Illegal Settlements
 | By suzanna
February 8, 2012 | Share |
Interesting information from Americans for Peace Now, Settlement Watch:
The owners of the Migron land are Palestinian residents of the villages of Deir Dibwan and Burka. The land on which the outpost was built was registered in the land registry in the name of the Palestinian owners from before 1967 (two of the land owners who originally petitioned the High Court to stop Migron have since died, with the case now passed on to their heirs). The Civil Administration's land registration division has in its possession all of the relevant ownership papers. Indeed, in response to Peace Now's petition, the state submitted an aerial photo confirming the claims of the landowner map. (Scanned versions of the relevant ownership documents and the aerial photo are available here, page 6). Peace Now recently released a video introducing the world to these owners.
Israeli officials have repeatedly confirmed, formally and on the record, that the land on which the outpost of Migron is built is legally owned by Palestinians.
"Nature of land rights: Private Palestinian land (agricultural lands of 'Ein Yabrud and Burka). Body which allocated the land: None." (March 2005 Sasson Report, comments regarding Migron - English translation)
"The land on which the buildings of the outpost were built is registered Palestinian land within the boundaries of the villages of Burka and Deir Dibwan." (Civil Administration declaration, December 2006, made by Brig. Gen. Kamil Abu Rukon, Head of the Civil Administration in the West Bank)
"The land upon which the buildings of the outpost were constructed is registered
privately owned Palestinian land, part of the agricultural terrain within the boundaries of Burka and Dir Debwan...." ( December 2006, statement of the State of Israel to the High Court of Justice in response to Peace Now petition against Migron)
COMMENTS
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:05 Rate this: 0 points | This has been known since at least 2006 - so? Photographic evidence proves that this land was abandoned over many years and therefore the claims to it are now questionable under applicable law. The law applicable states that if the land is not worked and taxes not paid for three years the land reverts to the government. However when it suits it Peace Now which specifically does not do anything to support the rights of Jews uses the Israeli Courts for its own political agenda. On the other hand the Jews who were thrown out of Arab countries since 1948 and whose land and property are occupied by Arabs do not have an Arab "Peace Now" to campaign on their behalf. No-one has paid or even offered them a penny in compensation but dispossessed Jews are obviously of no interest to suzanna. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:08 Rate this: 0 points | No Jordanian law dummy, Since Israel has not annexed Judea and Samaria the law applicable to the area before 1967 applies. But of course one would not expect a snivelling six year-old to know that. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:13 Rate this: 0 points | No dummy Jordan has given up all claims to Judea and samaria. Why don't you go and play with your toys - this is obviously well beyond you. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:14 Rate this: 0 points | Then that law must mean revert to the Jordanian government dummy |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:16 Rate this: 0 points | Dummy Israel can't be the government can it ? Or is it being rewritten as revert to the brutal occupying power ? |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:23 Rate this: 0 points | No snivelling six-year old moron look up the law I am sure your Mummy will help you with the hard words. Your use of the words "brutal occupying power" come straight out of the PLO handbook. Which terrorist summer training camp for kids did you attend? |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:25 Rate this: 0 points | Israeli government and Knesset efforts today to find a way to "legalize" Migron are emblematic of a troubling phenomenon in Israel: the growing readiness to sacrifice democracy and rule of law to further a far right-wing, anti-democratic ideology. They are indicative of a longstanding, ugly reality: the Israeli political system has to a great degree been hijacked by the settlers and their supporters, in the service of an agenda that openly seeks to keep all or most of the West Bank in Israeli hands in perpetuity, at the cost of any chance for Israeli-Palestinian peace. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:25 Rate this: 0 points | Jose lets try it dot to dot. You tell us the law says revert to the government. Is the government of the State of Israel the government of that bit of land ? Yes or no? |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:35 Rate this: 0 points | For the snivelling six year old moron - under International Law there is no sovereign government but Israel as was the case with the Allied Powers in 1945 post War Germany exercises the functions of Government. Furthermore since Judea and Samaria were part of the Palestine mandate Jews have every right to settle land which is abandoned. Where did you cut and paste that from suzanna? The Jewish Communities are situiatated on a minute fraction of Judea and Samaria but don't let that get in the way of your ridiculous rant. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:35 Rate this: 0 points | suzanna, israel is about to demolish this settlement (and make the 50 families there homeless), see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migron_(village) …
