Around 12:30… I went walking down, with an old friend and a new acquaintance, to the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem so that we could take a closer look at the Palestinian homes Israeli settlers had taken over (denoted by the giant Israeli flags hung from each of the buildings). As we approached the road leading to this flashpoint – settler youth sprinted towards us on their way out of the area up toward Nablus Road (in our direction). They were being chased… apparently by police.
Settlers running toward Nablus Road. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
We walked into a scene of angry Palestinians shouting up the side road toward two of the settler buildings. From the bottom of the road, we could see some religious settler children staring down. We began asking questions. The explanation we received was that the Palestinians had been attacked by the settlers who were throwing stones at them. Sure enough, I noticed one man lifting another man’s shirt to examine his bruises. I noted how calm and patient he was after being hit in the back with stones.
Examining the bruises after a settler attack. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
Later I discovered that earlier that morning settlers had broken into the As-Sabbagh family’s home and attacked them. As we heard more of the story, media began to show up in small numbers. I ran up the side road a bit toward the homes (Israeli settlers & Palestinians now living side by side) and took photos of the commotion that ensued higher up. Then I noticed an angry Palestinian man screaming as he came down. He was limping badly and was blood red in the face. The first policeman on the scene spoke perfect Arabic and calmly reassured the residents, but did nothing else, making no efforts to apprehend any one of the settlers. The limping Palestinian man shouted something to the effect of “You ask us to do nothing, but then they attack us and YOU do nothing. This is what you want from us? You’re not going to protect us? Then don’t complain when we protect ourselves!” I thought this was rather brazen as I couldn’t picture myself shouting at a policeman holding such a large semi-automatic weapon.
Confrontation with the Israeli police. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
He was visibly angry, and when I asked about photographing his leg where he was hit, he brushed me off and continued yelling… uninterested in media attention (I couldn’t blame him, it appeared he was really having trouble walking and clearly the police were doing nothing). Another young policeman, not older than 18 I imagine, sat by idly watching. Each Palestinian resident repeated the same theme “For how long can we sit by while they attack our children and you do nothing? HOW LONG?” or “If we had attacked them, one of us would be in handcuffs if not more… and yet here you sit doing nothing when they attack us. This is the police huh?”
That was when I heard a child crying, and as I walked over to him, I saw why he was crying. At his feet was another child, not more than 12 or 13 but possibly 10 or 11, lying on the ground. As I listened, I realized he too had been hit. At a minimum, I could see his knuckles were bleeding, but I knew there was more to it than that as he wasn’t getting up. He didn’t cry, didn’t shout, he just lay there waiting for help.
An injured Palestinian child waiting for help. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
That was when I heard what I couldn’t believe… honestly, you read about this kind of thing, but you never realize how serious it is until you hear it for yourself. The policeman called for an ambulance. The ambulance, over the radio, responded by asking in Hebrew “Is it an Arab or a Jew?” Immediately an angry woman (presumably the injured boy’s mother) shouted “OF COURSE! OF COURSE That’s what they ask… Because if he’s an Arab, WHY SHOULD THEY COME?” I couldn’t believe my ears. I didn’t understand… Why would an ambulance dispatcher ever pause to ask the ethnicity of an injured child before rushing to pick him up? At that moment, I was overwhelmed and had to step away from the situation. I imagined my own son lying in pain and bleeding, no matter how severe, with an ambulance dispatcher asking in the background for clarity on his religion or ethnicity. I believe that the original dispatcher who asked the police officer about ethnicity was from the Magen David (the Israeli equivalent of the Red Cross). In the end, two ambulances came, the Red Crescent Society came first (The Red Crescent Society is the Red Cross equivalent in the occupied Palestinian territories). I returned to take photos as the Red Crescent Society arrived to carry the child away.
The Red Crescent Society attends to the child. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
An old man shouted from the sidewalk about the racism and the theft of Palestinian land and buildings, asking how much longer they would have to endure this and watch as their buildings are taken one by one without any repercussion. I believe he was also shouting about the settlers stealing electricity from Palestinians’ lines, rather than paying for it themselves. On the other side of the road, a settler couple casually walked toward the side road leading up to their (or their friends’) new homes, until a Palestinian man intercepted them and appeared to be threatening them (my friend translated for me). They immediately turned around back toward the main road looking shocked that he would speak to them in such a fashion. In my mind, I condemned him for threatening them, in my heart I realized if I had witnessed all of this and watched people lose their homes, or lost my own, I might not be as kind as him to have used only words.
The settler couple (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
As the settlers stepped out of their homes for the sabbath, the media rushed them for photos and questions, and the settlers responded with empty phrases, some of which I understood, such as “We are only here for peace.” Of course the police stood between them and the media protecting the settlers and pushing media back.
The settlers began leaving their homes and heading to the main road with a significant police escort.
The settlers leave the settlement with the help of a police escort. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
Eventually, a settler my friend said was fingered as the one responsible for starting much of the trouble, was being escorted out as Palestinian children and the media ran toward him. However, at no point did he appear to be detained and at no point was he handcuffed in any way, shape, or form.
A settler leader gets attention from the media. (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
Another of the settlers walked by me with his son, seemingly upset by being photographed (my friend translated his statement to me) and asked why I do not write down the settlers’ side of the story. My friend responded in Hebrew “We will photograph and write down what we want, thanks.”
Further up the road, the settlers had gathered at a certain point with a police car and police protection. They interacted as friends, nothing less.
Afterward, my English colleague asked me “Who would voluntarily subject their children to this kind of thing?” (referring to the Israeli settlers). I couldn’t answer… I didn’t know.
Israeli settlers and police socializing in Sheikh Jarrah (Photo: Andrew Kadi)
Andrew Kadi is a human rights activist and a member of Adalah-NY: the Coalition for Justice in the Middle East who has written for the Guardian’s Comment is Free, Electronic Intifada, and other publications.
And yet, Zionism isn’t racism. Anyone else reminded of Selma?
Hey Witty, can you do your rendition of ‘Mutual Understand, Mutual Humanization’?
I always love that impression.
Did they drive the blacks out of their own homes in Selma? This is worse.
True. And apartheid South Africa was even worse than the American South. Isn’t it very telling, then, when people like Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu tell us that what they see being done to Palestinians is even worse still?
I agree. What’s up with asking a child’s ethnicity before sending an ambulance? These Zionists are scum. It’s time for regime change in Tel Aviv.
I’m still not certain who actually owns these homes. I keep hearing different stories about who has legal ownership of them. Even the naming is different “Sheik Jarrah” Vs. “Shimon HaTzadik” Neighborhood.
So you believe that might Russian and European immigrants own those homes, and not the Palestinian natives who were living there sixty odd years ago? The name “Shimon HaTzadik” couldn’t have existed in such away as to predate the Modern Hebrew it is derived from, could it?
Do yourself a favor and apply logic.
Chaos,
I think that is the whole issue, we have two different claims here. That even go back further than 60 years! I see 1876 on Wikipedia for example.
“Shimon Hatzadik” is not Modern Hebrew, Chaos, but refers to the tomb of Simeon the Just (high priest, 3rd cent. BC), believed by some to be located in the neighbourhood. Whatever. Theft and apartheid are still theft and apartheid.
BSDNOW is not certain of “anything,” that is why he is here…
Which is just fine.
BSD,
This is the second time you are asking the same question. I think I gave a pretty detailed explanation last time (and once before that), in answer to your question. Did you read it? Did you hear or read anything to the contrary?
For your convenience, I am reposting my message from 12 December:
I could give more details, but I think this covers the essentials. My apologies to everyone else, for posting this information for the third time.
Ok that clarifies things. So you are saying that the homes legally belong to the Jews that currently live there, but taken into context this is immoral.
Thank you very much and I apologize if I didn’t get it the first time! It’s confusing!
BSD,
To clarify, an Israeli court decided that the homes belong to the Separdic Community Committee (a decision that has been contested). The same court system has never recognised the pre-48 titles of Palestinians to property in Jerusalem or anywhere else in Israel, if such property has since been allocated to Jews. (Remember that the Palestinian families in question are refugees who, presumably, lost property elsewhere in Israel. They stand no chance whatsoever of regaining that property through the Israeli courts, or even legally residing in their towns or villages of origin.)
The settlers living there – and the organisations working on their behalf – have nothing to do with the Committee, but have engineered the eviction of the Palestinian families and moved in, for purely political reasons – with the permission of the holders of the title recognised by the court. Such settlement activity makes a mockery of the concepts of “home” and “property”.
The homes may or may not legally belong the the Sephardic Community Committee, but they certainly do not “legally belong” to the Jews that currently live there. Furthermore, the system that has made all of this possible is so blatantly discriminatory that I would not recognise the “legality” (in the international sense) of any such decision on its part.
Molesting their Palestinian neighbours with the “permission” of the Israel Police is icing on the cake.
Please don’t apologize for posting it again. Repetition never hurts; new people might visit the blog who may not have seen accurate information somewhere else. I myself had forgotten the details, and am glad to be reminded of them. Thanks.
Thank you very much and I apologize if I didn’t get it the first time! It’s confusing!
This is really bad acting, BSDNOW. It’s not at all confusing.
Do you also think that the refugees now driven out of the houses they built again, can get their first houses they were pusehd out of inside Israel back again?
