Source
Posted by Ibn Bint Jbeil
Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM — Muslim and Christian leaders across the occupied Palestinian lands are shocked with repeated Israeli insults of the prophets and religious sanctities. “I don’t really know when Jews will start to respect the religious sensitivities of non-Jews,” the Chief religious judge of Palestine, Dr. Taysir Tamimi, told IslamOnline.net on Saturday, February 28. “It is very shocking and very telling that Jewish religious leaders in Israel and abroad have not condemned these blasphemous acts.” Israeli media shocked millions of Muslims and Christians last week by mocking Jesus, his mother Mary and Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him). A TV comedy skit, hosted by Israeli comedian Lior Shlein, last week depicted Jesus as being “too fat” to have walked on water and that Mary was not virgin. The insult came after the host angered million of Muslims when he pointed to one of his shoes, saying “This is Muhammad.” “Muslims throughout the world have been shocked by the evil campaign waged against Islam and the Prophet (PBUH) and abuse of this shameful campaign against the sanctities with insults addressed against the Prophet and a religion followed by more than 1.5 billion Muslims,” said Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. “This shameful conduct came a few days after broadcasting insulting rhetoric against Prophet Jesus and his virgin mother, Mary, peace be upon them.” Wicked, blasphemous Salim Kubti, a lawyer representing Christian courts in Israel, said he was considering a libel suit against Channel-10, which hosted the comedy show. "Such remarks go beyond satire and dark humor,” he told IOL. “These are serious utterances insulting the sensibilities of every Christian and anyone who possesses values and mutual respect for other religions. “It’s clear that Shlein is a failure and as a result is looking for any way to improve his ratings, and he is jumping on a sensitive issue.” The Vatican labeled the Israeli show “a vulgar and offensive act of intolerance toward the religious sentiments of the believers in Christ.” Some Christian leaders and clergymen even Pope Benedict XVI to postpone or cancel his planned visit to Israel, scheduled to take place in May. The outcry forced outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to apologize for Pope Benedict XVI, saying the comedy segment didn’t represent Israel’s views. IOL has contacted some Jewish leaders for comment, but they refused to talk. Muslim leaders also denounced the Israeli TV show, calling it “wicked and blasphemous.” “We believe in freedom of expression, but we don’t believe in freedom of vulgarity and blasphemy,” Ikrema Sabri, head of the Supreme Muslim Council in Al-Quds (occupied East Jerusalem), said in the weekly Friday sermon. "You can’t insult and offend people under the pretext of freedom of expression.” He said the “apparent acquiescence” of the Israeli government to these vulgarities reflected “malice and ill-will” toward Muslims, calling on Muslims worldwide to send an “unmistakable warning” to Israel to refrain from insulting religious symbols. Israel has a long history of showing disrespect to Muslim and Christian faiths. In 1948, the Israeli army and paramilitary Jewish groups systematically destroyed hundreds of mosques in Palestine in an effort to obliterate the country’s Arab-Islamic identity. Mosques left intact, such as the Beir al Saba’a Mosque, were converted into bars or brothels. Others were simply left to fall into disrepair. Shortly after the 1967 Middle East war, the chief rabbi of the Israeli army, Shlomo Gorin, urged the military to blow up Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s third holiest shrine, “once and for all”. In January 1984, armed Jewish extremists, led by Rabbi Moshe Levinger, one of the leaders of Gush Emunim, the Jewish settler movement, attempted to dynamite and destroy Al-Aqsa mosque. Jewish insults of Muslim and Christian symbols became more common and audacious in recent years. Nearly ten years ago, a Jewish immigrant from the former Soviet Union drew an offensive image depicting Prophet Muhammad as a pig writing the Qur’an. In 2006, a Jewish couple walked into the Basilica of Annunciation Church in the Arab town of Nazareth in Israel, carrying 19 gas canisters, bottles of turpentine and kerosene, 64 firecrackers and 25 rocket-shaped fireworks. The couple placed the fireworks and the gas canisters in a corner then poured kerosene on them, causing a fire. Moreover, Yeshiva (Talmudic school) students have been spitting on Christian clergymen in Al-Quds and breaking their crucifixes. Some other fanatical Jews don’t hesitate to refer to Jesus as “Hitler of Bethlehem.” |
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
Posted on February 27th, 2009
from Maan News Agency
Palestinians and their international supporters held a vigil marking the 15th anniversary of the massacre of 33 Palestinians by an Israeli settler in the West Bank city of Hebron on Thursday.
The demonstration took place near the fence surrounding the present day settlement of Kiryat Arba. The families of the victims of the massacre were present, along with officials from the Palestinian People’s Party and foreign solidarity activists.
The demonstrators carried 33 banners with the names of the victims and lit 33 candles and carried torches.
