Israeli Police evict Palestinians in Jerusalem

Israeli Police evict Palestinians in Jerusalem

news.bbc.co.uk

The evictions have been condemned by the United Nations, the Palestinians and also the UK government.

The US said the evictions were not in keeping with Israel's obligations under the so-called "road map" to resolve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The operation to evict the 53 Palestinians in the Sheikh Jarrah district of the city was carried out before dawn on Sunday by police clad in black riot gear.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
jta.org
www.google.com
www.voanews.com

I hate the fact that the police force did this in Israel. It seems as if Israel is quickly becoming a Police-State. The feuds between Israeli's and Palestanians in Israel could be mirrored here in the U.S. between the people and the "Right-Wing Extremists". I hope this event does not spark anything else to happen.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

People that continue to defend Israel make me ill, it's like standing up for North Korea. I wonder how they would react if Israelis were removed from their homes here in the west by special police and forced to live in segregated areas at the edge of town... Although we're above that sort of disgusting racism as all first world nations ought to be.

Well it is totally unaccetable.

I have heard about this Israeli American Billionaire that transfers all his money to Israel in order to buy property in palestine, destroy it, rebuild it new and put israeli in the buildings. That way he thinks that he will get the Land back for Israel.
All these things make me sick, lets live in peace once and for all and stop the fighting !!

reply to post by Monte-Carlo


Any chance you could provide us with some information about said person? I have not heard anything about said individual.

-Sliadon

reply to post by Sliadon


I think he speaks about Irwin Moscovitch. Maybe there is more then one, i do not know. On general, if those Palestinians indeed lived on land owned by others i see no problem in the eviction.
Of course the general picture is less clear, and there were plans for "Judaisation" of Jerusalem and Arabs in Jerusalem more often then Jews have problems to get permits for new buildings , but in this specific case i see no problem. UK/US/UN/whoever better press on Israel to change the general policies concerning building permits in Jerusalem area and not when people are getting evicted from not their land. I see no posts on ATS when Jews are getting evicted by the same policeman in black uniform because they do not own the land they live on.

The Israeli Government and it's people make me sick , how could they allow this to happen. When the US collapses so will Israel, no more money from Uncle Sam kiddies.

Heres a vid of the people that got kicked out, this is just sad and I can't believe this is allowed to happen.

Well, how about a bit of context?

This housing complex is in the Sheik Jarra district of East Jerusalem, where there was a large Jewish community prior to the anti-Jewish riots in 1929. The home was originally Jewish, but its inhabitants were chased off in the above riots. Arab families then proceeded to squat on the property, without purchasing it.

Jordan then proceeded to annex East Jerusalem in 1950 and occupied it until 1967. During that time Jews were barred from that part of the city, homes were taken and synagogues were destroyed.

Now, in spite of the fact that documentation exists to prove that Jews had the original deeds to the property, Jewish groups legally re-purchased it from the Hezaji family. However, under pressure from the Palestinian Authority, the Hezaji family denied this (in spite of documentary evidence that the sale went through) - as I have pointed out before it is illegal for a Palestinian to sell land to a Jew and the penalty is death.

The courts ruled twice that there was little doubt that the property belonged to Jews. This is the result.

Bad luck for the squatters, but in the end this is a fairly mundane property dispute.

Originally posted by Sliadon
reply to post by Monte-Carlo

 

Any chance you could provide us with some information about said person? I have not heard anything about said individual.

-Sliadon

DUBAI/CAIRO (Al Arabiya)

A rightwing Israeli organization plans to coordinate the purchase of dozens of properties in Jordan by European Jews, the group's head said on Monday while an Israeli paper reported possible U.S. fund cuts to Israel.

The Israel Land Fund, which promotes Jewish construction in Jerusalem and has bought land and dozens of houses in occupied Palestinian territory in the West Bank, is now eyeing property once owned by Jews in neighboring Jordan, its chairman Arieh King told AFP.www.alarabiya.net...

The funder of this organisation is the billionaire Irwin Moscovitch and is run by the zionist supremacist Arieh King. Now land is being purchased in Jordan.