And how do you explain that the property built by the refugees is taken without recompense. How can “the homes legally belong to the Jews that currently live there” if neither they nor the former owners of the land built them.
Please explain.
What?
“refugees now driven out of the houses they built again, can get their first houses they were pusehd out of inside Israel back again”
I’ve read that sentence like three times and it’s really a tongue twister.
Who built the homes?
The point is, BSD, that even if some Jews happened to live in the houses before 1948, it is not those particular Jews or their heirs who have been given title to them by the court. It is some association who claims to represents “Jews” in general, who then turned around and gave the houses to religious settlers who have no conceivable claim, themselves, except for the fact of being Jews.
So the only reason the houses are being transfered is to replace Arabs with Jews.
Something about BSDNOW reminds me of Suzanne. She used to exhibit the same kind of hilarity about the fate of some “loosers”. Somehow it was funny for her. Exactly what I sense between the lines in the above comment.
BSD – the people who had been occupying these houses were Palestinian refugees, driven out of their homes in Israel during the 1947-8 war. They fled to Jordanian territory, while in turn the Jews who had lived in Jordanian territory fled to Israeli territory. The Jordanians settled the refugees in these E Jerusalem houses, where they lived until the Israeli courts decided to kick them out because at one time, Jews had lived in them.
But the Jews who were given the houses now were not the same Jews who had originally lived in them. And the Palestinian refugees have no way to claim the houses that they lived in, before 1948, in what is now Israel – home that are probably now occupied by Israelis. Like many Palestinians, they are now homeless a second time.
“it’s really a tongue twister.”
Yes, absolutely. Your joy made me mad. But let’s try a little reading comprehension:
the land was leased by the Jordanian administration of absentee property to Palestinian refugees, who built their homes there and were afforded the status of protected tenants.
It doesn’t say they moved into former collectively Jewish possession. As I read it is says they were given land to built their homes.
Compare your interpretation:
Ok that clarifies things. So you are saying that the homes legally belong to the Jews that currently live there, but taken into context this is immoral.
You didn’t answer my question. Why do you think “the homes” legally belong to the settlers.
Actually my suspicion is that they are only placeholders.
May I call you Suzanne, BDSNOW is slightly unwieldy, bulky.
Actually my suspicion is that they are only placeholders.
Which means in context, the police protects not so much the settlers but more powerful forces behind them or more precisely their future real estate enterprises. In which these groups then get a cheap home for their services.
The placeholder theory makes a lot of sense.
My interpretation was from Shmuels comments not from yours.
Show me were Shmuel writes what you deduct from it.
You write:
Ok that clarifies things. So you are saying that the homes legally belong to the Jews that currently live there, but taken into context this is immoral.
Show us were Smuel write the “homes legally belong to the Jews that currently live there”?
The pre-48 title is probably held by the Sephardic Community Committee. While under Jordanian rule (48-67), the land was leased by the Jordanian administration of absentee property to Palestinian refugees, who built their homes there and were afforded the status of protected tenants. The settlers have acted with the permission of the Sephardic Community Committee – recognised by the Israeli courts as the legal owner of the property.
Sorry, Shmuel writes.
What about this, Suzanne?
Shmuel: The homes may or may not legally belong the the Sephardic Community Committee, but they certainly do not “legally belong” to the Jews that currently live there.
Maybe Shmuel can tell us if he knows if they actually built the houses or moved into property left by it’s owners.
On the contrary I think LeaNder is quite correct, BS (minus the D, perhaps meaning deeper) NOW thinks he/she is clever, but is an easy spot. This character is not only “confused” about this issue, but every issue in the long contrived bogus dispute by the racist apartheid Israeli state.
It was easily deduced when I said that some Birthright Israel visits are nothing but pre-introduction to the the settlements, whereupon she/he said that it was categorically untrue. But it is not, and depends on what affiliation you go with, and is attested to by many individuals I personally know that told me that this is what they experienced by their affiliation.
BSDNOW is conveniently confused about everything, and than when pressed, tries to manufacture an elaborate defense, not characteristic of someone confused (see January 2, 2010 at 8:08 pm), or by simple denial like in my experience (Birthright Israel). Oh, and by the way, the pre-48 title produced by the Sephardic Community is unmistakeably bogus, and was the same one produced by the erstwhile colonial settlers and rejected by the court. The title information is readily available now on the web.
Oh, and also, the Sephardic Community is nothing but a front for developers, specifically for sole Jewish residence.
