If i understood you, you are referring to a World War II. I would hardly compare the Isreali-Palestinian conflict a war in that context. You have a state, Israel, fighting in retaliation for the act of a group (not a state). The group isn't acting on behalf of all Palestinians, but Israel is attacking all Palestinians. If you're at war and you're firing at am enemy target (soldiers, tanks, etc) and accidentally you killed civilians, that's an unfortunate accident. When you attack knowing that your are attacking civilians, that's a totally different story. Every time innocent people are intentionally killed in a conflict, it should be treated as a war crime. Brushstroking mass murder as something that we should expect because it's qbwar is very callous. If it were you or your family in these numbers, would you see it the same way?

A target attack against Hamas only. The Israelis have done these on numerous occasions.

If your neighbour commits a crime, should you be punished? Should the whole neighborhood? The Palestinians have suffered for a long time. Electing a government that isn't good Should not condemn you. Palestinian blood isnequal to Israeli blood. Remember the words of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere". The world should not accept the slaughter of innocent people. Everyone condemned Hamas for.what happened on October 7th, which was correct. But people are afraid to condemn Israel for their disproportionate response.

An interesting article! The second situation, Israeli-Palestinian, a lot of people will take this purely from an Israeli perspective. If we look to the current context only we get a bit of a sense of the problem. The attack on Israeli citizens was horrible. However, one group isn't a representation of all Palestinian people. All Palestinians are suffering for the acts of one group. The Israeli response isn't in purportion to what happened on their side. The world should stand up and condemn them for their actions.

Beyond the current conflict, you have to ask, what is fair? If you arrive in an area and say the land is yours because God said so, is it right for people who have lived there for centuries to be displaced? Should they be treated like dogs? We have to realize every person on this earth has the right to be treated as human. No one has the right to treat anyone otherwise. These games of backing those that are with us and turning a blind eye needs to stop.

The God of the Israelis, of the Palestinians, of all of us that believe in a supreme being encourages us to be good people. So, it's interesting that what transpires is not according to God's will.

Lol. Is this woman serious? Let's look at the picture. How will there be a major backup of traffic caused by Marcos and Wendy's?

For Wendy's and Marcos to create an issue now, does she expect that people will drive now to PI (paying Bridge toll) in order to get a sandwich or a pizza? Really?! The patrons will.be people who are already there for work or some other reason.

She mentions that there's already a traffic issue. So, how do you differentiate between your existing problem and the increase that you alleging will be caused by Wendy's and Marcos? I guess people going to Scotiabank in the past on Thursdays, Fridays and government payday was fine for them.

Why are they doing a traffic study? They lost the fight. Now they continue to waste people's time with frivolous nonsense. She should focus on resurrecting her failed company. A CEO's job is to bring in as much revenue as possible, minimize expense and increase value for shareholders. Atlantis has turned into a disaster. Stop fighting Miss. Do your job and run your company. Pretend you know what it means to be a CEO.

Making these adjustments would have an impact on a lot of businesses. So, businesses have to be at the table to voice their concerns. However, people need to eat and have a roof over their heads. So, there could be a middle.ground reached sooner than later. Smaller businesses that may not be able to handle an increase at this time could be exempted for now from the process but all larger businesses that can sustain such an increase should pay their workers a higher wage.

People who are working should be afforded some dignity paywise. They should be able to cover their necessities without having to get a second job. This isn't just a labour it for me seems a basic human right. How do you work and can't have a roof over your head and buy food? This of us whi have should support the fight for those who do not have.

Another thing, BPL should first provide a good service and evaluate if they need to do some downsizing to reduce costs. Any CEO should understand this basic concept.

Journalists need to start asking questions that get to the heart of the situation. A family in the inner city paying $50 to $100 for electricity and they are Kate will pay $5. A company with $20,000 in electricity bill that's late, also pays $5. Is this guy on crack? That makes no sense. If you're managing cash flow, the bigger ticket items are the ones you need to focus on. It should not be the same penalty across the board. Another thing, like someone commented before, make sure everyone knows when their fue dates are. This helps the process tremendously. As a CEO, he should have an idea why the bills are late. From this article er can deduce he's assuming they naturally just pay late. He talks about fuel costs benefits. It wasn't clear for me how he derived this benefit. Them to make things even more nonsensical, he talks you can get the benefit provided there are no surprises in fuel prices in the global market. This guy is a joke. Can someone please find someone to run BPL who understands basic fundamentals of finance? This guy should not be the CEO. If he was an engineer, send him back to engineering or maybe that's worse given his logic skills seems impaired.

Lol. This is a good one.

Why was so much power given to a foreign entity? They oppose restaurants but Anthony's and Dunkin Donuts are there already. Interesting! They are opposed to casinos etc. nearby but they allowed two number houses which provide online slot games which would be comparable to their slots in their casino. Why didn't they oppose those? You can't say certain businesses can't be there but arbitrarily restrict only some of them. For me, they would make better sense if they blocked everyone, not just these recent applicants.