New Israeli Settlements

[Timber Loftis]

Those damned Israelis. How could one argue they want peace. If I were Palastenian, I'd be strapping on my bomb right now.
_______________________________________________
October 3, 2003
Israel to Build 600 Homes in 3 Settlements; U.S. Officials Are Critical
By GREG MYRE and STEVEN R. WEISMAN

ERUSALEM, Oct. 2 — Israel indicated on Thursday that it intended to build about 600 new homes in three large West Bank settlements, a move that Bush administration officials in Washington said would undercut the Middle East peace plan and could bring a reduction in American assistance to Israel.

The Housing Ministry placed an advertisement seeking bids to build the homes one day after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government took another step that American officials said the administration opposed: approval of the construction of barriers deep inside the West Bank to guard Jewish settlements.

Palestinians expressed anger at both decisions, with the Palestinian leader, Yasir Arafat, calling the barrier a "wall of racism."

"What does the wall mean?" he asked at his badly damaged headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah. "It means that this government is destroying and ending the peace process. How long will this silence in the face of Israeli crimes last?"

The American-backed peace plan, known as the road map, has stalled as violence has continued; neither side is meeting obligations listed in the first phase of the plan.

Under that first phase, Israel is supposed to halt all settlement activity. But Israeli officials take the position that Israel is not required to do so until the Palestinian leadership cracks down on violent Palestinian factions.

The latest Israeli moves have put President Bush in a difficult position, American officials said, adding that despite American displeasure, it is not clear that the administration will engage in a public confrontation over the action on settlements and the barrier.

While the administration has backed Israel in charging that the failure of the Palestinians to crack down on terrorism is the main cause of the breakdown in the peace plan, American officials also appear to be increasingly impatient with steps taken by Israel.

A measure of the current problem is that John S. Wolf, the special administration envoy assigned to monitor progress on the peace plan, has returned to the United States. That is a sign, administration officials say, that there is no progress to monitor.

One way the United States is pressing Israel is by threatening to reduce loan guarantees by whatever sum Israel spends on expanding the barrier or the West Bank settlements. Top American officials discussed the issue at the White House on Thursday but did not decide to take such a step, administration officials said.

"We're willing to use our leverage," said a senior administration official. "We will be examining what Israel is doing closely and take it into account."

Israel's decision to allow the new homes in settlements was made clear in a newspaper advertisement published in Haaretz inviting bids from construction firms for the building of the homes in various parts of the West Bank.

The plan calls for 530 additional houses in Betar Ilit, a fast-growing settlement south of Jerusalem, along with 50 new homes in Maale Adumim, to the east of Jerusalem, and 24 more in Ariel, a settlement to the north of Jerusalem.

In the government decision on Wednesday, Ariel was one of the settlements to be shielded by the new barrier.

"We not only have the right to keep building, it is the obligation of the Jewish state to help us build," said Adi Mintz, director general of the Settlers Council, which represents Israelis living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip settlements.

The Bush administration made no formal condemnation of Israel's actions. But in a news conference on Thursday, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said that President Bush "continues to believe that the fence presents a problem."

"We also have concerns about continuing settlement activity," he said.

Mr. Sharon has been a leading proponent of settlement building for decades, and his government includes many ministers who are committed to expanding the nearly 150 settlements scattered throughout the West Bank and Gaza.

Palestinians want the settlements dismantled, saying they will make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to establish a contiguous Palestinian state in peace negotiations.

The total number of settlers has reached 230,000, double the figure of a decade ago, when the initial Israeli-Palestinian peace talks began.

Palestinian militants have frequently attacked settlers during the past three years of fighting, and residents in the more isolated settlements say they remain vulnerable.

However, the larger settlements, which are heavily guarded by Israeli security forces, are comparatively safe and continue to attract new residents.

The settlement population has been growing at a rate of about 10,000 annually over the past three years, despite the fighting.

"Sharon's definition of a Palestinian state is a bunch of strips of land that have no contiguity," said Dror Etkes, a spokesman for Peace Now, an Israeli group that monitors settlements.

"Sharon always speaks about a long-term interim solution with the Palestinians," Mr. Etkes said. "But with his policies, there will be nothing left to negotiate in the long term."

Haaretz, a liberal daily, recently estimated that annual Israeli government spending on civilian needs in the settlements was more than $500 million, and that the security costs in the West Bank and Gaza were around $900 million a year.

The newspaper also estimated that the settlements had cost Israel roughly $10 billion in civilian spending since they began going up after Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza in the 1967 war.

