If al-Qid Preferes to Starve, Let Him.

[Phoenall]

His wife says not. They have arrested him several times over the years but have never had the evidence to charge him.
Perhaps his "crime" is criticism of the Israeli state ?

Like the mothers and fathers in Rotherham perhaps, who criticized the Labour party and were threatened with more than just arrest. If he has ties to hamas then he is a terrorist supporter and should be arrested. Just as all the members of any communist group in the UK should be arrested for aiding and abetting the rape of children

 

[Phoenall]

What crime did he commit? Sounds like he's a journalist.

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

 

[Coyote]

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

So you say, but where is the evidence?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

 

[Boston1]

Court says Palestinian hunger striker to stay in Israeli hospital

A classic example of someone with zero authority trying to dictate terms.

Its a microcosm of the entire conflict.

"I'l throw my life away needlessly if I don't get my way"

Its like watching a four year old throw a tantrum.

The situation is obvious, Israel has every right to detain suspected combatants for as long as they want under the Geneva Conventions.

yet the pali's will stage it as if Israel is the bad guy.

go

What crime did he commit? Sounds like he's a journalist.

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

 

[Coyote]

Court says Palestinian hunger striker to stay in Israeli hospital

A classic example of someone with zero authority trying to dictate terms.

Its a microcosm of the entire conflict.

"I'l throw my life away needlessly if I don't get my way"

Its like watching a four year old throw a tantrum.

The situation is obvious, Israel has every right to detain suspected combatants for as long as they want under the Geneva Conventions.

yet the pali's will stage it as if Israel is the bad guy.

go

What crime did he commit? Sounds like he's a journalist.

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

 

[Coyote]

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Lets be honest here. If they actually had any evidence at all they would be shouting it from the roof tops. The silence is telling.

 

[Coyote]

Israel does not have a good reputation for free press or journalists, according to Reporters Sans Frontiers:

It's ranked 101 out of 180 countries for press freedom in 2015:
2015 World Press Freedom Index


Israeli army deliberately targeting news professionals - Reporters Without Borders

Operation “Brother’s Keeper” and its consequences for Palestinian media [1]


On 22 June, Israeli security forces raided the offices of two printing companies in the city of Ramallah, Turbo Computers and Software Co. Ltd and Jeel Publishing Co. Ltd., which publish, respectively, the Palestinian cultural magazine This Week in Palestine and the monthly Filistin Ashabab. Seven computers were seized, dealing a serious blow to the printing of the two magazines.


“During our 28-year history, we have had no affiliation with any political faction,” Turbo Computers CEO Sani Paul Meo said in a press release. “This Week in Palestine is a 15-year-old nonpolitical cultural publication.” He added, “We reserve the right to claim reparation for damages incurred and to consider legal action, both locally and internationally.”


An Israeli military spokesman said that “propaganda and incitement materials linked to Hamas were being printed at this place.”


At dawn on 22 June, the Israeli army searched the Bethlehem home of Sahib Al-Assa and his brother, Fadi. Both are correspondents for radio Bethlehem 2000. Sahib Al-Assa was taken to a military outpost at Beit Sahour and interrogated about his journalistic activities. He was released several hours later. His ID card and mobile phone, however, were confiscated.


On the same day, Israeli troops descended on the offices of Palmedia in Ramallah. Digital files going back to the company’s founding in 2006 were confiscated, and professional equipment was destroyed. Offices rented by Russia Today were also affected. According to Russia Today, quoting an Israeli military spokesman, Palmedia was targeted “because it provides services to Al-Aqsa TV, which has propagandist and inflammatory content.”


Palmedia management said that members of its staff, including photographer Amar Abideen, were subjected to a series of pressures in covering Operation “Brother’s Keeper” in Hebron. The company’s offices in East Jerusalem had been previously searched, in early June.


On 18 June, the Israeli army searched the offices of the Transmedia company in Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron, confiscating all equipment – worth about $1 million dollars. The Israeli authorities then ordered the company shut down, on the grounds that Transmedia did TV production work for Al-Aqsa TV.


On the 16 June, Israeli forces in Ramallah arrested Aziz Kayed, the chief executive of Al-Aqsa TV. According to the Union of Palestinian Radio and Television, Kayed was placed in “administrative detention” to last for six months.


The same day, Yahia Habayeb, correspondent for Palestinian radio station Ajiyal, was violently arrested by Israeli troops in Hebron, in the southern West Bank. His mobile phones and recording equipment were deliberately destroyed. The journalist was freed five hours later.


