Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Jordan and the Jews: Another lie Dershowitz told you

There will always be a market for books that explain complicated things, be it astronomy or Middle East politics, to laypeople who don't have much time to read. Some of the authors of those books, like Carl Sagan or Isaac Asimov, are serious writers. Some others, like Alan Dershowitz, are charlatans.

The problem is that because of Dershowitz's high profile, his bogus scholarship tends to go viral. Once he tells a lie, you can bet your monthly wage that web searches for that lie will yield a million hits in a matter of days.

Case in point, the Jordanian citizenship fable. As you have read time and again from a myriad commenters on the blogs and even from experienced journalists, "Jews are not allowed to be citizens of Jordan." The origin of this picturesque, but utterly wrong, notion can be traced back to Dershowitz's 2003 article The case against Jordan, a compendium of invectives against the Hashemite kingdom that sought (for a change) to apologize for Israel by comparison. In it, Dershowitz made the following astonishing claim:

Jordan has a law on its books explicitly prohibiting any Jew from becoming a citizen, or any Jordanian from selling land to a Jew.

Before we analyze the origin of this myth, let's hear the opinion of people just marginally more qualified than Alan Dershowitz to talk about human rights in Jordan (or elsewhere) -- the US's Department of State. In their 2006 International Religious Freedom Report, they had this to say:

The Government recognizes Judaism as a religion; however there are reportedly no Jordanian citizens who are Jewish. The Government does not impose restrictions on Jews, and they are permitted to own property and conduct business in the country.
So that the claim is a plain and simple lie.

However, and like most Dershowitz lies, this is one that is fabricated from an originally true fact, which was then twisted, distorted and magnified until it became a falsity. Jordan's Nationality Law includes the following clauses (Article 3):

The following shall be deemed to be Jordanian nationals:

(1)Any person who has acquired Jordanian nationality or a Jordanian passport under the Jordanian Nationality Law, 1928, as amended, Law No. 6 of 1954 or this Law;

(2)Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954;

(3)Any person whose father holds Jordanian nationality; (...)
As can be seen, there exists a restriction on SOME Jews (not on ANY Jew), namely the Jewish population that was involved in the Jewish-Arab conflict of 1948. These Jews (who, let's not forget, had a foreign nationality) were treated as members of an enemy belligerent faction and were thus denied citizenship by origin.

Unfair? Sure. Unique? By no means. Countries involved in conflicts usually go hysterical and tend to single out populations for discriminatory treatment. The US interned American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Perhaps more relevantly, Israel has laws that allow the foreign husband of an Israeli woman to become a resident of Israel except if he is a Palestinian from the occupied territories.

More to the point, however, the Jordanian law does not exclude Jews (even pre-1948 Palestinian citizens) from applying for naturalization. For instance, article 12 of the above-cited law says:

Any person other than a Jordanian who is not incapable by law may apply to the Council of Ministers for grant of a certificate of Jordanian naturalization if:

(1)He has been regularly resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for a period of four years preceding the date of his application;

(2)He intends to reside in the Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan.

Article 4, for its part, states:

Any Arab who has resided continuously in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for not less than 15 years may acquire Jordanian nationality (...).

Where an Arab is a citizen of an Arab country -- for instance, a Moroccan Jew. No restrictions based on religion are made in either article.

In other words, a restriction on certain Jews who had been involved in an Arab-Jewish conflict, which is very similar to other comparable restrictions put into effect by advanced countries, was extrapolated by Dershowitz's dialectical magic wand to become a hateful ban on all Jews, which, presumably, would justify, for example, the Israeli settlers' brutal clubbing of elderly Palestinians. And once the lie was let loose, Zionists cut-and-pasted it with abandon.

So that, for the record: Jews can be citizens of Jordan. And they can own property there. The Department of State sez. It's official.

39 comments:

Tree said...

Good point.

I would also point out that Dersh and others conflate Israelis and Jews when they insist that Jordan does not allow foreign Jews to own property there.

Some countries, such as Jordan, have “investor friendly” property laws. Foreign entities are allowed to own or lease property in Jordan for investment or personal use, provided that their home countries permit reciprocal rights to Jordanians.

http://www.ictregulationtoolkit.org/en/Section.2082.html

Guess what country does NOT allow Jordanians to own or lease property there? Yup, its Israel. The only foreigners who are allowed to purchase property in Israel are those who are eligible for immigration to Israel under the law of "return", i.e. Jews. Therefore, no Israelis are allowed to own or lease property in Jordan, becaus Israel confers no reciprocal rights on Jordanians.

