I’m still busy and I can’t manage to fix the bug in the comments section yet. I guess I might just get a new theme and modify it. It’s time for a new look anyway. But before that, here are some linkies for today:
1- Sudan ordered to pay $8 million to Cole victims’ families - fair enough, but the US government might as well pay for Bill Clinton’s mistake of bombing al-Shifa which was supposedly producing dangerous “chemical weapons”.
2- Sudan’s president declares 2007 as year for peace in Darfur - yeah, sure thing. We might actually get celebrate, I repeat might… in December 2007 being the earliest.
3- Celebrating Sudan, With Songs of Peace and Protest (Sudanese Concert in New York) - Rara Avis, who is a Sudanese girl living in NY, blogged about it after attending it. For cool pictures of the event you can click here and scroll down.
4- Anti-Zionism Vs Anti-Semitism - an excellent comment.
5- Israel’s mob wars: Hit men, drugs and recycling - looks like Israel is also having its own mini version of “Hamas Vs Fatah” issues to deal with.
6- Land For Sale…to Jews - Israel’s racist land policies.
7- I hate Israel - if you reverse the terminology (for example “Muslims” instead of “Jews”), what this loony nut is saying would be no different than many of the comments you see on LGF or JihadWatch. How ironic.
8- Apostate - She’s a Pakistani ex-Muslim. I just discovered her blog a few days ago. Even though I disagree with her points of view, I enjoy reading it. She’s a gifted writer. Moreover the fact that she blogs openly with a revealed identity is simply fascinating and interesting. The same can be said about Umar Lee, a white American Muslim convert.
Don’t you just love the blogosphere?
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }
I’d like to comment about the Jewish National Fund land law. The fund didn’t “hand over” the land to the state, it is still the de-facto owner of the lands it purchased, with the state merely acting as manager.
The JNF is a private landowner, in essense, one of a select few here. The others being certain Arab landowners who strictly passed their land in inheritance, the Muslim Waqf, and the numerous Christian organizations. The Waqf and the Christian groups own numerous private holdings,
(CONT)
and keep the land through laws that allow them to lease the lands to members of their faiths alone.
Whereas the JNF can’t lease land, as the state manages the lands fully. Thus lands are sold (by the original nation-building directives of the JNF, which bought the lands with donation money), with the state becoming the true owner post-purchase. The individual purchaser is then really leasing the land from the state, which is from that point onwards obliged to allow any citizen of the state to lease it.
The law in itself is rubbish, by the way, merely a jab at the Supreme Court in case it decides to try and change the legal status of the JNF-owned lands. There’s a bit of a feud going on right now between certain politicians and certain Supreme Court judges.
The main fallacy here is the mistaken belief that the state owns the JNF lands (as it owns just about all land in the country).
Regarding #7…
At least the guy admits that they are taught to hate from the earliest ages and are brainwashed and completely lied to …
Drima…there is a big big difference here….We are not taught to hate Arabs…it has no part in any school cirriculum that I know of and my wife was a teacher in Israel. I have spoken to hundreds of Israelis and never heard once of them being taught this racist rubbish…yet I have spoken to many Muslims who have been brainwashed in this regard.
Of course there are Jews and Israeli’s who hate Arabs…even Muslims…but there is no state-sponsored campaign to lie and smear and spread horrific sterotypes and lies
I like “Apostate” as well, some of her posts are quite good. I also disagree with many of her views, but I read her blog anyway. She doesn’t seem very “in your face” with her more militant attitudes, at least
I was interested in that “Anti-Zionism Vs Anti-Semitism” thing, until I saw it was on Mideast youth. That blog is the devil, I’m telling you, man! Most the posters there aren’t the least bit honest about their true opinions… read between the lines a little bit and you can easily see what they are really all about. Or confront somebody, and you won’t even have to read between the lines.
“6- Land For Sale…to Jews - Israel’s racist land policies.”
The JNF bought land and is certainly free to sell it to whomever they want, or what is the problem here?
I don’t understand this. Arabs complain about allegedly “stolen” land and then complain about the Jewish organisation that buys land for Jews?
What is the truth here? Do the Jews steal the land or do they buy the land? And why is both wrong?
How can a Jew legally obtain land without being a thief or a racist?
Roman and Andrew, correct me if I’m wrong but what you’re basically saying is that the organization is Jewish and buys the land using donations from Jews in Israel. Since the donations come from Jews the land can be (or should be) sold only to Jews. Meanwhile Israeli Arabs have their own land which they pass on through inheritance while the Christians also have land of their own.
If that is the case then I think it’s screwed up. How can there be sectarian divisions like this when it comes to buying and selling land? Why can’t people in Israel simply be treated based on the fact that they’re all Israeli citizens?
Drima,
You are essentially correct. (Except the donations came and come from Jews all over the world.) However, note that the reason the land should be sold only to Jews is not because the money comes from Jews, but because that is what the JNF want and what they collected the money for.
