Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

[Boston1]

Between 1946-48, the estimate is: 711,000 Palestinian refugees forced out by the Israelis.
How many Jewish refugees were forced out by the Palestinians?

Nearly a million were forced out by the surrounding Arab nations. Straight up ethnic cleansing since there was no war going on in those nations.

We're just talking about Palestine. The Palestinians aren't responsible for the actions of the other Arab nations.

But let's say you include all of them....

Palestinian Refugees:
711,000 Palestinians fled or were expelledfrom 1946-48 conflict.
280,000 to 325,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from the 6-day war.

So that is between 991,000 - 1,036,000.

900,000 Jews fled or were expelled from Arab countries between 1948-1970's.

Now, how does that compare with Boston's claims?

And, what does it have to do with the Palestinian refugees? They aren't responsible for the actions of other countries.

Compares perfectly except you've inflated the number of Arab Muslims who ended up actually moving due to the Arab Muslim declaration of war on Israel in 1948

Most of those Arab Muslims up and moved because their own people told them too, not because of the Israeli's defending themselves.

Oh I'm sure you can find a hundred thousand or so who might have moved because of direct Israeli action but that'd be about it ;--)

;--)

Nope. Did not inflate anything. I took both Jewish and Palestinian numbers from the same sources. Both sets of numbers iincluded those actually expelled and those who fled out of fear of persecution or conflict.

Israeli archival material list the primary reasons for their fleeing - being told to by their own people ranked near the bottom.

Sounds like you only used one source. Never a great idea.

 

[Shusha]

Coyote : The PA and the EU are providing funds to Palestinians to build illegally on land under Israel's jurisdiction. Do you have any comments on that?

Specifically - what illegal settlements are being built and where?

Also, I would still like an answer to my question - I'm beginning to feel like I'm doing all the answering

I've answered more than once. You might want to step away from the brick wall.

EU building hundreds of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

And for the PA -- see previously posted comment which Boston kindly re-posted.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote : The PA and the EU are providing funds to Palestinians to build illegally on land under Israel's jurisdiction. Do you have any comments on that?

Specifically - what illegal settlements are being built and where?

Also, I would still like an answer to my question - I'm beginning to feel like I'm doing all the answering

I've answered more than once. You might want to step away from the brick wall.

No you did not. Are you playing word games?

The question I asked was this: can you give me specific examples of Arab Israeli illegal settlements getting government support in infrastructure, funding, or legal help?

EU building hundreds of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Interesting, and complicated. A war of competing illegal construction.

And for the PA -- see previously posted comment which Boston kindly re-posted.

 

[Coyote]

Between 1946-48, the estimate is: 711,000 Palestinian refugees forced out by the Israelis.
How many Jewish refugees were forced out by the Palestinians?

Nearly a million were forced out by the surrounding Arab nations. Straight up ethnic cleansing since there was no war going on in those nations.

We're just talking about Palestine. The Palestinians aren't responsible for the actions of the other Arab nations.

But let's say you include all of them....

Palestinian Refugees:
711,000 Palestinians fled or were expelledfrom 1946-48 conflict.
280,000 to 325,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from the 6-day war.

So that is between 991,000 - 1,036,000.

900,000 Jews fled or were expelled from Arab countries between 1948-1970's.

Now, how does that compare with Boston's claims?

And, what does it have to do with the Palestinian refugees? They aren't responsible for the actions of other countries.

Compares perfectly except you've inflated the number of Arab Muslims who ended up actually moving due to the Arab Muslim declaration of war on Israel in 1948

Most of those Arab Muslims up and moved because their own people told them too, not because of the Israeli's defending themselves.

Oh I'm sure you can find a hundred thousand or so who might have moved because of direct Israeli action but that'd be about it ;--)

;--)

Nope. Did not inflate anything. I took both Jewish and Palestinian numbers from the same sources. Both sets of numbers iincluded those actually expelled and those who fled out of fear of persecution or conflict.

Israeli archival material list the primary reasons for their fleeing - being told to by their own people ranked near the bottom.

Sounds like you only used one source. Never a great idea.

You used none. At least the source I used is accessable to both sides.