The Israeli government does not publish figures on the costs of settlements.

[Sir Taliesin]

Idiots! We should cut everyone off! No money either side!

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Idiots! We should cut everyone off! No money either side!

Riiiight. On that note, I was wondering....

Does anyone have statistics on how much the American Jewish communities support Israel's policies? Any links? I'm just thinking that the American Jewish communities are (statistically) left-wing and Democratic -- just the group of people who would normally oppose Israel and its policies. However, well.... they ARE Jewish, y'know. So, I'm wondering as to whether the Jewish communities here have strong Israel ties and how much they lobby for Israeli interests. I haven't seen any information on this.

I mean, there has to be SOME reason why the US is best best friends with Israel, right?

[Donut]

America supports Israel because American Christians support Israel.

According to Revelations, for the Battle of Armageddon to start Jews must be in control of Jerusalem and only after the Battle of Armageddon will the Second coming of Christ occur.

That's 70 million voters and a lot of money.

[Donut]

On the other hand

"Neturei Karta is an organisation within the Jewish community which is dedicated to representing the hundreds of thousands of Orthodox Jews around the world who, out of loyalty to authentic Judaism, remain opposed to the Zionist movement, its embodiment the "Israeli" government and their ongoing occupation and aggression in the Holy Land."

[Timber Loftis]

More info on the illegal annexing of land:

September 30, 2003, NY Times
Israel Expected to Approve Plan for New West Bank Barrier
By GREG MYRE

JERUSALEM, Sept. 30 — Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government is expected to approve a plan on Wednesday for building a controversial separation barrier deep inside the West Bank around Ariel, one of the largest Jewish settlements.

The move could put the Israeli government at odds with the Bush administration, which opposes construction of the barrier on West Bank land in general, and which recently warned Israel not to proceed with this segment in particular.

Mr. Sharon on Monday expressed his support for building a fence around the settlement of Ariel, which is about 15 miles inside the West Bank. The measure appears set to win Cabinet approval at a session Wednesday, Israeli officials said.

But in an attempt to avoid a confrontation with the Americans, the Israelis plan to build in two stages.

Initially, Israel would place a fence around Ariel, but the barrier would not run from the settlement to the West Bank boundary, Israeli officials said.

After Ariel is encircled with the new fence, a process expected to take months, the government would again consult with the United States and decide whether to extend the fence from Ariel to the West Bank boundary, where it would meet up with the existing barrier.

"Israel is making this proposal to take care of its security concerns without getting into a fight with the United States," said Zalman Shoval, an adviser to Mr. Sharon. "The fence is a security statement, not a political statement."

Palestinians, meanwhile, say Israel is seizing large tracts of Palestinian land and is attempting to unilaterally set a future border.

"This will further radicalize Palestinian society," said Ghassan Khatib, the Palestinian labor minister. By dipping deep into the West Bank, the barrier will also make it difficult to establish a viable Palestinian state in any negotiations, he said.

Mr. Khatib said he believed the United States could force Israel to back down. "We don't think the Israelis will do something the Americans really don't want," he said.

Israel says the barrier, a network of electronic fences, concrete walls, trenches and guard towers, is a necessary shield against Palestinian attackers who have carried out more than 100 suicide bombings over the last three years.

But the Palestinians, and some people in the international community, say the main issue is the route Israel has chosen. The first part of the barrier was completed this summer in the northern West Bank, and it cuts several miles into Palestinian areas in many places.

The fence around Ariel would mark the deepest penetration into the West Bank to date.

William J. Burns, the United States assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, said in Detroit on Monday that by building the barrier well inside the West Bank, Israel "isolates Palestinians from each other, prejudges negotiations and, like settlement activity, takes us further from the two-state goal."

A report released today in Geneva by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights said the barrier would effectively annex Palestinian land.

Israel has "legitimate" security concerns, but "some limit must be placed on the violation of human rights in the name of counterterrorism," said John Dugard, a South African lawyer and the author of the report.

Ariel, which has close to 20,000 residents, is about 20 miles north of Jerusalem. Many commute to jobs in Israeli cities, including Tel Aviv, though the settlement is large enough to include a university with several thousand students.

Ariel already has an ordinary fence around its perimeter and, like all large settlements, is well-guarded by the Israeli security forces. Palestinian militants have carried out attacks near the entrance to the settlement, but have not breached the existing fence.

Still, Ariel residents have insisted that they be included on the western, or Israeli, side of the new, more elaborate barrier.

