NationStates Jolt Archive

Israeli minister admits barrier meant to ensure Jewish majority
Tuesday July 12, 2005

JERUSALEM: Israel’s separation barrier in and around Jerusalem is meant to ensure a Jewish majority in the disputed city, an Israeli Cabinet minister acknowledged Monday, contradicting government claims that the divider is solely a temporary security measure. Israel’s Cabinet on Sunday approved final details of the 60-kilometer (40-mile) Jerusalem barrier, which is halfway built and will eventually cut off some 55,000 Arab residents in four neighbourhoods from their city, while including some 30,000 Jewish West Bank settlers on the Jerusalem side.
...
About one-third of Jerusalem’s 700,000 residents are Palestinians who live in east Jerusalem, the sector the Palestinians seek as a future capital. Israel captured east Jerusalem from Jordan in the 1967 Mideast War, including the Old City, home to key holy sites for Christians, Muslims and Jews. In annexing the eastern sector, Israel also expanded the city’s borders around what were then West Bank areas near the city, including the refugee camp of Shuafat. Ramon said Monday that Israel made a mistake in expanding the Jerusalem boundaries in 1967, and suggested the barrier can shift the balance by cutting off four Arab neighbourhoods of the city, including Shuafat and the Kalandia camp.

"The government did well in determining the fence route without including Shuafat and Qalandia in Jerusalem,’’ Ramon said. "I don’t think anybody is sorry about this.’’

© Jang Group of Newspapers
http://jang.com.pk

Sorry, who the hell is Jang newspapers?!?! Going to have to treat this as garbage until it comes from a respectable source. Seeing it on some obscure news-site is not going to impress. Find it on a respectable site and I'll debate it.

Sorry, who the hell is Jang newspapers?!?!
their internet sufix in PK... so that means they are based in Pakistan.

I think its true. The question is- what exactly is the big deal here? The Palestinians want the East Jerusalem to become their capital- do they think dividing the city can be done without placing a barrier on the dividing line?

Not to mention that the people in question are not Israeli citizens, and Israel has every right to bar them from entering Israel proper.

"The largest English and Urdu newspaper publication group of Pakistan"

That's from the web site at the top. It's not going to be biased :D

Wait .... a Jewish state wanting a Jewish majority? Zowie. Now *that's* news!

:rolleyes:

I think its true. The question is- what exactly is the big deal here? The Palestinians want the East Jerusalem to become their capital- do they think dividing the city can be done without placing a barrier on the dividing line?

Not to mention that the people in question are not Israeli citizens, and Israel has every right to bar them from entering Israel proper.the Palestinians (like their parents and grand-parents) live in Jerusalem since way longer than most Israelis new-"settlers"....

If Israel want to annex Jerusalem into Israel (which the Palestineans oppose) they cant refuse voting rights to all the residents of Jerusalem.

No wonder they call it "Apartheid Wall".
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22apartheid+wall%22&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

It reflects the Jewish medium term strategy to defeat Arab higher birth rates
like I said ...Democracy, Jewish style.

oh its a Pakistani source!!!...so it must be lie then [/sarcasm]
Well, seeing as Israel sells weapons to India, it would be like trusting the Zimbabwe Herald or whatever its called to be objective about Britain.

Well, seeing as Israel sells weapons to India, it would be like trusting the Zimbabwe Herald or whatever its called to be objective about Britain.Zimbabwe?? Britain??? :confused:

I know Britain had a role to play in the Creation of Israel...

but what does Zimbabwe has to do with the ongoing bloodbath around Israel?

I think you need to ask your Geography teacher...and your History teacher a full refund...
What the hell do geography or history have to do with anything?

Zimbawe?? Britain??? :confused:
Please, stop posting then editing or deleting, its driving me nuts.

Zimbabwe don't like Britain much, in fact, they're convinced Britain are causing the famine by spreading a chemical into the air over zimbabwe.

