Reply #15: This is ridiculous on several counts. Let's start with #1 - [View All]

[Colorado Blue]

the nature of the "crime" in this instance - asserting a municipality's right to eminent domain: this has been upheld by the LIBERALS on the US supreme court, who have said that a political entity can seize private property in order to sell or turn it over to another private entity which would "make better use of it" (I paraphrase). It has long been held that any municipality has the right of eminent domain for other purposes, such as zoning code violations etc. National security would certainly fall into this category (in spades).

Secondly - the idea that terrorists AREN'T war criminals is absurd. Misusing the Geneva Conventions in this cynical fashion and trying to wriggle off the hook by claiming that Hamas, et.al., aren't signatories of the Geneva Conventions and therefore can't be charged with war crimes is cynical in the extreme.

Thirdly - yes Mr. Englander, Pelsar is right when he mentions similar deeds committed by the British. It is helpful to see events in historical perspective and if the British weren't charged with war crimes for certain deeds during the Irish struggles then the Israelis shouldn't be either. The law is dependent upon historical precedent.

What next - neighborhoods in Chicago, scheduled for demolition to create a new highway, charge the aldermen with war crimes?