But a Jew from the US or any other country that allows Jordanians to purchase property in that country is able to purchase property in Jordan.

Anonymous said...

Here's a truly great article by Dershowitz on the anti-Israel hypocrisy of the international community (including the US) -- it illustrates precisely why Israel must not listen to anyone except itself: http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/dershowitz/entry/targeted_killings_ok_for_us

Surely, this proves that Israel's is the most moral army in the world!

andrew r said...

Anon, go to your favorite anti-Zionist blog, read every blogpost and comment under the post and tally up how many commentators suggest or imply Israel should listen to them.

You'll probably find zero (0) such statements.

Of course there is hypocrisy in official US condemnation of anything Israel does. However, for some people out there, raving about the hypocrisy of condemning one thing or another is a non-issue. A local anti-war group called insteadofwar.org has on their front page a bit on the legality of the targeted killings by the US.

Melzer goes on to examine the legality of international
targeted killings, when one state commits a targeted
killing in another state. The United Nations Charter
prohibition against wars of aggression must be
considered. A nation can only commit acts of war on
another nation either as self-defense in response to an
imminent threat of attack or when the Security Council
has authorized a collective military action. Are U.S.
targeted killings in Pakistan acts of self-defense? Did the
Security Council authorize them?


Some defenders of Israel seem bent on aiming their criticism at supposed hypocrites as if they don't have a better argument than "everyone does it!"

Gert said...

Interesting post...

Bookmarked for future use.

Yitzchak Goodman said...

How do you tell an inaccuracy from a lie? I think Dershowitz's source was Yaakov Meron. The following article (not necessarliy Dershowitz's immediate source) by Meron lists two other Jordanian laws which discriminate against Jews:

http://www.meforum.org/263/why-jews-fled-the-arab-countries

There doesn't seem to be a section of the Jordanian law code available on the web that specifically discusses the position of Jews in Jordan. These discriminatory clauses seem to come up in passing in sections of the law code dealing with general issues.

In a 2005 Reuters article given the title that "Support for bin Laden falls in Muslim countries" we also learn that "99 percent of Jordanians . . . viewed Jews very unfavorably."

http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/174577/support_for_bin_laden_falls_in_muslim_countries/index.html

And in practice, I don't think Jordan, which includes territory that the Balfour Declaration considered to be part of Palestine, has any Jewish citizens. There is probably enough support for Dershowitz's polemic point, whatever it was. Do you ever quote anything you want to refute? For instance, who exactly defended the Likud charter as "mere sabre rattling"? You actually put that in quotes as if you were quoting someone.

Ernie Halfdram said...

Thanks for clearing that up, Ibrahim.

Once again, as with most hasbara, especially Dershowitz's, the issue, as Andrew points out, is not the facts, but the argument. Any three year old can tell you that you can't get away with racism just because there are other kids just as racist. But the hasbaristas think they can get away with it, and the scary thing is that they're right.

Mustafa said...

Except the Japanese are no longer in internment camps. Jordan has signed a peace-deal, surely if you want to apply the same principles it should be updated.

And what makes you so sure that Arab is defined by nationality and not by ethnicity? I think you are taking a huge leap here. Unless you can provide evidence to support your claim that Arab is not ethnically defined, your point is redundant.

Yitzchak Goodman said...

According to Al Arabiyah about a month ago [begin quote]:

In Jordan selling land to Israelis or someone acting on their behalf was illegal and punishable by death prior to1995. A milder statute that took its place still bars Israelis from buying, or leasing, Jordanian land.

"[I]t is impermissible for foreign persons or corporate entities that do not hold an Arab nationality to purchase, lease, or own directly or indirectly any immovable property in the kingdom" according to the Law on Economic Boycott and Banning Dealing with the Enemy (Article 6) without an exception approved by high level political authorization.

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/07/20/79267.html

This suggests that more is involved than simply issues of reciprocity.

P.S. I looked at the Dershowitz article that Ibrahim linked to a little bit. Is Jordan a much more admirable and enlightened place than Israel?

P.P.S. If Dershowitz is wrong about the Jordan citizenship law, but if he is not the "origin of this picturesque, but utterly wrong notion," i.e. there is some prior source for it besides the law itself, does that make this post "Another lie Ibrahim told you"?

edwin said...

P.S. I looked at the Dershowitz article that Ibrahim linked to a little bit. Is Jordan a much more admirable and enlightened place than Israel?