What the hell do geography or history have to do with anything?Zimbabwe has nothing to do about the Pal-Jew conflict...unless you want to talk about the Diamond black market.

Zimbabwe has nothing to do about the Pal-Jew conflict...unless you want to talk about the Diamond black market.
I'm aware of that, I was making a comparison.

Wait .... a Jewish state wanting a Jewish majority? Zowie. Now *that's* news!

:rolleyes:


Well I dont' see how you can call Israel a real Democracy when say only Jews are allowed to run, and only Jews are allowed to vote ?????????

...its driving me nuts. Driving people nuts is like...second nature to me...its like my middle name :D

Having said that...I am going to slow down the pace...

olny cause you asked in a good manner. ;)

I'm aware of that, I was making a comparison.fair enough...

Israeli Arabs may be freer, safer, wealthier, and more secure than the citizens of any Arab country, but they are not citizens in the same way, with the same duties and privileges, as Israeli Jews. Israel is not a liberal state, where all citizens have the same individual and interchangeable rights and responsibilities; it is an ethnic state, founded and devoted to the Jewish People, whose rights and obligations, as a group, are different from non-Jewish Israelis.

I think that the opinion of this libertarian thinker from California is very accurate.

Well I dont' see how you can call Israel a real Democracy when say only Jews are allowed to run, and only Jews are allowed to vote ?????????

Whoever said that? There are Arab political parties who have elective representatives in the Israeli parliment, I think they have 5.

The question is how many and which Arabs/non-Jews (I know the two aren't the same) actualy get to vote. His arguement, I think, was that they were trying to unfaily disenfranchise the vote of a certain block of Arabs,

If Israel want to annex Jerusalem into Israel (which the Palestineans oppose) they cant refuse voting rights to all the residents of Jerusalem.
West Jerusalem belongs to Israel under every existing international law. Israel has the legal right to ban non-citizens from entering the part of Jerusalem that is lawfully Israeli.

I think that the opinion of this libertarian thinker from California is very accurate.
It isn't. What rights, pray tell, are the Israeli Arabs lacking?

Hell, they have more rights than the Israeli Jews. Army service in Israel is obligatory for the Jews, but voluntary for minorities.

Well I don't' see how you can call Israel a real Democracy when say only Jews are allowed to run, and only Jews are allowed to vote ?????????so far they don't need to do that..as they still have a Jewish majority.

the Problem is that the Palestinians and other Arabs Working in Israel have a higher birth rate that the jewish...

So far they have offset that a bit by offering generous incentives for whoever claims to have/had a Jewish mother (mainly from Russia and East-Europe) to come "settle" in Israel...

but all that wont be enough ...and The Jewish shrinking majority will need a plan B or C...If they want to keep calling themselves a Democracy.

It isn't. What rights, pray tell, are the Israeli Arabs lacking?

Hell, they have more rights than the Israeli Jews. Army service in Israel is obligatory for the Jews, but voluntary for minorities.
The Israeli Arabs cannot own or lease the land, aren't they?

The Israeli Arabs cannot own or lease the land, aren't they?

heh, even if they could.. teh govt could seize and demolish it at anytime if it wanted too... oh, the U.S. Govt can do that too now :rolleyes:

The Israeli Arabs cannot own or lease the land, aren't they?
No one can buy land in Israel, neither Jews nor Arabs.

The only land Arabs can't lease is that of the Jewish Land Fund, which is basically private land entrusted to the government to manage it, on condition that it is only leased to Jews. The government simply has no legal right to break the terms of the agreement with the JLF.

No one can buy land in Israel, neither Jews nor Arabs.

The only land Arabs can't lease is that of the Jewish Land Fund, which is basically private land entrusted to the government to manage it, on condition that it is only leased to Jews. The government simply has no legal right to break the terms of the agreement with the JLF.
You're contradicting yourself. First you state that no one can buy land, i.e. that there is no private property on land in Israel. In the next sentence you say that the JLF has some 'private land'.

