Joint Declaration on International Law & Gaza & Final List of Endorsers

2 Aug

Final Text of Joint Declaration on International Law & List of Endorsers

 

(Prefatory Note: with only a voluntary effort the Joint Declaration on International Law in relation to the Gaza Attacks by Israel has elicited an encouraging response from legal experts from around the world, including some of our most distinguished colleagues. Others without formal legal credentials have also indicated their support, and expressed their desire to endorse the Joint Declaration. The original drafting group agreed that formal endorsers should be limited to those with a law background, although we have recorded all others in a second list that will be made public when an appropriate occasion arises. We thank all of you who have contributed to this initiative by indicating support.

 As might be expected the dissemination of this text also generated critical reactions from those who argued that we had understated Israel’s rights under international law and understated Hamas’ violations. There were other more vituperative denunciations of such an initiative and its endorsers that expressed anger and hostility toward anyone who dares criticizes Israel, and even encouraged Israel to persist in its military onslaught in Gaza, and do whatever its leaders think necessary.

 With this posting we are formally closing the endorsing process, but we will continue to do our best to insist on the relevance of international law to the behavior of Israel and the other parties in this conflict along the lines of the analysis contained in the Joint Declaration. We discourage pro and con comments at this stage, although welcoming substantive discussion and suggestions for further dissemination)

 

 

The International Community Must End Israel’s Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population in the Gaza Strip

As international and criminal law scholars, human rights defenders, legal experts and individuals who firmly believe in the rule of law and in the necessity for its respect in times of peace and more so in times of war, we feel the intellectual and moral duty to denounce the grave violations, mystification and disrespect for the most basic principles of the laws of armed conflict and of the fundamental human rights of the entire Palestinian population committed during the ongoing Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. We also condemn the launch of rockets from the Gaza Strip, as every indiscriminate attack against civilians, regardless of the identity of the perpetrators, is not only illegal under international law but also morally intolerable. However, as also implicitly noted by the UN Human Rights Council in its Resolution of 23 July 2014, the two parties to the conflict cannot be considered equal, and their actions – once again – appear to be of incomparable magnitude.

Once again it is the unarmed civilian population, the ‘protected persons’ under International humanitarian law (IHL), who is in the eye of the storm. Gaza’s civilian population has been victimized in the name of a falsely construed right to self-defence, in the midst of an escalation of violence provoked in the face of the entire international community. The so-called Operation Protective Edge erupted during an ongoing armed conflict, in the context of a prolonged belligerent occupation that commenced in 1967. In the course of this ongoing conflict thousands of Palestinians have been killed and injured in the Gaza Strip during recurrent and ostensible ‘ceasefire’ periods since 2005, after Israel’s unilateral ‘disengagement’ from the Gaza Strip. The deaths caused by Israel’s provocative actions in the Gaza Strip prior to the latest escalation of hostilities must not be ignored as well.

According to UN sources, over the last three weeks, at least 1,373 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed and 8,265, including 2,502 children and 1,626 women, have been injured. Several independent sources indicate that only 15 per cent of the casualties were combatants. Entire families have been murdered. Hospitals, clinics, as well as a rehabilitation centre for disabled persons have been targeted and severely damaged. During one single day, on Sunday 20th July, more than 100 Palestinian civilians were killed in Shuga’iya, a residential neighbourhood of Gaza City. This was one of the bloodiest and most aggressive operations ever conducted by Israel in the Gaza Strip, a form of urban violence constituting a total disrespect of civilian innocence. Sadly, this was followed only a couple of days later by an equally destructive attack on Khuza’a, East of Khan Younis.

Additionally, the offensive has already caused widespread destruction of buildings and infrastructure: according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, over 3,300 houses have been targeted resulting in their destruction or severe damage.

As denounced by the UN Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on the Gaza conflict in the aftermath of Israel’s ‘Operation Cast Lead’ in 2008-2009: “While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: The people of Gaza as a whole” (A/HRC/12/48, par. 1883). The same can be said for the current Israeli offensive.

The civilian population in the Gaza Strip is under direct attack and many are forced to leave their homes. What was already a refugee and humanitarian crisis has worsened with a new wave of mass displacement of civilians: the number of IDPs has reached more than 457,000, many of whom have obtained shelter in overcrowded UNRWA schools, which unfortunately are no safe areas as demonstrated by the repeated attacks on the UNRWA school in Beit Hanoun. Everyone in Gaza is traumatized and living in a state of constant terror. This result is intentional, as Israel is again relying on the ‘Dahiya doctrine’, which deliberately has recourse to disproportionate force to inflict suffering on the civilian population in order to achieve political (to exert pressure on the Hamas Government) rather than military goals.

In so doing, Israel is repeatedly and flagrantly violating the law of armed conflict, which establishes that combatants and military objectives may be targeted, i.e. ‘those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.’ Most of the recent heavy bombings in Gaza lack an acceptable military justification and, instead, appear to be designed to terrorize the civilian population. As the ICRC clarifies, deliberately causing terror is unequivocally illegal under customary international law.

 

In its Advisory Opinion in the Nuclear Weapons case, the ICJ stated that the principle of distinction, which requires belligerent States to distinguish between civilians and combatants, is one of the “cardinal principles” of international humanitarian law and one of the “intransgressible principles of international customary law”.

 

The principle of distinction is codified in Articles 48, 51(2) and 52(2) of the Additional Protocol I of 1977 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, to which no reservations have been made. According to Additional Protocol I, “attacks” refer to “acts of violence against the adversary, whether in offence or in defence” (Article 49). Under both customary international law and treaty law, the prohibition on directing attacks against the civilian population or civilian objects is absolute. There is no discretion available to invoke military necessity as a justification.

 

Contrary to Israel’s claims, mistakes resulting in civilian casualties cannot be justified: in case of doubt as to the nature of the target, the law clearly establishes that an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes (such as schools, houses, places of worship and medical facilities), is presumed as not being used for military purposes. During these past weeks, UN officials and representatives have repeatedly called on Israel to strictly abide by the principle of precaution in carrying out attacks in the Gaza Strip, where risks are greatly aggravated by the very high population density, and maximum restraint must be exercised to avoid civilian casualties. HRW has noted that these rules exist to minimize mistakes and “when such mistakes are repeated, it raises the concern of whether the rules are being disregarded.”

 

Moreover, even when targeting clear military objectives, Israel consistently violates the principle of proportionality: this is particularly evident with regard to the hundreds of civilian houses destroyed by the Israeli army during the current military operation in Gaza. With the declared intention to target a single member of Hamas, Israeli forces have bombed and destroyed houses although occupied as residencies by dozens of civilians, including women, children, and entire families.

 

It is inherently illegal under customary international law to intentionally target civilian objects, and the violation of such a fundamental tenet of law can amount to a war crime. Issuing a ‘warning’ – such as Israel’s so-called roof knocking technique, or sending an SMS five minutes before the attack – does not mitigate this: it remains illegal to wilfully attack a civilian home without a demonstration of military necessity as it amounts to a violation of the principle of proportionality. Moreover, not only are these ‘warnings’ generally ineffective, and can even result in further fatalities, they appear to be a pre-fabricated excuse by Israel to portray people who remain in their homes as ‘human shields’.

 

The indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, the targeting of objectives providing no effective military advantage, and the intentional targeting of civilians and civilian houses have been persistent features of Israel’s long-standing policy of punishing the entire population of the Gaza Strip, which, for over seven years, has been virtually imprisoned by an Israeli imposed closure. Such a regime amounts to a form of collective punishment, which violates the unconditional prohibition set forth in Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and has been internationally condemned for its illegality. However, far from being effectively opposed by international actors, Israel’s illegal policy of absolute closure imposed on the Gaza Strip has relentlessly continued, under the complicit gaze of the international community of States.

 

***

As affirmed in 2009 by the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict: “Justice and respect for the rule of law are the indispensable basis for peace. The prolonged situation has created a justice crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action” (A/HRC/12/48, para. 1958) Indeed: “long-standing impunity has been a key factor in the perpetuation of violence in the region and in the reoccurrence of violations, as well as in the erosion of confidence among Palestinians and many Israelis concerning prospects for justice and a peaceful solution to the conflict”. (A/HRC/12/48, para. 1964)

Therefore,

 

  • We welcome the Resolution adopted on 23 July 2014 by the UN Human Rights Council, in which an independent, international commission of inquiry was established to investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

 

  • We call upon the United Nations, the Arab League, the European Union, individual States, in particular the United States of America, and the international community in its entirety and with its collective power to take action in the spirit of the utmost urgency to put an end to the escalation of violence against the civilian population of the Gaza Strip, and to activate procedures to hold accountable all those responsible for violations of international law, including political leaders and military commanders. In particular:
  • All regional and international actors should support the immediate conclusion of a durable, comprehensive, and mutually agreed ceasefire agreement, which must secure the rapid facilitation and access of humanitarian aid and the opening of borders to and from Gaza;
  • All High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions must be urgently and unconditionally called upon to comply with their fundamental obligations, binding at all times, and to act under common Article 1, to take all measures necessary for the suppression of grave breaches, as clearly imposed by Article 146 and Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention; these rules are applicable by all interested parties as well;
  • Moreover, we denounce the shameful political pressures exerted by several UN Member States and the UN on President Mahmoud Abbas, to discourage recourse to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and we urge the Governmental leaders of Palestine to invoke the jurisdiction of the ICC, by ratifying the ICC treaty and in the interim by resubmitting the declaration under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute, in order to investigate and prosecute the serious international crimes committed on the Palestinian territory by all parties to the conflict; and
  • The UN Security Council must finally exercise its responsibilities in relation to peace and justice by referring the situation in Palestine to the Prosecutor of the ICC.

 

 

***

 

Please note that institutional affiliations are for identification purposes only.

 

  1. John Dugard, Former UN Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
  2. Richard Falk, Former UN Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
  3. Alain Pellet, Professor of Public International Law, University Paris Ouest, former Member of the United Nations International Law Commission, France
  4. Georges Abi-Saab, Emeritus Professor of International Law, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Former Judge on the ICTY
  5. Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Emeritus Professor of International Law, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
  6. Chantal Meloni, Adjunct Professor of International Criminal Law, University of Milan, Italy (Rapporteur)

 

  1. Roy Abbott, Consultant in International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, Australia
  2. Lama Abu-Odeh, Law Professor, Georgetown University Law Center, USA
  3. Taris Ahmad, Solicitor at Jones Day, London, UK
  4. Kasim Akbaş, Professor of Law, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir,Turkey
  5. Susan M. Akram, Clinical Professor and supervising attorney, International Human rights Program, Boston University School of Law, USA
  6. Maria Anagnostaki, PhD candidate, Law School University of Athens, Greece
  7. Antony Anghie, Professor of Law, University of Utah, USA
  8. Javier Ansuátegui-Roig, Director, Human Rights Institute Bartolomé de las Casas, Charles III University of Madrid, Spain
  9. Ayman Atef, LLM Ain Shams University, Egypt
  10. Ufuk Aydin, Dean, Professor of Law, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir,Turkey
  11. Nizar Ayoub, Director, Al-Marsad, Arab Human Rights Centre in Golan Heights
  12. Valentina Azarov, Lecturer in Human Rights and International Law, Al Quds Bard College, Palestine
  13. Ammar Bajboj, Lecturer in Law, University of Damascus, Syria
  14. Samia Bano, SOAS School of Law, London, UK
  15. Asli Ü Bali, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law, USA
  16. Jakub Micha³ Baranowski, Phd Candidate, Universita’ degli Studi Roma Tre, Italy
  17. Frank Barat, Russell Tribunal on Palestine
  18. Marzia Barbera, Professor of Law, University of Brescia, Italy
  19. Emma Bell, Coordinator of the European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social Control, Université de Savoie, France
  20. Barbara Giovanna Bello, Post-doc Fellow, University of Milan, Italy
  21. Brenna Bhandar, Senior lecturer in Law, SOAS School of Law, London, UK
  22. George Bisharat, Professor of Law, UC Hastings College of Law, USA
  23. Marta Bitorsoli, LLM, Irish Centre for Human Rights, Trial Clerk ICTY, The Hague, The Netherlands
  24. Barbara Blok, LLM Candidate, University of Essex, UK
  25. John Braithwaite, Professor of Criminology, Australian National University, Australia
  26. Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, lecturer in international law, University of Edinburgh, UK
  27. Eddie Bruce-Jones, Lecturer in Law, University of London, Birkbeck College, UK
  28. Sandy Camlann, LLM Candidate, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, France
  29. Grazia Careccia, Human Rights Advocate, London, UK
  30. Baris Cayli, Impact Fellow, University of Stirling, UK
  31. Antonio Cavaliere, Professor of Criminal Law, University Federico II, Naples, Italy
  32. Kathleen Cavanaugh, Senior Lecturer, Irish Center for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
  33. Elizabeth Chadwick, Reader in International Law, Nottingham, UK
  34. Donna R. Cline, Attorney at Law, USA
  35. Karen Corteen, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, University of Chester, UK
  36. Andrew Dahdal, Lecturer, Faculty of Business and Economics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
  37. Teresa Dagenhardt, Reader in Criminology, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  38. Luigi Daniele, PhD candidate in Law, Italy
  39. Alessandro De Giorgi, Professor of Justice Studies, San Josè State University, USA
  40. Cristina de la Serna-Sandoval, lawyer and human rights consultant, Spain
  41. Javier De Lucas, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  42. Paul de Waart, Professor Emeritus of International Law, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  43. Gabriele della Morte, Senior Lecturer in International Law, University Cattolica, Milan, Italy
  44. Max du Plessis, Professor of Law, University of Kwazulu-Natal, and Barrister, South Africa and London, UK
  45. Isabel Düsterhöft, LL.M., Utrecht, M.A. Hamburg, Germany
  46. Noura Erakat, Georgetown University, USA
  47. Mohammad Fadel, Associate Professor of Law, University of Toronto Faculty of Law, Canada
  48. Mireille Fanon-Mendés France, Independent Expert UNO, Frantz Fanon Foundation, France
  49. Michelle Farrell, lecturer in law, School of Law and Social Justice, University of Liverpool, UK
  50. Daniel Feierstein, Professor and President International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), Argentina
  51. Eleonor Fernández Muñoz, Costa Rica
  52. Tenny Fernando, Attorney at Law, Sri Lanka
  53. Amelia Festa, LLM Candidate, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
  54. Katherine Franke, Professor of Law, Columbia Law School, USA
  55. Jacques Gaillot, Bishop in partibus of Partenia
  56. Katherine Gallagher, Vice President FIDH, senior attorney, Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), New York, USA
  57. Avo Sevag Garabet, LLM, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
  58. Jose Garcia Anon, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  59. Cristina Garcia-Pascual, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  60. Jose Antonio García-Saez, International Law Researcher, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  61. Andrés Gascón-Cuenca, PhD candidate, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  62. Irene Gasparini, PhD candidate, Universitá Cattolica, Milan, Italy
  63. Stratos Georgoulas, Assistant Professor, University of the Aegean, Greece
  64. Haluk Gerger, Professor, Turkey
  65. Hedda Giersten, Professor, Universitet I Oslo, Norway
  66. Javier Giraldo, Director Banco de Datos CINEP, Colombia
  67. Carmen G. Gonzales, Professor of Law, Seattle University School of Law, USA
  68. Penny Green, Professor of Law and Criminology, Director of the State Crime Initiative, King’s College London, UK
  69. Katy Hayward, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  70. Andrew Henley, PhD candidate, Keele University, UK
  71. Christiane Hessel, Paris, France
  72. Paddy Hillyard, Professor Emeritus, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  73. Ata Hindi, Institute of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
  74. Francois Houtart, Professor, National Institute of Higher Studies, Quito, Ecuador
  75. Deena R. Hurwitz, Professor, General Faculty, Director International Human Rights Law Clinic, University of Virginia School of Law, USA
  76. Perfecto Andrés Ibánes, Magistrado Tribunal Supremo de Espagna, Spain
  77. Franco Ippolito, President of the Permanent People’s Tribunal, Italy
  78. Ruth Jamieson, Honorary Lecturer, School of Law, Queen’s University, Belfast, Northern Ireland
  79. Helen Jarvis, former member Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), member of IAGS, Cambodia
  80. Ioannis Kalpouzos, Lecturer in Law, City Law School, London, UK
  81. Victor Kattan, post-doctoral fellow, Law Faculty, National University of Singapore
  82. Michael Kearney, PhD, Lecturer in Law, University of Sussex, UK
  83. Yousuf Syed Khan, USA
  84. Tarik Kochi, Senior Lecturer in Law, School of Law, Politics and Sociology, University of Sussex, UK
  85. Anna Koppel, MSt Candidate in International Human Rights Law, University of Oxford, UK
  86. Azra Kuci, legal advisor TRIAL (track impunity always), Bosnia and Herzegovina
  87. Karim Lahidji, President of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and lawyer
  88. Giulia Lanza, PhD Candidate, Università degli Studi di Verona, Italy
  89. Massimo La Torre, Professor of Law, University of Hull (UK), Catanzaro University (Italy)
  90. Daniel Machover, solicitor, Hickman & Rose, London, UK
  91. Tayyab Mahmud, Professor of Law, Director of the Centre for Global Justice, Seattle University School of Law, USA
  92. Maria C. LaHood, Senior Staff Attorney, CCR, New York, USA
  93. Louise Mallinder, Reader in Human Rights and International Law, University of Ulster, UK
  94. Triestino Mariniello, Lecturer in International Criminal Law, Edge Hill University, UK
  95. Mazen Masri, Lecturer in Law, The City Law School, City University, London, UK
  96. Siobhan McAlister, School of Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  97. Liam McCann, Principal Lecturer in Criminology, University of Lincoln, UK
  98. Jude McCulloch, Professor of Criminology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
  99. David McQuoid-Mason, Director, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
  100. Yvonne McDermott Rees, Lecturer in Law, University of Bangor, UK
  101. Cahal McLaughlin, Professor, School of Creative Arts, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  102. Araks Melkonyan, LLM Candidate, University of Essex, UK
  103. Antonio Menna, PhD Candidate, Second University of Naples, Caserta, Italy
  104. Naomi Mezey, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, USA
  105. Michele Miravalle, PhD candidate, University of Torino, Italy
  106. Sergio Moccia, Professor of Criminal Law, University Federico II, Naples, Italy
  107. Kerry Moore, Lecturer, Cardiff University
  108. Giuseppe Mosconi, Professor of Sociology, University of Padova, Italy
  109. Usha Natarajan, Assistant Professor, Department of Law & Centre for Migration and Refugee Studies, The American University in Cairo, Egypt
  110. Miren Odriozola Gurrutxaga, PhD Candidate, University of the Basque Country, Donostia – San Sebastián, Spain
  111. Georgios Papanicolaou, Reader in Criminology, Teesside University, UK
  112. Marco Pertile, Senior Lecturer in International Law,
    Faculty of Law, University of Trento, Italy
  113. Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Professor of Law and Theory, LLM, The Westminster Law and Theory Centre, UK
  114. Carli Pierson, Attorney at Law, USA
  115. Antoni Pigrau Solé, Universitat Rovira i Virgili de Tarragona, Spain
  116. Joseph Powderly, Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Leiden University, The Netherlands
  117. Tony Platt, Visiting Professor of Justice Studies, San Jose State University, USA
  118. Scott Poynting, Professor in Criminology, University of Auckland, New Zeeland
  119. Chris Powell, Professor of Criminology, University S.Maine, USA
  120. Bill Quigley, Professor, Loyola University, New Orleans College of Law, USA
  121. John Quigley, Professor of Law, Ohio State University
  122. Zouhair Racheha, PhD Candidate, University Jean Moulin Lyon 3, France
  123. Laura Raymond, International Human Rights Advocacy Program Manager, CCR, New York, USA
  124. Véronique Rocheleau-Brosseau, LLM candidate, Laval University, Canada
  125. David Rodríguez Goyes, Lecturer, Antonio Nariño and Santo Tomás Universities, Colombia
  126. Alessandro Rosanò, PhD Candidate, Università degli Studi di Padova, Italy
  127. Jamil Salem, Director Institute of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
  128. Mahmood Salimi, LLM Candidate, Moofid University, Iran
  129. Nahed Samour, doctoral fellow, Humboldt University, Faculty of Law, Berlin, Germany
  130. Iain GM Scobbie, Professor of Public International Law, University of Manchester, UK
  131. David Scott, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, Liverpool John Moores University, UK
  132. Phil Scraton, Professor of Criminology, Belfast, Ireland
  133. Rachel Seoighe, PhD Candidate, Legal Consultant, King’s College London, UK
  134. Tanya Serisier, School of Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  135. Mohammad Shahabuddin, PdD, Visiting researcher, Graduate School of International Social Sciences, Yokohama National University, Japan
  136. Angeles Solanes-Corella, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  137. Dean Spade, Seattle University School of Law, USA
  138. Per Stadig, lawyer, Sweden
  139. Chantal Thomas, Professor of Law, Cornell University, USA
  140. Kendall Thomas, Nash Professor of Law, Columbia University, USA
  141. Gianni Tognoni, Lelio Basso Foundation, Rome, Italy
  142. Steve Tombs, Professor of Criminology, The Open University, UK
  143. Paul Troop, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers, UK
  144. Valeria Verdolini, Reader in Sociology, University of Milan, Italy
  145. Francesca Vianello, University of Padova, Italy
  146. Lydia Vicente-Márquez, Executive Director, Rights International Spain
  147. Aimilia Voulvouli, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Fatih University, Turkey
  148. Namita Wahi, Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, Dharma Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, India
  149. Sharon Weill, PhD, Science Po, Paris/ CERAH, Geneva, Switzerland
  150. Peter Weiss, Vice President of Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), New York, USA
  151. David Whyte, Reader in Sociology, University of Liverpool, UK
  152. Jeanne M. Woods, Henry F. Bonura, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Law, Loyola University College of Law, New Orleans, USA
  153. William Thomas Worster, Lecturer, International Law, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands
  154. Maung Zarni, Judge, PPT on Sri Lanka and Visiting Fellow, London School of Economics and Political Science

