actual evidence that Israel -that democracy with rule of law- imprisons random foreign minors for no other reason than being random foreign minors. 

I'm going with that one. They are to show that the ~600 minors they imply to be innocent are actually innocent. 

[sunday]

1 hour ago, Markus Becker said:

They are to show that the ~600 minors they imply to be innocent are actually innocent. 

In modern, rule of law societies, there is that thing of innocent until proven guilty, you know.

Not that all of those detainees would be have the luxury of a hearing in a justice court. See, for instance:

How Israel jails hundreds of Palestinians without charge

Quote

(...)
But human rights groups say Israel's expansive use of the measure is an abuse of a security law not designed to be employed at such scale, and that detainees cannot effectively defend themselves, or appeal, because they have no access to the evidence against them.

"Under international law, administrative detention should be a rare exception," said Jessica Montell, the executive director of HaMoked, an Israeli human rights organisation that monitors detention of Palestinians.
"You are supposed to use it when there is a present danger and no other way to prevent that danger than detaining someone. But it is clear Israel is not using it that way. It is detaining hundreds, thousands of people, without charge, and using administrative detention to shield itself from scrutiny."

Palestinians have been subject to administrative detention in this region since 1945, first under the British Mandate and then in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The law has in some very rare instances been used against Israeli settlers, but it is overwhelmingly used to detain West Bank Palestinians, including children.

Administrative detainees are granted a hearing - at a military court, in front of an Israeli military judge - but the state is not required to disclose any of its evidence to the detainees or their lawyers. The detainees can then be sentenced to up to six months. But the six months can be extended indefinitely by the military court, meaning that administrative detainees have no real idea at any point how long they are going to be locked up.

Quote

When 16-year-old Osama Marmesh was detained, he was pulled off the street and into an unmarked car, he said. So for the first 48 hours of Osama's detention, his father Naif had no idea where he was. "You call everyone you know to ask if they have seen your son," Naif said. "You don't sleep."

Osama asked repeatedly during his arrest for the charges against him, he said, but was told each time to "shut up".
When 17-year-old Musa Aloridat was arrested, in a 5am raid on his family home, Israeli forces pulled apart the bedroom he shared with his two younger brothers and fired a bullet into the wardrobe, smashing the glass, he said.

"They took him away in his underwear," Musa's father Muhannad said, holding up a picture on his phone. "For three days we knew nothing."
Neither Yazen, Osama nor Musa, nor their parents or lawyers, were shown any evidence against them during their months of detention. When Israel published lists of the detainees to be released in the recent exchanges, in the column detailing the charges, against Yazen, Osama and Musa's names there was only the vague line, "Threat to the security of the area".

Another version of the list said Yazen and Musa were suspected of being affiliated with Palestinian militant groups. When Osama was released, he was handed a brief charge sheet which said that on two occasions, months earlier, he had thrown a stone, "half the size of his palm", towards Israeli security positions.

Israel/OPT: Horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees amid spike in arbitrary arrests

Quote

Israeli authorities have dramatically increased their use of administrative detention, a form of arbitrary detention, of Palestinians across the occupied West Bank; extended emergency measures that facilitate inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners; and failed to investigate incidents of torture and death in custody over the past four weeks, Amnesty International said today.  

Since 7 October, Israeli forces have detained more than 2,200 Palestinian men and women, according to the Palestinian Prisoners’ Club. According to Israeli human rights organization HaMoked between 1 October and 1 November, the total number of Palestinians held in administrative detention, without charge or trial, rose from 1,319 to 2,070.  

Testimony from released detainees and human rights lawyers, as well as video footage and images illustrate some of the forms of torture and other ill-treatment prisoners have been subjected to by Israeli forces over the past four weeks. These include severe beatings and humiliation of detainees, including by forcing them to keep their heads down, to kneel on the floor during inmate count, and to sing Israeli songs.   

 

Quote

“The summary killings and hostage-taking by Hamas and other armed groups on 7 October are war crimes and must be condemned as such, but Israeli authorities must not use these attacks to justify their own unlawful attacks and collective punishment of civilians in the besieged Gaza Strip and the use of torture, arbitrary detention and other violations of the rights of Palestinian prisoners. The prohibition against torture can never be suspended or derogated from, including – and especially – at times like these.” 

Palestinian children in Israeli military detention report increasingly violent conditions

Quote

RAMALLAH, 29 Feb 2024 --Rising numbers of Palestinians including children detained without charge in the Israel military system since 7 October have reported to monitoring groups facing violence and abuse while imprisoned, Save the Children said.

Three organisations tracking the detention of children in the occupied Palestinian territory said they have gathered child testimonies -- seen by Save the Children - showing that levels of violence have increased since stricter rules were introduced in October blocking visits from parents or lawyers. Some children have reported broken bones and beatings.

The Palestinian Commission for Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs, a prisoners' organisation set up in 1998, estimates that about 460 children have been detained in about five months. This is a jump from previous estimates of about 500-700 Palestinian children being held in Israeli military detention each year.

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

41 minutes ago, sunday said:

In modern, rule of law societies, there is that thing of innocent until proven guilty, you know.

Not that all of those detainees would be have the luxury of a hearing in a justice court. See, for instance:

How Israel jails hundreds of Palestinians without charge

Israel/OPT: Horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees amid spike in arbitrary arrests

 

Palestinian children in Israeli military detention report increasingly violent conditions

 

Israel has a justice system and a rule of law. Until Netanyahu's recent (January 2023 onwards) attempts to dismantle the judiciary (which failed), Israel's justice system was considered credible and effective. It wasn't even weakened, really. Netanyahu's attacks have actually strengthened it, granting it unprecedented authority like striking down quasi-constitutional laws. International actions like attempted sanctions on individuals, and the ICJ's ruling - are due to them smelling blood. They think it has a chance of weakening, but that is just a hypothetical scenario. It hasn't happened yet.