Ah - its a version of the "Israel is not the worst country in the world, so there is nothing wrong with it" argument combined with the "hey - lookie over here and stop looking at Israel ploy.

Yitzchak Goodman said...

Ah - its a version of the "Israel is not the worst country in the world, so there is nothing wrong with it" argument combined with the "hey - lookie over here and stop looking at Israel ploy.

I am asking what do you find when you compare Israel with other countries. That involves looking at Israel, but not in isolation, and it seems to me that I ought to be able to ask the question anyway. Aren't we all here to follow the path of intellectual inquiry where ever it leads? Ibrahim sometimes seems to be saying that Israel isn't the worst country in the world but it is important to debunk the claims of its supporters because it claims to be better than anyone else. I would say that while you do encounter claims such as "most moral army in the world," I could probably get many or most supporters of Israel to agree with my characterization, which is that Israel is like other democracies such as the United States in its values but that it also finds itself in unique and difficult circumstances.

tree said...

This suggests that more is involved than simply issues of reciprocity.

The article you cite actually supports the interpretation that the issue is in fact merely reciprocity. Your source cites Israeli Jews recruiting European Jews to purchase land in Jordan. If the land purchase statutes in Jordan were religiously-based then European based Jews would not be able to purchase land there anymore than Israeli Jews would, and Israelis would have no reason or desire to recruit European Jews. But European Jews can purchase land in Jordan, because their countries of origin allow Jordanians to purchase land in reciprocity, and thus they are being recruited by the Israel Land Fund.

Thanks, Yitzchak, for providing more proof of Ibrahim's point.

Yitzchak Goodman said...

The article you cite actually supports the interpretation that the issue is in fact merely reciprocity . . . Thanks, Yitzchak, for providing more proof of Ibrahim's point.

But there was a death penalty until 1995 and the law is still called "Law on Economic Boycott and Banning Dealing with the Enemy." That is why I said it sounds like more than a reciprocity issue. And who says those European Jews will get anywhere? If I am deserving of thanks for clarifying a point, isn't that the case no matter where this inquiry leads?

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

Interesting points you raise, Yitzchak. I believe Dershowitz does lie because he consciously manipulates sources to make them conform with his theses.

CAMERA quotes Dershowitz as claiming that the Jordanian law “explicitly denies citizenship to all Jews, even those who lived there for generations. Its law provides that citizenship is open ‘to any person who was not Jewish’ and who meets certain other criteria.” This is a claim that is tailored to mislead the reader into thinking that Jordan generously offers citizenship to anyone except the Jews. When, in actuality, the law formulates very stringent requirements (which are dismissed by Dershowitz as "certain other criteria"), and the condition of not being Jewish applies to just one of many ways to acquire Jordanian citizenship. In fact, Dershowitz fails to distinguish between citizenship by origin and citizen by naturalization, which is surprising in a lawyer, and thus fails to note that there are no restrictions on Jews who seek to be naturalized as Jordanian citizens. I believe these are deliberate omissions.

You say, and you're right, that even if there is no formal ban, there are actually no Jews who are citizens of Jordan. But in terms of a country's image, laws have a higher impact than practical results. You know perfectly well that there are no Israeli Arab engineers with the Israeli Electric Corporation. But you also know that Israel's image would suffer much more if Arabs were banned by law from professional positions in public utilities.

Finally, and contrary to your opinion, I think most Israel supporters play the moral superiority card. The country is often painted as meeting impossibly high moral standards. Those are lies, and I think they deserve to be exposed.

evildoer said...

Very good post!

Yitzchak Goodman said...

Did you notice what your link points to in the sentence "And once the lie was let loose, Zionists cut-and-pasted it with abandon"?

The first thing the reader sees is a link to Elder of Ziyon, who quotes the text of the actual law and who accepts corrections from commentators gracefully.

Anonymous said...

Haha you taking on Dershowitz -- one of the greatest legal minds of all times -- you don't stand a chance! Your article is so full of holes it's no surprise that no well-known blogs link to yours or that nobody asks "Ibrahim Yusuf" for submissions. I only hope that the anti-Zionist/antisemitic contingent stays a bunch of dumb goys. Then we'll be just fine.

Mustafa said...

Ibrahim, I hope you understand that I agree with you that Dershowitz has intentionally misled his readers in thinking that all Jews are banned from gaining citizenship.

