Report: U.K. takes steps to end arrest threats to Israeli officials

Rene Cassin and other prominent Jewish and non-Jewish lawyers have participated to the formulation of Human Rights in post-shoah Europe. It is based on "Natural Law" which is in turn based on Biblical principles. 60 years later the HR corpus of international agreements is used against democrats by the supporters of tyranny, terrorism and islamism. The Nations perverted the message of the Bible into Christianity and Islam, now they pervert the message of Human Rights. Nothing new unde the sun.

This law, and similar laws elsewhere, has often been used. That is as it should be. But it has never before been used against an Israeli. That too is as it should be: it should never be used against an Israeli. They are above all laws. Because of the holocaust, they have the right to commit what would, if done by others, be the gravest of atrocities - I will not waste time explaining this self-evident fact - and any attempt to try them would be like chickens trying to put the farmer on trial. Laughable, futile, and in many ways disgusting.

This law may be related to the Geneva Convention,which I believe the UK signed. It is not designed to target any particular nation, but would apply to war criminals everywhere.Changing the law might violate the Geneva Convention?

It was a good law. It had a good intention. Today it's the most abused law in the EU. The abuse is always aimed at Israel. European anti-semitism seems as alive as it always was.

"Israel begged the groups shooting rockets into Israel to stop it!!! " This in no way mitigates the slaughter of hundreds of women elderly and children. The blame may fall on Hamas for firing the rockets but Cast Lead and its massacres are 100% the responsibility of Israel. As you say yourself, had the Israelis made allowance for women and children to get out[as in Fallujah MkII] this would have been hugely significant. Had they not used white phosphorous in urban centers this too would have helped their case, but when you think of the deliberate destruction of almost all the Gazan agricultural crop as well as water treatment facilities,Gaza's only flour mill etc one starts to realise that it WAS the wider population who Israel were really targeting. "Why should Israel have to show so much restraint when no other country would stand for it." More delusions. I am told that 7 or 8000 rockets were fired from Gaza over an 8 year period. Here is just one instance amongst dozens where Israel did anything but *show restraint*, firing over 2000 artillery shells each one many times more deadly than any qassam in the space of just 2 weeks in April 2006: "Israel has recently been firing 150 shells into Gaza every day" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4910810.stm Is that what you call restraint?!

1 KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT every post sent by r cummings fails on rule 1

There are three people on here who don't seem to have a clue about anything legal or practical. Cipora Kohn, SDHD and Hardman/Harzion/whatever his name is today. I think they just come on to disrupt things, particularly when the debate is not going the Zio's way! We shouldn't waste too much energy replying to these idiots.

Answer johnboy's clearly stated questions in #26. Why was Eichman not handed over to the int`l tribunal for trial, since it is you who state that he was "under indictment by the duly constituted international nuremberg tribunal" ? 2. Is there a specific number of people who may be unlawfully killed before proceeding should be instituted? A hundred, a thousand or does it have to be at least a million? What johnboy is pointing out correctly in my opinion, is your recourse to exceptionalism as opposed to universalism, which is ironically in itself a complete abrogation of Jewish ethics.

"Because I don`t happen to believe into an ideology ("expansive Zionism"), that tells me to expand my territory at any costs.." What about simply allowing Jews to live where they had a steady presence all the way up until 1948? Jewish presence in the Middle East hasn't EXPANDED, fool. It has CONTRACTED. The only "expansion" you yammer on about is when Jews moved back onto lands they were only cleansed from for a 19-year period (1948-67).

....that there is a Goldstone report out there against my person. Because I don't happen to believe into an ideology ("expansive Zionism"), that tells me to expand my territory at any costs....

....if this article is correct, then Israel has now also become part of that privileged "club"...:)

....and the other "troublemakers" I mentioned in my post. While Mugabe and al-Bashir are accused of having committed crimes against their own people, Tzipi Livni, Barak + Co. did allegedly commit crimes against their Palestinian neighbours according to Mr.Goldstones report (and the white phosphorus fog we saw on our TV screens). To be honest, I'm not really sure which is worse, committing crimes against your own people or your neighbours...??? P.S. Just to make sure that there is no misunderstanding, if Livni and Barak should go to Den Haag, then also those Palestinian militant leaders, who ordered the firing of rockets into Sderot (but of course then also all of Israels right-wing politicians, who reject any fair compromise between Israelis and Arabs).

ther is nothing wrong with universal jurisdiction if it is competently applied through proper investigation and an examinataion of the law propsed in prosecution ! what is wrong with england is that a3rd tier and 4th rate judge issues an arrest warrant without any of those procedures being involved . that the applicants have no credibility whatsoever and are known troublemakers. this judge CAN REFUSE THE APPLICATION ! by mnot doing so he brings the whole system into disrepute !

is that a promise michael instead of the emotive nonsense you provide day in and day out ??? sound argument is based on knowledge and fact ! try it !

