> Since when do the people of that region follow English common law? > I don't even subscribe to it. They may not. But the message claimed that the UK won the land of the Palestinians from the Turks, in World War I, and then gave it to the Jews. Surely the UK must follow their own laws. Under British law the Palestinians should have owned their own land; it would not have belonged to the government.
> > Whether or not someone would have a measure of ownership in common > law, or any other law is irrelevant. This isn't about what is legal > or illegal, it's about what is right and wrong. Exactly. The Palestinians built villages, farms, and orchards, on the land they owned for hundreds of years. The Israeli army attacked them, killing many civilians, and destroying their villages. Hundreds of thousands fled in 1949, and have been living in refugee camps, raising their children and grandchildren, ever since. There are over 400,000 Palestinian refugees still in Lebanon, today. The Israeli government will not let them return home. This is clearly wrong. > > When you own land, it's yours and nobody else's forever. No person, > group of people, or government have any legitimate claim to it, > whether in easements, squatter rights, or anything else. Yes, and the land of people of Palestine belongs to them. Private property cannot be "honestly acquired" by war. It rightfully belongs to the private owner, no matter what governments may do. > > No person, group of people, or government has any legitimate authority > to tell you what you can or can't do on your own land assuming your > actions don't infringe on the equal rights of others or trespass > against them such as ground water pollution. I agree. Why should the Israeli government be any exception? Harland Harrison Libertarian Party of San Mateo County CA > > > --- In [email protected], Harland Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> "Edward J. Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>> In fact, if people just drive or walk across an owner's >>>> property for a long time, they acquire an "easement" >>>> giving them the right to keep crossing there. >>> >>> Wrong again! The laws for easement vary from state to state, and >>> even by county. Do you have a reference to back up this claim, >>> because I have never heard of it. >> >> It is called a "Prescriptive Easement" and is a fundamental principle of >> English Common law: >> >> http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1588&bold= >> >> I think that local laws only differ in the time required to establish an >> easement, and the kind of notice or other interference the owner > must take >> to prevent it. Do you know differently? >> >> Further, under the common law principle of Adverse Possession, the >> Palestinian people would own the land where they had lived for > generations, >> no matter what: >> >> http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=2356&bold=|||| >> >> >> Harland Harrison >> >> >> PS An attempt to send to >> >> "Edward J. Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Bounced. Earthlink says that address has not been used in a long time. >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> 209.86.93.227 does not like recipient. >> Remote host said: 550 [EMAIL PROTECTED] to extended >> inactivity new mail is not currently being accepted for this mailbox. >> Giving up on 209.86.93.227. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> --- In [email protected], Harland Harrison <harlandh5@> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Here is libertarian land theory for you... >>>> ... >>>>> If land is won by governments in wars, it is honestly >>>>> acquired land every bit as much as if it were purchased >>>>> or given to them as a gift. >>>> ... >>>>> While I'm against imperialism and the initiation of force, >>>>> land won in wars is honestly acquired, >>>> >>>> Sorry, but that theory is barbarianism, not libertarianism. >>>> Governments have no special powers to libertarians. Just because >>>> a government calls a war, does not justify armed robbery. >>>> >>>> International law respects private property, also. The citizens >>>> still own their property, even if the government is conquered. >>>> Changing borders changes "sovereignty" but the owners still >>>> retain ownership. >>>> >>>> >>>> Also, in the common law in the US as inherited from England, >>>> squatters can obtain an interest in property: >>>> >>>>> Your presence on my land does not give you any ownership of it; >>>>> not even if you've been there for 300 years. >>>> >>>> In fact, if people just drive or walk across an owner's property >>>> for a long time, they acquire an "easement" giving them the right >>>> to keep crossing there. >>>> >>>> Why is it that some people sound very libertarian, until it comes >>>> to the government of Israel? >>>> >>>> Harland Harrison >>>> Libertarian Party of San Mateo County CA >>>> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
