Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Is that why Muslims wipe their ass with their left hand........they're not primitive?
and Mohammad tried to reform Judaism into something much more civilized.
I believe the term is epic fail.
In California, 3,000 votes were recorded from an empty dorm building
- Thread starter Drop Dead Fred
- Start date
Is that why Muslims wipe their ass with their left hand........they're not primitive?
and Mohammad tried to reform Judaism into something much more civilized.
I believe the term is epic fail.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Since the Palestinians had lived there for generations and had built homes, shops, etc., they legally owned 100% of the land.
Farmers owned pastures collectively, by village.
The right of adverse possession supports the Palestinian ownership, but not Israeli ownership since their take over was immediately disputed.
I was going to just do the wiki spreadsheet showing less than 5% of Palestine was considered owned or occupied by Jews in 1920, but this was a more nuanced and interesting article.
{...
In striking down the “Regulation Law,” which legalized buildings which had been built on “disputed land,” Israel’s High Court of Justice accepted the view that the land in question was “privately” owned. The critical question is, however, what constitutes privately owned land? Are the claims valid, who makes this decision, and on what basis? The High Court did not explain.
If it is true that Jews are stealing land, this violates Jewish and Israeli laws and values and justifies calls for boycotts, sanctions and even the elimination of the state, since it applies to areas acquired after 1948 as well as in 1967. A devastating moral and legal indictment, it undermines Israel’s moral foundation, its raison d’être.
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult. Based on titles and deeds, land that is registered becomes private property, but what if there are no documents to prove ownership?
In many cases, land that Arabs claim as their private property was not purchased; it was State-owned land that was either given away during the Ottoman, British and Jordanian occupations, or was encroached upon and developed. Arab claims based on gifts and alleged agricultural uses are not property deeds. And what about claims of absentee owners living in enemy states whose land is under the control of the Custodian of Enemy Property? How then did this confusion about “private Palestinian land” come about?
Using ownerless, uninhabited land is a universally recognized method for claiming it, unless contested. Until the modern period, land registration especially in sparsely populated areas, like the Middle East, Africa and North Africa was not widely practiced. With the rise of nation-states and the development of bureaucracies this changed.
According to international agreements such as the San Remo Accord (1920), League of Nations (1922), the Mandate for Palestine was intended as a “Jewish National Home.” This anchors the rights of the Jewish people and Israeli sovereignty in law. It has never been superseded and remains in force, despite Arab objections.
During the British Mandate, land surveys were made in Palestine, primarily to collect taxes and create an orderly system of land ownership and transfer. According to Dr. Dov Gavish, who wrote the only extensive study of this topic, Survey of Palestine, 1920-1948 (2005), maps were drawn based on where inhabitants were found and on verbal claims, usually by local mukhtars (chieftains or village dignitaries) and sheikhs, not on documents or land registration.
Based on aerial photos and evidence of cultivation, villages were arbitrarily divided into large blocks of 600 dunams, which were then sub-divided among local peasants. Highly inaccurate, these fiscal maps nevertheless became the basis for taxation. They did not and do not reflect legal ownership.
As Gavish notes, the registration process lacked legal procedures for determining proper (actual) ownership, the investigators often had little professional training, surveyors who drew boundaries relied on inaccurate methods (such as vague geographical markers), and were hampered by constant Arab violence.
Maps and registration held by Turkish and Jordanian governments are not accessible, and many maps held by the British Mandatory government were “accidentally” destroyed. The Israeli Civil (Military) Administration also has aerial maps which are used to determine land use, and surveys which are not necessarily reliable or accurate documentations of private ownership.
These questionable maps and documents, however, are used to verify Arab claims and the basis of charging Jews with stealing “private Palestinian land.” Although these lands could have been registered, most were not. Moreover, land which was not used, or not passed on by inheritance reverts to the original owner, the State, by law.
Most of what is called “private Palestinian land” is claimed – and some registered – based on policies that legitimized squatting after the fact and by counting land as “owned” when in fact it had been leased, or simply used.
