|
Stay on topic. I cannot put it more clearly then that. Derailments will be met with consequences. ~Nyovne |
On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two.
I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave.
|
On December 02 2012 03:39 Intact 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 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.
But they are not the UN, they are private NGO's with agendas and individuals with personal opinion.
|
On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave.
what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. (namely: not electing Hamas, not letting themselves be used by neighboring Arab countries as a meat shield, recognizing Israel's right to exist, etc.)
launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew...
(btw, most Palestinians don't approve of the rockets, and some have been killed while trying to prevent the launching of rockets... so yeah, stop pretending like Hamas is anything but a brutal terrorist org. with an agenda that doesn't include helping Palestinian Arabs)
|
On December 02 2012 03:52 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:39 Intact 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 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. But they are not the UN, they are private NGO's with agendas and individuals with personal opinion.
"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."
|
On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave.
Once again, after the withdrawal in 2005 there was no blockade of Gaza the blockade was implemented after Hamas rose to power and started attacking Israel. And if you look at the stats for the west bank you will see that they above global average in pretty much everything.
|
On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.html
Read this link.
Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel?
|
On December 02 2012 03:56 Intact wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:52 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:39 Intact 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 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. But they are not the UN, they are private NGO's with agendas and individuals with personal opinion. "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."
Yes, but they were not the majority and they didnt separate the navel from the ground blockade but looked at it as a whole.
|
On December 02 2012 03:49 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote: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.
Civility and human rights? You do know that they're going to institute Islamic law into every facet of society that they want to right? Its not like the government is going to become that much better off then the People in Iran are. We all know what will happen to democracy in Egypt. Democracies tend to not actually give any benefit to the people in it just look at iraq.
On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel?
Hamas (being the leading government in the gaza strip) having their slogan "we love death more then the jews love life" Should be any answer you ever need to that question.
|
On December 02 2012 04:00 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:56 Intact wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:39 Intact 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 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. But they are not the UN, they are private NGO's with agendas and individuals with personal opinion. "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." Yes, but they were not the majority and they didnt separate the navel from the ground blockade but looked at it as a whole.
Maybe your english reading skills are lacking, but the this panel DID seperate the naval blockade, where as the UN decision did not. Just because the UN makes a decision to please USA doesn't mean it complies to international laws.
|
On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel?
tell me why Israel should be required to deal with, on any terms, a "government" which is composed of a terrorist organization that has repeatedly called for the destruction of every single Jew on earth?
|
On December 02 2012 04:02 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:49 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote: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. Civility and human rights? You do know that they're going to institute Islamic law into every facet of society that they want to right? Its not like the government is going to become that much better off then the People in Iran are. We all know what will happen to democracy in Egypt. Democracies tend to not actually give any benefit to the people in it just look at iraq.
Talking out of your ass, ain't ya? I read the main point of the constitution and it seems fine to me. Some controversial points but not anywhere near becoming the Iran. It is also much better than the previous one. And Iraq is a whole different story so do not bring it in here
|
On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel?
Huffington post is known as extremely biased in this subject and is not what i would regard as reliable source. If you want a example there was a claim made by them that there are jew only roads (cant find the source article but it is cited here)
|
On December 02 2012 04:05 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel? tell me why Israel should be required to deal with, on any terms, a "government" which is composed of a terrorist organization that has repeatedly called for the destruction of every single Jew on earth?
I only heard them calling for destruction of the state of Israel (which i do not agree with). So why don't exaggerate some more. And seeing from the tone of your post that you consider Israeli's superior beings to Palestinians, then why don't you prove it by being more civilized. Give Hamas a chance, remove the blockade, stop spying on them and let's see what happens. You answered to my question with another question, it makes me believe that what I said before is actually true
|
On December 02 2012 04:06 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel? Huffington post is known as extremely biased in this subject and is not what i would regard as un-biased source. If you want a example there was a claim made by them that there are jew only roads (cant find the source article but it is cited here)
Perhaps, but following the same logic you are from Israel and likely to be extremely biased in this subject and thus we should not consider you argument ?
