Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The thread is about a Druze Israeli who lives in the Galilee.
He suffers discrimination living in the Galilee.
Good.The thread is about a Druze Israeli who lives in the Galilee.
He suffers discrimination living in the Galilee.
Good.The thread is about a Druze Israeli who lives in the Galilee.
He suffers discrimination living in the Galilee.
Maybe he needs to live in Jordan, instead.
His story is nothing special.
A friend of mine was sent into lock up for ditching the army. I know of 3 more.
"right to be told"? of course, why not.
Something overly exciting? hardly.
.What is the penalty for not registering? Failure to register is a violation of the Military Selective Service Act. Conviction for such a violation may result in imprisonment for up to five years and/or a fine of not more than $250,000.
Selective Service System: Registration Information
Wikipedia is not a credible source for setting forth relevant international law. Amnesty International is a credible source. I choose to accept Amnesty's opinion that Omar's detention is unlawful under international law. Amnesty International has an understanding of the specific facts of Omar's case and international law that Kondor 3 lacks.
\And, with respect to the previously-raised Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Amnesty International's questionable interpretation of the Declaration, as it applies to Military Conscription around the world...
...In 1948, the issue of the right to "conscience" was dealt with by the United Nations General Assembly in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It reads: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." The proclamation was ratified during the General Assembly on 10 December 1948 by a vote of 48 in favour, 0 against, with 8 abstentions.
In 1974, the Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, Sean MacBride said, in his Nobel Lecture, "To the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights one more might, with relevance, be added. It is 'The Right to Refuse to Kill.'"
In 1976, the United Nations treaty the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights entered into force. It was based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and was originally created in 1966. Nations that have signed this treaty are bound by it. Its Article 18 begins: "Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. ..."
However, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights left the issue of conscientious objection inexplicit, as we see in this quote from War Resisters International: "Article 18 of the Covenant does put some limits on the right [to freedom of thought, conscience and religion], stating that [its] manifestations must not infringe on public safety, order, health or morals. Some states argue that such limitations [on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion] would [derivatively] permit them to make conscientious objection during time of war a threat to public safety, or mass conscientious objection a disruption to public order,...[Some states] even [argue] that it is a 'moral' duty to serve the state in its military."
On July 30, 1993, explicit clarification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 18 was made in the United Nations Human Rights Committee general comment 22, Paragraph 11: "The Covenant does not explicitly refer to a right to conscientious objection, but the Committee believes that such a right can be derived from article 18, inasmuch as the obligation to use lethal force may seriously conflict with the freedom of conscience and the right to manifest one's religion or belief." In 2006, the Committee has found for the first time a right to conscientious objection under article 18, although not unanimously.
In 1997, an announcement of Amnesty International's forthcoming campaign and briefing for the UN Commission on Human Rights included this quote: "The right to conscientious objection to military service is not a marginal concern outside the mainstream of international human rights protection and promotion."
In 1998, the Human Rights Commission reiterated previous statements and added "states should . . . refrain from subjecting conscientious objectors . . . to repeated punishment for failure to perform military service." It also encouraged states "to consider granting asylum to those conscientious objectors compelled to leave their country of origin because they fear persecution owing to their refusal to perform military service . . . ."
Conscientious objector - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
========================================
Clearly, this is a matter for broad and generous interpretation, leaving each country which employes Military Conscription, a wide latitude in dealing with such persons.
Hell, Switzerland - the home of the Geneva Conventions - has Military Conscription!!!
Note that none of the so-called International Law on the subject, as referenced herein, either explicitly prohibits Military Conscription nor does it explicitly protect Conscientious Objectors.
Rather, the UN Human Rights Commission and its various Committees have said that it believes that such protections should exist or can be inferred from various elements of such law and recently made an arbitrary pronouncement on such matters based on such beliefs - an arbitrary pronouncement which various member States are entirely free to adopt or reject without prejudice to their standing at the United Nations.
Also, we should note that the Committee's admonishments and cautions merely suggest that a State should not punish a Conscientious Objector REPEATEDLY, but remains silent upon the matter of the FIRST punishment. This, too, tells us something about the narrow extent to which these International interpretations about Conscientious Objectors and related punishments are binding (or non-binding) upon various member States.
And, as for Amnesty International, and its interpretations and pronouncements and pontifications.. its reputation for impartiality and objectivity is not what it once was; at least, outside of a Liberal-leaning framework. Many people today subject such outputs to a very close and skeptical scrutiny.
It would appear that the Israelis are not even out of compliance with Mandatory or Binding aspects of international law and related declarations, in their dealings with their Conscientious Objectors - Druze, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, whatever - certainly no more than most other countries which actively employ Conscription or keep it On Standby.
Israel does seem to fall a bit short with respect to repeated punishments, such as was the case with the 10 jailings of Natan Blanc, the Jewish kid refernced in recent postings in this thread, but they, like others, may have learned their lesson about such things, with the Blanc case.
"Repeated imprisonment is a violation of international legal standards. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in Opinion 24/2003*on Israel came to the conclusion that the repeated imprisonment of conscientious objectors in Israel is arbitrary, and therefore it constitutes a violation of 14 par 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which Israel is a signatory."
Meet Nathan Blanc, Israeli conscientious objector | Mondoweiss
As usual, we see Israel violating her obligations under international law with respect to her treatment of conscientious objectors
"Repeated imprisonment is a violation of international legal standards. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in Opinion 24/2003*on Israel came to the conclusion that the repeated imprisonment of conscientious objectors in Israel is arbitrary, and therefore it constitutes a violation of 14 par 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which Israel is a signatory."
Meet Nathan Blanc, Israeli conscientious objector | Mondoweiss
As usual, we see Israel violating her obligations under international law with respect to her treatment of conscientious objectors
Can you tell us why you are so obsessed with this when your "fellow Christians" are being murdered in the Middle East? I would think that on a Middle East forum you would like to discuss this as it is really more important than someone who refused to serve in the military, especially when this happens in militaries around the world.
"Repeated imprisonment is a violation of international legal standards. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in Opinion 24/2003*on Israel came to the conclusion that the repeated imprisonment of conscientious objectors in Israel is arbitrary, and therefore it constitutes a violation of 14 par 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which Israel is a signatory."
Meet Nathan Blanc, Israeli conscientious objector | Mondoweiss
As usual, we see Israel violating her obligations under international law with respect to her treatment of conscientious objectors
Can you tell us why you are so obsessed with this when your "fellow Christians" are being murdered in the Middle East? I would think that on a Middle East forum you would like to discuss this as it is really more important than someone who refused to serve in the military, especially when this happens in militaries around the world.
I am not obsessed with delusions of dying Christians like you!
Do yourself a favor, get help for your problem.
And STFU if you have nothing to say about thread topics.