 

After July 28th

 

  1. Lindsay Adams, Barrister, London, U.K
  2. Kasim Akbaş, Professor of Law, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir,Turkey
  3. Nidal al-Azza, lecturer in Refugee Law, Al-Quds University, Director of Badil Resource Center for Residency and Refugee Rights, Palestine
  4. Reem Al-Botmeh, Institute of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
  5. Rouba Al-Salem, PhD candidate, faculty of Law, Montreal University, Canada
  6. Koorosh Ameli, Former Judge, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, The Hague, Netherlands
  7. Rinad Abdulla, Lecturer in Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law, Birzeit University, Palestin Claims Tribunal
  8. Mojgan Amrollahi Biuki, Human Rights Lawyer in Tehran, PhD candidate, Freiburg University, Freiburg i.Br., Germany
  9. Alessandra Annoni, Senior Lecturer in International Law, University of Catanzaro, Italy
  10. Javier Ansuátegui-Roig, Director, Human Rights Institute Bartolomé de las Casas, Charles III University of Madrid, Spain
  11. Alicia Araujo Mendonca, Lawyer, London, UK
  12. Maria Aristodemou, School of Law, Birkbeck College, USA
  13. Huwaida Arraf, Attorney and Human Rights Advocate, New York, USA
  14. Ayman Atef, LLM Ain Shams University, Egypt
  15. Ufuk Aydin, Dean, Professor of Law, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir,Turkey
  16. Irene Baghoomians, Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney, Australia
  17. Ajamu Baraka, human rights activist and former director of the U.S. Human
  18. Marzia Barbera, Professor of Law, University of Brescia, Italy, Rights Network (USHRN), USA
  19. Faisal Bhabha, Assistant Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  20. Onder Bakircioglu, Lecturer in Law, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
  21. Alonso Barros, PhD, Attorney at Law, Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights Advocate, Chile
  22. Asmaa Bassouri, PhD Candidate, Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakech, Morocco
  23. Jinan Bastaki, Law PhD candidate, School of Oriental and African Studies, London, UK
  24. Paolo Bertoli, Professor of International Law, University of Insubria, Como-Varese, Italy
  25. Marta Bitorsoli, LLM, Irish Centre for Human Rights, Trial Clerk ICTY, The Hague, The Netherlands
  26. Tessa Boeykens, Legal Researcher in Transitional Justice, Ghent University, Belgium
  27. Audrey Bomse, Co-Chair, National Lawyers Guild Palestine Subcommittee, USA
  28. Giorgio Bonamassa,  Lawyer, Legal Team Italia, Lawyer
  29. Marco Borraccetti, senior Lecturer in European Union Law, Alma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna, Italy
  30. Fatma Bouraoui, Lawyer, Tunisia
  31. Bill Bowring, Barrister, Professor, Director of the LLM/MA in Human Rights, School of Law, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK
  32. John Burroughs, Executive Director, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, New York City, USA
  33. Valentina Cadelo, Researcher, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Geneva, Switzerland
  34. Andrea Caligiuri, Senior Lecturer in International Law, University of Macerata, Italy
  35. Alejandra Castillo Ara, Lawyer, PhD Candidate, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg i.Br., Germany
  36. Giovanni Cellamare, Professore of International Law, Faculty of Political Science, University of Bari, Italy
  37. Emanuele Cimiotta, Assistant Professor of International Law, Law Faculty, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  38. Maivan Clech Lam, Professor Emerita, City University of New York Graduate Center, USA
  39. Ziyad Clot, Lawyer, University of Paris II Assas and Sciences Po Paris, France
  40. Marjorie Cohn, Professor of Law, Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president, National Lawyers Guild, USA
  41. Nicola Colacino, Associate Professor of International Law, University Niccolò Cusano, Rome, Italy
  42. Judith Cole, Adjunct Professor of International Law, International University in Geneva (IUG), Geneva, Switzerland
  43. Luigi Condorelli, Professor of International Law, University of Florence, Honorary Professor, University of Geneva, Switzerland/Italy
  44. Aoife Corcoran, Human Rights Researcher, (UCL Human Rights graduate), London, United Kingdom
  45. Francesco Costamagna, Assistant Professor of EU Law, University of Turin, Italy
  46. Jamil Dakwar, International Human Rights Lawyer, New York, USA
  47. Fredrik Danelius, LLM, former lecturer in international law, Lund University, Sweden, Oslo University, Norway, former editor-in-chief of Nordic Journal of International Law
  48. Shane Darcy, lecturer, Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway, Northern Ireland
  49. Nasrin Dashty, Barrister, Associate Special Assistant, ICC, The Hague, The Netherlands
  50. Birju M. Dattani, Barrister and PhD Student in International Law, SOAS University of London, UK
  51. Gail Davidson, Director, Lawyers against the War, USA
  52. Mark de Barros, Lecturer in Law, Université Paris II Panthéon, Assas/Attorney at Law, New York Bar, France/USA
  53. Emanuele De Franco, Lecturer in Criminal Law, University Federico II, Solicitor, Naples, Italy
  54. Javier De Lucas, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  55. Fanny Declercq, LLM, Leiden University, The Hague, The Netherlands
  56. Géraud de La Pradelle, Emeritus Professor International Law, France
  57. Adele Del Guercio, Researcher in International Law, University L’Orientale, Naples, Italy
  58. Cristina de la Serna-Sandoval, lawyer and human rights consultant, Spain
  59. Francesca De Vittor, Researcher in International Law, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy
  60. Saverio Di Benedetto, Senior Lecturer of International Law, Università del Salento, Italy
  61. Mahmoud Dodeen, Lawyer and Professor of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
  62. Linn Döring, Lawyer, PhD Candidate, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany
  63. Pierre-Emmanuel Dupont, Member of the Hague Center for Law and Arbitration, Senior Lecturer at the Free Faculty of Law, Economics and Management, Paris, France
  64. Isabel Düsterhöft, LL.M., Utrecht, M.A. Hamburg, Germany
  65. Penelope Ehrhardt, MSt in International Human Rights Law Candidate, University of Oxford, UK
  66. Lena El-Malak, PhD in Public International Law SOAS, Legal Counsel, UAE
  67. Ali Ercan, Researcher and Intern at the OIC Mission to the United Nations, New York, USA
  68. Siavash Eshghi, PhD candidate, SOAS University, London, UK
  69. Marco Fasciglione, Researcher in International Law, International Institute for Legal Studies, Naples, Italian National Research Council, Italy
  70. Matteo Fornari, Researcher in International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Milan-Bicocca, Italy
  71. Francisco Forrest Martin, Former Ariel F. Sallows Professor of Human Rights, University of Saskatchewan, College of Law, Canada
  72. Fabrizio Forte, PhD Candidate, University Federico II, Solicitor, Naples, Italy
  73. Micaela Frulli, Associate Professor of International Law, University of Florence, Italy
  74. Domenico Gallo, Judge, Italian Supreme Court, Rome, Italy
  75. Cristina Garcia-Pascual, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  76. Jose Antonio García-Saez, International Law Researcher, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  77. Andrés Gascón-Cuenca, PhD candidate, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain.
  78. Francesco M. Genovesi, Attorney at Law, Milan, Italy
  79. Andrea Giardina, Emeritus Professor of International Law, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  80. Jérémie Gilbert, Reader in Law, University of East London, School of Law and Social Sciences, London, UK
  81. Andrés Felipe Gómez Ariza, Colombia, Public International Law LLM candidate, University of Leicester, UK
  82. Henning Grosse Ruse, PhD, Khan, King’s College, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, UK
  83. Kelly L. Grotke, PhD, Affiliate Research Fellow, Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law, Iceland
  84. Kumaravadivel Guruparan, Lecturer, Department of Law, University of Jaffna, Sri Lanka
  85. Mateenah Hunter, LLB (Wits), LLM Public Interest Law and Policy (UCLA), Attorney, South Africa
  86. Ivan Ingravallo, Associate Professor of International Law, University of Bari, Italy
  87. Issaaf Ben Khalifa, Lawyer, University of Carthage, Tunisia
  88. Urfan Khaliq, Professor of International Law, Cardiff University, UK
  89. Ahmed Amine Khamlichi, Investigator at the CNRS, France
  90. Adilur Rahman Khan, Senior Advocate at Supreme Court of Bangladesh
  91. Shoaib M. Khan, Solicitor, Human Rights activist, London, UK
  92. Daniela Kravetz, International Criminal Justice and Gender Expert, The Hague, The Netherlands
  93. Azra Kuci, Human Rights Lawyer, LLM Graduate, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  94. Massimo La Torre, Professor of Law, University of Hull (UK), Catanzaro University, Italy
  95. Roberto Lamacchia, Lawyer, President, Association Democratic Jurists, Turin, Italy
  96. Michelle Landy, Solicitor, London, UK
  97. Federico Lenzerini, Assistant Professor of International Law, University of Siena, Italy
  98. Afsaneh Lotfizadeh, Human Rights Researcher (UCL LLM graduate), London, United Kingdom
  99. Michael Lynk, Professor, Faculty of Law, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
  100. Osama Malik, Advocate, Islamabad High Court Bar Association, Pakistan
  101. Marina Mancini, Senior Lecturer in International Law, Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria, Italy
  102. Ana Manero Salvador, Associate Professor of Public International Law, University Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  103. Fabio Marcelli, Research Director, Institute for International Legal Studies of the National Research Council, Rome, Bureau Member of IADL, Italy
  104. GIlberto Pagani, Avvocato, Legal Team Italia,
  105. Antonio Martínez Puñal, Professor of Public International Law, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  106. Mari Matsuda Professor, William S. Richardson School of Law, USA
  107. David McQuoid-Mason, Director, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
  108. Maeve McMahon, Associate Professor, Law and Legal Studies, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
  109. Ladan Mehranvar, PhD candidate in International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, Canada
  110. Ezio Menzione,  Lawyer, Legal Team Italia, Italy
  111. Ruth Mestre, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  112. Lies Michielsen, Lawyer Antwerp, Belgium
  113. Jeanne Mirer, President, International Association of Democratic Lawyers
  114. Bela Mongia, Human Rights Researcher, (UCL Human Rights student), London, United Kingdom
  115. Lavinia Monti, PhD candidate in International Law and Human Rights, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  116. Gloria M. Moran, Professor of Law, Religion and Public Policy, UDC, Spain/USA
  117. Giuseppe Morgese, Senior Lecturer in European Uninion Law, University of Bari, Italy
  118. Raffaella Multedo,  Lawyer, Legal Team Italia, Italy
  119. Raymond Murphy, Professor of Law and Human Rights, Irish Centre for Human Rights, Galway, Northern Ireland
  120. Francesca Mussi, PhD candidate in International Law, University of Milan- Bicocca, Italy
  121. Egeria Nalin, Senior Lecturer in International Law, Faculty of Political Science, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy
  122. Nina Navid, Human Rights Researcher, (UCL MA Human Rights graduate), London, U.K.
  123. Mary Nazzal-Batayneh, Barrister, Palestine Legal Aid Fund, Amman, Jordan
  124. Dorothy-Jean O’Donnell, Lawyer, Hope, British Columbia, Canada
  125. Maria Irene Papa, Senior Lecturer in International Law, Faculty of Law, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
    Facoltà di Giurisprudenza
  126. Brad Parker, Attorney, Defence for Children International Palestine, USA
  127. Gilberto Pagani, Lawyer, Milan, Italy
  128. Brunilda Pali, Researcher, KU Leuven Institute of Criminology, Leuven, Belgium
  129. Paolo Picone, Emeritus Professor of International Law, University La Sapienza, Rome, Member of Institut de Droit International, Member of Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
  130. Enrique Pochat, profesor de Derechos Humanos en la Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, Argentina
  131. Giuseppe Puma – PhD, International Law, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  132. Antonio Martínez Puñal, Professor of Public International Law, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  133. Micòl Savia, human rights lawyer, permanent representative of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) at the UN, Italy
  134. Chiara Ragni, Senior Researcher and Assistant Professor of International Law, University of Milan, Italy
  135. Michael Ratner, President Emeritus, Center for Constitutional Rights, New York, USA
  136. Edel Reagan, LLM, Irish Center for Human Rights, Galway, Northern Ireland
  137. Clara Rigoni, PhD Candidate, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany
  138. Sunčana Roksandić Vidlička, assistent lecturer Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, PhD Candidate Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany
  139. Yashvir Roopun, Barrister at Law, UK
  140. Itziar Ruiz-Gimenez Arrieta, Lecturer of International Relations, University Autónoma of Madrid, Spain
  141. Simeon A. Sahaydachny, LL.M in International Law, New Jersey, USA
  142. Francesco Saluzzo, PhD candidate in International Law, University of Palermo, Italy
  143. Laura Salvadego, research Fellow in International Law, University of Ferrara, Italy
  144. Stephanie Schlickewei, Research Associate in Public International Law, University of Kiel, Germany
  145. Smita Shah, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers, London, UK
  146. Rasha Sharkia, Media Advisor, Israel/Palestine,UCL MA Human Rights graduate, London, UK.
  147. Francesco Sindico, Reader in International Environmental Law, University of Strathclyde Law School, Glasgow, UK
  148. Francisco Soberon, Director Fundador, Asociacion Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH), Lima, Peru
  149. Angeles Solanes-Corella, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute, University of Valencia, Spain
  150. Mihira Sood, Human Rights Lawyer, Supreme Court of India, India
  151. Marta Sosa Navarro, Lawyer and International Criminal Law researcher, PhD in International Criminal Law, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain
  152. Pamela Spees, Senior Staff Attorney, Centre for Constitutional Rights, New York, USA
  153. Euan Sutherland, CB, Barrister and Parliamentary Draftsman, London, UK
  154. Patrice Tacita, Lawyer, Member of LKP, Guadeloupe
  155. Dennis Töllborg, Professor in Legal Science, STIAS Fellow, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
  156. Seline Trevisanut, Assistant Professor in International Law, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  157. Maïa Trujillo, Senior Programme Officer for International Law and Human Rights, The Hague, The Netherlands
  158. Lydia Vicente-Márquez, Executive Director, Rights International Spain
  159. Luisa Vierucci, Lecturer in International Law, university of Florence, Italy
  160. Gianluca Vitale,  Lawyer, Legal Team Italia, Italy
  161. Daniela Vitiello, PhD, International Law and EU Law, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  162. Benjamin Vogel, Senior Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg i. Br., Germany
  163. B.J. Walker, Professor, University of Victoria, Canada, and PUC-Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  164. Burns H Weston, Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Senior Scholar, UI Center for Human Rights, The University of Iowa, USA
  165. Laura Westra, PhD, University of Windsor, Canada – International Law
    University Bicocca, Milan, Italy
  166. John Whitbeck, Expert on International Law, former legal advisor, Palestinian Negotiation Team
  167. Richard Wild, Lecturer, School of Law, University of Greenwich, UK
  168. Pål Wrange, Professor of International Law, Stockholm University, Sweden