Of course when these purchases are being made, front companies and locals are used to hide the identity of the purchaser. I surmise that when the required portions of Jordanian property is purchased, the owners will demand they secede from Jordan and unite with Israel. The Jordanians will obviously refuse and Israel will yet again embark on another war of conquest ostensibly to free its citizens from the 'barbaric! Arabs.

reply to post by mattpryor


How about a bit of context in your context:

The inability of the Haganah to protect Jewish civilians during the 1929 riots led Jewish Polish immigrants who supported Jabotinsky to break away from the Labor-dominated Haganah. They were members of Betar, an activist Zionist movement founded in 1923 in Riga, Latvia, under the influence of Jabotinsky. The first Betar congress met at Danzig in 1931 and elected Jabotinsky as its leader. In 1937, a group of Haganah members left the organization in protest against its "defensive" orientation and joined forces with Betar to set up a new and more militant armed underground organization, known as the Irgun. The formal name of the Irgun was the Irgun Zvai Leumi (National Military Organization), sometimes also called by the acronym, Etzel, from the initial letters of the Hebrew name. The more extreme terrorist group, known to the British as the Stern Gang, split off from the Irgun in 1939. The Stern Gang was formally known as the Lohamei Herut Israel (Fighters for Israel's Freedom),www.country-data.com...

Basically the Jewish community in Jerusalem were immigrants from Europe who settled in Palestinian neighbourhoods under the British mandate. They came in large numbers and imposed there will on an ancient community.

Jerusalem was an open city to Christians, Muslims and Jews and foreigners were permitted come, do their religious duties and were accepted. Unfortunately the zionist movement organised to take control, took action without regards to communal harmony, municipal authority and regards to the host community. Communal strife arrived from Eastern Europe.


[edit on 053131p://pm3149 by masonwatcher]

Truly disgusting!

Well, I wonder what the hard core Zionists who frequent this board will have to say about this?

Land given to Palestinians by the U.N. and then forcibly taken away by Zionistic goons.

What is so ironic is that the Nazis did the same thing to the Jews that are now turning around and doing to the Palestinians. And this, coming from God's alleged chosen people! Ha, ha. Let this be a lesson to all that Jewish dogma is as phoney as slight of hand. No race, creed, or faith is immune from evil and ignorance.


Ethnic cleansing 101.

Originally posted by mattpryor
Well, how about a bit of context?

This housing complex is in the Sheik Jarra district of East Jerusalem, where there was a large Jewish community prior to the anti-Jewish riots in 1929. The home was originally Jewish, but its inhabitants were chased off in the above riots. Arab families then proceeded to squat on the property, without purchasing it.

Jordan then proceeded to annex East Jerusalem in 1950 and occupied it until 1967. During that time Jews were barred from that part of the city, homes were taken and synagogues were destroyed.

Now, in spite of the fact that documentation exists to prove that Jews had the original deeds to the property, Jewish groups legally re-purchased it from the Hezaji family. However, under pressure from the Palestinian Authority, the Hezaji family denied this (in spite of documentary evidence that the sale went through) - as I have pointed out before it is illegal for a Palestinian to sell land to a Jew and the penalty is death.

The courts ruled twice that there was little doubt that the property belonged to Jews. This is the result.

Bad luck for the squatters, but in the end this is a fairly mundane property dispute.

So the news reporters were lying about the U.N. giving this property to the Palestinians?

Originally posted by 3DPrisoner
So the news reporters were lying about the U.N. giving this property to the Palestinians?

To the best of my knowledge, the UN does not (yet) have the right to arbitrarily claim privately owned property and re-assign it.

This was the result of an Israeli Supreme Court decision that ruled that the lawful owners of the property were Nahalt Shimon International, that the occupants had failed to pay rent to said owners, and were therefore issued an eviction order.

The same thing happens every day in every country. Yet in this instance the media, UN and US have turned it into an international event. Why? Think!!

Do you want to dispute the court ruling? If so investigate the abundant documentary evidence and prove why the decision was wrong.

