Thursday, July 02, 2015

70 Square Meters Driving the Pals. Crazy

The news:

RAMALLAH, July 1, 2015 (WAFA) – The so-called Israeli central command officer has ordered the confiscation of 70 square meters of private Palestinian lands near the illegal outpost of ‘Migron’ near Ramallah, Peace Now reported on Wednesday.

Seventy square meters equals 753.474 square feet.

To get a sense of proportion, I googled and found this:

1 bed apartment rentals in NYC average about 750 square feet and cost 2700 per month. Most of the listings for one bedrooms are in Manhattan, where prices hover in the $3000 per month range. If you are looking to pay less per month for one bedroom apartments NYC look to Brooklyn ($2000), the Bronx ($1250), Queens ($1350) or Statan Island ($900).

I am not going to try to ascertain how much that 7 sq. m. plot at Migron goes for.

And that plot?

It's an antenna.



Here:

As part of the request of the cellular companies from the court to avoid the eviction of their antennas from the Palestinian lands in Migron, the Commander of the Central Command has issued a seizure order for one of the antennas for security purposes...On the 29th of June, the State informed the court that one of the antennas is being used also by the IDF, and is considered necessary for security needs, and therefore, the Commander of the Central Command had issued a seizure order for 73 sq.m. on which the antenna of Hot Mobile company was built. The land is seized for 6 months till mid December. Meanwhile they hope that the company will move the antenna to an alternative place. The other antennas, of companies Cellcom, Partner and Pelephone, were not part of the seizure order.  

Monday, June 29, 2015

Amazing Occupation Or, A Question That Has Been Occupying My Mind

RL and I were conversing last night and the topic of terms was discussed, with me pointing out that the word "occupation" need not be feared.  After all, we were occupied in conversation and we each had professional occupations, etc.

And he pointed out that probably most of the people who were engaged in late 2011 and early 2012 in this movement




and wished to extend and enlarge it further


people like him



and like them



and them



as well as many who supported and identified with their protests, would very much be opposed to an "occupation" of another kind (even if it isn't quite an occupation)






especially Jews






Another double standard?




^

Friday, June 26, 2015

NYTimes Headline Writer Does It Again

Here is the headline and lead-in:-

Palestinian Shot After Opening Fire on Israeli Forces in West Bank
By Diaa Hadid
It was not clear whether the gunman was killed, and a spokesman for Israel’s military said the attack had occurred at a checkpoint in the Jordan Valley.

Why couldn't the headline writer compose it so?:-

Arab Shoots Israeli Soldiers At Checkpoint, Kille dBy Response Fire

Well, why not?


P.S.


He seems dead:


Ma'an


Palestinian security officials told Ma'an that a Palestinian drove towards the al-Hamra checkpoint and opened fire at soldiers from his car.

UPDATE

A Palestinian man opened fire on Israeli soldiers at a checkpoint in the Jordan Valley on Friday morning. The soldiers returned fire at the attacker, seriously wounding him. He later died of his wounds.  No Israeli soldiers were wounded in the incident.

The shooting took place at the Beka'ot checkpoint in the northern Jordan Valley. The attacker got out of a vehicle and opened fire at the Israel Defense Forces reservist soldiers manning the checkpoint. The soldiers reacted quickly, taking out the attacker with their return fire.

Temple Mount Cucumbers

A cucumber harvest from Arnon Segal's weekly column on the Temple Mount in Makor Rishon this week




The south-east corner, looking east to the Mount of Olives, snapped in June 1933 (and thanks to the Israel Antiquities Authority).

^

Thursday, June 25, 2015

There Went Transjordan

I quote from the "Agreement between His Majesty and the Amir of Trans-Jordan", signed in Jerusalem on February 20, 1928 and ratified on October 31, 1929 (and there is a supplement):

WHEREAS His Britannic Majesty in virtue of a Mandate entrusted to him on the 24th of July, 1922, has authority in the area covered thereby; and Whereas His Highness the Amir of Trans-Jordan has set up an Administration in that part of the area under Mandate known as Trans-Jordan; and Whereas His Britannic Majesty is prepared to recognise the existence of an independent Government in Trans-Jordan under the rule of His Highness the Amir of Trans-Jordan, provided that such Government is constitutional and places His Britannic Majesty in a position to fulfil his international obligations in respect of that territory bymeans of an Agreement to be concluded with His Highness.

There is also this

Article 7.      Except by agreement between the two countries there shall be no customs barrier between Palestine and Trans-Jordan...
Article 18.    No territory in Trans-Jordan shall be ceded or leased or in any way placed under the control of any foreign Power; ...

But allow me to also quote from that League of Nations 1922 decision:

ART. 5.The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

True, there was this there, too:

ART. 25.In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 1516 and 18.

I would think that the operative term there is "postpone".  Postpone does not mean something is not done or finished or resolved but there is a delay, and the original situation is still in place until all sides, which in this case means the Jews, agree.

Consider this

Britain Rejects Demand of Transjordan Cabinet for Abrogation of Mandate
June 23, 1944

The British Government has rejected a demand submitted by the cabinet of Transjordan asking abolition of the mandate and complete independence, it was learned here today.

Any new arrangements or treaties concerning the status of Transjordan must wait until after the war, the British Government informed Emir Abdullah...Sir Harold Michael, British High Commissioner for Palestine and Transjordan...made a flying trip from Jerusalem to Amman, the capital of Transjordan.

Under the terms of Article 25 of the mandate, Transjordan was included in the mandated territory of Palestine. But by virtue of a saving clause in the article, the British Government, as mandatory, was empowered to withhold application of any clauses of the mandate which she might consider to be inapplicable to Transjordan, and to provide it with such administration as she might think fit.

In the British view, Transjordan unlike Palestine fell within the area in which the McMahon promise of independence applied. The British Government, therefore, in 1922, secured approval by the Council of the League of Nations of a memorandum proposing that Transjordan be exempted from all those clauses dealing with the Holy Places and the Jewish National Home. On the strength of this, Jews have been refused immigration into Transjordan and the right to purchase land there, a step which they resent as being an infraction of the article of the joint mandate which provides against discrimination on grounds of race, religion or language.

And what was the reaction at the time?

Transjordan Independence to Be Recognized, is Rumor
September 7, 1927   Jerusalem
(Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
Sensational reports concerning a new treaty between Great Britain and Transjordania, recognizing the latter as an independent state were published by the Arab weekly, “El Yarmuk.”
The Arab newspaper publishes what is purported to be the draft of a treaty between Great Britain and Transjordania. The treaty provides for the recognition of Transjordania’s independence under Emir Abdullah and for the creation of a legislative council at Amman. Great Britain is to provide adequate technical advisers for the Transjordanian government.
The treaty is to be in force for two years, the paper states. 


Umm, ISIS and ...Netanya

From here:

Karen sat in a hotel room in Istanbul, grappling with a difficult decision. She had spent about $3,500 (£2,220) on the round trip to Turkey from her home in the US but, when she had bought the ticket, she had had no intention of flying home. The return bookings were for appearance’s sake. Her SMS mailbox was filled with promises for the future: messages from an Islamic State fighter who had promised to marry her. But as she sat in that Istanbul hotel room, something didn’t feel quite right.
Her prospective groom’s insistence on absolute secrecy had not seemed strange at first. Karen had met him through the swarm of Isis-friendly social media...the hint of danger was part of the glamour and Karen thought she was being careful. She was in her late teens and had recently graduated from high school, where she had been a lonely girl interested in Star Trek and computer programming.
She converted to Islam less than a year before her journey, after watching the news and deciding to learn more about the religion. She had been inspired by Isis’s apparent authenticity – they were as far removed from the west as it seemed possible to be. Her Christian parents worried...Online, she disguised her identity by using a kunya – a traditional Arab title. Karen had created several of these, but mostly she went by Umm Khalid – “mother of Khalid”. The name derived from Khalid bin Walid, a military commander known as the “Sword of God” in the early days of Islam. Umm Khalid was also the name of a Palestinian village that was evacuated in 1948 and swallowed up by the Israeli city of Netanya. The name has its roots in violence inflicted and violence suffered.

I recall that the lands upon which Netanya was built were purchased.  So, I looked it up --- at Wikipedia:

In 1928 members of Bnei Binyamin and Hanote, an organisation set up after Straus was informed of the establishment of the settlement, are said to have purchased 350 acres (1.4 km2) of Umm Khaled (!) lands.

But a pro-Palestinian editor inserted this:

There remains today, however, considerable controversy among Palestinian and Israeli interpretation about whether land was sold (primarily from non-resident Arab land holders) during the British Mandate.

With no footnote or other reference site.

If you check the footnote for the purchase fact, you'll read this:

Oved Ben Ami and Itamar Ben Avi...returned from the U.S. [and] they started looking for land suitable for growing citrus orchards. During their search they came across Sheik Tzalah Hamdan, the ‘muchtar’ (head) of Umm Haled (!) village which was located east of the municipal cultural center of today, and they purchased 350 acres of Umm Haled lands for 5,600 Turkish Lira.

If you go to the Hebrew Wikipedia site, you'll learn that it was on the recommendation of the son of the mayor of Tul Karem who suggested to the potential land buyers that Sheikh Salah Hamdan would be a contact and indeed, he sold them the 1400 dunams and added that the price was cheap since he was simply accepting a symbolic fee for watching over the land for the 2000 years the Jews had been unable to return.

