SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Truth About Islam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lorne who wrote (9260)8/3/2007 10:59:44 AM
From: Elmer Flugum  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20106
 
More on the Jewish National Fund:

A racist Jewish state

haaretz.com

"The clause in the bill stating that "the leasing of JNF lands for the purpose of settling Jews will not be seen as unacceptable discrimination," even though it involves 13 percent of state-controlled lands and allows for further expressions of discrimination. For example, the establishment of a university only for Jews on JNF land, or a hospital, or a movie theater.

It is not surprising that MK Uri Ariel, who favors the redemption of lands by Jews also beyond the Green Line, is the person who initiated the Jewish National Fund bill. But the support of Benjamin Netanyahu, Ami Ayalon, Michael Eitan, Reuven Rivlin and Shalom Simhon is a very bad omen for the future of legislation in Israel. The Ka'adan case in the Supreme Court failed to bring about change. The power to discriminate was passed on to communities' acceptance committees that reject candidates by reverting to the clause of "being ill-suited to the community." If it was not for the Supreme Court's ruling in the Ka'adan case, it would have been possible also to reject non-Jewish candidates from Russia.

The Ka'adan ruling was exceptional in setting red lines, allowing a broad range for change, establishing norms and preventing the debasement of the rule book. It turns out that the Supreme Court is not omnipotent. In an instant, a racist Knesset can overturn its rulings."

********************

Ottoman Land Code:

[The Ottoman Land Code of 1858] required the registration in
the name of individual owners of agricultural land, most of
which had never previously been registered and which had
formerly been treated according to traditional forms of land
tenure, in the hill areas of Palestine generally masha'a, or
communal usufruct. The new law meant that for the first time a
peasant could be deprived not of title to his land, which he had
rarely held before, but rather of the right to live on it, cultivate it
and pass it on to his heirs, which had formerly been
inalienable...Under the provisions of the 1858 law, communal
rights of tenure were often ignored...Instead, members of the
upper classes, adept at manipulating or circumventing the legal
process, registered large areas of land as theirs...The fellahin
[peasants] naturally considered the land to be theirs, and often
discovered that they had ceased to be the legal owners only
when the land was sold to Jewish settlers by an absentee
landlord...Not only was the land being purchased; its Arab
cultivators were being dispossessed and replaced by foreigners
who had overt political objectives in Palestine.

******************************

Land ownership in Palestine:

passia.org