Netanyahu's talking points to cover the settlements going up in East Jerusalem sound like he's been talking to the Israel Project and Frank Luntz about how to market biblical expansionism to an American audience:
Netanyahu told ministers at the weekly cabinet meeting that
Jerusalem is the united capital of Israel and that all citizens are
allowed to purchase property in any part of the city they choose.
"Imagine what would happen if someone were to suggest Jews could
not live in or purchase [property] in certain neighborhoods in London,
New York, Paris or Rome," he said.
"The international community would certainly raise protest.
Likewise, we cannot accept such a ruling on East Jerusalem," Netanyahu
told ministers.
This is the policy of an open city, he said, and Israel would not accept a stance that counters that civil right.
"Israeli Arabs are not forbidden from buying houses in west
Jerusalem and Jews must be granted the same right in the eastern part
of the city," he added.
Netanyahu said that he had made this stance clear to U.S. President
Barack Obama, declaring that the issue of construction in Jerusalem
could not be linked to the discussion on settlements.
OK: Palestinian citizens of Israel are allowed to buy in W. Jerusalem–and Irving Moskowitz can buy in the Occupied Territories– but does Netanyahu allow Palestinians who aren't citizens to buy? No.
Any Jew anywhere can move to Israel and automatically get all the privileges and rights accorded Jews born in Israel, which are much better than those accorded Arabs born in Israel, and way better than Arabs born in the land Israel occupies. Irving Moskowitz gets all the benefits of being both an American and a Jew. That what he does defies official US foreign policy and the sentiments of the entire West regarding the settlements is not even discussed in the USA. Successive Israeli administrations have been unequivocal in their insistence that Jerusalem has a special status and is not included in ongoing discussions concerning land acquired by Israel in the 1967 war. Communities built in those areas are considered “settlements” and are at the core of fierce disagreement between the Israeli and American administrations. The U.S. government and other western nations reject the Israeli contention.
If it weren't for the state's selective protection of Jewish property interests in East Jerusalem, and for a one-way heart valve for Palestinian building permits, Netanyahu's assertions that "Jews should be able to live anywhere in their homeland" is true. NO ethnic screens should prohibit residence in the country that one is a citizen, Israeli, Jewish or Palestinian.
Meanwhile, from last Wednesday's JPost: "The Justice Ministry will not intervene to cancel the results of a public tender that awarded land in Jaffa to a construction company planning to build apartments exclusively for the religious-Zionist community, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) revealed on Wednesday. The land was awarded to Bemuna, a construction company that is building projects in mixed cities such as Ramle, Lod and Acre with the express intention of beefing up the Jewish population there. In a letter to Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz protesting the ILA decision, ACRI wrote, "the Israel Lands Authority is obliged to honor the constitutional right to equality and to act itself in an egalitarian manner. Therefore, it must not allocate public land to a third party that discriminates." In response, Justice Ministry attorney Ariel Zvi wrote that "after examining the concrete circumstances in this case, we did not find reason to intervene, because the land had been offered in tender twice before without any response, because the [Bemuna] construction company offered the highest bid and because the project involves a relatively small number of housing units." However, Zvi added that the question of whether the ILA should be allowed to grant land to a company that intends to market the housing in a discriminatory way "is a very serious one." He wrote that on the one hand, there was the matter of discrimination. On the other, there was the question of whether the ILA could be held responsible for overseeing how the land purchaser used the land. "As a result, the Justice Ministry has decided to consider the possibility, from now on, in certain kinds of tenders, of demanding of those applying for the tender to declare that they will not discriminate against anyone when they market the land," wrote Zvi. While the Justice Ministry has refused to intervene in the sale, ACRI has also petitioned the Tel Aviv District Court to cancel the awarding of the land. The district court threw the petition out, but the organization appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, asking it to order the district court to consider the petition. In the meantime, the Supreme Court has issued an interim injunction prohibiting any more work on the disputed land. " http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=J...
Jews have the right!