 

 

 

  1. Selma Abdel Qader, LLM, SciencesPo, PSIA, Paris, France
  2. Jacqueline Alsaid, LLM, freelance writer and Human Rights Activist, UK
  3. Soumaya Ben Dhaou, PhD, Assistant Professor Nipissing University, ON, Canada
  4. Francisco Bernete, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
  5. Carla Biavati, Members of the IPRI – Institute for Peace Research, Italian branch
  6. Linda Bimbi, International Section of the Lelio and Lisli Basso Foundation, Rome
  7. Robert Bourque, Professor of Philosophy and Political Science, College de Thetford and UMCE University, Canada
  8. Elpidio Capasso, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  9. Joseph Chiume, Barrister, Malawi
  10. Elena Coccia, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  11. Esmeralda Colombo, Legal Practitioner, (LLM, College d’Europe), Milan, Italy
  12. Antonio Crocetta, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  13. Maurizio Cucci, Member of the IPRI – Institute for Peace Research, Italian branch
  14. Simon Dalby, professor, Wilfrid Laurier University, USA
  15. Luigi De Magistris, Mayor of Naples and former Judge, Italy
  16. Silvia De Michelis, PhD candidate, University of Bradford, Department of Peace Studies, Bradford, UK
  17. Gennaro Esposito, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  18. Roja Fazaeli, Lecturer in Islamic Studies, Department of Near and Middle Eastern Studies, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
  19. Andrea Florence, Master in International Law (IHEID), Brazil
  20. Alejandro Forero, Researcher, Observatory on Penal System and Human Rights University of Barcelona, Spain
  21. César Alejandro González Carrillo, Master in law
    Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jalisco, México
  22. Héctor Grad, Associate Professor, Social Anthropology, University Autónoma, Madrid, Spain
  23. Cristina Greco, PhD in Semiotics, Department of Communication and Social Research, Rome University Sapienza, Italy
  24. Sondra Hale, Research Professor and Professor Emerita, Anthropology and Gender Studies, UCLA; and Coordinator, California Scholars for Academic Freedom, USA
  25. Remzi Halil, LLB, UK
  26. Naomi Head, Lecturer in Politics, University of Glasgow, UK
  27. Carlo Iannello, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  28. Mahmood M. Jaludi, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA
  29. Rabania Khan, LLB, UK
  30. Ronald C. Kramer, Professor of Sociology and Criminology, Western Michigan University, USA
  31. Charles H. Manekin, Professor of Philosophy, University of Maryland, USA
  32. Sarah Maranlou, Independent Legal Researcher, UK
  33. Lloyd K. Marbet, Executive Director, Oregon Conservancy Foundation, USA
  34. Miriam McColgan, Solicitor (Lawyer), Dublin, Ireland
  35. Giuseppe Nesi, Dean of the Law School, University of Trento, Italy
  36. Alba Nogueira López, Associate Professor of Administrative Law, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  37. Francis Oeser, Poet, London, UK
  38. Sarah Pallesen, MA Social Anthropology of Development, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, UK
  39. Daniele Perissi, LL.M Graduate, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Italy
  40. Raffaele Porta, Professor, Chemical Sciences, University Federico II, Naples Italy
  41. Nicola Quatrano, Judge, OSSIN – International Observatory on Human Rights, Italy
  42. Minhaj Quazi, B.Com(Hons) M.Com, LL.B.
  43. Rezaur Rahman Lenin, Executive Director, Law Life Culture, Bangladesh
  44. Jale Reshat, Solicitor, UK
  45. Dario Rossi, Lawyer, Italy
  46. Marco Russo, Member of Naples City Council and lawyer, Italy
  47. Ghassan Shahrour, MD
  48. Lloyd Schneider, Retired Minister, United Church of Christ, Delegate to General Synod 2015, Tuolumne, California, USA
  49. Gene, Schulman, Former senior editor, Overseas American Academy, Geneva, Switzerland
  50. Salvatore Talia, graduate in law, Università degli Sudi di Milano, Italy
  51. Carlo Tagliacozzo, Human Rights Activist, Turin, Italy
  52. Jeanne Theoharis, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, Co-Founder of Educators for Civil Liberties , Brooklyn College of CUNY, New York, USA
  53. Ismail Waheed, Lecturer, Institute of Islamic Studies, Maldives
  54. Paul Wapner, Professor, School of International Service, American University, USA
  55. Saïd Zulficar, Network for Colonial Freedom
About these ads

128 Responses to “Joint Declaration on International Law & Gaza & Final List of Endorsers”

  1. kevinclements2012 August 2, 2014 at 1:03 am #

    I would still like to endorse this Declaration as an individual and as Director of the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, Dunedin NZ.

  2. Fred Skolnik August 2, 2014 at 1:41 am #

    The substantive issues were all raised in the comments to the previous post and of course ignored by the signers of this disgraceful declaration, aside from Prof. Falk’s feeble efforts to defend the good faith and integrity of a group of self-proclaimed legal experts who did not utter a single word of protest when Israeli woman and children were being blown to pieces in busses and restaurants by Arab terrorists and 170,000 Syrians were being slaughtered by Arab butchers. This speaks for itself.

    The issue is simple. Hamas has embedded its entire military apparatus – rocket stores, rocket launchers, attack tunnels leading into Israel – among the civilian population of Gaza and from there fired over 1,000 rockets into Israeli population centers, both of which acts are by definition war crimes, though the term “war crimes” has not been attached to Hamas’s actions a single time in this unbalanced declaration. Israel has attacked these military targets in accordance with international law, making every effort to avoid the inevitable civilian casualties that are the direct result of turning residential areas into war zones by Hamas, firing rockets from schools and playgrounds, digging tunnel entrances in boobytrapped residential buildings, storing rockets under mosques, shooting from hospital windows, setting up a major command post under al-Shifa hospital.

    I said it before and I will say it again. Whoever signs his name to this is placing himself beyond the pale of moral and rational discourse.

  3. Koorosh Ameli August 2, 2014 at 2:01 am #

    Thank you, dear Prof. Falk.

    However, please note that my affiliation in the Final List of Endorsers for After July 28th, No. 6, has been mixed with the name and affiliation of another person. My affiliation is, Former Judge, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, The Hague, The Netherlands.

    In case there is a new edition of the final list, I would appreciate the correction.

    Kind regards,

    Koorosh Ameli

    From: Global Justice in the 21st Century Reply-To: Global Justice in the 21st Century Date: Saturday 2 August 2014 09:56 To: Koorosh Ameli Subject: [New post] Joint Declaration on International Law & Gaza & Final List of Endorsers

    WordPress.com Richard Falk posted: “Final Text of Joint Declaration on International Law & List of Endorsers (Prefatory Note: with only a voluntary effort the Joint Declaration on International Law in relation to the Gaza Attacks by Israel has elicited an encouraging res”

    • Richard Falk August 2, 2014 at 2:48 am #

      I am sorry about this mistake, and we will correct it as soon as possible. I will make a change myself
      on the blog site, but I am not handling the broader distribution of the Joint Declaration.

      Thanks for your endorsement, and I am glad to be in touch after many years.

  4. Weston, Burns H August 2, 2014 at 2:46 am #

    Dick:

    I do not see my name listed. Did you not get my message to add my name?

    B

    Burns H Weston
    Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus
    Senior Scholar & Founder, UI Center for Human Rights (UICHR)
    Co-Director, Commons Law Project (CLP)
    The University of Iowa

    Currently at:
    West-on-East
    920 Hurricane Road
    Keene, NY 12942 USA

    Tel/Fax: + 518-.576.2250 (home studio: UTC/GMT -05:00)
    Skype: burns.h.weston

    http://www.law.uiowa.edu
    http://www.uichr.org
    http://www.commonslawproject.org
    http://www.burnsweston.com

    [pic11876]

    Burns Weston’s and David Bollier’s new book, Green Governance: Ecological Survival, Human Rights, and the Law of the Commons was published by Cambridge University Press in January 2013, available at 20% discount at http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/isbn/item6975799/?site_locale=en_US (with early reviews) or http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/discountpromotion/?site_locale=en_US&code=WESTON13; also at Amazon.com (with early reviews).

    CONFIDENTIALITY: This communication is intended for the use of the addressee only, and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If your are not the intended recipient, please note that any dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies of the message (including all attachments), and please also notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your cooperation.

    • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 5:26 am #

      Professor Burns

      Regrettably I have to notify you that your communication to Dick has been posted by Dick in breach of your confidentiality warning.

      I hope you don’t get too sore with Dick.

      I would have expected him to respect your confidentiality. Any lawyer worth his salt would have proffered that advice.

      I cannot destroy your communication.

      Only Dick can.

      • Richard Falk August 2, 2014 at 5:38 am #

        I strongly suspect, Mr. Singer, that you would do all in your power to make trouble
        for those who have endorsed our statement by whatever means are at your disposal. The confidentiality statement is unrelated
        to this posting, which is what Burns Weston intended by his initial submission.

      • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 7:16 am #

        Professor Falk
        Professor Weston’s publicly released correspondence does indicate that you and he are apparently on a first name relationship.
        Are there any others who similarly signed the Declaration and if so how many?
        Do you not feel an obligation to disclose that there is not an arms length relationship with perhaps other signatories to the Declaration?
        The impression created by the Declaration is that each signatory carefully read and understood its contents before putting their names to it. I hope you can confirm this to be the case. They will all have to explain their reasoning in doing so before all the facts have been established to enable them to endorse the contents of the Declaration if it requires to be reformulated.

        On the three issues I have outlined – this appears to be a distinct possibility.

      • Kata Fisher August 2, 2014 at 1:12 pm #

        Dear David,

        I have a reflection about this:

        I am not getting some of all in total of Professors Flak’s post on my phone for days now, at all, when I look at the chronological web-posts. Meaning, when I look at them anew month by month.

        I do not like that, and quite frankly I do not understand that.
        It is almost as a hindrance because I hate to have to walk all the way to the computer in order to keep up.
        Since this is a diplomatic / academic setting – would anything be restricted by anyone? I just do wonder? If so by whom and why?

      • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 2:35 pm #

        Kata

        Afraid I cannot help you. Perhaps Professor Falk can.

  5. Josep Xercavins Valls August 2, 2014 at 3:12 am #

    Richard, I would like to endorse the statement! Xerca

  6. Fred Skolnik August 2, 2014 at 3:13 am #

    Prof. Falk

    I see that you removed a challenge to me to respond to a number of what might be called hostile questions. I don’t know why, since most of these questions are connected to the case you habitually make against Israel, and are also connected to the present round of fighting, I will reply with your permission.

    What is your response to the use of palestinian civilians as human shields by israel?

    Israel’s Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that it is illegal and the Chief of Staff immediately issued orders banning the practice. Violations since then have been very rare.

    What is your response to the targeting of civilian infrastructure and targeting of civilians by israel in Gaza and Lebanon?

    Israel targets civilian installations that are being used for military purposes. Israel does not target civilians. Civilians are being killed in Gaza because Hamas has turned their homes, hospitals, mosques, schools and playgrounds into a war zone.

    What is your response to the blockade of humanitarian aid and support to Gaza?

    Humanitarian aid is not blockaded, war materials are. Any ship purporting to carry humanitarian aid can dock in Ashdod and have its cargo inspected and transshipped to the border crossings, only 25-50% of whose capacity Hamas ever used, preferring to get their big kickbacks from smugglers using the tunnels into Sinai. It may interest you to know that Hamas used 40% of its budget over the past 4 years to build its system of attack tunnels, the sole purpose of which was to infiltrate Israeli settlements and murder civilians. The cement that Hamas poured into these tunnels – the cement that Israel allowed it to import – could have been used to build hospitals, schools, homes and, yes, shelters, but of course wasn’t.

    What is your response to the fact that Israel is a colonial power engaged in an occupation, to which palestinians have a legal right to resistance expressed through organising in the form of Hamas?

    Israel is not a colonial power. That is your definition. Israel occupied Arab territories after the Arabs started and lost a war and the status of the Arabs in these territories is no different legally from the status of the Germans in Occupied Germany after World War II

    What is your response to the increasing growth of Israeli settlements in palestinian areas?

    Israel has not built a new settlement or expanded the boundaries of existing settlements since the early 1990s. The increase in population in these areas is within the settlements themselves. As their final disposition will be determined in negotiations, it makes very little difference if they have 2 or 3 kindergartens or 50 or 60 families. In addition there are a hundred or so unauthorized “outposts,” most of which consist of 3 or 4 caravans on a barren hilltop. These should be dismantled, in my view.

    What is your response to the assertion that the Palestinian people have a legal right to resist, with arms the occupation by israel and other western powers by whatever means necessary?

    The Palestinians do not have a legal right to murder civilians.

    Should Israel appear in the ICC, alongside Hamas if necessary in order to face the well documented and evidenced charges of crimes against humanity?

    The Israeli government will decide where and when Israel appears in international forums, not me. You are just ranting when you call something “well-documented evidence of crimes against humanity.”

    Finally, does it make you feel good when israeli missiles blow palestinian children to smithereens?

    Of course not, not me or the vast majority of Israelis. But when Israelis are blown to smithereens the act is celebrated throughout Palestinian society.

  7. David Singer August 2, 2014 at 3:59 am #

    Professor Falk

    I rest my case to respectfully request you tear up the joint declaration and withdraw your signatures when you all view the following video relating to a mosque used to house weapons and provide an entrance to the extensive tunnel network running under Gaza.

    This will no doubt be the first of many such videos involving Hamas fighting their war from within residential areas, hospitals, schools, UN buildings and mosques.

    Rushing to judgement is not what lawyers do. Evidence is the compelling necessity before any one can be convicted.

    • Richard Falk August 2, 2014 at 5:42 am #

      You raise an important question, but I think it leads to a different set of conclusions, perhaps a reformulation,
      but certainly not a withdrawal of a joint declaration, and that assumes the video is both authentic and representative
      of a wider pattern that must be independently confirmed.

      • Fred Skolnik August 2, 2014 at 6:02 am #

        Are you being serious, Prof. Falk? Assumes? Independently confirmed? Where have you been? Have you not seen enough evidence of what Hamas is doing in Gaza. Are you not aware of the tunnels running from clinics and residential buidings into Israeli territory. Did you even now not look at the aerial photographs and videos showing rockets being fired from mosques, playgrounds, schools. You are going to lose what little credibility you have if you persist in this stubborn unwillingness to acknowledge what Hamas has done. And compare that with the standards of evidence that you appled to Israel in your reports and elsewhere. (“I was told that rockets were not being stored and fired in residential areas.” Were you really!)

      • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 6:53 am #

        Professor Falk

        Thank you for your honest response.

