Red Cross: Israel's Blockade of Gaza is Illegal

  • tokugawa

    Posts: 945

    Jul 21, 2010 5:17 PM GMT
    Israel is in clear violation of international humanitarian law with respect to Gaza, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

    The Red Cross paints a bleak picture of the situation in Gaza: hospitals short of equipment, power cuts lasting hours each day, drinking water unfit for consumption.

    "The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished.The closure therefore constitutes an illegal collective punishment."

    Source:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10306193
  • solak

    Posts: 493

    Jul 21, 2010 7:44 PM GMT
    ehh theyre brown since when did brown people have rights
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 12:22 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidMessage to RJ admin:

    Please add another 120 GB hard drive to the RJ server. Caesarea4 will be posting endless pages of Israel icon_rolleyes.gifhistory lessons soon.

    Okay, I'll say it because no one else will. Regardless of whether he's right or wrong, why don't you criticize Tokugawa for creating yet another thread about a subject which has already been exhaustively discussed in recent related threads in which he was an active participant? Even reviving those threads would've saved space. And what is your obsession with C4? Get a room already!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 7:36 AM GMT
    eagermuscle said
    southbeach1500 saidMessage to RJ admin:

    Please add another 120 GB hard drive to the RJ server. Caesarea4 will be posting endless pages of Israel icon_rolleyes.gifhistory lessons soon.

    Okay, I'll say it because no one else will. Regardless of whether he's right or wrong, why don't you criticize Tokugawa for creating yet another thread about a subject which has already been exhaustively discussed in recent related threads in which he was an active participant? Even reviving those threads would've saved space. And what is your obsession with C4? Get a room already!


    Hear hear!

    Southbeach1500 and Caesarea4, sitting in a tree...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 8:09 AM GMT
    tokugawa said"The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished.The closure therefore constitutes an illegal collective punishment."


    Well duh, sucks to live in Gaza and get stuck in this mess. But it's going to continue until Hamas abdicates.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 8:09 AM GMT
    solak saidehh theyre brown since when did brown people have rights


    Since the MLK movement in the 60s...in America. Not until 1990 in South Africa though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 8:20 AM GMT
    JB82 said
    tokugawa said"The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished.The closure therefore constitutes an illegal collective punishment."


    Well duh, sucks to live in Gaza and get stuck in this mess. But it's going to continue until Hamas abdicates.


    Not until Israel end the Gaza siege, occupation, and apartheid. Dude, ever ask yourself why there is Hamas? It is all because of ISRAEL.


    duhhhh
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 9:03 AM GMT
    IanCT said
    JB82 said
    tokugawa said"The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished.The closure therefore constitutes an illegal collective punishment."


    Well duh, sucks to live in Gaza and get stuck in this mess. But it's going to continue until Hamas abdicates.


    Not until Israel end the Gaza siege, occupation, and apartheid. Dude, ever ask yourself why there is Hamas? It is all because of ISRAEL.


    duhhhh


    Your a poephoel! Apartheid in Israel, that's a good one. icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 11:59 AM GMT
    icon_exclaim.gif I am South African and grew up during the height of the National Party's power, or if you like during the Apartheid period. And you really should study the full history of that system and when you finished, come and tell me there is the same system in place in Israel.

    Apartheid (Afrikaans pronunciation: [ɐˈpɐrtɦəit], separateness) was a system of legal racial segregation enforced by the National Party government in South Africa between 1948 and 1994, under which the rights of the majority non-white inhabitants of South Africa were curtailed and minority rule by white people was maintained.

    Racial segregation in South Africa began in colonial times, but apartheid as an official policy was introduced following the general election of 1948. New legislation classified inhabitants into racial groups ("black", "white", "coloured", and "Indian"),[1] and residential areas were segregated, sometimes by means of forced removals. From 1958, black people were deprived of their citizenship, legally becoming citizens of one of ten tribally based self-governing homelands called bantustans, four of which became nominally independent states. The government segregated education, medical care, and other public services, and provided black people with services inferior to those of white people.[2]

