Tensions over Palestinian evictions in East Jerusalem boil over

I don't understand what this means. I asked if you'd be OK with Israel dropping a nuclear bomb on Gaza. I thought that question, at least, should be easy to answer.

 

What's so hard to understand?

They would be killing themselves.

Do you even understand how nuclear bombs work?

On top of that, it's a totally dumbass question, because Israel would never do that even if it didn't mean killing themselves.

Would you, durvasa, go and massacre your next door neighbors? I thought that question, at least, should be easy to answer.

 

https://m.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-says-hamas-is-targeting-iron-dome-sites-airports-668194

JPost pointing out this Hamas strategy is being orchestrated by Iran. Wouldn’t surprise me.

It isn’t working.

They’re probably trying to get Israel or Israeli settlers specifically to damage Al Aqsa mosque. But even that won’t change anything.

 

I think Hamas is just trying to increase their popularity among Palestinians by "fighting back", however ineffectively. Obviously they know that they're not going to defeat Israel in any military sense. They're willing to put Israeli lives, and significantly more Palestinian lives, at risk with their actions. It's sad and infuriating that this strategy actually works for them, politically.

 

Palestinians are in a bad place. If they do nothing, they are forcibly expelled. If they try to integrate into Israeli society, they’re second class citizens because they’re not Jewish. If they fight back, they are killed.

If I were Palestinian, I would be livid at how this past 100 years unfolded.

As an American, there is little I can even do. BDS is criminalized in a bunch of places. I’d still buy Israeli goods even if it wasn’t.

It’s just ****ed up that we carved out Palestine for Jewish Holocaust survivors. It’s ****ed up how the world treats Jewish people in general.

 

Alright, then I'll rephrase. What would be an action that Israel could possibly take militarily that you'd disagree with?

No.

Yes.

 

"Almost Nothing You’ve Heard About Evictions in Jerusalem Is True":

https://www.wsj.com/articles/almost...rusalem-is-true-11621019410?mod=hp_opin_pos_3

Almost Nothing You’ve Heard About Evictions in Jerusalem Is True
Neutral application of property law becomes an international incident because a landlord is a Jew.
By Avi Bell and Eugene Kontorovich
May 14, 2021 3:10 pm ET

Hamas never needs a special occasion to bombard Israel with rockets. Yet the progressive narrative connects the terrorist group’s current onslaught to eviction proceedings in Israeli courts concerning a few properties in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren claim these are stark human-rights violations by the Israeli government, and illegal under international law. Even the State Department expressed “serious concern.”

The truth about Sheikh Jarrah is the opposite. It is an ordinary property dispute between private parties. The Jewish claimants’ ownership of the few plots of land has been confirmed repeatedly in court, following laws that apply equally regardless of ethnicity. Israeli courts have gone out of their way to avoid evicting the Palestinian residents who haven’t paid rent for half a century.

In the case now before Israel’s Supreme Court, the owner is an Israeli corporation with Jewish owners whose chain of title is documented back to an original purchase in 1875. Until 1948, the neighborhood now known as Sheikh Jarrah was home to both Jewish and Arab communities. Jordan invaded Israel in 1948 and occupied half of Jerusalem, expelling every one of its Jewish inhabitants and seizing their property.

When Israel reunited Jerusalem and ended the Jordanian occupation in 1967, it had to decide what to do with these properties. In the many cases in which Jordan had officially transferred the title of Jewish-owned properties to Palestinians, Israel respected the new titles—and still does—even though they are based on forcible takings in a war of aggression followed by ethnic cleansing against Jews. Where title had never been transferred, however, Israel returned properties to their owners. Critics of Israel claim that Arabs can’t recover property under the same law, but the law is entirely neutral—it is simply the case that Jordan took property from Jews, not Palestinians.

Title to the properties in dispute in Sheikh Jarrah was never given by Jordan to Palestinians, so Israeli law respects the unbroken title of the plaintiffs. This case has nothing to do with ethnicity or religion. The only discrimination in the legal treatment of Sheikh Jarrah property is historic, by Jordan, and against Jews to the benefit of Palestinians.

The plaintiff and its predecessors in title have spent four decades in court seeking to recover possession of the properties. In every case, courts have ruled in favor of the owners. In the latest lawsuits, the courts ruled that four of the eight defendants were squatters with no legal rights in the land, and the remaining four were descendants of tenants who had never paid rent.

Nevertheless, Israeli courts have treated the Palestinian squatters and leaseholders alike as “protected tenants,” and would shield them from eviction indefinitely if they paid rent. They have refused to do so.

The laws involved are the same as any landlord would invoke. There is only one objection in this case: the owners are Jews. Western progressives have elevated the desire of some Arabs not to have Jewish neighbors into a human right and a legal entitlement that even the Jewish state must protect.

The human-rights groups pushing this issue focus on the owners’ Jewishness. A letter from 190 progressive groups mentions the Jewish identity of the plaintiffs eight times, calls them “settlers” seven times—another way of saying they’re Jews living where Jews aren’t allowed—and points out that upholding the plaintiff’s property rights could change Jerusalem’s “demographic character.” J Street, a left-wing Jewish organization, characterizes the lawsuits as an attempt to “Judaize primarily Palestinian neighborhoods,” as if the ethnicity of neighbors is a reason to take away Jews’ property.

Israeli courts adjudicate property disputes in Jerusalem between Arab parties, or by Arabs against Jews, with no protest. The manufactured controversy this time is an attempt to pressure Israel effectively to perpetuate Jordan’s ethnic cleansing—in the name of human rights.