|
On December 02 2012 04:05 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 04:02 Sermokala wrote:On December 02 2012 03:49 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote: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. Civility and human rights? You do know that they're going to institute Islamic law into every facet of society that they want to right? Its not like the government is going to become that much better off then the People in Iran are. We all know what will happen to democracy in Egypt. Democracies tend to not actually give any benefit to the people in it just look at iraq. Talking out of your ass, ain't ya? I read the main point of the constitution and it seems fine to me. Some controversial points but not anywhere near becoming the Iran. It is also much better than the previous one. And Iraq is a whole different story so do not bring it in here
RELIGION
Sharia, or Islamic law, remains the main source of legislation. A new article states Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam’s top authority, is to be consulted on “matters related to sharia,”
WOMEN’S RIGHTS
The draft drops an earlier article linking women’s rights to sharia
CENSORSHIP
The state will protect “the true nature of the Egyptian family
These things seem fine to you? You can't just say things are off the table just beacuse they don't support your view of thinking. Thats just a horrible argument to have with anything.
|
On December 02 2012 04:06 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel? Huffington post is known as extremely biased in this subject and is not what i would regard as reliable source. If you want a example there was a claim made by them that there are jew only roads (cant find the source article but it is cited here)
Well aljazeeraH is definitely more reliable than Huffington. Way to go, sir
|
On December 02 2012 04:11 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 04:06 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel? Huffington post is known as extremely biased in this subject and is not what i would regard as reliable source. If you want a example there was a claim made by them that there are jew only roads (cant find the source article but it is cited here) Well aljazeeraH is definitely more reliable than Huffington. Way to go, sir
He said that aljazeera cited a huffinton post source for their claim of jew only roads.
|
On December 02 2012 04:11 Art.FeeL wrote:
Well aljazeeraH is definitely more reliable than Huffington. Way to go, sir
Sigh.
In what world is Al Jazeera not a reliable source?
Al Jazeera is world famous for being a reliable and a relatively unbiased source of information as most of their staff are former BBC journalists.
Al Jazeera even had a feature in The Economist as an unbiased source of news in a biased USA.
|
On December 02 2012 04:11 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 04:05 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 04:02 Sermokala wrote:On December 02 2012 03:49 Elroi wrote:On December 02 2012 03:42 Goozen wrote: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. Civility and human rights? You do know that they're going to institute Islamic law into every facet of society that they want to right? Its not like the government is going to become that much better off then the People in Iran are. We all know what will happen to democracy in Egypt. Democracies tend to not actually give any benefit to the people in it just look at iraq. Talking out of your ass, ain't ya? I read the main point of the constitution and it seems fine to me. Some controversial points but not anywhere near becoming the Iran. It is also much better than the previous one. And Iraq is a whole different story so do not bring it in here RELIGION Sharia, or Islamic law, remains the main source of legislation. A new article states Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam’s top authority, is to be consulted on “matters related to sharia,” WOMEN’S RIGHTS The draft drops an earlier article linking women’s rights to sharia CENSORSHIP The state will protect “the true nature of the Egyptian family These things seem fine to you? You can't just say things are off the table just beacuse they don't support your view of thinking. Thats just a horrible argument to have with anything.
Let's link some morehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20555478
How is that bad? Do you even know what Shariah is? Is it maybe chopping hands only?
|
On December 02 2012 04:10 Intact wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2012 04:06 Goozen wrote:On December 02 2012 03:59 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 02 2012 03:52 Art.FeeL wrote:On December 02 2012 03:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:
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 sister was killed while shielding him from a rocket attack if there is any difference to him between the two. I am against suffering from both sides, and just want to make you realize that what Israel is doing isn't really legal nor 'good'. I can continue the trend and say to you to ask all those who died because of IDF. But it's obvious that Hamas isn't an angel here, it is also obvious that they came to power not because Palestinians are Vandals, but because they had no other choice. You know some people prefer dignity over living like a slave. what Israel is doing is largely legal, with some exceptions. and the Palestinians have had other choices all along, and still do have other choices. launching rockets at children from densely populated areas, without the consent of the people whose homes you are launching them from, is dignified? who knew... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/israel-in-gaza-three-wron_b_156801.htmlRead this link. Can you be straightforward and say that the problem lies in Palestinian mentality that wants to destroy Israel? Huffington post is known as extremely biased in this subject and is not what i would regard as un-biased source. If you want a example there was a claim made by them that there are jew only roads (cant find the source article but it is cited here) Perhaps, but following the same logic you are from Israel and likely to be extremely biased in this subject and thus we should not consider you argument ?
The main stream media here is very factually accurate because of the shitstorm that happens globally when its wrong. There is a different between one sided and factually incorrect.
My distrust of the media in this comes from the publishing of pictures form Syria calming its in Gaza and to the story from Jenin from several years ago printing calms made the palestinians that there was a massacre with 400+ dead as fact when in truth there were around 50 dead most of them militants. These are 2 examples out of the massive amount the exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