Meanwhile, Adalah's litigation docket for land issues in January 2009: (Adalah=Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights In Israel.) Supreme Court Demanding the Cancellation of an Israel Land Administration (ILA) Policy Permitting the Marketing and Allocation of Jewish National Fund (JNF)-Controlled Lands by the ILA through Bids Open only to Jewish Individuals H.C. 9205/04, Adalah v. Israel Land Administration, et al. (In 9/07, the Supreme Court agreed over Adalah’s strenuous objection, to suggestion made by the Attorney General (AG) and the JNF that JNF-controlled land will be made available to all citizens, including Arab citizens, but that the state will compensate the JNF with other state land if an Arab citizen wins the tender. The state requested numerous delays in proceeding with the case in order to allow it to reach an agreement with the JNF over a land exchange; no agreement has been reached to date). Seeking the Annulment of the “Wine Path Plan” for the Establishment and Retroactive Legalization of 30 Individual Settlements in the Naqab (Negev) for the Purpose of Securing the Land for Exclusive Use by Jewish Citizens. Petition pending for final decision. H.C. 2817/06, Adalah, et al. v. The National Council for Planning and Building, et al. Representing Residents of the Village of Kammaneh in the Galilee against Attempts by the Neighboring Jewish Town of Kamoun to Impose Racist Conditions on the Approval of Kammaneh’s Master Plan H.C. 6176/06, The Cooperative Organization for the Agricultural Settlement of Kamoun v. The National Council for Planning and Building, et al. (Petition pending for final decision; hearing scheduled for 30/9/09) Appealing Land Confiscation in Lajoun Belonging to 300 Arab Families in Umm al-Fahem C.A. (Civil Appeal) 4067/07, Jabareen, et al. v. The State of Israel, et al. (Hearing scheduled for 18/5/09) Challenging the ILA’s Policy and Use of Admissions Committees in Allocating Land for Housing in Community Towns, Excluding Arab Citizens, Mizrahim (Eastern Jews), Single Parents and Gay Individuals H.C. 8036/07, Fatina Ebriq Zubeidat, et al. v. The Israel Land Administration, et al. (Injunction issued in 10/07 ordering the Rakefet community town to set aside plot of land for Zubeidat family pending a final decision on the petition; order to show cause granted in 1/09) Seeking an Order to Freeze Bidding Procedures initiated by a Private Israeli Company for the Sale of Land in Nazareth Confiscated from Arab Owners in 1958 H.C. 5902/08, Sa’ida Hamdan, et al. v. The Minister of Finance, et al. (Request for injunction denied in 7/08; petition pending on the issue of returning the land to the owners. Hearing scheduled for 6/09) Representing Arab Family in an Appeal by Moshav Nevatim against a District Court Decision Upholding the Right of a Jewish Israeli Family to Rent their Home to them, Despite the Moshav’s Racist Objections (Response to the appeal filed in 10/08) Civil Appeal 7831/08, Nevatim: Labor Moshav for Agriculture Settlement, Ltd. v. Zakai Wazman, et al. District Courts Challenging Master Plan that Threatens to Confiscate Land of 24 Arab Residents of Daliyat al-Carmel to a “National Park and Har Shukiv Forest” Administrative Petition (A.P.) 4377/07, Maqaldah Safi, et al. v. The National Council for Planning and Building (Haifa District Court) (In 1/08, the state announced its decision to rescind the appropriation of 27 of 36 plots of land – 900 dunams – designated for the park. Adalah is in negotiations with the National Parks Authority over the remaining plots of land; hearing scheduled for 25/2/09) Demanding that the Arab Town of Jisr al-Zarqa be Connected via Roadway to the Tel Aviv-Haifa Coastal Highway Administrative Petition (A.P.) 1998/08, Local Council of Jisr al-Zarqa v. Ma’atz (Public Works Agency) (Tel Aviv District Court) (Hearing scheduled for 5/3/09) Compelling the Safad Municipality to Connect the Arab Neighborhood of Akbara to the Sewage System Appeal on Administrative Petition 10291/08, Hajeb Salah v. The Municipality of Safad, et al., Supreme Court (In 1/09 Adalah filed a motion to withdraw the appeal after a company authorized by Safad Municipality to build and maintain the town’s sewage system published a bid to connect houses in Akbara to the sewage network)