So the Israeli Government honours some kind of a restrictive covenant? That's quaint...

BTW, 93% of the Israeli land are in public domain, not 100% (if we are to believe Wikipedia).

You're contradicting yourself. First you state that no one can buy land, i.e. that there is no private property on land in Israel. In the next sentence you say that the JLF has some 'private land'.
Here's how it works. JLF is an international charity created in the late 19 century that was purchasing lands for Jewish immigrants worldwide (mainly in the land of Israel, but also in Argentina). It now owns about 10-12% of the land in what is now Israel. In the 60-s, they have entrusted the management of these lands to the government on an almost 50-50 basis (JLF appoints half the committee members minus one, the government appoints the rest), but only on condition that this land is only leased to Jews. It isn't always observed though; from what I've heard, some of this land is being used as pastures for Beduin cattle breeders.


So the Israeli Government honours some kind of a restrictive covenant? That's quaint...
That's a fact. Check it out.


BTW, 93% of the Israeli land are in public domain, not 100% (if we are to believe Wikipedia).
Yep, 6% of the land is privately owned- most of it lands that were in private ownership before the creation of Israel. This land is pretty evenly divided- Jews and Arabs own more or less an equal amount.

...

Yep, 6% of the land is privately owned- most of it lands that were in private ownership before the creation of Israel. This land is pretty evenly divided- Jews and Arabs own more or less an equal amount.
So Arabs do own some land in Israel? Then I stand corrected.

BTW, the separation fence is a good protection against terrorists, and it can be torn down anytime. It definitely infringes upon the Palestinians' of movement, but it is a necessity, and recent bombing in Netanya is a proof of that.

The Gaza Strip had its barrier since 1994, IIRC, and the world wasn't too offended by its existence.

So Arabs do own some land in Israel? Then I stand corrected.
You know, its fascinating really. People make claims before thinking them over. Just ask yourself: if Arabs couldn't own or lease land in Israel at all, on what land would all those Arab villages and neighborhoods be standing? :rolleyes:

You know, its fascinating really. People make claims before thinking them over. Just ask yourself: if Arabs couldn't own or lease land in Israel at all, on what land would all those Arab villages and neighborhoods be standing? :rolleyes:
On the Israeli land belonging to the state... and I think some of them do. :)

On the Israeli land belonging to the state... and I think some of them do. :)
But that would mean the land in question was either leased or given to them, right? :p

But that would mean the land in question was either leased or given to them, right? :p
Erm... not necessary -- I lived for 13 years on the Soviet land, and I neither owned nor leased it. The country magnanimously allowed my family to live in a flat belonging to the state. The notion of 'leasing', not to mention 'buying' property, was inimical to the very nature of the State. Maybe it's different in Israel. ;)

Erm... not necessary -- I lived for 13 years on the Soviet land, and I neither owned nor leased it. The country magnanimously allowed my family to live in a flat belonging to the state. The notion of 'leasing', not to mention 'buying' property, was inimical to the very nature of the State. Maybe it's different in Israel. ;)
That's even better than leasing- you didn't actually have to pay the rent ;)

That's even better than leasing- you didn't actually have to pay the rent ;)
That was a bit more complex. We still had to pay a certain amount of money each month -- you know, the state agency was supposed to maintain our flat in order and fix everything, and the money was meant to support that agency.

That was a bit more complex. We still had to pay a certain amount of money each month -- you know, the state agency was supposed to maintain our flat in order and fix everything, and the money was meant to support that agency.
I know how it worked, I lived in the FSU myself till the age of 18. It's a distorted Soviet form of leasing property. There is no basic difference.

I know how it worked, I lived in the FSU myself till the age of 18. It's a distorted Soviet form of leasing property. There is no basic difference.
Well, the Soviet Government considered 'lease' as something from the old Bourgeois society. Still, a rose by any other name.