If al-Qid Preferes to Starve, Let Him.

[Phoenall]

He has made his choice, and in a utopia the door of his hospital room would be locked for the next month. Then his remains scooped into a plastic bag and burnt along with the rest of the rubbish.


What crime were the families of the girls in Rochdale guilty of when they where arrested on the orders of the Labour party ?

Time to put your own house in order before demanding other do it

So what crime did he commit?

Its irrelevant,

The conventions clearly state

QUote

• Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
• Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

End Quote

Which makes them illegal combatants or POWs and are subject to being held without trial for the duration of the war.

It sounds as if you are saying the state has the right to declare a person hostile for any or NO reason. Given it won't charge him, and has held him for so long that certainly makes it seem bogus.

No he is saying that International law is very clear on the subject, and it is international law that is saying anyone suspected of being engaged with the terrorists can be held under arrest until their trial or deportation.

Once again you stand against a fair law because it comes out in support of the Jews, care to explain why this is always the case ?

What's fair about any law that calls for indefinate detainment with no charges, no hearing, no trial based on information that could be bogus? What if it were YOU? You just sit there passively twiddling your thumbs and and humming your happy song? Or would you be trying every avenue to have your case heard?

Don't like the law then get your legislators to have it changed. If they refuse then vote them out. Are you active in politics, and do you make fair demands of your elected representatives with threats of taking your vote elsewhere ?

 

[Coyote]

Ties to a known terrorist group, as in lawyers with ties to the mafia or gang bangers with ties to the local drug barons. You cant be selective with laws just because one side is Jewish and so does not deserve any legal support.

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

 

[Coyote]

Long story short: it gives them the right to imprison anyone for any reason, however bogus.

No evidence.

No charges.

and he's a journalist.

Makes one wonder.

And given all that, a hunger strike is most certainly not your "tantrum".

It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. The facts are that Israel is within its rights under the internationally agreed upon terms of war.

POWs and illegal combatants Those aiding and those suspected of aiding or being, can be held indefinitely. Period.

Those are the rules of war.

I guess that means that Iran is within it's rights to detain and hold journalists for any reason, and North Korea too...

No charges, a country with a history of hostility to journalists, indefinate detention - most people would not consider that to be good. And you label the hunger strike a "tantrum" - is that so you can diminish what is happening?

If it were any other country detaining a journalist like this - there would be a huge outcry.

Which is why the US government tells its journalists that they are on their own if they go to those places. You might not see how many are arrested in Iran because your government tries to keep it quiet, but we do see the numbers here and ask why isn't Obama doing something about it

We do. It is not a secret. However, I have never before heard of a jailed journalist's hunger strike being labeled a "tantrum". That must only apply to Palestinian Journalists detained indefinately without charges.

Such is the wages of the terrorist supporter. We see them being arrested all the time in the UK, and their lawyers know better than to keep demanding evidence of their ties to terrorist organisations.



Most of what Palestinians do are just tantrums, until they realise that they wont get their own way and have gone too far to back down. The IRA soon learnt their lessons when they were allowed to die alone and in pain, even the church were banned from seeing them.

However there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. Given Israel's past history with journalists, I suspect that what they are detaiming him for.

 

[Coyote]

Lets work on staying on topic.

If Quds or whatever his name is prefers to starve should the Israeli's force feed him or not.

I'd say they should so as not to encourage these kinds of tantrums in the future. Let him go a few years with a feeding tube in him and see if he's a little more cooperative then.

And take lots of pictures so all the other terrorist collaborators can see what awaits them if they pull the same stunt.

Where is the evidence that he is a terrorist collaborator? Oh wait...there isn't any.

The only two things we can say for a FACT are that he is a Palestinian Journalist and Israel has a history of targeting journalists.

Where is the due legal procedure that you would be demanding be put in place if it was a Jew under house arrest. You would be telling everyone to stop asking for the evidence if they wanted a case to be heard.