    Apartheid sparked significant internal resistance and violence as well as a long trade embargo against South Africa.[3] A series of popular uprisings and protests were met with the banning of opposition and imprisoning of anti-apartheid leaders. As unrest spread and became more violent, state organizations responded with increasing repression and state-sponsored violence.
    Reforms to apartheid in the 1980s failed to quell the mounting opposition, and in 1990 President Frederik Willem de Klerk began negotiations to end apartheid, culminating in multi-racial democratic elections in 1994, which were won by the African National Congress under Nelson Mandela. The vestiges of apartheid still shape South African politics and society.[4]

    The British colonial rulers introduced a system of Pass Laws in the Cape Colony and Colony of Natal during the 19th century.[5][6][7] This stemmed from the regulation of black people's movement from the tribal regions to those occupied by white and coloured people, ruled by the British. Laws were passed not only to restrict the movement of black people into these areas, but also to prohibit their movement from one district to another without a signed pass. Black people were not allowed onto the streets of towns in the Cape Colony and Natal after dark and had to carry their passes at all times.[8]

    The Franchise and Ballot Act of 1892 instituted limits based on financial means and education to the black franchise,[9] and the Natal Legislative Assembly Bill of 1894 deprived Indians of the right to vote.[10] In 1905 the General Pass Regulations Bill denied blacks the vote altogether, limited them to fixed areas and inaugurated the infamous Pass System.[11] Then followed the Asiatic Registration Act (1906) requiring all Indians to register and carry passes,[12] the South Africa Act (1910) that enfranchised whites, giving them complete political control over all other race groups and removing the right of blacks to sit in parliament,[13] the Native Land Act (1913) which prevented all blacks, except those in the Cape, from buying land outside "reserves",[13] the Natives in Urban Areas Bill (191icon_cool.gif designed to force blacks into "locations",[14] the Urban Areas Act (1923) which introduced residential segregation and provided cheap labour for industry led by white people, the Colour Bar Act (1926), preventing anyone black from practicing skilled trades, the Native Administration Act (1927) that made the British Crown, rather than paramount chiefs, the supreme head over all African affairs,[15] the Native Land and Trust Act (1936) that complemented the 1913 Native Land Act and, in the same year, the Representation of Natives Act, which removed previous black voters from the Cape voters' roll.[16] One of the first pieces of segregating legislation enacted by the Jan Smuts' United Party government was the Asiatic Land Tenure Bill (1946), which banned any further land sales to Indians.[17]

    Jan Smuts' United Party government began to move away from the rigid enforcement of segregationist laws during World War II.[18] Amid fears integration would eventually lead the nation to racial assimilation, the legislature established the Sauer Commission to investigate the effects of the United Party's policies. The commission concluded integration would bring about a "loss of personality" for all racial groups.

    National Party leaders argued that South Africa did not comprise a single nation, but was made up of four distinct racial groups: white, black, coloured and Indian. These groups were split further into thirteen "nations" or racial federations. White people encompassed the English and Afrikaans language groups; the black populace was divided into ten such groups.

    The state passed laws which paved the way for "grand apartheid", which was centred on separating races on a large scale, by compelling people to live in separate places defined by race. In addition, "petty apartheid" laws were passed. The principal apartheid laws were as follows:[21]

    The first grand apartheid law was the Population Registration Act of 1950, which formalised racial classification and introduced an identity card for all persons over the age of eighteen, specifying their racial group.[22] Official teams or Boards were established to come to an ultimate conclusion on those people whose race was unclear.[23] This caused difficulty, especially for coloured people, separating their families as members were allocated different races.[24]

    The second pillar of grand apartheid was the Group Areas Act of 1950.[25] Until then, most settlements had people of different races living side by side. This Act put an end to diverse areas and determined where one lived according to race. Each race was allotted its own area, which was used in later years as a basis of forced removal.[26] Further legislation[which?] in 1951 allowed the government to demolish black shackland slums and forced white employers to pay for the construction of housing for those black workers who were permitted to reside in cities otherwise reserved for white people.

    The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949 prohibited marriage between persons of different races, and the Immorality Act of 1950 made sexual relations with a person of a different race a criminal offence.
    Under the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act of 1953, municipal grounds could be reserved for a particular race, creating, among other things, separate beaches, buses, hospitals, schools and universities. Signboards such as "whites only" applied to public areas, even including park benches.[27] Black people were provided with services greatly inferior to those of whites, and, to a lesser extent, to those of Indian and coloured people.[2] An act of 1956[which?] formalised racial discrimination in employment.