        You confirm that there has been a rush to judgement based on a number of assumptions and without any consideration of facts that could lead to a different set of conclusions – perhaps a reformulation of the Joint Declaration.

        Let me just point out three matters in the Declaration.

        1. The unsubstantiated claim that the Gazan civilian population of 1.8 million people has been subjected to collective punishment. So far as I am aware Israel has targeted Hamas ( not the civilian population) in specific areas of Gaza and not indiscriminately throughout Gaza. Interestingly the Declaration makes no claim that Israel’s civilian population has been subjected to collective punishment despite the evidence that 2800 rockets have been indiscriminately fired throughout the length and breadth of Israel.

        2. The Declaration talks of “a falsely construed right to self defence” – ignoring the inherent right to self defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. How can any of the distinguished legal signatories substantiate such a claim?

        3. The Declaration claims that “according to UN sources (which are identified in the declaration) over the last three weeks at least 1373 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed”.

        The UN source does not say what the Declaration alleges.

        It says the 1373 deaths comprise:

        852 civilians
        181 members of armed groups
        340 unknown.

        You are quick to say that the video I posted of the mosque being used for weapons storage and an entry to the extensive network of tunnels needs to be authenticated and representative of a wider pattern that must be independently confirmed.

        Mustn’t the same apply to deaths of civilians and members of armed groups and unknowns be similarly verified before the Declaration makes the false and spurious clim it has?

        Professor Falk – how can a group of international lawyers put their names to a document that is so grossly deceptive and misleading?

        I urge you to reconsider withdrawing the Declaration to avoid further embarrassment to those lawyers .who signed it.

  8. Georgianne Matthews August 2, 2014 at 4:59 am #

    Dear, dear Richard Falk: I agree with your superb intentions and morally support you and all the others on your list. Sincerely, Georgianne E. Matthews g.e.matthews@att.net

  9. Mansour Farhang August 2, 2014 at 5:46 am #

    I wish to endorse the Declaration and I am deeply grateful to those who took this initiative.

    Mansour Farhang
    Professor of International Relations
    Bennington College
    Bennington, VT 05201

  10. Stop the Zionist Troll August 2, 2014 at 6:27 am #

    Why every trash of zionist troll is posted? They have no respect for anyone. They are arrogant and have self centeric mind. The world is fed up with them

    • Kata Fisher August 2, 2014 at 10:30 am #

      “Stop the Zionist Troll” — you are a tiring Israelite!

      You are very disrespectful, considering that Holy Land Territory is not prohibited for a people that you call “zionist troll”.

      Your argument is against the state? — so you may or may not limit your disrespect to that.

      Why are YOU so arrogant?

      • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 2:32 pm #

        Kata

        Even more importantly – why does Professor Falk allow this Post to remain on his blog page.

        Is this the standard of civil dialogue that Professor Falk wants to see on his web site?

      • Kata Fisher August 2, 2014 at 3:44 pm #

        David: Let’s just start apologizing for lay-people—because their misbehavior may or may not be censoring…

        What is civil to an argument-sphere? I do not understand that.

      • David Singer August 2, 2014 at 4:43 pm #

        Kata

        Ask Professor Falk. He is the one who sets and insists on the standards for civil discourse on his web page.

      • Kata Fisher August 2, 2014 at 5:24 pm #

        Dear David,

        I am in agreement with you – if Professor Falk censors things so he will do. I do not think that his web-site can be censored except by him / restricted by anyone in their own will-power.

        However, I am not sure about that…and really who would do such thing?

        I do not know David — that what happened with BBC is just way too strange.I do not like it.

        It seems to me that media is so badly managed – but what can you do with lay-people?

  11. Akhtar Hussain August 2, 2014 at 7:10 am #

    I fully support the statement and sign it.Akhtar Hussain senior Advocate supreme court of Pakistan ,member Pakistan bar council appex statutory body of legal profession and its former vice chairman.professor of law ,teaching constitutional history of Pakistan at Islamia law college of Karachi university

    • David Carr August 2, 2014 at 4:25 pm #

      This “declaration” is nothing more than a propoganda piece dressed up and very thinly-disguised as a legal opinion. Law is based on facts not surmises, lies, distortions, discredited tropes and certainly not on a pre-judged assumption of guilt on the part of Israel. Even the laws you do refer to are incorrectly invoked, misapplied and inappropriate.

      In short, this is a thoroughly dishonest exercise in Israel-baiting from beginning to end, conducted by a self-appointed kangaroo court of anti-Israeli bigots.

  12. Arturo Tagliacozzo August 2, 2014 at 10:41 am #

    Il you are collecting new endorsements, pelaste addosso mine

    Arturo Tagliacozzo
    Associate professor. Physics of matter
    Università’ di Napoli “Federico II ” Napoli , Italy

  13. Francis Oeser August 2, 2014 at 11:49 am #

    Richard,
    I’m 44 on second list.
    If you want professional details for a poet, mine are: Ba Arch. Dip T&RP ((Melbourne), Dip. Shak Stud.(Birmingham)X

  14. Dr. Aly H. El-Kabbany August 2, 2014 at 3:30 pm #

    I support this legal procedure of putting the culprits of the severe violations of human rights and those who committed crimes against humanity in Gazza. All those who killed unarmed civilians, women and even defenceless children should be brought to justice. We are living in the 21st century when the international law should be respected and applied not to allow the law of the jungle to prevail. Israel believes “Might is Right” and the civilised world should prove that “Right is Might” in order that the Law should be entitled for the respect it deserve. Urgent legal action should be taken against political and military leaders in Israel if we want the international law to be respected !! And if we want to combat fanaticism, extremism and terrorism. Because these ills spread in a lawless world and in the absence of justice !!

  15. Dr. Aly H. El-Kabbany August 2, 2014 at 5:39 pm #

    I whole heartedly endorse this excellent declaration. It is an alarm call to move us from the law of the jungle to the proper international law which ought to be respected and applied on all !! As we all know it is not enough to apply justice but it has to be clearly shown that justice is applied. Killing of innocent defenseless children can’t go unpunished otherwise the whole of the international community will be a contributing culprit in this crime against humanity !! Massacres of non combatant civilians can’t go unpunished if we are to believe that we live in a civilized world in the 21st century. How can the world trust or have confidence in the UN wile we witness its impotence towards crimes committed against humanity by the Israeli government and the Israeli Army of occupation. Why do the world need a UN (who issued its resolution in 1947 to establish the state of Israel) who can’t force Israel today to respect and comply with all the UN resolutions relating to the Arab -Israeli conflict. The whole world have to wake up to the fact today that Israel is the only occupier in the world and Palestine is the only occupied country !! The solution is to end the occupation and force Israel to abide by the International law. The Israeli crimes against the Palestinians today are as horrible, if not worse, than the Nazi crimes and they have to stop.

  16. Elisabeth Weber August 3, 2014 at 2:04 am #

    Dear Richard,

    I have not signed the petition because it was introduced as being presented by legal scholars. However I would like to sign the second list, if this is still possible.

    Warmly, Elisabeth

    • Richard Falk August 3, 2014 at 3:20 am #

      Dear Elizabeth:

      Of course, I will! These have been dark days for me, having friends in Gaza and lamenting the
      way the world has responded, including the Arab neighbors. I will write separately. Hope you are
      all fine. Warmly, richard

  17. A6er August 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm #

    Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.

  18. david singer August 3, 2014 at 10:11 pm #

    Professor Falk

    I have endeavoured to post on two occasions but do not appear to have had any success. Can you please check to see whether there is a gremlin in the system?

    • Richard Falk August 3, 2014 at 10:28 pm #

      I am not sure why. There has been too heavy a flow of comments for me to handle efficiently. It is possible
      if you were challenging me to respond, I did block as I am trying to keep the focus on issues. I am not able
      to respond to the many questions that you and others raise, not because there are not answers available, but
      because of other priorities.

      • Kata Fisher August 4, 2014 at 8:26 pm #

        David: I am sure that our Beloved Profesor Falk will eventually get to it — when he has time…Sustain on, David.

      • David Singer August 4, 2014 at 9:18 pm #

        Kata

        I hope your confidence in Professor Falk posting my blocked post is not misplaced.

        The contents are in my opinion very damaging to the credibility of the Joint Declaration and the professional reputations of the lawyers who rushed to judgement and signed the Declaration whilst only the scantiest of facts were known at that time.

        New evidence contained in my blocked post confirms the need to withdraw it and take account of new information which makes the Declaration an object of derision already.

        New evidence continues to appear every hour that makes the Declaration unsupportable.
        Those signing it need to be given the opportunity to withdraw or confirm their signatures.

      • Richard Falk August 5, 2014 at 1:52 am #

        Mr. Singer: I have repeatedly indicated that this is a private website that exists for the posting of opinions.
        It is not intended as a venue in which I have accepted a responsibility to respond to all questions raised
        or to be attacked for failing to answer. I continue to give my critics the benefit of the doubt, which is
        not reciprocated, and have come under attack for excesses of receptivity. By now I would be a fool if I didn’t
        realize that you put forward views that you hold with unshakable will, and that your intention is not an exchange
        of views so much as a belittling of mine. You are free of course to think whatever you wish about the Joint Declaration
        but I can tell you that it has received an overwhelming positive response from around the world, including from
        legal experts that normally refrain from taking public positions on contested political terrain. I would be grateful
        if you state your own views in these comments without trying to engage me in a dialogue that is only valuable to you
        for the sake of posing additional objections to whatever I might say, e.g. my effort to explain my rejection of the
        authority generated by the Balfour Declaration, and its later acceptance in the League context. We simply disagree on
        the nature of ‘law’ in relation to such questions, and should leave it at that. Surely you have better ways to spend
        your time.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 2:37 am #

        The questions raised should normally be for all of us to think about and try to find answers for our selves. Mr. Falk is not obliged to answer each and every question. After all he is not answerable to anybody !! People can always comment on any post and raise any question without necessarily expecting answers. Also a “no” answer should be taken sometimes as an answer!!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • David Singer August 5, 2014 at 2:59 am #

        Professor Falk

        You are under no obligation to respond to a post if that is what you want to do.

        I believe that blocking posts such as you have done three times with mine is a dangerous practice that you need to reconsider.

        The post in question contains further evidence to put the credibility of your Joint Declaration in serious doubt – and in my opinion requires that it be withdrawn or reformulated.

        I have been waiting patiently for you to post my comment. I hope you reflect on continuing to block it.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 2:56 am #

        They did not rush to judgement, they left that to the ICC who are more qualified to judge than me and you.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 2:53 am #

        I am always surprised to see people who don’t agree with the message of a website because they are biased and represent the other side of the equation, to try to discredit a neutral message which exposes their crimes. For me and millions others like me, I would never go into a Zionist web site, because I strongly object to and totally reject their racist and expansionist policies at the expense of the Palestinians and other Arab land in Syria and South of Lebanon. So, if I don’t agree with them in principle, it would be a waste of valuable time to discuss or argue about details.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Richard Falk August 5, 2014 at 3:00 am #

        Thanks for these two messages. I am slowly coming to share the view that this kind of conversation
        is not constructive for either side. My bias from years of teaching is that it is always beneficial
        to be open to a diversity of views, and I think that I benefitted over the years from adhering to
        that framework. Only occasionally was that framing of dialogue threatened when on rare occasions confronted
        by a student who combined dogmatism with anger and incivility. Unfortunately, on this website with this
        set of concerns that inflame emotions so easily, such confrontations are common, if not habitual.

      • Kata Fisher August 4, 2014 at 9:56 pm #

        Dear David,

        When I read this at first (this morning), I wanted to ask you this:” what did you write?”

        Then I was thinking that I should not do that.

        After that, I was just moved by Spirit.

        All of this taking place is under the Law of the Spirit, and move of the Spirit. Do you see that?

        I think we have to get Church Charismatic from Rome – who are man celibate-priesthood under prophetic anointing: diplomas-nuncio oversee this.

        I have incredible ear-yanking by Spirit about that.

        We cannot mess anything up this time.

        Postpone it? Look at more things?

        These signatures can spiritually excommunicate Church Family lines (and all other lines) if they are not fully, and in the absolute right in approach/impartiality.

      • David Singer August 4, 2014 at 11:24 pm #

        Kata

        I included in a post I sent to you what I had sent to Professor Falk. He blocked that post as well.

      • Kata Fisher August 5, 2014 at 12:27 am #

        David,
        I have read this. Let’s just be still for a while.

    • Kata Fisher August 4, 2014 at 12:15 pm #

      David,

      I have a reflection:

      “Check this out:”

      – Pastor Jonathan

      http://online.wsj.com/articles/in-defense-of-zionism-1406918952

      • Kata Fisher August 4, 2014 at 12:32 pm #

        I got another reflection:

        “Psalms 147:3 reads, ‘ He heals the brokenhearted And binds up their wounds.’ Be encouraged. Your wound is temporary once God gets involved.”

        – Pastor Jonathan

      • David Singer August 4, 2014 at 6:37 pm #

        Kata

        A wonderful article – that Professor Falk and his co- signatories to the Joint Declaration would do well to read.

        I sent a similar response as the above some two hours ago – also enclosing with it my response to Professor Falk which he blocked from publication.

        When distinguished lawyers deny freedom of speech in this manner – one can only doubt their bona fides and impartiality.

  19. Richard Falk August 4, 2014 at 10:06 pm #

    Thanks for this suggestion. I have been reluctant to take such a step, but perhaps at this
    stage, what passes for dialogue more often seems written in the spirit of harassment.

    • Kata Fisher August 4, 2014 at 10:36 pm #

      Dear Professor Falk,

      When we have prophetic anointing here involved it is ecclesiastical in a civil setting, and it is very heavy load for a civil setting…I do apologize for the circumstances. However, it has its purpose.

    • akabbany@aol.com August 4, 2014 at 11:42 pm #

      What is wrong in sending the Israeli political and military leaders to the ICC for alleged genocide and crimes against humanity ?!! If they were innocent and behaved according to the international law .. Then they have nothing to fear !! On the contrary, they should seize the opportunity to clear their names …
      Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • David Singer August 5, 2014 at 4:24 am #

        Dr

        A person is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

        If you read the Joint Declaration the signatories acknowledge some of the difficulties in even bringing any such proceedings:

        “Moreover, we denounce the shameful political pressures exerted by several UN Member States and the UN on President Mahmoud Abbas, to discourage recourse to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and we urge the Governmental leaders of Palestine to invoke the jurisdiction of the ICC, by ratifying the ICC treaty and in the interim by resubmitting the declaration under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute, in order to investigate and prosecute the serious international crimes committed on the Palestinian territory by all parties to the conflict;”

        The Joint Declaration is remiss in claiming serious international crimes have been committed on the Palestinian territory by all parties to the conflict – but have not detailed what these crimes are. They need to be specified.

        I can think of some 3000 war crimes committed by Hamas and the new unity Government that now governs Gaza and the West Bank – the indiscriminate firing of 3000 rockets into civilian population centers in Israel during the past month. Do you agree?

        I invite you and the signatories to the Joint Declaration to similarly point out in the same specific terms the war crimes committed by Israel. I will then be more than happy to discuss them with you.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 5:39 am #

        Sir, a lot of Palestinians can’t understand as to why Mahmoud Abbas did not sign the Rome treaty yet !! His unconvincing excuse is the pressure put upon him by the US and a number of EU countries !! Abbas forgot that he is answerable only to his own people not to the Americans and the Europeans who are sponsoring the state terrorism of Israel. You asked me to pin point the crimes of Israel .. I don’t know where to start, but I will give it a go : 1- The illegal occupation (according to UN resolutions and the international law) of the Palestinian territories and other Arab land since June 67 war. 2- Building illegal settlements on occupied territories. 3- The illegal Transfer of the occupiers own citizens to live on occupied territories. 4- Exercising an apartheid policy. 5- The inhuman siege of Gazza for the last 10 years which act as a collective punishment to 1.8 million innocent civilians (you can’t blame them for Hamas policies, as I can’t blame each and every Israeli for the Likud’s barbaric policies. Putting in mind that the latest opinion poll in Israel revealed that more than 90 percent of the Israeli support the “brutal invasion and policies of the current Israeli government). 6- Launching 8 barbaric invasions against Gazza in less than 8 years destroying the infrastructure of the strip, and killing civilian men, women and children in several indiscriminate air strikes. 7- killing more than 1700 civilian Palestinians, more than 600 innocent children among them in horrible massacres during the current brutal campaign. I saw pictures of bodies of young children burned to death, and one showing a bullet in the back of an embryo when they took him out of the womb of his mother. I don’t believe that the world experienced or will experience more barbaric brutality !! In fact savage act that led the Bolivian president to declare Israel a terrorist state. The majority of the world countries ( who are not subjected to strong Zionist lobbying condemned the brutality of the current invasion. Please don’t insult my intelligence and use the Israeli propaganda that it is Hamas to blame because they are using children as human shield. These are their own children. I only blame the trigger happy culprits. Enough with this short list for the time being. And let us send the Israeli leaders and Hamas leaders to the ICC and wait for the court rulings.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 5, 2014 at 7:24 am #

        Dear David,

        Please be more sensitive to your calling because you know that you have spiritual authority over the people in Holy Land.

