OOPS

[Vagabond63]

Yes many times, and some of these are still in place.

Would you mind giving me some examples? I'm going to be busy reading up about the Nurenburg Laws and the Pact of Umar

 

[montelatici]

Unfortunately, there have been very few historical examples in which an identifiable ruling group (racial, ethnic, national, religious, etc.) has given up power over a docile ruled population of a different group or groups. But hope springs eternal.

 

[Phoenall]

Yes many times, and some of these are still in place.

Would you mind giving me some examples? I'm going to be busy reading up about the Nurenburg Laws and the Pact of Umar

Try these for starters



Israel eases restrictions on Gaza - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East


Gaza blockade: Israel eases export restrictions - BBC News


Israel lifts blockade on West Bank city Ramallah



Israel lifts blockade of main road in southeastern Hebron


Israel eases Al-Aqsa limits as 90 wounded in Gaza, West Bank

 

[Vagabond63]

Yes many times, and some of these are still in place.

Would you mind giving me some examples? I'm going to be busy reading up about the Nurenburg Laws and the Pact of Umar

Try these for starters



Israel eases restrictions on Gaza - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East


Gaza blockade: Israel eases export restrictions - BBC News


Israel lifts blockade on West Bank city Ramallah



Israel lifts blockade of main road in southeastern Hebron


Israel eases Al-Aqsa limits as 90 wounded in Gaza, West Bank

Thank you, but these are more cosmetic than anything. I meant remove all restrictions for a trial period, let them rule themselves and see what happens.

 

[Phoenall]

Yes many times, and some of these are still in place.

Would you mind giving me some examples? I'm going to be busy reading up about the Nurenburg Laws and the Pact of Umar

Try these for starters



Israel eases restrictions on Gaza - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East


Gaza blockade: Israel eases export restrictions - BBC News


Israel lifts blockade on West Bank city Ramallah



Israel lifts blockade of main road in southeastern Hebron


Israel eases Al-Aqsa limits as 90 wounded in Gaza, West Bank

Thank you, but these are more cosmetic than anything. I meant remove all restrictions for a trial period, let them rule themselves and see what happens.

They are lifted restrictions, and just a few of the ones that have been lifted. This was done in 2005 and the Palestinians decided that war and violence was the answer, then complained when Israel retaliated in force. So the restriction went on 2 years after Israel walked away from gaza and left the Palestinians to their own devices

 

[Hollie]

Yes many times, and some of these are still in place.

Would you mind giving me some examples? I'm going to be busy reading up about the Nurenburg Laws and the Pact of Umar

Try these for starters



Israel eases restrictions on Gaza - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East


Gaza blockade: Israel eases export restrictions - BBC News


Israel lifts blockade on West Bank city Ramallah



Israel lifts blockade of main road in southeastern Hebron


Israel eases Al-Aqsa limits as 90 wounded in Gaza, West Bank

Thank you, but these are more cosmetic than anything. I meant remove all restrictions for a trial period, let them rule themselves and see what happens.

In a very real sense, what you are asking was already tried when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. It was an opportunity for Arabs-Moslems to demonstrate that they were interested in building a responsible, first-world society with an economy that was not dependent on the UNRWA welfare fraud. However, that was expecting too much from Islamic terrorists who were somehow expected to manage civil affairs of government when that is not the role of Islamic terrorists. It took no time at all following the Israeli withdrawal before the Islamic terrorists began launching rockets (an act of war) directed at Israel.

 

[montelatici]

Israel did not withdraw from Gaza. It just converted it into a large concentration camp over which it controls the perimeter, air space, territorial sea, controls imports and exports and collects its taxes.

Concentration camp in the original sense of the word, as during the Boer War.

 

[Hollie]

Israel did not withdraw from Gaza. It just converted it into a large concentration camp over which it controls the perimeter, air space, territorial sea, controls imports and exports and collects its taxes.

Concentration camp in the original sense of the word, as during the Boer War.

Israel withdrew from Gaza. That's just a fact that you're in denial of.

As to controlling the actions of Islamic terrorists, that is a matter of self defense that any responsible government owes to its population. It's just a fact that early after Israel withdrew from Gaza, the Islamic terrorist groups initiated acts of war by attacking Israel with rocket fire.

You find those facts to be uncomfortable because they conflict with your biases. However, you shouldn't expect others to accept your pointless and juvenile whining that is fact-less, point-less and nothing more than flailing your Pom Poms for the Islamic terrorist retrogrades you define as heroes.

 

[montelatici]

The blockade, which was in effect prior to any rockets being fired, is the instigating act of war.

 

[Hollie]

The blockade, which was in effect prior to any rockets being fired, is the instigating act of war.

Your Islamic terrorist heroes refused to renounce violence. Wave those Pom Poms, sweetie.

However, who would be surprised at Islamic terrorists (Hamas with their Death Cult Charter), not renouncing violence and using violence to fulfill the writ of their 7th century politico-religious ideology?