"It tells us that Israel insists that "universal jurisdiction" exists WHEN IT SUITS ISRAEL, and insists that it doesn`t exist WHEN IT IS TURNED AGAINST ISRAEL." How many Israeli citizens did Eichmann directly victimize? How many British citizens did Livni directly victimize? You are universally stupid.

CJK: "he was under indictment by the duly constituted international nuremberg tribunal. had he been caught by the allies, he would have been tried and executed" JB: "And yet he was not caught by the allies: he was caught by Mossad." SDHD: "Which international criminal court was going to hear Livni`s case, birdbrain?" Whooooooooooooosh! SDHD: What woz that?!?!?!? JB: That, sunshine, was the point I was making. I see it flew many miles over your mystified head. Hint: It isn't that Livni *wouldn't* have been brought before an int'l court, but that Eichmann *wasn't*. Q: What does that tell us about ISRAEL'S attitude towards "universal jurisdiction"? A: It tells us that Israel insists that "universal jurisdiction" exists WHEN IT SUITS ISRAEL, and insists that it doesn't exist WHEN IT IS TURNED AGAINST ISRAEL. Dumbass.

"No, **YOU** attempted to use it to claim that Eichmann`s situation was different from Livni`s situation, and I do not agree." Your disagreement demonstrates that you are a fool. Eichmann was tried by Israel's attorney general and there were any number of direct victims present -- who happened to be Israeli citizens. He wasn't tried in some British kangaroo court which Britain's own government states has no jurisdiction in such matters. Maybe you should finally shut up on some matters instead of demonstrating precisely how anti-Semitic you truly are. Now, be a good boy and admit that if anyone has a problem of such magnitude, they should be pressing their case in the ICJ, or continue making a shrill fool of yourself.

Regular posters on here usually come with arguments. SDHD is one of the repeat offenders who hasn't worked out that it's better to argue your case rather than just hurl infantile insults at people who disagree with him or her.

CJK: "the holocaust is recognised as the genocide committed against the jewish people." Rhetorical handwaving, and an attempt to change the subject. CJK: " of the six million slaughtered, one and a half million were children." Rhetorical handwaving, and an attempt to change the subject. CJK: "the holocaust is commemorated by the united nations every year." Rhetorical handwaving, and an attempt to change the subject. CJK: "your attempt to minimise it or make fun of it" No, **YOU** are now attempting to use it to shut down a debate. No, **YOU** attempted to use it to claim that Eichmann's situation was different from Livni's situation, and I do not agree. Playing the "Jew-hater" card is the laziest of responses. It is the last refuge of the zionist scoundrel and that, surely, is what you are. You disgust me, Cipora.

there will be always those who will exploit every opportunity to denigrate the shoa. it is part of the antisemitic creed. shabbat shalom. cipora

the holocaust is recognised as the genocide committed against the jewish people. of the six million slaughtered, one and a half million were children. the holocaust is commemorated by the united nations every year. your attempt to minimise it or make fun of it only reflects on your own lack of human values.

SDHD: "Israel HAS prosecuted its own war criminals, brain trust." A "war crime" is not the same thing as "a crime committed during wartime". War crimes are "grave breaches" of int'l humanitarian law, and you can find a list of them in Article 147 of GCIV. How many prosecutions has Israel carried out that would fit into that list, SDHD? SDHD: "What gives Britain the international jurisdiction to arrest foreign dignitaries?" Article 146, Geneva Convention IV SHDH: "If Britain wants to charge foreign dignitaries with war crimes, why doesn`t it pursue proceedings through the proper venue -- namely, the ICC?" Articles 146 and 148, Geneva Convention IV SDHD: "How would you like Israel to start arresting British generals and politicians, which it believes have perpetrated war crimes in Iraq or Afghanistan?" Please do.

"CJK: "he was under indictment by the duly constituted international nuremberg tribunal. had he been caught by the allies, he would have been tried and executed" JB: "And yet he was not caught by the allies: he was caught by Mossad." Which international criminal court was going to hear Livni's case, birdbrain?

"This law is based on the Geneva Conventions." Then pursue charges in Geneva, clown.

"As long as Israel refuses to prosecute its own war criminals, other countries have the responsibility under the Geneva Conventions to do that." Israel HAS prosecuted its own war criminals, brain trust. What gives Britain the international jurisdiction to arrest foreign dignitaries? If Britain wants to charge foreign dignitaries with war crimes, why doesn't it pursue proceedings through the proper venue -- namely, the ICC? How would you like Israel to start arresting British generals and politicians, which it believes have perpetrated war crimes in Iraq or Afghanistan?

"The UK hasn`t taken steps. Discussions have begun. Big difference. What`s happening is that Brown and Milliband are trying to find out if there`s any way they can do this wothout having to change the law," Discussions are the first step, dolt.

Actually it is the Ministry for Womens' Affairs, which deals with all womens' issues. I believe there are such departments in all democratic governments to protect the rights of all individuals - children and vulnerable adults, for instance, the physically and mentally challenged, protection of the individual, ethnic minorities etc. Israel doesn't do so well on the latter, or religious issues for that matter.

I was just about to seek a warrant for the Premier of China for human rights violations, Prime Minister of Pakistan for supplying Iran with nuclear technology, Putin over Georgia, and Obama over all the Iraqi wedding guests, not to mention Ronald MacDonald for his role in resisting the war on obesity.

This is a disgraceful climb-down. Livni should be arrested if ever she sets foot in the UK.

I hate to disappoint you all, but as far as I'm aware, to eradicate this law would take an act of parliament, which I would doubt will happen in the life of this government. Therefore, it would be advisable for all the Israeli cast lead heroes to stay within their own little country for the forseeable future.

I find i'm much more frightened of Cobra Commander, Destro, and Serpentor actually then yet another nobody who thinks it is his/her place to tell Israel what Israel should do. More hot air.

Extreme insanity like this one and Goldy report will FIZZLE. And it did.

And so they should - but not before Nasralla, Haniye, the Sudanese President, Mugabe, those murdering thousands each day in the Congo, Ahmedinajad and the entire motley (note spelling) gang throughout the Moslem world.

Without fear of being arrested for the war crimes he's committed. It is easy to accuse, but nevertheless, I want to know if and when he stopped targetting civilians.

"We have free speech and a Ministry for Women`s rights - which are far more liberal than those of Orthodox Jews" as those in the know see. The problem is that those who don't know might believe you. An Orthodox religious women may become irrelligious if she wants to without fear of stoning. You are comparing official institutions (Ministry of Women's Rights - why is such a ministry needed?) to sectoral traditions and lifestyles, which anyone is free to join or leave.

This amounts to the end of an independent justice system in the UK.

What war crime are you talking about and who committed this war crime?Facts not propaganda. Please do not give the usual 1400 Palestinian civilians killed in cast lead,this is good for the Israel haters not me.

Along with Bush, Rumsfeld and all the mottely crew! Many Brits and Americans look forward to the day!

The Israeli government stands accused of War crimes - and what does that say about the Israeli electorate who voted them in!

Yes the Pals voted Hamas. However, Hamas has a neat line in contributing to the democratic process. For example, instead of arguing with the opposition they throw them off the rooves of apartment blocks etc. Don't hold them up to be good examples of democracy!

...because they are afraid that in the future Tony Blair and his cronies may be picked up for war crimes for Afghanistan and Iraq.

Israel begged the groups shooting rockets into Israel to stop it!!! They chose to keep doing it for almost ten years. The only issue I have was that innocent people could not get out of Gaza when Israel had no choice but to go in and stop the rocket attacks against its civilian population. The blame is on the Hamas leadership and the other violent groups. Israel has every right to protect their population. It is really sad that Hamas does not care about their people. Why should Israel have to show so much restraint when no other country would stand for it.

No democracy eh? The Palestinians voted in Hamas and Israel and its "democratic" allies promptly slammed the Hamas MP's in prison, where they still remain. We have free speech and a Ministry for Women's rights - which are far more liberal than those of Orthodox Jews, by the way. Better watch out for the new voice in the EU - the Baroness has just spoken out against the Israeli occupation, settlements and the Wall. So things ain't gonna get any easier for Israel!

I find it humorous that people who abhor democracy in their country and practice none of its tenets (i.e. free speech, free press, open court system etc.)but then use loopholes in the law in other democracies, to further their agenda of hate and injustice. Now you feign moral indignation because the plot to embarrass Israel can't be used in the future. The West has caught on to the abusive tactics being employed and refuse to tolerate it. So have a good laugh at another PR success but you will have to find another way. PB writes: "Gaza is still a point in question where war crimes may have been committed." They have, every rocket fired at civilians by Hamas was a War Crime and until that gets equal treatment...at a minimum...all bets are off. Save the hollow moral indignation only displayed at Israel for antisemitic reasons alone.

UK ever taken steps to un-arrest Israeli's after they GAVE arabs all their armaments and forts then BLAMED the Stern gang, Irgun and Haganah after denying so many access to Israel during WWII, realigning borders about 15 times, giving Trans-Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudis( etc) extra time to murder the rest of our relatives....and now 60 plus years later they trump charges and play nice. King David Horel was NOT a travesty, it was war just as the USS Libetrty was playing signals wars with the Brits who politiely sent off reports to Egypt and Russian in 1967.P lay very careful withthese folks, Israel as I see it has no friend in the international world. This iscreating war with Iran vs Israel but it's Oh so much bigger, This whole last couple years has been pure negativity. Burn your liberal peace signs and keep the powder dry. Were I more adept in Hebrew I'd fly over and join the iDF and huff 100 pound rucksacks. If Caleb could do it, I'd give it a go. Old news but same news.

i am forever dubious about the thought of mentioning the events of 1939-1945. why?because it gives people like johnboy a chance to meddle in our sorrows.

B: "It is precisely the international laws which define who and what a 'war criminal' is, that should determine who is arrested." *snicker* They can't be a "war criminal" until they are found "guilty", Brant. They therefore have to be "tried", and that does rather presuppose an "arrest". GCIV, Art 146 lists all the acts that amount to "grave violations" and, therefore, makes the perp liable for arrest. As to who chooses when an arrest is "warranted" well, so sorry, but Art 146 puts that onus here: "Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts." You may not like it, but you are demanding that int'l law do something that this convention has ALREADY handed over to the state parties to do. Sorry.

Must be a severe blow to all those hypocritical bigotts who several days ago celebrated the issue of the arrest warrant. To Swiss Dino: Of course this law will apply for everybody in the same manner, not like in Switzerland which dropped charges against Gaddhafi junior and wife for maltreatment of servants and sent the Swiss President crawling to Tripolis for an apology when Lybia threatened to reduce oil supplies. The result was: Oil supply still not back to normal, 2 Swiss business men practically held hostages, Ghaddafi sen. suggested to disintegrate Switzerland. So Dino, after all the special treatment your country gives to law trampling foreign politicians and its pathetic outcome, it is amazing you think to be entitled to speak up on the UK decision.

CJK: "eichman was a mass muderer of over a million jews." There is a weighting that is to be applied to grave violations of int'l humanitarian law? Where do I find the quadratic equations, CJK? Tho I'm also curious where you think the greater weighting lies: is it that Eichmann killed millions, or is it that Eichmann killed Jews? CJK: "he was under indictment by the duly constituted international nuremberg tribunal. had he been caught by the allies, he would have been tried and executed" And yet he was not caught by the allies: he was caught by Mossad. Who should have (under the Cipora-doctrine) handed him over to that duly constituted int'l tribunal for trial; after all, it was THEIR indictment..... Yet they didn't: Mossad immediately handed him over to an Israeli criminal court, and he was tried there. That's "international jurisdiction", Cipora. Didn't you know that?

It is precisely the international laws which define who and what a "war criminal" is, that should determine who is arrested. When that role is seized, instead, by activists or partisans, it alters it from International Law to who's smartest and/or loudest agenda or politics driven lawyer. Which, I suspect, is why Britain plans to add a sanity checkpoint to stop this.

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the position of the UK authorities here. The proposal under discussion is not what Bibi would like, that Israel's leaders have a "stay out of jail" card. The problem is that under present law the UK Government simply doesn't know whether an arrest warrant has been issued. So this proposal is aimed at avoiding embarassment to the UK Government - not at making life easier for alleged Israeli war criminals. For alleged crimes outside the jurisdiction, the permission of the Attorney General would be needed for an arrest warrant. This would require an Act of Parliament, and there is no chance of that getting through before the next election. Not much afterwards, in my view, but we'll see. Moreover, it would only apply to England and Wales. So, Livni, better not go to Scotland!

DINO: The whole affair is a deliberate,calculated taking of advantage of s ridiculous lack of clarity in a rule by Palestinans and their friends. This is not the ind of thing you make "fair" by encouraging all other interest groups to be as wickedly clever. It is something that (as the British are doing) you alter so that it CAN'T be used by anyone for any one-sided, self-serving interest.Actual international law and its many mechanisms serve the need to accurately indict and prosecute war criminals. It's those laws that should continue to determine that and not the sly creativity or the blind of self-serving zealotsfor the cause they espouse. This isn;t about fairness; it's about removing a riduculous loophole that created even more ridiculous abuse.

campaigner he has been working against israel and its interests for over 35 years.he becomes more extreme with age,

if the british government wanted the law to be changed and to stop the haters in the uk from continuing their campaign we would see things changing very quickly indeed.

eichman was a mass muderer of over a million jews. he was under indictment by the duly constituted international nuremberg tribunal. had he been caught by the allies, he would have been tried and executed.

for inciting ethnic cleansing and extermination of israel, but with his cyclopic vision sees only israel. he fails to ask why the situation in gaza is as it is ! ask hamas who provoked aresponse dr ben and prescribe for all not just your bias against jews !!!

No, Chaim, the UK is not taken over by Muslims. It is hilarious to read this type of comments, mostly made by people who live far away from the UK and have not got a clue what countries like the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are: they are liberal democracies, multicultural societies, where everybody, Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist, pagan, animist, is equal before the law. These states belong to their citizens. It must be difficult for you to imagine that concept, if you have been raised in and gone through the educational system of the "Jewish" state of Israel.

The UK is not under any pressure at all to become a Muslim nation! That really is total rot. They do not number 5% of the population - they are a small minority. Much work is going on to integrate them in the community and many have good professional or business jobs. There are some militant mullahs - less than there were, because the Muslims themselves have cracked down on them - and there are always impressionable young bloods who the extremists target and indoctrinate, as anywhere else. (Just like the settler youth in many ways). British Muslims have fully equal rights and protection in all things and, while there is still some ignorant racial prejudice in some areas, they by and large fit in and things will get better. We are used to absorbing immigrant communities.

But isn't Britain the country that attacked Afghanistan and Iraq without being attacked? Those two wars have caused a million deaths. Maybe all this condemantion from the part of Britain is just a smoke-screen to hide their war crimes. Israel's war against Gaza is a defensive one against next door jihadists, unlike Britain's. The queen, the British PM and generals to The Hague now!

and stems from 1956. It was brought in to permit the apprehending of Nazi war criminals. All signatories have the same duties as the UK, to arrest and try alleged war criminals. Sarah "I mean, how would we feel if other countries started arresting our leaders left, right and centre?", it was this rule that Eichmann was arrested under if I recall. I assume you don't object to that? The UK government can say what it likes about the law but the decision whether to change it or not is down solely to the law courts and the judges. Sometimes they let themselves be bullied by the executive, usually not. As this sounds to be international statute law, I can't see the courts agreeing to being governed by the whims of our political masters. The laws cannot be bent because it is Livni or Putin, any war criminal has to expect apprehension and trial worldwide. If they can't do the time, don't do the crime.

There was a huge outcry in the UK when the Emporer of Japan visited the UK. He was the Japanese leader at the time the British army suffered tremendous war crimes at the hands of the Japanese. The Brits finally caught up with Pinoche of Chile also. Why not Israeli leaders? Gaza is still a point in question where war crimes may have been committed. Israel searches the world for decaying Nazi leaders, regardless of which country they maybe living. What's the difference?

This is a mistake. The UK is backing down and allowing this Israeli government a diplomatic advantage. It's a mistake because it gets this and the previous Olmert government off the hook of accountability. Its a mistake because it allows Livni's words denying the Gaza humanitarian crisis for which she and her government had a major responsibility to go unchecked -together with her insistence that the IDF destroy Hamas which would only exacerbate the crisis she denied existed and in a context in which the IDF could not and did not destroy Hamas but hundreds of innocent lives instead. But it reveals something few have commented on - the importance in Israel's view of the role of the UK and in the UK's eyes on being an effective player in resolving the conflict. nd all this despite the character of the person who is our Foreign Minister.