        Dear akabbany:

        When I observe Mahmoud Abbas and Netanyahu – I see this: they behave like in the spirit of the Cold War secret agents, but against the people in Holy Land. They are just mulling in that spirit—that is the spirit in that Israel/Palestinian leadership…

        They won’t do that what they should be doing…they do not have spiritual authority over the people in Holy Land.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 9:37 am #

        Dear Ms. Fisher,
        I can’t agree with you more. They have been negotiating for ages without reaching an agreement to save all this blood shed !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 5, 2014 at 9:48 am #

        Dear akabbany,
        I am in agreement with you.
        Also, I am in agreement with David.
        Something has to happen to shift these conditions to a better future.

      • david singer August 5, 2014 at 8:24 pm #

        akabanny

        1,2,3,4, do not in my opinion constitute prima facie war crimes that can be prosecuted in the ICC.

        In relation to 5 the 2011 UN report (the Palmer Commission} found:

        “The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.

        Bearing in mind its consequences and the fundamental importance of the freedom of navigation on the high seas, Israel should keep the naval blockade under regular review, in order to assess whether it continues to be necessary.

        Israel should continue with its efforts to ease its restrictions on movement of goods and persons to and from Gaza with a view to lifting its closure and to alleviate the unsustainable humanitarian and economic situation of the civilian population. These steps should be taken in accordance with Security Council resolution 1860, all aspects of which should be implemented.

        All humanitarian missions wishing to assist the Gaza population should do so through established procedures and the designated land crossings in consultation with the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority”

        6 and 7 could constitute actionable war crimes but Israel would have defences to those claims based on its inherent right to self defence under article 51 of the UN Charter and that the tragic and distressing deaths of civilians were accidental being the result of breaches of international humanitarian law by Hamas and other terrorist groups located in Gaza. I have endeavoured to post evidence of these breaches by Hamas and other terror groups but Professor Falk regrettably continues to block my post.

        I would also draw your attention to the following article:

        http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/jerusalem-babylon/1.591596

        There is no doubt that the indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israeli civilian population centres by Hamas and other terror groups constitute war crimes to which there is no possible defence.

        It was these kinds of indefensible war crimes alleged to have been committed by Israel that I wanted you to detail – which you have failed to do.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 5, 2014 at 11:37 pm #

        Sir, I wonder how any one however biased, but have little human feelings could justify the barbaric invasion of Israel today and the brutal massacres of thousands of civilian Palestinians , and the killing of more than 600 innocent defenceless babies and children, and the missile attacks even on UN shelters as self defence permitted under the international law !! That will be a rotten and savage interpretation of such law. I wished if you could imagine for a second that the Palestinians did that to your own people..would you accept that then as an acceptable legitimate self defence under International law ?! You described Hamas rocket attacks (the primitive hand made rockets that killed no body, but is still -in my personal opinion a sign of dignified resistance not to surrender to an illegal brutal occupation-) on Israel, which is justified under any divine or universal law as legitimate resistance to brutal illegal occupation, and a justified self defence against the current barbaric invasion, as a war crime .. But the hundreds of Israeli air strikes and the indiscriminate dropping of American bombs and missiles on heavily populated residential areas killing no less than 1700 Palestinian civilians NOT a war crime ?! If this is not a blatant example of biased, double standard and political hypocrisy .. Then what is ?! You did not consider brutal and illegal occupation for more than 40 years and inhumane siege for more than 10 years a crime. Which is in fact a huge crime against humanity not only the Palestinians. It is this illegal occupation, illegal expansion policy and the illegal settlements of Israel are the main reasons behind the blood shed all these decades. Israel can end the current human tragedy and the current vicious circle by ending its illegal occupation and giving to the Palestinian what is not hers. Mahmoud Abbas made many concessions (which are in my opinion crimes against the legitimate and historic rights of the Palestinians. So did Arafat before him) hoping to reach any settlement but in vain !! He did not realise yet that Israel is not interested in peace, their only interest is land grabbing and ethnic cleansing!! Otherwise how can you explain their refusal to withdraw to the 4th of June borders ?! You talked about the naval blockade again as a precaution against arms smuggling to Gaza (in fact I believe that the International community is at fault and is sharing in the Israeli crimes by not supplying the Palestinians with enough weapons to defend themselves and resist the Israeli occupation of their land). What about closing the 5 crossings with Israel which we all know are under Israeli control?! Israel’s crimes can’t be justifies under any circumstances !! The whole world including millions of honest jews (which I admit it takes a lot of courage to do) is condemning the Israeli savage invasion with exception of the Zionists !! In fact Israel today is a terrorist state -as the Bolivian president declared- and a rouge state that had no respect for any law nor UN resolutions (despite of the fact that Israel was established as a state by one). So, if you can’t see that Israel committed any crime that is your problem then. Israel can fool some of the people some of the time, but can’t fool all people all the time !! Israel exposed her ugly face and the world will deal with her sooner or later accordingly…
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 1:16 am #

        David & akabbany:

        I wrote this as a reflection for you but it was posted on another part. I must have not taken attention. I was dizzy.

        I have a reflection:

        We have this ongoing problem and this is why: Hamas Charter is the problem #1 in Holy Land that has to go away.

        Until they annul or edit – Palestinian / Gaza’s people will be submitted (ecclesiastically) to self-appointed judgment / destruction and a dead-end direction.

        International Law cannot protect the content of the Charter itself due to the essence and intentions of the application of it. It can, however, protect Hamas people in Gaza’s their right to self-defense.

        Someone has to take responsibility and spiritual authority over issues with the Hamas Charter. Their right to defend themselves is mixed up with the intentions of the Charter itself, and with that there are no clear distinctions when we look at the contexts of approach that is based on different disciplines / approaches to the problem — there are limitations to the extent of distinctions that are based on some disciplines. This is mixed up with prejudice / bias.

        As long as they do not remove that ecclesiastical hindrance – they are, legally by Hamas Charter under destruction that is self-appointed.

        Holy Quran is in spiritual authority of the Church-Charismatic that is under prophetic anointing because it is a prophesy in the Church age; yet, not discerned, in essence, due to the nature that was given and written/passed down: prophet Muhammad did not write it down. However, it was a prophesy that prophet Muhammad has received in the age of the Church.

        According to the Apostolic teaching and instruction; it must be discerned (as a prophesy) in the exactly same anointing and gifts spiritual that was given to Muhammad; meaning, prophetic anointing during the Church age.

        Hamas Charter takes ecclesiastical property of the Church Charismatic / prophesies in the Church age and places ecclesiastical property in unauthorized areas. This is causing destruction that is civil and ecclesiastical in nature for people in Palestine and Gaza.

        Prophet Muhammad was not a false prophet– he was a prophet in the Church age. Not like other false prophets who gave false Gospels.

        Holy Quran is not a false Gospel it is a prophesy in the Church age, and it has to be read, interpreted, and instructed only by and within prophetic anointing individually and corporately.

        Hamas Charter is violating ecclesiastical realities and violates the right to self-defense of Palestinians & Gaza’s people.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 4:04 am #

        My dear Lady,
        We heard this argument before about the PLO Charter (before even Hamas existed) !! The PLO changed their charter. Signed the Oslo accord. Went into fruitless negotiations for decades under the auspecies of 4 American presidents, and they got nothing in return, but the humiliation of Arafat and his murder at the end by the Israelis then the humiliation of Abbas now.
        So, please don’t try to find excuses for the occupiers. Even the Americans (the main sponsors of this rouge state are fade up from Netanyaho’s arrogance in dealing with them – the masters and financiers without them his country can’t survive – and his barbaric invasion of Gaza that threatens even the strategic interests of the US.
        Don’t forget also that the current government of Israel to date did not accept the American 2 state solution (which the American adopted not to solve the conflict and help the Palestinians but to save the jewish identity of Israel from the demographic time bomb.
        What prevent Israel (the strongest country in the ME a country with an atomic arsenal of more than 300 nuclear war heads, who can destroy all the Arab countries – 23 of them in hours) from unilaterally ending its illegal occupation. If Israel did come after and talk with me about the validity of Hamas Charter or the need for Hamas existence at all. We Arabs know now all the dirty tricks of Israel to escape international pressures with such false excuses. And even if Hamas through away its charter completely, Israel will find many other false excuses to avoid ending its illegal and brutal occupation !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 9:22 am #

        Dear akabbany,

        Please do not give a reference to me as “Lady” because it is spiritually unacceptable and offending for me as Church Charismatic.

        Th term “Lady” has also often meant “harlot” according to my understanding.

        Further,

        I do understand your concerns, and these are valid one; however, people in Israel and Gaza have made dangerous alliances and agreements generational — and we are here to sort them out/brake them off? Perhaps, I do not know…and quite frankly we not sure by what means?

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 12:21 pm #

        Dear Ms. Fisher, Please accept my sincere apology. I used the word “lady” as a sign of respect and honestly to God I did not mean any offence. As for how to solve the dispute .. In my modest view it is simple .. Put an end to the illegal occupation. And put international UN observers to watch the borders and report any violation by either side to the security council of the UN. The Palestinian / Israeli negotiation for the last 30 years were about 4 issues: the borders – the settlements – the right of return – Jerusalem. 1- The Borders: the international law states clearly that “No country is allowed to annex occupied territories gained by force”. All the UN resolutions since confirmed that. So Israel has to withdraw to the 4th of June 67 borders. During the negotiation, the Palestinian side made concessions and agreed certain alterations responding to Israeli demands. 2- The Settlements: the international law states clearly that “Forces of occupation are not allowed to transfer their own citizens to live on the occupied territories”. So according to the International law the settlements are illegal and ought to be dismantled as the Israeli did before in Sinai and in Gazza. But the Palestinians again agreed to concessions for the Israeli to keep the big settlements in return for land exchange. 3- Jerusalem: What applies to the settlements applies to Jerusalem, according to the International law and the UN resolutions. But again, the Palestinian authority made further concessions and agreed to Clinton parameters, to keep the part of Arab Jerusalem which has been changed to make it jewish during the occupation under Israeli jurisdiction and the Arab part to the Palestinians i.e. to divide the Arab occupied East Jerusalem !! 4- The Right of Return to 6 million Palestinians who live now in refugee camps: The International Law and UN resolutions give them the legal right to return to their own homes. Homes they still carry the ownership deeds and their own keys. Abbas made a further concession to drop the Right of Returns to those millions of Refugees, and agreed with Israel that only 400 thousands refugee can return to the currently occupied West Bank and not to their homes. From the above you will note that the Palestinian negotiators made all the concessions and the Israeli made none. Still the Israelis did not sign an agreement on these terms !! So, who is at fault in your honest Christian opinion ?? Respectfully yours, Aly El-Kabbany
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 2:37 pm #

        Dear Aly El-Kabbany,

        This is what I have understood what is taking place: resistance of Israeli and Palestinians/former Jordanians toward each other’s legitimate inheritance. By that they have created heresies and spiritual excommunication for them self’s.

        Yes, Israeli state has created issues that are irrevocable. Likewise, Palestinians / former Jordanians have done the same—they have created issues that are irrevocable.

        What is not so irrevocable, in substance/essence is this: their imaginary maps, flags & charters and approaches that are without substance.

        The “state” of Israel has to be erased in ideology and on the map, as well and replaced with valid one: the entire Holy Land to be given back to the spiritual authority of Old Testament and Jewish exiles in Holy Land.

        Likewise, Palestinians (Jewish exiles’s) pursuit of their “independence” in Holy Land is self-determination without self-realization, and is at a dead-end. They want the “state” independent for themselves when the entire Holy Land is their legitimate inheritance – but it is under spiritual authority of David and Old Testament, so it is. Why is that?

        Well, they have created circumstances for their self-realization, both Israeli and Palestinians/former Jordanians: they are spiritually excommunicated in the Holy Land, as they are now.

        Palestinians /Former Jordanians will not realize any validity of theirs self-determination outside the Holy Land territory (former Jordan that they have annulled for themselves with just another “imaginary flag.”

        How many more imaginary flags and landmarks in Holy Land will be before Israelite’s in the region realize that Holy Land belongs to descendant of Kind David, and who is under spiritual authority of Old Testament, just as Holy Land is—and it has to be given back at some point in time.

        In order to get Israeli and Palestinians committed to the Holy Land Landmarks and peace with their neighbors in the region, instead of their dead-end cycle’s of all: that nuclear issue’s & all to that mull of that spirit – we all are at dead-end with them, as well.

        Who is at fault? We can look at time pass, and we can look at that what is going on now. Who is, doing what? Yes, we can ask that, and we can look what were done in the past – but it is a dead-end without direction. What are the most valid directions – or a direction? We do ask that.

        We no longer want trickery and cheating to the Holy Land and people in the Land; those ways are to be over.

        I do not know what else to tell you.They would have to erase their imaginary maps, flags & charters and approaches in no substance: all heresies toward the Holy Land & people in Holy Land.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 10:07 am #

        Dear Ms. Fisher
        I note your comment, but I did not understand what you said about “Palestinians/former Jordanians” ?! There was no Jordanian state prior to WWI. While Historic Palestine and the Palestinians existed there for 3 thousand years. Jordan was created as an Emmirate by the British after the war as a reward for the children of Sherif Hussain, for siding with them against the Ottoman Empire. So they gave one of the Sherif’s Son (Abd El-Illah) the East Bank of the Jordan river to be the ruler there, and made Faisal the other son the King of Syria the King of Iraq. And put historic Palestine under British mandate.
        So, we can say Jordanians/originally Palestinians, and not the other way round.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 7, 2014 at 10:43 am #

        Aly,

        Thank you for this note, and I understand.

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 4:38 am #

        akabanny

        You incorrectly state:
        “There was no Jordanian state prior to WWI. While Historic Palestine and the Palestinians existed there for 3 thousand years. Jordan was created as an Emmirate by the British after the war as a reward for the children of Sherif Hussain, for siding with them against the Ottoman Empire.”

        The factual inaccuracies are:

        1. The Palestinians did not exist in ” historic Palestine” for 3000 years.

        The “Palestinians” are defined for the first time in 1964 in the PLO Charter as follows:

        “The Palestinians are those Arab citizens who were living normally in Palestine up to 1947, whether they remained or were expelled. Every child who was born to a Palestinian Arab father after this date, whether in Palestine or outside, is a Palestinian.”

        Arab citizens before then were referred to and included among “the non-Jewish communities” in the League of Nations Mandate in 1922. They did not rate a mention in the 1947 Partition Plan which only spoke of a Jewish State and an Arab state.

        2. Jordan was not created as an Emirate to reward the children of Sherif Hussain for siding with Britain against the Ottoman Empire. It was intended as a temporary six months arrangement to stop Abdullah travelling to Syria with 300 armed men to help out his brother Feisal against the French. It became more permanent at the expense of the Jews when Great Britain excluded the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home applying in Transjordan – 78% of the total area of the Mandate

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 7:37 am #

        I am talking about genuine history and you are talking about fabricated jewish history !!
        You contradicted yourself, when you said that the Palestinians were only defined in 1964 (which is the biggest Zionists lie or joke call it as you wish) then you mentioned that the Palestinians are those Arab Citizens living in Palestine until 1947 !! So, yourself defined them as Palestinians prior to 1964!! Go back to your ancestors books to see them mentioning Palestine and the Palestinians !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 3:14 pm #

        You need to calm down and read what I wrote more carefully.

        This definition of Palestinians was contained in the 1964 Charter of the PLO.

        That is what the Charter says – not me.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 5:52 pm #

        I may write today the definition of the British people ( which in fact a number of sociologists are doing now) would that deny the existence of the British people before the date of that definition?!
        Again I refer you to all history books about the area written even by Jewish and more over by Zionists, before the establishment of the state of Israel by a UN resolution in 1947, you will find them all talking about historic Palestine and the Palestinians, who existed long before the PLO existed, which was established as a liberation movement. Note the hypocrisy of both Israel and the USA .. While the world recognised the PLO as a liberation movement, they called it a terrorist organisation !! And both countries at the end had to sit with the leaders of the PLO for negotiations and the problem is they are still sitting !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 6, 2014 at 6:06 am #

        Kata

        Hamas Charter is indeed the first problem

        The PLO Charter is the second problem

        The continuing failure to allow the Palestinian Arabs to hold free and fair elections in the West Bank and Gaza since 2006 is the third problem.

        An election is supposed to be held by the end of September 2014. I doubt it will happen – which will be the fourth problem.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 6:35 am #

        The real problem is Israel and its brutal occupation. End the occupation and leave the Palestinians deal with their own problems.
        We should not forget or let the dirty Israeli propaganda change the facts which states that the Palestinians are the victims who lost their land (100 per cent of historic Palestine, while the 1947 UN resolution granted the jews a state only on 52 per cent of the Palestinian land) are currently treated inside Israel as second class citizens. Six millions of them lost their homes and are currently living in refugee camps, while recently Jewish immigrants to Israel are stealing their lands and building their homes in illegal settlement built on illegally occupied land (Note that it was declared “illegal” according to the UN, the International community including the US and according to the International law you seem to be very acquainted with).
        So, let us be fair and give.. Justice a chance .. Fairness a chance .. Peace a chance and force Israel to stop its savage and barbaric behaviour .. To stop the crimes against humanity .. To stop the brutal massacres against civilians and above all end its illegal occupation.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 8:58 am #

        David

        — what you say, and have said before is confirmed to me by the Spirit of God, by the move of the Spirit of God, and the Law of the Spirit– all this in respect to your human limitations.