There is much to say about Jewish property rights in the region. The one million Jews who fled pogroms in Egypt, Iraq and elsewhere in the Arab world after 1948 were forced to leave behind billions of dollars of property, for which they have no remedy. Even today, in the areas of the West Bank under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority, Palestinians who sell land to Jews are subject to torture, imprisonment and death.

Israel’s only crime in Sheikh Jarrah is refusing to follow these examples of discrimination and respecting property rights. Many critics, including the United Nations’ human-rights functionaries, have tried to say this amounts to establishing settlements and violating international law, a reference to the Fourth Geneva Convention. But even in the mistaken view that the convention applies here, it prohibits only “the deportation or transfer” of citizens by a government into an occupied territory. It has no bearing on private property rights and certainly doesn’t require a government to refuse to enforce them.

The real story behind Sheikh Jarrah is a microcosm of the conflict: Israel is condemned for policies that are entirely unremarkable, while discrimination against Jews is proclaimed to be a rule of international law.

Mr. Bell is a professor at the University of San Diego Law School. Mr. Kontorovich is director of the Center for the Middle East and International Law at George Mason University School of Law. Both are scholars at the Kohelet Policy Forum in Jerusalem.
​

 

Get em.

 

Do you disagree with Hamas indiscriminately shooting thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians?

Do you think Israel should just take that lying down?

It's insane that Israel is the side that is getting accused by large parts of the media and the usual suspects from the left (Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez has turned out to be an idiot).

What exactly do you expect Israel to do?

There was a proceeding in a court of law over some property. The Israeli side won.

Hamas (sponsored by Iran and sadly by "aid money" from the EU) uses this as "justification" for shooting thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians, killing several, including children. Hamas, as always, hides behind civilians and international media. Israel, despite being superior from a military perspective, tries to be as measured as possible in its response, trying as well as possible to target Hamas terrorists while sparing Palestinian civilians (which is extremely difficult because Hamas uses them as human shields).

I repeat, it is crazy that Israel gets painted as the bad guys in this conflict. Are there some shades of grey and does Israel have its own extremists, and is there fair criticism of Netanyahu? Yes.

But does Israel indiscriminately target civilians in this conflict? No. Hamas does. And large parts of the Left and of the international media side with Hamas. It's shameful.

durvasa, imagine that there would be some indigenous population in, let's say, Galveston. They hate the 6 million people living in the larger Houston area. They have been launching suicide attacks on people in Houston for decades. They have been assembling weapons in secret tunnels. Someone from Houston wins a court battle over some property in Galveston. The indigenous people in Galveston start launching missiles at Houston. Thousands of them. Houston has the stronger military force. But the militant indigenous people in Galveston hide behind civilians, media, houses of worship in Galveston. What do you think Houston would do? Just take the missiles lying down, doing nothing?

 

iSraEL wOuLD nEVER mASsACRE TheiR nEXt DoOR nEiGHbORS.

I get that english isn't the first language for some folks, but to say one side doesn't indiscriminately attack is disingenuous. There wouldn't be a justfication of "a bunch of children died because we saw hammas there last week" just about every other day. By nature, regular collateral damage in of itself refutes that point. These are the facts, emotions of "but they would never do this!!! they told me so" are meaningless.


https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/000_99Z69M-1.jpg?resize=770,513

 

Hamas terrorists hide behind civilians, while launching thousands of rockets at civilians in Israel. What do you expect Israel to do, LPH?

Someone is shooting a gun at you while hiding behind another person from his tribe who is unarmed. What do you do? Take the bullet? Or shoot back, at the risk of hitting the "human shield"?

The thing is, Hamas wants dead Palestinian civilians. They want these photos for a propaganda war, so that gullible folks like Los Pollos Hermanos further their cause.

 

I appreciate your effort in a respectful dialogue. I don't disagree that israel doesn't have a right to defend itself, which is why I hold them to that standard. I don't think they are completely innocent in this situation either though. Party of warfare is appropriately vetting your targets etc. Hammas is scrum and so are the neighboring arab countries. There has never been a war/conflict where civilian casualties are not a concern, people on your side just routinely forget this when it comes to this situation.

It doesn't matter what you aim to do with pictures of dead children. They are dead children. If your biggest offense to it is that pictures of what the offensive is doing, you shouldn't remain ignorant to it. I believe the pictures of israeli damage is equally as bad. The difference here is I'm not mitigating one side or placing a higher value on the life of a citizen of one country vs a poor refugee. You see?

My stance is and always will be that the palestenian people should leave the region and the arab countries using them should absorb them in as a reparation. There is no other way. So that completely refutes your last point brother.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-13331522?xtor=AL-72-[partner]-[apple.news]-[link]-[news]-[bizdev]-[isapi].

Parental discretion is advised

 

I agree that dead civilians are tragic on either side. But we just have to see that one side are terrorists (Hamas) taking the rest of the Palestinian population hostage while the other side are defending themselves.

This sentence still holds true: If Hamas could kill the entire Jewish population of Israel, they would. Israel could kill the entire Palestinian population, but hasn't, and doesn't.

The whole thing gets complicated by religion. Hamas manages (and gets lots of support from other Muslims everywhere in the world, as well as the leftist media) to create an "us vs. them" thing between all Muslims and Israel. Unfortunately, this is aided by the religion of Islam itself. Hostility towards Jews is ingrained in the roots of the religion. Hamas is just one symptom of that, and at the same time uses it for its own "benefit".

 

I know I really don’t provide much as far as the conversation at hand but I love the Dialogue in this thread today

 

Yeah wondering how such a poor country or strip of land can produce thousands of Rockets

it’s not like Daryl Morey worked there
@Os Trigonum

 

Please don’t send another pallet of billions of dollars in cash

 

Yeah those citizens look really poor but they got unlimited weapons

 

I know one thing for a fact they don’t have it nearly as bad as some Americans