The question was whether there is a distinction in how the settlement was originated which determines if it is ethnic cleansing or whether it is removal of squatters.
Gush Etzion was settled on land bought earlier. However, quite a few of the settlements exist based on much flimsier legal limbo.
While I am at it, given the definition of "ethnic cleansing" as I am now reading it, would it not follow that the removal of the Bedouin today in the Negev regions is not also ethnic cleansing? I have a hard time distinguishing the difference between the laws applied to them and the laws as they are applied to the settlers. Seems like to me there is plenty of legal precedence here to remove settlers using the exact same laws which are being applied to the Bedouin.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
