It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Israel evicts two Palestinian families 2 Aug 09 (Video)

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 07:56 AM

You will see in the video that some of the evictees are still in their pyjama bottoms and slippers.

From one of the stolen houses, you can see the Israeli army loading trucks with the contents of the houses. It could be that they are kind enough to secure the possessions for the people they have just thrown out of their homes. Alternatively, they could just be looting.

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:53 AM
This is exactly why the world no longer gives israel any sympathy.

They deserve rockets after acting like this, and probably worse.

I love how they always move into the Palestinian home too, not tear it down and build a new one.

It must be nice to go claim a home on land that is not yours and not have to pay for the land or the building of a home.

israel is digging its own grave, and will soon face judgment.

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 09:40 AM
omg...this is a spympathy goes all to the Palestinians Victims

S & F...gr8 Find

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:13 PM
reply to post by masonwatcher

These were amazing videos.I am sorry that those families lost
their homes.
I still support Israel, because they are God's chosen people.

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:26 PM
reply to post by mamabeth

So in effect, you admit that you are of a religion that is in favour of theft, the murder and ethnic cleansing of people. Anything goes. So who are the terrorists now?

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:36 AM

Originally posted by masonwatcher
reply to post by mamabeth

So in effect, you admit that you are of a religion that is in favour of theft, the murder and ethnic cleansing of people. Anything goes. So who are the terrorists now?

Until Yeshua the Messiah returns,we won't have true peace.God gave
Israel that land thousands of years ago.I can't and won't go against God!
I am very sorry those people lost their homes.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:23 AM
Just a minor note the Mason "accidently" left out.

It was not their homes.

They were being allowed to live there for a time.

Now it is time to allow others to live there for a time.

A simple fact check usually turns up very interesting details "SOME" may "accidently" leave out.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:33 AM
reply to post by mrmonsoon

Quote from first video:

The family have documents from 1956 proving the house was built and given to them by the United Nations and the Jordanian government

So it appears it was indeed their home which they legally owned. They have proof it belongs to them. Do you have any proof to the contrary?

Why should they allow others to live there? They legally own it, and it has been stolen from them.

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.'"

Souce - UK Parliamentary Debate

[edit on 12-8-2009 by Nammu]

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:48 AM
There's a little bit more to the story not brought to the surface here yet.

However, things are not always what they seem and the eviction of the Hanoun and Ghawi families are an apt example of how an appetite for a certain type of story can create that story regardless of the facts. As an organisation that follows media coverage of the Middle East closely, we gathered from Sunday and Monday's reporting, such as on the BBC, in the Guardian and in the Times that the two Palestinian families were evicted because Israeli courts had found that the land belonged to Jews, not to the Palestinians living there. Cut to religiously clad Jews busting in to the newly vacated houses and the whole thing is just obvious: Israel mercilessly turfs Arabs on to the street to plant more settlers in east Jerusalem.

It turns out that this is simply not the case. In fact, there is nothing simple about this case at all. There is a long legal history pertaining to the dispute between 28 Arab families and Jewish organisations over the ownership of the land in question. However, one crucial point was omitted from all reporting from the British sources named above (bar a small amendment to the BBC article made yesterday following a communication from us): the two Arab families evicted on Sunday were evicted for failing to pay rent in violation of the terms of their tenancy agreements. The Arab families who have kept to the terms of their tenancy agreement have not been evicted.

It is true that the non-payment of rent is tied up with the dispute over who owns the land, but it is still intensely relevant to the story. It's all very well for the Guardian's Middle East editor, Ian Black, to describe the evictions as "the ugly face of ethnic cleansing" or for Cif contributor Matt Kennard to claim that they represent "a process of racial purification". But without informing readers that the only people being evicted are the ones who refused to pay rent to the landlords they recognised decades ago, they paint a distorted picture.


top topics


log in