Jeffrey Goldberg gives one of his Goldbloggers, Hershel Ginsburg, the space to explain to Goldberg’s unenlightened readers that Gilo, where the Israelis are now building another 900 housing units, is not a part of East Jerusalem, but in Jerusalem: "a neighborhood in the city, i.e., within the city limits, forming the southernmost part of the city (not in "east" Jerusalem as a number of ignorant journalists have reported)."
The use of the folksy term,"neighborhood," was slyly introduced a few years back, as British journalist Robert Fisk first pointed out, in a public relations effort to humanize what the international community and its laws had long ago determined were illegal settlements.
Even though every modern map of the city shows that Gilo is definitely in its Eastern portion, Ginzburg’s argument that Gilo is not in East Jerusalem, however, is legally correct. Until the 1967 war, the land on which Gilo now sits was part of the greater West Bank. After their rapid victory in 1967 the Israelis expanded Jerusalem’s area to three times its original size and promptly annexed it, a decision that angered the international community which has accepted it.
In fact, to protest the illegal action, all the foreign countries, including the US, moved their embassies from West Jerusalem to Tel Aviv. An " integral part of Jerusalem," as Ginzburg, Goldberg’s alter ego, would have us believe, it isn’t.
Ironically, a frank description of the annexation process and the building of Gilo and other settlements in the captured area that became today’s Jerusalem was provided by one of their most avid defenders, Moshe Elad, writing on Ynet, Wednesday:
"On June 27, 1967 [PM Levi]Eshkol decided to annex an area of roughly 70,000 dunams, only 10% of which was part of the Old City. The rest of the area included the land of 28 villages in the West Bank from the Bethlehem and Ramallah area.
"In three different stages of confiscation and construction, by 1970 the State of Israel built the following neighborhoods: Shapira Hill (known as French Hill,) Ramot Eshkol, Maalot Dafna, Neve Yaakov, Ramat Alon, Talpiot East, Gilo, and later on Ramat Shlomo – these neighborhoods were built on 23,500 dunams of the annexed territory."
Israel is not planning on giving any of them up .
Related posts:
- ‘May I interject?’ A demonstration in the landgrab that is ‘East Jerusalem’
- Look at the path of the wall through East Jerusalem
- ‘Times’ Does Fine Piece on ‘Juda-izing’ of East Jerusalem But Has Lots of Work to Do
- Netanyahu tries to market East Jerusalem expansion in civil rights lingo
- Weekly Sheikh Jarrah protest greeted with hostility in West Jerusalem, cheers in East Jerusalem
{ 22 comments }
And no one seems to have any plans to make them give it up.
Truly, this is damage that was done a long time ago. The opportunity to stop it was then, but Israel has always gotten away with any thefts of Palestinian land.
Gilo is Gilo, not Jerusalem.
Your headline was misleading, even for your valid point.
Hey asshole. Here’s your opportunity to make a stand against the settlements, and what? You use it to attack Mr. Blankfort? Are you married, Witty? Because if you haven’t been divorced your wife must be a goddamn saint. I can just imagine what that must be like — she gets rear-ended in a traffic accident, calls you in tears and your chide her for being late with dinner.
And here I thought Gilo meant neighborhood =P
Alright, look. I disagree with most of what Witty posts on here. But frankly, I don’t come here to read ad hominem attacks on people. Argue, disagree, advance the discussion, but I’m not very interested in participating in a sight where people think calling other posters “assholes” and talking about their marital status makes for good discussion.
Also, Witty is right–Gilo is in East Jerusalem, and East Jerusalem is in the West Bank–it was controlled by Jordan between ‘49-’67, just like the West Bank. The only difference between E. J’lem and the West Bank is the the urban fabric, which has changed dramatically since ‘67.
Ok, Ginsburg and Goldberg are right. Gilo’s not in East Jerusalem. It’s in the West Bank. Happy now?
Gilo IS in East Jerusalem. And, East Jerusalem is in the West Bank, per Blankfort’s article.
R Witty: “Gilo is Gilo, not Jerusalem.”
R Witty: “Gilo IS in East Jerusalem.”
Contradiction anyone?
I think we should come up with a special term for situations like this: Wittypocrisy.
The terms are often intentionally confused (of course Gilo is in the southern part of the city, Mr. Ginsburg), but generally speaking, East Jerusalem, West Jerusalem and the West Bank are used to refer to parts of the current/former municipal jurisdiction of Jerusalem that were under Jordanian rule from ‘49 to ‘67 (EJ), parts of the current/former municipal jurisdiction of Jerusalem that were under Israeli rule from’49 to ‘67 (WJ), and areas outside the current/former municipal jurisdiction of Jerusalem that were under Jordanian rule frm ‘49 to ‘67 (WB), respectively. There’s some overlap, but it is by no means “ignorant” to refer to Gilo as East Jerusalem (note the caps, Mr. Ginsburg – we’re not playing with our compasses here).
It is thus irrelevant, in terms of international law and basic decency, whether Gilo is in East Jerusalem or in the West Bank. The only thing that matters is that it is stolen Palestinian land Israel has no intention of giving up even in its “best offers ever”. It is equally irrelevant whether it is a “suburb” or a “neighbourhood” or a “community” or a “settlement” or a “colony”.
Of course, the same goes for the parts of West Jerusalem stolen from Palestinians (Sheikh Bader, Deir Yassin, Talbiye, ‘Ayn Karim, etc.).
Exactly–in terms of international law, both East Jerusalem and the West Bank are occupied Palestinian territory.
