Sunday, March 25, 2012

Found: Israel 'Apartheid '

From Karni Eldad's "Israel's 'agricultural apartheid'" column in...Haaretz:-

Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria can be broken down into a number of periods - the settlement period...the agricultural period...and the period of tourism...

, during which wineries, bed and breakfasts, restaurants and tourist attractions were built under every tree.

...However, there are good people in the military advocate general's office who do not look favorably upon Jewish farmers in Judea and Samaria and are doing their best to remove Jewish presence from the area. Agricultural apartheid. One of the most important and creative means is the "directive for disruptive usage."

According to Israeli law it is possible to evict someone who has entered an area that is not their own for 30 days after the fact. However, the directive for disruptive usage states that Jews can be evicted from land they have cultivated for as long as three years, and later this period of time was extended to five years. This applies even if the land has never been cultivated before, even if for years no single Arab has claimed ownership of the land, and even if there is no proof of another person's ownership.

This directive discriminates against Jews...Col. Eli Bar On...wrote a sharply worded letter to the Civil Administration head...explain[ing] the reasons why the directive should be implemented - an absence of court proceedings, a lack of legal tools and an inability to access a land registry. Of course these are ridiculous claims and are fundamentally exaggerated. The courts are full of Palestinians submitting complaints all the time...the fourth argument in Bar On's letter is that it is necessary to "minimize the number of conflicts and their intensity." In other words, the honored brigadier general says it is possible to prevent Palestinian violence if the Jewish side surrenders in advance, instead of holding a fair trial...

...The directive of disruptive usage embroils the Civil Administration in civilian land disputes. This is not its role but the role of the courts. If someone has a claim and proof, then he should turn to the authorized organ for a decision...

I think Bar On has become confused on a number of levels: a. The head of the Civil Administration should not intervene in civil land disputes; b. A legal adviser should not forcefully intervene in the decisions of the head of the executive authority on the ground; c. He apparently has forgotten that this is a Zionist state.

And I knew her when she was just a little girl.


No comments: