Adrian Blomfield in the UK Telegraph:
Palestinian officials counter that the West Bank’s 300,000 settlers should not be there in the first place, pointing to international treaties that forbid civilian settlement by the natives of an occupying power.
That's simply not correct.
Wrong.
Misrepresented.
Wrong, really.
Very.
And does this not read like a bit of racism?
Nazmi Hussein, who runs the family olive grove near the Jewish settlement of Har Bracha, said: “The settlers are like locusts. They eat everything, the dry and the green.”
Posts
5 comments:
Meh. Your disproof of someone else's opinions are just other people's opinions to the contrary. He said she said makes the whole world confused.
VP: really, you astound. but that's the point: the Arab & looney left claim is also worthless, at least according to your thinking so I presume you don't believe them either. But how about these two articles by an expert in Int'l Law? Help you?
Oh, and what about that "locusts" remark?
>VP: really, you astound. but that's the point: the Arab & looney left claim is also worthless, at least according to your thinking so I presume you don't believe them either. But how about these two articles by an expert in Int'l Law? Help you?
But what makes them loony? The fact that you and Eugene Rostow disagree with them? What is objectively ridiculous about holding that Article IV's provisions apply to the Occupied Territories? You throw one expert at me, I throw one expert back, starting with Theodor Meron, who was legal counsel to Eshkol's foreign ministry who held that civilian settlement was outlawed by the Geneva Convention. Is he insane?
In fact, I'm pretty sure the consensus in every country except Israel, among international legal scholars, is that civilian settlement of the OT is proscribed by Article IV. Now, you can disagree with that authority, and advance you own reading, which I personally think is tendentious, but fine. I don't think it's absurd to disagree with something. But I think it's silly to pretend that the opinion espoused by the Palestinian officials in the article you quoted as being prima facie "incorrect" or "Wrong. Very" as if there was no room for disagreement here.
(I'm assuming you, YMedad are the author of this blog.)
>Oh, and what about that "locusts" remark?
Because I disagree with you about the Geneva Conventions I now take the side of everyone you criticize? :) Okay, I'll play. Palestinians don't like settlers, and they believe they steal their land, and their olives, evidently. While I'm sure their opinion of Jews in general ain't great, she didn't say Jews. Or even Israelis. But settlers. I'm not sure why comparing a segment of Israeli society to locusts is particularly antisemitic - or more so than any other negative comparison that could be made - e.g. settlers as thieves, thugs or parasites.
VP: there are opinions and there are facts. there are opinions based on facts and opinions based on assumptions as well as political or ideological beliefs. If you can't distinguish, well, have a nice day.
As for bugs, my point was, Raful's remark about making sure that terrorist were controlled like drugged cockroaches in a bottle was exploited by Arabs & friends in a misleading way but they permit themselves the same behavior they criticize. That is wrong.
>VP: there are opinions and there are facts. there are opinions based on facts and opinions based on assumptions as well as political or ideological beliefs. If you can't distinguish, well, have a nice day.
Tu quoque. You have an opinion about the Geneva Convention, but are mistaking it for fact. Leaving aside the question about whether legal interpretation can ever be "fact", basic humility would dictate that just because you think your opinion is based on "fact" does not make it so, especially when the preponderance of opinion believes the opposite. You're certainly well within your rights to believe that you're right, but I think you're only hurting yourself by describing the other position as embraced solely out of ideological or political rigor, while yours (also dictated by your political and ideological beliefs - or are you opposed to settlement?) are based only on truth and fact.
Post a Comment