Does Gaza have any non-civilian areas?

What is a "non-civilian area"? Is that like Disney Land?

It was your own phrase.

Is that your answer? Is there a Disneyland in Gaza?

Other than pointless wordplay, what are you asking me?

Do you agree or disagree that Hamas soldiers seek out dense civilians areas to fire mortars in the hopes that Israel will hestitate to respond so as not to incur innocent casualties?

Why is this question so hard for the anti-Israel ranters to address?

Oh right. Because we can't have any complicity on the part of Gaza's leadership in Israel's "genocide" or "Nazism" or whatever ridiculous label is being applied.

Why don't you drop this "Do you agree or disagree..." bullshit.

Who the hell do you think you are, Hamilton Burger?

No wonder they chased you out of DKos. They get tired of twits there eventually. Do you agree or disagree? Huh?

Thanks for reminding me why I try to ignore your moronic tripe.

You do know that the internets allow one to post in more than one place on a given day, right?

And have you tried The Google yet? I hear it's a series of tubes.

Moron.

And you claim to have a PhD. PhhhhhhD!

Uhm, no. I do not yet have a Ph.D. and never claimed I did. Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else.

What is a "non-civilian area"? Is that like Disney Land?

Which online diploma factory did you use?

And you didn't answer his question:

Does Gaza have any non-civilian areas?

Can you answer this? Do you know? Do you care?

I don't understand the question.

My point was Hamas moves to civilian areas not in the sense that there are "civilian" and "non-civilian" areas (a ridiculous binary) but the notion that there are more densely populated areas and less densely populated areas.

I ask again, not that you'll answer, do you agree or disagree that Hamas intentionally fires from densely packed civilian houses and buildings in the hopes that fear of civilian casualties will prevent Israel from responding?

Could this fact have anything to do with high civilian casualties in Gaza?

Actually you know what, don't bother responding. Don't let facts get in the way of a good hatefest.

Are you paid by the post?

Glenn, any thoughts on if the new Justice Department might see merit in reversing some of these draconian "mandatory" drug laws? Seems like now's our best chance.

Our drug laws are so irrational, such horrid wastes of lives and resources, that it can make you just scream thinking about it. And, as is true with our criminal justice system generally, we've been moving in the opposite direction of most of the Western world.

Couldn't agree more, Glenn, please do what you can to push this vital issue into the land of the bobbleheads on TV. We may have powerfully different views of the American-Israel relationship, but on this issue, we are in total agreement.

The reason I think we have a shot is because the "machismo" of the Bush years, and republican codpiece keyboard warrior masculinity, and results in delusional disastrous choices like invading Iraq, also relates to the "war on drugs."

So many of these "tough" laws were the result of the tough talking sober, serious crowd proving their uber-masculine bonafides.

But I feel Obama, simply through his corporeality, his body language and his image, completely obliterates the fake tough-talking crowd (the Marty Peretz warrior types) and replaces that image with a toughness-as-humility framework.

This framework allows the legal change to take place without threat from codpiece republican tough talk.

Witness the nonsense from the traditional media over closing Gitmo. TV lit up with right wing keyboard warriors calling Obama effeminate, weak, terrorists on the streets, etc.

But Obama shrugs it off like the white-noise fake machismo that it is.

What's taking place is a shift not in the specificity of issues but in the semiotics of body language and masculinity. If Obama can establish a new template in which toughness is not represented by codpiece landings on aircraft carriers nor "suck. on. this." idiocy, but temperance and judiciousness, then the justice department should have the ability to reverse these horrifying laws and tune out the right wing macho tough guys in our media.

I see real potential here.