Look up the term sub judice and see what it means, then ask yourself if only a Jew hater would keep asking for the evidence that you are asking for.

Wrong. I would demand the same thing regardless of who it is but you and I both know this seldom happens with Jews. In fact, only recently, after the firebombing of the Palestinian family, has it been used on Jewish extremists and the public outcry was intense.

 

[Shusha]

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

People are generally not being detained indefinitely. While that is a possibility, the majority of those held in administrative detention are released within six months to a year and very few are kept longer than two years. (Yes, I realize that you may find that excessive -- but it is not the same as "indefinitely" and I think its important to accurately convey the reality).

And it is false that they can be detained for any or no reason. The detainee appears before a judge, with his lawyer, a prosecutor and usually an intelligence officer which name reasons for the detention. The reasons exist, they are just kept secret to serve Israel's security interests. (Again, you may not find this adequate, but again, it is not the same thing as "no reason" and I think its important to accurately convey the reality.)

 

[Coyote]

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

People are generally not being detained indefinitely. While that is a possibility, the majority of those held in administrative detention are released within six months to a year and very few are kept longer than two years. (Yes, I realize that you may find that excessive -- but it is not the same as "indefinitely" and I think its important to accurately convey the reality).

And it is false that they can be detained for any or no reason. The detainee appears before a judge, with his lawyer, a prosecutor and usually an intelligence officer which name reasons for the detention. The reasons exist, they are just kept secret to serve Israel's security interests. (Again, you may not find this adequate, but again, it is not the same thing as "no reason" and I think its important to accurately convey the reality.)

It seems to be a system that easily opens itself to abuse.

A Guide to Administrative Detention — Visualizing Palestine

They can be prevented from seeing a lawyer for 90 days, their lawyer can be barred from seeing the evidence. Ahmad Qatamesh - was held for 6 years, and never charged, and he is not alone in serving detainment that stretches into years. (that too conveys a reality)

 

[Boston1]

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

Its war, there was never intended to be any transparency.

It would be counter productive.

Now if our little hunger striker would like to cooperate with the authorities and identify his terrorist sources I'm sure he'd find himself in far more favorable conditions. But since he'd rather throw a fit and refuse to eat his dinner. Best thing to do is just leave him kicking and screaming on the floor. Or beat his ass and send him to his room, which would likely reduce the overall number of tantrums.

Anyway its inconsequential. No amount of hunger silly behavior like this is going to effectively end the pali's inherent racism and bigotry. That will only come when the UNWRA is thrown out of Israel and a neutral body takes its place.

 

[Shusha]

It seems to be a system that easily opens itself to abuse.

They can be prevented from seeing a lawyer for 90 days, their lawyer can be barred from seeing the evidence. Ahmad Qatamesh - was held for 6 years, and never charged, and he is not alone in serving detainment that stretches into years. (that too conveys a reality)

Sure. Its a system that easily opens itself to abuse. I would agree with that. But just because it can doesn't mean it has. We are talking about security issues in the face of widespread terrorism here. There are a lot of things one might do to promote terrorism without necessarily committing a provable crime.

Every site I can find indicates that the detainee must be brought before a judge within 8 days of arrest and is permitted a lawyer at that hearing. Although, some sites claim this prevention from seeing a lawyer -- I can't find anything about the circumstances under which it could happen. Which leads me to believe something else is going on here. Someone is not telling the whole truth.

And sure there have been cases where detainees have been held for years. Its rare. Again, let's not judge the value of the system by the few odd cases which are outside the norm.

 

[Phoenall]

If he had ties to a terrorist organisation he would have been charged with it. He hasnt, and neither has he been on the 3 other occasions they have locked him up without charge.

He was involved with a youth movement when he was in college but there is no evidence that he is today. This is a corrupt government silencing critics.

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

 

[Phoenall]

It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. The facts are that Israel is within its rights under the internationally agreed upon terms of war.

POWs and illegal combatants Those aiding and those suspected of aiding or being, can be held indefinitely. Period.