You would have preferred for Israel to stand idly by while your Islamic terrorist heroes spent their welfare fraud dollars to re-arm but that would only have resulted in more Israeli deaths. As it happened, your Islamic terrorist heroes were met with a military response to their rocket fire which resulted in far greater numbers of islamo-deaths than Israeli deaths.

Islamic terrorism carries consequences.

 

[montelatici]

Instead of writing nonsense in a very silly (and childish) manner, try to address the issue. A course in English composition and grammar would do you good.

The blockade is the act of war. When the Gulf Aqaba was blockaded, Israel considered it an act of war and started a war as a consequence.

 

[Hollie]

Instead of writing nonsense in a very silly (and childish) manner, try to address the issue. A course in English composition and grammar would do you good.

The blockade is the act of war. When the Gulf Aqaba was blockaded, Israel considered it an act of war and started a war as a consequence.

Instead of stuttering and mumbling in support of your Islamic terrorist heroes, accept the fact that Islamic terrorism carries consequences.

Your waging of your own flaccid gee-had from behind the safety of a keyboard makes you a rather comical gee-had wannabe.

You obviously demand an entitlement for your Islamic terrorist heroes to commit acts of war against a sovereign nation. You are in De-Nile of the fact of the Hamas Death Cult Charter and what the charter requires of the pious Islamist.

 

[Vagabond63]

From what I've read in Wikipedia, Israel's withdrawl from Gaza did not remove any restrictions as Isreal kept control over the land border, seas and air space. Also the agreements regarding free and open access, building a sea port, etc were never implimented by the Israelis. I can see how that might have caused frustration amongst the Gazans that pushed them towards Hamas rather than Fatah.

From what I can tell, much of these eased restictions were cosmetic exercises without substance and not a genuine effort to allow the Palestinians the opportunty to create a more peace oriented cultural or emotional state.

I found this statement troubling in the Wiki article Israeli disengagement from Gaza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In October 2004, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior adviser, Dov Weissglass, explained the meaning of Sharon's statement further:

"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process, and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress. That is exactly what happened. You know, the term `peace process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen.... what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did."[7]

 

[Phoenall]

Israel did not withdraw from Gaza. It just converted it into a large concentration camp over which it controls the perimeter, air space, territorial sea, controls imports and exports and collects its taxes.

Concentration camp in the original sense of the word, as during the Boer War.

So says Abdul the sock puppet who spouts what his imam tells him to when he is sat at computer 5 in the boiler room

 

[Phoenall]

The blockade, which was in effect prior to any rockets being fired, is the instigating act of war.

LINK to the law that says this is so ?

 

[Phoenall]

From what I've read in Wikipedia, Israel's withdrawl from Gaza did not remove any restrictions as Isreal kept control over the land border, seas and air space. Also the agreements regarding free and open access, building a sea port, etc were never implimented by the Israelis. I can see how that might have caused frustration amongst the Gazans that pushed them towards Hamas rather than Fatah.

From what I can tell, much of these eased restictions were cosmetic exercises without substance and not a genuine effort to allow the Palestinians the opportunty to create a more peace oriented cultural or emotional state.

I found this statement troubling in the Wiki article Israeli disengagement from Gaza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In October 2004, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior adviser, Dov Weissglass, explained the meaning of Sharon's statement further:

"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process, and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress. That is exactly what happened. You know, the term `peace process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen.... what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did."[7]

The land borders are those of Israel which of course Israel will not give up. Would you expect the USA to stop[ control of its borders with Canada and Mexico ?

The reason is simple the Palestinians had instigated terrorist actions against Israel and made threats of future violence so Israel just withdrew from any plans to re-build a sea port. Why spend all that money to only destroy it a short time later when the Palestinians start importing weapons to use against Israeli civilians.

They were easments of the blockade in as much as they allowed the Palestinians access to goods they could only get on the black market, paying hamas for the goods at inflated prices. The Palestinians have had it in their power since 1923 to show they can be peaceful and have instead engaged in terrorism, violence, murder and belligerent propaganda.


So what don't you understand about the non existent disengagement plan that was a fantasy that never happened. Try a much more valid source than wiki as monte has again admitted to having edited other peoples entries only this week.

 

[Phoenall]

Instead of writing nonsense in a very silly (and childish) manner, try to address the issue. A course in English composition and grammar would do you good.

The blockade is the act of war. When the Gulf Aqaba was blockaded, Israel considered it an act of war and started a war as a consequence.

WRONG AGAIN freddy as the act of war was the blocking of Israeli vessels from using the high seas

 

[Phoenall]

Instead of writing nonsense in a very silly (and childish) manner, try to address the issue. A course in English composition and grammar would do you good.

The blockade is the act of war. When the Gulf Aqaba was blockaded, Israel considered it an act of war and started a war as a consequence.

WRONG AGAIN freddy as the act of war was the blocking of Israeli vessels from using the high seas

And it was the President of the USA that said it was an act of war