 

[Coyote]

Ok - can you give me specific examples of Arab Israeli illegal settlements getting government support in infrastructure, funding, or legal help?

If I am remembering correctly from articles read last night, there are 11 Bedouin communities which were retroactively legalized, as well as 7 custom built communities. The problem with the Bedouin is not one of discrimination so much as resistance to urbanization, which, of course, Israel wants to encourage.

I'm not talking about "retroactive legalization" - I'm talking about actively providing support and infrastructure and legal help to currently illegal communities - including legal help in helping them retain the privately owned land they built on!

The Beduoin want to live where they are living - what's wrong with that? There is an historical parallel here....custom built communities in some other place so another ethnic group can move in.

In your last paragraph, are you are stating that these sort of discriminatory actions by the government between Jewish Israeli's and Arab Israeli's are defensible? We're talking about citizens.

I disagree that they are discriminatory as I disagree that the issue is one of ethnicity. Communities built on land intended for communities tend to stay and eventually become legalized. Communities built in military zones, on national park land, or blocking planned roads tend not to stay. Its not based on the ethnicity of the builders but on the goals of Israel.

[/QUOTE]


What you said was this:

And as to why the government is doing it with Jewish communities built illegally: it supports Israel's political and security goals -- ensuring a united Jerusalem that is not a border town, a security issue; ensuring swift and direct passage through to Jericho and the eastern border also for security reasons; and building in areas which Israel intends to annex.

You can't claim it's not based on ethnicity. Jewish communities. Not Arab-Israeli communities. How can you say it is not discrimminatory? They are all citizens, in theory at least.

 

[Coyote]

Between 1946-48, the estimate is: 711,000 Palestinian refugees forced out by the Israelis.
How many Jewish refugees were forced out by the Palestinians?

Nearly a million were forced out by the surrounding Arab nations. Straight up ethnic cleansing since there was no war going on in those nations.

We're just talking about Palestine. The Palestinians aren't responsible for the actions of the other Arab nations.

But let's say you include all of them....

Palestinian Refugees:
711,000 Palestinians fled or were expelledfrom 1946-48 conflict.
280,000 to 325,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from the 6-day war.

So that is between 991,000 - 1,036,000.

900,000 Jews fled or were expelled from Arab countries between 1948-1970's.

Now, how does that compare with Boston's claims?

And, what does it have to do with the Palestinian refugees? They aren't responsible for the actions of other countries.

Compares perfectly except you've inflated the number of Arab Muslims who ended up actually moving due to the Arab Muslim declaration of war on Israel in 1948

Most of those Arab Muslims up and moved because their own people told them too, not because of the Israeli's defending themselves.

Oh I'm sure you can find a hundred thousand or so who might have moved because of direct Israeli action but that'd be about it ;--)

;--)

Nope. Did not inflate anything. I took both Jewish and Palestinian numbers from the same sources. Both sets of numbers iincluded those actually expelled and those who fled out of fear of persecution or conflict.

Israeli archival material list the primary reasons for their fleeing - being told to by their own people ranked near the bottom.

Sounds like you only used one source. Never a great idea.

I'm happy to provide more sources...numbers actually pretty much line up give or take...

Palestinian Refugees: An Overview

Estimates vary of the number of Palestinians refugees displaced from within what became the borders of Israel in 1948. In 1949, the United Nations Conciliation Commission put the number at 726,000; the newly-established United Nations Relief and Works Agency subsequently put the number at 957,000 in 1950. The Israeli government has in the past suggested numbers as low as 520,000, while Palestinian researchers have suggested up to 850,000.​

Palestine refugees | UNRWA

When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees.​

Palestinian Refugees

• During the ensuing (1948) war, as many as 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled their homes in the newly created state.
• During the 1967 Six Day War, another estimated 250,000 Palestinians fled the West Bank and Gaza Strip with the arrival of Israeli forces.
• From 1948-1951 as many as 800,000 Jews were expelled from their native Arab nations or forced to flee as a result of state-sponsored anti-Zionist violence.

 

[Shusha]

The Beduoin want to live where they are living - what's wrong with that?

It depends. It may be because Israel is building a road there. It may be that it is too close to a military area. It may be that it is a nature reserve or place of archeological significance.

