UN: 60,000 Palestinian homes to be demolished.

[Thunder]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1082149.html

So Israel may demolish the homes of 60,000 Palestinians in East Jerusalem, because they had no building permit.

How many Jewish homes without permits has Israel demolished? How many illegal trailer settlements in the West Bank has Israel demolished?

How do you feel about Israel possibly destroying the homes of 60,000 people?

Does Israel have on standard for illegal Jewish homes and another standard for illegal Arab homes?

Even the ADL has called on Israel to take down the illegal trailer towns in the West Bank. Yet Israel still refuses.

 

[Slayhamlet]

You know, maybe your Israel threads wouldn't suck so bad if you actually put some effort into making the titles and OPs factually correct.

60,000 residents ≠ 60,000 homes. Also, "at risk of being demolished" ≠ "to be demolished".

Now, instead of furthering discussion on a serious issue, this thread is doomed to be nothing more than a bickering match about your biases (which, though real, are neither important nor very interesting).

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Someone has to bash Israel while Tin Foil Timothy is... uhhh... "convalescing".

 

[a_unique_person]

Someone has to bash Israel while Tin Foil Timothy is... uhhh... "convalescing".

I think he's just trying to present enough evidence to convince you that you are wrong. All you have to do is say, "Yes, you are right, it's not fair and Israel should change it's policy". I can't see it working, myself.

Haaretz has plenty of articles on the one sided and racist way the 'building permits' issue is handled. One example that comes to mind is the way a large Arab area was demolished to clear a 'no mans' land between Jewish and Arab areas. It wasn't too long before that open area was being populated with new Jewish homes. Arabs who have lived all their lives being declared to be residents of the West Bank. The aim is clear, the ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem.

 

[webfusion]

For the record

3,000 demolition orders are pending against Palestinian buildings in Area C.

Three thousand, not 60,000.

Also, in response to the question posed by the OP:
"How many Jewish homes without permits has Israel demolished?"
The answer can be found right here, if Parky76 had bothered to look ---

The four Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank.
Kadim
Ganim
Homesh
Sa-Nur
and the 21 beautiful Jewish settlements in Gaza.


I wouldn't worry too much about the "ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem" -- it is not something that is going to happen. There will be redistricting, gerrymandering, reconfiguration of the city limits, and redefinition of what is actually al-Quds. But the Arabs will remain there, and the Arabs will continue to have access to the Temple Mount.

 

[Skeptic]

Of course, this is the same UN which just gave Ahmadenijad the podium to call for Israel's destruction... in an "anti-racism" event held on holocaust memorial day and Hitler's 120th birthday.

Somehow, the UN's claims about Israel tend to be less than 100% accurate.

 

[a_unique_person]

3,000 demolition orders are pending against Palestinian buildings in Area C.

Three thousand, not 60,000.

Also, in response to the question posed by the OP:
"How many Jewish homes without permits has Israel demolished?"
The answer can be found right here, if Parky76 had bothered to look ---

The four Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank.
Kadim
Ganim
Homesh
Sa-Nur
and the 21 beautiful Jewish settlements in Gaza.


I wouldn't worry too much about the "ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem" -- it is not something that is going to happen. There will be redistricting, gerrymandering, reconfiguration of the city limits, and redefinition of what is actually al-Quds. But the Arabs will remain there, and the Arabs will continue to have access to the Temple Mount.

The reduction in settlements in Gaza was more than offset by the increase in the West Bank. And they weren't removed because they were illegal. The question was how many have been removed because they were illegal. The few that have been removed in the West Bank were all minor league, the major ones are expanding continuously, and spawning offshoots.

 

[Darth Rotor]

This decision makes the Kelo decision in the US seem rather tame, in comparison, if the homes are indeed demolished in the near future.

DR

 

[Thunder]

Also, in response to the question posed by the OP:
"How many Jewish homes without permits has Israel demolished?"
The answer can be found right here, if Parky76 had bothered to look ---

The four Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank.
Kadim
Ganim
Homesh
Sa-Nur
and the 21 beautiful Jewish settlements in Gaza.

These settlements were built without permits? Since when??

Prove this or you have made a huge lie.

and btw, when if ever does Israel plan on demolishing the illegally built trailer settlments in the West Bank, home to the "Hilltop Youth"?

 

[Oliver]

Of course, this is the same UN which just gave Ahmadenijad the podium to call for Israel's destruction

And this is the same Ahmadinejad who Obama is willing to talk to.
And this is the same Obama who is a communist.
And this is the same type of communism which Stalin used to love.
And this is the same Stalin who made a non-aggression Treaty with Hitler.
And this is the same Hitler who the UN opposed.
And this is the same UN which just gave Ahmadenijad the podium to call for Israel's destruction.
...

 

[WildCat]

And this is the same Ahmadinejad who Obama is willing to talk to.

Uh, no. Obama has no plans to talk to Ahmadinejad.

Therefore, the rest of you post can be safely ignored.

