• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel’s High Court legitimizes l***ing of land in Derekh Ha’avot outpost

expandmymind

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
229
Reaction score
120
Location
Scotland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
On 1 September 2010, Israel’s High Court of Justice sanctioned the looting of land and the unlawful building carried out in establishing the Derekh Ha’avot outpost, near the Elazar settlement, in the Etzion Bloc. The court’s decision was made even though the state had declared for almost nine years that the construction in the outpost was unlawful. The court rejected Peace Now’s petition, filed in 2008, demanding evacuation of the outpost and its residents, who had taken control of land they did not own and had built houses without obtaining a building permit. It also refrained from ordering the state to set a binding time-table for enforcing the law. The court based its decision, written by Justice Edmond Levy, with justices Edna Arbel and Neal Handel concurring, on the claim that the court refrains, as a rule, from interfering in priorities of the defense establishment relating to law enforcement. On this pretext, the Israeli judicial system, including Supreme Court justices sitting as the High Court of Justice, has not ordered enforcement of the law on the outposts for 12 years.
Background and details here: B'Tselem - Israel’s High Court legitimizes looting of land in Derekh Ha’avot outpost
 
Last edited:

MKULTRABOY

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Please keep in mind that stealing the homes of palestinians is legal. :roll:

What? It is.
 

expandmymind

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
229
Reaction score
120
Location
Scotland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Please cease spreading baseless rhetoric.
Baseless rhetoric? Why do you even 'debate' on these forums. I have yet to see you add anything that could be considered as even slightly constructive.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,723
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Moderator's Warning:
On topic responses only. No personal attacks.
 

Vader

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,064
Location
Whitewater, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Baseless rhetoric? Why do you even 'debate' on these forums. I have yet to see you add anything that could be considered as even slightly constructive.
I have yet to see you do anything but attack Israel for defending itself. Why do you hate the Israelis so much?
 

expandmymind

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
229
Reaction score
120
Location
Scotland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I have yet to see you do anything but attack Israel for defending itself. Why do you hate the Israelis so much?
A country loses the right to claim that it is acting in defence when they actively occupy the other party's land. Quite clearly the resistance is a form of defence. Your reasoning is warped as you continually reverse cause and effect to suit your own purposes. I'm not sure how you can claim you are only acting in defence when you occupy a country, then go on attack those people for exercising their fundamental human right of resisting occupation. Twisted logic to say the least..

You asking me (with the not so subtle inclination behind the question) 'why', is the amongst the shoddiest and poorest forms of stifling debate that exists. You have never once in any of your posts addressed the actual content of mine, opting instead to rhyme off truly empty statements and question my character. I even explained to you in another thread, briefly, a bit about my stance which I was certain (as I mentioned in the post) that you would probably not even read or acknowledge. Obviously I was correct.
 
Top Bottom