From: bv652@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ilan Uri Woll)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Deportation of Palestinians
Date: 4 Jan 1993 06:30:38 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bv652@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ilan Uri Woll)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim) says:

>In article <1i3bmaINNr6e@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bv652@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ilan Uri Woll) writes:
>>>Thirdly, we can also consign to oblivion the
>>>notion that the majority of the Israeli public really want a just peace
>>>based on honest dealing with the Palestinians, since according to opinion
>>>polls 91% of them are in accored with the deportations.
>>
>>I pose to you a parallel situation, in the U.S. if a non- U.S. citizen 
>
>non-US citizens come from another country. Where do the palestinians come
>from?

Quite literally, they are citizens of no country.  They had a legal right
to claim Israelly citizenship and chose not to.  As a result, they have no 
legal right to stay in Israel.  I do not know if they were originally 
Lebanese, Jordanian or from another nation.  Perhaps someone else does.


>>commits murder, then they are also subject to deportation before a trial.
>>As to the 91%.  I would first ask you to site the poll (as I've never 

>I believe it was in "Yedoat Ehranot" an quoted by CNN and others.

Thank you.

>>seen anything like that and am curious) and also remind you that as a
>>people constantly under the threat of attack, many Israelis are forced
>>into a defensive "us v. them" mentality.  It's very easy to judge this
>>from the mentality of a nation unthreatened by foreign invasion which 
>>can afford a morally absolute posture,  Israel realistically cannot.

>Maybe they should ask themselves WHY they are under constant attack, could it
>be something they did (or still doing) to the palestinians?

I think both sides blame the conflict on each other far too much.  Realis-
tically, I chalk it up to a hatred that has lasted so long, that neither 
side even remembers why they started fighting.  However, many Palestinian
leaders have stated that there can be no peace until Israel is "liquidated".

>>Remember the occupied territories are under Israeli military rule, as it
>>was taken in a war.  Thus, the Supreme Court can only rule whether the 
>>military acted in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner (using U.S.legal
>>terms).  I am unsure as to whether these Hamas members held Lebanese
>>citizenship (maybe someone out there knows?), but regardless, Israel has
>>the legal right to deport non-citizens.
>     ^^^^^ ^^^^^
>Not according to the Geneva Convention!

I don't believe that Israel was an original signator to that agreement.
But even if they were, the Arab countries legitimately forfeited their
right to the land by attacking Israel in 1967.  The same argument applies
to US land grabs from Mexico after the 1845 war.

Another legitimate argument involves the fact that the Geneva Convention
applies to the end of a war.  In a very real sense, the Palestinians and
Israel have never ended the war.  The PLO (as it claims to be the sole voice
of the Palestinian people) has never acknowledged the end of the 6-Day War,
they Arab nations never surrendered and still don't acknowledge Israel's 
right to exist within it's 1948 borders.  Thus, if the 1967 war is still on,
then that territory is still held as the property of war.

Ilan U. Woll

"Do you want fries with that" Gino Torreta's future career quote.

-- 
---  !      ^    !\  !
 !   !     /-\   ! \ !
___  !__  /   \  !  \!  
                        Avoid cliches like the plague" George Shaw
Xref: sparky talk.politics.mideast:25106 soc.culture.greek:12154