RE: “No, Gilo is not East Jerusalem” – BLANKFORT
SEE: “Intel Inside? Prove It.” – By Bernard Avishai, 11/22/09, TPM
(excerpt) …A week ago Saturday, Intel’s facility on Har Ha’Hotzvim–a technology park in a belt of land near (but not at all in) the burgeoning ultraOrthodox neighborhood of Sanhedria–was surrounded and vandalized by acolytes of various Haredi rabbis, most notably, the leader of Eda, Rabbi Yitzhak Tuvia Weiss. Intel met with representatives of the Haredi groups, facilitated by Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat and Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin–both rightists tied to Haredi voters. The Sabbath shift, so the “compromise” stipulates, will be cut from 120 employees to 20. None of them will be Jews. (By the way, this absurd agreement may have satisfied most, but not Rabbi Weiss. His mobs were back yesterday demanding a complete shut down.)…
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/22/intel_inside_prove_it/
ALSO SEE:”San Francisco Chronicle Fires Reporter For Attending Peace Protest”, by Amy Goodman and Henry Norr, 04/24/03
Former Chronicle columnist Henry Norr talks to Democracy Now!
(excerpt)…NORR: …And then there was another thing last summer I wrote in my technology column. I wrote a column about a $2 billion dollar, state of the art, high-tech factory that Intel owns in Israel. I wrote about the history of the land that that factory is on and about the Palestinian villagers that were there before. It’s a complicated story, but it happens that that land was subject to some special legal agreement. There were just two villages but the Israeli government had signed a treaty, an international agreement, protecting the rights and property of the Palestinians who lived there back in 1948 for historical reasons. And then of course, almost immediately after they signed the agreement, they proceeded to do what they did elsewhere in Palestine: chase and terrorize the local residents out of their villages. They eventually converted that area into what they call an economic-development zone.
Many years later, in the 90s, Intel happened to choose it as the site for this state-of-the-art fancy factory. So I wrote about that kind of as a metaphor perhaps, for Israel’s so-called first-world high-tech economy and the foundations it sits on. Needless to say I actually I got a tremendous amount of support. I was amazed. Most of the email I got about the column was supportive and appreciative. But the local pro-Israeli Zionist lobby was outraged and the Israeli Consulate in San Francisco, which is kind of the cheerleader coordinator for those forces apparently, was outraged and, I found out later because nobody at the Chronicle told me, but apparently they came and demanded an immediate meeting to object to my column…
ENTIRE TRANSCRIPT – http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0424-04.htm
RE: “Jeffrey Goldberg gives one of his Goldbloggers, Hershel Ginsburg, the space…”
MY COMMENT: So Jeffrey Goldberg got someone else to do his lying for him. An old, tried-and-true Israeli tactic!
Nice to sleep all tucked in your bed, with visions of sugar plums….
http://alethonews.blogspot.com/2009/10/fight-for-survival-in-west-bank.html
Per your article Citizen -
“Atta Jaber claims his family suffer daily harassment from the nearby settlers, he says: “They threaten my children all the time. They ride up on their horses every night and circle our home, threatening us.”"
The KKK used to do this in the South, ride up outside of black families homes, burn crosses and threaten the people. They used to say that the KKK was an “outlaw” group, but people know that “leaders” in the community even sheriffs used to ride with them. In the same way Israel claims what the colonists are doing is illegal, but we know the armed forces support them – ZERO difference.
This isn’t the first time I’ve heard of them ripping up irrigation and tearing down cisterns near Hebron.
There have been two “agreements” between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators. The Clinton parameters which were accepted by both negotiating teams (but with comments indicating where they did not actually accept the parameters) and the Geneva “accords” negotiated by Yasser Abed Rabo and Yossi Beilin. Question: is the current construction scheduled for Gilo on the Israeli side of the border that was negotiated in those (unofficial) negotiations?
Why does it matter what side of a fantasy border in two non-signed “agreements” the new construction would be on? Israel has violated these “borders” so many times already, constructing just about everywhere in the West Bank and Jerusalem, that they cannot possibly be cited now, in Israel’s defence. Either Israel accepts these paramaters or not. If it doesn’t (as it has demonstrated repeatedly, with “facts on the ground”), they are meaningless, and must bring all honest two-staters back to the original principle of the Green Line and pre-’67 borders.
Furthermore, zoning, municipal boundaries and construction in Jerusalem (including roads, light rail, etc.) have been so politicised by Israel, in order to maintain “maximum territory with minimum Arab population” and preclude any territorial compromise in the greater Jerusalem area, that all claims of “normal urban growth” (that’s what they always say) are extremely suspect.
gilo is actually on the land of beit jala and is closer to beit lahem than it is to east jerusalem. ironically the terms “east” and “west” don’t really apply geographically to jerusalem. it’s more like north/south jerusalem.
Akiva Eldar on “Jerusalem”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1130000.html
Eldar puts his finger on a very important phenomenon, which extends well beyond Jerusalem. Whatever the Israeli Left is willing to “accept” is considered acceptable internationally, and must therefore be accepted by the Palestinians. At first, it was just the Etzion Bloc and the “Allon Plan”, but Oslo helped extend that to any settlements “near the Green Line” and anything that would be Israel’s in an eventual agreement, as envisioned by Barak or Beilin or Ayalon. Employing the classic “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine” method, successvie Israeli governments have also built or allowed settlement beyond the areas of “consensus”, but at least expected a certain amount of internal and external criticism. They become indignant however, if not downright surprised when construction within the “consensus” is questioned. That seems to be what happened in Gilo, and WJs comment that it should be ok if it’s within the parameters of one of Israel’s unilateral “peace” plans, is indicative.
Comments on this entry are closed.