 

[webfusion]

Settlements dismantled & demolished

parky76: "...And they weren't removed because they were illegal."

Yes, they were.
The Israeli Knesset passed the Disengagement Plan Implementation Law (On February 16, 2005, the Knesset finalized and approved the plan with 59 in favor, 40 opposed, 5 abstaining). Under this legal authority of the State of Israel, those settlements I mentioned all were declared illegal, and demolished.

Those are the facts.

 

[Thunder]

Yes, they were.
The Israeli Knesset passed the Disengagement Plan Implementation Law (On February 16, 2005, the Knesset finalized and approved the plan with 59 in favor, 40 opposed, 5 abstaining). Under this legal authority of the State of Israel, those settlements I mentioned all were declared illegal, and demolished.

Those are the facts.

were they built without Israeli govt. approval? were they built without legal building permits?

 

[a_unique_person]

Yes, they were.
The Israeli Knesset passed the Disengagement Plan Implementation Law (On February 16, 2005, the Knesset finalized and approved the plan with 59 in favor, 40 opposed, 5 abstaining). Under this legal authority of the State of Israel, those settlements I mentioned all were declared illegal, and demolished.

Those are the facts.

That was how they were abandoned, but it wasn't why they were abandoned.

 

[Thunder]

That was how they were abandoned, but it wasn't why they were abandoned.

Webfusion is just playing games. He knows that the Gaza settlements were built legally with Israeli approval and Israeli building permits.

Playing dumb is Neo-Zionist strategy.

 

[Darth Rotor]

And this is the same Ahmadinejad who Obama is willing to talk to.
And this is the same Obama who is a communist.
And this is the same type of communism which Stalin used to love.
And this is the same Stalin who made a non-aggression Treaty with Hitler.
And this is the same Hitler who the UN opposed.
And this is the same UN which just gave Ahmadenijad the podium to call for Israel's destruction.
...

The United Nations who fought Hitler and the United Nations, current global bureaucracy, are barely recognizable as the same organization.

But that was an interesting linkage, Oliver.

DR

 

[a_unique_person]

The United Nations who fought Hitler and the United Nations, current global bureaucracy, are barely recognizable as the same organization.

But that was an interesting linkage, Oliver.

DR

The UN didn't fight Hitler.

 

[Skeptic]

This is the same Oliver that thinks it would be a wondeful idea if the "Zionists" (that is, the Jews) were "removed" from Israel -- peacefully, of course -- so that there will be no more fighting.

No wonder he thinks it's a good idea that Obama is "willing to talk to Ahmadenijad" (whether Obama really is willing to do so is another issue), since his idea of a solution is the same, if perhaps slightly less violent, than that of the Iranian leader's.

Besides, even if Obama is willing to talk to Ahmadenijad, so what? Churchill and FDR talked with Stalin, Nixon with Mao, and Chamberlin with Hitler. So? Does that make Stalin, Hitler, or Mao any less murderous thugs? Of course not.

 

[Oliver]

This is the same Oliver that thinks it would be a wondeful idea if the "Zionists" (that is, the Jews) were "removed" from Israel -- peacefully, of course -- so that there will be no more fighting.

No wonder he thinks it's a good idea that Obama is "willing to talk to Ahmadenijad" (whether Obama really is willing to do so is another issue), since his idea of a solution is the same, if perhaps slightly less violent, than that of the Iranian leader's.

Besides, even if Obama is willing to talk to Ahmadenijad, so what? Churchill and FDR talked with Stalin, Nixon with Mao, and Chamberlin with Hitler. So? Does that make Stalin, Hitler, or Mao any less murderous thugs? Of course not.

Nope, I would be happy if the Palestinian State would come into existence due to Israels willingness to establish peace without trying to extend control and territory in a bullish manner first. Anyway: My linkage was meant to portray that your argument about "the same UN that supported Ahmadinejad ..." was meaningless because I can easily imagine TFT [for example] making such an argument in the opposite direction: "The same UN that supported Israel and doesn't impose real sanctions against settlements ... etc".

 

[Darth Rotor]

AUP. Oh, so the UN didn't fight Hitler and the Axis?

Really? The United Nations were not in opposition to Hitler and the Axis power?

I beg to differ. FDR begs to differ, circa 1943

This is the first United Nations conference. Together, we are fighting a common enemy.

Please explain this letter, from 1943 by the man named Franklin Delano Roosevelt:

The broad objectives for which we work have been stated in the Atlantic Charter, the Declaration of United Nations, and at the meeting of the 21 American Republics at Rio de Janeiro in January, 1942. It is the purpose of this Conference to consider how best to further these policies in so far as they concern the consumption ...

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=16401

Please read carefully what I wrote to Oliver once you have done so.

The use of that name in 1945, when the bureaucracy establishing treaty was signed, was no accident. This was brought to my attention a bit over a decade ago, by a political science prof.

Doing what I can to pass along his message, and put the E into JREF.

DR