Adalah's litigation docket continued: Magistrates’ Courts Seeking the Cancellation of Evacuation Lawsuits against about 1,000 Arab Bedouin Citizens of Israel Living in Atir-Umm el-Hieran in the Naqab and Demanding Recognition for the Unrecognized Village Beer el-Sabe Magistrates’ Court, Civil File 1769/08, The State of Israel and the Israel Land Administration v. Ibrahim Farhood Abu el-Qian, et al. (+ legal representation on 26 additional civil files) (Adalah submitted its closing arguments to the court in 11/08; hearing scheduled for 09/2/09) Motions to Cancel Ex Parte Demolition Orders against 33 Homes in the Unrecognized Arab Bedouin Village of Umm el-Hieran in the Naqab Beer el-Sabe Magistrates’ Court, Different Motions 6928/03, Abu el-Qian Ali, et al. v. The State of Israel (In 10/06, the court delayed the implementation of the orders but in 6/07, nine homes were demolished by the ILA in violation of the court’s orders. Adalah has demanded that the AG open an investigation into the ILA’s illegal actions; hearing scheduled for 24/2/09) 45 Urgent Motions to Cancel Ex Parte Demolition Orders Issued against Almost All Homes in the Unrecognized Arab Bedouin Village of Al-Sura in the Naqab Beer el-Sabe Magistrates’ Court, Different Motions 9364/06, Suleiman Nasasra and Adalah v. The State of Israel (In 8/07 the court ordered the freezing of the demolition orders; hearing scheduled for 3/3/09) Planning Committees Objection Filed Against Master Plan for the Arab Village of Sandalah in the North on behalf of the Members of the Local Village Council Objection filed in 12/07 demanding the redrafting of the master plan so as to maintain the agricultural nature of the village, allow for its economic development, and reflect the vision of its residents of the future of their community (In 4/08 a decision was issued to partially reject the objection, following which Adalah applied for permission to appeal; the decision regarding the appeal has not yet been delivered) Objection to Master Plan for Metropolitan Beer el-Sabe, which Violates the Rights of Arab Citizens Living in the Naqab to Dignity, Equality and Suitable Housing Objection filed in 10/07 and hearing held in 7/08; objection pending for final decision Seeking Cancellation of Master Plan for Metropolitan Beer el-Sabe (Beer Sheva) and Recognition for Arab Bedouin Village of Umm el-Hieran Objection filed in 10/07 by Adalah and Bimkom and hearing held in 7/08; objection pending for final decision Appeal against Local Master Plan for Daliyat al-Carmel on the Ground that it Disregards the Rights of the Town’s Arab Residents Appeal filed in 3/08 against a decision to reject objections submitted by residents of the town and to approve the plan; a hearing was held in 8/08; appeal pending for final decision. All these are cases within the green line, discriminating against Israeli citizens who are not Jews.
The problem with Netanyahu's statement is that he is endorsing violations of international law. Israelis, of any religion, shape or form, are prohibited from being transferred into territory that they occupied by consequence of war. Annexation of territory as the result of war is likewise illegal under international law. And the other problem is that the Shepard's Hotel was property seized by the Israeli Custodian of "Abandoned" Arab Property. It is illegal for that property to be sold by that custodian. Therefore Moskowitz has no legitimate title to the land.
250 Muslim families have moved into Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. In some cases, they have built exclusively MUSLIM apartment buildings in otherwise entirely Jewish neighborhoods. None of the bigots, from Hussein-Obama on down to MondoLiars, complained about this. But when Jewish families move into Muslim neighborhoods, all of a sudden segregation becomes a lofty goal! People with track-records like that are properly called hypocrites. Sometimes, even worse.
Jews aren't being transferred anywhere. They move of their own free will. This is just ONE of the reasons that there is no violation of international law here. Oh, Jews WERE moved against their will… OUT OF GAZA, which is now Judenrein. You didn't have a problem with that. Figures.