You have to understand that in the zeal of these colonial thieves sometimes they overstep the lines of protocol – they act independent of the larger body like the Sephardic Community which is a more acceptable front for theft, and are connected to the moneyed interest in Israel as represented in their cadre of developers (for Jewish “communities”). So eventually they end up going to court, and the same documents (that the settlers presented earlier on their own) which do not show Sephardic Community ownership but oversight are than taken as valid, and the court does a flip flop and kicks the Palestinians out of their homes (just like moneyed interest in American courts eventually, for the most part, wins out against the people of lesser means, and lesser “findings”).
The fact of the matter is, in the original titles, not the rulings of contingent activity after the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians (Sephardic Community trusteeship, not ownership – and that care bequeathed upon the care of the homeless Palestinians) still belong to Palestinians, their mandate (the Sephardic Communities) is wholly ignored and turned around into theft of the property. I mean, even in very clear cut cases of holding properties according to law, supposedly until a agreement is met between Palestinians and Israelis (which will never naturally occur), the Israelis sell the properties to Jewish parties. A case example of this can be seen in this exchange, where you have the classic, shrill, I am a Zionist and if I lift my voice high enough and drown you out my argument is valid bullshit can be seen in clear cut cases that are not nearly as encumbered by complexity –
PALESTINIAN HOMES FOR SALE
I don’t agree with you being so personally vicious to me when I am asking questions looking for the truth. You are supposed to be humanists and caring people so act like it instead of berating me when I’m looking for help.
Well than I hope you lick your “wounds” BSDNOW and do some reading of the above posts, I trust they are helpful.
BSD: Who built the homes?
The homes in question were built for the refugess by the Jordanian government, in conjunction with the UN, in 1956.
For a detailed report on the historical background and interests involved the Jewish takeover of Sheikh Jarrah (as part of a much broader plan), see this report, by the Israeli organisation Ir-Amim.
I think you’re a transparent hack, BSD.
Be a bit more condescending. You don’t think these people are humanists. You’re a troll. You’re mocking them by agreeing with this self-serving image you have of Leftists as being snobs.
The fact that people have taken the time to speak with you maturely, demonstrates how wrong you are.
BSDNow loves to beg the question and play ignorant. Wake up people, he’s a troll. Stop humoring him.
If he’s a troll, he’s a low-maintenance one, and his questions are often useful. He made me look for the Ir-Amim report, which I think is an important resource for anyone who wants to protest the current ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem.
“Suleiman Hijazi’s appeal to the Magistrate Court to establish his ownership of 18 plots in the disputed territory was rejected on March 31, 2009. He had
presented an official letter from the Ottoman archive in Ankara stating that the archive had no record of the Committees’ 1875 registration…
However, a broad look at recent events in Sheikh Jarrah reveals the
differential use of the legal system to (a) carry out eviction orders again
Palestinian residents but not against settlers, and (b) to support pre-1948
Jewish land claims in East Jerusalem while opposing pre-1948 Palestinian
land claims in West Jerusalem. This systemic distortion results in the cynical use of the legal system in the service of advancing an inequitable and inflammatory political agenda.”
I agree with Shmuel. It doesn’t matter if troll or not. Whatever that is or is considered to be, I never had much use for the term.
On the other hand I don’t really regret my mails, I was curious if the lately more subdued insult layers could be triggered easily. A relapse in Mondoweiss-comment-section-fighting-addiction. …
Anyway something about BSDNOW feels very, very familiar. But I do not have the time to watch him/her more closely and compare it to some older patterns.
Personally I always found the Israelis like Eurosabra much more interesting than the often not too well informed American “pro-Israel against the evil Arabs” type of partisans. Which means, yes knowledge matters.
“1956:
UNRWA signed a contract with the Jordanian Custodian of Enemy Property and, in cooperation with the Jordanian government, built housing for 28 Palestinian refugee families who had been living in temporary housing in the Sheikh Jarrah area. The agreement, dated July 3, states that the refugees—from West Jerusalem and elsewhere—would pay minimal rent for three years, at which point the ownership would officially transfer to them.
1959
Ownership rights were never transferred to the 28 families although the 3
years had passed.26″
Insert – bad faith premise, all records showing that fulfillment of the agreed upon premise of ownership, yet still no transfer. Yet, with the previous rulings the same old accusations of “illegal building” pressed against the Palestinian families – which show the intent of using spurious legal means assuming the ownership, until the bad faith non-transfer of property is discovered.
1967:
Following the Six Day War, Israel expanded Jerusalem’s boundaries by 70
square kilometers, and the 28 homes in Sheikh Jarrah come under control of the Israeli Custodian for Absentee Property. At that point, one of the 28
families left the area, and the other 27 families remained.”
Further explanation, but in this document that Shmuel submits (not an accusation, just an inquiry), there is no mention of the illegal nature of the annexation due to war. Which are clearly violations of international law.
