I don't understand how appropriating land for a particular religion is ethnic cleansing. Does that mean that appropriating land for the Catholic Church in Brooklyn, New York ethnically cleanses black protestants?
shhh this is a logic free zone. Dont you dare contaminate it.
Okay, bringing us back to the world of today, with a Jewish organization refusing to sell land to people who are not of the Jewish faith, I will articulate the question you're actually getting at. Do organizations have the right to specify the religion of their patrons? It's a good question.
Maybe you should discuss it.
Shalom
Actually Joe, next time a Melanie Philips wannabe tells you that the only state in the world whose right to exist is questioned, tell them that when Ken Livingstone said that he'd like to see the Saudi royals swinging from lampposts, that was the same as saying that Saudi Arabia has no right to exist. I don't usually discuss or post on Saudi because we don't have Saudi-ists dominating our media here in the UK. We have zionists doing that.
Oh and regarding "appropriating the land" the zionists (including the JNF) expropriate/d the land from the Palestinians.
Shalom again
I don't know jack about Ms. Philips and Mr. Livingstone. But on the subject of returning to reality.
JNF. Stupid charity, thinks it can go around paying money to landowners and getting land back in return. Then big boatload of Jews lands from Europe and then they actually expect to live on the land JNF bought. The nerve.
And then a Jewish government wants to sanction Judaism as its religion. Damn Jews start strutting around like Canadians sanctioning Catholicism via a parliamentary Quebecois. Why can't they be like Egyptians with all the nice rights they give Coptic Christians. Or with all the nice rights Iranians give non-Shia. Dammit, who do those Jews think they are?
Most of the land the JNF "bought" was in fact stolen from the Palestinians by the Israeli government and then quickly transferred to the them (the JNF) to ensure that the land was forever beyond the reach of its rightful owners. http://www.semitism.net/node/97?
...1460c5fa2bbb84c
Actually such actions are certainly illegal in the UK and the EU and I had always assumed that they were also outlawed by human rights and antidiscrimination laws in the US as well.
Would our friends be relaxed about an 'Anglo-Saxon National Fund' buying up Jewish-owned properties in Golders Green for the exclusive use of non-Jews?
And if not, can they be surprised if Palestinians react in the same way?
The first tier, the level at which the key distinction between 'Jew' and 'non-Jew' is rendered openly and explicitly, is in the Constitutions and Articles of Association of all the institutions of the Zionist movement ... Thus the Constitution of the Jewish Agency stipulates:
Land is to be acquired as Jewish property and ... the title of the lands acquired is to be taken in the name of the JNF ...
Until 1948, it could have been argued with some justice that the WZO, the JA, the JNF ... are institutional expressions of a technically voluntary organization of primarily parochial interests, and that they should, therefore, be properly judged by standards relevant to similar establishments, for example, the establishment of the Catholic Church ...
The situation alters radically after the establishment of the State of Israel in that now the exclusivist constitutional stipulations of the WZO, JA and the JNF (for Jews only) are incorporated into the body of the laws of the State of Israel ... into the legal, compulsory, judicial machinery of the state ...
it is through this two-tier mechanism that an all-encompassing apartheid system could be legislated by the Israeli Knesset in all that pertains to access to land under Israeli sovereignty and control without resorting to explicit and frequent mention of 'Jew' as a legal category versus 'non-Jew'. ...
And it is through this mechanism of legal duplicity that the State of Israel has successfully veiled the reality of Zionist apartheid in the guise of legal democrcy since the establishment of the State of Israel to date.
Joe, the JNF didn't buy land simply from "landowners," they bought much of the land from land stealers who got the land registered in their names over the heads of their illiterate "tenants" who had owned the land for thousands of years prior to the registration regime. In one purchase in the 1920s the zionists bought a series of hamlets from a Greek Orthodox family based in Beirut, had the Brits evict thousands of tenants (sorry James et al, I know this is a bit of a recap) and then had the Brits stand guard while the zionists tried to drum up enthusiasm among European Jews for colonial settlement. It was years before the hamlets were populated.
http://engforum.pravda.ru/
showth...threadid=119589
http://www.peacenow.org/mepr.asp...sp?rid=&
cid=357
A DUNAM HAS BEEN STOLEN IN YOUR NAME:
Israeli police are investigating suspicions that the former CEO of Himnuta, a subsidiary of the Jewish National Fund (JNF), purchased stolen Palestinian lands in exchange for bribes. JNF does not acquire land in the West Bank, but its subsidiary does so in its stead. Five suspects were arrested in the affair: Haim Cohen, who was Himnuta’s CEO until two months ago; Lt. Col. Yair Blumenthal, head of the Civil Administration’s infrastructure department; brothers Yosef and Yaakov Amram; and their lawyer, Eitan Tzachi. They are suspected of forging documents, illegal land dealing, and aggravated fraud. Police think the ring was responsible for at least five deals in which West Bank lands were stolen from their Palestinian owners and sold to Himnuta for a total of over NIS 20 million. The stolen lands are located near Hebron, Gush Etzion, Jericho, Maale Adumim, and Givat Ze’ev.