Muslim citizens of Israel have and deserve equal rights to purchase apartments where they choose. The title to the land in question is contested. In a society ruled by law, construction on such land would have to be perfected by compensation and consent of the previous landowner to be allowable. Its NOT innocuous, and not rationalizable as such.
you talk like jerusalem is already undivided. it isn't. east jerusalem is occupied territory. international law stipulates you cannot move your citizens into occupied territory. simply announcing jerusalem as undivided or legislating it so doesn't quite cut it. In November 1967, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 was passed, calling for Israel to withdraw "from territories occupied in the recent conflict". In 1980, the Knesset passed the Jerusalem Law which declared that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel",[1] however, without specifying boundaries. This declaration was declared "null and void" by United Nations Security Council Resolution 478. … In March 2009, a confidential "EU Heads of Mission Report on East Jerusalem" was published, in which the Israeli government was accused of "actively pursuing the illegal annexation" of East Jerusalem. The report stated: "Israeli 'facts on the ground' – including new settlements, construction of the barrier, discriminatory housing policies, house demolitions, restrictive permit regime and continued closure of Palestinian institutions – increase Jewish Israeli presence in East Jerusalem, weaken the Palestinian community in the city, impede Palestinian urban development and separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank."[7] The right of Israel to declare sovereignty over the entirety of Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, which regarded the move as de facto annexation [12] and deemed Israeli jurisdiction invalid in a subsequent non-binding United Nations General Assembly resolution.[13] However in a reply to the resolution, Israel denied that these measures constitute annexation.[14] wiki
No Jews were moved against their wil out of Gaza. The Jews in Gaza elected a Prime Minister who made an agreement on their behalfm as their politicla reprensentative, so now, there is no problem with that.
"Jews have the right! " Within the internationally recognized borders of the state of Israel only.
How many exclusively MUSLIM apartment buildings exist in Jerusalem? Do you consider Barak Obama to be a biggot or do you just hate black people Jake? When Jewish families move into Muslim neighborhoods, it it usualyl involved the demolition of Palestinian homes, so yes, it creates conflict. You are the worst hypocrite of them all.
Ariel Sharon campaigned on Anti-disengagement. He broke his election mandate. The expulsion was a criminal act.
It is not internationals that decide where a Jew can live. We are the masters of our own destiny. We will build in our land.
International law makes no distinction according to whether the transfer is voluntary or not. Its still a violation of international law. Gaza is occupied territory obtained through war, therefore any Israeli citizens that move there at the behest of the Israeli government were there unlawfully. If Israel had transferred Israeli citizens of Palestinian background it would have likewise been illegal. But since Israel is a racist nation that seeks to encourage ONLY Jews to move to settlements in occupied territories, it is only Jews who end up having to leave. If you have a problem with that, perhaps you should have complained that Israel didn't encourage its own Palestinian citizens to move to the settlements. Of course Israel doesn't want more non-Jews in the occupied territories so it only promotes and encourages Jewish only settlements there.
Muslim citizens of Israel deserve equal rights to purchase apartments where they choose, but rarely get them. If they did have euqal rights, their religion or ethnicityu wouldn't be an issue to begin with. The soverighty of the land in question is not contested because it is occupied and has NEVER belonged to Israel. Perhaps the private title to the land is contested, though it it likely that the title has no basis in law.
Jews an individuals should be allowed to live anywhere, so long as they observe the law and government of that land. Israel on the other hand, sits inside Palestine and is defined by the 1967 borders. Everyone is a master of their own destiny. That does not give them the right to steal land.
Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Israel does not sit inside Palestine. Palestine is just a term the Romans used to spite Jews by temporarily renaming our land after our ancient enemies. They also called Jerusalem Aeola Capitolina but that didn't stick. Jews have not stolen land. It is our land.
An elected representative is not bound by any mandate. Once they are elected, they are free to do as they wish. The transfer was legal under Israeli and international law..
It was illegal under both.
Any Jew claiming to support Palestinians but failing to demand the return of the Dead Sea Scrolls to their rightful owners, the Palestinian people, is only trying to protect the State of Israel and to preserve Jewish privilege: Khaleej Times: Israel Steals Palestinian Heritage, History .
"It is not internationals that decide where a Jew can live. We are the masters of our own destiny. We will build in our land." The Aryans were another tribe that were masters of their destiny too. And with that mastery they went out and built themselves a 1,000 year Reich on other people's land that lasted all of 12 years. So good luck in the West Bank.