It also depends on whether or not they are actively assisting the Palestinians to create "facts on the ground".

 

[Coyote]

The Beduoin want to live where they are living - what's wrong with that?

It depends. It may be because Israel is building a road there. It may be that it is too close to a military area. It may be that it is a nature reserve or place of archeological significance.

It also depends on whether or not they are actively assisting the Palestinians to create "facts on the ground".

In the particular case I think I referenced earlier - it was because they wanted to put a Jewish settlement there and move the Beduoins elsewhere.

You seem to be working hard to justify what is rather unequal situation here.

 

[Boston1]

Nearly a million were forced out by the surrounding Arab nations. Straight up ethnic cleansing since there was no war going on in those nations.

We're just talking about Palestine. The Palestinians aren't responsible for the actions of the other Arab nations.

But let's say you include all of them....

Palestinian Refugees:
711,000 Palestinians fled or were expelledfrom 1946-48 conflict.
280,000 to 325,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from the 6-day war.

So that is between 991,000 - 1,036,000.

900,000 Jews fled or were expelled from Arab countries between 1948-1970's.

Now, how does that compare with Boston's claims?

And, what does it have to do with the Palestinian refugees? They aren't responsible for the actions of other countries.

Compares perfectly except you've inflated the number of Arab Muslims who ended up actually moving due to the Arab Muslim declaration of war on Israel in 1948

Most of those Arab Muslims up and moved because their own people told them too, not because of the Israeli's defending themselves.

Oh I'm sure you can find a hundred thousand or so who might have moved because of direct Israeli action but that'd be about it ;--)

;--)

Nope. Did not inflate anything. I took both Jewish and Palestinian numbers from the same sources. Both sets of numbers iincluded those actually expelled and those who fled out of fear of persecution or conflict.

Israeli archival material list the primary reasons for their fleeing - being told to by their own people ranked near the bottom.

Sounds like you only used one source. Never a great idea.

You used none. At least the source I used is accessable to both sides.

I've used countless, but the standard is to simply ignore ignore ignore. Your source used data provided by each side; we know that Pallywood has no integrity in factually reporting much of anything so its reasonable to suggest its counting all Arab Muslims of the mandate area as refugees rather than just the ones forced to move due to conflict.

I suppose we could go miles off topic but it seems like just another distraction from the fact that Israel is actually quite tolerant of all the illegal building that goes within its borders.

 

[Shusha]

You seem to be working hard to justify what is rather unequal situation here.

It seems to me that you are working hard to label a very complex situation as being plain vanilla discrimination against Arabs.

How does it serve Israel and all her people to have dozens or hundreds of tiny rural villages in the Negev each expecting to hook up to water, electricity, sewers, roads, schools and hospitals and clinics? How does it serve Israel to allow semi-nomadic tribes to set up villages wherever it is convenient for them and take over that land for their own use and/or have those villages grow without any sort of urban planning?

Its a vexing problem, to be sure. Its a fundamental resistance to urbanization while wanting the perks of urbanization. Its a wanting to be "planned" enough to have the services, but not "planned" enough to consolidate into one area.

But its not fundamentally a problem of vanilla discrimination.

 

[Shusha]

Interesting, and complicated. A war of competing illegal construction.

Well, no. A war of illegal construction vs. (mostly) legal construction. Area C, remember.

 

[sharif]

Mod Edit - off topic post, please review the rules.

 

[Boston1]

who permit ISRAEL to settle very soon all enemies of Islam will destory and Hizbolluh defeat Isarel which too early forgotten?

Huh ?

the subject is Israeli's right to demolish structures built without permits.

 

[Shusha]

It just seems to me that some are too quick to criticize Israel and too eager to simplify the situation down to a case of pure vanilla discrimination without considering what Israel is juggling here.

1. A Jewish population which believes very strongly in her rights to the lands; as well as her need for safety, security and a safe haven for the Jewish people and who, understandably, have an on-going, deeply entrenched fear of attack. A position with which the government largely agrees and supports. But also with a portion of that population who are willing to commit illegal and even occasionally immoral acts in order to achieve these goals, supported by their strong (even extreme) religious beliefs.

