These women on FOX are evil

[TLOL is back]

@TLOL is back how are ya, man? After I handed you your ass in that settlement legality debate I hadn't seen you around. I'm glad you're here to test your talking points on me so you can run back to whoever you work for and try a new angle. I wouldn't be surprised if you had a new angle in the settlement debate

What the hell are you talking about?

Last I remember your beliefs were basically that if the UN says something that means it is true, and that you didn't understand the basic language of the article. My "angle" (understanding of the English language) is basically the same.

Yo seriously which think tank do you work for....

According to Broke Wave, that guy that looks like Lloyd Banks, TypeUsernameHere, and most other posters, I work directly for for Netanyahu or some other Jewish organization, breh.

 

[Broke Wave]

What the hell are you talking about?

Last I remember your beliefs were basically that if the UN says something that means it is true, and that you didn't understand the basic language of the article. My "angle" (understanding of the English language) is basically the same.



According to Broke Wave, that guy that looks like Lloyd Banks, TypeUsernameHere, and most other posters, I work directly for for Netanyahu or some other Jewish organization, breh.

4th Geneva Convention you racist cac

 

[TLOL is back]

4th Geneva Convention you racist cac

You said nothing in this post. Other than you're a fan of irony.

 

[Broke Wave]

You said nothing in this post. Other than you're a fan of irony.

You said nothing of substance about the convention before and didn't in this post. This post and your stupid posts from last time are equal in substance. You're a paid troll and a dikkhead.

 

[TLOL is back]

You said nothing of substance about the convention before and didn't in this post. This post and your stupid posts from last time are equal in substance.

I actually had a discussion about the article's language.

Instead your responses were "but.... The UN interprets it in a way that doesn't match the language, so the UN is right!"

ou're a paid troll and a dikkhead.

I may be a dikkhead, but accusing me of being a secret agent puts you in the same class as the rest of the retards on this website, breh.

 

[Broke Wave]

I actually had a discussion about the article's language.

Instead your responses were "but.... The UN interprets it in a way that doesn't match the language, so the UN is right!"



I may be a dikkhead, but accusing me of being a secret agent puts you in the same class as the rest of the retards on this website, breh.

Paid Troll =/= secret agent.

Secondly, you had a typo... I think by UN you mean US... who also agrees with that interpretation. Can you give any other body besides the Likud party that interprets it the way you want it to be interpreted? Furthermore,

http://online.wsj.com/articles/isra...-units-in-west-bank-east-jerusalem-1401991417

Just private citizens doing private things, totally voluntary transfers

 

[TLOL is back]

Paid Troll =/= secret agent.

Well if I am paid and denying it, then I would be a secret agent.

Secondly, you had a typo... I think by UN you mean US... who also agrees with that interpretation. Can you give any other body besides the Likud party that interprets it the way you want it to be interpreted?

The problem is it is not up for interpretation. The language is clear. It is illegal for a country to transfer its citizens. The US government may have built homes, and I may move into them one day. The US government did not transfer me there, I moved there.

Furthermore,

http://online.wsj.com/articles/isra...-units-in-west-bank-east-jerusalem-1401991417

Just private citizens doing private things, totally voluntary transfers

Yeah breh, nothing in the article suggests Israel was forcing anyone to move there.

 

[Broke Wave]

Well if I am paid and denying it, then I would be a secret agent.



The problem is it is not up for interpretation. The language is clear. It is illegal for a country to transfer its citizens. The US government may have built homes, and I may move into them one day. The US government did not transfer me there, I moved there.



Yeah breh, nothing in the article suggests Israel was forcing anyone to move there.

This is the complete nonsense you're spouting now.

The law says a state may not DEPORT or TRANSFER parts of its civilian population.

Deport indicates the forceful transfer which you're talking about, lets look at the definition

de·port
verb \di-ˈpȯrt, dē-\
: to force (a person who is not a citizen) to leave a country

The bracket indicates how it is usually used, that's why it's bracketed.

Transfer

trans·fer
verb \tran(t)s-ˈfər, ˈtran(t)s-ˌ\
trans·ferredtrans·fer·ring
move, shift

b : to cause to pass from one to another : transmit

c : transform, change
2
: to make over the possession or control of : convey
3
: to print or otherwise copy from one surface to another by contact
intransitive verb
1
: to move to a different place, region, or situation; especially: to withdraw from one educational institution to enroll at another
2
: to change from one vehicle or transportation line to another

So this doesn't indicate forceful transfer but can also mean incentive transfer. This is why they made the distinction between deport and transfer. Obviously they considered a country paying its citizens to populate an occupied place.

And this argument is over.

 

[TLOL is back]

This is the complete nonsense you're spouting now.

The law says a state may not DEPORT or TRANSFER parts of its civilian population.

Deport indicates the forceful transfer which you're talking about, lets look at the definition

de·port
verb \di-ˈpȯrt, dē-\
: to force (a person who is not a citizen) to leave a country

The bracket indicates how it is usually used, that's why it's bracketed.