    Further laws had the aim of suppressing resistance, especially armed resistance, to apartheid. The Suppression of Communism Act of 1950 banned the South African Communist Party and any other political party that the government chose to label as 'communist'. Disorderly gatherings were banned, as were certain organizations that were deemed threatening to the government.
    Education was segregated by means of the 1953 Bantu Education Act, which crafted a separate system of education for African students and was designed to prepare black people for lives as a labouring class.[28] In 1959 separa
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 12:00 PM GMT
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 4:30 PM GMT
    IanCT> Not until Israel end the Gaza siege, occupation, and apartheid. Dude, ever ask yourself why there is Hamas? It is all because of ISRAEL.

    Hamas originates from the Muslim Brotherhood - which predates the re-establishment of Israel.

    It's not a "siege" but a blockade.
    Ever ask yourself why the blockade is recognized by the US, EU, UN and others?
    Ever ask yourself why it is also enforced by Egypt (the largest Arab country)?
    Ever ask yourself why even the Palestinian Authority supports the blockade?


    Your use of the "apartheid" soundbite was discredited long ago.
    Do you ever ask yourself why your arguments are limited to superficial soundbites?

    Likewise your slogan of "occupation" is troubled.
    Under Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, only territory of a "High Contracting Party" can be "occupied".
    Are you saying that Gaza is Israeli occupied EGYPT?
    Can't be since Egypt (and Jordan) have rescinded their claims (which were based on aggressive use of force in 1948 ).

    The last legal and accepted partition (you yourself argued that the 1947 UN Partition compromise, UNGAR 181, was not binding) was the League of Nations Mandate document which allocated all of western Palestine (from the Jordan River to the sea) to the Jewish state. That amounted to 22% of the territory of Palestine, with the rest being allocated exclusively to an Arab state (no Jews allowed). That 77% of eastern Palestine was known as Trans-Jordanian Palestine, gained independence in 1946, and today is known simply as Jordan.

    Israel's administration of the disputed territories is authorized by UNSCR 242 (which has been accepted by Israel, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority - but not Hamas) which is also the basis of the Oslo Accords. UNSCR 242 does not require an immediate, unilateral or full Israeli withdrawal from the disputed territories. It envisions an Israeli withdrawal AFTER peace is made, during which a permanent border will be negotiated.

    Are you saying that the ancient Jewish quarter of Jerusalem, which Israel would keep in a future peace agreement, is "Israeli occupied Israel"?

    Saying that one is figthing because of the "occupation" also misses the point. An "occupation" is what happens between war and peace. No one claims that the Allied occupation of Germany or Japan was "illegal" or even wrong. The difference is that the Germans and the Japanese made peace rather than attempt to use the "occupation" as a pretense to fight forever.

    The problem is that the Arab parties, your side, is fast to war and slow to peace.
    That is, when they are not - like Hamas - actively fighting against peace.



    All of which has already been demonstrated in numerous RJ topics.

    "Palestine" is the Latin/European name for Eretz Yisrael, the Jewish homeland
    - and Arab denials of the existence of "Palestine".

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/349491

    Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people.
    (Judaism is a religion, Jews are an ethnic group)

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/494893

    Arabs are not indigenous to Israel
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/979648

    Jerusalem
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/887747

    1947-1948: Arabs reject compromise and attack Israel
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/960691

    Jaffa: 94% fled before entry of Israeli forces; 6% became Israeli citizens
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/960691#54845_1035438_name

    In search of a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict: UNSCR 242, Oslo and Camp David/Taba
    (Or: I support the Clinton COMPROMISE parameters. Do you?!)

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843

    Pallywood: fake news revealed
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/897708

    Free Gaza from what truly afflicts it: Hamas
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/973888

    Countries that support gays or kill them
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/984797

    Yet we get more and more anti-Israel topics, all with the same vacuous soundbites and silly slogans spammed over and again?

    If you were interested in peace, why don't you advocate that your leaders come to the negotiating table (from which they walked out) instead of endlessly resorting to violence and terrorism in order to extract unilateral concessions in order to return to the peace table?

    Do you favor and support direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 4:54 PM GMT
    "Jewish town won't let Arab build home on his own land"
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/jewish-town-won-t-let-arab-build-home-on-his-own-land-1.2194

    Yeah sound like apartheid to me.

    Marriage law as example of apartheid too in Israel.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 4:55 PM GMT
    boschboy saidhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid


    You are not even from South Africa. You liar.

    “The so-called ‘Palestinian autonomous areas’ are bantustans. These are restricted entities within the power structure of the Israeli apartheid system.”
    - Nelson Mandela

    Tutu condemns Israeli 'apartheid'
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1957644.stm

    "I was shocked to see these walls, it's a new apartheid, barbaric behavior: How can you impose such a collective punishment and separate people? After all, we are all living on the same planet. It seems to me the world should have already learned from what happened in South Africa. And a country that hasn't learned should be boycotted, so that's why I don't perform in your country [Israel]."
    — Nigel Kennedy

    "It reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa. I have seen the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about. Many South Africans are beginning to recognize the parallels to what we went through."
    — Desmond Tutu
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 5:05 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidI'm still curious as to why Caesarea4 hasn't yet gone to Israel and joined the military. They would give him a gun and munitions, seems like the perfect fit for him and the best way for him to protect Israel and all things Israeli.


    He is a troll posting same links over and over again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 7:28 PM GMT
    IanCT> He is a troll posting same links over and over again.

    Because what I post REFUTES what you repeatedly spam.

    I can, point-by-point, show that everything you say is wrong.
    You can't respond to a single thing I say, not above, not ever.
    Instead you simply cycle and post another slogan, soundbite or video repeating the same superficial nonsense.

    You post X, I show NotX. Rather than support X, you post Y.
    I show NotY. Rather than support Y, you post Z.
    I show NotZ. Rather than support Z, you repost X....
  • solak

    Posts: 493

    Jul 22, 2010 8:43 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidI'm still curious as to why Caesarea4 hasn't yet gone to Israel and joined the military.


    because he'd prefer to let dumb Americans pay for the war and risk American blood instead, so he can keep comfy in his bedroom and post? win-winicon_cool.gif




    780278C85DDFF5FE6BE92FFA9E0726F4.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 9:01 PM GMT
    It's unfortunate that some people prefer to post ad hominems even while they complain that they have been the victims of such and despite their inability to contribute anything of substance to the topic.
  • solak

    Posts: 493

    Jul 22, 2010 9:11 PM GMT
    it's unfortunate i'm paying for war, and death...

    when i can barely make tuition.

    you're welcome for my help. at least make it tax deductible for me please?icon_smile.gif



    780278C85DDFF5FE6BE92FFA9E0726F4.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 10:11 PM GMT
    solak> "U.S. Sees Little Support in the U.N. From Countries Receiving U.S. Aids"

    Have you bothered to look at what you keep posting?
    That Israel is essentially the only exception to the above?
    Voting with the US 91% of the time and 95% when on "important" issues?

    (The only other country over 50% is Bosnia & Herzegovina at 51%, with only 4 other countries voting with the US on "important" issues between 50-70% of the time.)

    Do you realize that Israel votes with the US 2-3x more often than Iraq, Egyp and Jordan - combined?!

    Aid to Israel amounts to about $7 per the average American. The entire foreign aid budget is tiny.
    If you are seeking to curtail spending, probably better to focus first on pork and other spending and put foreign aid at the bottom of the list.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 10:19 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 11:24 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Caesarea4 saidIanCT> He is a troll posting same links over and over again.

    Because what I post REFUTES what you repeatedly spam.

    But what's the point? You aren't helping Israel at all.


    Sure he is. He's caused me to reconsider some of my own anti-Israel bias. I'm sure I'm not the only one so affected. And public opinion impacts the flow of money and power.
  • solak

    Posts: 493

    Jul 22, 2010 11:26 PM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidsolak>
    Aid to Israel amounts to about $7 per the average American.


    haha, assuming i'll accept that low figure, let us...

    -Subtract counted Infants/Babies/non-working Children
    -Subtract Full time HS/College Students
    -Subtract the Unemployed
    -Subtract those on Gov't Assistance
    -Subtract millions of Public Employees who support further taxes such as this b/c it also funds their pensions http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1048968
    -Subtract the wealthy capable of hiring the smartest CPA's/Attorneys to utilize loopholes
    -Subtract Exempt organizations/employees

    You're left with a vanishing middle-class paying a much higher rate on top of the unadjusted AMT taxes, new higher payroll taxes, property tax, ssi/medi, etc, etc, etc.

    But don't worry, we'll keep propping you up.

    Israel is now in the #1 spot for most US aid received.

    More than Iraq.

    http://politics.usnews.com/news/washington-whispers/articles/2010/07/06/despite-rift-israel-gets-more-us-aid-than-iraq.html

    You're welcome, my sire. L'chaim.icon_cool.gif

    obama_bows_to_burger_king.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2010 11:39 PM GMT
    IanCT> Not until Israel end the Gaza siege, occupation, and apartheid. Dude, ever ask yourself why there is Hamas? It is all because of ISRAEL.

    Hamas originates from the Muslim Brotherhood - which predates the re-establishment of Israel.

    It's not a "siege" but a blockade.
    Ever ask yourself why the blockade is recognized by the US, EU, UN and others?
    Ever ask yourself why it is also enforced by Egypt (the largest Arab country)?
    Ever ask yourself why even the Palestinian Authority supports the blockade?


    Your use of the "apartheid" soundbite was discredited long ago.
    Do you ever ask yourself why your arguments are limited to superficial soundbites?

    Likewise your slogan of "occupation" is troubled.
    Under Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, only territory of a "High Contracting Party" can be "occupied".
    Are you saying that Gaza is Israeli occupied EGYPT?
    Can't be since Egypt (and Jordan) have rescinded their claims (which were based on aggressive use of force in 1948 ).

    The last legal and accepted partition (you yourself argued that the 1947 UN Partition compromise, UNGAR 181, was not binding) was the League of Nations Mandate document which allocated all of western Palestine (from the Jordan River to the sea) to the Jewish state. That amounted to 22% of the territory of Palestine, with the rest being allocated exclusively to an Arab state (no Jews allowed). That 77% of eastern Palestine was known as Trans-Jordanian Palestine, gained independence in 1946, and today is known simply as Jordan.

    Israel's administration of the disputed territories is authorized by UNSCR 242 (which has been accepted by Israel, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority - but not Hamas) which is also the basis of the Oslo Accords. UNSCR 242 does not require an immediate, unilateral or full Israeli withdrawal from the disputed territories. It envisions an Israeli withdrawal AFTER peace is made, during which a permanent border will be negotiated.

    Are you saying that the ancient Jewish quarter of Jerusalem, which Israel would keep in a future peace agreement, is "Israeli occupied Israel"?

    Saying that one is figthing because of the "occupation" also misses the point. An "occupation" is what happens between war and peace. No one claims that the Allied occupation of Germany or Japan was "illegal" or even wrong. The difference is that the Germans and the Japanese made peace rather than attempt to use the "occupation" as a pretense to fight forever.

    The problem is that the Arab parties, your side, is fast to war and slow to peace.
    That is, when they are not - like Hamas - actively fighting against peace.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2010 2:10 AM GMT
    More propaganda ping-pong?

    sxydrkhair> Many pro-Zionists believe occupation is "not" illegal.

    People who understand international law agree.
    Surely you aren't arguing that the Allied occupation of Germany and Japan after WW II was "illegal", right?

    Note that the Israeli administration is authorized by UNSCR 242 which does NOT require a unilateral, immediate or full Israeli withdrawal.
    It DOES call for an Israeli withdrawal AFTER a comprehensive peace agreement is reached.
    This is why it is called the "land for peace" (not "peace for land") formula.

    The roadmap to ending the "occupation" is through peace.
    Only war-mongers seek to explain, rationalize and justify further violence, terrorism and war based on the pretense of "occupation".
    They seek to perpetuate the conflict (until "victory", no matter how pyrrhic) yet in reality they just perpetuate the suffering.
    Which, cynically, they then latch on to as yet another pretense to perpetuate the conflict.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2010 6:22 AM GMT
    IanCT said"Jewish town won't let Arab build home on his own land"
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/jewish-town-won-t-let-arab-build-home-on-his-own-land-1.2194

    Yeah sound like apartheid to me.

    Marriage law as example of apartheid too in Israel.




    Yuslyk, lyk vir my julle is meer dom as wat ek gedink het - its still doesn't equate to the same as the official policy of Apartheid - 1948 - 1991. Do your research.