Ethnic Cleansing in East Jerusalem

BBC up to its usual tricks. Jane Corbyn said "under international law, east Jerusalem is occupied." Nonsense. According to the UN, eastern sections of Jerusalem are not "occupied" but "disputed."

She said "Peace talks reckon east Jerusalem goes to the Palestinans." Wrong. It is a final status issue.

She gave Nir Barkat hardly any time. The programme was completely slanted to the Palestinian 'narrative'.

Sheik Jarra: She depicted this as "Jews forcing Arabs out". She allowed no-one to comment on ?Jawad Siyam's? 'ethnic cleansing' allegation.

Truth: The homes were originally Jewish but Jewish occupants were chased out during countrywide anti-Jewish Arab riots in 1929. Arabs then squatted on the property, with one family, the Hejazi family, becoming the de facto occupants despite never having purchased the property. Even though documentation proves the complex is owned by Jews and that Arabs have been squatting on it illegally for almost a century, Jewish groups still legally repurchased the property from the Hejazi family. Following pressure from the Palestinian Authority, however, the family later denied selling the complex back to the Jews despite documentation and other evidence showing the sale went through. Israel's court system, not exactly a friend of Jewish "settlers," twice ruled that the property belongs to Jews.

She said 'most people believe the Wall will be the border'. There is no evidence that 'most' people think this. She said 'the aim of the wall is to join up the settlements'. Nonsense. Its aim is to prevent suicide bombers. She never said that.

And the excavations under Silwan. We got the old lie that they are undermining Palestinian houses and serving to emphasise that it used to be Jews who lived there.

Laughable rubbish.

Compare it with the mostly great Ross Kemp programme for SkyTV 2 weeks ago ...

It is pathetic that the BBC is discussing east Jersusalem now. The discussions won't even ever get that far! Hamas loathe Fatah and vice versa. They will always hate each other. Hamas has slaughtered hundreds of Fatah activists. They will only reconcile when hell freezes over.

Then Hamas won't ever allow the Jews a state even if every jew was cleansed from East Jerusalem.

Then there is the Palestinian "right of return".....

The BBC hasn't got a scooby when it comes to analysing the Middle East, althought they must be given credited for recognising Israel's mission in Haiti.

East Jerusalem; where Arabs are allowed to live.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs are allowed to live in peace.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs are allowed to live in security.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs are allowed to criticise the State Of Israel.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs are allowed to go about their business freely.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs have their own elected representatives in Israel's Parliament.
East Jerusalem; where Arabs live in a Democracy.
Gaza - now that is ethnically, cleansed - OF JEWS!!!
Gordon Bennett or Bennet or whoever you are - why don't you go off and hijack another website, one more in line with your warped thinking, like the Guardian.

@ Jonathan Hoffman
You seem to have seen the eviction of Palestinians as 'laughable rubbish', interesting sense of humour you have.

Firstly, you need to research your 'facts' a bit more. Many of the Palestinians evicted in Sheikh Jarrah are not living in 'Jewish homes that Jews were chased out of in 1929'. Actually, there are 88 houses that the settlers are seeking to demolish who were resettled here after being forced out of Israel during the Nakba of 1948, they were subsequently rehoused in Sheikh Jarrah after an agreement by the UNRWA and the Jordan government who then controlled this territory, the Jordanian government promised it pass official rights to these Palestinian refugees but never did so.

Regarding archaeology in Silwan, the excavations are politically driven, they seek to prove Jewish historical sites, this has led many Israeli archaeologists such as Rafi Greenberg of Tel Aviv University to criticise them as 'non-transparent' 'fast-archaeology' based on tenuous or little actual evidence

I would like to know why the bible is considered as historically accurate, when we now clearly some of it is not? and why the fact that there has been no archaeological evidence presented, yet this has nevertheless enabled Elad to claim that the 'King David's Garden' is actually near Al-Bustan, in Silwan?