In response to the vigil, Israeli soldiers declared the area a closed military zone, …
Ma’an – A key Israeli government agency has been promoting plans to build thousands of new houses in illegal West Bank settlements, government documents made public on Friday show.
Documents from Israel’s Civil Administration, the government organ responsible for nonmilitary affairs in the occupied West Bank, were obtained by the organization B’Tselem through a Freedom of Information request.
The plans, developed over the last two years, were approved by the Environment Subcommittee of the Civil Administration’s planning wing and plot out a major expansion of the Gush Eztion settlement bloc. If realized the plan will cut a swath of the West Bank …
Ma’an – An Israeli military tribunal has issued a decision that could pave the way for the expansion of the West Bank settlement of Efrat without informing a group of Palestinians who were petitioning to save their land.
In the ruling, a court in the settlement of Ofer rejected eight separate petitions, each representing dozens of Palestinians. The petitioners had objected to a 2004 declaration by the Israeli Civil Administration to designating some 1,700 dunums (1.7 square kilometers) of land north of Efrat “state land.”
The land at stake belongs to the Palestinian village of Artas, on the southern outskirts of Bethlehem. A catholic monastery is located just to the north of the land slated for confiscation.
If the Israeli Defense Ministry approves it, the seizure of this land could result in a massive expansion of the settlement. By comparison, the village of Artas itself is only 13,500 dunams.
The ruling was first reported on 17 February by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Following up on this report, Ma’an found that neither the petitioners, their lawyer, nor local authorities in Artas had received any notification of the decision.
“We’re still awaiting a decision to this minute,” said Sami Khoury, the lawyer representing the landowners in the case, speaking on Wednesday afternoon.
“This is a very serious matter,” said Khoury, speculating that Israeli authorities “did it on purpose” so that the land could be seized without protest or legal opposition. He said he and his clients would appeal the case to the Supreme Court and demand an investigation of the failure to notify.
Khoury said that only on Wednesday had he received confirmation of the decision to dismiss the eight objections. He said obtained this information private lawyer in Tel Aviv representing the Israeli government. The government’s lawyer said he had received a letter in October 2008, referring to a decision rendered on 4 September.
A spokesperson for Israel’s Civil Administration, Miki Galin, confirmed that the eight appeals had been declined, but claimed that the Palestinian petitioners had been informed. A ninth objection was reportedly granted.
One of the landowners in Artas, Abu Kamal, said that he had no notification of any decision regarding his appeal. He said he works on his land frequently and sees Israeli military jeeps there.
The head of the Municipal Council in Artas, Hamdi Ayesh, also said that he had received no word of any ruling regarding the land.
“Artas will have a new Nakba [disaster] if this ruling is implemented,” said Ayesh, using the term Palestinians use to describe the mass expulsions of 1948. He pointed out that if Efrat is expanded, the settlement will encroach on the town itself.
The Israeli settlers, meanwhile, are making no secret of their intention to seize the land on the south side of Artas. Efrat Mayor Oded Revivi was quoted by the Associated Press earlier this month saying he envisions the settlement growing from 9,000 to 30,000 residents. He hopes to build 2,500 new homes on the land at stake in the military court proceedings.
Sami Khoury, the lawyer for the Palestinians, said that the settlers had mentioned these plans in court, presenting documents from the 1970s showing the intention to build at least 1,500 homes on the land. The land, called Givat HaEitam by the settlers, is already within the settlement’s self-declared jurisdiction. In the summer of 2007, settlers held demonstrations on the land, calling for it to be included on the western side of Israel’s separation wall. The original planned route of the wall would have placed the area on the eastern side.
According to the Haaretz report, Eftat plans to wait until the new Israeli government assumes power before seeking approval from the ministries of Housing and Defense to build on the land. The settlers see the right-wing’s victory in the elections as a sign that the new government will be more sympathetic to their claims.
Hamdi Ayesh, the head of the local council in Artas, is also aware of this political situation. He said he is “not optimistic” about the coming Israeli government. He noted that when Israeli Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu was responsible during his last term as prime minister in the late 1990s, he designated a hilltop north of Bethlehem “state land,” and then approved construction there. The hilltop is known to Palestinians as Abu Ghneim, and is now the location of the settlement of Har Homa.
PSP Note: Artas was the site of weekly demonstrations for several months when part of their agricultural land was bulldozed and confiscated by the Israeli military to make room for a sewage treatment system built for the Efrat settlement in 2007.
B’Tselem: Plans Moving Forward to Expell 2000 Palestinians From Homes
With Kadima refusing publicly to join Likud, time is running out for Netanyahu to form a government, writes Khalid Amayreh in occupied East Jerusalem Tasked with forming the next Israeli government, Likud leader Benyamin Netanyahu has been trying in vain to convince Kadima leader Tzipi Livni to join him in a coalition government that would be acceptable to the international community, particularly the new US administration. This week, Netanyahu met with both Livni and Labour Party leader Ehud Barak. However, the meetings ended fruitlessly as both refused to join a Likud-led government, citing “diametrically opposed agendas” and opposition to a partnership with the Likud by their respective constituencies. Prior to her meeting with Netanyahu on Sunday, 21 February, Livni told reporters that joining a Likud government would be a “breach of Kadima voters’ trust”. “These days are a test for Kadima. People are looking at us. We presented our stance. We spoke during the campaign about content and ideology, about the differences between hope and despair and between ‘two states for two peoples’ and no path at all.” Elucidating the “wide gap” with the Likud, Livni suggested that a partnership with the Likud amounted to sacrificing Kadima’s principles, saying “this is not what our voters want.” “We spoke about Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. That is why we asked for the trust of the public. We received a wave of support on the condition that we keep our promises. If we compromise… by joining a government with a path that is not ours, we would violate the trust of our voters,” she said. However, it is uncertain if Livni’s initial refusal to join a Netanyahu-led coalition government is motivated by ideology and principles, or is a mere bargaining tactic aimed at extricating more concessions from the Likud. Responding to Livni’s obstinacy Netanyahu warned, “I won’t wait forever for a unity government.” “I want to give Livni a real chance to join us, but we can’t wait forever,” Netanyahu told the Likud faction following a recommendation by party hawks, who constitute a majority within the party, to give up on Livni and Barak and start formal negotiations with extremist right-wing and religious factions. Exuding not a small amount of desperation, Netanyahu argued that political parties ought to work together for the sake of Israel. “Our emergency situation requires putting aside political and personal reasons that are legitimate at a different time and that are not legitimate now,” Netanyahu said. The Likud leader has reportedly offered Kadima three top portfolios for joining the government: foreign affairs, defence and finance. However, the “generous offer”, which is likely to be met with stiff opposition from the Likud rank and file, has so far failed to woo Livni. Nonetheless, Kadima’s refusal to join a Netanyahu-led government doesn’t seem to be absolute and irreversible. Shaul Mofaz, Kadima’s number two, was quoted as saying that the party should join a Likud government. “The Israeli people want to see a unity government. We have great challenges, and we need to influence them from within the government.” Mofaz added: “If in the end we don’t come to an agreement regarding the platform and a change in the system of government, then we will go to the opposition.” Mofaz is a notorious hawk and his views on the Palestinian problem have more in common with those of the Likud and extremist factions than with Livni’s. One Israeli newspaper reported Tuesday that Livni was coming under pressure from her party’s senior members urging her to accept a national unity arrangement. Unconfirmed reports suggest that some high- ranking Kadima officials, including Mofaz, would leave the party should Livni choose to go into opposition. Netanyahu’s running after Livni seems to reflect a real political dilemma he is facing following the indecisive outcome of the recent Israeli elections. The Likud leader could easily form a narrow-based government comprising the Likud, Shas, Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu, United Torah Judaism and other extremist parties, including the National Union. However, such a government, while harmonious on the Palestinian issue, would be rife with contradictions given the diametrically opposed agendas and platforms of parties such the ultra- Orthodox Shas and the ultra-secular Yisrael Beiteinu. Moreover, such an extremist government would be a public relations disaster for Israel in the world, especially in the United States and Europe. Netanyahu, a veteran and experienced politician, is aware of the ramifications and repercussions that such a rightist government would have on paramount relations with the United States. Hence, exhaustive and desperate efforts to include Kadima in the coalition government he is trying to form. But if the Israeli prime minister designate fails to win over Kadima and the Labour Party, he will have no choice but to form a government with the right-wing and religious parties. Netanyahu then would seek to fend off criticisms, domestic and international, for partnering up with brazenly fascist parties, such as National Union and the Jewish Home, by arguing that he had made his utmost efforts to include Kadima and Labour but to no avail. The other choice available to Netanyahu is simply to admit failure and return to Israeli President Shimon Peres and tell him that he is unable to carry out the task of forming a stable and durable government. This seems an unlikely scenario, however. Nonetheless, if the political stalemate continues, and if Netanyahu reaches the conclusion that no government is better than a failed government beset by crises, it is possible that Peres will task Livni with forming the next government. This wouldn’t be necessarily good news for the Kadima leader, if only because her chances of forming a stable and durable government would be even worse than those of Netanyahu. |
"....There are obvious political reasons for Netanyahu's refusal to demonstrate a more moderate stance: It would cost him his potential coalition with the right-wing National Union and Habayit Hayehudi, and force him into a rotation arrangement with Livni. But his opposition to a Palestinian state is also a matter of principle, one he has held for many years.........
Netanyahu believes Israel must insist on retaining 50 percent of the West Bank - the open areas in the Jordan Valley and the Judean Desert that are vital as a security zone. In light of statements the outgoing government has made to the Palestinians, Netanyahu's position is a joke meant to kill the negotiations before they even begin..."