Israel doesn't owe a country that has been waging a genocidal war against Israel to fix their water supply problems. Billions of aid money have gone into Gaza. Easily enough money to build desalineation plants. Gaza is not landlocked. Instead, it went into the pockets of corrupt terorrist leaders residing in Qatar, and into tunnels and rockets. Next.
“You are making a claim that these other people I don’t like also make to justify their heinous crimes. Therefore, you must support those crimes.” Such a bad and sadly common argument that I see from the left and the right.
So you didn't read it. Got it. Punishing civilians for the government's action is wrong, inhumane, and a crime. The Israelis already made agreements and are breaking those agreements. They have two policies for water based on ethnicity. That is true in policy but even exponentially in practice. Collective punishment is wrong, stupid, and decreases Israeli security. Allowing civilians to have water has zero to do with fighting against terrorism. It does have a negative effect on the part of the population being cheated of water because they can't very well irrigate if they don't even have drinking water. Meanwhile the militant settlers in the illegal settlements get water enough for drinking and irrigation. Two policies based entirely on ethnicity. First part of Apartheid has been checked by Israel.
A lot of people want to reduce the Israel Palestinian issue to purely about religion and that all it is is they Muslims hate Jews and vice versa. It’s actually far more complicated with that and water rights are just one of several Issues besides religion that makes it very difficult to address.
I hope so, especially if I were you and had publicly mocked the image. Sadly, it doesn’t look like a doll to me in the hi-res picture, in which one can see detailed texture in the skin and deformation in the mouth against which the mother is pressing her face. I could also post links to information providing more information about the background of the strike that allegedly killed the baby and the baby’s family, but I know (from ample past experience) that you are constitutionally incapable of believing anything that doesn’t already confirm what you want to believe. It would be a waste of time.
I’ve perused the legal definitions of apartheid (under international law) according to the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute of the ICC. Didn’t see anything in there about apartheid only applying to how a state treats its own citizens within its own legal borders. Maybe I missed it.
