|
Stay on topic. I cannot put it more clearly then that. Derailments will be met with consequences. ~Nyovne |
On December 02 2012 03:17 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:11 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:08 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs? Well even Israel has to accept that today at least Gaza is not their land, therefore the naval and other blockades are illegal. Constant spying on them is considered an act of war mongering also. And putting fences and erecting walls and making cross border incursions are also not so legal. A big, big jail indeed. I guess if we reverse the question your answer would be ''under God's law''?? under which laws are naval blockades illegal? I don't think "warmongering" is a legal term either. and how is putting up fences also illegal? where in heaven's name are you getting these ideas? God's law ain't got nothing to do with it (other than not supporting Hamas, a bullshit terrorist POS organization) So USA can freely put naval blockade on China and threaten their fishermen, pretty legal huh? Between Gaza and Israel there is your common border passage, just like like between Mexico and USA, amirite?
if China is routinely threatening (and carrying out those threats) to destroy the USA, kill all of her citizens, and replace her with a Chinese state... than yes, I think we have the right to put a blockade on them.
are there tens of thousands of missiles being launched from Tijuana into San Diego? why compare the border between two allied nations with the border between one nation and a hostile non-state run by a terrorist organization?
|
On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs?
Under the guidelines stipulated in the security council resolution 242. The ongoing illegal deportation and subsequent colonization of parts of this land (in the Golan heights, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza) is a direct violation of international law that is not recognized and acted upon because of US support for Israel.
|
Legal arguments
According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21]
In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20]
The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151]
Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops.
Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37]
BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155]
Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157]
source
|
On December 02 2012 03:22 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs? Under the guidelines stipulated in the security council resolution 242.
which the Palestinians rejected...
(international law is pretty shaky when one party hasn't signed it yet.)
|
On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source
So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying.
|
On December 02 2012 03:22 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:17 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:11 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:08 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs? Well even Israel has to accept that today at least Gaza is not their land, therefore the naval and other blockades are illegal. Constant spying on them is considered an act of war mongering also. And putting fences and erecting walls and making cross border incursions are also not so legal. A big, big jail indeed. I guess if we reverse the question your answer would be ''under God's law''?? under which laws are naval blockades illegal? I don't think "warmongering" is a legal term either. and how is putting up fences also illegal? where in heaven's name are you getting these ideas? God's law ain't got nothing to do with it (other than not supporting Hamas, a bullshit terrorist POS organization) So USA can freely put naval blockade on China and threaten their fishermen, pretty legal huh? Between Gaza and Israel there is your common border passage, just like like between Mexico and USA, amirite? if China is routinely threatening (and carrying out those threats) to destroy the USA, kill all of her citizens, and replace her with a Chinese state... than yes, I think we have the right to put a blockade on them. are there tens of thousands of missiles being launched from Tijuana into San Diego? why compare the border between two allied nations with the border between one nation and a hostile non-state run by a terrorist organization?
Speech is one thing and executing it is another. Now exaggerate a bit more, weren't there ''millions of rockets fired'' and someone not knowledgeable about the situation would believe that Gaza is firing some high tech stuff. But that's irrelevant now. And don't come out with the rhetoric of having to defend yourself against nasty Palestinians, because none is mad enough to provoke Israel. Take for example the last incident. The majority of the media reported that Israel was simply defending itself against ''raining rockets'', but the real info about the boy being shot few days prior and about Israel army incursions into Gaza territory went under the radar. Wonder why! Incidents like these are beneficial for Netanyahu (who knows why stuff as these happen before elections) and bring nothing but death to Gaza.
|
On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying.