However, I still believe my point stands: there are no longer internment camps, do you not agree that the law should be ammened? And the fact that it isn't, makes it not only discriminatory (like the internment camps) but unnecessarily discriminatory. I am not arguing that the internment camps were good and logical but you say that these actions are taken as a result of the situation they are in - Jordan is no longer in that situation.

Lastly, I still don't understand how you seem confident in your assertion that 'Arab' is a citizen of an Arab country. I have tried to email various Jordanian embassies for clarification (none of them have got back to me with useful information). Do you have any evidence that Arab is defined by nationality and not by ethnicity?

Mustafa

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

Mustafa:

I understand it makes sense to repeal certain laws when they have created a state of unfairness that can and needs to be reversed. But even in those cases, there is also the option of not enforcing the law.

For instance, during Franco's era Spain enacted a law that no films could be shot in languages other than Spanish. The law was never repealed, yet today there's a vibrant film production in Basque, Catalan and Galician. The law is simply not enforced.

In the case of the Jordan nationality law, it did cause harm to a number of Jews, but the harm has already been reversed, because a) the overwhelming majority of the Jews covered by the law lived in the West Bank, currently under Israeli control, and b) those Jews' desire was, in any case, to return to where they were expelled from, not to become Jordanian citizens. We have never seen a Jew who was living in East Jerusalem when the Jordanians took over, and who was expelled from there, asking to be granted Jordanian citizenship. On the other hand, we have seen them wanting to return to their homes in East Jerusalem, and doing so when the Israeli High Court has ruled in their favor.

In short, there's no practical need for the law to be repealed.

As for the "who is an Arab" question, the law says:

"Arab" means, for the purposes of this Law, any person whose father was of Arab origin and who is a national of a State Member of the League of Arab States

As you can see, the definition is rather tautological, but it makes no explicit mention of religion.

Mustafa said...

For Ibrahim,

"But even in those cases, there is also the option of not enforcing the law."

But why not? I understand its the next best thing, but what is actually stopping them doing so? Is it that they don't have time? I doubt that. They have the capability, and while not enforcing the law is a good step forward, it's not the end. And that goes for all country's with discriminatory laws - whether enforced or not.

""Arab" means, for the purposes of this Law, any person whose father was of Arab origin and who is a national of a State Member of the League of Arab States"

If we go by that definition then it actually does exclude Jews, no? Jews are not of Arab origin and while they may be nationals of the Arab states, the law states "and" (meaning they must fulfil both criterion. Or am I reading it incorrectly?

Mustafa

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

Mustafa:

You seem to be implying that "Arab origin" excludes Jews who speak Arabic. Arabness is a cultural concept, as opposed to Jewishness, which is a religious one. You can be a Christian or a Muslim or a Druze or a Jew and also be an Arab, and you can speak Hebrew, serve in the IDF and root for Betar Yerushalaim and not be a Jew.

There's no definition of "Arab" whereby Jews are excluded.

Mustafa said...

Ibrahim,

Again, we have fallen into the trap of definitions. Unless you have evidence suggesting otherwise, 'Arab origin' - keeping in mind the source is an Arab country law supplement - gives me a clear message of someone who is ethnically Arab. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

And how does "ethnically Arab" exclude Jews?

Anonymous said...

Its actually sort of a mental virus you have to be this pre occupied with Israel and the Jews that you dedicate your life to it. I would never expect to reason with you, but I wonder if you have any other interests in your life! I did note one post about the an incident in Spain but as I saw the end I realized that it was about Jews after all.....you must spend your time collecting Nazi uniforms and doing watching Third Reich videos. Its pathetic but entertaining. Hey, did you even realize there are other countries? China? Tibet? Haiti? Turn off your computer and get a life...

Anonymous said...

Ibrahim: "And how does "ethnically Arab" exclude Jews?"

Seriously, this is the display of ignorance par excellence about the nature of the Jews.

A Jew cannot be "ethnically" anything by definition. As soon as a Jew defines himself in terms of an "ethnicity" he has already divorced himself from his Jewish identity. Defining a Jew by "ethnicity" is like defining an artist by his paintbrush, or a bird by its aerodynamic lift: utterly irrelevant from the point of view of the artist's joy of painting or the bird's joy in flying.

The same goes for the Jew's: nationality (Jews are not by definition "Israeli" and vice versa), citizenship (the allegiance to one's Jewish heritage always transcends it), blood (just look at the ethnic mix in israel and you'll see how meaningless bloodlines are to the jews), worship (after all the worshippers of the golden calf were still jews in the eyes of god, who most jews don't believe in anyway), name (imposed on him by circumstance), language (arbitrary since truth is the same in any tongue.)