They were judged guilty by a credible justice system. So they are guilty - until proven otherwise.

[Yama]

5 hours ago, Markus Becker said:

Article 49 of the GC bans forced population transfers. Like the 1948 ethnic cleansing of Jews from East Jerusalem, Samaria and Judea. Also the post 48 expulsions of Jews from pretty much all Arab countries. 

Convention signed in 1949 is hardly applicable to something what happened in 1948, no?

Also, you continue to promote fantastically absurd idea that Jews were to inherit all of British Mandate of Palestine, despite the obvious facts that 1. No such provisions were made in original text of the Mandate 2. British immediately clarified afterwards that the text should not be interpreted that way.

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

2 minutes ago, Yama said:

Convention signed in 1949 is hardly applicable to something what happened in 1948, no?

Also, you continue to promote fantastically absurd idea that Jews were to inherit all of British Mandate of Palestine, despite the obvious facts that 1. No such provisions were made in original text of the Mandate 2. British immediately clarified afterwards that the text should not be interpreted that way.

 

The years after 1949 occurred post-1949. So the mass expulsions from the Arab states are definitely a violation - which none answered for. 

[Perun]

10 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

The years after 1949 occurred post-1949. So the mass expulsions from the Arab states are definitely a violation - which none answered for. 

Who answered for Nakba?

[Mighty_Zuk]

38 minutes ago, Perun said:

Who answered for Nakba?

What about ism?

[Perun]

43 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

What about ism?

As usualy you didint answered 🤣🤣🤣

[sunday]

31 minutes ago, Perun said:

As usualy you didint answered 🤣🤣🤣

An IDF condecoration was created for the members of Lehi, even: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)#Service_ribbon

Edited July 21 by sunday

[Mighty_Zuk]

2 hours ago, Perun said:

As usualy you didint answered 🤣🤣🤣

didint is not a word. "Didn't" is. This is something you "usualy" miss.

"Answered" is past tense, or "tents" for you.

If you say a word that implies a past event, you should write your verbs in present form.

For example:

"As usual, you didn't answer".

As for your "question":

Whataboutism is not a question.

Edited July 21 by Mighty_Zuk

[TrustMe]

Oh God, this topic is going to get canned by the Mod's again for the usual Perun Vv Mighty Zuk flame wars     

[Perun]

I didnt started nor I have a wish to argue with him. He is constantly attacking me and I try to stay indiferent as much I can. There is someone who could stop him but for now I didnt see any change

[Markus Becker]

16 hours ago, Yama said:

Convention signed in 1949 is hardly applicable to something what happened in 1948, no?

Also, you continue to promote fantastically absurd idea that Jews were to inherit all of British Mandate of Palestine, despite the obvious facts that 1. No such provisions were made in original text of the Mandate 2. British immediately clarified afterwards that the text should not be interpreted that way.

 

Read it yourself:

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

The Arabs were supposed to get Irak, Syria and Lebanon after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Jews 'Palestine'.

[sunday]

7 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

Read it yourself:

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

The Arabs were supposed to get Irak, Syria and Lebanon after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Jews 'Palestine'.

I am beginning to think you did not read that, as I could find easily the following:

Quote

ART. 15.
The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.

The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the Administration may impose, shall not be denied or impaired.

Quote

ART. 16.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for exercising such supervision over religious or eleemosynary bodies of all faiths in Palestine as may be required for the maintenance of public order and good government. Subject to such supervision, no measures shall be taken in Palestine to obstruct or interfere with the enterprise of such bodies or to discriminate against any representative or member of them on the ground of his religion or nationality.

Furthermore, that document was from before WWII, while the current State of Israel was created by the UN passing Resolution 181 (II), and that would supersede any document on the matter passed by the Society of Nations.

Quote

The General Assembly is the main deliberative organ of the United Nations, composed of representatives of all Member States.  The question of Palestine was first brought before the General Assembly in 1947. By resolution 181 (II), the Assembly decided to partition Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, with Jerusalem placed under a special international regime. After the 1948 war, the Assembly by resolution 194 (III) of 1949 established the Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) to help the parties reach a final settlement, while reaffirming the rights of Palestine refugees to return and restitution. UNRWA, a Palestine refugee agency, was established by the Assembly the same year.

In 1974, the question of Palestine was re-introduced in the Assembly’s agenda. Resolution 3236 (XXIX) reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty, and the right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property. In 1975, the Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. The question of Palestine and related issues have been the subject of numerous resolutions and decisions adopted by the Assembly’s regular, special and emergency sessions.

 

[Markus Becker]

19 hours ago, sunday said:

In modern, rule of law societies, there is that thing of innocent until proven guilty, you know.

Not that all of those detainees would be have the luxury of a hearing in a justice court. See, for instance:

How Israel jails hundreds of Palestinians without charge

Israel/OPT: Horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees amid spike in arbitrary arrests

 

Palestinian children in Israeli military detention report increasingly violent conditions

 

Acc. to the much knowing Wiki, the Brits put administrative detention in the books in 1945 and it is still in use because:

Geneva Convention, ART. 64. — The penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain
in force, with the exception that they may be repealed or suspended
by the Occupying Power in cases where they constitute a threat to its
security or an obstacle to the application of the present Convention.