“July 17: Following the June 20th ruling, the Al-Kurd, Hanun, and Ghawi
families appealed to the Land Settlement officer of the court to initiate the land settlement process and cancel the Committees’ ownership. The Land
Settlement officer files a letter with the ILR to cancel the registration. The ILR rejected the request, stating that the authority to alter the registration lies with the courts.”
The claims of jurisdiction are not valid being based on the illegal annexation of land on the premise of war booty. However, we find this continuation of claim via the registration which was never validated by the said “Committee.” All during this time no rulings on the illegal break ins by the settlers, except removal in some instances. Some of the remaining settlers with collusion of local authorities who moved in to the renovated sections refuse to budge, not allowing the Palestinians to complete their said obligations to tear down the renovations, the ones once again, who pay the price are the Palestinian families without any reference to the illegal squatting settlers –
“2007:
February 25: The Al-Kurd family received an order to demolish and seal the
renovated section, which was broken into on November, 2001, and remained inhabited by settlers.49 Over subsequent months, the family, with the legal assistance of Adv. Hatem Abo-Ahmed filed three requests with the district police seeking “immediate assistance” to evict the “trespassers” (the settlers) and allow the Al-Kurds to act in accordance with the ruling that they demolish the renovated section. These requests were ignored.”
In the meantime the new building planned marches on. Hardly any solid legal recourse for the Palestinian families in ANY venue of the so-called courts of law, all premised on an illegal annexation. All the way from the original bad faith non-transfer of the properties, to the intermediate ensuing activity, to the current dates just more proof of the illegitimate activity of any courts of law in Israel. To be totally forward, there is no legitimacy of any institution, because all are premised on the basis of an illegal occupation – not one institution stands without this skewed activity. The later rulings of “finality” by the lower courts and repeated by the Supreme Court is unmitigated bullshit.
Just as an aside, a lot of blind sided assumptions in this document with no references to the illegality taking place in the wrongly annexed territory – however, what else can you expect with Israeli previous and continuous performance?
Mohammad Al-Kurd
1972 …
September 15: The Jerusalem District Court ordered the settlers in the Al-Kurd’s extension to vacate. The Court reiterated Israel’s obligation to enforce the order if ignored by the settlers.
…
November 9: At 3:30 in the morning, Mohammad and Fawzia Al-Kurd were evicted by police forces. One settler family, presumably affiliated with Nahalat Shimon, moved in. Mohammad spent the following two weeks in and out of the hospital, and Fawzia moved to a tent erected on private Palestinian property across from the tomb. Over the next several months, the tent was repeatedly destroyed by police and re-erected, and police have reportedly threatened to expropriate the private land.
November 23: Mohammad Al-Kurd died in the hospital.
Meglio una fine con orrore che l’orrore senza fine.
Weren’t the buildings left by the settlers in Gaza demolished so nobody could move in?
VR,
You make a good point about the illegitimacy of Israeli jurisdiction in East Jerusalem. I don’t know what international law has to say on the matter (although an illegal occupier, Israel does have some administrative responsbilities toward the occupied population), but as a strategy it strikes me as more effective to accept Israeli jurisdiction as a given and focus on the illegality and injustice of the system and its decisions. After all, that is the sysem with which the Palestinian families of Sheikh Jarrah are forced to contend – whether they like it or not.
I agree Shmuel, however in order to get true handle on what happens in the so-called judicial realm inside and outside of Israel, I recommend studying the Israeli system(s) as a whole. That is, inside of Israel, in the Occupied Territories, or primarily in light of Palestinian vs. Israeli in either setting, because it is here that you find the precedent not merely in the seemingly specialized case of Jerusalem (or an exceptional).
For people to familiarize themselves with the twin judicial atrocities I recommend two sites:
THE ARAB ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS: ASSOCIATION IN SERVICE OF THE PALESTINIAN ARAB MINORITY INSIDE OF ISRAEL
and also –
YESH DIN
This will help to dispel the misconception that this is merely a special case occurring in Jerusalem.
Within the Yesh Din site there is one section which gives one an immediate grasp of the injustice occurring deeply and daily against Palestinians in the OT, see –
YESH DIN – MILITARY COURTS PROJECT
Actually the Yesh Din site is one of the most comprehensive sites dealing with apartheid “justice” meted out by Israel.
On the ARABHRA site I recommend starting with the ON THE MARGINS dissertation (found on the column to the right) –
ON THE MARGINS – ANNUAL HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS REVIEW OF ISRAELI ARAB MINORITY INSIDE ISRAEL
You find the “judicial” process is intimately involved inside of Israel in divesting Israeli Palestinians of their human and legal rights. It is broken into eight parts –
1). Inferior Citizenship Rights;
2). Political persecution;
3). Discrimination in the confiscation and allocation of land in policy planning;
4). The Arab citizens of the Naqeb;
5). The war against Lebanon and Arab Citizens;
6). Sex racism against the Arab citizens of Israel;
7). Violence against Arab Citizens;
8). Desecration oh Holy Sites;
Appendix: List of house demolition and demolition notices
The site is a veritable cornucopia of judicial injustice.