If I give money to a fund to help Sudan, I would also expect the fund to help Sudan, and I would not consider it racist if they rejected Egyptian claims to the money.
There is no essential sectarian division when it comes to buying and selling land. It’s just that one land owner (the JNF) wants to sell land to Jews because it was bought for that purpose. I understand a Muslim who wants to sell land only to another Muslim is totally free to do so in Israel. The JNF claims that same right and privilege.
I heard wild stories about what happens to Arabs who sell strategic land to Jews in Israel or the territories. They are accused of being “collaborators”. Oddly enough, they are not being accused of racism if they refuse to sell to Jews. Odd, that…
Drima -
You’re missing the point, bro. The land is privately owned by a company which was created (via donations from all over the world) to buy land in Israel and sell it to Jews. That’s its purpose, that is the reason it was created back in the day - to buy up land for Jews in the Jewish national home. The laws of Israel are such, however, that the JNF cannot do this directly - they have to use the government as a middle-man.
The point of the law is preventing the Supreme Court from forcing its desires on JNF (the SC has been acting up in the recent years, trying to act as a separate and pretty totalitarian government; not only do they seem to believe they can and should dictate to the State what to do, but also to private bodies and businesses).
Asking JNF to sell land to non-Jews is like asking the Wildlife Preservation Fund to kill off wild animals.
The Muslims and Christians are not selling land to Jews. Never did, never will. It’s their right - it’s their land, after all. Why should Jews be treated any different?
And as for th Middle East Youth…
The rigid ideological control that goes on there is disgusting. What Craig said
As for crime in Israel… the government has pretty much abandoned vital areas of its responsibility. The Negev and much of Northern Israel are like the bloody Wild West. If it’s not the Bedouin land-pirates, it’s the bloody mafias. Respect for the law is being eroded quite rapidly, and I certainly hope we’ll change that… which will require some tough decisions. We need a Guiliani.
Drima, firstly the JNF stopped land-purchasing after the state was founded. It merely retained ownership of the lands it purchased under Ottoman and British governing. At the time, the lands were purchased for national purposes, with donations from Jews worldwide.
It does not purchase any further land, as such purchase is impossible. The state is the owner of land in Israel (with the exceptions I noted).
People here lease lands, be they Jewish, Arabs, Druze, or whatever.
What I find worrying is that people scream “racism” immediately when Jews are doing something.
Jews buying land to sell to Jews… racism!
Arabs buying land to sell to Arabs… normal.
Israel occupying a territory from which she was attacked… racism!
Arab countries trying to invade Israel to throw all the Jews into the sea… acceptable.
I don’t think people see the irony.
Secondly, the Christian and Muslim religious orders retained total control of the lands they owned pre-state foundation as well. They cannot buy further land.
The few Arab farmers I mentioned (the majority lease as well) retain total ownership because they never sold their land, but instead kept it in the family. Selling land means the state “takes” it, whereas private land can be passed down in inheritance. That’s just how the laws here are made.
As for what the JNF does today, its chief goals are development of arable land and forestry. Most of the forests here were planted by the JNF, as the Turks razed the entire countryside during WWI for fuel. I think just about all foresters here work for the JNF.
Drima, in the case of the JNF-owned lands, the state of Israel is merely in charge of… selling off an estate in accordance to a will. The will being written by the dead wealthy Jews of the early 1920s and 1930s.
Of course, the state could simply confiscate the lands, and end it at that. That’s what some here want, certainly. Of course, a lot of laws will be bent, trust will be broken, and a lot of graves will be effectively spat on.
I’m sorry, but I can’t accept that. And I could imagine the outrage should any of those Arab farmers I mentioned have his land “confiscated”. (Which is to say, the definition of their ownership merely changed to “leased from the state”)
“Drima, firstly the JNF stopped land-purchasing after the state was founded. It merely retained ownership of the lands it purchased under Ottoman and British governing.”
Okay, now THAT settles the confusion and effectively answers many questions.
Testing new template to see if bug in comments section is gone…
Testing to see if the mobile browser stopped crashing every time I comment.
Bah, oh well. At least the comments get posted every time.
Concerning 1:
“In his book 9-11, Noam Chomsky argues that the bombing of Al-Shifa was a piece of terrorism by the United States Government that probably resulted in the deaths of “several tens of thousands” of Sudanese people from diseases such as malaria and TB because they were deprived of the medicines manufactured at the plant.”
Is it a terrorist act when it was obviously a mistake and it was not meant to hit a pharamceutical plant? In other words: if it was sure for the US it was a pharmaceutical plant, you think they would have bombed it? If you can say yes to the last question, it would be with no doubt a terrorist act. If no, however, it’s just plainly a mistake. Even though a very horrible one!