Transfer

trans·fer
verb \tran(t)s-ˈfər, ˈtran(t)s-ˌ\
trans·ferredtrans·fer·ring
move, shift

b : to cause to pass from one to another : transmit

c : transform, change
2
: to make over the possession or control of : convey
3
: to print or otherwise copy from one surface to another by contact
intransitive verb
1
: to move to a different place, region, or situation; especially: to withdraw from one educational institution to enroll at another
2
: to change from one vehicle or transportation line to another

So this doesn't indicate forceful transfer but can also mean incentive transfer. This is why they made the distinction between deport and transfer. Obviously they considered a country paying its citizens to populate an occupied place.

And this argument is over.

That would be false. Deportation, within the context of the law, refers to forcing someone to leave their country. Considering a country may force its citizens to transfer within or outside their country, both terms need to be used to refer to forced transfer.

...

"to cause to pass from one to another"

Israel would not have 'caused' that, the people moving there 'are ready' to move there.

The rest of the definitions you listed make no sense within this context.

 

[Broke Wave]

That would be false. Deportation, within the context of the law, refers to forcing someone to leave their country. Considering a country may force its citizens to transfer within or outside their country, both terms need to be used to refer to forced transfer.

...

"to cause to pass from one to another"

Israel would not have 'caused' that, the people moving there 'are ready' to move there.

The rest of the definitions you listed make no sense within this context.

That is not true AT ALL. A forced transfer IS a deportation. Obviously a forced transfer of citizens within their own countries wouldn't be against the 4th Geneva Convention, as that covers occupations. So that argument is absolutely erroneous. It says deport OR transfer. Israel approving settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem is transferring their civilians to the occupied territories. The article earlier uses the term forcible transfer. Lawyers are not stupid people. If they meant forcible transfer, they would have used that phrase. Legally speaking, I win, again.

 

[Truth200]

Republican Zionist....

 

[rapbeats]

Robots aren't inherently evil, They are programmed to think this way



word to Ira Levin

i'm sayin doe... some of these chicks are kinda cute but in a not so human way. am i the only one looking at them like are these chicks real life barbies? up there going hard for the killing of the innocent. now do i understand the logic behind "dont let some terrorist hide behind civilians. yes. but when you have the kind of capabilities that israel does and the minimal life loss and injury(not counting troops. you have to ask yourself, whats the point in blowing up an entire school more or less? are you really playing wack-a-mole with an atom bomb? whats the end game with that mentality?

 

[3rdWorld]

When you repeat "Israel has the right to defend itself" that goes without saying.

Obviously Israel has a right to defend its self but killing 1600+ civilians hardly sounds like a "defensive" mechanism.

Then when Geraldo mentions the children being killed Andrea responds "who's fault is that?"

This whole, 'we have a right to defend ourselves' argument I keep hearing is only reserved for Jewz it appears. Palestinians are forced into a tiny suburban area, where Gaza is the most concentrated area on Earth.
There are more people living in Gaza per square mile/km than anywhere else on the planet. Is the loss of land and human rights not an attack?? is forcing a people into a concentration camp not an attack?? I admit I dont care for Muslims because of their treatment of Blacks, but this one sided shyt is insane. Infact Id go as far as to say ?Palestinians have every right to reclaim ALL the stolen land, even if it means destroying Israel. Why not?

 

[TLOL is back]

That is not true AT ALL. A forced transfer IS a deportation. Obviously a forced transfer of citizens within their own countries wouldn't be against the 4th Geneva Convention, as that covers occupations. So that argument is absolutely erroneous. It says deport OR transfer. Israel approving settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem is transferring their civilians to the occupied territories. The article earlier uses the term forcible transfer. Lawyers are not stupid people. If they meant forcible transfer, they would have used that phrase. Legally speaking, I win, again.

Lawyers are not stupid, if they did not mean forcible transfer, couldn't they have used clearer language, like "allow their civilians to be transferred" ? Your argument is convincing to me, so I will concede.

Regardless, the article does not apply to the Israeli situation is that occupation occurs when the party in control was not given consent. The Palestinians not only gave Israel consent but signed a legal agreement that Israel has the right to control the areas.

 

[TLOL is back]

This whole, 'we have a right to defend ourselves' argument I keep hearing is only reserved for Jewz it appears. Palestinians are forced into a tiny suburban area, where Gaza is the most concentrated area on Earth.
There are more people living in Gaza per square mile/km than anywhere else on the planet. Is the loss of land and human rights not an attack?? is forcing a people into a concentration camp not an attack?? I admit I dont care for Muslims because of their treatment of Blacks, but this one sided shyt is insane. Infact Id go as far as to say ?Palestinians have every right to reclaim ALL the stolen land, even if it means destroying Israel. Why not?

.... This whole post makes no sense. I will address the part in bold.

1) The Palestinians who are actually alive today, have not lost land. The Palestinians fighting today have not lost land. In fact, the Palestinians today have governmental control over more territory than at any time during history.
2) Their human rights are determined mostly by their governments, who force Israel into wars and security measures which is a strain on Israel, and Israel would rather not deal with, but has to.
3) Gaza is not a concentration camp. It is one of the most densely populated places on earth. But Singapore and Hong Kong are more densely populated. Are they concentration camps too? Gazans are free to leave through Egypt, if they would like to travel somewhere. Not to mention, Concentration camps typically don't have amusement parks, water parks, olympic sized swimming pools, luxury hotels and shopping malls, and beauty spas. The term "concentration camp" is only used to spite the Jews for their struggle in the holocaust, and is completely emotional with no factual basis.

Republican Zionist....

Not even Republican breh.