A Jew can never be an "ethnic Arab" anymore than he can be a "religious Christian" for the reason that these categorizations are alien to Jewish culture and thought. As Rabbi Gamliel says in the Talmud, "Israel has no religion, nor race nor nation -- she is a people apart: the bridge between." This is why the Jews have no priests, but only rabbis. And no founders but only ancestors. and no ethnicity but Adam's. This is the reason for the universal appeal of the Jews -- why the One God (who has no face, no name, no heaven, and might as well exist only as a bunch of laws for men) has conquered all the other gods -- because the Jews are nothing but the feet of the Book; i.e. the people without an ethnicity, the ethnos without a chthonos.

Trying to label a Jew as an "ethnic X" is doomed to failure. This is precisely why Zionism is so powerful for the Jews: because it reawakens the PROMISE of the land without defining it religiously or ethnically. In other words, it did not rebuild the Temple or try to reestablish the Pharisees, Sadduccees, and Kohanim. What it did was gather the Jews from the Diaspora around and through the dream of the PROMISED LAND -- which is a true fiction and a forgotten memory -- and abolish judaism, semitism, ethnicity and religion (the name and the book) in favor of Zionism: the rebirth of the Jews as a historical actor; the most radical solution to the "Jewish Question" -- in typical Jewish fashion answering a question with an even more unanswerable question: if this is where the Jews belong and the Jews belong nowhere, then where does "belonging" belong, to the Jews? If you wish to understand us, Ibrahim, (and "us" is a variable for the jews who are always "Them") then understand that we/they are defined by this question and not, like most nations unfortunately are, by ethnicity.

Mustafa said...

Oh come on now, Ibrhaim. Consider the source. Are you seriously suggesting that Jordan would consider a Jew ethnically Arab?

andrew r said...

blood (just look at the ethnic mix in israel and you'll see how meaningless bloodlines are to the jews),

Hate to break this to you, but there's a mound of evidence the early Zionists were concerned with notions of race and blood.

Arthur Ruppin in The Jews of Today: "But there is not the slightest doubt that many children of such marriages who, by will of their parents, have been brought up as Jews, will revert to Christianity as soon as they are grown up. The fact that they have a number of Christian relatives, and are only half-Jewish by blood, facilitates their change of religion."

Ze'ev Jabotinsky: "the source of national feeling ... lies in a man’s blood ... in his racio-physical type, and in that alone ... a man’s spiritual outlooks are primarily determined by his physical structure ... For that reason we do not believe in spiritual assimilation. It is inconceivable, from the physical point of view, that a Jew born to a family of pure Jewish blood ... can become adapted to the spiritual outlooks of a German or a Frenchman ... He maybe wholly imbued with that German fluid but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish ... The spiritual assimilation of peoples whose blood is different is impossible"

Max Nordau: "This is the history of Israel at the end of the 19th century. To sum it up in a word: The majority of the Jews are a race of accursed beggars."

And there's also a good deal of evidence that even now the ethnic differences between Israeli Jews are of material import.

http://www.countercurrents.org/leb-lavie280706.htm

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

Are you seriously suggesting that Jordan would consider a Jew ethnically Arab?

The Jordanian law makes no mention of ethnicity. It speaks of Arab origin. Admittedly, it's a vague term. What exactly do they mean by it? The only way to know is if a Jordanian judge clarifies it in a ruling.

Until that happens, we cannot conclude that Arab Jews are excluded. Dershowitz cannot say that either, because it's his interpretatiuon of the law, and he's an American lawyer, not a Jordanian judge.

Mustafa said...

Ibrahim,

I agree with you: Dershowitz has misled his readers and he is wrong for saying what he did. But given that you are not a Jordanian judge, also, how are you to assert that "Arab origin" means that Jews are not excluded? "The only way to know is if a Jordanian judge clarifies it in a ruling."

And you never got back to me on that e-mail! :P

Anonymous said...

I don't see a problem with Jews being allowed to buy land in Jordan/etc.

But it's not an uncontroversial issue.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=101174&sectionid=351020202

I wouldn't be surprised if the Zionists try to colonize Jordan next - slowly over time.

They can use force/start proxy wars via the US/etc. to get what they want.

Dershowitz is - like many Zionists - a scumbag, liar, and fascist.

Bill said...

