Israelis plan more homes on occupied land

[Violet_Crumble]

Conal Urquhart in Tel Aviv
Friday May 11, 2007
The Guardian

Jerusalem's city council plans to build three new Jewish settlements on land it occupied in 1967, in contravention of international law, it was announced yesterday. The estates will be built on land that has been earmarked for a future Palestinian state, close to Bethlehem and Ramallah.
International law forbids construction on land acquired by war, but since 1967 Israel has built homes for around 500,000 Israelis in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

The construction is planned to link existing Jewish settlements in Jerusalem with each other and with settlements in the West Bank. Saeb Erekat, the head of negotiations for the Palestinians, said the building plans suggested that Israel had no real interest in peace. "Today it is obvious that Israel wants Jerusalem for only some of Jerusalem's people," he said. "I wish Israel would do what majorities of both Palestinians and Israelis want: accept the two-state solution and accept peace."

While Israel says that it supports the creation of a Palestinian state, its building projects - which include walls, fences, bypasses and tunnels as well as settlements - restrict the amount of land that would be available to the new state.

In 1967 Israel annexed East Jerusalem, but most of its residents are in limbo, neither residents of Israel, nor of the West Bank. To ensure its hold on East Jerusalem Israel has built a series of settlements which divide the city from its hinterland in the West Bank. The annexation was condemned by the UN and has not been recognised by any major country.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2077222,00.html

[Tom Joad]

1. Celebrating 40 years of occupation. A promise from the Israeli regime that it will never end.

We have to change US policy.

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/
On the 40th anniversary of Israel's illegal military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, join the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation and United for Peace and Justice in Washington, DC, June 10-11, 2007 for a protest, teach-in, and lobby day.

[acmavm]

2. Gotta hand it to them peace lovin' Israeli's. And then they friggin' wonder

why they've lost the support of everybody but the neocons.

[Tom Joad]

3. Israeli policies have lost political support? Not from Congress.

almost universal, unconditional support for all Israeli policies are supported there by nearly everyone.
Excepting a handful of congresspeople.

[azurnoir]

5. .Any politician who dared to speak against

Israel would driven out of office by screeches of Antisemitism, it would not matter if the person was a Jew themselves it has been the way of stifling any debate or criticism for years

[msmcghee]

4. Yeah, the neocons and almost every Dem in . .

. . the house and senate including every Dem running for president. The Dems with the highest polling numbers right now are also the ones that tend to support Israel the strongest.

[breakaleg]

6. So much for settlements being for defense. So much for the wall being temporary. So much for peace

[azurnoir]

7. Settlements for defence?

I thought only terrorists used human shields.

[breakaleg]

8. Weren't they army bases or built on the land the bases was on? Or have we gone past pretending

anymore?

[azurnoir]

9. As far as I know

they never really tried to pretend. Weren't the Israelis selling plots of land to Americans, who would in turn allow them to be used to build houses for settlers on, of course these wingnut Israeli occupation supporters would never dream of supporting Israel with anything more then their checkbook, would live they in these houses themselves? H*ll no, call the yellow elephant of a different kind.

[oberliner]

10. Please note that the article is talking about East Jerusalem

Israel has a different view of East Jerusalem then it does the West Bank. What this article calls "Jewish settlements" the Israeli press (including Ha'aretz) refers to as "Jewish neighborhoods".

This same story in Ha'aretz is headlined:

Committee approves construction of three new Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/858055.html

The resolution of the Jerusalem question is one of the major obstacles towards a peaceful settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

[breakaleg]

11. What Israel believes, if contrary to international law, is of no consequence. nt

[Tom Joad]

12. Isreal has a different view. The rest of the world calls it occupied.

[UndertheOcean]

13. I don't think Israel really wants east Jerusalem ...

if they wanted it they would have given Jerusalem Arabs the same status as Israeli Arabs long ago.



Its a small fanatic minority that thinks it either an all Jewish Jerusalem or the Highway.

The "Demographic Problem" (using Bibi's language) is of more concern to the elite there I suspect.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. Poll 49% of Israelis support / 49% of Israelis oppose compromise on Jerusalem

link: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3185313,00.html

However....

53% of Israeli Jews want to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock to rebuild the temple:

Poll: 53% of Israelis want third temple
From: Jerusalem Post --http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-54600808.html

_______________

However, Some 63 percent of the Jewish public sees Arab civilians as a security and demographic threat

"The poll presented Wednesday showed that 68 percent of respondents said they do not wish to live next to an Arab neighbor, compared with 26 percent who said they would agree.

Responding to a question about Arab friends, 46 percent said they would not be willing to have Arab friends who would visit them at their home.

link: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3231048,00.html

Some 46 percent of Israel's Jewish citizens favor transferring Palestinians out of the territories, while 31 percent favor transferring Israeli Arabs out of the country, according to the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies' annual national security public opinion poll

link: http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=140196&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0

.