Can we and should we use archaeology to displace the present, to recreate a mythical past? This is ethnic cleansing, carried out under the guise of archaeology, by organisations like Elad that confirm they seek to Judaise Jerusalem

"after being forced out of Israel during the Nakba of 1948,"

Can this be substantiated please?

OK, Jonathan, let's play it your way. If it is OK for Jews to reoccupy homes they were "chased out of" in anti-Jewish riots, it must be OK for Arabs to reclaim the Katamon, Mankhat, Bakaa, Talbiyeh (Talpiot), Mamilla and other houses they were "chased out of" in 1948. They also have the right to claim compensation for the shopping mall built on one of their cemeteries in Malkha. And the ruination of another cemetery in Mamilla to make room for holiday apartments for rich foreigners.
East Jerusalem -- like the rest of the West Bank -- is occupied territory because it was obtained by force and irrespective from whom.
So, just to be clear, you are defending the indefensible ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem Palestinians and you are defending the armed goons of the extremist mainly foreign-funded Elad movement.

"chased out of" in 1948.

Please substantiate.

As I wrote, the court ruled that the original Jewish owners had title to the Sheikh Jarrah homes.

We already know that you are a proven liar ...

http://thejc.com/blogpost/british-jews-owed-apology

... so nothing you write has a shred of credibility, Troll.

Hey Moshe, ever hear of the concept that there are consequences of starting a war?? Arabs are not entitled to reclaim property in western Jerusalem like Katamon etc (where I live, BTW) because of just that concept.

Then you write: "Occupied territory because it was obtained by force.." You're too funny! Defending oneself against attackers bent on your annihilation is now "force??" I suppose you live somewhere in occupied Europe...

"....many Israeli archaeologists such as Rafi Greenberg of Tel Aviv University...."

Allegations of the type made by Greenberg are heard at almost every international conference and also in “scientific” publications, and to our regret we have already become accustomed to these distortions which are only intended to bash Israel. Greenberg did not only stain himself but Israel archaeology in general. What a pity that, like those who are not Israeli, Greenberg too has permitted his political opinions to distort the facts.

- Dr. Amnon Ben-Tor

http://blog.bibleplaces.com/2007/01/response-to-rafi-greenberg.html

Hey, Judy -- ever heard of Tochnit Deled? It was used by Israeli forces to intimidate and chase out the indigenous Palestinian residents from places like Katamon etc? And yes, east Jerusalem was obtained by force in 1967 when Israel started the war, hence it is occupied.
Hey Jonathan, so an Israeli archaeologist in Israel knows less about Israeli archaeology than you? Where do your talents start?

The process of systematically hindering 'Arab' construction in East Jerusalem through lack of permits being issued, while Jewish settlements are given financial assistance is a long standing policy in the Jerusalem Municipality. Amir Cheshin, Teddy Kollek's advisor for Arab affairs has detailed this systematic policy with the use of official government archives and records, reproduced in 'Separate and Unequal: the inside story of Israeli rule in Eat Jerusalem.

My statement that many of these Palestinians facing eviction orders in Sheikh Jarrah were originally forced out of Israel during the Nakba of 1948 is based on two sources, firstly a publication by Ir Amim and secondly after conversations with a Attorney in Israel. Some of these Palestinians were forced out of West Jerusalem after 1948, there is no doubt about that, while other Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah have lived their since before 1948 and are therefore harder to be forcibly displaced by settlers.

I would like to know if we apply the 'justification' used by settlers and zionists to force out these Palestinians, to other cases would the defenders of this ethnic cleansing still support it in principle, or is it only because its directed at Palestinians. If a American-Indian came to a Jewish house in New York, would it also be acceptable if he removed the Jews simply on the basis that his people lived here a long time ago? Clearly not, so why is it acceptable in Jerusalem

moshetzarfati2

You hit the nail on the head - its indeed an apartheid state, as the right of return is only for one section of the Israeli population the Jews. Under the 1950 law of return, Jews from anywhere in the world can 'return' to Israel, yet Palestinians born in Israel and the Occupied Territories are denied the same rights and in many cases even denied citizenship. Can someone please explain how treating different religious groups differently can be acceptable?

Leaving aside any "moral" arguments re who is right and who is wrong, I can appreciate the strategic "wisdom" of what Israel is trying to do by these settlements, at any rate, what Israel is trying to do by Jane Corbin's reckoning.
I have yet to be convinced, however, that turning Arabs out of their homes in brutal fashion will lead to lasting peace. In some respects I feel the same way as Daniel Seidemann, in his talking to Corbin.
If A believes that his people have a divine right to a territory and B entertains identical views re his people's entitlement, there is no possibilty of a modus vivendi.
Having said that, however, I distrusted that programme and its thrust from the beginning, when Jeremy Vine intoned about "knocks on the door at midnight". The statement was deliberately meant to invoke the filthy doings of the Gestapo; it was BBC-speak at its calculated, Israel-bashing worst. I guarantee it.

Hey, Judy -- ever heard of Tochnit Deled?

Hey Troll

Take your myths back to Guardian CIF where there is a ready market for them.

Plan Dalet was not used to 'chase out' anyone.

Here is Benny Morris:

There was no Zionist plan or blanket policy of evicting the Arab population, or of “ethnic cleansing”. Plan Dalet (or Plan D) of March 10 1948 (it is open and available for all to read in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) Archive and in various publications) was the master plan of the Haganah – the Jewish military force that became the IDF – to counter the expected pan-Arab assault on the emergent Jewish state. That's what it explicitly states and that's what it was. And the invasion of the armies of Egypt , Jordan , Syria and Iraq duly occurred, on May 15 1948 (the date of Israel 's declaration of independence).

It is true that Plan D gave the regional commanders carte blanche to occupy and garrison or expel and destroy Arab villages along and behind the front lines and the anticipated Arab armies' invasion routes. And it is also true that mid-way in the 1948 war the Israeli leaders decided to bar the return of the refugees (those “refugees” who had just assaulted the Jewish community), viewing them as a potential fifth column and threat to the Jewish state's existence. I for one cannot fault their fears or logic.

Hey Jonathan, damned by your own (sorry, I'm assuming original thinking, Benny Morris's) words

It is true that Plan D gave the regional commanders carte blanche to occupy and garrison or expel and destroy Arab villages along and behind the front lines and the anticipated Arab armies' invasion routes. And it is also true that mid-way in the 1948 war the Israeli leaders decided to bar the return of the refugees (those “refugees” who had just assaulted the Jewish community), viewing them as a potential fifth column and threat to the Jewish state's existence. I for one cannot fault their fears or logic.

This is, of course, the later Benny Morris who said the Yishuv leadership did not go far enough in its ethnic cleansing. What do you make of the original Benny Morris? Anti-Semite? Self-hater? Troll? Mendacious?

Also, it was left to the commanders in the field, among them Yitzhak Rabin, to decide the modus operandi of the plan. And they didn't deal with niceties or nuances, that's why Ramle and Lod were ethnically cleansed of Arabs, as was Safed, and Tiberius, as well as Sheikh Munis and Manshiyeh which have now been gobbled up by Tel Aviv. That's why the original residents of Ikrit and Biram, in Galil, have never been let back to their homes, despite promises that they would be able to after 6 months. That was in 1948.

Oh and by the way, if you are going to be a vice-chair of a Zionist organisation, it would behove you to learn some Hebrew: Tochnit is Hebrew for Plan or Programme. If you learned some Hebrew, you might be able to get at some proper Israeli sources, not just the crib sheets put out by Bicom and the Yisrael Beiteinu-run Foreign Ministry.

"You hit the nail on the head - its indeed an apartheid state"

One, that's an antisemitic statement, see EUMC Definition

Two, plenty of states give citizenship to those with an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state: eg US, Canada, Greece, Germany, Bulgaria, Belgium, Croatia, and others too numerous to mention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis

Yvetta, some of us are not so Holocaust obsessed that every time we hear "midnight knock on the door" we think of the Gestapo. It happens all over, including in this country (ever heard of pre-dawn raids?) And as we saw, the army does go around chucking Arabs out of their homes in the early hours.

