So enlighten me.With no control of the Egyptian border, with the obvious fact that it can not prevent the passage of weapons into Gaza, and since that is also pretty strong evidence that Israel has not cut off it's ability to take part in international commerce, how exactly does it fit your quoted definition of occupation as "to take or hold possession or control of"?Unless you can provide an explanation of how an entity that doesn't control the border, imports, or finances of another entity has control of said entity, all you are doing is repeating talking points someone else has fed you and completely ignoring the obvious facts on the ground.
@JohnReb "so enlighten me."Sorry, but I'm not a special ed teacher. I provided you with an erudite paper, from an Israeli university, written by an Israel attorney with stellar creditionals who specializes in international law. She not only believes it is not properly defined as an occupation, but she presents an arguement with many valid points and a clear definition of all the relevant concepts. It would be a hour well spent to read her take on this issue and would prevent you lookish foolish in the future when you instinctively want to type before thinking. ....but you have no interest in learning anything on the subject, you simply have an opinion and refuse to let go of it no matter how wrong. Let me guess..... future republican? Let me give you some advice for when you join the workforce in earnest, your future boss won't put up with this laisse faire attitude to learning.
So your proof that Gaza is occupied is a paper that states in the third paragraph "Gaza is not occupied territory pursuant to the standards set forth in international law and doctrine."? I certainly hadn't assumed you thought that paper defended your position.Perhaps you should read it?Gaza can import weapons, has a border crossing that Israel can not control and is obviously able to make international purchases of weapons and other items.If Israel can not control Gaza's borders, finances, and imports, how can you claim Gaza is occupied? Try to explain it in your own words this time.
tvika613Again, a straw-man argument...So talking about nationalities in this manner is NOT racist? He? Also: how are you bringing religion into this now? First: when someone talks about Muslims like this, and I point out that it's racist, the answer is: it's a religion, not race, so you can't be racist. But according to you, you can only be racist if you talk about religions?About Jewishness: as I recall Jewish people do consider themselves as a separate people, not "just" a religion you can convert to. But now, in your mind it's only a religion? So if someone says "filthy Jews", that's not racist, either, because it's a religion? Or not racist, because it's a people? I'm confused.The other straw man was the ghetto-thing. Population density does not make the ghetto. Look up the definition in a dictionary. For a while I took you seriously, but you really are just a joker, aren't you?Don't answer, poetic questions.
adambazMar 23, 2010Submitter
"They're intentionally turning their children into mindless fanatics so I don't see why I should feel sorry when someone drops one of the crazies."Oh Really I guess you're talking about Israeli people, see see what Israel turning its children to<a class="user" href="http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/jesus-loves-the-little-children-some-of-the-children-of-the-world/" rel="nofollow">http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/jesus-lo ...</a>"Just Like Nazi Germany: Israel Breeds Aggression and Apartheid":<a class="user" href="http://www.paltelegraph.com/diaries/featured-articles/2962-israel-breeds-aggression-and-apartheid" rel="nofollow">http://www.paltelegraph.com/diaries/featured-artic ...</a>
kilgoretrout666Mar 25, 2010
It may not work but I say we try anyway.
Closed AccountMar 25, 2010
<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humus" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humus</a>
spongya77Mar 25, 2010
That's an amazingly level headed assessment.Or you're just a moron.
johnrebMar 25, 2010
So enlighten me.With no control of the Egyptian border, with the obvious fact that it can not prevent the passage of weapons into Gaza, and since that is also pretty strong evidence that Israel has not cut off it's ability to take part in international commerce, how exactly does it fit your quoted definition of occupation as "to take or hold possession or control of"?Unless you can provide an explanation of how an entity that doesn't control the border, imports, or finances of another entity has control of said entity, all you are doing is repeating talking points someone else has fed you and completely ignoring the obvious facts on the ground.
tzvika613Mar 26, 2010
^ With the magicul thought wavez and chem trails.
Closed AccountMar 26, 2010
@JohnReb "so enlighten me."Sorry, but I'm not a special ed teacher. I provided you with an erudite paper, from an Israeli university, written by an Israel attorney with stellar creditionals who specializes in international law. She not only believes it is not properly defined as an occupation, but she presents an arguement with many valid points and a clear definition of all the relevant concepts. It would be a hour well spent to read her take on this issue and would prevent you lookish foolish in the future when you instinctively want to type before thinking. ....but you have no interest in learning anything on the subject, you simply have an opinion and refuse to let go of it no matter how wrong. Let me guess..... future republican? Let me give you some advice for when you join the workforce in earnest, your future boss won't put up with this laisse faire attitude to learning.
johnrebMar 26, 2010
So your proof that Gaza is occupied is a paper that states in the third paragraph "Gaza is not occupied territory pursuant to the standards set forth in international law and doctrine."? I certainly hadn't assumed you thought that paper defended your position.Perhaps you should read it?Gaza can import weapons, has a border crossing that Israel can not control and is obviously able to make international purchases of weapons and other items.If Israel can not control Gaza's borders, finances, and imports, how can you claim Gaza is occupied? Try to explain it in your own words this time.
johnrebMar 26, 2010
And you still haven't proven your point that Gaza is occupied.Are you going to ever get around to that?
spongya77Mar 26, 2010
tvika613Again, a straw-man argument...So talking about nationalities in this manner is NOT racist? He? Also: how are you bringing religion into this now? First: when someone talks about Muslims like this, and I point out that it's racist, the answer is: it's a religion, not race, so you can't be racist. But according to you, you can only be racist if you talk about religions?About Jewishness: as I recall Jewish people do consider themselves as a separate people, not "just" a religion you can convert to. But now, in your mind it's only a religion? So if someone says "filthy Jews", that's not racist, either, because it's a religion? Or not racist, because it's a people? I'm confused.The other straw man was the ghetto-thing. Population density does not make the ghetto. Look up the definition in a dictionary. For a while I took you seriously, but you really are just a joker, aren't you?Don't answer, poetic questions.
kasha34Mar 30, 2010
These **** don't understand. This s**t has been going on for 1,400 years.