I corrected a mistake you made assertions about what an article since the article didn’t say what you claimed it said.
Now, since you’re disgusted with the Israeli government’s forcing people to move from an area for security reasons can we assume that you’re also disgusted by the far greater scale examples of urban renewal in the West were vastly more poor minorities are kicked out of their homes for the building of baseball stadiums?
If you can justify Israel’s actions in that case, I have to think there are few Israeli outrages you wouldn’t justify. You’ve lost any sense of perspective here for the sake of mere argumentation.
Let’s see how many other Dopers you can convince that the example in question is “just like urban renewal.” For my sake, I think your worldview is so alien to my own that any discussion of the point is going to be no more fruitful for me than for you.
That said please explain to me why Israel kicking thirty Palestinians out of their home is worse than the City of Los Angelos kicking thousands of Mexican-Americans out of their’s to build Dodger Stadium?
Sorry but Israel was excercising Emminent Domain the same as LA.
Personally I think both are wring but you seem to only object to the Israelis doing it.
All I can find from Rabbi Google is that the were in a “closed military area” that was used as a shooting range. Perhaps they didn’t want these families blow up by student pilots. The USAF claims they will shoot you in Area 51 if I may also compare Israeli deeds to American.
A) It’s not 30 Palestinians. That was a single cite for a single instance. There are more out there if you care to look for them.
B) You can’t exercise eminent domain on land you don’t own. If the Israeli government actually asserts ownership of the land in question, I’d like to see your cite for that.
C) The Palestinians, not being citizens of Israel (or indeed anything) have zero say in the process, zero recourse, and apparently zero compensation. The Israeli government – not God – declares the area a “closed military area” by fiat, and acts as it wishes. That’s simple tyranny.
The situation is absolutely outrageous, and it’s outrageous that you would minimize it.
Indeed, the US government has often seized people’s land for military use.
For example, the Navy and the people of Puerto Rico have long been in a pissing contest on related issues.
In this instance all I know comes from the AI article that SA linked to but apparently misread since he thought it said they were kicked out for being Palestinian.
Anyway, while deplorable, governments do that kind of thing all the time and often the people who lose their homes are poor minorities.
Hopefully SA can explain how Israel is behaving differently than the City of Los Angelos and the US government.
That’s just how it works ‘round here.
There are some folks whose arguments’ stock in trade is factual error, oversimplification and distortion. Calling 'em on it makes you the worst kind of nogoodnik.
You’ll note, of course, that Sal immediately went on the attack and has not retracted let alone apologized for his distortion whereby moving a population for military necessity is really the same thing as moving them simply because they’re Palestinians.
One thing I noted in my Googling is that they were temporary structures. One of the parties claiming ownership, Israel, Jordan, Syria, I’m too lazy to reGoogel, has a law that you must have a permanent structure to claim ownership. They may have razed “permanent structures” to insure there would be no claim based on such homes being present.
I do hope it’s that they didn’t want anyone killed because they had a tent in the middle of a military practice range.
One more stupid claim such as this–in which you call for the killing of an entire “class” of people to satisfy your own personal dreams, (as no legitimate juridical group in the world calls the actions to which you refer “war crimes”), and you will be out of this thread with your posting privileges under review.
So then you think the City of Los Angelos throwing thousands of poor, politically powerless Mexican Americans out of their homes to build Dodger Stadium(which they did when Walter O’Malley moved the Dodgers to LA) is ok but Israel moving 30 Palestinians out of an area for military security is a gross human rights violation?
Nope, no hypocrisy there.
I always find it amusing how many middle class and privileged white westerners like to wag their fingers at Israel, but when pointed out to their own governments treatment of minorities suddenly change their tune.
EVERYONE: There will be no more observations regarding the honesty, intelligence, motivations, or personalities of other posters. Stick to discussing the facts (and your interpretations of them) and refrain from posting about other posters.
You might be on dangerous ground here. I may have missed something in the news where HC put her foot fully in her mouth this way, but I tend to doubt it. Unless you can find give a cite for the above, don’t spread ignorance by using public figures as your personal ventriloquist’s dummies.
Readers will, of course, note that neither is a judicial group.
Readers should also note that the first link represents the thoughts of, shall we say, a less than balanced individual.
The second person is also, likewise, not a judicial group.
Let’s see some other things that she has to say. In reference to two Israeli soldiers, in uniform, driving a car with Israeli plates, who were arrested and then literally torn to pieces by a lynch mob, were really undercover members of a “death squad” infiltrating a protest rally. No, seriously.
Sevvy, what makes Hanan Ashrawi an expert on international law?
By such standards, the fact that Bibi insists they aren’t illegal and that the territories are “disputed territories” rather than “occupied territories” means that we should view them as such.
Because Ashrawi also calls settlers legitimate targets. Duh.
Likewise the quoted professor, in the link provided by dear Sev, justifies the attack against civilian settlers, since they are all, he declares, war criminals. Therefore the individual is, of course, representative of a “legitimate juridical group”.
Again, duh.
Well what do expect from less than 5 minutes on google?
. . . that fails to refute my point.
None of your sources are legitimate judicial entities. They are all partisans of your beliefs imposing their interpretations on the events.
You are free to argue that they are correct. You are not free to espouse killing an entire “class” of people or the destruction of a nation based on that personal interpretation. That is nothing more than trolling to pick a fight with your opponents.
