Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New East Jerusalem homes approved hours before Netanyahu-Obama meet

page: 1
6

log in

join

posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

New East Jerusalem homes approved hours before Netanyahu-Obama meet


www.haaretz.com

he Jerusalem municipality has given final approval to a group of settlers construct 20 apartments in a controversial hotel in East Jerusalem, Haaretz learned on Tuesday.

The announcement comes as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in Washington smoothing over ties with the United States over the latest settlement-related tensions, and hours before the premier was to meet with President Barack Obama in Washington.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.bangkokpost.com
www.nytimes.com
www.csmonito r.com




posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
I know there's been loads and LOADS of news about Israeli policy on here in the past few weeks. And that you all may be sick of it. But they just keep bringing the stories.

When the British decided to use the Balfour Declaration as the basis of their mandate in Palestine they assumed they could control the situation. That they could create a nice friendly buffer Jewish state as part of the British Empire to protect its links between N Africa and India.

However they could not control the Zionists. Becasue at heart they are extremists. Their whole ideologoy is based upon extremism. Chaim Weizmann the head of the Zionist Executive during this time and a supposed moderate stated ' I want to make Palestine as Jewish as France is French and England is English'. They never had any intention of sharing the land with the Arabs.

It is almost exaclty the same today. The U.S cannot control Israel just becasue it is the bigger and nominally more powerful nation. Israel does not pursue these settlements to annoy or antagonise the American's, it is just a policy of Zionists that has been in practice near on 90 years.

The Obama and future administrations have to understand that their is no reasoning with the Israelis on settlement expansion in E Jerusalem and the W Bank. It is their policy to eventually force all Palestinians out of the area. As Weizmann coined it, it is the 'Gradualist' approach.

The U.S are literally going to have to force a solution on Israel through U.N pressure and the real threat of withdrawl of military and more importantly diplomatic aid.

Thoughts?

How can Obama possibly paper over the cracks? I know, he'll find a way.


www.haaretz.com
(visit the link for the full news article)






[edit on 23-3-2010 by Peruvianmonk]



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
I only have a link to the Haaretz article on this story as no one else is covering it at the moment. The other links provided are to stories connected to it, such as the AIPAC meeting.

Ah here we go. ABC now going with the Haaretz story. blogs.abcnews.com... tml

[edit on 23-3-2010 by Peruvianmonk]



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Haaretz reports that this new development may be lead to further problems in the meeting between the two leaders, which i think is occuring right now.


U.S. President Barack Obama held a one-on-one meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on Tuesday as Israel sought to smooth over a diplomatic spat sparked by the announcement of Israeli construction in east Jerusalem.

Efforts to restore ties may have hit a roadblock, however, with the approval Tuesday of a further 20 east Jerusalem homes beyond the Green Line at the site of the former Shepherd Hotel.


www.haaretz.com...



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Very interesting situation. Thanks for sharing. Seems like this is a pattern of announcing new construction, when meeting with US leaders...



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ultrageek
 


You see i am not sure it is timed to conincide with meetings with the Americans at all. Why would it need to be? Yes Obama and co are making alot of noise about settlements and that they have to stop, but Israel is not listening as there have been no threats by this administration to take REAL steps to pressure them, i.e. through U.N resolutions, military aid. Is this going to change? The history of the relationship tells us no.

This expansion has been going on since Israel's creation and hardly any U.S President has batted an eyelid. Apart from Eisenhower cracking down during the Suez crisis in 1956 and Geroge Bush Snr threatening to withdaw aid in the 1990's, i cannot think of any REAL initiative or pressure placed on the Israelis.

I cannot find any word in the press as of yet on how the meeting went between Netanyahu and Obama.

The Guardian is reporting this.


Barack Obama and the visiting Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, capped a turbulent few weeks for mutual relations with unusually low-profile White House talks last night featuring no information about what was discussed or even a public handshake. The pair had an initial 90-minute meeting in the Oval Office that is likely to have been dominated by a row over Israeli plans to build new settler homes in Arab-dominated east Jerusalem.