2. A hostile group who are, for all intents and purposes, foreign national enemies who are actively working against Israel's best interests and receive financial backing and assistance from the enemy nation as well as the EU and general international public opinion.

3. A group of citizens who, for the most part, strongly associate with and support the enemy nation and actively work with them against Israel's best interests, while resisting urbanization and urban planning and yet demanding assistance and "equal" treatment.

Its a ridiculously complex situation and has to be handled with delicacy under the significant scrutiny of the court of public and political opinion.

 

[Boston1]

It just seems to me that some are too quick to criticize Israel and too eager to simplify the situation down to a case of pure vanilla discrimination without considering what Israel is juggling here.

1. A Jewish population which believes very strongly in her rights to the lands; as well as her need for safety, security and a safe haven for the Jewish people and who, understandably, have an on-going, deeply entrenched fear of attack. A position with which the government largely agrees and supports. But also with a portion of that population who are willing to commit illegal and even occasionally immoral acts in order to achieve these goals, supported by their strong (even extreme) religious beliefs.

2. A hostile group who are, for all intents and purposes, foreign national enemies who are actively working against Israel's best interests and receive financial backing and assistance from the enemy nation as well as the EU and general international public opinion.

3. A group of citizens who, for the most part, strongly associate with and support the enemy nation and actively work with them against Israel's best interests, while resisting urbanization and urban planning and yet demanding assistance and "equal" treatment.

Its a ridiculously complex situation and has to be handled with delicacy under the significant scrutiny of the court of public and political opinion.

This is why Israel should quit playing nice guy and start enforcing international law as spelled out in the Geneva Conventions.

Israel has every right to demolish illegally built structures.

 

[Coyote]

The Beduoin want to live where they are living - what's wrong with that?

It depends. It may be because Israel is building a road there. It may be that it is too close to a military area. It may be that it is a nature reserve or place of archeological significance.

It also depends on whether or not they are actively assisting the Palestinians to create "facts on the ground".

The Beduoin are Israeli citizens, and have even volunteered in the IDF. Therefore, it would seem to me they should get the SAME treatment as Jewish citizens. Every argument you make (without giving specifics I might add) seems to be arguing in favor of this discrimmination.

The example I gave was for Umm al-Hiran.

There is no road. It's not a nature reserve. It's not an archaeological preserve. What is replacing it is another, new village which will be a Jewish community. On the surface at least, it appears to be replacing one unrecognized village, with another recognized village and the only difference is ethnicity. Granted lack of appropriate infrastructure is a an understandable issue. However, illegal Arab communities built on state owned land do not get provided with infrastructure, legal assistance or funding while they are illegal. Many Jewish communities seem to.

According to this article:

The court’s decision ignored the fact that it was the state that moved the residents to the area 60 years ago, after removing them from their own land during the the 1948 Nakba. During those 60 years, people were born in the village, grew up, married, built houses, gave birth to children and even had grandchildren.

Moreover, the court did not relate to the fact that the state is not planning to use the land for a different purpose. Houses will be built on it and people will live in them, exactly as they do today — but they will be Jewish residents, not the Bedouin of

Thus, for example, the planning authorities based themselves from the start on the assumption that the original residents had tresspassed on the land. In addition, according to the admission of the state representative in court, the possibility of integrating the residents of the village within the new community was not even considered, as fairness would require.​

The same article also notes the following:

• It is convenient to forget that the lack of housing in Arab communities stems to a great extent from their limited municipal boundaries, which do not include state land and have never been expanded. Twenty percent of the population lives on 2.5 percent of the land.
• It also stems from the lack of up-to-date master plans in most Arab comunities and from the consistent discrimination in the allocation of resources — only 5 percent of the tenders published by the Israel Lands Authority for new housing in 2014 were for Arab towns.
• And it stems from the systematic exclusion of Arabs from government benefits and support. One example is the “target price” plan for affordable housing, which will be implemented in 30 Jewish communities and not a single Arab one.

Umm al-Hiran

Israel's Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a petition by residents of the unrecognized Bedouin village of Umm al-Hiran against their removal and the demolition of the community – in order to construct a new town for Jewish residents in its place. The court ruled the land belongs to the state and the Bedouins have no legal rights to it.