Hey, what do you think it is like where Dick Witty, our resident Israel Firster, lives?
Do you think he wouldn’t be outraged if his local goy cops would behave like the IDF?
You mean, if the cops in his town helped facilitate his Jewish friends and families kicking out disenfranchised minorities and turning over the homes to them?
No, I don’t actually think Witty would reject that. It’s a very Zionist notion, “self-determination” for Jews to determine where to live at the exclusion of anyone else.
… and the settlers responded with empty phrases, some of which I understood, such as “We are only here for peace.”
Now Zionists are using ‘peace’ as a euphemism for ethnic cleansing and colonization? These people are not right in the head. Disgusting …
two points to make: Iran is routinely demonized, certainly their government tho not as often their populace, except for basiji. But it says something about the overall nature of the Iranian character that
a. protesters in Iran aided police who were injured;
b. government took pains to minimize harm to protesters, at least in the recent round of protests (yes, I’m aware of reports of deaths of 4 or 5 or 9 or 12 persons — who can say for sure how many, and who killed them — it is not irrational to think that provocateurs were involved. Several sources have been caught filing photoshopped “evidence” of anti-government crowds:
French Media presents Honduras Coup photo as Iranian
link to indymedia.org.uk
On the other hand, the broad swath of Israelis have apparently gone mad. Avigail Abarbanel,
link to kboo.fm
and link to avigailabarbanel.me.uk
a psychologist who was born and raised in Israel, served in IDF, then left for Australia in dismay at the descent to incivility she observed in Israeli culture, has applied her psychologist’s skills to the task of analyzing the viciously and dangerously intertwined state of Israeli Holocaust enculturation and zionism. Her essays are insightful.
She agrees with Colin Murray: “These people are not right in the head.”
Ironic isint it.
I was at the Golden Gate Gaza March in San Francisco a couple days ago, and the Zionist committee in our area decided to hire an airplane to fly a banner saying:
Israel, Security, Peace, Freedom.
Hilarious.
Zionists are the new Romans. “They made a desert and called it peace.”
Riz Khan on Al-Jazeera interviews the Palestinian doctor whose three daughters and niece were killed in the massacre last year. This is the doctor who reported their deaths on air, on Israeli TV, while they were happening to him.
link to youtube.com
Racism of the most extreme kind, exacerbated by religious doughnuttery of the most mind-numbing variety…
Galileo (allegedly): “if G-d gave us a brain, why aren’t we allowed to use it?”
Phil, thank you for your clear, eyewitness accounts from Cairo and Jerusalem.
I’m curious about the identity of the Orthodox Jews in the pictures. The ones with the big white skullcaps look like Breslov Hassidim and the others look like generic Hassidim. From the 60s to the 90s, the activist settlers and provocateurs were of the Israeli modern Orthodox camp. Their Zionism is justified theologically and was defined in opposition to the traditionalist Haredim (‘black hats’). There were Haredim who moved into the West Bank but these were along the lines of the settlers-of-convenience, who were looking for the big house and garden in the suburbs and didn’t care if it happened to be on the West Bank.
If these are the settlers in Sheikh Jarrah, then it shows how the settler movement has moved into ultra-Orthodoxy. This is a further indication of how successful the settler movement has been to move beyond ideology and align their agenda with the Orthodox lifestyle.
Pingback: UN-Truth » Fatah’s 45th Anniversary
The ambulance dispatcher story yet again exposes the lie that East Jerusalem is not already a separate city in every aspect except the Israeli government’s propaganda. The Israeli police are essentially tasked with protecting the occupying civilians. Why should they lift a finger to help the locals?
More protests in Israel – against the Gaza blockade.
link to english.aljazeera.net
modern day israel ::: “Is it an Arab or a Jew?”
“We are only here for peace.”
They talk somehow like Dick Witty its crazy, they come steal your home, make you homeless, destroy your life, beat your children, kill your cousins and they call this peace. Zionism is neo-Nazim Dick Witty and your people.
Hey, Dick Witty is just your average middle class Jewish American. Doesn’t he give all his spare energy and time to USA, his homeland?
I don’t really like to use the report abuse button, but I’d appreciate it if the abusive terms for Richard could stop.
As the attempt to use every striking bit of Israel PR to assault Richard is really weak.
I agree. Attack the words, not the speaker.
Law is functional only where the principles of law applied are consistently applied to every person and where the principles (not the outcomes) are consented by the vast majority of persons subject to the law.
