Last night in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah there was a vigil, a memorial to the Palestinian families’ homes from which they were evicted. First they were refugees and now they are homeless. After weeks of legal battles, sit-ins and press conferences, several hundreds gathered to acknowledge a critical defeat in the battle over the future of this land and the two peoples who want to live here in peace.
Yes, the Supreme Court ruled, yes– the Palestinians were evicted in accordance with the law and yes, the Jews who moved in there did so legally. But this is a matter of the future viability of a Palestinian state, and the true test, or more correctly, disclosure of Israel’s true intentions and integrity. Assuming the Jews who moved into these houses (and now pray on the rooftops looking down on the newly homeless families in the street), did in fact live there at some point, this only strengthens the argument that all Palestinian refugees are entitled to reclaim their lost homes all over Israel. Israel’s legal system has set this precedent. It has given legal credibility to the 7 million Palestinians who once lived somewhere in Israel and cannot return.
Israel could not be making it any clearer that its policy is to allow, encourage and facilitate Jewish settlement anywhere and everywhere it wishes, right in the middle of Palestinian communities, with the ultimate aim of clearing them out.
How can Israel, in its claim to represent the Jewish people, who have experienced the worst forms of discrimination, violence, ghettoization and homelessness, now inflict it on another people? And what exactly is it trying to achieve? Have we heard any Israeli politician actually articulate what the objective is here, other than showing off the country’s ability to kick people out and take over whatever place they want? What does Israel think it will gain from these reprehensible actions?
The issue of consistency of law is a critical one.
My predisposition is in cases where a resident has lived there for a couple years (I don’t know what the appropriate statute of limitations should be), that the perfection of title should be accomplished by compensation and not by forced removal.
So, the Palestinian residents should be entitled to remain in their homes of 40 years, and if title is contested, reconciled by compensation.
Whatever precedent is established, it must apply to all on a color-blind basis. If the preference is for residents to perfect by compensation then that process should apply universally. If the precedent is removal on the basis of prior title status, then that should apply universally.
The selective and opportunist approach is fascistic, whoever attempts it.
It’s not just a matter of consistency of law Richard, but the fact that Israel choose to apply the law only when it suits them, such as the case in Gaza, where the ruling of Israel’s Supreme Court with respect to foreign journalists, was ignored.
And what does a couple fo years mean? There are Plestinians being evidected from properties that existed before the Staet fo Israel existed.
I agree. You just can’t throw families out into the streets that have lived in a home for decades.
apparently israels courts thinks differently… it’s citizens hold responsibility for their courts actions at this point and it ain’t pretty…
I agree with Richard Witty on this. Discrimination on the face of the law, or as the law is actually implemented, translates into no Rule Of Law that should be upheld. The rub is that discrimination per se is very much a tool of the law, including here in the USA–so it does boil down to political policy in the end. It’s a constant balancing act, trying to adhere the over-riding interest of most of the people, most of the time. All sides always claim they are acting in the “best interests of the people.” If we applied the Sotomayor impact test, the Palestinians would clearly be the winners.
this highlights how laws aren’t about justice so much as they are about who gets to control what…this is especially the case in a fascist regime which israel is displaying a continued move towards… it is very disturbing to see previous victims of cruelty and atrocities inflict the same on others when the situation is reversed…
One of the first things one learns in law school is that the law is not fundamentally aimed at fairness. The obvious clear case is Nazi law. It you look at USA law, it’s been a battle all the way, first against British law, then against–well you all know Jim Crow and all that. It’s a shame that most Americans know so little about what has happened to the Palestinians, and how that has translated into the world seeing the USA as
hypocritical, when it was once adored as a light to the world.
They are evicted in accordance to what law? The law of colonial occupation? They certainly cannot mean any known legal process that is used in the normal course of jurisprudence. Are they talking about the precedence of ethnic cleansing and genocide?
One day documents are rejected and another day they are accepted, all according to the racial makeup of those pursuing whatever gain. Legal corpus in this instance is a joke, everything is skewed by the occupation – it strains the bonds of credulity, and forces the question of legitimacy in any sense of the word. The Supreme Court is a unreliable poskim, all else unravels for that point forward.
That depends what you think the Jewish people (or at least the Israelis) learned from experiencing “the worst forms of discrimination, violence, ghettoization and homelessness.” Did they learn that these are terrible things that nobody should suffer, or did they just learn that these are things that those who have power can inflict on those who lack it? Doesn’t the Jewish belief in themselves as God’s favorites have something to do with this?
Reminds me of exchanges with our dear Richard Witty. The people had their day in court so to speak and it weren’t Palestinians. Now all we need is that ONE Palestinian case ends as successfully as these.
Assuming the Jews who moved into these houses (and now pray on the rooftops looking down on the newly homeless families in the street), did in fact live there at some point,
The whole context is highly confusing and I have no time to look into this as carefully as the subject deserves. But I read somewhere the people that moved in are Yeshiva students. Americans?
Slightly cynical flight of thought/imagination:
Stand-ins? Is their main function to prevent the former owners from moving back in? Maybe they are allowed to pay a low rent or no rent at all till demolition. This would make sense.
The real owners somewhere on the mountains sipping their Martini’s at the swimming pool, after having handed on his property to a real estate agent.
Given that no less than 91% of Israeli Jews supported the assault on Gaza which included the use of white phosphorous against civilian targets and the wilful destruction of hospitals why does this latest outrage come as a surprise ? Israel has just taken another step further into the darkness and when it reemerges into the light there probably won’t be a Jewish state as Israelis currently imagine it.
Yes, the Supreme Court ruled, yes– the Palestinians were evicted in accordance with the law and yes, the Jews who moved in there did so legally.
I must wonder the Israeli juridical system which gives the Jew the possibility to make land and property claims to decades old (not those biblical claims) disputed ownership claims, like those in Hebron and East Jerusalem, but not gives the same rights to Palestinians. Why can a Jew claim the ownership to something he owned long before 1948 but the Arabs can’t do the same. The only explanation is that the whole Israeli legal system is profoundly racist.
If the Israeli supreme court opens Jewish pre 48 and 67 ownership cases on the area which is internationally considered as Palestinian area so should the Palestinian cases inside the “Jewish area” be opened. To how many houses could the Israeli Palestinians, not to mention the other Palestinians, move, if the same justifications would be handeled in a non-racist way?
RE: “…this only strengthens the argument that all Palestinian refugees are entitled to reclaim their lost homes all over Israel.”
Hud Bannon (played by Paul Newman): “Well, I’ve always thought the law was meant to be interpreted in a lenient manner. Sometimes I lean one way and sometimes I lean the other.”
“Hud” (1963) – link to imdb.com
I made exactly the same point here on my blog when the al-Kurds were evicted from their East Jerusalem home last year.
A single, binational state, where everyone can live everywhere, is the only solution to this folly.
“While Israel disgracefully lags behind in every international educational ranking, it encourages and takes pride in the military service of its students as a questionable substitute.”
IN ISRAEL, SUCCESS IS MEASURED IN COMBAT SERVICE
I do not know if you noticed, but there seems to be a marked problem with the intelligence quotient and Zionism. It has a tendency to “rot the brain,” as I said on another site.
“The job of a school is to impart knowledge, education, and values on its students. On this score, they have registered a shameful failure, one after the other. International tests in recent years have exposed Israel’s education system for what it is, given the particularly meager achievements which are only getting worse. The latest TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) results registered by our students placed them 24th in math and 25th in science out of 49 countries that participated in the exam. Israel trails Armenia, Cyprus and Malaysia.”
It is the brain drain from individuals escaping from such a cloistered and narrow minded bigotry/racism. Did you ever wonder about it in the Southern United States? The deterioration of minds set on deep racism, participating in mentally numbing acts of barbarism. Pretty soon Israel will bear a striking resemblance to this –
Y’ALL COME BACK NOW, YE HEAR
Or, has it already reached this point?
“Arguing that a Jewish Majority in Palestine was not important, Einstein dismissed the goal of a Jewish state: “The state idea is not according to my heart. I cannot understand why it is needed. It is connected with many difficulties and narrow-mindedness. I believe it is bad.” ”
EINSTEIN ON POLITICS – HIS PRIVATE THOUGHTS AND PUBLIC STANDS ON NATIONALISM, ZIONISM, WAR, PEACE, AND THE BOMB
I’d just like to note the police force here, armed to the teeth as though they were off to battle, when they are knowingly dealing with peaceful protesters.
I’d also like to add that I don’t know when this specific land belonged to Jews, but they sure as hell weren’t these European whities.