In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal
Nope, navel is legal according to the UN
|
On December 02 2012 03:32 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:22 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:17 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:11 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:08 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs? Well even Israel has to accept that today at least Gaza is not their land, therefore the naval and other blockades are illegal. Constant spying on them is considered an act of war mongering also. And putting fences and erecting walls and making cross border incursions are also not so legal. A big, big jail indeed. I guess if we reverse the question your answer would be ''under God's law''?? under which laws are naval blockades illegal? I don't think "warmongering" is a legal term either. and how is putting up fences also illegal? where in heaven's name are you getting these ideas? God's law ain't got nothing to do with it (other than not supporting Hamas, a bullshit terrorist POS organization) So USA can freely put naval blockade on China and threaten their fishermen, pretty legal huh? Between Gaza and Israel there is your common border passage, just like like between Mexico and USA, amirite? if China is routinely threatening (and carrying out those threats) to destroy the USA, kill all of her citizens, and replace her with a Chinese state... than yes, I think we have the right to put a blockade on them. are there tens of thousands of missiles being launched from Tijuana into San Diego? why compare the border between two allied nations with the border between one nation and a hostile non-state run by a terrorist organization? Speech is one thing and executing it is another. Now exaggerate a bit more, weren't there ''millions of rockets fired'' and someone not knowledgeable about the situation would believe that Gaza is firing some high tech stuff. But that's irrelevant now. And don't come out with the rhetoric of having to defend yourself against nasty Palestinians, because none is mad enough to provoke Israel. Take for example the last incident. The majority of the media reported that Israel was simply defending itself against ''raining rockets'', but the real info about the boy being shot few days prior and about Israel army incursions into Gaza territory went under the radar. Wonder why! Incidents like these are beneficial for Netanyahu (who knows why stuff as these happen before elections) and bring nothing but death to Gaza.
and several days before that there rockets and attacks on patrols. And as you said they bring nothing but death so why fire rockets at civilians to begin with?
|
On December 02 2012 03:33 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:32 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:22 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:17 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:11 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:08 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 01 2012 03:28 Elroi wrote:On December 01 2012 03:23 KwarK wrote:On December 01 2012 03:21 oneofthem wrote:
that this crisis is happening on israel's doorsteps does in itself put responsibility on israel to do something, particularly when active measures are contributing to the ongoing situation.
This would be why Israel gives a colossal amount of humanitarian aid to Palestine? Which doesn't correspond even to a small bit to what they make out of the land that legally belongs to the Palestinians? They don't let the Palestinians trade or export their goods, they don't give them access to what used to be their cultivable land, they don't let them fish more than 10 km from the cost. They keep them alive, barely, but talking about humanitarian aid is just too much, in my opinion. under which law does the land belong to the Palestinian Arabs? Well even Israel has to accept that today at least Gaza is not their land, therefore the naval and other blockades are illegal. Constant spying on them is considered an act of war mongering also. And putting fences and erecting walls and making cross border incursions are also not so legal. A big, big jail indeed. I guess if we reverse the question your answer would be ''under God's law''?? under which laws are naval blockades illegal? I don't think "warmongering" is a legal term either. and how is putting up fences also illegal? where in heaven's name are you getting these ideas? God's law ain't got nothing to do with it (other than not supporting Hamas, a bullshit terrorist POS organization) So USA can freely put naval blockade on China and threaten their fishermen, pretty legal huh? Between Gaza and Israel there is your common border passage, just like like between Mexico and USA, amirite? if China is routinely threatening (and carrying out those threats) to destroy the USA, kill all of her citizens, and replace her with a Chinese state... than yes, I think we have the right to put a blockade on them. are there tens of thousands of missiles being launched from Tijuana into San Diego? why compare the border between two allied nations with the border between one nation and a hostile non-state run by a terrorist organization? Speech is one thing and executing it is another. Now exaggerate a bit more, weren't there ''millions of rockets fired'' and someone not knowledgeable about the situation would believe that Gaza is firing some high tech stuff. But that's irrelevant now. And don't come out with the rhetoric of having to defend yourself against nasty Palestinians, because none is mad enough to provoke Israel. Take for example the last incident. The majority of the media reported that Israel was simply defending itself against ''raining rockets'', but the real info about the boy being shot few days prior and about Israel army incursions into Gaza territory went under the radar. Wonder why! Incidents like these are beneficial for Netanyahu (who knows why stuff as these happen before elections) and bring nothing but death to Gaza. and several days before that there rockets and attacks on patrols. And as you said they bring nothing but death so why fire rockets at civilians to begin with?
Patrols that usually operate on the other side of the border. As for civilians question I do not know, I am neither a Palestinian neither live there so I do not know what kind of thinking they have
|
On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source
So, the pretty much everyone considers Israels actions illegal.