During the Mandatory period, most of the land that was registered by individuals was called “Miri.” Leased, not privately owned, “Miri” land remained property of the State. Although land that was not used for ten years should have reverted to the State, large areas of such unused land remained under local Arab control.
Another category of ownerless land, called “waste land” (“Mewat”), is known throughout the Middle East and recognized in international law. Dr. Ya’akov Meron’s authoritative article, “Waste Land (Mewat) in Judea and Samaria,” (Boston College Int’l & Comparative Law Review, 1981) notes that this land was not included in State land and could be claimed by whoever used it, Jews or Arabs.
Because land on which most settlements are built is not agriculturally useful, Arabs did not claim ownership until recently, when anti-settlement NGOs asserted that these lands belonged to Arabs, individually and/or collectively, based on hearsay, maps and documents that are grossly inaccurate and often false.
In many cases, land claims are based on the “mukhtar protocol,” where mukhtars decided land claims. As legal NGO Regavim’s Naomi Kahn wrote: “In practice, the “mukhtar protocol” spawned a massive industry of wholesale land giveaways and illegal land deals, forgery of documents and deeds, under-the-table payments, false testimony, and more. And it has created devastating results for the rightful owners of property, Arabs and Jews alike.”
The High Court’s opinion, therefore, that land is privately owned is not necessarily true unless essential documents have been examined and authenticated by lower courts. This was not done and it has led to much confusion about what constitutes “private Palestinian land.”
...}
What is not ‘private Palestinian land?’ | The Jerusalem Post
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult.
www.jpost.com
As for the 1948 war, the UN partition line before the war was identical to the cease fire line after the war.
So no land could have been gained or lost.
And since most of the fighting was over the push towards Jerusalem and the West Bank, clearly Israel lost the 1948 war.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Since the Palestinians had lived there for generations and had built homes, shops, etc., they legally owned 100% of the land.
Farmers owned pastures collectively, by village.
The right of adverse possession supports the Palestinian ownership, but not Israeli ownership since their take over was immediately disputed.
I was going to just do the wiki spreadsheet showing less than 5% of Palestine was considered owned or occupied by Jews in 1920, but this was a more nuanced and interesting article.
{...
In striking down the “Regulation Law,” which legalized buildings which had been built on “disputed land,” Israel’s High Court of Justice accepted the view that the land in question was “privately” owned. The critical question is, however, what constitutes privately owned land? Are the claims valid, who makes this decision, and on what basis? The High Court did not explain.
If it is true that Jews are stealing land, this violates Jewish and Israeli laws and values and justifies calls for boycotts, sanctions and even the elimination of the state, since it applies to areas acquired after 1948 as well as in 1967. A devastating moral and legal indictment, it undermines Israel’s moral foundation, its raison d’être.
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult. Based on titles and deeds, land that is registered becomes private property, but what if there are no documents to prove ownership?
In many cases, land that Arabs claim as their private property was not purchased; it was State-owned land that was either given away during the Ottoman, British and Jordanian occupations, or was encroached upon and developed. Arab claims based on gifts and alleged agricultural uses are not property deeds. And what about claims of absentee owners living in enemy states whose land is under the control of the Custodian of Enemy Property? How then did this confusion about “private Palestinian land” come about?
Using ownerless, uninhabited land is a universally recognized method for claiming it, unless contested. Until the modern period, land registration especially in sparsely populated areas, like the Middle East, Africa and North Africa was not widely practiced. With the rise of nation-states and the development of bureaucracies this changed.
According to international agreements such as the San Remo Accord (1920), League of Nations (1922), the Mandate for Palestine was intended as a “Jewish National Home.” This anchors the rights of the Jewish people and Israeli sovereignty in law. It has never been superseded and remains in force, despite Arab objections.
