Unfortunately, the author reduces the call "Free Palestine" to a mere parroted slogan mouthed by the street ignorant.

Not so.

It is a call to genocide.

Proof:

1. Free Palestine

A place that is not free is a place that is conquered and occupied.

If Palestine needs to be freed it is because it has been conquered and is occupied.

Where is Palestine?

2. From the River to the Sea (Palestine will be free)

The river is the Jordan river and the sea is the Mediterranean sea. 

What exists now between the River and the Sea?

Israel. Israel is the enemy, alien occupier of the Arab country, Palestine.

So whomust be removed to free Palestine? the Jews.

What must be removed to free Palestine? Israel.

How is Palestine to be freed from conquest and occupation?

3. Globalize the Intifada. There is Only One Solution, Intifada Revolution

Intifada is the Islamic call to kill Israelis and Jews wherever one finds them per Sahih Bukhari 2926 (Book 56, Hadith 139) and Sahih Muslim 2922 (Book 54, Hadith 99).

In keeping with this policy, the first and second intifada (1987-1993 and 2000-2005) were random attacks on Israelis on the street, in their homes, in schools, on buses, in cafés, in airports, Intifada is the Islamic call to kill Jews in Israel and abroad wherever they can be found.

Why should Israelis be killed?

4. "Jihad Now"

Jihad is the Islamic religious call to kill Israelis / Jews wherever one finds them. As Sasih al-Bukhari 2926 declares: “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. 'O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.' "

And according to Hamas' Covenant, Article 15: "The day that enemies usurp part of Muslim land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Muslim. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised."

And how should Israelis be killed to free the land of its conquerors and occupiers?

5. Resistance by Any Means

Random attacks on Jews be they in Israeli or abroad through knife stabbing, car ramming, bombings, raping, mutilating, decapitating, burning, are all legitimate acts of resistance. In fact, because Jews came from Europe to take over the country Palestine, it is necessary to kill all Jews anywhere they live lest they descend once again upon Palestinians and conquer and humiliate them.

Problem is according to Article II of the Genocide Convention

Article II:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part

Article III:

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) DIRECT AND PUBLIC INCITEMENT TO COMMIT GENOCIDE;

(rf) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Thus, according to International Law’s legal definition of genocide, the chants are calls to commit genocide against a people who less than a hundred years ago were subjected to this very crime.

October 7th was that call put into action.

The slogans are not to champion a good cause by any standard of morality, ethics, or law. It is the call to exterminate a people in the name of a Righteous Cause,

As one well know expression goes, "All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to look on and do nothing."

CONCLUSION: Because calls to commit genocide — such as through slogans — signal their ”intent to destroy, in whole or in part . . . [by] Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,” according to the Convention on Genocide those chanting "Free Palestine" and the rest of the slogans are guilty of committing this very crime themselves.

Lastly, the author continually uses the term "The West Bank" as if that was its real designation, of course now routinely referred to by the media, Social Justice NGOs, and most politicians as "The Occupied West Bank."

Problem is in 1950 Jordan's king, Abdullah bin Hussein renamed the area his country had seized through war to sever any relationship the Jews had to the place.

For thousands of years until then, the territory was called Judea and Samaria. According to UN Charter 2(4) and Hague Convention Articles 43 & 55 Jordan violated the prohibition of any state from changing the permanent character of a territory it captures through war. Name changing was but one of the changes in permanent character Jordan created in 1950.

Of course through the power and influence of its institutions, the East and West enthusiastically embraced and promoted this name change because it resonated with their religeo-cultural preconception of Jews, as attested by their history with the Jews.

Those Jews who use the Jordanian geographical renaming are validating the not-so-subtle implication that Jews have no connection to and therefore no place in this "indigenous Palestinian national territory."

In other words, every time a Jew or non-Jews uses the term "The West Bank" what they are really saying is "Juden raus!"