        I have had brainstorming about this what you wrote, and as soon as I have a reflection that is in substance (that is confirmed/visible to me; I will submit that reflection to you).

        I read what you wrote few hours ago, but I have nothing visible to me in substance, right now.

      • david singer August 6, 2014 at 1:23 am #

        I have tried to give you my honest assessment. I can do no more.

        Are you a lawyer?

        Did you sign Professor Falk’s Joint Declaration?

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 2:36 am #

        I have a reflection and this is what I understand:

        David has given assessment that is in his appointed area: the Law.

        We can view things from base of our ethics and/or conscience; however, the laws whether ecclesiastical or civil (as realities) are not limited to ethics and /or conscience; rather, the substance.

        The Law will prevail only by a valid substance — that what validates.

        If there is no valid substance, it becomes null and void.

        The Law of conscience has to be grounded in Laws that are with/in valid substance in order to be valid to the conscience as law of the conscience.

        Joint Declaration has to be confirmed in substance before it is submitted; meaning, it has to have confirmed evidence. There is substantial evidence; however, it has to be discerned in particles .

        Otherwise, we can act by law of the conscience and human limitations and /or academic disciplines, and submit this to God alone, and allow for the move of the God’s Spirit to allow or restrict it.

        I have to see without doubt that this is submitted to God, when not discerned so that people are not spiritually excommunicated with their Family lines.

        Dealing with Holy Land issues and people in the Land in any invalid way can spiritually excommunicate.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 3:32 am #

        I am not a lawyer. I don’t believe that a law that does not comply with ethics and conscience to apply justice is not worth the ink it is written with !! I also have no respect for lawyers who try to find loopholes in the law to save their clients !! Not because their clients are innocent but because they can acquit using such loop holes. In the absence of true justice and equal treatment for all peoples, only savage animals can survive in such a jungle !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 6, 2014 at 6:13 am #

        The law is not perfect but it is the best system we have to peacefully settle disputes without resort to violence.

        But you have to prove your case first to succeed.

        In every case there are two competing legal opinions fiercely held by each team of lawyers. Only one will prevail – and it can be reversed on appeal.

        If you can come up with a fairer system then please let me know.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 6:57 am #

        The Palestinians are not allowed even the privilege to file their case in the ICC and wait for the legal outcome!! I have a personal question .. Are the Israeli really proud of the illegal behaviour of their government and the brutal and barbaric invasion of their army ?! I don’t need a public answer !! And don’t give me the exhausted slogans of the aggressors all over history that they regret the collateral damage !! Be human the loss of a life even of one innocent civilian and the sadness of his family and his nation can’t be dismissed as a collateral damage!! Otherwise the death of 6 millions Jews and other tens of millions of other European can be justified by the Nazi generals as collateral damage .. They just want steel the land so the people are killed on the way!! In fact many are describing the Israeli practices now as a “Zio-Nazi” racist and brutal practices which ought to be stopped by the international community if we want to have terrorism free world …
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 6, 2014 at 9:33 pm #

        The Palestinian Arabs are free to take whatever legal action they like, wherever and whenever they like. No doubt every lawyer who signed Professor Falk’s Declaration would happily represent them.

        You continue to rant about Israeli “illegal behaviour” – but have yet to point to one example of such indefensible behaviour.

        I have pointed out to you thousands of indefensible acts of illegal behaviour carried out by Hamas and other terror groups including:

        1. the indiscriminate firing of thousands of rockets into Israeli civilian population centers
        2, Firing rockets from within densely populated civilian centers
        3. Storing military materiel within densely populated civilian centers
        4. Constructing tunnels under and within residential houses, mosques and hospitals
        5. Booby trapping houses and public health centres used and frequented by civilians
        6. Influencing civilians to place themselves in grave danger by urging them to ignore warnings by Israel to vacate areas that are going to be targeted for military purposes
        7. Locating bombs in UNRWA buildings.

        Yes – the list keeps growing as the evidence is uncovered.

        These are all recognized and indefensible war crimes.

        I am sure those lawyers signing Professor Falk’s declaration can also add a few more.

        Every loss of life has been tragic but most could have been avoided if Hamas had accepted the ceasefire offered on 16 July. Do you agree?

        Have you asked Hamas why Gaza’s civilian population was not allowed access to the fortified tunnels running under Gaza which would have certainly reduced the casualties suffered?

        Have you asked Hamas why cement imported for building houses and factories was diverted to building tunnels under Gaza with exit points into Israel and equipped with weapons, motor bikes, handcuffs, and drugs?

        Have you ever considered describing the Islamic practices of ethnic and religious cleansing of Christian communities in Syria and Iraq as ‘“Islamo -Nazi”- “racist and brutal practices which ought to be stopped by the international community if we want to have terrorism free world”

      • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 11:41 pm #

        Have you ever asked Israel why don’t you end your “illegal” (according to the UN and the International law) occupation, which is the main reason behind all the blood shed?!
        Have you ever asked Israel to stop building “illegal” settlements on the illegally occupied West Bank, at least during the (fruitless) negotiation, to give the American 2 state solution a chance .. And give peace a chance.. Otherwise we will be left with the one state solution and the loss of the jewish identity in historic Palestine and ultimately the loss of Israel as we know it today !! The atomic arsenal will not help you then against the demographic time bomb.
        Yes what the extremist ISIS is doing in both Syria and Iraq is shameful and barbaric and those terrorist are no different from the savage barbaric generals of Israel!! The whole bunch should be tried in the ICC.
        But please don’t talk with me about Muslim extremists, because such extremist minority does not represent Islam. This is not a defence of Islam because it is not in need of defence. Educated people (and you seem to me to be one) would measure the behaviour of the followers according to their adherence to their religious message (then we judge are they real Muslims who represent their religion or know. Accordingly I judge ISIS to be non Muslims) and not vice versa. But the Zionist propaganda machine is behind the Islamophobia campaign!!
        I can assure you that Muslims and Christians are united in resisting the Israeli occupation in the holy land.
        Religious extremists is not the subject now. But I refer you to the books and lectures of the late Professor Israel Shahak to see the horror and the brutality and the barbaric behaviour of Jewish fanatic extremists against Christians more than Muslims and what do they say about Jesus (PBUH).
        I don’t need to talk here about the Jewish terrorist who killed innocent people praying in al-AQSA mosque, who is now a national hero !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • David Singer August 7, 2014 at 4:15 am #

        akannaby?

        Do you regard Hamas as being “Muslim-extremist”?

        Just a “yes” or “no” will be sufficient.

      • Kata Fisher August 7, 2014 at 8:44 am #

        David,

        Nozomi Takahashi wrote about sanctions on Israel, and I had a reflection about that:

        Advising any ecclesiastical-items sanction in Holy Land region would be unacceptable in substance, illegal.

        Ecclesiastical items should not be sanctioned. Likewise, free-migration of ecclesiastical peoples should not be sanctioned in and out of the Holy Land, or anywhere. (It would be in Nazi-spirit).

        Sanction on Food’s in general is not to be allowed, anywhere. (It would be in Nazi-spirit when it is).

        We do want; however; unnecessary weaponry to be gone from the region. Alternatively, instead of Israel, perhaps Jordan should restrict Hamas’s attacks over Israel, and all other that they do in Gaza illegally – would that be more secure, if legal?

        Israel could be denied their direct rights to escalated self-defense — if Jordan can take responsibility for Hamas and their wild ways.

        In general, the part of Gaza’s Land is not Holy Land territory, and Israeli cannot take responsibility for all of the people in Gaza based on Spiritual authority of the Old Testament — Jordan would have to do that, when legal and acceptable to them & possible.

        …then again, look and see conditions of refugees in Islamic lands—they do not take care of ecclesiastical peoples — they are not integrating peoples with local population. (It would be in Nazi-spirit, as well—these unacceptable conditions of refugees).

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 9:42 am #

        What about the siege of Gaza for the last 10 years, which is starving and suffocating the 1.8 million inhabitants .. Is that legal ?!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 7, 2014 at 10:34 am #

        Dear Aly El-Kabbany,

        …”starving and suffocating” is in Nazi-spirit, in fact.

        In addition to that:

        Hamas can have an independent state outside the Holy Land Territory. I fully support their right for independence and self-determination (even without their self-realization) outside the territory of Holy Land, however.

        That is, outside the territory of Holly Land /Israel as Kingdom (literally) that is under Spiritual authority of Descendant of King David, who is a Jew under spiritual authority of Old Testament, just as Holy Land is.

        I would cheer for Gaza’s/their “Independent state” and in fact, they can even have the liberty of their Hamas Charter to themselves (outside the Holy Land–Holy Land that what is in spiritual authority Son of David/David who is Jew, and Spiritual Authority of Old Testament).

        However, and again—how would we view that Gaza’s independent state under Islamic Theology of Fascism/ misapplication of Holy Quran?

        In reality, they can choose to be an Islamic Kingdom (based on Holy Quran, as whole Book of Prophesy & with Law that is submitted to the International Law) or terrorist in the region–and without any rule of law, just that is next to the Holy Land.

        They can not take Holy Quran and misapply it to the Holy Land that is in Spiritual Authority of Descendant of King David, and who is a Jew under Spiritual Authority of Old Testament just as Holy Land is–they sure can but they are under self-appointed consequence.

        This is addressing in the terms of black and white; meaning, good and evil.

        We do want all the best for people in Gaza, as well as people in Holy Land.

        I am only looking at ecclesiastical realities, as much and possible. I will allow others to address you other concerns.

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 5:03 am #

        Do you have any statistics for the number of Gazans that have starved or suffocated over the last 10 years? The number that are suffering or have suffered from malnutrition?

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 7:02 am #

        Go to the Web site of the UN humanitarian organisation in Gaza and have all the verified statistics you require about the human tragedies, children suffering, lack of medications, lack of food and other essential commodities etc… Due to the inhumane Israeli siege. Do you think the Palestinians are taking all the risk to build the tunnels for fun ?!! Or it is away around such inhuman and brutal siege. As if Israel is allowed to commit genocide and the ready excuse is their national security. No civilised country all over history commits similar crimes against humanity for such silly and fabricated reasons !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 3:58 pm #

        Man is very ingenious and overcoming blockades by building tunnels has been used before and will be used again – usually at great financial gain to those who do so.

        Hamas itself extracted heavy duties from those engaged in such smuggling activities to help fund the construction of its terror tunnels into Israel.

        The smuggling tunnels built from Sinai into Gaza and the food delivered daily into Gaza from Israeli crossings ensured Gaza was well stocked with food. Regrettably those tunnels were also used to smuggle in rockets, weapons and terrorists – and to divert cement delivered through the Israeli crossings for the construction of the terror tunnels into Israel instead of for the benefit of the civilian population..

        As a result your claims that the Gazans are starving is unsustainable.

        Might I also remind you that a UN Report in September 2011 made the following finding:

        “The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the “requirements of international law.”

        It also made the following recommendations:

        ” Bearing in mind its consequences and the fundamental importance of the freedom of navigation on the high seas, Israel should keep the naval blockade under regular review, in order to assess whether it continues to be necessary.

        Israel should continue with its efforts to ease its restrictions on movement of goods and persons to and from Gaza with a view to lifting its closure and to alleviate the unsustainable humanitarian and economic situation of the civilian population. These steps should be taken in accordance with Security Council resolution 1860, all aspects of which should be implemented.

        All humanitarian missions wishing to assist the Gaza population should do so through established procedures and the designated land crossings in consultation with the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority”

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 5:28 pm #

        The difference between us can be summarised in the fact that a freedom fighter in the eyes of some is a terrorist in the eyes of others. Don’t forget that 2 prime ministers of Israel were declared “Terrorists” (Menahim Begin and Is’haq Shamir) by the British courts (the most respected courts in the world). Again, It is normal and legitimate for the resistance groups in Gazza (and I hope soon in the West Bank) to threaten the national security of Israel until it ends its barbaric, brutal and illegal occupation and stop its illegal activities of building settlements in the illegally occupied West Bank in clear violation to the International Law and in blatant challenge to the international community (including even the USA -the main sponsor of the Israeli state terrorism- and the 2 state solution to save Israel). It will be interesting to hear your “legal” (or in fact illegal) argument to justify that ?! You showed all the Israeli brutal and barbaric atrocities as human, moral and above all legal. My anser to that is : I hope the Palestinians will be strong enough soon to do the same to the Israeli population. A military siege of Israel to protect the Palestinian national security from the American most modern and sophisticated military weapons and missiles that help the State terrorism of Israel. Also to deny Israel any cement substances until they stop building illegal settlements to the end of the other atrocities !! Then we will refer to your rants to prove that all such atrocities are legal under the international law !! You may even find in this way that all Hitler’s crimes were legal if you were on his side !! Israel has to treat the Palestinians the she likes to be treated. Because one day (and I hope soon) when the Arab capitals are liberated from the puppets ruling today, Israel -most certainly will not have the upper hand in the ME even with its Nuclear Arsenal !! I refer you to the writings of Mao Tsi-Tong, Che Guevara to know that history is on the side of the Guerilla fighters who come out victorious at the end. I may also have referred you to the latest 2 books of Shlomo Sand (the Jewish, Israeli academic historian) entitled: “The Invention of the Jewish Nation” and “The Invention of the Land of Israel”.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 4:57 am #

        Kata

        There is a need for a Government in Gaza that takes responsibility for what happens there. That Government was Hamas till it was replaced by a PLO-Hamas Unity Government a few months ago.

        That Unity Government was nowhere to be seen during the recent conflict.

        Hamas took over the running once again with disastrous results for the civilian population.

        Jordan or Egypt ruling Gaza could indeed make a difference.

        Egypt administered Gaza between 1948-1967. Maybe such an arrangement could be put in place again with international support.

        Israel may want to have some input as well.

        Gaza has become an enormous problem careering out of control since Israel unilaterally withdrew in 2005 and Hamas came to power in 2007.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 7:22 am #

        You mentioned the administration of Gaza by Egypt until June 67, and suggested to go back to that arrangement once again !! You forgot to mention that the West bank was administered by Jordan again for the same period until the illegal occupation of the West Bank by Israel in June 1967 !! So why we don’t adopt your suggestion also to involve the West bank and we return it to the administration of Jordan and we finish with this conflict ?!! Or we have to wait for another Hamas to be created in the West Bank with more of blood shed for Israel to be convinced with that solution ?!
        As for Ms. Fisher I say, the greatness of Islam is in making the value of one human life ( the life of any human being, not necessarily a Muslim one ) is more valuable in the eyes of God than any holy land on earth including our holy Ka’bba in Mecca !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 3:10 pm #

        If you have been following the comments posted to this article you will see that Professor Falk and I are right now engaging in a discussion about the possibility of restoring the status quo of the West Bank as existed on 4 June 1967 taking into account the changes on the ground since then and Security Council Resolution 242.

        Do you agree with that idea?

        You state:

        “As for Ms. Fisher I say, the greatness of Islam is in making the value of one human life (the life of any human being, not necessarily a Muslim one ) is more valuable in the eyes of God than any holy land on earth including our holy Ka’bba in Mecca !!”

        How can you justify your statement in light of the following two statements:

        1. ““In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate You are the best community that has been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah. And if the People of the Scripture had believed, it had been better for them. Some of them are believers; but most of them are evil-doers. They will not harm you save a trifling hurt, and if they fight against you they will turn and flee. And afterward they will not be helped. Ignominy shall be their portion wheresoever they are found save [where they grasp] a rope from Allah and a rope from man. They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them. That is because they used to disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slew the Prophets wrongfully. That is because they were rebellious and used to transgress.” Surat Al-Imran (III), verses 109-111 Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors. The Islamic World is burning. It is incumbent upon each one of us to pour some water, little as it may be, with a view of extinguishing as much of the fire as he can, without awaiting action by the others.”

        2.” Article Eight: The Slogan of the Hamas
        Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.”

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 6:48 pm #

        No I did not follow that discussion. I would agree with that, with one reservation “putting into account the changes on the ground”, if these changes were illegal they should be removed and they should not be taken into account.
        Please, Keep the discussion political and away from religions. And don’t use verses of the Qu’ran out of their historic, linguistic and theological context. I don’t know what do you want to prove ? As a Jew, you don’t believe in Islam .. I understand that. So, if you don’t believe in the principle fact that Islam is a revelation from God, then it would be illogical from your side to discuss the details. It will be also a waste of my time and effort to go into a fruitless discussion with you or any other Jew.
        As for us Muslims we believe Moses (PBUH) and Jesus (PBUH) and Mohammad (PBUH) and we don’t differentiate between them or any other Prophets and Messengers of God.
        So, don’t start this road otherwise I will remind you of the brutality and genocide glorified in your Torah and the filth of the Talmoud when Jesus (PBUH) is referred to and what the Talmoud mention about (according to Islam,the most sacred lady of all universes) Mary the Mother of Jesus (Peace and God’s blessing will be upon both of them). I don’t like to talk about the hatred you implant in the hearts of your children in their religion lessons against the non-Jews (Al-Aghiar) and how they should be badly treated, even dead !! A devout Jew should spit on the graves of the non-Jews and curse them and their parents, whenever he passes their cemeteries ( they are talking now about Christians and Muslims)!! All these racist practices and filth you can read in details and with clear examples with reference to the verses of the Torah and the teaching of the Talmoud in a book by the late Jewish Israeli Professor Israel Shahak, entitled “Judaism and the problem of the other religions”. Those who are interested to read the Professor can Google his name and see how can they get his books.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 12, 2014 at 8:59 pm #

        Dear David and Aly,

        You are on a fine line (smile).