Or do you dispute that a country governed by the rule of law should enforce said rule of law?

Originally posted by mattpryor

Originally posted by 3DPrisoner
So the news reporters were lying about the U.N. giving this property to the Palestinians?

The same thing happens every day in every country. Yet in this instance the media, UN and US have turned it into an international event. Why? Think!!

With the difference being that Palestinians have no such rights. Could you possibly imagine what the impact would be if Palestinians would be allowed to make such claims? The property has been given to Palestinian refugees legally. Any idea how many properties and plots have been stolen by Israeli settlers, but why would you treat Palestinian citizens equally, right?

For those who agree with the decision, predominantly Americans, I would love to see Indians being granted the right to claim their property and land. Kick you out of your houses while showing you a piece of paper stating the land you build a house on is theirs. Would be really amusing to watch.

Double standards.

Originally posted by mattpryor

Originally posted by 3DPrisoner
So the news reporters were lying about the U.N. giving this property to the Palestinians?

To the best of my knowledge, the UN does not (yet) have the right to arbitrarily claim privately owned property and re-assign it.

This was the result of an Israeli Supreme Court decision that ruled that the lawful owners of the property were Nahalt Shimon International, that the occupants had failed to pay rent to said owners, and were therefore issued an eviction order.

The same thing happens every day in every country. Yet in this instance the media, UN and US have turned it into an international event. Why? Think!!

Do you want to dispute the court ruling? If so investigate the abundant documentary evidence and prove why the decision was wrong.

Or do you dispute that a country governed by the rule of law should enforce said rule of law?

It's funny how you forgot to include this reasoning of yours (that you don't recognize the U.N. judgements) in your original "Let's keep things in proper perspective" claim.

No, you'd have us all believe that the innocent Zionists are just doing business as usual and there's nothing wrong here.

I propose the claim that you haven't kept anything in proper perspective here. You have only proven bias and a bias that excluded all of the facts until cornered.

What we really have happening here is the U.N. made a binding judgement that Israel being a member is bound to adhere to. Therefore breaking or ignoring this ruling is against international law.

Here you are trying to nonchalantly claim that it is ok for the Zionists to ignore this law when it doesn't suit their agendas.

I don't buy this lie that you are trying to propagate on this forum and this thread in particular. Let us throw you out of your home and see if your deceptions bear out your disgusting display of smugness that accepts U.N. rulings (land boundaries etc.) when they are beneficial and ignores them when they get in the way of land grabs.

Therefore, you have not kept anything in proper perspective. You have only displayed a willingness to protect unfair imperialism at the cost of honesty.

You asked me if I was prepared to dispute the the ruling of a country that was governed by a rule of law.... Well just remember this- Nazi Germany was governed by a rule of law too. I'd dispute their crooked laws that dispossessed people of their properties just as energetically as I now dispute these Zionistic mechinations of thievery. Mechinations that have been trumped by an International ruling.

reply to post by 3DPrisoner


So we're back to the Zionists = Nazis argument again?

I've read a bit more about this case, and I've tried to summarize it below.

Jordan invaded East Jerusalem in 1948 and seized ownership of the land. Jordan then made a deal with the UNRWA who built the housing compound in 1959. The intention was the let them to 27 Palestinian families for a nominal rent for three years, and then ownership would be transferred to the families. The ownership was never transferred (not sure why), and so when Israel retook the area in 1967 control of the land was transferred to an organisation called the Israeli Custodian for Absentee Property (i.e. property that Jordan had sat on and original ownership was unclear).

In 1972 two organisations - Sephardic Community Committee and Knesset Israel Committee - went to court to get ownership transferred to them based on pre-1948 deeds. They then sold the property on to Shimon International in 2003 (I think).

Various court orders, attempts to evict families for non payment of rent, etc, take place between then and now. It gets a bit complicated. Some excellent research has been done here.

Ultimately this does seem to be a case of big business versus the little guy, and I agree definitely doesn't help to repair the damage between these two communities. All seems (legally) above board though, I don't have a problem with the ruling itself.