[UndertheOcean]

15. "53% of Israeli Jews want to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock to rebuild the..."

"temple"


Is this really so ? APPALLING...


If the supposedly more reasonable side in this conflict harbors such sentiments , then peace will not be had for a million years.

[Douglas Carpenter]

16. I would hope that reflects an "off the cuff" emotive opinion. not a thoughtout opinion

sometimes there is a big difference

[oberliner]

17. Poll: 96% of Israeli Jews won't give up Western Wall for peace

Ninety-six percent of Israeli Jews are against Israel relinquishing the Western Wall, even in exchange for lasting peace and ending the dispute over Jerusalem, a new poll suggests. According to the poll, most Israeli Jews do not believe territorial concessions in Jerusalem would bring peace.

The poll, performed at the request of the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, also reveals that 89 percent of Israeli Jews are unwilling to give up the Temple Mount for a similar arrangement.

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/858892.html

[Douglas Carpenter]

19. on this issue I suppose the Geneva Initiative comes as close to anyone to finding a compromise

in short, the Palestinian state would have sovereignty over the Haram al Sharif/Temple Mount compound but with an international presence including Israeli observers and an international committee including Israelis to handle disputes. The Western Wall would be under complete Israeli sovereignty.

No Palestinian negotiator could ever, ever, ever renounce sovereignty over the Haram Al Sharif. That would be impossible. Not because of Palestinian national aspirations but because of international Islamic determination. This more than any other reason is why the Muslim and Arab world fought the Crusades almost a thousand years ago. And this more than any other reason is why the Islamic world from Morocco to Indonesia cares so much about the Palestinian issue. Even the most Westernized, modernist and secularized Muslim would feel very strongly about this. And international law does indisputably declare the area to be Occupied (not disputed) Territory.

In this case I think the Geneva Initiative comes up with something workable.



link to Geneva Initiative Text on Jerusalem:

http://www.geneva-accord.org/Accord.aspx?FolderID=33&lang=en

"5. al-Haram al-Sharif/ Temple Mount (Compound)

i. International Group

a. An International Group, composed of the IVG and other parties to be agreed upon by the Parties, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), shall hereby be established to monitor, verify, and assist in the implementation of this clause.

b. For this purpose, the International Group shall establish a Multinational Presence on the Compound, the composition, structure, mandate and functions of which are set forth in Annex X.

c. The Multinational Presence shall have specialized detachments dealing with security and conservation. The Multinational Presence shall make periodic conservation and security reports to the International Group. These reports shall be made public.

d. The Multinational Presence shall strive to immediately resolve any problems arising and may refer any unresolved disputes to the International Group that will function in accordance with Article 16.

e. The Parties may at any time request clarifications or submit complaints to the International Group which shall be promptly investigated and acted upon.

f. The International Group shall draw up rules and regulations to maintain security on and conservation of the Compound. These shall include lists of the weapons and equipment permitted on the site.

ii. Regulations Regarding the Compound

a. In view of the sanctity of the Compound, and in light of the unique religious and cultural significance of the site to the Jewish people, there shall be no digging, excavation, or construction on the Compound, unless approved by the two Parties. Procedures for regular maintenance and emergency repairs on the Compound shall be established by the IG after consultation with the Parties.

b. The state of Palestine shall be responsible for maintaining the security of the Compound and for ensuring that it will not be used for any hostile acts against Israelis or Israeli areas. The only arms permitted on the Compound shall be those carried by the Palestinian security personnel and the security detachment of the Multinational Presence.

c. In light of the universal significance of the Compound, and subject to security considerations and to the need not to disrupt religious worship or decorum on the site as determined by the Waqf, visitors shall be allowed access to the site. This shall be without any discrimination and generally be in accordance with past practice.

iii. Transfer of Authority

a. At the end of the withdrawal period stipulated in Article 5/7, the state of Palestine shall assert sovereignty over the Compound.

b. The International Group and its subsidiary organs shall continue to exist and fulfill all the functions stipulated in this Article unless otherwise agreed by the two Parties.

6. The Wailing Wall

The Wailing Wall shall be under Israeli sovereignty.

7. The Old City:

Muslims.

link to Geneva Initiative Text on Jerusalem:

http://www.geneva-accord.org/Accord.aspx?FolderID=33&lang=en

[Shaktimaan]

20. Bullshit

53% of Israeli Jews want to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock to rebuild the temple:


There's absolutely no way that that figure is accurate.

I wrote that then went to the link... at the link, it said something quite different.