The dispute has seen the countries' relations undergo their most turbulent period for some years. After a break, Netanyahu requested further discussions and he and the US president returned to the Oval Office for another 35 minutes.

Neither leader, nor their officials, would comment on what was said, although Netanyahu's spokesman said that "the atmosphere was good". More unusually still, no reporters or photographers were invited to see the traditional pre-meeting handshakes, with the duo not seen together publicly at all.


www.guardian.co.uk...

Here are some more links to the original story.

www.cnn.com...
www.democracynow.org...

[edit on 24-3-2010 by Peruvianmonk]



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


My thoughts on the issue is that the British did create the Jewish mandate in Palestine it was done under fairly noble pretences even if it was done in a very underhanded manner.

Just like in India and Pakistan and Australia and many other protectorates the empire tried to give us limited autocracy and supported self determination. People were placed in their own area and the peace was enforced by the empire for the commonwealth.

The fact is even though the power of the commonwealth has declined we should have taken steps to deal with the heavy handed and brutal nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict long ago.

Perhaps peacekeepers are the only way to ever hope to stabilise the area and bring peace. It is easily within the means of the international community to do so.



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 07:26 AM
link   
This is a very interesting situation indeed. By doing this, Israel creates a situation in which a peace deal effectively becomes impossible. What is even more interesting is to see how the US responds to this. If it is failed to strongly condemn this provocation, America cannot be taken serious any longer in being a peace broker. Is this what Israel seeks to achieve? Could it be a strategy to pressure the US to toughen its stance on Iran?

Either way, it feels to me that Israel is overplaying its hand.



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by belial259
 


Yes of course we did create the situation as we used the Balfour Declaration as the basis of our position in the country and this was enshrined by the Leauge of Nations.

Some within Britian underestimated the Zionists others supported their aim of creating an eventual 'Jewish state'(Lloyd George, Arthur Balfour) and others were fully against Britain's policy in supporting the Zionists(Curzon).

Going back to today, i think the idea of a resolution calling on all sides to submit to actual peace talks that will lead to the removal of settlements on all sides backed by peacekeppers is a great idea. Kudos to you.



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Washington, March 24 (AGENCIES): Washington’s relations with Israel appeared to have reached a new low last night as the White House imposed a virtual news blackout on a meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that followed an Israeli threat to delay peace talks by a year.


source



posted on Mar, 24 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Mdv2
 


Thanks for the link Mdv.

Back to the original story about the approval for these 20 new apartments. On the sounds of it it doesn't sound anywhere near as brutal or provocative as the 1600 approved during Biden's visit.

However scratch below the surface and this actually may be of more significance.


The Shepherd Hotel in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood was purchased by American Jewish tycoon Irving Moskowitz in 1985 for $1 million.

Moskowitz, an influential supporter of Ateret Cohanim and heightened Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem, plans to tear down the hotel and build housing units for Jewish Israelis in its place.



Moskowitz is a supporter of Ateret Cohanim (“Crown of the Priests”), a religious movement that seeks to populate East Jerusalem with Jewish settlers.

As the Yeshiva puts it: “The Yeshiva is the spiritual epicenter of a community of almost 1000 residents in the heart of the Old City in the so-called ‘Moslem’ Quarter. This area was in fact, prior to the Arab riots, largely inhabited by Jews. It is on this historical basis that we refer to it now as the Renewed Jewish Quarter.”


warincontext.org...

Irving Moskowitz

warincontext.org...

This guy appears to be at the extreme right within Israel. And appears determind to see all Jerusalem under Israeli control with not an Arab Moslem in sight.

This appears to be a signal. The settlers are in control in Israel. It is the far right that make the decisions in Netanyahu's coalition, not the more moderate elements.

Scary stuff. I think the Palestinians in E. Jerusalem are in real, real trouble here, mabye more so than at any point since 1948.






top topics



 
6

log in

join