|
|  |
Israel eeuwige boevenstaat?
John Veldhuis - 22.02.2005 11:18
"" Jeruzalem zal verenigd blijven als de eeuwige hoofdstad van het Joodse volk. Het zal niet verdeeld worden", bezwoer Ariel Sharon op maandag na afloop van een gesprek met president Moshe Katsav".
Dit ondanks het feit dat de rest van de wereld de illegale annexatie van Oost Jeruzalem afwijst, en het als bezet Palestijns gebied ziet.
"Asked what would happen if peace was not forthcoming after completion of the disengagement plan and if Palestinians would launch a third intifada, Sharon said that Israel is not powerless and that Israeli security forces have many achievements to their credit.
The prime minister said he had told every world leader he had met with, as well as the Palestinian leadership, that while Israel is ready to make painful compromises, such concessions would not be made at the expense of the security of the people of state of Israel.
Israel would not be willing to take dictations from others regarding the country's security needs, he said. "We will not compromise on security, not today nor in future" said Sharon."
En gelijk wordt maar weer de diefstal van andermans land goedgepraat met een beroep op "veiligheid"...
 Website: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1108956309290
|
| aanvullingen | | | Voorlopig wel in ieder geval... | JV - 24.02.2005 09:00
" Israel continues to kill Palestinians, despite the optimism and the recent period of so-called "quiet." 139 Palestinians, about half of them children, have been killed by Israelis in the three months since Yasir Arafat died, while 16 Israelis have been killed in the same period. This is a kill ratio of 8 to 1. And yet we barely hear about this lopsided death toll in the media, amidst all the optimism.
I'd like to take two small Palestinian villages and give you a description of the conditions there to give you a couple of examples of what life is like under Israeli domination.
The first is the village of Jayyous, about which there has been some press coverage. Jayyous is a village of 3,200 people in the northwestern West Bank. The separation wall was built there in the summer of 2003. This used to be a prosperous farming village, living on 3,000 acres of olive groves, citrus trees, guava, and smaller crops. Many of us in the U.S. think of Palestine as a dry, desolate land, but this is not true. Jayyous is located in a rich agricultural area.
Fully 72% -- almost three-quarters -- of this village's land ended up on the Israeli side of the wall. All six of the village's fresh water wells ended up on the Israeli side of the wall.
Farmers must now obtain permits to farm their land. Those who get permits must pass through the one gate in the wall, which is manned only for about an hour two or three times a day -- and then only when the Israelis feel like it. For instance, it's not manned at all during the approximately ten-day period of the Jewish high holy days.
Last year, 15,000 orange trees died and an entire guava harvest was lost because farmers could not get to the land to irrigate it.
Much of the town's land that's now on the Israeli side began to be bulldozed in December, and is still being bulldozed, to build 2,000 new housing units for a nearby Israeli settlement. And Israel's defenders try to say this wall is not a land grab."
Lees het hele verhaal, ook over het dorp Anata, op counterpunch
Website: http://counterpunch.org/christison02192005.html
| | de lieg-, bedrieg- en verdraaimachine | JV - 24.02.2005 09:40
En de lieg-, bedrieg- en verdraaimachine tuft vrolijk verder.
"The prosecution described the "factual infrastructure" on which the Hague court's opinion is based as "superficial and wanting," saying the court almost totally ignored the terror attacks that made it imperative to set up the fence, the considerations that led to planning its route, and the state's duty to protect its citizens."
De veiligheid is maar bijzaak, de afscheiding gaat toch echt om het inpikken van andermans land, en het beschermen van de inpikkers, niet van onschuldige Israeli's.
"According to the state, the Hague judges assumed that the fence would annex 16 percent of the West Bank to Israel, whereas the actual fence route authorized by Attorney General Menachem Mazuz includes just 3.3 percent.
Furthermore, the state argued, Mazuz's approved route did not include three enclaves that would have pushed the fence deep into West Bank territory in the areas of Ariel, Ma'aleh Adumim, and the Gush Etzion bloc south of Jerusalem. The fence's route in these area will be discussed separately in the future.
Altogether, the response notes, Israel will leave 8 percent of the West bank on the "Israeli" side of the fence. The Israeli calculation does not include the East Jerusalem municipal area.
The prosecution included in its response a detailed map of the new route of the fence approved Sunday by the cabinet. The state reiterates its position that the fence is "a temporary security measure aimed at combating terror attacks, and does not in itself attempt to define the future border of the state of Israel.""
Hou toch op, ik heb al buikpijn...
Website: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=544238&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y
| | This Is About Israel, Not Anti-semitism | Ken Fan - 09.03.2005 12:52
...
All racist and anti-semitic attacks must be stamped out. However, the reality is that the great bulk of racist attacks in Europe today are on black people, Asians and Muslims - and they are the primary targets of the extreme right. For 20 years Israeli governments have attempted to portray anyone who forcefully criticises the policies of Israel as anti-semitic. The truth is the opposite: the same universal human values that recognise the Holocaust as the greatest racist crime of the 20th century require condemnation of the policies of successive Israeli governments - not on the absurd grounds that they are Nazi or equivalent to the Holocaust, but because ethnic cleansing, discrimination and terror are immoral.
They are also fuelling anger and violence across the world. For a mayor of London not to speak out against such injustice would not only be wrong - but would also ignore the threat it poses to the security of all Londoners.
volledig artikel:
Website: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=7369
| |
| aanvullingen | |