{i}Over half of all Israeli Jews would like to see the building of a third temple, according to a survey commissioned by the Reform movement's Israel Religious Action Center.

Where is the part about destrying the Al Aqsa Mosque? Or are you just assuming that destrying the mosque would have to be part of constructing a third temple, so much a part of it in fact, that they didn't even see a need to mention it to any of the poll's participants? I didn't find anything saying what you are suggesting anywhere else on the net.

By the way, many of these numbers are from a report put out by "the center for combating racism," an Arab organization that I've never heard of before. I would take their report with a grain of salt, for the time being at least.

[Douglas Carpenter]

21. is there a way to rebuild the Temple without removing the Mosque?

I hope you are right that this is a minority opinion. However among the Nationalist Religious Right and the settler movement it is certainly the majority opinion.

This story originally appeared on Thursday, July 18, 2002 in The Jerusalem Post featured an article on page 2 under the headline, "Poll: 53% of Israelis want Third Temple" by Haim Shapiro.

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. the survey specifically asked: rebuilt on Temple Mount?

Since that is the sight of the Haram Al Sharif; the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque it would be hard to imagine such a temple fitting in to a nice little corner pocket of the compound.

It cost me a whopping $3.95 to access the original article from the Jerusalem Post archives, but I suppose it was a worthwhile sacrifice.

"Poll: 53% of Israelis want third temple

Jerusalem Post - Jerusalem
Author: HAIM SHAPIRO
Date: Jul 18, 2002
Section: News "

link: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/140165121.html?dids=140165121:140165121&FMT=FT&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jul+18%2C+2002&author=HAIM+SHAPIRO&pub=Jerusalem+Post&desc=Poll%3A+53%25+of+Israelis+want+third+temple

snip:"According to the survey, conducted by the Dahaf Institute, a total of 53 percent of the 775 people queried said that they would like a third temple erected on the Temple Mount.

These included some 87% of religious and haredi respondents and 64% of those who described themselves as traditional, but it also included 63% of respondents from the former Soviet Union, as well as most of those of Middle Eastern origin and those of Western origin aged 18 to 35. Only among older respondents of Western origin did a majority, 53%, not want to see the Temple rebuilt.

At the same time, 55% of the respondents said that the present arrangement on the Temple Mount, according to which public Jewish prayer is not permitted, should remain in force."



.

[Shaktimaan]

23. Yeah, I can't access it.

But something is not right with those numbers, I'm sure you'll agree. For instance, 55% of the respondents said that the present arrangement on the Temple Mount, according to which public Jewish prayer is not permitted, should remain in force."???

It seems like those 2 conclusions are pretty disparate, right? How can you want to destroy the temple yet keep the policy unchanged?

All I can say is that Israel is very much secular minded, excepting the right wing religous folks, who are a class unto themselves and represent a very small part of the population. There's another disparity in that as well, the really religous don't believe that Israel should even exist until the messiah returns. Forget about asking whether Israel should rebuild the temple themselves?! No way. How could you even rebuild it without walking over it? And how would you know where the original ark stood? How could you be sure you weren't stepping on the ark? (This is why no one is allowed in there regardless of the mosque. You might step on the area that the ark used to be. Very bad.)

The people we are discussing who want to rebuild the temple are the kipot schrugot, the knitted yarmulkes. The right wing settler types, modern orthodox and nutty. These people represent a very small section of the population, believe me. There is absolutely no way that very many people in Israel would want to knock down the Al Aqsa mosque to rebuild the temple outside of this specific sect.

Why would they? They aren't particularly religous. They don't harbor hatred against the Arabs that they want to destroy their places of worship. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Douglas Carpenter]

24. Frankly I agree that it is highly unlikely

And I would hope that if 53% did answer yes they did so in an "off the cuff" manner without thinking of the details or consequences.

However, among the settler movement and the nationalist religious right they almost all have this high on their agenda. And they seem convinced that it is just a matter of time. And they even have American rightwing Christian fundamentalist (they support it so Jesus can return) and some rightwing politicians like Tom Delay and Dick Armey actually cheering it on.

Needless to say that all makes news throughout the Islamic and Arab world and fuels the worst paranoia. So when people in the West observe what may appear like extreme sensitivity from Muslims regarding the Haram Al Sharif, this is where it is coming from.

[Englander]

18. New Jerusalem settlement planned

The Israeli authorities are planning to build three new Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, an area regarded as occupied land under international law.

The plan, which has yet to receive final approval, would involve building about 20,000 homes.

The Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said the plan destroyed efforts to re-start the peace process.

He said Israel had to choose between settlements or peace, but could not have both.

Yehoshua Pollak, Jerusalem's deputy mayor, said the intention was to create a contiguous Jewish residential area linking East Jerusalem with major West Bank settlement blocs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6645777.stm