Israel plans to build the barrier on or near the entire West Bank boundary, and it is expected to stretch for more than 300 miles when it is completed.

In a separate development today, three Israelis were sentenced to 12 to 15 years in prison for parking a truck bomb next to a Palestinian girls' school in east Jerusalem in April of last year.

Police caught the men at the scene during the middle of the night. The bomb was set to go off in the morning when the students arrived, but Israeli authorities neutralized the explosive.

Since the Mideast violence began three years ago, Jewish extremists have killed at least nine Palestinians, according to Israeli officials.

Also, Israeli soldiers blew up the family home of an Islamic Jihad gunman who shot dead two Israelis, including a 7-month-old girl, in a West Bank attack last Friday, the start of the Jewish New Year.

The troops demolished the home of Mahmoud Hamdan in a village near Hebron, in the West Bank. Mr. Hamdan was killed during the Friday night attack.

Israel regularly tears down the homes of Palestinian assailants, saying it believes the practice deters other Palestinians from carrying out such attacks.

[Black Baron]

What we build, while is still "illegal" (as you claim, kaliningrad and new mexico, are not usa land or russias.), is "natural birth" add ons. Yes, it is nasty, stupid and whatever, regarding the international community and the palis, but consider this simple fact.
We cannot economically put everyone out. we must build a lot of homes for the thrown away, roads, infrastructure. they are stuck there. it will cost us more than 50 billion dollars to evacuate them. Our year budget is less than that.

we cannnot give 100 percent. sorry. the time had past for it. we can give 95+ percent yes, and making east jerusalem "international ruled".
So the question is-where we build? If we build in the places that will not be given away, it is ok. if we build in places that we will give, it is not good at all.

And please cut us out from the support!!!!!! i pray for it (in truth). it will boost our economy! really. We buy american production with these dollars, which leads to unemployment here, and other bad things.
if we refuse support conditions (buying usa products), we will anger usa.

please remember-the government and the nation is 2 different things.
And nothing justifies suicides.

Haaretz is left oriented newspaper that tends to print lies in 24-7 fashion.
It printed the "presents" case with bibi, and shut up with barak's criminal problems.
turned out that bibi was innocent. barak guilty.
haaretz is not a newspaper to qoute. no israely hebrew newspaper is , in fact as all are left oriented and all tend to "white wash" the left and "black wash" the right.
russian newspapers here,are not for qouting either, because they are right oriented.
there is no newspaper here that cares to print the truth.
believe me, i know.

[Timber Loftis]

Thank you for the insight, Black Baron. It's nice to see. Believe me, I am more of an Israeli supporter than not -- I sympathize greatly with the dilemma of being surrounded on all sides by enemies. And, I respect the Israeli army/special ops especially -- who can argue it has been the best counter-terrorism fighter in the world?

However, assuming Palestine is to have a nation it should include all lands that were not defined as Israel prior to '67. Those lands are not Israels. While the Israeli action in '67, attacking the troops amassing on the border, was completely justifiable, keeping some of the bordering non-Israel lands was not. Post-WWII, international law simply forbids annexation. These territories (Golan HEights, etc.) were held under a "buffer" theory, that theory (1) had no backing in law and (2) it turns out the "buffer" territories are where the lion's share of the problems are.

So, to your:

We cannot economically put everyone out. we must build a lot of homes for the thrown away, roads, infrastructure. they are stuck there. it will cost us more than 50 billion dollars to evacuate them.

I say, fine. However, settling Israelis there is wrong. For Israelis, you should only build in Israel. Building in the occupied territories is fine so long as Palestinians are settling there. But, the Israeli "settlers" are settling an annexed land, and that is simply wrong.

[ 10-06-2003, 12:48 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Black Baron]

I agree with you that it was wrong from the start to settle there. We had to treat these lands as a bargaining chip, that should be returned.
Alas we have a coalition here, where the right wing has a lot of voices, if sharon will do something that the right will not like he would be thrown away asap (that is if he wants to do it in the first palce).
The coalition is a very bad thing, we do not have to my sorrow the american way of "two parties". Here the situation is such that many times the leaders are hostages of the coalition members. Like shas party and rabin. rabin had to fire a minister because this ultraorthodox party demanded. It was not big, but without it there was no coalition.

[Link]

This is just so stupid. They say they want peace, but then they do something like this.. [img]graemlins/1disgust.gif[/img] I don't understand why this should be happening?!?!