On 17 June, Abderrahman Younes, a photographer for the Al-Quds.com site was prevented from covering a traffic jam caused by the Israeli army at what is known as the “container checkpoint” in north Bethlehem. Israeli troops confiscated his camera and threatened him with imprisonment in case of a repeat offence.
​

Of course, that insures that only one viewpoint gets heard.

How much you want to bet that this detention has little to do with links to terrorism and everything to do with journalism?

 

[Boston1]

What crime did he commit? Sounds like he's a journalist.

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

Its not what I'm saying. Its what the Geneva Conventions say.

Lets get it straight.

The controlling power has the right to consider anyone "under definite suspicion" as having forfeit their protected person status.

Whether you like it or not those are the agreed upon conventions.

Israel is not required to try or charge POWs or illegal combatants; and mind you, illegal combatants may also be held indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

If you believe otherwise you are welcome to locate the international laws that support your view. However I can't help but notice you have yet to really cite anything that supports your views.

Long story short not only does Israel have the right to detain legal or illegal combatants indefinitely or until the end of hostilities, but they would also be within their rights to repatriate those detained to neutral third parties, which may include a neutral country.

IE throw the bums out

 

[Coyote]

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

Its not what I'm saying. Its what the Geneva Conventions say.

Lets get it straight.

The controlling power has the right to consider anyone "under definite suspicion" as having forfeit their protected person status.

Whether you like it or not those are the agreed upon conventions.

Israel is not required to try or charge POWs or illegal combatants; and mind you, illegal combatants may also be held indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

If you believe otherwise you are welcome to locate the international laws that support your view. However I can't help but notice you have yet to really cite anything that supports your views.

Long story short not only does Israel have the right to detain legal or illegal combatants indefinitely or until the end of hostilities, but they would also be within their rights to repatriate those detained to neutral third parties, which may include a neutral country.

IE throw the bums out

Long story short: it gives them the right to imprison anyone for any reason, however bogus.

No evidence.

No charges.

and he's a journalist.

Makes one wonder.

And given all that, a hunger strike is most certainly not your "tantrum".

 

[Boston1]

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

Its not what I'm saying. Its what the Geneva Conventions say.

Lets get it straight.

The controlling power has the right to consider anyone "under definite suspicion" as having forfeit their protected person status.

Whether you like it or not those are the agreed upon conventions.

Israel is not required to try or charge POWs or illegal combatants; and mind you, illegal combatants may also be held indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

If you believe otherwise you are welcome to locate the international laws that support your view. However I can't help but notice you have yet to really cite anything that supports your views.

Long story short not only does Israel have the right to detain legal or illegal combatants indefinitely or until the end of hostilities, but they would also be within their rights to repatriate those detained to neutral third parties, which may include a neutral country.

IE throw the bums out

Long story short: it gives them the right to imprison anyone for any reason, however bogus.

No evidence.

No charges.

and he's a journalist.

Makes one wonder.

And given all that, a hunger strike is most certainly not your "tantrum".

It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. The facts are that Israel is within its rights under the internationally agreed upon terms of war.

POWs and illegal combatants Those aiding and those suspected of aiding or being, can be held indefinitely. Period.

Those are the rules of war.

 

[Coyote]

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

Its not what I'm saying. Its what the Geneva Conventions say.

Lets get it straight.

The controlling power has the right to consider anyone "under definite suspicion" as having forfeit their protected person status.

Whether you like it or not those are the agreed upon conventions.

Israel is not required to try or charge POWs or illegal combatants; and mind you, illegal combatants may also be held indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

If you believe otherwise you are welcome to locate the international laws that support your view. However I can't help but notice you have yet to really cite anything that supports your views.

Long story short not only does Israel have the right to detain legal or illegal combatants indefinitely or until the end of hostilities, but they would also be within their rights to repatriate those detained to neutral third parties, which may include a neutral country.

IE throw the bums out

Long story short: it gives them the right to imprison anyone for any reason, however bogus.

No evidence.

No charges.

and he's a journalist.

Makes one wonder.

And given all that, a hunger strike is most certainly not your "tantrum".

It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. The facts are that Israel is within its rights under the internationally agreed upon terms of war.

POWs and illegal combatants Those aiding and those suspected of aiding or being, can be held indefinitely. Period.

Those are the rules of war.

I guess that means that Iran is within it's rights to detain and hold journalists for any reason, and North Korea too...

No charges, a country with a history of hostility to journalists, indefinate detention - most people would not consider that to be good. And you label the hunger strike a "tantrum" - is that so you can diminish what is happening?