...In November 2013, a number of families from the Abu Alkiyan clan, who live in the unrecognized community of Umm al-Hiran, filed a petition with the aid of Adalah – Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, to prevent the demolition of their homes and the evacuation of the residents – after the cabinet approved the creation of Hiran and the demolition of their unrecognized village.

The petitioners claimed they did not squat on the land, but were transferred to the area in the Yattir Forest in 1956 by direct order of the military administration of the time. But now, their lands lie within the master plan of the Be’er Sheva metropolitan area. The government has never denied that the residents were moved to Umm al-Hiran by state authorities. Umm al-Hiran is now home to about 700 people, say residents, but like other Bedouin villages that lack official recognition as local municipal communities, it lacks infrastructure and electricity.

The Abu Alkiyan clan now resides in two villages, Atir and Umm al-Hiran, located near Wadi Atir, close to Route 316 and east of the village of Houra. Until 1948, the clan lived on the land now used by Kibbutz Shoval. After the War of Independence, they traveled across the Negev looking for new land, but did not find any, because most of it was already claimed by other tribes. In 1956, it approached the military administration and was transferred to the Wadi Atir area. A classified military administration document dating from 1957 says the clan received 7,000 dunams of land near the wadi. It then split into two hamlets that shared the land. Unlike in many Bedouin communities, the houses in Atir and Umm al-Hiran are built of stone.

Decade of house demolitions

Over the past decade houses in the village were demolished a number of times, and residents were offered a compromise of moving to the nearby town of Hura, where they would be compensated with an 800-square meter plot of land. But the families who petitioned the court refused the offer, saying they will not be removed from their land a third time.

Rubinstein wrote about this claim: “This is not expulsion and not expropriation, but the proposed evacuation involves various proposals of moving, construction, compensation and the possibility of homes, whether in the town of Hura where most of the residents of the illegal villages involved will be moved, or in the community of Hiran, which is to be built.”

In conclusion, Rubinstein said the issue of the Bedouin lands is one of the most difficult and challenging the court has dealt with, and is filled with sensitive emotions and political disputes.

Justice Daphne Barak-Erez, who disagreed with parts of Rubinstein’s opinion, criticized the government’s actions: “The petitioners cannot receive the full support they asked for, but it is also not possible to reconcile oneself with the flaws in the authorities’ actions concerning the decision on the evacuation and compensation involved.” She said the authorities should reconsider the compensation offered, since the residents had lived there for 20 years and were not trespassing. In addition the state should consider offering them a plot to live in the new town to be built on the land, in addition to the previous proposals, she suggested.

In 2012, the National Planning and Building Council approved the master plan for Hiran, the latest in a series of decisions on the matter by the state. Despite being approved, work on the town was delayed following the appeal by the Bedouin residents. Hiran is slated for 2,400 housing units, and the Bedouin can also choose to live there if they want, attorney Moshe Golan, representing the government, told the court in one of the hearings. But he noted the Bedouin residents would not receive the same 800-square meter plot in Hiran they would receive elsewhere, since the plots in Hiran were much smaller. The core group of families slated to move to Hiran are national religious Jews, who are to be joined by secular residents moving to the site from the nearby community of Meitar, along with others.
​

I agree, from everything I've read, the situation regarding the Beduoin is complicated. However, here is what I see.

This group of people have been displaced, forceably, twice. They are now to be displaced yet again from a community they've built and lived in for 20 years.

Supposedly, they can "choose to live" in the new village if they want, however, Israeli law allows communities to determine whether or not to allow residents to buy into the community and that law has allowed them to, in practice exclude certain ethnic groups. It's also creates the question of can they afford to?

Looking at this particular situation, I would ask the following questions:

• Why should they be required to move yet a third time from a community they have been in for 20 years?
• Would the same thing have happened if it were a Jewish community? You have made the case for the unfairness of forcing illegal Jewish communities and settlements that have been established to be evacuated - do you not have the same standard for Arab communities?
  
• There are many examples where illegal Jewish communities have been funded, provided by the state with infrastructure, and legal help to fight demolition - why not this community?
• Would you consider this discrimmination?

