Solar Power pays off for enterprising Palestinians.

[Stephanie]

Well they have the Climate for it. for those Few who can Afford it

 

[P F Tinmore]

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

Khaled Al Sabawi - Keeping Palestine Cool: A Different Kind of Underground Movement

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

 

[theliq]

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Three years ago, Rabia al-Rabi stopped purchasing electricity from the Jerusalem Electricity Company, the official power provider in the city of Ramallah.

The Palestinian woman actually started selling electricity to the very same company for 800 shekels (about $200) per month after she started a renewable energy generation project at her home.

Rabi had carefully studied the economic feasibility of the project. Despite the high cost of installing the solar cells, she decided to run the risk and make her house one of the first in Ramallah to generate electricity from solar energy.

Read more: Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

We understood what you mean,Mindful,Thanks steve

 

[Phoenall]

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

Khaled Al Sabawi - Keeping Palestine Cool: A Different Kind of Underground Movement

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

Khaled Al Sabawi - Keeping Palestine Cool: A Different Kind of Underground Movement

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

 

[Phoenall]

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

Khaled Al Sabawi - Keeping Palestine Cool: A Different Kind of Underground Movement

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

Khaled Al Sabawi - Keeping Palestine Cool: A Different Kind of Underground Movement

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

Standard Israeli bullshit.

 

[RoccoR]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Now all we need to do is keep the bulldozers away from the projects. Here is another one to look at.

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

 

[Phoenall]

That would be so easy to do, just stop the violence, terrorism and illegal weapons coming from Palestine and Israel will have no need to retaliate and return the violence

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

Standard Israeli bullshit.

No standard facts that you have failed to prove wrong

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Indeed, Israel needs to stop its violence.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

Standard Israeli bullshit.

No standard facts that you have failed to prove wrong

Why do Palestinians need to get permits from foreign assholes to build in Palestine?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Israel only responds to violence, it does not start it. And every time they respond more Palestinians get killed as a result of the Palestinians violence.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so Israel is illegally destroying Palestinian property.

That was my point.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You got it wrong again.

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so Israel is illegally destroying Palestinian property.

That was my point.

(COMMENT)

The actions were justified under the ICC Article because it was necessary and militarily justified to meet the Article 43 Requirements.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You got it wrong again.

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so Israel is illegally destroying Palestinian property.

That was my point.

(COMMENT)

The actions were justified under the ICC Article because it was necessary and militarily justified to meet the Article 43 Requirements.

Most Respectfully,
R

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

 

[Phoenall]

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.