I don't think Nazi comparisons are appropriate on this forum. That being said every person and every nation is the "master of their own destiny" Israel is built upon justice and will prevail. We have survived for thousands of years, far before Germany was a country and will be around far after.
ShingoLiar has no grasp of ancient history nor of recent history. For ShingoLiar, newspapers weren't invented yet 4 years when the Jews of Gaza were expelled. The subtleties behind Sharon's decision to expel Jews from Gaza are, of course, much too complex for ShingoLiar. No hope for ShingoLiar.
Intl Law forbids the FORCED transfer of an occupying population into territory conquered and considered occupied. Neither Israeli citizen JEWS nor Israeli citizen ARABS are forced to move anywhere (except for the expulsion iof Jews from Gaza). Thus, there is no violation of intl law. There are many other counts where your argument fails, as well.
Annie, THanks for your quotes. Under UN 242, Israel has complied over 90% – it has evacuated nearly ALL the territory that 242 refers to, namely Golan, WB, Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula. Of the two dozen Arab states that were at war with Israel at the time of UN 242, less than 10% have signed a peace treaty with Israel. More than 90% of the Arab states are still in violation. If you're going to get legal about it, you'll have to pay attention to the details.
1) Hundreds of apartment buildings in Jerusalem are exclusively Muslim. They aren't living in tents, you know. Israel isn't Egypt… 2) Some of my best friends are black. (Where have we heard this before???? :-) ) Barack Hussein Obama is expressing openly bigoted policies against Jews, especially with his demands against Jews while leaving the backwards Arabs with no demands at all. 3) Jewish families generally move into Arab neighborhoods only – a) when the courts agree that the Arabs are squatting land thieves who have stolen property from Jews or – b) when Jews buy property legally from Arabs. In every case, the courts approve of these actions. Demolition is rare. But ShingoLiar can believe what it wants to. ShingoLiar is also a ShingoFool. No hope for Shingo.
No Israeli law or intenational law was broken. It was perfectly legal and moral.
The Jews weren't expelled Jake, because the goivernment they elected entered into an agreeement to dismantle the illegal settlements. It's logic 101 Jake, but even that is above your pay grade.
"Intl Law forbids the FORCED transfer of an occupying population into territory conquered and considered occupied. " Exactlyl which is what Israel has done in the occupied territories. Well done Jake. "Neither Israeli citizen JEWS nor Israeli citizen ARABS are forced to move anywhere " Arabs are frequently driven out of their homes. "There are many other counts where your argument fails, as well. " Only you can't think of any.
Annie, As you can see, Jake is clueless and willfully ign\\orant. Israel has flouted UN 242 90%. UN 242 refers to occupied territories which includes all of the West Bank. Israel occupies and controls all of the West Bank. Apart from 242, there are another 90 UN resolutions Israel has ignored. 22 Arab States have offered a peace initiative to recognize Israel and normalise relations with Israel, but Israle has rejected the offer. So the reaon that only 10% have signed a peace treaty with Israel is bevause Isrle has rejected their offer to sing a peace treaty. See how Jake leaves that part out? He's not even a good liar.
You are a supremacist who is opposed to mixed marriages, so you Eitan are a prime candate for the Nazi comparison. You want your fellow Israelis to remain pure and inbred.
1) There are not hundreds of apartment buildings in Jerusalem are exclusively Muslim. That is a lie. 2) Obama has expressed what has been US policy and the international consensus for decades. Isrel has moved to the far right, and suddenly regards this as new and radical. It's not. 170 of 190 states at the UN have voted very year for these policies. 3) a) No courts have determined that Arabs are squatting. On the contrary, Israeli settler are the squatters. No prop[erty has been stolen from Jews. b) When Jews buy stolen proerty it is illegal. Arabs who have nowhere to go don't sell land. Demotion is common, which is why tens of thousand of Palestinian homes have been demolished. Jake is a liar and a very bad liar at that.
Pingback: The lobby parrots Netanyahu on the Jewish civil right to Palestinians’ homes