It rather reminds me of the way we treated native Americans - forced them out of their nomadic lifestyles onto reservations and then when something valuable was discovered on the reservation land or they wanted to open it up to settlers, they moved them again.

 

[Coyote]

Interesting, and complicated. A war of competing illegal construction.

Well, no. A war of illegal construction vs. (mostly) legal construction. Area C, remember.

There are many illegal Jewish settlements (as defined by Israeli law). They are just as illegal as illegal Arab settlements.

The only difference is one group of settlements get's illegal support from the government, and the other gets it from the EU.

Illegal is illegal...or is it?

According to West Bank Areas in the Oslo II Accord - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia significant parts (40%?) of Area C are supposed to be handed over to Palestinian authority under the Oslo Accords.

In 1972, there were 1,000 Israeli settlers living in what is now Area C. By 1993, their population had increased to 110,000.[13] As of 2013, an estimated 350,000 Jewish settlers lived in Area C in Israeli settlements and outposts.[3] In 2013, some 300,000 Palestinians lived in Area C, scattered over 532 residential locations.[3] The majority of whom are Bedouin and farmers, constituting 5% of the Palestinian population, who are cut off from services available to other Palestinians in Areas A and B. In contrast to the Israeli settlers, the Palestinians are not allowed to travel free throughout Area C.​

It looks like what is happening is Jewish settlers are given legal and illegal incentives to settle and become "facts on the ground"....but Palestinians are discriminated from the same process and their attempt to expand naturally, with population growth is severely restricted by Israel. When they build illegally - their homes are demolished. In an area with two populations under one nation's control - discrimminating against one in favor of the other seems to me like discrimmination. Israel should simply annex it, give citizenship and be done with it. If Jewish settlers are allowed to come in and settle and expand their communities shouldn't non-Jewish residents be given the same treatment?

 

[Coyote]

It just seems to me that some are too quick to criticize Israel and too eager to simplify the situation down to a case of pure vanilla discrimination without considering what Israel is juggling here.

Actually, it seems that some are too quick to defend Israel regardless of the evidence. Yes, it's a complex situation but so is the situation of the Palestinians which you are quick to boil down to "hatred of Jews".

1. A Jewish population which believes very strongly in her rights to the lands; as well as her need for safety, security and a safe haven for the Jewish people and who, understandably, have an on-going, deeply entrenched fear of attack. A position with which the government largely agrees and supports. But also with a portion of that population who are willing to commit illegal and even occasionally immoral acts in order to achieve these goals, supported by their strong (even extreme) religious beliefs.

2. A hostile group who are, for all intents and purposes, foreign national enemies who are actively working against Israel's best interests and receive financial backing and assistance from the enemy nation as well as the EU and general international public opinion.

3. A group of citizens who, for the most part, strongly associate with and support the enemy nation and actively work with them against Israel's best interests, while resisting urbanization and urban planning and yet demanding assistance and "equal" treatment.

Its a ridiculously complex situation and has to be handled with delicacy under the significant scrutiny of the court of public and political opinion.

Yes. It is a complex situation. Are you saying that you support discrimmination and inequality in this situation?

 

[Shusha]

Yes. It is a complex situation. Are you saying that you support discrimmination and inequality in this situation?

I am saying that Israel is under no obligation to support enemy foreign nationals against Israel's own interests. And I am saying that security is a valid concern. And that both these things must be taken under consideration. Therefore, the charge of discrimination based purely on ethnicity is a false one.

 

[Shusha]

The example I gave was for Umm al-Hiran.

But, see, this is why it is important to understand these issues on a case-by-case basis rather than making broad, sweeping statements. Umm al-Hiran is atypical.

To my understanding, the people of Umm al-Hiran have refused relocation and compensation with both land and money. They have refused offers homes within the new community of Hiran.

Personally, for this particular village, my inclination would be to leave them where they are and build Hiran around them. Hook them up to the infrastructure. Provided that security does not become problematic.

Of course, this leaves them in the same position they are now -- unable to expand or build new homes without the appropriate permits and no legal title to the land.

Let's say this is what happens -- would you, twenty years from now, support the demolition of homes built there without a permit?