Frankly, considering how well selling land to Jews worked out for the Palestinians, it's understandable if Jordan wanted to restrict it. Not admirable, but understandable.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry; it does sound from the quote YOU published that indeed jews can't own land in Jordan. It's very plain. So what you are saying is that Dershowitz is right?

Generic Levitra said...

Hi…………………
This is a nice blogs I liked it very much it is really awesome thanks for the sharing.

sex shop tienda said...

Quite worthwhile information, thank you for the article.

viagra said...

Thanks for sharing such an interesting post with us. You have made some valuable points which are very useful for all readers

viagra sale said...

I liked this blog, i think is very interesting, most of all for the new ideas that this blog talk.

Anonymous said...

Ibrahim,

I think you're reading the law too broadly. It is possibly less anti-Jewish, though less clear, than you suggest.

There are three sections that you quote:

(1)Any person who has acquired Jordanian nationality or a Jordanian passport under the Jordanian Nationality Law, 1928, as amended, Law No. 6 of 1954 or this Law;

(2)Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954;

(3)Any person whose father holds Jordanian nationality; (...)

The first grants citizenship to those who already received it under previous Jordanian laws, or those who fulfill the conditions set forth further below. As you indicate, those subsequent conditions don't discriminate against Jews, though they discriminate against non-Arabs. Whether acquiring citizenship under the previous laws was descriminatory or not is a different question, which this law doesn't answer.

The third clause passes on citizenship to children.

The middle clause, which discriminates against Jews, applies only to those who were in Palestine, a separate country from Transjordan, but found themselves in Transjordan or the occupied West Bank.

meltabs said...

I love the way you write.You always update something unique content to your blog.Thanks for the sharing !!!!
Generic Viagra | kamagra

Donnie Marx said...

How many Jews are Jordanian citizens? Have they got a little community to visit? Maybe a synagogue?
Thanks.

Nate Salant said...

You are wrong. Jordanian Law prohibits Jews from becoming citizens or owning property. You are mis-interpreting the actual language and the proof is in the actual application of the law. The only exception would be someone who was granted citizenship by the Jordanian Council of Ministers - and that has never happened.

Furthermore, the ban on Jews pre-dates Jordanian independence - it was actually imposed by the British in 1933. In 1933, a number of prominent Arabs in Transjordan asked Great Britain to allow Jews to settle there, to help its ailing economy, and Zionists were enthusiastic about the idea. But since the British saw the riots that were happening in Palestine at the time they didn't want to worry about more problems of that type, so they created a law banning Jews from living there.

This policy was ratified — after the emirate became a kingdom — by Jordan's law no. 6, sect. 3, on April 3, 1954, and reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963. It states that any person may become a citizen of Jordan unless he is a Jew. King Hussein made peace with Israel in 1994, but the Judenrein legislation remains valid today.

Here's the law: (h/t british18)
The following shall be deemed to be Jordanian nationals:
(1)Any person who has acquired Jordanian nationality or a Jordanian passport under the Jordanian Nationality Law, 1928, as amended, Law No. 6 of 1954 or this Law;

(2)Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954;

(3)Any person whose father holds Jordanian nationality;

(4)Any person born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of a mother holding Jordanian nationality and of a father of unknown nationality or of a Stateless father or whose filiation is not established;

(5)Any person born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of unknown parents, as a foundling in the Kingdom shall be considered born in the Kingdom pending evidence to the contrary;

(6)All members of the Bedouin tribes of the North mentioned in paragraph (j) of article 25 of the Provisional Election Law, No. 24 of 1960, who were effectively living in the territories annexed to the Kingdom in 1930.

What happens if a Jew wants to renounce his/her citizenship in another country and become a Jordanian citizen?

The law reads that "Any ARAB (emphasis added) who has resided continuously in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for not less than 15 years may acquire Jordanian nationality, by decision of the Council of Ministers taken on a proposal by the Minister of Internal Affairs, if he renounces his nationality of origin and the law of his country permits him to do so..."

There are those who incorrectly argue that the Council of Ministers could grant a Jew citizenship. They base the argument on "Article 12," which reads: Any person other than a Jordanian who is not incapable by law may apply to the Council of Ministers for grant of a certificate of Jordanian naturalization if:
(1)He has been regularly resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for a period of four years preceding the date of his application;
(2)He intends to reside in the Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan."

The problem is that an already existing law - the one banning Jews - prevents the Council from granting the request...and Jews are NOT considered Arabs, so they fail the other potential exception as well.

I realize your site is anti-Israel and arguably anti-Jewish, but I think the facts take precedence over your editorial positions.