News Why Does Israel Target Civilian Water Infrastructure?

[Evo]

I agree that a large portion of the Jews that inhabit Israel were born in other parts of the world. I'm also not in agreement with the decision to hand them a country, at the same time I have to admit that it's true that they were there originally, but they were conquered and driven out. Would that scenario mean that the US should give back the country to the American Indians because they were here first?

 

[mheslep]

It fits Palestinians as a population, dating back long before WWII, while same cannot be said for the Jewish population of the region, which was built though colonization, as largely recorded in the British Mandate period records I linked above. What drives you to distort that history and argue equivocation here?

Everybody 'colonizes' (to settle, to inhabit) initially Kyleb, and as far as I tell the evidence shows that Jewish settlers did little displacement of Palestinians before WWII. I did not say that the time-lines or the numbers of Arab and Jewish settlers are identical. I simply assert the visible, again, that many thousands of Jews after being born there or living most of their lives there prior to 1945, some of them going back many generations, are indigenous to Palestine.

The discussion changes once we consider the millions of Palestinians living today, as many of them have never set foot in Palestine. They lay claim to Palestine as descendants, and once you do that nearly all Jews, everywhere, are descendant from 70 AD Judea.

 

[kyleb]

I agree that a large portion of the Jews that inhabit Israel were born in other parts of the world.

That isn't what I suggested. Rather, the vast majority of the Jews that inhabit Israel are solely descended from people who lived elsewhere for a couple thousand years.

I'm also not in agreement with the decision to hand them a country, at the same time I have to admit that it's true that they were there originally, but they were conquered and driven out. Would that scenario mean that the US should give back the country to the American Indians because they were here first?

It means we need to address reality as it exist now, including Israel refusal to give Palestinians civil rights in defense of it's ethnic-nationalist nature. Hence, we must convince Israel to respect Palestine's right to exist as a sovereign nation in what little of their homeland Palestinians still hold legal right to, and arrange compensation for the refugees Israel has displaced. That is the two-state solution Israel has been allowed to disregard over decades of US backing.

Everybody 'colonizes' (to settle, to inhabit) initially Kyleb, and as far as I tell the evidence shows that Jewish settlers did little displacement of Palestinians before WWII. I did not say that the time-lines or the numbers of Arab and Jewish settlers are identical.

You are obfuscating the difference between a small amount of Arab immigration coming to live along with the existing population, and a mass Jewish colonialist movement which ethnically cleansed the region of much of that indigenous population shortly after WWII.

I simply assert the visible, again, that many thousands of Jews after being born there or living most of their lives there prior to 1945, some of them going back many generations, are indigenous to Palestine.

And again, the Jews few that were there generations ago had no interest overcoming the many Arabs who lived along side them to ethnic-nationalist state, it was the colonists who came from Europe to do that.

The discussion changes once we consider the millions of Palestinians living today, as many of them have never set foot in Palestine. They lay claim to Palestine as descendants,...

Rather the few millions who are considered Palestinians today but have never set foot in Palestine are refuges of the ethnic cleansing discussed above, as they have been since their birth in refugee camps near their families homelands in what is now Israel. However, such facts are a stark change in the discussion which was about indigenous populations which militant Zionists drove out in 1948.

...and once you do that nearly all Jews, everywhere, are descendant from 70 AD Judea.

Many for sure, but Jews had spread far from the region in the centuries before. Furthermore, some Palestinians are bound to be descendants of Jews of that time and others as well, along with those of the many other Semitic people of the region.

 

[drizzle]

...Of course, there has been a joint Christian-Jewish majority in the city of Jerusalem since well before 1800 (sorry, I have no link for this ).

