Ira Glunts writes:
The public disagreement between Israel and the U.S. over continued settlement expansion
in the West Bank and Jerusalem has heated up considerably today. At a cabinet meeting on
Sunday, Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly rejected the Obama administration's request for a
halt to construction of a planned settlement in Sheik Jarrah, located in Israeli occupied
East Jerusalem.
The disputed site is owned by settlement supporter Irving Moskowitz, a wealthy American doctor who
bought the property in 1985. It is the present site of the Shepherd Hotel and was once the
residence of the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini. The location borders on a
Palestinian historic district which was described at the Israeli Channel 1 web site as a
"time bomb since 1985." The municipality of Jerusalem has prevented the
development of the site because of Palestinian sensibilities until recently.
The request to refrain from building on the property was delivered to Israeli
Ambassador Michael Oren by State Department officials within the last few days. According
to Ha'aretz, Oren told the Americans that
Jerusalem is no different from any other part of his country and that Israel would not
accede to their demand.
In his speech to the cabinet , Netanyahu declared, "Jerusalem is united, it is the
capital of the Jewish people, and its sovereignty is not open to debate." He further
added that any Jew has the right to build anywhere in Jerusalem. The Prime Minister's
statement received support from opposition member of parliament Yoel Hasoon (Kadima), who
said,"the American request to refrain from building in Jerusalem is not legitimate.
Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the Jewish people, and is not a
settlement…."
Further evidence that Israel and the United States are far from resolving settlement
expansion dispute was the postponement of this
week's schedule meeting between Special Envoy George Mitchell and Defense Minister
Ehud Barak. There has been no official confirmation of when the next meeting between the
two will occur.
Weiss adds:
Isn't this the whole enchilada? Isn't this what Obama promised in the Cairo speech, a shared Jerusalem? Where does Obama's vision go from here?
Note that Moskowitz is an old Netanyahu friend who reportedly pressed him into opening the Hasmonean tunnels in the Old City back in the 90s, leading to Palestinian riots. Moskowitz funded David Wurmser, one of the visionaries of the Bush Administration, while he was at the American Enterprise Institute pushing for a war with Iraq, which, lo, came to pass. The peace process, quoth Moskowitz, is "a slide toward concessions, surrender and Israeli suicide."
You're a Jew like I'm the Chief Mufti….
Got to agree with Craig on that one. Pollard belongs in prison. Even if he had spied just out of principle I would say that his place is in prison. He took money for it. As for those who say others who did worse got lighter sentences, I say that the other people should have gotten heavier sentences; Pollard should not have gotten a lighter sentence.
I don't believe you. There are a few neo-Nazi's who were born Jewish, but they are rare enough that it is more likely that you are simply a run-of-the-mill neo-Nazi who is pretending to be Jewish. Let me guess, you were abused as a child, am I right?
OK, now you are in Colbert/Jack Chick territory. Where we can't tell whether you are a serious lunatic or just pretending to be one to be funny. The irony critical point.
Many people have been convicted of spying and got off far easier. Pollard delivered information about Iraqi nuclear installation. It's time to free Pollard. I didn't see anyone one this website complain that Samir Kuntar was released by Israel to Lebanon after serving a fraction of a sentence for bashing the head in of a little girl.
In other news, Netanyahu told President Obama not to build in American occupied East Washington DC. President Obama said "forget about it". Somehow I think a President whose capitol is occupied territory from the Native Americans, taken in wars of aggression by the U.S. against the Native Americans lacks the moral high ground to tell a President whose capitol is "occupied territory" from the Arabs, taken in wars of defense by Israel from the Arabs what his people should or should not be able to do with their own land in their own capitol. As for Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, he was a convicted war criminal, a close ally of the Nazis, supported the extermination of the European Jews and tried to get the Nazis to send troops to what is now Israel to exterminate the Jews there as well. Boo freakin' hoo that his old residence is now owned by a Jew. He's probably looking up at it right now. (just kidding, I don't believe in Hell, though people like al-Husseini make me wish I did).
As always Thom, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
1. America long ago admitted to the attrocities is inflicted on the indigenous Americans and has paid reperations. Israel on the other hand, denies it did anything wrong, denies the Palestinians even existed, and refuses to pay reperations.
2. There is no such thing as land taken in war belonging to the agressor. Israel started the 9167 war, and as Begin and Shamirtold the world, started the war to seize land.
3. The Grand Mufti, though he deserved it, was never convicted as a war criminal.
4. The Stern gang and Irgun collborated with Nazi affiliated facists in Iraly who provide them money to drive out the British.
Are you serious? Do you know of his life? Aren't you concerned that your advocacy is a revision of Torah, rather than an affirmation of it? Where do you study?
I'm actually reading one of his books now "The Jewish Idea" which is really good. I don't believe his advocacy to be a revision of Torah and I think he had an excellent understanding of Jewish history, Jewish activism and Torah
I love Jews. Hate Zionists. Murdering thieves.
Indians are American citizens. At least.
And if there were 300 million of their descendants living in Canada and launching missiles at the U.S., killing say, 50,000 Americans in 10 years, do you think the U.S. would give them the right of return?
Indians. I think nobody says that anymore. Native Americans I mean.
Because US forced them
That sounds awfully parental, and wise!