        I believe that the argument of both of you underline essentially devotion to Faith versa confusion’s of religion/s. Do you understand what is being said, in an argument?

        I believe that you are misunderstanding each other.

        Interpretations of Sacred Text (without Faith) have nothing to do with Secret text itself when they are void of Faith (those interpretations); it becomes a religion, at best (in essences without Faith). Why do we have splits in Judaism, Christianity and Islam?
        Every Faith has that essence of “religious context” of diversity in the spirits; however, it has nothing to do with authentic Faith and Spirit of the Faith-authentic and practices of it. I believe both of you have indicated /argued that..

        What is most important is to recognize the condition of those who are lost to the Faith-authentic, and bring them in line to the Faith itself.

        Interpretations that are diverse are difficult to argue about, I would not recommend, unless one is under mature prophetic anointing and/or Church-Charismatic mature and/or in a valid Church-ordination under prophetic anointing.

        When these things are brought up, they should be in a private context (for example– a Catholic example: we discuss heresies in the Church within confession time, when necessary). Usually the priests are not irritated about it, and are Charismatic.

        You would confront your doubts about your Faith (not the priest), without a question, in a private setting, however.

        In general, you just do not go about that in a public setting unless you really have to & are equipped so that you can — for good of others and not your own.

        I hope that this is helpful.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 13, 2014 at 7:24 am #

        Dear Ms. Fisher. Your comment is helpful and most certainly very thoughtful. I believe that diversity of interpretations enrich any subject including religions. For me I don’t see the different sects within any religion as splits, but as different schools of thought which should compliment one another rather than being in conflict with each other. I am a Muslim by choice and belief (not because I was born to Muslim parents). Married to a French Catholic for more than 35 years now. I never tried to let her convert to Islam (knowing very well that that will not benefit her -unless she was strongly convinced to do so- but I would claim that I made her a more religious Christian). Human beings are different, because this is the way God created them. I love the beautiful message of Islam, and strongly believe that today’s Muslims failed Islam and tarnished its peaceful message and image!! We are not, and should not be in competition with other religions, or in fact with people with no religion. One of the main principles of the real Islam is: “There is NO compulsion in religion”. The only war allowed in Islam is a defensive war, as the Qu’ran states clearly in several verses that “God loves not transgression” and “… transgress not”. So, we can always blame bad Muslims for not adhering to the message of Islam, rather than blaming Islam for the bad behaviour of Muslims. I believe the same applies to Christianity and Judaism .. After all Hitler – the monster of the 20th century- was a Christian!! And the Jewish Shameer, Begin and Sharon were the monsters responsible of Palestinian massacres. Jews were persecuted all over Christian Europe and had their refuge and safe heaven in the Muslim world !! In addition it was not Muslims who launched the 1st and 2nd world wars where tens of millions were killed. It was not Muslims who dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in a barbaric action which killed each and every living being including embryos in the wombs of their mothers!! It is not the Muslims who stole the land of others in the worse example of settling colonialism in the 20th century!! It is not Muslims who committed massacres and ethnic cleansing to get rid of the indigenous inhabitants (note that the number of Jews in 1947 were less than 10 percent of the population of historic Palestine at the time and 90 percent were Palestinians. I can give the exact numbers when I return home from my holiday. Please also note that religious claims and historic claims over territories have no place under the International Law .. Otherwise the Arabs would claim back Spain and a great part of Southern Europe which they ruled for about 800 years!! Also the Irish can claim back Scotland!! And so on to have a different map of today’s world. And after all that the propaganda promote the Isalmophobia and blame the Muslims for defending themselves against aggression!! Did I leave the main subject to side issues .. I may have done that !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 13, 2014 at 10:27 am #

        Dear Aly,

        I believe that God moves people to conversions according to His purpose, and he moves people in His times and seasons.

        It is fact that there is no “There is NO compulsion in religion.” I lived in Germany for many years, and did not see or experience the compulsion in religion; rather, they were complementing each other as different branches of Christianity corporately as Evangelicals, Lutheran and Catholic Church.

        Occasionally, one would hear women demanding that the baptism is to be done in certain Church –or would complain that baptism was not done in certain Church. These women would step outside spiritual authority of men and priest/pastors (regardless what Church would be).

        However, that is just women demanding and complaining, often without any valid reason.

        It is not like that here in US. Here in US is like this: “If you are in my church—you aren’t Christian” and they will try to get one out of one Church just to another… and this is so because their lay-people think they are called to do evangelism and conversion from one Church tradition/teaching just to another. This is what lay-people do in US.

        Another persistent thing is that I have observed is that women move their husbands from one Church to another–their Church. This, too, is very wrong from the spiritual point of view because it is not valid to authentic Christianity.

        That, in fact, is not Christianity– that is radical Christianity, often headed by woman. They do not believe and obey by any of the Scripture and orders of the Church. They will occasionally believe in counterfeit (demonic) signs, however.

        You are in an anointed purpose. We need more anointed people to the conversions to the Faiths that are essentially of One Book and One Faith while different in spiritual authority and traditions that leads people into the realization of Faith and grafting in in accordance to the promise.

        I hope you have wonderful holidays. You are doing excellent with your wife, and both of you are in an anointed purpose. I am confident in that.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 13, 2014 at 3:16 pm #

        Thank you Ms. Fisher for your kind wishes. I can’t agree with you more. I liked your polite reference to “lay people” which I am going to use in the future, as I use to call them “ignorant people”!! Ignorant about the spiritual core massage of religion, any religion of the heavenly revelations. People of the different sects of the same religion should understand that they are brothers and sisters in religion and not adversaries. Again people of different religions should understand that they are brothers and sisters in humanity (as Imam Ali put it) and not adversaries. No one on earth has a monopoly on the absolute Truth. Only God Almighty has, and He will judge us according to our deeds on the “Day of Judgement”. Judgement of all human being is a Divine Task. So, I wonder about those people who dare to assume God’s task and judge each other, not realising due to their ignorance that they even lack the quality of Divine Justice!! I don’t have a copy of the Qu’ran in English with me now, so I would kindly ask you to read Verse 62 of Chapter 2, Which is very clear in Arabic ( the language the Qu’ran was revealed in). My interpretation of that verse in my own language as I don’t have the English translation of the exact text in front of me now is .. Muslims, Jews, Christians and Sabians, those among them who believe in God and the last day (when they will be judged and will be answerable to God for all their deeds) and did righteous deeds(to emphasise here that the belief in God alone is not enough. One has to work hard to prove it). They will rewarded by their God and they should have nothing to fear nor to be sad about. Of course you will find a lot of Muslims mis interpreting the verse and they explain it in a way to suit the way they wanted rather than the fair and clear meaning of the verse !! They would wrongly argue that the verse applies only before the revelation of Islam ! The answer is how come? While Muslims are mentioned in the verse with the people of other religions? “Islam” in linguistic term means “submission to God”. Accordingly a Muslim is “the one who submits his face to God” so any one who does that in Arabic could be called Muslim. Religious conflicts , in my modest opinion, are an outcome of ignorance which leads to extremisms and fanaticism !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • akabbany@aol.com August 14, 2014 at 1:18 am #

        Thank you Ms. Fisher for your kind wishes. I can’t agree with you more. I liked your polite reference to “lay people” which I am going to use in the future, as I use to call them “ignorant people”!! Ignorant about the spiritual core message of the religion, any religion of the heavenly revelations. People of the different sects of the same religion should realise that they are brothers and sisters in religion and not adversaries. Again people of different religions should understand and realise that they are brothers and sisters in humanity (as Imam Ali put it) and not adversaries. No one on earth has a monopoly on the absolute Truth. Only God Almighty has, and He will judge us according to our deeds on the “Day of Judgement”. Judgement of all human beings is a Divine Task. So, I wonder about those people who dare to assume God’s task and judge each other, not realising (due to their ignorance) that they even lack the quality of Divine Justice!! I don’t have a copy of the Qu’ran in English with me now, so I would kindly efer you to Verse 62 of Chapter 2, Which is very clear in the Arabic text ( the language the Qu’ran was revealed in). My interpretation of that verse in my own language as I don’t have the English translation of the exact text in front of me now is .. Muslims, Jews, Christians and Sabians, those among them who believe in God and the last day (when they will be judged and will be answerable to God for all their deeds) and did righteous deeds(to emphasise here that the belief in God alone is not enough. One has to work hard to prove it). They will be rewarded by their God and they should have nothing to fear from nor to be sad about. These are the 3 main ans simple criteria. I believe that Gods messages and instructions are simple and straight forward and people like to complicate them!! Of course you will find a lot of Muslims mis interpreting the verse and they explain it in a way to suit the way they wanted rather than the fair and clear meaning of the verse !! They would wrongly argue that the verse applies only before the revelation of Islam ! The answer is how come? While Muslims are mentioned in the verse with the people of other religions? “Islam” in linguistic terms means “submission to God”. Accordingly a Muslim is “the one who submits his face to God” so any one who does that from the followers of other religions could be called a “Muslim” from the Arabic language point of view. Religious conflicts , in my modest opinion, are an outcome of ignorance which leads to extremisms and fanaticism !! I re edited this reply, as I was probably half sleepy when I wrote the original yesterday !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 14, 2014 at 8:06 am #

        Dear Aly,

        I read this and I reflected about it, and this is what I understood by the Scripture about that what you said:

        The Message of Holy Quran and Islam is clear, but it is a notable difference when Holy Quran is interpreted in prophetic anointing and valid Hermeneutics.

        It is all about doing the will of God; that is, to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. (By the out-pour of God’s Spirit – this according to prophet Joel would be the start of the Church-age) / according to the Gospel age (for Christianity), and according to Quran /Islam (submission to God) by God’s Spirit and /or God’s Presence.

        Submission to God is only possible by God’s Spirit (that what prophet Joel wrote about) and / or by the God’s Presence with a person:

        http://biblehub.com/text/joel/2-28.htm

        There is no doubt in my mind that Holy Quran is the only prophesy in Church age that is given to Jews and non-Jews (during the Church age) and is sufficient to justify. However, any valid prophesy is only accepted by those who believe, in essence righteous / believers.

        Unbelieving unrighteous will follow false prophesy, but can not accept a prophesy.This is why: They can not accept & believe any part of the Scripture that can justify — they will only misuse the Scriptures in order to justify their behavior because of their spiritual condition that is nonredeemable: unrighteousness even after all of the Scriptures/Special Revelation is given to them.

        According to Quran we can say Islam / “all believers/righteous” (these who were/are set apart for God):

        http://quran.com/2/62

        In essence, this points what we find in the Book of Daniel ch. 12:

        http://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/12-10.htm

      • akabbany@aol.com August 14, 2014 at 3:53 pm #

        Dear Ms. Fisher,
        I thank you for your very thoughtful reflection.
        You mentioned that: “submission to God is only possible with God’s spirit, and / or with the God’s presence with the person”. That is absolutely correct, and is confirmed in the Qur’an when God told Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) “You can’t guide (to the right path) whom you like. But only God can guide those he chooses to guide”.
        Unbelieving unrighteous (who are mostly hypocrites) do try to misinterpret the verses of the Qur’an to suit their aims and Goals !!
        Muslim scholars made their different interpretations (which is a human effort of their understanding of the texts, which is limited by the time and place constrains) of the Qur’an after the death of the prophet (PBUH)nearly 14 centuries ago. The majority of the scholars today still adhere to those interpretations !! This is wrong in my opinion. Because if there was a permanent interpretation of the Qur’an, The Prophet (PBUH) would had provided us with such interpretation, But he left the Qur’an to have its different interpretation in the different times.
        The problem of translation to different languages is even more Complicated because the translator enforce consciously or unconsciously his own interpretation (or that of one of the late Muslim scholars, which is as any other human intellectual effort could be right or wrong) to the translated text.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 14, 2014 at 8:32 pm #

        Aly,

        I understand what exactly the issue is.

        Corporately Muslim’s as Islamic scholars / Theologians need Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation in order to protect the prophetic Scripture from unmanageable abuses (in some future point in time).

        Prophesy is not interpreted in any other way but prophetic anointing and/or watch on times (this is the only valid way to interpret the prophetic writings.

        I was @ LU (Evangelical-Baptist/Protestant setting) for many years, and had the opportunity to look at Theology in application, itself. This had nothing to do with the teaching office of the Church and nothing with the order of the Church. In essence, the Gospel and order of the Church itself was/is perverted (misrepresented). Their valid Church conversions by Faith and marriages – as they would need to be…are random, in essence! That is my honest estimate.

        Here in US and else where — If they cannot manage Old Testament, Gospels, and Christian writings that were written by Church Charismatic in prophetic anointing– they will not manage prophesy that is written in Arabic, either.

        There was an instance of reference by Apostle Peter about Paul’s writings / Pauline letters that were difficult to understand (specifically, “difficult Church Doctrine”) according to 2 Peter ch. 3 v. 15-16, and some of that what Paul was teaching was distorted by “ignorant and unestablished” Christians who worked self-appointed destruction.

        http://biblehub.com/text/2_peter/3-15.htm

        http://biblehub.com/text/2_peter/3-16.htm

        Church Charismatic under prophetic anointing is established – we do not nor should ever misinterpret Paul Apostle and his apostolic instruction when comes to any prophesy in Church-age.

        Christianity, in general, is not in any valid interpretation of Apostolic teaching and instruction now days. They do not understand Paul’s writings and Gospel. If they would US would not be “a culture of death.”

        Also, I read that writing of Peter and I think to myself “why was Paul difficult to understand to the Church that should have been Charismatic?” This is why: they were not under the Law of God’s Spirit, and were not called and were not qualified, and were just about their bellies–and more likely have not had received God’s Spirit and/or were backsliders who then fell of from Faith — or were never part of the Church-Charismatic Faith.

        Contemporary Churches are after their own bellies, likewise. All Paul’s letters are the Law according to the Gospel of the Church Charismatic: the Gospel of Paul Apostle. It is by God’s Spirit appointed, and God’s Spirit directed.

        One thing one would not do in order to be ignorant and unestablished to go about prophesy by their your own way and conscience. It is a task for corporate believers & their responsibility. Moreover, they “ignorant and unestablished” will say, “we not responsible for doing that?!”

        I’ll say – they are not called and not qualified.

        Also, they need to be asked away from the Holy Quran and invalid interpretations of it. Holy Quran is under spiritual authority of Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (just as you said/gave reference to it), and under spiritual authority of the Church Charismatic, and prophetic anointing within Abrahamic tribes; meaning Hebrew Arabs and Hebrew Jews.

        We do not want any invalid interpretations by ignorant and unestablished, at all. This is why: they are misrepresenting Holy Quran and are basically saying that is a false prophesies or portraying it so in works (by those who are unbelieving Muslims) when it is not a false prophesies. On the contrary, their understanding/s and /or works are false.

        Instead of disqualified discerning of Holy Quran in their interpretation/s they may like to study Arabic for twenty years or so, and another decade of the years or so some Islamic Hermeneutics & Systematic Theology…or just be born under prophetic anointing, and appointed over.

        I do understand spiritual consequences for mishandling of Secret Texts to the lay-people. All things must be corrected that possible.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 15, 2014 at 12:04 am #

        Dear Ms. Fisher,
        I sincerely enjoy reading your deeply thought analysis and your neutral scholarly way of thinking, which is very rare in our acutely polarised world, if I don’t say fanatically oriented. Of course, you would appreciate that, that does not mean that I agree with everything you are saying, but most certainly I respect all what you are saying.
        I wonder if you have any published books .. If so, please let me know to acquire them.
        With all my best wishes and personal appreciation.
        Aly
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 15, 2014 at 9:20 am #

        Dear Aly,

        I consistently study New Testament Books, and I could definitely come up with a best seller. However, it is not US environment relevant, and it would be a waste of my pearls going about any publishing in a heretical environment & environment of abhorrent scales. The beginning of wisdom understands the principle that is not void to ownership.

        Neutrality and Faith is in gene-pull. My mother’s Grandfather was Arabic-line; he moved from the city of Livno (western Bosnia and Herzegovina) into small far off Roman-Catholic village (northeastern part).

        Ancestral blessings are not with those who are contentious – but with these who are content in all of their circumstances.

        I believe that the complete blessing of Faith as realized by me under intensive influence and work of God’s Spirit because I feel under enormous spiritual attack & spiritual abuse, and with that enormous blessing was automatic, as well. Accepting all Scripture and Prophets by the Scripture and the Spirit of God, alone (on my own) was possible for me.
        It was nice conversing with you, and thank you.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 15, 2014 at 9:48 am #

        Dear Ms. Fisher,
        Heretical environment needs to be shaken sometimes. A book of yours will enlighten them, like a candle in a dark tunnel.
        People of faith never seek to be environmentally friendly from a cultural point of view. They speak their mind for the sake of God, rather than going with the current !!
        Finally the pleasure is all mine, and it was an honour to have such conversation with a learned person like you.
        Good luck with all your studies.
        Respectfully yours.
        Aly
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 13, 2014 at 1:31 am #

        akabanny

        You state:

        “Please, Keep the discussion political and away from religions. And don’t use verses of the Qu’ran out of their historic, linguistic and theological context.”