___________
UPDATE   see here, pg. 177-178
___________

Additionally, this entry notes that:

(a) the village existed until 1949.  in 1945 its population was just under 1000 souls.
(b) the Arab village, archaeological excavations have proven, was established on a Jewish village.

By the way, a few buildings, including a moque, still stand.

Moreover, you noticed this (!) I twice inserted?

Well, that's because the Muslim hero's name was Khaled ibn Walid.  And that's why the village was called Umm Khaled.  Not Khalid.

Poor Karen.

But she was lucky, after too much sexting from her intended:


She had flown home to the US after two days in Turkey (“with great photos of Istanbul”, she added, “lol.”). One final piece of information had clinched her decision to call off the Isis marriage...She began to wonder if Abu Muhammad was really who he claimed to be. “Talking to him, I realised that things weren’t right,” she said. She became convinced that Abu Muhammad was not from Isis but the PKK. It was by the grace of God, she told me, that she was still alive and free...She issued some sharp advice. “Brothers lie to get a wife.”
_______________

Here it is/was:


^

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

There's An Error in Diaa Hadid's Story


Israel canceled permission for hundreds of residents of Gaza to enter Jerusalem to pray during Ramadan in Al Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s third-holiest site, after rocket fire from the coastal enclave, officials said on Wednesday.

The move represents the latest effort by Israel this week to rescind gestures that were intended to ease movement into Israeli-controlled territory for the holy month of Ramadan.

I would suggest she errs.

This is from the Ma'an Agency:

Weekly access to the Al-Aqsa mosque by Gazans has become routine since October 2014 when some 500 Palestinians in Gaza prayed at the mosque for the first time since 2007

And more explicitly:

The decision to allow Gazans to travel to Al-Aqsa was reached as part of the ceasefire deal between Palestinian militant groups and Israel...

In other words, the visit of Gazans was not linked to recent measures for this month's Ramadan arrangements but rather to the halting of terror activity in and from Gaza even if there were additional improvements instituted for the Ramadan month.

And with continued rocket fire from Gaza, there is no reason to permit such a goodwill gesture.

^

America's Agenda - March 20, 1918


Well, well, a Jewish state was on the agenda (all found here):



P.S.  From a November 1918 Wilson memorandum:






and in later notes, including the term "liberation" and the matter of separating of Palestine and its Jewishness from other Arab matters:






and this record:



and one more reference:



^

Friday, June 19, 2015

And I Didn't Know

I didn't know this

Political Indoctrination of Soldiers in the IDF, 1948–1949,
Hazkani, Shay
Israel Studies Review, Volume 30, Number 1, Summer 2015, pp. 20-41(22)


Abstract:
This article explores themes in the political education and indoctrination of soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during the 1948 War. It argues that the army command attempted to advance the notion that a form of militarism rooted in Judaism was the only way to win the war. Education officers explained to soldiers that 'the Jewish tradition' sanctioned the eradication of the invading armies and indifference to the fate of Palestinians. The article also traces the influence of Abba Kovner's lurid propaganda on the rest of the IDF's education apparatus. Kovner, the education officer of the Givati Brigade, believed that hate propaganda made killing the enemy easier, and his views were shared by many other education officers who saw his work as a road-map for the entire military. Nevertheless, there were some officers who opposed his work out of fear for the consequences that it would have on the future of Israeli society.

I wonder: did the Arabs of the Mandate and the countries who invaded have 'education officers' or did they really need any?

Thursday, June 18, 2015

This Decision Occupies Me

This was sent my way and seems it will occupy opponents of Jewish revenant residency rights in Judea and Samaria:


Important decision of European Court of Human Rights (and discussed here) which includes this:

94 …. Military occupation is considered to exist in a territory, or part of a territory, if the following elements can be demonstrated: the presence of foreign troops, which are in a position to exercise effective control without the consent of the sovereign. According to widespread expert opinion physical presence of foreign troops is a sine qua non requirement of occupation], i.e. occupation is not conceivable without “boots on the ground” therefore forces exercising naval or air control through a naval or air blockade do not suffice.

As also the next paragraph which could be relevant to Gaza, perhaps also Area A of in Judea and Samaria:

95.  The rules of international humanitarian law do not explicitly address the issue of preventing access to homes or property. However, Article 49 of Convention [No. IV] relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 (“the Fourth Geneva Convention”) regulates issues of forced displacement in or from occupied territories.  [emphasis added]



As JT noted, this is support for view that art 49(6) does not apply to voluntary settlement.

I Love That Hat

.


A Betariah from Yurburg, 1935.


^