Both Israeli assertions and dissenters are basing their conclusions on outcome of the law rather than legal principles.
While the claim that the Palestinian Authority is in development of consistent legal principles and application, the same needs to occur to reform Israeli law, particularly of title law.
To get to consented principles, it would take some collaboration between Palestinian and Israeli courts and hopefully lawmakers to assist in the clarification of as parallel legal principles as could be defined.
In that way, even with the changes of jurisdiction, that has happened so profoundly in the region MANY times (Turkish pre-registration period, Turkish registration period, British, Jordanian, Israeli occupation, and/or PA jurisdiction), owners and lessees can be confident of their individual rights.
They would then NOT be subject to title expropriation just by decree.
One thing that the note of Sephardic Community Council title indicates though, is the ethnic cleansing of Jews that occurred in the West Bank during the 1948 war and during the period of Jordanian rule.
The same questions are asked here by dissenters when they rarely willingly discuss that flip of the propaganda. That is “They left by choice” (stated by Zionist and Palestinian apologists of the “other”). Or, “shit happened, it was wartime” (stated by Zionist and Palestinian apologists). Or, “They were sovereign, they could do what they wanted.” Or, “It was fair politically as the individuals’ rights don’t matter, so much as the political requirements, you know “justice”".
Each assertion stated by advocates for Palestinian/Arab control of land or Israeli control of land.
Better that consistent principles be consented and applied in a color-blind manner.
Look, Richard, I basically agree, but you are aware you are comparing one tiny bit of land, which as far as expropriation is concerned seems to be expanded beyond the ground of the original title, versus the expropriation from 80% of the whole land.
Admittedly I would like to know the history of theoriginal Jewish community their as much as their interrelation with the diverse groups and institutions that exploit the fact, down the the diverse squatters, settlers and occupants. We are not talking about the return of the earlier inhabitants after all. Can you suggest literature? Am I missing something that from your point of view is crucial. What is the central point, lost property, religion, politics or business?
I would love to read closer research on the topic. As I am a bit curious: was there a secret deal between Israel and Palestine. Does Israel have some kind of FOIA act:
.. Jordanian rule:</a According to the agreement, the families would forfeit their baskets of refugee assistance and would pay token rent for three years until the ownership of the houses would transfer to their names. The houses, according to the agreement, would be built on “formerly Jewish property leased by the Custodian of Enemy Property to the Ministry of
Development, for the purpose of this project.”10 Three years passed and
ownership was not formally transferred to the families.
1972 – 2001
In 1972, 27 families (one family had left of its own accord) received notice that
rent was due to the Sephardic Community Committee and the Knesset Israel
Committee—landlords they had not known they had. That year, the
Committees initiated a process with the Israel Lands Administration (ILA) to
register the lands in their names, based on 19th-century, Ottoman-era
documents.
These family were clearly tricked. Was this all an accident?
And who exactly is behind: Nahalat Shimon International?
The web is useless in this context, it only repeats the same sentences several thousand times.
sorry:
.. Jordanian rule: According to the agreement, the families would forfeit their baskets of refugee assistance and would pay token rent for three years until the ownership of the houses would transfer to their names. The houses, according to the agreement, would be built on “formerly Jewish property leased by the Custodian of Enemy Property to the Ministry of
Development, for the purpose of this project.”10 Three years passed and
ownership was not formally transferred to the families.
1972 – 2001
In 1972, 27 families (one family had left of its own accord) received notice that
rent was due to the Sephardic Community Committee and the Knesset Israel
Committee—landlords they had not known they had. That year, the
Committees initiated a process with the Israel Lands Administration (ILA) to
register the lands in their names, based on 19th-century, Ottoman-era
documents.
These family were clearly tricked. Was this all an accident?
And who exactly is behind: Nahalat Shimon International?
The web is useless in this context, it only repeats the same sentences several thousand times.
Can someone answer a question for me? We know that between 700,000 to 800,000 non-Jewish Palestinians — half the non-Jewish Palestinian population, in fact, was displaced.
Zionists insist that was not an ethnic cleansing.
They do, however, insist that the removal of Jews from the West Bank was an ethnic cleansing.
How many Jews were displaced, exactly? And how come it is only considered ethnic cleansing if the victims are Jewish?
You know the answers, Chaos. Is there any point in asking questions or engaging in dialogue on the subject at this point?
I actually don’t know the specific number, or else I’d have posted it. I think I might be able to find it but I figured I’d let someone with more authority speak on that topic.
I think being able to compare the number of Palestinians who have suffered to the number of Israelis who have suffered is actually quite demonstrative to the objectionists that haunt this blog.
