I've always found it absurd how you can get compensated with amounts of money you would not see in a lifetime of work if you win the right type of legal case in the US so much so that purposely getting hurt to sue has become a running joke. Nothing against this particular case or individual but it always seemed like a perverse form of justice instead of, for example, making the party in the wrong change their policy to avoid similar incidents happening in the future while also covering legal fees.
I believe it's US-only for now
So both of those words are spelled sabaya when anglicized and while I will admit I was not familiar with the soft s variant because it's antiquated (and still not necessarily sexual in meaning even if that one is debatable), it doesn't sound like the man in the video who is supposed to have said that even said either of those words to me. I genuinely can't even make out what the word he said is.
Why is this the subject of debate nearly 8 months after the fact?
Pretty much yes. (Ma)demoiselle vs madame are also used due to french influence over the region for singular use but sabaya is what you would use for a group of younger women with neswein being the alternative for older/married women.
This is just straight up racist propaganda. No other way to describe it
sabaya is straightforwardly associated with what we moderns call rape
Absolutely factually incorrect. Sabaya is the plural of sabiye which means young woman/girl. The masculine form is sabi which means boy or shab for young man (not exactly symmetric like use of guy vs girl in english). Zero sexual connotation and used in everyday language in levantine arabic.
Depends, some people see it as what is the most accessible (eg. Prusa) while others want affordability (eg. Ender 3 and clones) and most want a mix of both.
Yes the US establishment is mostly in favor of Israel's actions. That is the problem. If you think the US can actually "lose" Israel then I don't know what to tell you. They have very, very few allies without US backing.
The same roads they can use to let in aid trucks without any of these theatrics. Should the UN officials also "approach their news diet more rationally"? Please realize that outside of your western bubble you are completely isolated in your viewpoints on the ongoing ethnic cleansing.
Sorry, but you've fallen for the propaganda if you actually think Israel has to allow the United States to do anything given the power dynamics. The reason this is performative is that everyone acknowledges (including ex Israeli high ranking military leadership) that this war cannot be fought without explicit US support at all times. If not for the offensive weapon supplies then for the defensive iron dome re-supply. They have held and continue to hold complete leverage over Israel and can end this tomorrow if the US administration so chose. You don't have to have to the same viewpoint as I do but at the very least you have to acknowledge the power dynamics at play.
A crucial part of warfighting? They are building a port purportedly to feed the people that their closest ally is deliberately starving by denying aid that Israelis have engineered to be necessary for their subsistence.
Do you think the ships will not be docking in Israel and that nothing will be transported by land through crossings? The same crossing that Israel uses to move their armed forces, weaponry and supplies through on a daily basis. Somehow those crossings will be completely off limits for the same US military that helps Israel coordinate a lot of their military operations and logistics.
I don't understand how you can fail to see the absurdity of this situation. It's been 7 weeks since they announced their plans and so far no construction has begun and a ship has had to return to the US due to a fire. Even if they do get something built, there will still be the need to operate and deliver the aid from the pier to the interior of the enclave with.... trucks.
Yeah, I mostly used that example since it was a school district so it would be feasible to enact actual policy change that would punish violations internally. I agree that for private corporations this does not work but for public institutions it's also not as effective of a deterrent as it could be due to lack of direct financial accountability.