Despite international pressure and American officials pressing Israel for a settlement freeze, early Sunday, Israeli security forces evicted two Palestinian families from their homes. One of the families, the Ghawis, had 38 members living in 6 apartments. They had resided there for 53 years.
As soon as the Palestinians had been forcibly removed from the houses, Jewish nationalists moved in, witnesses said.
Robert H. Serry, the United Nations special Middle East coordinator, who visited one of the homes in the spring, said in a statement that he deplored the evictions, which he described as “totally unacceptable actions by Israel.”
The British Consulate, in Sheik Jarrah, said in a statement that its officials were “appalled” by the evictions.
Israelis break down door and evict family who lived in home for 53 years
JERUSALEM — Israeli security forces evicted two Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem early Sunday after the families lost a long legal battle to remain in the contested properties, furthering a plan for Jewish settlement in the predominantly Arab area. The move, days after senior American officials visited Jerusalem to press for a settlement freeze, prompted sharp international criticism
I am not sure how familiar you all are with the case, but as a libertarian this one REALLY irks me.
Essentially, the ruling was based on ottoman documents from the 1870s (the validity of which has not yet been ruled upon). So in this case, Israel accepts property claims from decendants from way before its founding.
However, should a refugee palestinian try and claim their property lost in 1948 or 1967 they would be rejected. With this ruling, will the pre-1948 inhabitants of Lod and Ramle (Lydda and Ramla) be allowed to take possession of their property based on pre-1948 documents?
Or even more graving for Israel as a country based on laws - when an Israeli arab 'present absentee' try and claim their property, they are rejected. Oftentimes despite supreme court rulings in their favor. For example, in 1951 the supreme court ruled that the villagers of Iqrit should be allowed back in their village. They are still today prohibited from building on their own land.
My issue with this is that if Israel wants to be a western democracy, laws regarding private property has to be respected and applied in a non-selective manner. Nevermind the politicizing of the private property of the refugees - how do you reconcile the recent actions in east jerusalem with the farce that is the 'present absentees'?
from good old wikipedia:
Libertarianism is a term used to describe a broad spectrum of political philosophies which seek to maximize individual liberty and minimize or even abolish the state. Libertarians embrace viewpoints across that spectrum ranging from pro-property to anti-property, from minimal government to openly anarchist. The word libertarian is an antonym of authoritarian.
Let me rephrase that, replace the libertarian part with: "as a believer in private property rights and the importance of the government to evenly protects those rights, this really irks me".
Now, back to the actual arguments.
Also, orochi, there is a difference between national or imperial soveriegnty over land - which is what you are talking about - and the private owenership of that land - which is what I made my point about. Private property is according to international law not negated by a change of sovereignty.
Israel Evicts Palestinians From Homes
Despite international pressure and American officials pressing Israel for a settlement freeze, early Sunday, Israeli security forces evicted two Palestinian families from their homes. One of the families, the Ghawis, had 38 members living in 6 apartments. They had resided there for 53 years.
As soon as the Palestinians had been forcibly removed from the houses, Jewish nationalists moved in, witnesses said.
Robert H. Serry, the United Nations special Middle East coordinator, who visited one of the homes in the spring, said in a statement that he deplored the evictions, which he described as “totally unacceptable actions by Israel.”
The British Consulate, in Sheik Jarrah, said in a statement that its officials were “appalled” by the evictions.
Israelis break down door and evict family who lived in home for 53 years
JERUSALEM — Israeli security forces evicted two Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem early Sunday after the families lost a long legal battle to remain in the contested properties, furthering a plan for Jewish settlement in the predominantly Arab area. The move, days after senior American officials visited Jerusalem to press for a settlement freeze, prompted sharp international criticism
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/world/middleeast/03israel.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
I am not sure how familiar you all are with the case, but as a libertarian this one REALLY irks me.
Essentially, the ruling was based on ottoman documents from the 1870s (the validity of which has not yet been ruled upon). So in this case, Israel accepts property claims from decendants from way before its founding.
However, should a refugee palestinian try and claim their property lost in 1948 or 1967 they would be rejected. With this ruling, will the pre-1948 inhabitants of Lod and Ramle (Lydda and Ramla) be allowed to take possession of their property based on pre-1948 documents?
Or even more graving for Israel as a country based on laws - when an Israeli arab 'present absentee' try and claim their property, they are rejected. Oftentimes despite supreme court rulings in their favor. For example, in 1951 the supreme court ruled that the villagers of Iqrit should be allowed back in their village. They are still today prohibited from building on their own land.
My issue with this is that if Israel wants to be a western democracy, laws regarding private property has to be respected and applied in a non-selective manner. Nevermind the politicizing of the private property of the refugees - how do you reconcile the recent actions in east jerusalem with the farce that is the 'present absentees'?
" ... as a libertarian ..."
No further discussion necessary.
If you're going to take that route kunga, then Israel and the United States still belong to Britain.
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.
from good old wikipedia:
Libertarianism is a term used to describe a broad spectrum of political philosophies which seek to maximize individual liberty and minimize or even abolish the state. Libertarians embrace viewpoints across that spectrum ranging from pro-property to anti-property, from minimal government to openly anarchist. The word libertarian is an antonym of authoritarian.
Let us keep this ad rem, not ad hominem orochi.
Let me rephrase that, replace the libertarian part with: "as a believer in private property rights and the importance of the government to evenly protects those rights, this really irks me".
Now, back to the actual arguments.
Also, orochi, there is a difference between national or imperial soveriegnty over land - which is what you are talking about - and the private owenership of that land - which is what I made my point about. Private property is according to international law not negated by a change of sovereignty.
all power leads to abuse and what the zionists do to the palestinians is on par with what the nazi's did to the jewish (and others)
if the corporatism of military industrial complex is not stopped i fear for all humanity
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.