Oh, puhleeze, Jonathan, that is so cliche'ed. Israel does behave like an apartheid state. That's not anti-Semitism, that's a statement of fact. Irresepective of the fact that it now controls more disenfranchised non-Jews than it does enfranchised Jews and non-Jews, look at the figures concerning investment in Arab areas.
Look at the Arab education system and compare its resources with those devoted to Jews.
Look at the transport infrastructure in Arab towns and villages and compare it with Jewish areas.
Why is it that Arab towns have to wait until they have 70,000 residents in order to get municipal status while Jewish towns need on 15,000?
Why is it that there are no Arab directors general of government ministries?
Why is it that no new Arab town has been built in Israel since 1948?
Why is it that building planning permission for Arabs is delayed until eternity, while for Jews it isn't?
Why is it you can up and leave Britain and go get Israeli citizenship and a healthy immigration basket, but someone whose family has lived in say Sakhnin for generations but now lives abroad can't?

Your argument regarding other countries' citizenship laws is fallacious. This is because these countries existed when the people emigrated from them. Israel didn't exist as a state before 1948.

@Troll

Regarding your ad hominem about my Hebrew:

1. ad hominems are the first resort of a Liar, no surpise there then

2. I am perfectly aware what Tochnit means which was why i referred to Paln Dalet

Your "Lod and Ramle" reference is predictably part of the revisionist aim to change history.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/4330187

It won't wash.

http://www.z-word.com/uploads/assets/documents/ZWord_Julius3_pgaRoTsA.pd...

First, Arab irregulars attacked Jews. The IDF intervened and there were some expulsions but it was never government policy.

As Judy says, that's what can happen when you start wars...

Oh good grief now he's saying it's an ad hominem to point out his lack of Hebrew. If you were so perfectly aware what Tochnit means, why didn't you use it instead of mixing languages?
And if you are going to give me blogs and self-serving Israeli military historians -- who at least acknowledge that there was an expulsion (I said nothing about a massacre) -- as reliable sources... well I'll leave it up to others to decide on your desperation. Resign.

@Troll

If you choose to indulge in antisemitic discourse what does that make you?

Troll: "Look at the Arab education system and compare its resources with those devoted to Jews."

>>> FACT: There are more Arab women in higher education in Israel than anywhere else in the Middle East.

Troll: "Why is it that there are no Arab directors general of government ministries?"

>>>> FACT: There has been a Beduin Vice Consul, an Arab Minister and an Arab sitting on the Supreme Court

Now name a Jew in an equivalent position anywhere in the Middle East outside Israel

Whatever Israel-bashing course you went on I think you'd better demand your money back, Troll

http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/prime-time-bbc-documentary-on-jerusal...

Robin Shepherd on the flagrant bias of last night's Panorama:

But as an instance of propagandist methodology in airbrushing out vital context, especially in a documentary about the status of Jews in Jerusalem and the underlying causes of the wider conflict, this really rather takes the biscuit.

Please read it, it is excellent

And of course Mr Shepherd has no axe to grind or books to sell....

Jonathan, check your facts. I wasn't comparing Israel with the Arab world -- I was comparing it with the democratic world with which it likes to be associated. So your argument is a bit of a straw man, quelle surprise.

Now to the points (and believe me, despite your bullying and name calling I will stand up to you with facts just to show you up)

FACT: There are more Arab women in higher education in Israel than anywhere else in the Middle East.

That might be the case, but compared to Israeli Jewish women -- which is what I was comparing them to -- they are far behind. If you are going to do comparisons, do like for like -- apples with apples, pears with pears -- and since Israeli Jewish women and Israeli Arab women are citizens of the same state (although it is not a state for all its citizens) that is the comparison I will make.

"Why is it that there are no Arab directors general of government ministries?"