        To what are you referring?

      • Kata Fisher August 14, 2014 at 11:37 am #

        David,

        I have a reflection:

        Aly is giving reference to the Dogmatic Constitution on divine revelation (according to my understanding).

      • Kata Fisher August 12, 2014 at 11:01 am #

        Dear David,
        I have read and have reflected on it as well – this what you say sounds as just as should be. I am in agreement with you that specifics can be regulated, and be in exact terms that are based on legit natural and spiritual substance (when possible).

      • Kata Fisher August 7, 2014 at 8:56 am #

        I have another reflection:
        “Directly: Hamas is not integrating and is restricting integration’s of the tribes.”

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 9:36 am #

        Hamas has a different political view from “Fateh” of Mahmoud Abbas. Rightly or wrongly they believe that Israel will only end occupation by force. Their argument is 30 years of negotiation got Abbas no where. While the resistance in the South of Lebanon and in Gaza forced Israel to withdraw and forced even Sharon to dismantle his settlement in Gaza !! Not because the resistance was stronger than Israel, on the contrary they paid a lot in valuable blood of their heroes who are confronting the military might of the 4th strongest army in the world and most certainly the most brutal!! But just because they made Israel pay a price for their occupation (as the French resistance did to the German in WWII, and the Vietnamese resistance did to the American). So, Israel could not afford the price of the occupation in these 2 sites. It is not the case in the West Bank or the Golan Heights of Syria!! So the Israeli are not serious in their negotiation with Abbas and they are expanding their illegal settlements there !!
        So, I would argue that Hamas has a valid point. And history teaches us all that liberation has its high price. It seems that Hamas is ready to pay such price, as the freedom fighters did all over history. I admire that and blame the world for not supporting their struggle for freedom and allowing the Israeli to massacre them !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 9:09 am #

        Akabbany,

        Without the substance, you will be achieving no justice. If you do not anchor/ground the Laws of conscience, ethics, natural, and eccalistical in substance itself – you are in a cycle of a dead-end, in fact, and you will be paralyzed to achieve any justice and, in fact, only be able continuously to deny the way of justice. You cannot achieve justice by ethics and law of any conscience, only law of the conscience and law of ethics (ethics and law) that is grounded in substance.

  20. Muhammad Arooj August 5, 2014 at 7:54 am #

    Reblogged this on Writing & Sharing and commented:
    Final Text of Joint Declaration on International Law & List of Endorsers.

  21. Kata Fisher August 6, 2014 at 1:08 am #

    I have a reflection:

    We have this ongoing problem and this is why: Hamas Charter is the problem #1 in Holy Land that has to go away.

    Until they annul or edit – Palestinian / Gaza’s people will be submitted (ecclesiastically) to self-appointed judgment / destruction and a dead-end direction.

    International Law cannot protect the content of the Charter itself due to the essence and intentions of the application of it. It can, however, protect Hamas people in Gaza’s their right to self-defense.

    Someone has to take responsibility and spiritual authority over issues with the Hamas Charter. Their right to defend themselves is mixed up with the intentions of the Charter itself, and with that there are no clear distinctions when we look at the contexts of approach that is based on different disciplines / approaches to the problem — there are limitations to the extent of distinctions that are based on some disciplines. This is mixed up with prejudice / bias.

    As long as they do not remove that ecclesiastical hindrance – they are, legally by Hamas Charter under destruction that is self-appointed.

    Holy Quran is in spiritual authority of the Church-Charismatic that is under prophetic anointing because it is a prophesy in the Church age; yet, not discerned, in essence, due to the nature that was given and written/passed down: prophet Muhammad did not write it down. However, it was a prophesy that prophet Muhammad has received in the age of the Church.

    According to the Apostolic teaching and instruction; it must be discerned (as a prophesy) in the exactly same anointing and gifts spiritual that was given to Muhammad; meaning, prophetic anointing during the Church age.

    Hamas Charter takes ecclesiastical property of the Church Charismatic / prophesies in the Church age and places ecclesiastical property in unauthorized areas. This is causing destruction that is civil and ecclesiastical in nature for people in Palestine and Gaza.

    Prophet Muhammad was not a false prophet– he was a prophet in the Church age. Not like other false prophets who gave false Gospels.

    Holy Quran is not a false Gospel it is a prophesy in the Church age, and it has to be read, interpreted, and instructed only by and within prophetic anointing individually and corporately.

    Hamas Charter is violating ecclesiastical realities and violates the right to self-defense of Palestinians & Gaza’s people.

  22. Stanley Chassagne August 6, 2014 at 6:07 am #

    8/6/14
    I think that we should expose once for all the bullying and the slow extermination process of the Palestinian People undertaken by the State of Israel. We must rescue the people of Palestine from Israel the same we rescued the Jews from Hitler. That is American to me. For God sake the international community must expose and explain what Israel is doing to the Palestinians. We should tell the truth about these idiotic, cynical justifications of a nuclear power, Israel, to attack a people based on a few flying rockets that we could fire to celebrate our 4th of July. These rockets are no Minute Men missiles. They are no Cruse Missiles. They are not even BB guns in comparison to the might of the Israeli Army. Nobody talks about the palestinian army divisions deployed against Israel, the palestinian Air Force terrorizing Israel population, the palestinian Navy attacking Israel Coast Guard and deploying palestinian marines on Israel shores. How come? There are none. So what is the threat to Israel? The news show attack helicopters, tanks, fighter jets, bomb explosions leveling palestinian tunnels and buildings. “À vaincre sans péril on triomphe sans gloire.” That is Israel’s today. Sorry, Israel, the glory goes to the Palestinians. Israel has become the Goliath of the 21st Century. Palestine is to see its own David arise from the international community.

    • akabbany@aol.com August 6, 2014 at 7:27 am #

      Stanley .. You are a star .. For an American to speak his mind and tell the truth is very rare .. I can’t agree more.
      I thank you whole hearted for your courage to tell the truth .
      Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

    • david singer August 6, 2014 at 8:32 pm #

      Sorry but I cannot agree with your following statement:

      “Sorry, Israel, the glory goes to the Palestinians. Israel has become the Goliath of the 21st Century. Palestine is to see its own David arise from the international community.”

      That may be your perception.

      My perception understands that what Hamas says – Hamas means;

      1.”This Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), clarifies its picture, reveals its identity, outlines its stand, explains its aims, speaks about its hopes, and calls for its support, adoption and joining its ranks. Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah’s victory is realised.”

      2.”The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. It is characterised by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and judgement, the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam.”

      3.”The basic structure of the Islamic Resistance Movement consists of Moslems who have given their allegiance to Allah whom they truly worship, – “I have created the jinn and humans only for the purpose of worshipping” – who know their duty towards themselves, their families and country. In all that, they fear Allah and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors, so that they would rid the land and the people of their uncleanliness, vileness and evils.”

      4.”The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day.”

      Hamas personifies Evil at its very worst as it acts to try and realise its above stated intentions.

      Hamas has caused nothing but death, trauma and destruction for the Gazans since they themselves elected Hamas to power in 2006.

      Hamas builds terror tunnels to provide safety for its terrorist members but no air raid shelters to protect Gazan civilians.

      No country would tolerate the indiscriminate firing of 3300 rockets into Israeli civilian population centres from rocket launchers located in Gazan civilian population centres – as shown in this video:

      No country would tolerate the building of terror tunnels and storage of weapons in mosques as shown in this video:

      People have had to live with the consequences of their 2006 decision because they have not had their inalienable right to recognise their mistake and throw Hamas out at a subsequent election.

      The death and suffering is tragic – but it could have been almost entirely avoided had Hamas accepted the first ceasefire on 16 July..

      Until the Hamas Charter is revoked or Hamas is kicked out of power and disarmed – the death and suffering is set to continue.

      We are not talking about a struggle between David and Goliath.

      This is a struggle between Good and Evil – and you better believe it.

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 12:53 am #

        You talk about Hamas .. Hamas .. The boggy man and what they say, while they could do nothing to Israel!! While the whole world is witnessing Israel’s atrocities, collective punishment, massacres of innocent civilians -babies and children included-,indiscriminate bombardment of heavily populated residential areas etc… Of the other Zio-Nazi “illegal” (for those who ask me to pin point Israeli crimes .. Or may be our respected lawyer will find nothing wrong with that because Hamas -again and again put bombs in these area. I don’t know what Israel would have done in the absence of Hamas which is used to excuse all of its Zio-Nazi practices. Note that Hamas was only created in the early eighties as a resistance movement, while Israel were still practising its barbaric and brutal policies and committing massacres in Qana (a UN centre used by civilians as shelter) and other places. Israeli crimes were the same .. only the false excuses change from time to time!!
        I have many honest Jewish friends who are ashamed of the Israeli Zio-Nazi practices !! And this is their description not mine.
        I advise the readers to read the two latest books of the Israeli writer and historian Professor Shlomo Sand .. “The invention of the Jewish People” and “The invention of the Jewish land”. The other one which was published last year also is “The wondering who?” (I don’t have the book available to me now, as I am spending my summer holiday in St Tropez, and forgot the name of the Israeli author. But I recommend the 3 books as good reading to know about the current dilemma in the Israeli society among the intellectuals).
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 5:39 am #

        David,
        You asked me a question and required a “Yes” or “No”.. My frank answer is “No”.
        If you care to know why ? They are part of the “Muslim Brotherhood” organisation, who is not known to be extremist Islamists.
        I invite you to read an article by Chris Hedges entitled “Why Israel lies” in which he stood witness to the trigger happy Israeli soldiers insulting and swearing at Palestinian children in Arabic then shoot them dead !!! The Western Journalist confirmed in his article that he personally witnessed several incidents (I call them Zio-Nazi brutal murders not just “incidents”) in Khan Younis town last week !!
        I judge these crimes to be brutal barbaric practice by the Israeli army .. Now in turn I will require a yes or no answer from you !! To be fair to you .. You can start your answer by “if true”, but I wonder why Chris Hedges would lie .. While I admit the story would sound unbelievable to sane people. But it seems that those Israeli soldiers are insane sadistic savage animals !!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 7, 2014 at 6:54 am #

        Your recounting of what Hedges said is not true as you omitted some material facts of the event that were set out in his article..

        One needs to know a lot more about the provocations by the Israeli troops and the threats to safety that the stones thrown by the boys caused and how Hedges estimated the boys were about 10 years old.

        Stones thrown at vehicles by boys have killed and injured many Israelis in previous incidents.

        That said – Hedges needs to make a statement to any of the NGO’s in Israel such as B’Tselem and they will take the matter up with the Israel Defence Forces. I have no doubt that it will be investigated and charges laid if Hedge’s statement is credible..

        Alternatively he should make a complaint to the UN Inquiry that is presently gathering evidence,

        I remind you that any person is presumed innocent until he is found guilty – a principle that you seem to have difficulty in understanding.

        On the question of Hamas – are these two statements by Hamas part of the religious message adhered to by real Moslems and representative of Islam:

        “This Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), clarifies its picture, reveals its identity, outlines its stand, explains its aims, speaks about its hopes, and calls for its support, adoption and joining its ranks. Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah’s victory is realised.”

        “Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.”

        “The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day.”

      • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 9:45 am #

        So, you believe a child throwing a stone on a soldier of occupation hidden in a tank deserve to be shot dead ?!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

      • david singer August 12, 2014 at 5:13 am #

        Until one knows all the facts one should not presume to pass judgement.

        How many children were present? How many adults were present? Was it just one stone that was being thrown or a barrage of stones? Did the soldiers have a reasonable apprehension that their lives were in danger?

        You have to restrain yourself becoming prosecutor, judge and jury on the basis of what could only be some facts – not all the facts.

        Certainly an investigation into establishing the veracity of the claim should be made and charges laid if a prima facie case is established.

        That is how the rule of law works in democracies. Is this how it works in your country?

      • akabbany@aol.com August 12, 2014 at 6:43 am #

        When a soldier shoot dead a child whatever the child wa doing to him, I judge that soldier to be inhuman trigger happy brutal murderer. I don’t need any more facts. I don’t also wait for Israeli investigation which start immediately after each massacre the Israeli army commits (just to absorb the anger of the international public opinion at the time) but we never hear about the outcome of such investigation, or the same old lies we used to hear in their war propaganda machine !!
        When more than 470 children and babies are killed in less than 4 weeks, I judge the Israeli army of illegal occupation and invasion to be a barbaric brutal and uncivilised army. I need no more facts and I don’t wait for fruitless Israeli occupation !!
        You miss the principle main fact .. the Israeli army is an army of illegal occupation, which gives Hamas and all the other Palestinian resistance groups all the moral and legal rights to fight that army by all means available to them until that army end the illegal occupation and the Palestinians liberate their land and liberate themselves. The world never had respect for those who don’t fight and ultimately defeat their occupiers !!
        By the way don’t talk with me about the Rule of the law with regard to a rouge state like Israel who never respected the international law and only believed that might is right. Now Hamas believes that Israel understand no language but the language of force and it only end its illegal occupation when it suffers losses it can’t sustain!!
        Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

  23. Nozomi Takahashi August 7, 2014 at 3:26 am #

    Dear Prof. Falk,
    Thank you for undertaking this great declaration. As I’m not a legal expert, I would like to have my name to be added in the second list as an individual who firmly believes that only respect for the rules of law will create a peaceful world and foster progress of humanity.
    In a small country Belgium where I live, a declaration with the same spirit was published by medical doctors and legal specialists. May I ask you to provide us a permission to translate this declaration in Dutch and French and publish it in two major newspapers in each language region with additional Belgian signatories?
    We are also drafting an open letter by academics, scientists, engineers and university staffs to call Belgian government and the EU to impose arms embargo to Israel, following the good example of Spain.

    Cordially yours
    Nozomi Takahashi, Ph.D. (Mrs.)

    • akabbany@aol.com August 7, 2014 at 9:46 am #

      I commend that.
      Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

  24. The worst president August 19, 2014 at 11:11 am #

    To Have a black president is the worst thing to happen to blacks in the US
    Having an African-American president has been the worst development for African-Americans in the US. For many reasons: 1) it basically made many whites feel that racism is now dead, and that the very election of ONE African-American person to the presidency is all what is needed to wash away all the sins of the republic against African-Americans, and should in itself force African-Americans to just forget about slavery and racism and to stop whining and complaining. 2) this black president has been desperate to show that he is not really black from day one, and has avoided every opportunity to speak against racism. And in that one speech that he gave about race (not about racism) he manages to please whites because he makes the issue of racism a mere misunderstanding and he lays the blame on both sides. Man/Woman: this is a man who said that his grandmother’s fears of black men was justified. 3) the election of this black president will now end the little motive in the political process to address grievances of African-Americans. 4) this particular African-American has basically spent his entire time in the White House trying to prove to white Americans that he is above and beyond race. 5) This African-American president has been using violence indiscriminately in various parts of Africa and Asia, and thus the idea of violence by white cops against blacks in Missouri would not in any way disturb him. He would in fact be hypocritical to feign outrage.

    • akabbany@aol.com August 20, 2014 at 2:30 am #

      The first black president in the White House did his best to hide his colour, and hide the religion of his father and forefathers !! He was more white than whites!! He launched or assisted wars against Muslims!! He was more Zionist than all white presidents before him !! He supported Israeli barbaric invasion of Gaza and all its crimes against humanity including the massacres of civilians among them more than 490 babies and children and considered such brutal crimes a legitimate self defence !! The American people should be ashamed of this president who was dwarfed by Netanyaho arrogance and his repeated insults to the current doorman of the White House who pretends to be president !! In defence of Israeli atrocities, one day he declared that if my 2 daughters are under any threat I will do every thing in my power to protect them !! Good man .. So, why don’t you support Hamas heroes who are trying to do exactly as you said to protect not only their daughters but also their babies, sons, women and elderly from the Zio-Nazi death machine ?! Unless you are fake and coward !!
      Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Richard Falk: Joint Declaration on International Law & Gaza & Final List of Endorsers | Peace and Justice Post - August 2, 2014

    […] Falk,  Global Justice in the 21st Century, August 2, […]

  2. Gaza: quasi 400 docenti, giuristi ed esperti di diritti umani chiedono alla comunità internazionale di agire - Pressenza - August 2, 2014

    […] durissima la denuncia di quasi 400 docenti e difensori dei diritti umani da tutto il mondo (tra cui ex esperti indipendenti dell’ONU e professori di diritto internazionale e di […]

  3. porre fine alla punizione collettiva della popolazione civile della striscia di Gaza! | cambiailmondo - August 2, 2014

    […] durissima la denuncia di quasi 400 docenti e difensori dei diritti umani da tutto il mondo (tra cui ex esperti indipendenti dell’ONU e Professori di diritto internazionale e di diritto […]

  4. TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » Joint Declaration on International Law & Gaza – Final List of Endorsers - August 4, 2014

    […] Go to Original – richardfalk.wordpress.com […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 10,040 other followers

%d bloggers like this: