Israel Kills 7 Palestinians And Injures 52 In Ongoing Attack On Occupied Gaza

[kvetch]

You state the occupied lands are not occupied.

We have an Opinion by The International Court of Justice, the Highest legal authority in our world, telling the world that Israel occupies East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza.

Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

You obviously have no regard or respect for International law and desire to clothe Israel's violations of intl law with Impunity.

I'll try to keep this simple for you Sherri -- please let me know which sovereign nation's territory Israel captured when it "occupied" the territory. Until you can do that, your claim to occupation is null and void. Cite whatever you want but words have meanings and you can't escape that this word "occupied" has a particular legal use.
The question of an advisory position by the ICJ ignores this distinction and actually asserts israeli occupation in Gaza (which Israel has withdrawn from thrice and received shelling in response, contrary to international law) and areas which, actually, were under PA control (ineffective though it is). So keep citing all those decisions about "international law."

rosends,

You are not the legal authority that has decided this question, the International Court of Justice is. And I provided a link to that Opinion. This Opinion is consistent with the other intl legal authorities, what they have been saying in UN Resolutions for decades. Palestinians have a right of self determination in their indigenous lands and homes inside Palestine, their lands in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza, that is a recognized legal right under intl law, and it is that right that lies at the base of the Court Opinion. The particular lands the Court has held Israel occupies today , that are known as the Occupied Palestinian Territories, were lands that Israel took control over in 1967, in the 1967 war, that were occupied then by Arab nations (Jordan and Egypt) in the 1967 war Israel initiated in the region.

Sherri

Sherri

if israel returned to 1967 borders they would be keeping all the land they stole from the Gazans around Ashkelon, Ashdod etc where there were never Jews in all History.

You pose as the Gazans friend yet you too want Israeli thieves to keep their stolen lands.

And doesnt that racist genocidal Old Testament bunch of cruel Jewish fairy stories you believe in say the Jews have a God given right to all the "promised land" and the right to commit genocide to steal it??

Do you actually know the first thing about the Gaza story??? Or your god damned Bible??

 

[AnjelicaT]

kvetch,

You just keep on judging all of us here, that is your kvetch thing, obviously.

I think I already addressed what Jesus had to say about judging others, that is in Matthew 7, I will not restate it again here. If you or anyone else is interested, they can look it up for themselves.

You call yourself a Christ loving adversary? You just called the Apostle Paul a woman hater. And you called the Christian Scriptures Biblical drivel. Do you really call that loving Christ?

Do us all a favor, but most of all do it for YOU, for yourself, look at yourself in a mirror, read the words Christ actually said, deal with your own hate.

I will end by agreeing with one comment you just made, about the real Christ, that He is love personified. And God is Love, I add to that.

Sherri

Kvetch is quite right, Saul was a misogynist. And most of the books that could have, and some might argue, should have been included in the bible aren't there, and as such it is an almost arbitrary collection which could have been very different today if the councils such as Nicea hadn't happened, or had they had another agenda, or had they included the more gnostically inclined scriptures, for example. I think Kvetch is acknowledging these issues and therefore suggesting that your apparent obsessive reliance on what we today refer to as the bible is a little bit silly. I think Kvetch is an equal opportunities relgion basher so you need not feel singled out.
However, you are the only person on this particular forum who is regularly torturing its inhabitants with your constant abuse of scripture and shoving your opportunistic interpretations down our throats.
Oh and you clearly don't know what JC meant by love, He loved the Jews and everyone else. You hate His people and support terrorism against them. Your love Isa, not Jesus, but that is not really surprising, is it?

Angel

I think right now, the Catholickers, the Orthodox and the prostitutes, sorry, Protestants all have different bibles.

Yes, equal opportunity hate and lie basher I try to be.

But it's all to easy to mash up that anti-christ jew hatin sherri and then think you have won the arguments about Gaza which you have definitely not.

Not with tinnie and not with me either.

the ghetto that is Gaza was created by Israel in 1948 to 1956 long before Hamas the PLO or any violent Jewicides ever happened....plenty of Israeli Palicides along that vicious way and little if any resistance from Gazans or Pals.

And none of you Zionuts or acolytes like you have rebutted a single truth that Tinne or I have expressed along the way.

You just resort to Sherri tactix;

accusin us of Hamas Jewicide supportin which aint true.

So how about we return to the subject of this thread and ignore Sherri, eh?

How on earth did my post to Sherri leave you with the impression I believe I have 'won the argument about Gaza'? I am addressing Sherri's drivel and as long as she posts it ad nauseum and as long as it amuses me to respond, I will. You are also quite deluded if you believe none of the 'truths' that you and tinne have expressed have not been rebutted, and if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - its a duck. Tinnie and Bcoz are hamas supporters and therefore they are terrorist supporters imho, and thats what I will call them. Tinnie does not have a single bad word for Hamas nor for anyone who conducts terrorism out of gaza. That is a terrorist supporter. Maybe you should let him fight his own battles, although I appreciate that seems rather difficult for him since he barely seems able to string more than one sentence together at a time.

 

[kvetch]

Kvetch is quite right, Saul was a misogynist. And most of the books that could have, and some might argue, should have been included in the bible aren't there, and as such it is an almost arbitrary collection which could have been very different today if the councils such as Nicea hadn't happened, or had they had another agenda, or had they included the more gnostically inclined scriptures, for example. I think Kvetch is acknowledging these issues and therefore suggesting that your apparent obsessive reliance on what we today refer to as the bible is a little bit silly. I think Kvetch is an equal opportunities relgion basher so you need not feel singled out.
However, you are the only person on this particular forum who is regularly torturing its inhabitants with your constant abuse of scripture and shoving your opportunistic interpretations down our throats.
Oh and you clearly don't know what JC meant by love, He loved the Jews and everyone else. You hate His people and support terrorism against them. Your love Isa, not Jesus, but that is not really surprising, is it?

Anjelica,

Why would I or should I care about anything a Christ Hater and nonChristian like you had to say about Jesus?

And go educate yourself, Isa is simply the Arabic name for Jesus, and His Jewish name was Yeshua.

Sherri

When did I ask you to 'care', Sherri? Now, for a Christian who must know Islam pretty well since you claim to be married to someone raised as a muslim, and since you can read, the fact that you say Isa is JC and peddle the lie that Isa is simply His Arabic name is very interesting. Would the Jesus you allegedly know and love be waiting to come down to earth to break all the Christian crosses, to destroy Christian churches, to enforce Shariah law and to destroy all those, even His own Christian followers, who refuse to embrace Islam and Shariah? That is what Isa is waiting to do whilst he sits patiently by Allahs side. What kind of Christian makes out this is one and the same person? Muslims also admit that Isa was a muslim and they claim he did not die on the cross but was replaced by a lookielike. So you are following Isa, a muslim, ergo you are a muslim?
Can you really be as dumb as you make out?

I think if christ was stoopid enough to return he would definitely want to break down the churches and crosses before he did anything else.

Today they wouldn't crucify him; they would put him in Israel's special loony bin reserved for sufferers of "jerusalem syndrome"

anyhow he aint comin back after what happened last time
What a way to spend Easter!

and god was asked if he would ever have another son

he said.................not bloody likely
2,000 years ago I had an affair with a nice jewish girl and they are still gossiping about it!

 

[rosends]

Sherri, I can't believe you just conceded a really important fact. Thank you for saying,
"that were occupied then by Arab nations (Jordan and Egypt) in the 1967 war Israel initiated in the region. "

So the Arab countries OCCUPIED the area and had no sovereign claim to it. Thus, Israel's defeating of those countries in the 1967 defensive war (thought I missed that, didn't you) was not a matter of taking land from a legally owning country.

By the way, whose land (which nation's) did the Egyptians and Jordanians OCCUPY? What group moved against them in show of defense then? What did the UN say about their occupation at that point?

Nice work.

 

[kvetch]

Kvetch is quite right, Saul was a misogynist. And most of the books that could have, and some might argue, should have been included in the bible aren't there, and as such it is an almost arbitrary collection which could have been very different today if the councils such as Nicea hadn't happened, or had they had another agenda, or had they included the more gnostically inclined scriptures, for example. I think Kvetch is acknowledging these issues and therefore suggesting that your apparent obsessive reliance on what we today refer to as the bible is a little bit silly. I think Kvetch is an equal opportunities relgion basher so you need not feel singled out.
However, you are the only person on this particular forum who is regularly torturing its inhabitants with your constant abuse of scripture and shoving your opportunistic interpretations down our throats.
Oh and you clearly don't know what JC meant by love, He loved the Jews and everyone else. You hate His people and support terrorism against them. Your love Isa, not Jesus, but that is not really surprising, is it?

Angel

I think right now, the Catholickers, the Orthodox and the prostitutes, sorry, Protestants all have different bibles.

Yes, equal opportunity hate and lie basher I try to be.

But it's all to easy to mash up that anti-christ jew hatin sherri and then think you have won the arguments about Gaza which you have definitely not.

Not with tinnie and not with me either.

the ghetto that is Gaza was created by Israel in 1948 to 1956 long before Hamas the PLO or any violent Jewicides ever happened....plenty of Israeli Palicides along that vicious way and little if any resistance from Gazans or Pals.

And none of you Zionuts or acolytes like you have rebutted a single truth that Tinne or I have expressed along the way.

You just resort to Sherri tactix;

accusin us of Hamas Jewicide supportin which aint true.

So how about we return to the subject of this thread and ignore Sherri, eh?

How on earth did my post to Sherri leave you with the impression I believe I have 'won the argument about Gaza'? I am addressing Sherri's drivel and as long as she posts it ad nauseum and as long as it amuses me to respond, I will. You are also quite deluded if you believe none of the 'truths' that you and tinne have expressed have not been rebutted, and if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - its a duck. Tinnie and Bcoz are hamas supporters and therefore they are terrorist supporters imho, and thats what I will call them. Tinnie does not have a single bad word for Hamas nor for anyone who conducts terrorism out of gaza. That is a terrorist supporter. Maybe you should let him fight his own battles, although I appreciate that seems rather difficult for him since he barely seems able to string more than one sentence together at a time.

Angel

yes but tinnie can say more truth in one civilised sentence than all his abusers put together
and you lot never ever answer what he says;
only repeat his hamas addiction over and over

i agree about his hamas support; his achilles heel.

nor did you address what i just said to you about gaza, either

i get the feeling that Bikoz has a crush on you.!!
you get under peoples' skins, you know, mine included

 

[kvetch]

Kvetch is quite right, Saul was a misogynist. And most of the books that could have, and some might argue, should have been included in the bible aren't there, and as such it is an almost arbitrary collection which could have been very different today if the councils such as Nicea hadn't happened, or had they had another agenda, or had they included the more gnostically inclined scriptures, for example. I think Kvetch is acknowledging these issues and therefore suggesting that your apparent obsessive reliance on what we today refer to as the bible is a little bit silly. I think Kvetch is an equal opportunities relgion basher so you need not feel singled out.
However, you are the only person on this particular forum who is regularly torturing its inhabitants with your constant abuse of scripture and shoving your opportunistic interpretations down our throats.
Oh and you clearly don't know what JC meant by love, He loved the Jews and everyone else. You hate His people and support terrorism against them. Your love Isa, not Jesus, but that is not really surprising, is it?

Anjelica,

Why would I or should I care about anything a Christ Hater and nonChristian like you had to say about Jesus?

And go educate yourself, Isa is simply the Arabic name for Jesus, and His Jewish name was Yeshua.

Sherri

When did I ask you to 'care', Sherri? Now, for a Christian who must know Islam pretty well since you claim to be married to someone raised as a muslim, and since you can read, the fact that you say Isa is JC and peddle the lie that Isa is simply His Arabic name is very interesting. Would the Jesus you allegedly know and love be waiting to come down to earth to break all the Christian crosses, to destroy Christian churches, to enforce Shariah law and to destroy all those, even His own Christian followers, who refuse to embrace Islam and Shariah? That is what Isa is waiting to do whilst he sits patiently by Allahs side. What kind of Christian makes out this is one and the same person? Muslims also admit that Isa was a muslim and they claim he did not die on the cross but was replaced by a lookielike. So you are following Isa, a muslim, ergo you are a muslim?
Can you really be as dumb as you make out?

Isa is also the Indian name for Jesus used by all faiths there, including Christians themselves

and Christianity in India is called Isayee

There is even a tomb of Isa...Jesus in Indian Kashmir where people believe Jesus went to after the crucifiction.

Some Indians also believe Jesus was in India before his baptism and studied advanced yoga

Any advanced yogi bear of those times could withstand 3 days on a cross like a bed of nails...childs play for that time!!

 

[BecauseIKnow]

No I don't.

 

[kvetch]

Sherri, I can't believe you just conceded a really important fact. Thank you for saying,
"that were occupied then by Arab nations (Jordan and Egypt) in the 1967 war Israel initiated in the region. "

So the Arab countries OCCUPIED the area and had no sovereign claim to it. Thus, Israel's defeating of those countries in the 1967 defensive war (thought I missed that, didn't you) was not a matter of taking land from a legally owning country.

By the way, whose land (which nation's) did the Egyptians and Jordanians OCCUPY? What group moved against them in show of defense then? What did the UN say about their occupation at that point?

Nice work.

rosends

this is thieves' logic, you is usin;
twisting and turning and distortin to avoid the truth of israel's thievery
and justify its continued stealin

it wouldn't and doesn't stand up in a court of any law; international law included.

the "terrirories" and a third of 1967 israel proper were awarded by the UN to the arabs in palestine and that's the one and only legal ruling

so ashkelon, ashdod, nazareth, akko/acre all belong to the arabs as well.

of course the Jordanians and Egyptians were ethnic cleansing genocidal thieves as well

But that does NOT affect the palestinian rights one little bit, does it

now what zio-squirming thief logic are you going to use to try to rebut this fact and truth??

 

[BecauseIKnow]

If Israelis were defending theirselves in the 67 war, I'm sure Israelis agree that Palestinians are defending themselves in Gaza. Right?

 

[irosie91]

if you want to know what muslims think of christians AND JESUS----say you are a jew. I was only 19 when I took a little part time job in a very big hospital with LOTS OF FOREIGN med school graduates on HOUSE STAFF---- I am short and dark haired and generally "shy" The young boys were not AFRAID OF ME------I looked like a normal person as compared to the
6' WASPS in that area of the USA and the many MUSLIMS assumed me to be christian------I got the story as a "christian"-----but candid little creature that I was------I always corrected the misaprehension with "I AM A JEW" -------then I got the story of christians and jesus and islam

 

[Hossfly]

If Israelis were defending theirselves in the 67 war, I'm sure Israelis agree that Palestinians are defending themselves in Gaza. Right?

Right! The are defending against retaliation for Israels retaliation of original terrorist atacks from Gaza. Smart boy!

 

[Billo_Really]

I'll try to keep this simple for you Sherri -- please let me know which sovereign nation's territory Israel captured when it "occupied" the territory. Until you can do that, your claim to occupation is null and void. Cite whatever you want but words have meanings and you can't escape that this word "occupied" has a particular legal use.

What are you, a John Yoo fan? You think you can re-define common GC and IHL terms? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

The actual definition of what constitutes an "occupation" mentions nothing about the territory being part of a sovereign nation. It's an area a State takes control of where it had no sovereign title.

Under IHL, there is occupation when a State exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory on which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

Israel has no sovereign title to the areas it took in the '67 war.

The question of an advisory position by the ICJ ignores this distinction and actually asserts israeli occupation in Gaza (which Israel has withdrawn from thrice and received shelling in response, contrary to international law) and areas which, actually, were under PA control (ineffective though it is). So keep citing all those decisions about "international law."

You're missing a couple of things here as well. You do not have to have a military presence in an area to be considered "occupied". An occupation exists if a State maintains "effective control" of that area. Israel, because of its illegal and immoral blockade of Gaza and control of all its border crossings (with the exception of Rafah), controls 80% of what goes into (and out of) Gaza.

One source of the obligations imposed on Israel toward residents of the Gaza Strip is the laws of occupation, which are incorporated in the Hague Convention (1907) and in the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949). These laws impose general responsibility on the occupying state for the safety and welfare of civilians living in the occupied territory. The laws of occupation apply if a state has "effective control" over the territory in question. The High Court has held contrary to Israel 's claim, stating that the creation and continuation of an occupation does not depend on the existence of an institution administering the lives of the local population, but only on the extent of its military control in the area. Furthermore, a certain area may be deemed occupied even if the army does not have a fixed presence throughout the whole area. Leading experts in humanitarian law maintain that effective control may also exist when the army controls key points in a particular area, reflecting its power over the entire area and preventing an alternative central government from formulating and carrying out its powers. The broad scope of Israeli control in the Gaza Strip, which exists despite the lack of a physical presence of IDF soldiers in the territory, creates a reasonable basis for the assumption that this control amounts to "effective control," such that the laws of occupation continue to apply.

Que pasa, mutha?

 

[AnjelicaT]

Anjelica,

Why would I or should I care about anything a Christ Hater and nonChristian like you had to say about Jesus?

And go educate yourself, Isa is simply the Arabic name for Jesus, and His Jewish name was Yeshua.

Sherri

When did I ask you to 'care', Sherri? Now, for a Christian who must know Islam pretty well since you claim to be married to someone raised as a muslim, and since you can read, the fact that you say Isa is JC and peddle the lie that Isa is simply His Arabic name is very interesting. Would the Jesus you allegedly know and love be waiting to come down to earth to break all the Christian crosses, to destroy Christian churches, to enforce Shariah law and to destroy all those, even His own Christian followers, who refuse to embrace Islam and Shariah? That is what Isa is waiting to do whilst he sits patiently by Allahs side. What kind of Christian makes out this is one and the same person? Muslims also admit that Isa was a muslim and they claim he did not die on the cross but was replaced by a lookielike. So you are following Isa, a muslim, ergo you are a muslim?
Can you really be as dumb as you make out?

Isa is also the Indian name for Jesus used by all faiths there, including Christians themselves

and Christianity in India is called Isayee

There is even a tomb of Isa...Jesus in Indian Kashmir where people believe Jesus went to after the crucifiction.

Some Indians also believe Jesus was in India before his baptism and studied advanced yoga

Any advanced yogi bear of those times could withstand 3 days on a cross like a bed of nails...childs play for that time!!

I am aware of the Kashmir tomb and the beliefs that JC studied in India then returned before His death, St Thomas' alleged evangelsim there and so on, thank you Kvetch. None of the above is relevent to Sherri's ridiculous statement that Islam's Isa is one and the same as the Christian Jesus, for incredibly obvious reasons, imo. But thanx anyway.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

If Israelis were defending theirselves in the 67 war, I'm sure Israelis agree that Palestinians are defending themselves in Gaza. Right?

Right! The are defending against retaliation for Israels retaliation of original terrorist atacks from Gaza. Smart boy!

We're talking about blockades. Gaza was blockaded near the elections. So Palestinians have every right to war against Israel, right?

 

[AnjelicaT]

Angel

I think right now, the Catholickers, the Orthodox and the prostitutes, sorry, Protestants all have different bibles.

Yes, equal opportunity hate and lie basher I try to be.

But it's all to easy to mash up that anti-christ jew hatin sherri and then think you have won the arguments about Gaza which you have definitely not.

Not with tinnie and not with me either.

the ghetto that is Gaza was created by Israel in 1948 to 1956 long before Hamas the PLO or any violent Jewicides ever happened....plenty of Israeli Palicides along that vicious way and little if any resistance from Gazans or Pals.

And none of you Zionuts or acolytes like you have rebutted a single truth that Tinne or I have expressed along the way.

You just resort to Sherri tactix;

accusin us of Hamas Jewicide supportin which aint true.

So how about we return to the subject of this thread and ignore Sherri, eh?

How on earth did my post to Sherri leave you with the impression I believe I have 'won the argument about Gaza'? I am addressing Sherri's drivel and as long as she posts it ad nauseum and as long as it amuses me to respond, I will. You are also quite deluded if you believe none of the 'truths' that you and tinne have expressed have not been rebutted, and if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - its a duck. Tinnie and Bcoz are hamas supporters and therefore they are terrorist supporters imho, and thats what I will call them. Tinnie does not have a single bad word for Hamas nor for anyone who conducts terrorism out of gaza. That is a terrorist supporter. Maybe you should let him fight his own battles, although I appreciate that seems rather difficult for him since he barely seems able to string more than one sentence together at a time.

Angel

yes but tinnie can say more truth in one civilised sentence than all his abusers put together
and you lot never ever answer what he says;
only repeat his hamas addiction over and over

i agree about his hamas support; his achilles heel.

nor did you address what i just said to you about gaza, either

i get the feeling that Bikoz has a crush on you.!!
you get under peoples' skins, you know, mine included

Gaza was administered by Egypt during the time you mention and Egypt refused the denizens citizenship, refused to annex, refused to take them under their wing, kept them in miserable conditions and flooded the area with terrorists, many of whom managed to infiltrate Israel. The Egyptians cared not one iota for the Gazans, and clearly still don't. Just imagine how different the region would be today had Egypt seized this wonderful opportunity and had acted with humanity and compassion

 

[irosie91]

If Israelis were defending theirselves in the 67 war, I'm sure Israelis agree that Palestinians are defending themselves in Gaza. Right?

Right! The are defending against retaliation for Israels retaliation of original terrorist atacks from Gaza. Smart boy!

We're talking about blockades. Gaza was blockaded near the elections. So Palestinians have every right to war against Israel, right?

correct habibi A "STATE OF WAR" is a mutual condition----I agree that a "STATE OF WAR" exists between Gaza and Israel which makes LEGAL any attack on Gaza that Israel wishes to make, HOWEVER----jihadista sluts with bombs on the whorish asses is a violation of "THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" and the dogs who slit the throats of infant for the glory of lump of shit "allah" are also in VIOLATION

 

[MHunterB]

ONLY if they war against Egypt - which also blockaded Gaza.

Otherwise, it's obviously about something other than the blockade.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

When did I ask you to 'care', Sherri? Now, for a Christian who must know Islam pretty well since you claim to be married to someone raised as a muslim, and since you can read, the fact that you say Isa is JC and peddle the lie that Isa is simply His Arabic name is very interesting. Would the Jesus you allegedly know and love be waiting to come down to earth to break all the Christian crosses, to destroy Christian churches, to enforce Shariah law and to destroy all those, even His own Christian followers, who refuse to embrace Islam and Shariah? That is what Isa is waiting to do whilst he sits patiently by Allahs side. What kind of Christian makes out this is one and the same person? Muslims also admit that Isa was a muslim and they claim he did not die on the cross but was replaced by a lookielike. So you are following Isa, a muslim, ergo you are a muslim?
Can you really be as dumb as you make out?

Isa is also the Indian name for Jesus used by all faiths there, including Christians themselves

and Christianity in India is called Isayee

There is even a tomb of Isa...Jesus in Indian Kashmir where people believe Jesus went to after the crucifiction.

Some Indians also believe Jesus was in India before his baptism and studied advanced yoga

Any advanced yogi bear of those times could withstand 3 days on a cross like a bed of nails...childs play for that time!!

I am aware of the Kashmir tomb and the beliefs that JC studied in India then returned before His death, St Thomas' alleged evangelsim there and so on, thank you Kvetch. None of the above is relevent to Sherri's ridiculous statement that Islam's Isa is one and the same as the Christian Jesus, for incredibly obvious reasons, imo. But thanx anyway.

You're lying.

Jesus is gonna come as a messiah in Islam. You don't get what that means, he isn't gonna proclaim a religion. He's gonna be the Messiah of God. And will be sent to save people from the Gog and Magog and kill the Anti God Satan, known as Dajjal.

He will break a cross in Syria, and he will land in Syria. He won't be leading the Muslims, he's going to be leading everyone, the Muslims have another figure known as Mahdi, the last of the Imams, who will lead prayers, and yes, Jesus will pray with them.

And yes muslims believe most people are gonna be Muslims at that time, Muslims, meaning followers of Islam.

Sharia Law won't matter then. Then will be a time of survival from the Dajjal. And religious strict law existed at the time of Jesus, and Moses Law is very similar. When God sends a Prophet to earth, everyone will be religious and want religious law.

So it doesn't surprise me you speak about it in a hateful manner. Because you're a Muslim hater, and don't tell me that crap that you only hate Islam, you say that to hide behind it. You do hate Muslims. Sick person.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Right! The are defending against retaliation for Israels retaliation of original terrorist atacks from Gaza. Smart boy!

We're talking about blockades. Gaza was blockaded near the elections. So Palestinians have every right to war against Israel, right?

correct habibi A "STATE OF WAR" is a mutual condition----I agree that a "STATE OF WAR" exists between Gaza and Israel which makes LEGAL any attack on Gaza that Israel wishes to make, HOWEVER----jihadista sluts with bombs on the whorish asses is a violation of "THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" and the dogs who slit the throats of infant for the glory of lump of shit "allah" are also in VIOLATION

No, any attack on Israel is LEGAL because Israel blockades the Gaza Strip. You're on the wrong side.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

ONLY if they war against Egypt - which also blockaded Gaza.

Otherwise, it's obviously about something other than the blockade.

Obviously you're a fool, Gaza found ways to transport through Egypt, and Mubarak the dictator was the one who shut the border down on American and Israeli orders.

Israel blockades Gaza and controls 7 of the crucial borders.

Take the blame, Israel is to blame you coward.