The bombing on the state TV station in Belgrade however, while the people inside were just working there, is in my opinion a criminal act (act of terrorism?). I cannot recall that they warned the TV station or surrounding area beforehand with flyers and stuff. Or is my memory failing me for the moment?
Suzanne, I wouldn’t call al-Shifa an act of terrorism but it was a bad mistake.
And damn, I’m seriously enjoying the new look and the convenient new comments section. Muahahaha!
As a rule, anything that Noam Chomsky says when he isn’t discussing linguistics (his academic field) can be disregarded. How he got any political respectability at all is beyond my too-rational mind.
It’s worth noting, by the way, that certain Sudanese opposition members claimed that the cosmetics plant served as more than just that, thus contributing to the (most likely false) intel to serve their political ends.
*pharmaceutical, rather than cosmetics
Roman,
Not all linguists are still regarding Chomsky’s theories as all-so-important either.
He is apparently well-known in academic circles for, shall we say, sloppy arguments and is more respected among non-linguists than among linguists.
Darn it man, I saw myself on those pics of the concert, even though I explicitly told the photographers not to click some of mine!
maybe I can sue now
I just came back from the mideastyouth discussion about the JNF…
I was accused of bigotry:
“And Andrew, you said Palestinians are second class citizens, and defended that. So stop your bigotry.”
That is despite the fact that I didn’t use the word “Palestinians”, nor did I mention “second class”, nor do I believe that Israeli Arabs are second class citizens, and nor do I support the idea that they should be.
What the poster said I said I never said. And I am a bigot, apparently, for saying it.
In fact, anybody who knows me knows that I rarely ever use the word “Palestinian” to refer to Arab inhabitans of Palestine. (I say “Arab Palestinians” or “Arabs”.)
I reject the word “Palestine” not only because it was given to the region by pagan invaders to erase the land’s connection with G-d (and that alone should be reason enough for any Jew, Christian, and Muslim not to use the word to refer to the land of Israel), but also because the current definition of “Palestinian”, meaning non-Jewish inhabitants of “Palestine” is plain racist. (But it is a typical strategy. Germany also changed the definition of “German” to exclude Jews in 1934. But for me Jewish Germans remain Germans.)
If the region is “Palestine” than certainly ALL inhabitans are “Palestinians”.
But the region has only been “Palestine” because the pagan Roman empire called it such.
Before that the region was called “Israel” and “Judaea”. And the Quran refers to it as the land given by G-d to the sons of Israel.
And yes, I am a bigot when it comes to paganism, have been for a while.
Have nothing against paganism as such, just don’t like it influencing monotheistics religions because for some reason the result is always war and terror.
Those bloody Romans!
“They’ve bled us white, the bastards. They’ve taken everything we had, and not just from us, from our fathers, and from our fathers’ fathers. (…) And what have they ever given us in return?!”
http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/brian/brian-09.htm
Golda Meir:
“Golda Meir: “Important, no. A new factor, yes. There was no such a thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian State? It was either southern Syria before the First World War and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.”"
Summarizing a simple truth by a Jewish Palestinian herself (Palestinian as in an inhabitant of the Palestinian Mandate - not as in Israeli Arabs nowadays, nor as the people who call themselves “Palestinians”)
And an important question I have:
Why is there no outrage towards Jordan who took 80% of the Palestinian Mandate - “stealing” thus 80% of Palestinian land?
Tell me about Suzanne.
Israel’s creation has been problematic to us, but our reaction to it has been FAR more problematic. Thanks to the brainwashing we undergo in school of course.
Death to the Piggy Apes!
Fortunately there are people like you Drima who can see it in perspective
“Israel’s creation has been problematic to us, but our reaction to it has been FAR more problematic.”
Yes, but why was Israel’s creation problematic?
King Faisal seemed to think that a Jewish state would be a good interface between the western world and his Arab empire (unluckily his empire was not to come because of the Saudis).
What was objectively problematic about the creation of Israel?
And I don’t mean what was problematic after the Arab attack (I agree that not being allowed to go back home IS a problem, but it is a) not a big problem and b) not related to the creation of Israel but to the war started by the Arabs).
When Israel was created the Arabs living in the (by then) Jewish majority half of (the remaining) Palestine became voting citizens, free to support their new country (as can be expected of citizens). That in itself is not a problem.
The new country allowed free Jewish immigration, but Jewish immigration has always been a good thing for a country, especially for the non-Jews in the country. America profitted greatly from Jewish immigration from Germany and eastern Europe and Germany and Russia lost a lot when the Jews fled.
I don’t see the problem. What the creation of Israel brought, to EVERYONE who lived in the new country and the region, was a democratic, stable government, equal rights for men and women, Arabs and Jews, Jewish immigration and western technology and knowledge. THOSE ARE GOOD THINGS.
King Faisal saw it, the Zionists saw it.
The “problem” was that these (to me) obvious advantages were very bad things for Arab nationalism and Wahabism.
Leave a Comment