Those are the rules of war.

I guess that means that Iran is within it's rights to detain and hold journalists for any reason, and North Korea too...

No charges, a country with a history of hostility to journalists, indefinate detention - most people would not consider that to be good. And you label the hunger strike a "tantrum" - is that so you can diminish what is happening?

If it were any other country detaining a journalist like this - there would be a huge outcry.

Which is why the US government tells its journalists that they are on their own if they go to those places. You might not see how many are arrested in Iran because your government tries to keep it quiet, but we do see the numbers here and ask why isn't Obama doing something about it

We do. It is not a secret. However, I have never before heard of a jailed journalist's hunger strike being labeled a "tantrum". That must only apply to Palestinian Journalists detained indefinately without charges.

Such is the wages of the terrorist supporter. We see them being arrested all the time in the UK, and their lawyers know better than to keep demanding evidence of their ties to terrorist organisations.



Most of what Palestinians do are just tantrums, until they realise that they wont get their own way and have gone too far to back down. The IRA soon learnt their lessons when they were allowed to die alone and in pain, even the church were banned from seeing them.

However there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. Given Israel's past history with journalists, I suspect that what they are detaiming him for.

More conjecture based on your Jew hatred, now you will deny that you show any Jew hatred

 

[Phoenall]

Lets work on staying on topic.

If Quds or whatever his name is prefers to starve should the Israeli's force feed him or not.

I'd say they should so as not to encourage these kinds of tantrums in the future. Let him go a few years with a feeding tube in him and see if he's a little more cooperative then.

And take lots of pictures so all the other terrorist collaborators can see what awaits them if they pull the same stunt.

Where is the evidence that he is a terrorist collaborator? Oh wait...there isn't any.

The only two things we can say for a FACT are that he is a Palestinian Journalist and Israel has a history of targeting journalists.

Where is the due legal procedure that you would be demanding be put in place if it was a Jew under house arrest. You would be telling everyone to stop asking for the evidence if they wanted a case to be heard.

Look up the term sub judice and see what it means, then ask yourself if only a Jew hater would keep asking for the evidence that you are asking for.

Wrong. I would demand the same thing regardless of who it is but you and I both know this seldom happens with Jews. In fact, only recently, after the firebombing of the Palestinian family, has it been used on Jewish extremists and the public outcry was intense.

Until you are proven wrong yet again, and have to eat humble pie. How many times now have Jews been arrested, found guilty and been sentenced. Only to come back a week later and claim that Israel never puts Jews in prison, or arrests them or charges them with criminal offences. Rather two faced aren't you when it comes to racially demonising the Jews.

 

[Boston1]

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

You won't get a rational response. The arguments supporting the terrorists aren't themselves rational nor are the beliefs needed to maintain the racism and bigotry involved in the Arab mind set concerning Israel.

The simple fact is that Israel has every right to detain him indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

 

[Coyote]

I'm wondering if the fact that he's a journalist is a part of it.

RSF concerned about journalist held without charge since November - Reporters Without Borders

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

Actually, it's funny you should mention Egypt - I've complained plenty about Egypt's crack down on political dissent and journalists recently, but the standard response has been to ignore it or justify it as a remedy for the Muslim Brotherhood. Where were you?

For example - this thread. Morsi sentenced to death

So I'm curious - do you think administrative detainment doesn't get abused? How many journalists (including the one in the OP) never get charged with anything or convicted of anything?

 

[Coyote]

Lets work on staying on topic.

If Quds or whatever his name is prefers to starve should the Israeli's force feed him or not.

I'd say they should so as not to encourage these kinds of tantrums in the future. Let him go a few years with a feeding tube in him and see if he's a little more cooperative then.

And take lots of pictures so all the other terrorist collaborators can see what awaits them if they pull the same stunt.

Where is the evidence that he is a terrorist collaborator? Oh wait...there isn't any.

The only two things we can say for a FACT are that he is a Palestinian Journalist and Israel has a history of targeting journalists.