During the British Mandate, land surveys were made in Palestine, primarily to collect taxes and create an orderly system of land ownership and transfer. According to Dr. Dov Gavish, who wrote the only extensive study of this topic, Survey of Palestine, 1920-1948 (2005), maps were drawn based on where inhabitants were found and on verbal claims, usually by local mukhtars (chieftains or village dignitaries) and sheikhs, not on documents or land registration.
Based on aerial photos and evidence of cultivation, villages were arbitrarily divided into large blocks of 600 dunams, which were then sub-divided among local peasants. Highly inaccurate, these fiscal maps nevertheless became the basis for taxation. They did not and do not reflect legal ownership.
As Gavish notes, the registration process lacked legal procedures for determining proper (actual) ownership, the investigators often had little professional training, surveyors who drew boundaries relied on inaccurate methods (such as vague geographical markers), and were hampered by constant Arab violence.
Maps and registration held by Turkish and Jordanian governments are not accessible, and many maps held by the British Mandatory government were “accidentally” destroyed. The Israeli Civil (Military) Administration also has aerial maps which are used to determine land use, and surveys which are not necessarily reliable or accurate documentations of private ownership.
These questionable maps and documents, however, are used to verify Arab claims and the basis of charging Jews with stealing “private Palestinian land.” Although these lands could have been registered, most were not. Moreover, land which was not used, or not passed on by inheritance reverts to the original owner, the State, by law.
Most of what is called “private Palestinian land” is claimed – and some registered – based on policies that legitimized squatting after the fact and by counting land as “owned” when in fact it had been leased, or simply used.
During the Mandatory period, most of the land that was registered by individuals was called “Miri.” Leased, not privately owned, “Miri” land remained property of the State. Although land that was not used for ten years should have reverted to the State, large areas of such unused land remained under local Arab control.
Another category of ownerless land, called “waste land” (“Mewat”), is known throughout the Middle East and recognized in international law. Dr. Ya’akov Meron’s authoritative article, “Waste Land (Mewat) in Judea and Samaria,” (Boston College Int’l & Comparative Law Review, 1981) notes that this land was not included in State land and could be claimed by whoever used it, Jews or Arabs.
Because land on which most settlements are built is not agriculturally useful, Arabs did not claim ownership until recently, when anti-settlement NGOs asserted that these lands belonged to Arabs, individually and/or collectively, based on hearsay, maps and documents that are grossly inaccurate and often false.
In many cases, land claims are based on the “mukhtar protocol,” where mukhtars decided land claims. As legal NGO Regavim’s Naomi Kahn wrote: “In practice, the “mukhtar protocol” spawned a massive industry of wholesale land giveaways and illegal land deals, forgery of documents and deeds, under-the-table payments, false testimony, and more. And it has created devastating results for the rightful owners of property, Arabs and Jews alike.”
The High Court’s opinion, therefore, that land is privately owned is not necessarily true unless essential documents have been examined and authenticated by lower courts. This was not done and it has led to much confusion about what constitutes “private Palestinian land.”
...}
What is not ‘private Palestinian land?’ | The Jerusalem Post
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult.
As for the 1948 war, the UN partition line before the war was identical to the cease fire line after the war.
So no land could have been gained or lost.
And since most of the fighting was over the push towards Jerusalem and the West Bank, clearly Israel lost the 1948 war.
As for the 1948 war, the UN partition line before the war was identical to the cease fire line after the war.
You're lying. And there was more than one "partition" line.
Now post the map after the cease fire.
Your #2 shows you're insane. There is not ONE mostly Moslem country that has equal human rights to that of Israel. Thanks for playing.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Adverse possession is basic US real estate law.
It applies when things like fences are mistakenly built without survey, slightly over property lines.
If a complaint is filed immediately, then the owner can demand satisfaction.
But if no one notices the problem for 7 years or whatever the actual legislation says, then it becomes too late to object any more and the land passes to the occupier.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Since the Palestinians had lived there for generations and had built homes, shops, etc., they legally owned 100% of the land.
Farmers owned pastures collectively, by village.