FACT: There has been a Beduin Vice Consul, an Arab Minister and an Arab sitting on the Supreme Court

Now name a Jew in an equivalent position anywhere in the Middle East outside Israel

That's easy. Houda Ezra Ebrahim Nonoo is Bahrain's ambassador to the US. She's Jewish.
Andre Azoulay is a top adviser to Morocco's King Muhammad VI.

Oh and compare like with like. How many Jews are there in the Middle East outside Israel? More than a quarter of Israel's population isn't Jewish.

So as you see, Israel is behaving like an apartheid state, and the new Residency and Loyalty laws suggested by your friends in Yisrael Beiteinu will make it even more so.

Yes, Moshe, I have heard of "pre-dawn" raids. The operative term is "pre-dawn", not "midnight".
That "midnight knock" has always been associated with the Gestapo; I heard of it when I was kneehigh to a grasshopper; no doubt Jeremy Vine did too.
Thanks for posting the Robin link, Jonathan; he's a man of courage and integrity, who as Moshe probably needs reminding has no "axe to grind" other than the love of truth, and has suffered in his career owing to his honesty about the demonised Jewish State.

btw, Moshe, the fact that there are fewer Israeli Arab than Israeli Jewish women in higher education is almost certainly due to familial expectations governing the "place" of girls in Arab society.
It's still a fiercely malecentric one where "honour" killings exist - those dead female Arab bodies that turn up from time to time at the side of roads in the Disputed Territories aren't the victims of IDF or Settlers, but of their own menfolk, who try to make them look like road accident fatalities.

Funny how the Israel-bashing leftist media - even its female harpies - tend to overlook such facts.

Yvetta... Almost certainly? That wouldn't be stereotyping, would it? Israeli Arab women tend to be fairly middle class, and as such are aspirational. Also, how would you explain the disparity in numbers between Israeli Jewish males and their non-Jewish counterparts in Israeli academic institutions? Malecentricity?

Yvetta, actually I associate the midnight knock with 1956 Hungary and later shown in the excellent film, The Lives of Others. All horrid regimes do it -- and even some not-so-horrid ones.

So you gave me one. Houda Ezra Ebrahim Nonoo.

Morocco was not in the Middle East last time I looked - looks like you flunked geography as well as history (and truthfulness), Troll!

"How many Jews are there in the Middle East outside Israel?"

>>> Take some advice from a friend, Troll: stop digging!

Morocco is indeed part of the Middle East, as it stretches from the Maghreb to Afghanistan. you must be confusing it with the Levant. Never mind, when you study the region's history it's one of the first things they teach you.
You only wanted one instance, Jonathan. Also, try next time to compare like with like (as in citizens of the same state, Israel -- even though they are not equal because of their ethnicity and religion).

"Morocco is part of the Middle East!"

Give up Troll!

It's further west than Nigeria, Italy....

Spelling: B
History, Geography and Truth: D - - -

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/EndArrestsNow/

End Lawfare Now!

(trolls welcome but must use real name)

Not a huge fan of Wikipedia, Jonathan, but it defines the Middle East as:

The Middle East (or, formerly more common, the Near East)[1] is a region that encompasses southwestern Asia and Egypt. In some contexts, the term has recently been expanded in usage to sometimes include Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Caucacus, and North Africa. It's often used as a synonym for Near East, in opposition to Far East.

Now this corresponds with what my teachers taught me at Tel Aviv University in the early to mid-1980s. I suggest you ask your good friends Colin Schindler and Jonny Paul, with whom I am willing to argue the toss because at least they have knowledge of what they speak and write.

Indeed, let's end lawfare. Let's also end the stupid way in which the indefensible is defended -- by both sides.

So Nigeria and Italy are in the Middle East since they are further East than Morocco ....

You only use Wikipedia when it agrees with you!

ad hom noted ... the first resort of a lier ...

Ask your friends Colin and Jonny, I'll argue the toss with them. And as I wrote, I am not a great fan of Wikipedia...
What ad hom? And to quote Corporal Jones: "They don't like it up 'em Captain Mainwaring".

Moshe, there is nothing wrong with the assessment by Benny Morris about Plan D. It was indeed a military tactic and involved moving Palestinians out of the way so the Jews could more easily defend an attack by the Arabs. And of course they stopped the Arabs returning. It all seems fairly logical to me.

Population removal may seem logical to you, Rich, but it's still ethnic cleansing in most people's books.

I agree with you Moshe but if you ever led a platoon you and your men would be dead in 60 seconds. Lucky for you you don't have to take such life and death decisions.

Oh, and Jonathan, the Middle East is a term coined to denote its position with regards to Europe (our historians tend to be a bit Euro-centric, so the term Middle East would sound ridiculous to a Japanese "orientalist" as it were). So, no Italy and Nigeria aren't in the Middle East.
Still an' all, the term also derives from combining the French terms proche-orient (near east, the term still used by the Yanks) and moyen-orient (Middle East) because whether we like it or not, the French were the first to do proper studies of the region.
So endeth today's lesson. And it was free. Say thank you.

Rich, unfortunately for you, I have led a company. Gedud 890 between 1977 and 1981, and miluim thereafter for 5 years. So are you justifying ethnic cleansing?

Yes, if the circumstances necessitate.

Would you have let the Arabs attack and use the Arab villages as hideouts because you were so ethical?

returning to the discussion on Plan Dalet, Benny Morris does indeed claim that he believes based on taking Israeli archives at face value (something which serious historians no-longer do, see for example 'Subaltern Studies') that there was 'no systematic plan' to expel all the Palestinians. However, he does confirm loads of Palestinians were expelled from many whole villages which were razed to the ground and subsequently replaced with Jews, all this appears in his book 'The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited.

So whether we accept his argument that there was no systematic, or not, his book confirms many Palestinians were expelled and whole villages burnt to the ground. Also many of the myth mentioned on this blog surrounding 1948 such as justifying the expulsion as a 'defensive' move against incoming Arab armies, is debunked by Avi Shlaim in 'the debate about 1948'.

We never expelled people from their homes. We always allowed them back.

I'm not sure that answers my question, Moshe.

What would you have done in 1948 when faced with the invading Arab armies?

Rich, the same as we did in 1982 -- except we didn't lie about it and make ourselves to be whiter than the driven snow. Wars are wars.

I am sure, Jonathan, that you would like to comment on some further info on that very interesting piece by Alon Kaddish and Avraham Sela re: Lod and Ramle. I am sure that you, too, have noted that as sources they used books published by Misrad Habitachon, which I am sure you are aware is Israel's Ministry of Defence. Other sources are from Efal. Now, in case you are unaware, Efal is based at Ramat Efal, near Ramat Gan, and is an educational institute run by the Kibbutz movement. And as we almost sing on the terraces "if you know your history..." you'd know that Ramat Efal houses the archive of the Haganah and the Palmach, which were subsumed into the Israeli Army, which is run by Misrad Habitachon.
Further sources include publications by the Gallili Centre, named for Yisrael Galilli, who was on the extreme right wing of Israel's Labour Party (Mapai) and as such was even more Kahane than the late unlamented rabbi in that he advocated the "transfer" of Arabs from Israel long before the American swivel-eyed racist arrived in Israel.
So I expect you realise that while you may be able to fool some of the people some of the time, you can't fool all of them all the time.
This is so easy.

In 1948 they did what they had to do to stay alive as you did what you had to do in 1982.

No, in 1948 they did what they needed to ethnically cleanse part of Israel. Then they lied about it until they were found out. Then their megaphones abroad started calling those who questioned the actions all sorts of lovely names. Then the megaphones were found out to be empty vessels.

Until they were found out? You mean until Israel opened its archives, which the Arabs have failed to do.

You call it ethnic cleansing, Israel calls it fighting a war. I think you would have done the same in 1948. It is very easy for you to criticise 62 years later.