Where is the due legal procedure that you would be demanding be put in place if it was a Jew under house arrest. You would be telling everyone to stop asking for the evidence if they wanted a case to be heard.

Look up the term sub judice and see what it means, then ask yourself if only a Jew hater would keep asking for the evidence that you are asking for.

Wrong. I would demand the same thing regardless of who it is but you and I both know this seldom happens with Jews. In fact, only recently, after the firebombing of the Palestinian family, has it been used on Jewish extremists and the public outcry was intense.

Until you are proven wrong yet again, and have to eat humble pie.

You haven't been very good at proving me wrong.

How many times now have Jews been arrested, found guilty and been sentenced. Only to come back a week later and claim that Israel never puts Jews in prison, or arrests them or charges them with criminal offences. Rather two faced aren't you when it comes to racially demonising the Jews.

I don't use the term "never". What I've said, and backed up with evidence, is that Jews are far less likely to face the same penalties for the same actions as Palestinians. Crimes against Jews are pursued far more vigourously than crimes against Palestinians by Jews. Jews who commit the same crimes as Palestinians, particularly juviniles, face far less harsh treatment and have better legal protections. This isn't demonizing anyone - it's stating facts that I've supported over and over.

 

[Coyote]

How do you stand on the arrest of muslim terrorists caged in Gitmo then ?

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

You won't get a rational response. The arguments supporting the terrorists aren't themselves rational nor are the beliefs needed to maintain the racism and bigotry involved in the Arab mind set concerning Israel.

I provided a rational response.

Who has made an argument supporting terrorists? Show me the evidence he is a terrorist and I'll support it. I happen to believe in the value of a justice system that relies on evidence.

The simple fact is that Israel has every right to detain him indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

That's your belief, and that might be technically legal under international law but I disagree with it. I find it interesting that you guys are happy to quote international law and UN decisions when it suits you, but label them racist and anti-semitic when they work against you.

 

[Coyote]

I guess that means that Iran is within it's rights to detain and hold journalists for any reason, and North Korea too...

No charges, a country with a history of hostility to journalists, indefinate detention - most people would not consider that to be good. And you label the hunger strike a "tantrum" - is that so you can diminish what is happening?

If it were any other country detaining a journalist like this - there would be a huge outcry.

Which is why the US government tells its journalists that they are on their own if they go to those places. You might not see how many are arrested in Iran because your government tries to keep it quiet, but we do see the numbers here and ask why isn't Obama doing something about it

We do. It is not a secret. However, I have never before heard of a jailed journalist's hunger strike being labeled a "tantrum". That must only apply to Palestinian Journalists detained indefinately without charges.

Such is the wages of the terrorist supporter. We see them being arrested all the time in the UK, and their lawyers know better than to keep demanding evidence of their ties to terrorist organisations.



Most of what Palestinians do are just tantrums, until they realise that they wont get their own way and have gone too far to back down. The IRA soon learnt their lessons when they were allowed to die alone and in pain, even the church were banned from seeing them.

However there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. Given Israel's past history with journalists, I suspect that what they are detaiming him for.

More conjecture based on your Jew hatred, now you will deny that you show any Jew hatred

Sorry dude, you're stuck on "jew hatred" - maybe that's to cover up deficiencies on your part My "conjecture" is backed, I'll repost the source: Reporters Without Borders

 

[Boston1]

Not happy with Gitmo either - they should be tried and done with and whether it ends in execution or life or whatever, I don't care - they deserve a trial. That applies to anyone in captivity.

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

You won't get a rational response. The arguments supporting the terrorists aren't themselves rational nor are the beliefs needed to maintain the racism and bigotry involved in the Arab mind set concerning Israel.

I provided a rational response.

Who has made an argument supporting terrorists? Show me the evidence he is a terrorist and I'll support it. I happen to believe in the value of a justice system that relies on evidence.