… so what are you complaining about? or are you just drawing attention to the impartiality of the israeli judicial system
|
?Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:46 Rate this: 0 points | 'The Jewish Communities are situiatated on a minute fraction of Judea and Samaria but don't let that get in the way of your ridiculous rant.' Spreading more misinformation. The apartheid roads and military zones that support these illegal settlements prohibit the Palestinains from moving freely in 60% of the occupied West Bank. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:52 Rate this: 0 points | Suzanna |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:56 Rate this: 0 points | Like I said Jose re written as revert to the brutal occupying power. Happy goldfish what the Israel courts say has about as much clout as ...oh make up your own analogy. The Israeli Supreme court said the apartheid wall around Bil'in should be rerouted four years ago. And ? The Settlers of Migron have not been moved out. They look like they are going to be resettled a short distance away on more stolen land,this time called "state land " and COMPENSATED at the Israeli taxpayers expense. In other words REWARDED for their theft. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:56 Rate this: 0 points | Peace Now first petitioned the court over 5 years ago requesting the state stop the expansion of the outpost and immediately evacuate the settlers, in particular as the settlement was built on private Palestinian land. And yet an illegal settlement on privately owned Palestinian land is still there. '. . . . or are you just drawing attention to the (apartheid)impartiality of the israeli judicial system'? One rule for Palestinians another for Jewish terrorists settlers? |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:57 Rate this: 0 points | There are no apartheid roads but again "ms information" is your real name ain't it? Certain roads are off bounds both to Israelis and Palestinians for security reasons.Some of your Palestinian terrorist buddies have the rather bad habit of throwing stones at Jewish civilian cars hoping to cause death or injury and/or shooting their occupants dead. Where did you get the figure of 60% from Peace Now, b'tselem or one of those other anti-Israel NGOs. Since 98% of Plaestinians are under the governance of the PA that figure is about as accurate as much of the other rubbish you inflict on us. It's judea and Samaria it was only "the West Bank" when it was illegally occupied by Jordan between 1948 and 1967. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:58 Rate this: 0 points | This is how the 'law' operates in Israel: In 2002, settlers placed mobile homes on the hill adjacent to the antenna, without any legal permission to do so. A few months later, they began building a few permanent homes. Since then the outpost has been enlarging and expanding continuously and in all respects, including a number of roads, connection to the electricity and water supplies, and the erecting of a large fence surrounding the outpost, enclosing huge areas of surrounding land for "security purposes." |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:04 Rate this: 0 points | Here we go Millis/Phoney/Armbach/sniveller resorts to apartheid/theft when he is unable to mount a worthwhile argument. No point in enaging a brain dead bigot. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:04 Rate this: 0 points |
suzanna, don't be ridiculous wikipedia, unlike you but perhaps even you won't object to this, from peace now Dramatic Decision: Supreme Court Orders Dismantling of Migron by March 2012 |
, links to its sources 
…Chris Tucker (not verified) Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:04 Rate this: 0 points | Yep no apartheid here. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:07 Rate this: 0 points | If there is any stealing going on it ain't the Jews http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xel5wd_how-the-arabs-stole-jewish-land_... |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:14 Rate this: 0 points |
and now the israeli supreme court has stopped it! this is how the law operates in Israel … better than in any other middle east country |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:18 Rate this: 0 points | I see they are all coming out of the woodwork now. Another insightful post from the odious Tucker. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:31 Rate this: 0 points |