The UK is under extreme pressure from it's growing Muslim minority to become a Muslim nation and has brought increasing Anti-Semitism to the UK and Europe in General. It is good that the UK is taking steps to balance the Islamic hegemony taking place.

other countries have the responsibility under the Geneva Conventions to do that. That is the aim of universal jurisdiction, not to let war criminals get away. The detailed report of Richard Goldstone provides overwhelming evidence. The fact that one year after "Cast Lead" many of Gaza's children continue to live amongst the bombed out ruins of their former homes, because Israel continues its shameful siege of the Gaza Strip is reason enough for an indictment. Israel used the principle of universal jurisdiction to arrest and bring to trial a war criminal like Adolf Eichman. The least the Palestinian people under occupation can expect is protection under international law. But Labour politicians like Gordon Brown and David Milliband - rather than upholding the law - prefer to give cover for suspected war criminals. Labour after all harbours its own war criminal, Tony Blair. Israel could arrest him for his role in the war against Iraq. But it won't happen. It sets a precedent!

no dopey it never applies to all only to countries thta cannot hit back! so russia , usa ,china , france, etc will never be inconvenienced. no magistate at the westminster court would ever stick his neck out so only countries like israel got the treatment anyway, suprisingly no one has named the idiot who issued the livni warrant !

Your basic error is to equate Zipi Livni and other Israeli leaders, whose main goalis protect the citizens of Israel against those who wish them harm, with some of the world's cruellest despots who are guilty of terrorizing and murdering hundreds of thousands of their own citizens with total impunity (not a word of criticism from you or the Brits). You are really something else!

"Report: U.K. takes steps to end arrest threats to Israeli officials" Wrong. What's happening is that Brown and Milliband are trying to find out if there's any way they can do this wothout having to change the law, because they know parliament won't want to change the law for anyone connected with Cast Lead. They probably also hope that these discussions will be seen as positive action by Israel and will shut Israel up until it's all forgotten about as some other diplomatic storm blows up. Discussions will no doubt also focus on how, if the law has to be changed, to make it seem like it's not being done just for Israel, which it is. The really interesing question is why Brown and Milliband are so desperate to appease Israel at this point. Are they scared of being arrested themselves at some stage in some other country? or has a big pro-Israel Labour party donor turned the thumbscrews on them?

"Lawyers involved were quoted as saying they were outraged by the proposed change". The lawyers are outraged because they can't get paid to legally persecute their political opponents. How sad for the lawyers! They say the law is blind but that is not true. Lawyers can see a cash cow even if they have to sacrifice the innocent to get to it. I'm glad that Tzipi Livni never saw the corrupt side of European law in action as Kafka and Dreyfus had seen. There is no moral equivalence between those who fight murderous Islamic terrorism and the murderous Islamic terrorists. However, lawyers with sights set on a truck load of petro dollars would naturally argue against that...

....accused of war crimes, including folks like Mr. al-Bashir from Sudan and Mr. Mugabe from Zimbabwe. If not, then it is plain discrimination against those countries, and then the British people will ask themselves, what the "special reason" might be, why this generosity only applies to Israel....

Friends of the AG need not concern themselves with the distinctions.

so far, no one else can be held accountable, so what crap are you trying to sell?.

Half way around the world lies a fine example of British hypocrisy ? the Chagos Archipelago, which London refers to as the British Indian Ocean Territory. Both Mauritius and the Seychelles have strong claims to it as their own, but that didn?t stop Britain from forcibly expelling all the inhabitants between 1965 and 1971 to make way for a military base it wanted to lease to the US. And though the Chagossians, as they are known, have repeatedly won court cases against the British government demanding their ?right of return,? the Brits will have none of it, and have largely left the islands? former residents to fend for themselves in exile. More about British occupation at : http://xrl.us/oxegf

Because the real war criminals get away with blue murder. I would like to know why Britain has singled out Israel for this treatment.

THE UK HAS FINALLY STARTED TO PUT AN END TO THIS PREPOSTEROUS LAW. I mean, how would we feel if other countries started arresting our leaders left, right and centre?