Police think the motive for the crimes was primarily financial, but some of those involved may also have been influenced by a desire to “redeem” Palestinian lands and use them for settlement construction. “I have more than a gut instinct that there was also an ideological motive,” said Chief Superintendent Eliezer Elhar of the Samaria and Judea District Police. Army sources concurred, noting that Blumenthal is an ideological ally of the settlement movement and good friends with many of its leaders. In his professional capacity, he often facilitated the establishment of illegal settlement outposts. (Ha’aretz, 2/28/05 & Jerusalem Post, 2/27/05)
Do you somehow know wish to claim that such activities are/were acceptable?
The ignorance and complete lack of historical perspective is shocking.
Your question :“Do organizations have the right to specify the religion of their patrons? It's a good question.”
Before attempting an answer, I think it is worth thinking about your question a bit more. First of all, the state is not simply an organisation. It is of central importance to a country and extremely powerful creating laws, taxing and spending public money and is an expression of the identity of a country. For a state to treat individuals because of their religion or race (as Israel does) is simply to deny the importance of the universal value of human life. The Jewish National Fund is a de facto part of the Israeli State. Maybe later people might want to talk about how it treats Jews and Palestinians differently in more detail.
In any case most people would consider it unacceptable for most non-state organisations to treat people differently on the basis of race or religion. Many Western countries have shameful histories of retailers, transports services, estate agents etc. treating people of different races in a discriminatory way.
Perhaps you might argue that Israel is sensible in denying basic human rights to Palestinians because Israel wants to maintain a Jewish majority in Israel. I don’t think this is a good argument - although you do see it elsewhere. Some commentators in the US are worried that whites will not be a majority in coming decades. Still this position has not found much favour and few people argue that immigration from Africa, the Caribbean or South / Central America should be halted. Neither does anyone argue that Hispanic Americans or Afro-Americans shouldn’t be in the US but in Africa, South America etc.
The sad truth is that when Zionist arguments are debated in a serious way, the are almost always pretty shoddy. Perhaps you could produce some good Zionist arguments? I can only think of one.
2. I've been under the impression that the "rental" clause has always been disregarded in practice, and that Kaadan/Qatzir applies to purchases. So with K&Q enforced, non-Jews will have unlimited access to sale and rental of state land. The state has rather nastily withdrawn land from bidding every now and then to keep it out of the "wrong" hands.
Land law, along with the fate of the Jewish communities of the Arab world, is one of the recurrent topics here...
I'm not sure what proportion of land in the occupied territories was waqf land (owned by religious bodies) in 1967 or now. In any case, Palestinian land is confiscated by the Israeli state if it wants it - Palestinian public land, land owned by religious bodies or even privately owned land. It really is outrageous that this happens and is an example of gross racism. If I went round London or New York and took land owned by Jews or Muslims or public land and appropriated it for Christians, I think this would go down quite badly.
Former Chief Justice Rehnquist of the Supreme Court had a "no jews" clause in his deed. He was not allowed to sell his land to jews.
I'm sure American and Israeli Jewry would celebrate the Southern Baptist south setting up "no jews can own land" laws throughout the South.
Please, Joe, tell us how much you support this! Please Israely Expat!
America is 80% Christian. You can imagine that many of the states are far more Christian than that.
Why shouldn't they write "GET OUT, JEWS!" at the State Border?
Put up a wall to keep out Jews, even.
Just to be consistent with American precedent, it should be a wall to keep out blacks, latinos and jews. Not just jews.
Anyone here seen Monty Python's 'Life of Brian?' If you have, nuff said!!
Wasalaam
Yakoub
His long racist history, though, which he mostly smirkingly denied during his confirmation to the positions of Associate and Chief Justice, is more to the point, but not directly anti-Jewish.
--
SPLITTERS!
Commenting by HaloScan