and it has been, you time-waster (at a cost of 31 million nis to israel) see http://www.idfblog.com/2011/06/26/security-fence-path-near-bilin-deconst... … Today marked the start of the relocation of the security fence bordering the West Bank village of Bil’in. The IDF began implementing a court ruling by Israel’s Supreme Court, which will enlarge neighboring Palestinian territory. Israeli soldiers have relocated dozens of Palestinian olive trees and replanted them during the re-routing of the fence. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 16:50 Rate this: 0 points | Yes after three and a half years they purported to make a start and then stopped. A bit of a PR exercise, you RUDE time waster.Which is why the demos have continued And dearie me quoting an IOF blog. How about IsraelNationalNews ? Or The Dandy ? Or The Beano. And as for the purpose of the fence. If it was really about security and not land theft it would have been built on Israeli land or on the border. The reality is that so far as the brutally occupied territories are concerned the Israeli courts count for nothing if the government and/ or the army don't like it. It is after all a military dictatorship. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:14 Rate this: 0 points | I believe the source is Peace Now. The same group Goldfish quotes (see above) |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:15 Rate this: 0 points | They Say: Settlements are not an obstacle to peace. They take up only a tiny fraction, around 1 percent, of the entire West Bank. We(Peace Now)Say: The "one percent argument" is a classic example of how supporters of the status-quo use a fraction of the truth to misrepresent the truth on the ground in the West Bank. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:18 Rate this: 0 points | You lied Phoney but are we shocked? nah. There you go complaining about the fence as land theft but of course how can one steal something that already belongs to you. The Jews have been called thieves from time immemorial nothing new there. The fence would never have been needed if your terrorist buddies hadn't blown up our children on buses and in restaurants but of course in your perverted world you consider that to be resistance. Military Dictatorship? you obviously do not have a clue what a military dictatorship is. Perhaps a week in Homs will educate you. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:29 Rate this: 0 points | Joshua789 when it comes to truth Peace Now has a lot to learn. Peace Now, the Israel-based advocacy group claimed in a controversial report, Breaking the Law – One Violation Leads to Another, that “a large proportion of the settlements built on the West Bank are built on privately owned Palestinian land,” including 86.4% of Ma’ale Adumim’s land and 35.1% of Ariel’s. Overall, the report claimed, “Palestinians privately own nearly 40% of the land on which settlements have been built.” This is in direct contradiction to often repeated claims by numerous Israeli governments that settlements are built only on state (that is, public) land and not on private land. CAMERA raised numerous factual and legal objections to Peace Now’s claims which the group never addressed. Peace Now, however, was eventually forced to admit that no more than 0.54% of Ma’ale Adumim’s land was privately owned by Palestinians. That is, Peace Now had erred by almost 16,000 percent! Now comes word of another error – one with real consequences. Peace Now claimed in its original report that the community of Revava sat on land that was 71.15% privately owned by Palestinians. Revava did not agree that any of their land was privately owned by Palestinians. According to an article in Israel National News Revava therefore complained to Peace Now, which, without admitting any error, reduced the figure of 71.15% to 22%. Peace Now, however, refused to accurately correct their original claim, and refused to issue an apology. The group that formally owns Revava’s land, The Fund for Redeeming the Land, then sued Peace Now and the report’s authors (Dror Etkes and Hagit Ofran) for libel in Jerusalem Magistrates Court. The decision came on December 11th 2008 and it was a slam dunk for Revava and Fund attorney Doron Nir Tzvi. Justice Yehezkel Barclay convicted Peace Now and its staffers of libel, ordered them to pay the Fund 20,000 NIS plus tax, and to make a public apology which they must publish in the newspapers Ha’aretz and Maariv. Will Peace Now finally come clean and admit that the rest of their reports are also nonsense? Or will each community that it libeled have to file a similar lawsuit for the full truth to come out. http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_print=1&x_context=7&x_issue=5&x_articl... . |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:38 Rate this: 0 points | Not on the say of camera they won't . Maybe if the Dandy or the Beano asked them to ? A week in Homs ? Nag the Jordan valet is closer. As the area IOF commander said his very self. " We are the law here " |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:38 Rate this: 0 points | I think I trust Peace Now as a source of verifiable truth more than I would ever trust you Advis3r. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:50 Rate this: 0 points | Joshua - I haven't been successfully sued for libel Peace Now have so who is to believed? What a strange world you must inhabit. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:51 Rate this: 0 points | sniveller can't take the heat so he attacks the messenger pathetic loser. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 17:55 Rate this: 1 point | Can I make a suggestion? Let's all ignore Advs3r / Jose. He is so unbelievably tedious. Goodbye Advs3r. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:03 Rate this: 0 points | Wishful thinking troll - you can't take the truth when it is presented so you run away and pretend to hide. You print lies about Israel and there will be someone to rebut you and if you find that tiresome so much the better sooner or later you will realise the error of your ways and discover that Israel is not the evil country you pathetically try and make out it is. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:19 Rate this: 0 points | I think she said goodbye. What part of goodbye don't you understand ? Goodbye Mitnachel/ Advsr / Jose / Anthony /blackie Hitnachlut....a term meaning " settlement " as both a verb and a noun and used exclusively in modern Hebrew to signify Jewish settlement in the West Bank and Gaza. A settler in one of these communities is a MITNACHEL , plural mitnachlim. Ok time for sayonara go on Jose break my heart ( apologies to Shane McGowan ( |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:30 Rate this: 0 points | Sniveller you know what I wish you - and soon I thought suzanna was leaving she said goodbye after all i didn't and I certainly am not going - you want harrass me some more bigot/Phoney/Armbach? |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:32 Rate this: 0 points | By the way loser Jose has been banned you will have to think of another name to link to me. |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:52 Rate this: 0 points | Suzanna |
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 18:54 Rate this: 0 points | Don't hold your breath Harvey questions like that hurt what passes for her brains. |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 10:11 Rate this: 0 points |
what reason do you have to say that they've stopped? you can't just make things up because you'd like them to be true
but then it wouldn't protect the settlers in modi'in illit … you can see from the aerial photo that it does protect them or are you one of those zionists who believe that jews who settle on the west bank have lost their right to life? |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 11:32 Rate this: 0 points | Perfectly ludicrous arguments. I say it having BEEN there and being in close contact with people that ARE there. Go to YouTube and search Bil"in. And when you say "Jews " in this contact you don't mean Jews. You mean Israelis illegally occupying the land at the point of a tank turret. And what is so special about the Modi'in settlers? Why not have a wall that protected ALL the settlers ? This would of course mean building it along the Jordan river with all the non Israelis driven the other side of it. Are you one of those zionists who think THAT would be a good idea ? It is all about land theft and you KNOW it. Stay out of it Jose this discussion does not benefit from your drivel. |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 12:44 Rate this: 0 points |
you're seeing things that aren't there, again! jose was banned 2 days ago … he is no more!
we have no idea who you are, and no way of checking what you say we do know however, that what you said is not supported by anything available on the internet! (at least, nothing that you've been able to find!
no, you do it, and provide a link if you can find anything |
)Thu, 02/09/2012 - 13:09 Rate this: 0 points | I am not here to be believed but to tell the truth as I see it .I am not so stupid as to think I will persuade or convert people like yourself. If I am here for anything it is to practice , and learn from the reactions to , the arguments. And believe me I have d a lot. Jonathan has been a particularly interesting study. No you do it!!.....ok I will Do you intend to address the routing of the walk issue ? |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 13:36 Rate this: 0 points |
ok, let's see …
i] in the modi'in and similar areas, it isn't a wall! ii] the barrier (like many things, including the peace process generally) has to be a compromise the israelis evidently believe that protecting ALL the settlers would be a bad idea (and i agree with them) unfortunately, no security system will stop all murderers the present route of the barrier is a reasonable compromise
|
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 14:16 Rate this: 0 points | Well I have to say you are an excellent teacher if albeit a demanding one. I hope you haven' t missed your vocation. First of all who is the judge of reasonableness in this case. ? |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 14:27 Rate this: 0 points |
"reasonable" covers a very wide range anything within that range is reasonable just because you or i would come to a different compromise, that doesn't mean that the israeli compromise is unreasonable |
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 14:46 Rate this: 0 points | And it doesn't prove that it is either. But proof isn't the issue. I assume you are saying that Israel is the effective judge of reasonableness here? |
MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR
LATEST COMMENTS
- Ben F RE: Oxfam and the Board - what should happen if the red lines are crossed
- happygoldfish RE: SCoJeC and Board of Deputies respond to Church of Scotland revised report
- happygoldfish RE: SCoJeC and Board of Deputies respond to Church of Scotland revised report
- happygoldfish RE: SCoJeC and Board of Deputies respond to Church of Scotland revised report
- happygoldfish RE: MEMO 352
Real Real Zionist
Wed, 02/08/2012 - 15:04
Rate this:
The law applicable.....ha you mean on of the several Israeli laws of legalised theft.