Reply #32: Do Give It A Rest, Sir

[The Magistrate]

To engage just one of the more fundamental flaws in your Grand Proposal: on what ground do you liken Israel to a landlord of the premises in question? A landlord has a clear title deed to the premises let to a tenant; it is that which gives the landlord right to a say in who occupies it and how they conduct themselves while they do so. Israel has no title deed whatever to that land; it has merely seized it by force of arms, and done so while its present inhabitants were in occupation of it. The normal presumption that the occupant of a habitation is its owner, unless sound documentation to the contrary can be produced, is in this case re-inforced by the actions of the previous clear owner, the United Nations, which inherited the property from the League of Nations, that had it in receivership from the defunct Ottoman imperium: the United Nations, in partitioning the whole of Palestine into a Jewish Zone and an Arab Zone, designated those areas as part of the Arab Zone. At a minimum, this can be certainly taken to indicate the property in question is not Israel's, and that therefore Israel cannot exercise a landlord's right to evict a tenant from it.