I don’t know the exact number either, but I can make an educated guess. According to the estimates of the UN Partition Plan, there were only 10,000 Jews living in the area that was designated to become the Arab State. Therefore, from that area the absolute maximum would be 10,000, but, of course, Israel grabbed half again as much territory as was allotted to it during the war, so that number is probably considerably less than 10,000. The Jewish settlements of the Gush Etzion would be one of the areas that remained outside of Israel, and there were approximately 500 people living there prior to the war, but the Israeli government discouraged the abandonment of the settlement, and most of them were killed in fighting, some by massacre after their final surrender.
There is, however, also Jerusalem to consider, which was to be designated an international protectorate under the Plan. There were 100,000 Jews and 100,000 non-Jews living in Jerusalem at the time. However, the overwhelming majority of those Jews lived in West Jerusalem, which became a part of Israel, not Jordan. There are accounts of approximately 2500 Jewish civilians who surrendered to the Jordanian forces when they took control of the Old City. All accounts, both Israeli and Jordanian, aver that the civilians were treated well and, by their request, turned over to the Israeli forces shortly after their surrender.
Also, there were approximately 400 Jews who had lived in Hebron prior to the violence there, who were prevented from returning there in the 1930′s by the British, who claimed that they could not guarantee their safety during the Arab uprising against the British that occurred from 1936-9.
So, my educated guess would be that 20,000 would be a generous estimate of those Jews who were forced to leave their homes during the war. However, as another point, in contrast to Israel, which issued “shoot to kill” orders against any returning Arab refugees, I have never heard of any attempts by Israeli Jews seeking to return to their lands and properties then in Jordan and am aware of no equivalent orders from Jordan. As such, I am not sure that one can use the term “ethnic cleansing” in this case, although it is possible that such a description may be accurate in some cases.
Also, Samaritans, who had longstanding religious connections to Mt. Gerizim, near Nablus, remained in the West Bank and were not ethnically cleansed. They are considered Palestinian as well as Israeli citizens and have a representative in the Palestinian Legislative Council.
Its all a bit fuzzy, but I hope that helps. I suspect that the “ethnic cleansing of Jews” is merely used as a ploy to excuse the ethnic cleansing of the Arabs in 1948 and after, even up to today, as if ethnic cleansing of three quarters of a million Palestinians was justified because some Jews suffered the same treatment. Logically, besides being an immoral argument (two wrongs don’t make a right), its a stupid one as well because such an argument, if flipped around, would justify the ethnic cleansing of all the Jews of Israel, because Palestinian non-Jews were ethnically cleansed. Of course, hasbarists tend not to consider that non-Jews have the same “rights” as Jews.
Thank you, tree.
See, Todd? That is the sort of discussion I was trying to promote.
I would add that 20,000 is quite a generous estimate, made due to the uncertainty of the number of Jews living in the area of Jerusalem that came under Jordanian control. Outside of Jerusalem, the numbers would probably be in the order of a few thousand or less. Again, I am attempting to guess on the high end rather than the low.
That’s fine, and even making the most favorable read of the estimates for Zionists — “only” 700,000 non-Jewish Palestinians expelled versus “as many as” 20,000 Jews expelled — means that, at minimum, the crime against Palestinians was more voluminous than the crime against Jews (most of whom were not even natives) by a factor of at least 35.
So if what was done to Jews in 1948 was ethnic cleansing, and what was done to Palestinians was at least 35 times worse — at least — what does that make the Nakba if not a greater, more pervasive act of ethnic cleansing? (And we aren’t even bothering to discuss the timing, because by the time any Jews were under threat of expulsion, many if not most of the Palestinians had already lost their homes if not their lives to Zionist militants and terrorists.)
So anyone want to “devil’s advocate” that, given the facts as they are laid out?
I don’t believe that exact numbers matter to supporters of Israel. It’s clear that Israel was founded on Palestinian lands, and that many Pelastinians were displaced or murdered in order for there to be a Jewish majority.
Yes, Todd, but we’re not necessarily speaking to the hard core Zionists that harrass this blog. You have to realize, there are people who will come to this blog not knowing about the Nakba in the first place — and only being told that Jews were the only ones who lost land in 1948.
People who genuinely want the facts? Those are the people we should be speaking to.
According to Zionist sites these are the figures after 67′ –
“In 1967, the total population of Jerusalem stood at 267,800 — 196,500 Jews, 60,500 Muslims and 10,800 Christians. In December 1993, there were 567,700 residents of the city — 406,800 Jews and 160,900 non-Jews.”
I think enough “return” of the Jewish population has occurred by their own figures.
Pingback: Sheikh Jarrah « Progress in thinking
Pingback: Racism and Zionism « A Voice for Palestine
Pingback: Business As Usual « Robert Lindsay