The right of adverse possession supports the Palestinian ownership, but not Israeli ownership since their take over was immediately disputed.
I was going to just do the wiki spreadsheet showing less than 5% of Palestine was considered owned or occupied by Jews in 1920, but this was a more nuanced and interesting article.
{...
In striking down the “Regulation Law,” which legalized buildings which had been built on “disputed land,” Israel’s High Court of Justice accepted the view that the land in question was “privately” owned. The critical question is, however, what constitutes privately owned land? Are the claims valid, who makes this decision, and on what basis? The High Court did not explain.
If it is true that Jews are stealing land, this violates Jewish and Israeli laws and values and justifies calls for boycotts, sanctions and even the elimination of the state, since it applies to areas acquired after 1948 as well as in 1967. A devastating moral and legal indictment, it undermines Israel’s moral foundation, its raison d’être.
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult. Based on titles and deeds, land that is registered becomes private property, but what if there are no documents to prove ownership?
In many cases, land that Arabs claim as their private property was not purchased; it was State-owned land that was either given away during the Ottoman, British and Jordanian occupations, or was encroached upon and developed. Arab claims based on gifts and alleged agricultural uses are not property deeds. And what about claims of absentee owners living in enemy states whose land is under the control of the Custodian of Enemy Property? How then did this confusion about “private Palestinian land” come about?
Using ownerless, uninhabited land is a universally recognized method for claiming it, unless contested. Until the modern period, land registration especially in sparsely populated areas, like the Middle East, Africa and North Africa was not widely practiced. With the rise of nation-states and the development of bureaucracies this changed.
According to international agreements such as the San Remo Accord (1920), League of Nations (1922), the Mandate for Palestine was intended as a “Jewish National Home.” This anchors the rights of the Jewish people and Israeli sovereignty in law. It has never been superseded and remains in force, despite Arab objections.
During the British Mandate, land surveys were made in Palestine, primarily to collect taxes and create an orderly system of land ownership and transfer. According to Dr. Dov Gavish, who wrote the only extensive study of this topic, Survey of Palestine, 1920-1948 (2005), maps were drawn based on where inhabitants were found and on verbal claims, usually by local mukhtars (chieftains or village dignitaries) and sheikhs, not on documents or land registration.
Based on aerial photos and evidence of cultivation, villages were arbitrarily divided into large blocks of 600 dunams, which were then sub-divided among local peasants. Highly inaccurate, these fiscal maps nevertheless became the basis for taxation. They did not and do not reflect legal ownership.
As Gavish notes, the registration process lacked legal procedures for determining proper (actual) ownership, the investigators often had little professional training, surveyors who drew boundaries relied on inaccurate methods (such as vague geographical markers), and were hampered by constant Arab violence.
Maps and registration held by Turkish and Jordanian governments are not accessible, and many maps held by the British Mandatory government were “accidentally” destroyed. The Israeli Civil (Military) Administration also has aerial maps which are used to determine land use, and surveys which are not necessarily reliable or accurate documentations of private ownership.
These questionable maps and documents, however, are used to verify Arab claims and the basis of charging Jews with stealing “private Palestinian land.” Although these lands could have been registered, most were not. Moreover, land which was not used, or not passed on by inheritance reverts to the original owner, the State, by law.
Most of what is called “private Palestinian land” is claimed – and some registered – based on policies that legitimized squatting after the fact and by counting land as “owned” when in fact it had been leased, or simply used.
During the Mandatory period, most of the land that was registered by individuals was called “Miri.” Leased, not privately owned, “Miri” land remained property of the State. Although land that was not used for ten years should have reverted to the State, large areas of such unused land remained under local Arab control.
Another category of ownerless land, called “waste land” (“Mewat”), is known throughout the Middle East and recognized in international law. Dr. Ya’akov Meron’s authoritative article, “Waste Land (Mewat) in Judea and Samaria,” (Boston College Int’l & Comparative Law Review, 1981) notes that this land was not included in State land and could be claimed by whoever used it, Jews or Arabs.
Because land on which most settlements are built is not agriculturally useful, Arabs did not claim ownership until recently, when anti-settlement NGOs asserted that these lands belonged to Arabs, individually and/or collectively, based on hearsay, maps and documents that are grossly inaccurate and often false.
In many cases, land claims are based on the “mukhtar protocol,” where mukhtars decided land claims. As legal NGO Regavim’s Naomi Kahn wrote: “In practice, the “mukhtar protocol” spawned a massive industry of wholesale land giveaways and illegal land deals, forgery of documents and deeds, under-the-table payments, false testimony, and more. And it has created devastating results for the rightful owners of property, Arabs and Jews alike.”
The High Court’s opinion, therefore, that land is privately owned is not necessarily true unless essential documents have been examined and authenticated by lower courts. This was not done and it has led to much confusion about what constitutes “private Palestinian land.”
...}
What is not ‘private Palestinian land?’ | The Jerusalem Post
Since most of the land in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has not been registered, proving ownership is often difficult.
As for the 1948 war, the UN partition line before the war was identical to the cease fire line after the war.
So no land could have been gained or lost.
And since most of the fighting was over the push towards Jerusalem and the West Bank, clearly Israel lost the 1948 war.
As for the 1948 war, the UN partition line before the war was identical to the cease fire line after the war.
You're lying. And there was more than one "partition" line.
View attachment 501329
Now post the map after the cease fire.
Good point.
I thought the UN partition was identical before and after the 1948 war, and I see they are not.
Israel did gain land.
But I don't see how that is legal or why the UN allowed them to?
But here is a site I ran into.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
And you think it is more civilized to use either hand and not care?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Rigby5
Diamond Member
While Israel has modern civil privileges for SOME of its citizens, the fact is badly abuses the rights of the MAJORITY of the people under its jurisdiction, makes your claim false.
If they are not enforced equally and with blind justice, then they are not rights but privileges instead.
And they are less civilized, not more.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
How old are you?
You've been spreading your lie for decades, haven't you?
But here is a site I ran into.
Yeah, that fake map is great. And fake.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
12 million? Link?
Rigby5
Diamond Member
US real estate law is based on inherent rights of all individuals, so is the measure to be used by everyone everywhere.
The Ottoman Empire also obviously followed the same principles.
They were not landlords renting out to transients because the Palestinians preceded them and built their own buildings.
The Ottoman Empire would only be landlords over what building they built, which likely was zero.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Link?
Rigby5
Diamond Member
No its not fake at all.
Very few Jewish residents existed before the 1930s, and the refugees after 1930 did not and could not buy any land.
Legal Jewish land ownership in Palestine or Israel is almost nonexistent.
Its not like the Ottoman dispossessed Jewish land owners or anything like that which would allow for some previous historic claim.
Jews pretty much abandoned the Levant after the 3 failed Jewish rebellions against the Romans.
WRONG. That is not my argument. My argument is that EVERY single mostly Muslim country is a humanitarian disaster so why would I support another one? These are facts you cannot dispute. Then again you said Assad was a nice guy. Stop eating those retard sandwiches, Rigby.
Why is the safest place for a Muslim woman and or a Muslim gay person in the Middle East, Israel? I mean if they are so cold hearted, how could that be?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
No its not fake at all.
Prove it......Just go back to the 1920 census data collected by the British.
Bootney Lee Farnsworth
Diamond Member
Hold on, what dorm building holds 3,000 students? That's a lot.
Anybody know the capacity of this dorm building?
candycorn
Diamond Member
Now I remember why I have that turkey on ignore.....he never admits he's wrong.
New Topics
-
The REAL reason Cesar Chavez is now being expunged was his adamant OPPOSITION to illegal immigrants.- Started by MarathonMike
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
dictator Putin [to Armenian PM]: You can’t trade with both EU and Moscow empire . You have to choose.- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
Facebook page saying white race is most beautiful and most special and there should be a trillions more- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 3
