🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Apr16.021518.14077@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr15125928@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # In article <1992Apr15.145219.18739@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   # >   In article <JIME.92Apr14230116@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # >   # The way the occupation is being run (deportation of elements of the
>   # >   # local populace, construction of permanent settlements, ...) also goes
>   # >   # against the Geneva Convention.
>
>   # >	   No they do not.
>
>   # Please explain.  A simple denial doesn't hold much weight.
>
>	   The Geneva conventions do not prohibit deportations of individuals
>   for security reasons.  They prohibit deportations of mass groups of
>   people.  While the wording may seem to ban deportations of
>   individuals, the subsequent official interpretaions and documents
>   state otherwise.  William Safire had an article on this a while ago.

If you will give me a more precise reference, I will read this article.

In any case, you addressed only the deportation orders, not the
settlement construction policy.

>	   Now I admit that "my" transfer idea would violate they Geneva
>   conventions, but there is ample precedent this century that allows
>   such violations if they save lives.  By allow I mean that the world
>   community accepted them, not that there was an international court
>   ruling (although there may have been, I am just not aware of any).

So essentially your point is one of blackmail.  Either the world will
approve the mass deportation of Palestinians, or the Israelis will
kill them all.
--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)