If it were any other country detaining a journalist like this - there would be a huge outcry.

 

[Boston1]

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

Its not what I'm saying. Its what the Geneva Conventions say.

Lets get it straight.

The controlling power has the right to consider anyone "under definite suspicion" as having forfeit their protected person status.

Whether you like it or not those are the agreed upon conventions.

Israel is not required to try or charge POWs or illegal combatants; and mind you, illegal combatants may also be held indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

If you believe otherwise you are welcome to locate the international laws that support your view. However I can't help but notice you have yet to really cite anything that supports your views.

Long story short not only does Israel have the right to detain legal or illegal combatants indefinitely or until the end of hostilities, but they would also be within their rights to repatriate those detained to neutral third parties, which may include a neutral country.

IE throw the bums out

Long story short: it gives them the right to imprison anyone for any reason, however bogus.

No evidence.

No charges.

and he's a journalist.

Makes one wonder.

And given all that, a hunger strike is most certainly not your "tantrum".

It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. The facts are that Israel is within its rights under the internationally agreed upon terms of war.

POWs and illegal combatants Those aiding and those suspected of aiding or being, can be held indefinitely. Period.

Those are the rules of war.

I guess that means that Iran is within it's rights to detain and hold journalists for any reason, and North Korea too...

No charges, a country with a history of hostility to journalists, indefinate detention - most people would not consider that to be good. And you label the hunger strike a "tantrum" - is that so you can diminish what is happening?

If it were any other country detaining a journalist like this - there would be a huge outcry.

Yikes, you are just not paying attention. The Geneva conventions only apply to situations of armed conflict and or war between one or more signatories

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I think it will be ok until they start locking up American journalists.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Actually they can shove food down his throat. Insert feeding tube, and pour.

Its an option. If the Israeli's decide to make the slob live, they have every right to "ensure he receives the proper diet and nutrients. Even if they have to administer them rectally

See

Quote

Article 7

Copyright U of Minn Human Rights Library

Prisoners of war may in no circumstances renounce in part or in entirety the rights secured to them by the present Convention, and by the special agreements referred to in the foregoing Article, if such there be.

Article 26

Copyright U of Minn Human Rights Library

The basic daily food rations shall be sufficient in quantity, quality and variety to keep prisoners of war in good health and to prevent loss of weight or the development of nutritional deficiencies. Account shall also be taken of the habitual diet of the prisoners.

The Detaining Power shall supply prisoners of war who work with such additional rations as are necessary for the labour on which they are employed.

Sufficient drinking water shall be supplied to prisoners of war. The use of tobacco shall be permitted.

Prisoners of war shall, as far as possible, be associated with the preparation of their meals; they may be employed for that purpose in the kitchens. Furthermore, they shall be given the means of preparing, themselves, the additional food in their possession.

Adequate premises shall be provided for messing.

Collective disciplinary measures affecting food are prohibited.

End Quote

I believe under the circumstances Israel would be within its rights to puree his dinner and send it up any orifice they so chose

Providing food and forcing it on someone are two completely different things
If he doesn't want to eat then so be it bring him his meals and let them sit in the room

 

[Phoenall]

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

So you say, but where is the evidence?

Well the evidence has been presented, just that you wont accept that evidence because your Jew hatred clouds your ability to think straight.

 

[Phoenall]

Lets be honest here. If they actually had any evidence at all they would be shouting it from the roof tops. The silence is telling.

No because any lawyer would use that as evidence against the trial being fair and have him released. Which is why you neo Marxists always want to see evidence made public so you can then go for a mistrial.

 

[Phoenall]

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Ties to a known terrorist group. Enough evidence to have him arrested in most civilised nations. The UK has deported muslims for the same reasons

What "enough evidence" specifically since you seem to know this.

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

You should know all about that seeing as yours threatened to have laws changed so that people could be " disappeared " without arrest or trial for speaking out against government sanctioned child rape. Your favourite tactic not that long ago was to add peoples names to the list of BNP members so you could blacken their names, costing many excellent teachers and Doctors their jobs.

 

[Phoenall]

What crime did he commit? Sounds like he's a journalist.

I cant see what crime he committed. He has not been charged or tried either. Its an absolute disgrace.

Video: Palestinian hunger striker's wife makes urgent plea

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

No he is saying that International law is very clear on the subject, and it is international law that is saying anyone suspected of being engaged with the terrorists can be held under arrest until their trial or deportation.

Once again you stand against a fair law because it comes out in support of the Jews, care to explain why this is always the case ?