And to the above poster, if I'd been living in a property for that long and knowingly not paid any rent, then yes I'd expect to get evicted at some point.

I wonder why the UNRWA didn't transfer ownership when they were supposed to, would have saved all this hassle.

Originally posted by mattpryor
reply to post by 3DPrisoner

 

So we're back to the Zionists = Nazis argument again?

Why yes we are, especially when the two acts mirror each other... If you don't wish to be compared to them then don't act like them.

I've read a bit more about this case, and I've tried to summarize it below.

Jordan invaded East Jerusalem in 1948 and seized ownership of the land. Jordan then made a deal with the UNRWA who built the housing compound in 1959. The intention was the let them to 27 Palestinian families for a nominal rent for three years, and then ownership would be transferred to the families. The ownership was never transferred (not sure why), and so when Israel retook the area in 1967 control of the land was transferred to an organisation called the Israeli Custodian for Absentee Property (i.e. property that Jordan had sat on and original ownership was unclear).

In 1972 two organisations - Sephardic Community Committee and Knesset Israel Committee - went to court to get ownership transferred to them based on pre-1948 deeds. They then sold the property on to Shimon International in 2003 (I think).

Various court orders, attempts to evict families for non payment of rent, etc, take place between then and now. It gets a bit complicated. Some excellent research has been done here.

Ultimately this does seem to be a case of big business versus the little guy, and I agree definitely doesn't help to repair the damage between these two communities. All seems (legally) above board though, I don't have a problem with the ruling itself.

And to the above poster, if I'd been living in a property for that long and knowingly not paid any rent, then yes I'd expect to get evicted at some point.

I wonder why the UNRWA didn't transfer ownership when they were supposed to, would have saved all this hassle.

If the land was given to you by the U.N. then you don't need to worry about squat, it's yours.

But you would have us believe that you'd allow a foreign government to ignore this U.N. ruling (thereby breaking international law) and boot you off of it because it decided to proceed through it's own illegal venues of litigation? Something tells me that your smugness is tying into your deceptive presentations again.

[edit on 5-8-2009 by 3DPrisoner]

[edit on 5-8-2009 by 3DPrisoner]

[edit on 5-8-2009 by 3DPrisoner]

Originally posted by 3DPrisoner
If the land was given to you by the U.N. then you don't need to worry about squat, it's yours.

But you would have us believe that you'd allow a foreign government to ignore this U.N. ruling (thereby breaking international law) and boot you off of it because it decided to proceed through it's own illegal venues of litigation? Something tells me that your smugness is tying into your deceptive presentations again.

The land wasn't given to anyone by the UN. The land never belonged to the UN. It was occupied by Jordan and in the hands of the Jordanian Custodian of Enemy Property. The UN just built on it.

Jordan lost it when in 1967 they tried again to invade Israel and it backfired and they were ousted from all the land they'd taken in 1948.

The foreign power here is Jordan. They took the land by force (and in the process murdering 78 doctors and nurses on their way to Hadassah Hospital), and then conspired with UNRWA to settle it with their own citizens (something which people vilify Israel for doing). Those citizens then enjoyed several decades of rent free accommodation. Now they've been booted out.

But I'd hate to let these inconvenient facts get in the way of your hateful slogans and personal attacks against me. Please, carry on...

[edit on 6-8-2009 by mattpryor]

Was just reading through some parliamentary debates, as i sometimes do, and found some interesting points relating to this:

The legal position is clear. There have been successive UN Security Council resolutions—for example, resolution 465 from 1980, which stated that

"all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof have no legal validity and...Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East".

In the advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice in 2004 on the legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory, it unanimously ruled that settlements were illegal. It stated that

"since 1977, Israel has conducted a policy and developed practices involving the establishment of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, contrary to the terms of article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Convention which provides: 'The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.'"

I'd recommend reading the full comments by MP Rob Marris on 21st July 2009 in a parliamentary debate. He makes some very good points:

MP's comments on Israeli Settlements