The simple fact is that Israel has every right to detain him indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

That's your belief, and that might be technically legal under international law but I disagree with it. I find it interesting that you guys are happy to quote international law and UN decisions when it suits you, but label them racist and anti-semitic when they work against you.

Martial law as defined within the Geneva Conventions doesn't require that a detainee be charged. Period. End of subject.

By speaking out in favor and support of the terrorists and joining your voice with theirs for their release rather than continued detention you are supporting the terrorists.

Oh and they did give him a reason, "incitement" which is a big deal in Israel.

So again your response simply defies rational when you blatantly ignore the applicable international laws

 

[fanger]

GCIV emphasised an important change in international law. The United Nations Charter (June 26, 1945) had prohibited war of aggression (See articles 1.1, 2.3, 2.4) and GCIV Article 47, the first paragraph in Section III: Occupied territories, restricted the territorial gains which could be made through war by stating:

Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.
Article 49 prohibits the forced mass movement of people out of or into occupied state's territory:

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive. ... The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.
Military occupation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[fanger]

Within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, any Israeli district army commander can issue an administrative detention order, and the order can be appealed at the Israeli district military court, or, if denied there, at the Supreme Court. Here too, an administrative detention order is valid for at most six months, but can be renewed by the appropriate authority. Israel refers its use of administrative detention in the occupied territories to Article 78 of the Fourth Geneva Convention 1949, which states that "If the Occupying Power considers it necessary, for imperative reasons of security, to take safety measures concerning protected persons, it may, at the most, subject them to assigned residence or to internment."[23]

According to Addameer, Israel held 285 Palestinians in administrative detention in June 2012.[24] Eighteen of them were members of parliament, out of 4,706 political prisoners. According to B'Tselem, as of April 2012, about 308 Palestinians were being held under administrative detention by the Israel Prisons Service(IPS) and statistics on those held by the IDF were unavailable.[25] According to IPS figures for December 2012, 178 Palestinians were being held in administrative detention (without charge or trial).[26] As of December 2013, B'Tselem reported that 140 Palestinians were being held under administrative detention by the IPS
Administrative detention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Coyote]

To have a fair trial the courts need all the details, if the defendant refuses to give their details them the wrong person could be found guilty. So the Geneva conventions were changed to reflect this and allowed for prisoners to be detained until the end of hostilities. This was deemed the fairest result possible under the circumstances, after the first released prisoner was arrested engaging in terrorism the doors should have been shut for good.

Except it's being abused. It's allowing people to be detained indefinately for any or no reason - and no transparency.

So any comment on it happening much more in Egypt then, have you heard about the 4 year old sentenced to life for his part in a terror attack. Or how about this one, In June 2014, Baher Mohamed, Mohamed Fahmy and Peter Greste were found guilty of aiding a terrorist organization all journalists

You won't get a rational response. The arguments supporting the terrorists aren't themselves rational nor are the beliefs needed to maintain the racism and bigotry involved in the Arab mind set concerning Israel.

I provided a rational response.

Who has made an argument supporting terrorists? Show me the evidence he is a terrorist and I'll support it. I happen to believe in the value of a justice system that relies on evidence.

The simple fact is that Israel has every right to detain him indefinitely or until the end of hostilities.

That's your belief, and that might be technically legal under international law but I disagree with it. I find it interesting that you guys are happy to quote international law and UN decisions when it suits you, but label them racist and anti-semitic when they work against you.

Martial law as defined within the Geneva Conventions doesn't require that a detainee be charged. Period. End of subject.

By speaking out in favor and support of the terrorists and joining your voice with theirs for their release rather than continued detention you are supporting the terrorists.

Oh and they did give him a reason, "incitement" which is a big deal in Israel.

So again your response simply defies rational when you blatantly ignore the applicable international laws

I've not spoken out in favor of support of TERRORISTS. I've asked for evidence, and if there is evidence then he should be tried - beyond just Israel's say-so. The same as I would demand of Egypt. But keep on distorting it.