Also, a lot of the things you claim in earlier posts contradict everything the the major news agencies across the world are reporting regarding the conflict. Since you seem to live in Israel you might want to consider if the information and news you are getting might be scewed in Israels favor. I'm sure that if Sweden was ever in a conflict I would be heavily affected by the media and quite biased.
|
On December 02 2012 02:03 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 01:55 Intact wrote:
How someone can support a country like Israel that stops ships carrying food, medicine and building materials to help people that suffered from war crimes commited Israel is beyond me ..... You mean the fact that we supply all the electricity, fuel and water? The fact the the supplies were offered to be transferred as long as they were first screened? Or maybe that despite the Hamas has control of Gaza and openly calls for the destruction of Israel and yet Egypt who also shares a border with Gaza only supplies it with a fraction of what Israel supplies? Ya i also dont know how people can support us.
How generous. Did it occur to you that you wouldn't have to, had you not destroyed their whole infrastructure, bombed their power plants, hospitals, etc. and denied them access to resources necessary to rebuild, as much as possible? This is not Israel being generous. This is Israel bulldozing Palestine and making it completely dependent on Israel's "help".
|
Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip have occurred since 2001. Between 2001 and January 2009, over 8,600 rockets had been launched, leading to 28 deaths and several hundred injuries, as well as widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life. According to research done by the Social work department at the Sapir Academic college, an estimated 15,000 people from Sderot suffer from PTSD and an estimated 1,000 are undergoing treatment.
add in the thousands of rockets that have been fired since 2009 and you have over ten thousand. I never said they were technologically advanced rockets, though why that should matter is beyond me.
further:
A few projectiles have contained white phosphorus.
not that we'll ever see the outrage about that...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel
edit: hmmm... it seems my link is not working.
edit 2: ahh, there it goes
|
On December 02 2012 03:36 Intact wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So, the pretty much everyone considers Israels actions illegal. Also, a lot of the things you claim in earlier posts contradict everything the the major news agencies across the world are reporting regarding the conflict. Since you seem to live in Israel you might want to consider if the information and news you are getting might be scewed in Israels favor. I'm sure that if Sweden was ever in a conflict I would be heavily affected by the media and quite biased.
As someone who has experienced a lot of this, the media is biased but the weaker side always more sympathy, after im done with these DOTA games ill make a long detailed post about the negotiations.
|
On December 02 2012 03:32 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying. In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legalNope, navel is legal according to the UN
Are you kidding ? The article you posted contains EIGHT people/organisations that deem the blockade illegal, and five of them work for the UN. 8 to 1 is pretty good odds you know.
|
On December 02 2012 03:32 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying. In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legalNope, navel is legal according to the UN
Continue citing please...
Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[17][18][19][20] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and, according to Richard Falk, most experts on international law[21] consider the blockade illegal.[22][23][24][25][26]
|
On December 02 2012 03:39 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:32 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying. In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legalNope, navel is legal according to the UN Continue citing please... Show nested quote +
Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[17][18][19][20] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and, according to Richard Falk, most experts on international law[21] consider the blockade illegal.[22][23][24][25][26]
I said navel, not land, didnt i? Also once again Egypt get out free of mention and too remind you Mubarak is no longer in control of Egypt.
|
On December 02 2012 03:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip have occurred since 2001. Between 2001 and January 2009, over 8,600 rockets had been launched, leading to 28 deaths and several hundred injuries, as well as widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life. According to research done by the Social work department at the Sapir Academic college, an estimated 15,000 people from Sderot suffer from PTSD and an estimated 1,000 are undergoing treatment.
add in the thousands of rockets that have been fired since 2009 and you have over ten thousand. I never said they were technologically advanced rockets, though why that should matter is beyond me.
further:
[quote]A few projectiles have contained white phosphorus.[quote]
not that we'll ever see the outrage about that...
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel[/url]
edit: hmmm... it seems my link is not working.
[/quote]
Oh my. Why don't we ask Palestinians if their lives have been disrupted or if maybe, just maybe they have psychological trauma. And there is a difference you know between few rockets with phosphorus that usually land in the middle of nowhere and deliberately raining down phosphorus in populated areas. Just search youtube videos or I really have to link the nsfw images of dead palestinians to wake you up?
[quote]I said navel, not land, didnt i? Also once again Egypt get out free of mention and too remind you Mubarak is no longer in control of Egypt.[/quote]
As far as I can see the border should be open. Can't find real time news, but Morsi said that he would open it.
|
you're missing the point here. I'm not condoning anyone's actions, not right now; I'm just shedding some light on the fact that there have been over ten thousand rockets fired into Israel from over their border.
ask the boy whose teenage sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. or maybe ask the 75-94 percent of Israeli children in Sderot that suffer from PTSD if they feel any better because usually the rockets don't kill them.
|
On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:39 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:32 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying. In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legalNope, navel is legal according to the UN Continue citing please...
Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[17][18][19][20] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and, according to Richard Falk, most experts on international law[21] consider the blockade illegal.[22][23][24][25][26]
I said navel, not land, didnt i? Also once again Egypt get out free of mention and too remind you Mubarak is no longer in control of Egypt.
Why do you keep bringing up Egypt? Egypt didn't take land from Palestin, Egypt didn't destroy Palestinas infrastructure, Egypt hasn't built any walls, Egypt doesn't send out it's navy to perform piracy on international waters. Egypt has the same requirement to help the refugees in Palestina as every other nation, but Israel is blocking those relief efforts and Egypt has been busy taking care of their own issues anyways.
|
On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:39 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:32 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:27 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:25 Goozen wrote:Legal arguments According to Princeton University professor emeritus of international law Richard Falk, there exists an "overwhelming consensus" view among qualified international law specialists that both the blockade and its enforcement are illegal.[21] In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legal.[18][19][20] The findings of the Palmer report on the legality of the blockade were disputed by a panel of five UN human rights experts, who said that the blockade amounted to a "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law".[151] The panel said the Palmer report failed to recognize that the naval blockade was part of Israel's closure policy toward Gaza, which disproportionately affects civilians. Richard Falk said the authors of the Palmer report were poorly qualified to assess legal aspects of the blockade,[21] and that they were politically motivated to find the naval blockade legal.[151] Since 2005 Israel asserts that it ended its occupation of Gaza when it disengaged from the coastal strip in 2005.[152][153] After Israel's unilateral disengagement plan from the Gaza strip, Israel no longer has troops stationed within Gaza. Israel has retained control over Gaza's airspace and coastline, and over its own border with the territory. Egypt has control of its border with Gaza. Israel and Egypt also control the flow of goods in and out. Israel controls fuel imports to Gaza, and also controls the majority of electricity used in Gaza (approximately 60%), which it supplies from the Israeli electrical grid.[37][154] There have been a series of attacks by Israeli ground forces such as the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as well as rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and cross-border attacks by Gazan militant groups against Israeli troops. Human Rights Watch argues that Israel is still an occupying power and is responsible for Gaza under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which seeks to protect the civilian population.[37] BBC's World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said that if Gaza is treated as a "hostile entity" the question is whether the measures used by Israel and Egypt sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military. The 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions protocols prohibits the use of collective measures that do not distinguish between civilians and military.[37] The amendment protects civilian populations in time of conflicts that fall short of war. Israel has not signed these protocols but there is an expectation internationally that it should respect them.[37] Hamas does not administer an internationally recognized state and also has not signed these protocols. Amnesty International said that “The blockade constitutes collective punishment under international law and must be lifted immediately,” and that as the occupying power, Israel has a duty under international law to ensure the welfare of Gaza’s inhabitants, including their rights to health, education, food and adequate housing.[155] Justus Weiner and Avi Bell of the JCPA said that Israel’s combat actions and blockade cannot be considered collective punishment. They cite Article 75(4)(b) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which says the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal-type penalties on individuals or groups on the basis of another’s guilt, or the commission of acts that would otherwise violate the rules of distinction and/or proportionality.[156] According to Weiner and Bell, the blockade does not "involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties or the violation of the rules of distinction and proportionality."[157] source So the blockade is illegal... that's what we are saying. In September 2011, a UN investigative committee concluded in the Palmer Report that the blockade is legalNope, navel is legal according to the UN Continue citing please...
Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[17][18][19][20] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and, according to Richard Falk, most experts on international law[21] consider the blockade illegal.[22][23][24][25][26]
I said navel, not land, didnt i? Also once again Egypt get out free of mention and too remind you Mubarak is no longer in control of Egypt.
I said the blockade. It is a sham that the Naval part of the blockade is considered legal.
Why are you talking about Egypt? We don't know yet what will happen with the democracy in Egypt. But I have high hopes that the country will change after the fall of the ruthless dictatorship. After all, democracy usually goes hand in hand with some civility and respect for human rights - with Israel as one of the most obvious exceptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
