- 16 Jun 2016 03:48
#14690863
Where in all this is it stated that a conclusion has been reached, even the last paragraph is open-ended. In the same article it is stated that in 2005, a decision was reached but in 2007 Adalah had to file another petition to overturn other laws that in concert discriminated against Arabs. You claim that the Katzir case in 2000 settled the matter, yet in 2005 the matter was not settled despite action being taken and then again in 2007 the issue remain unresolved despite the action taken in 2000(Court) and in 2005(Mazuz), the action taken in 2007 close with a paragraph that does not provide any final conclusion.
When you accuse people that have done all these things I mentioned for the Jews, raise memorials, pass legislation, help them, support them materially, psychologically and so on, you then need to prove your accusation wat0n, I am the one who does not need to prove your negative, you post some non-sense and we are supposed to consider your non-sense valid if not proven wrong? LOL. No dear the non-sense are wrong until they are proven correct. You make a claim that westerners are biased against Jews and are more supportive of Palestinians victims than they are to Jewish.
You claim that westerners have consciously ignored injustices brought to their attention by Jews or Israel. Prove it or stop badmouthing and accusing people that have done and still do so much for you.
wat0n wrote:Umm? Those deal with the administrative functioning of the ILA and with a possible privatization of some of its land, not with the issue of Arab property rights.
Where in all this is it stated that a conclusion has been reached, even the last paragraph is open-ended. In the same article it is stated that in 2005, a decision was reached but in 2007 Adalah had to file another petition to overturn other laws that in concert discriminated against Arabs. You claim that the Katzir case in 2000 settled the matter, yet in 2005 the matter was not settled despite action being taken and then again in 2007 the issue remain unresolved despite the action taken in 2000(Court) and in 2005(Mazuz), the action taken in 2007 close with a paragraph that does not provide any final conclusion.
In September 2007, the High Court heard a further Adalah petition seeking cancellation of an ILA policy as well as Article 27 of the Regulations of the Obligations of Tenders, which in concert prevent Arab citizens from participating in bids for JNF-controlled land.[52] The High Court of Justice agreed to delay a ruling by at least four months, and a temporary settlement was reached (following the compromise proposed in 2005 by Menachem Mazuz) wherein, although the JNF would be prevented from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity, nevertheless every time land is sold to a non-Jew, the ILA would compensate it with an equivalent amount of land, thus ensuring the total amount of land owned by Jewish Israelis remains the same.[4]
An alternative proposal submitted by Amnon Rubinstein, a former minister, recommended that a distinction be made between JNF lands and state lands, such that all JNF lands directly acquired via donations from abroad specifically for the benefit of Jews (some 900,000 dunams (900 km2)) will pass to the direct control of the JNF; while properties purchased by the JNF from the state in the 1950s and formerly belonging to Palestinian refugees (the so-called "lands of missing persons" or "absentee" lands, amounting to 2,000,000 dunams (2,000 km2)) would revert to state control.[53] Rubinstein's intention was "to avoid passing racist legislation [such as the Ariel Bill] that would limit the use of these lands to the Jews". Others denied however that the Ariel Bill was racist.[54] The Rubinstein proposal was not taken up.
In late 2007 a deal was proposed to swap land between the state and the JNF, thus rendering redundant the Ariel Bill, deemed by some to be racist, while allowing the JNF to continue leasing its lands only to Jews. After the initial land swap, urban JNF land sold in future to non-Jews would include an automatic swap mechanism: the fund would transfer the land to the ILA, and in exchange would receive the purchase price plus a similar-sized plot in the Negev.[55]
What about you prove that there is a major movement in the West to force Arab states to compensate Jewish property title deed owners similar to BDS?
I don't need to prove a negative here. Such movement doesn't exist because the Western public generally doesn't care - it cares even less about this than about BDS (itself a marginal movement all in all).
When you accuse people that have done all these things I mentioned for the Jews, raise memorials, pass legislation, help them, support them materially, psychologically and so on, you then need to prove your accusation wat0n, I am the one who does not need to prove your negative, you post some non-sense and we are supposed to consider your non-sense valid if not proven wrong? LOL. No dear the non-sense are wrong until they are proven correct. You make a claim that westerners are biased against Jews and are more supportive of Palestinians victims than they are to Jewish.
You claim that westerners have consciously ignored injustices brought to their attention by Jews or Israel. Prove it or stop badmouthing and accusing people that have done and still do so much for you.
EN EL ED EM ON
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...