Talk:Israel evicts two Palestinian families from their homes
==Review==
 |
Revision 856079 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 856079 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
U.S Aid[edit]
has everything to do with this story, that is a crucial part of the context of the "international community's" call on Israel to stop settlement building. That really should be in there.Soapy (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Why were they evicted?[edit]
Were they just kicked out, or was there an explanation of the motives? "An Israeli court rejected their appeal filed against the eviction" gives the impression that we've overlooked some factual nuances.
I do most of my work at Wikipedia, so I don't know if this would be improper content for an article like this ... Agradman (talk) 06:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- - -
The first reference gives hint to this question: "Police said they were acting on eviction orders issued by an Israeli court, which upheld a settler organisation's land ownership claim based on 19th-century documents." [1] It looks like the case was brought to court by a settler organization claiming the property belongs to them based on some 19th century documents. Yaz (talk) 07:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Here is the answer you were looking for. This info should be included in the article, and the biased and irrelevant politics/settlement background should be deleted from the article :
"...things are not always what they seem and the eviction of the Hanoun and Ghawi families are an apt example of how an appetite for a certain type of story can create that story regardless of the facts. As an organisation that follows media coverage of the Middle East closely, we gathered from Sunday and Monday's reporting, such as on the BBC, in the Guardian and in the Times that the two Palestinian families were evicted because Israeli courts had found that the land belonged to Jews, not to the Palestinians living there. Cut to religiously clad Jews busting in to the newly vacated houses and the whole thing is just obvious: Israel mercilessly turfs Arabs on to the street to plant more settlers in east Jerusalem.
It turns out that this is simply not the case. In fact, there is nothing simple about this case at all. There is a long legal history pertaining to the dispute between 28 Arab families and Jewish organisations over the ownership of the land in question. However, one crucial point was omitted from all reporting from the British sources named above (bar a small amendment to the BBC article made yesterday following a communication from us): the two Arab families evicted on Sunday were evicted for failing to pay rent in violation of the terms of their tenancy agreements. The Arab families who have kept to the terms of their tenancy agreement have not been evicted..."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/06/israel-eviction-palestinian-east-jerusalem
Kinetochore (talk) 03:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
This Jpost article verifies the above explanation of the eviction: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1249275681082&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull Kinetochore (talk) 03:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Not done We can't alter the content of a news story after it has already been locked and archived. Please see WN:ARCHIVE. Tempodivalse [talk] 22:07, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