You and other members keep saying that Jews live in Palestine ages ago, but what I’ve known and most of you know that Jews live in every country by diverse percentages that shouldn’t be a reason to OCCUPY Palestine, as for the religious back ground that they the Jews should live there and their father Jacob (Israel) was born there (correct me if I’m wrong in this)…if anyone reads carefully they’ll eventually know the holy land is prohibited for the Jews (as a punishment from God Allah) after they refuses to enter the holy land and fight alongside prophet Moses (peace be upon him) against the Canaanites who were there saying:

"Go, you and your Lord and fight, indeed here [sitting] we are [waiting]." (Quran 5:24)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Moses#The_Holy_Land_.5BJerusalem.5D"

According to the Quran, Moses encourages the Israelites to enter Canaan, but they are unwilling to fight the Canaanites, fearing certain defeat. Moses responds by pleading to Allah that he and his brother Aaron be separated from the rebellious Israelites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses#Judaism"

I’m pretty sure there also are other than Qur’an like Torah that do discuss this, an interview in Fox news with a religious jew man who said that jew people have no right establish Israel in the name of Judaism, here’s the link;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeaZuj7ruwM"


this reminds me the historical meeting between two leaders general de Gaulle and king Faisal of Saudi that was held in Paris 1967 where the general changes his opinion in giving arms to Israel, I only have an Arabic Biography book (author Aldwaleby) as a reference but I’m sure you guys can find one, maybe you can humanino:shy:.

i wouldn't say I'm so much cheering them on as believing they should have their place. all i see from the muslims is that they want the jews dead, so it's very difficult for me to sympathize with them. the jews are occupying a small speck of land that is their traditional homeland, while their muslim brothers occupy the vast majority of land in the region. i don't see what's unfair about it, and i see the muslims as a thousand times more aggressive. but i wasn't raised with jews, so maybe you've developed some negative feelings towards them that I'm not privy to.

just to make things right, the Muslims do not hate Jews as a belief, it just what they see from those who live in Israel (that is 100% Jew state)whom killing their Muslim brothers and sisters and the fact that Muslims will exterminate the Jews only who live in the holy land and agreed to the occupation of that land. but along the history you can see that the Muslim world do accept Jews to live among them following God’s orders;

The Quran calls them "People of the Book", i.e., those who received Divine scriptures before Muhammad (P). Muslims are told to treat them with respect and justice and do not fight with them unless they initiate hostilities or ridicule their faith. The Muslims ultimate hope is that they all will join them in worshipping one God and submit to His will. "Say (O Muhammad): O people of the Book (Jews and Christians) come to an agreement between us and you, that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall take no partners with Him, and none of us shall take others for Lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are those who have surrendered (unto Him)." (Quran 3:64)

http://www.hammoude.com/Faq25.html"

PEACE

 

[Werg22]

You and other members keep saying that Jews live in Palestine ages ago, but what I’ve known and most of you know that Jews live in every country by diverse percentages that shouldn’t be a reason to OCCUPY Palestine, as for the religious back ground that they the Jews should live there and their father Jacob (Israel) was born there (correct me if I’m wrong in this)…if anyone reads carefully they’ll eventually know the holy land is prohibited for the Jews (as a punishment from God Allah) after they refuses to enter the holy land and fight alongside prophet Moses (peace be upon him) against the Canaanites who were there saying:

Please do not use arguments resting on religious beliefs. Read the guidelines.

 

[drizzle]

Please do not use arguments resting on religious beliefs. Read the guidelines.

look at other related threads you’ll find the same even tiny-tim do so
maybe I should post it in the right of return thread but it all show the same talk.

 

[kyleb]

I am not sure what posts you are referring to, but there is a difference between discussing theological perspectives making a religious argument. The former is allowed on this forum but the latter is not. Regardless, what you are quoting from Quran is taken way out of context, as it refers to an event preceding the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel, as detailed in the Book of Numbers. What the Rabbi in the interview you linked is referring to is detailed latter throughout Tanakh, and also vaguely eluded to in Quran 17:104. Put simply, both scriptures are historically understood to suggest that the the Kingdom of Israel will be reestablished in fulfillment of prophesy, but though the will of God rather than by that of people imposing their own as the State of Israel is now.

 

[Proton Soup]

Put simply, both scriptures are historically understood to suggest that the the Kingdom of Israel will be reestablished in fulfillment of prophesy, but though the will of God rather than by that of people imposing their own as the State of Israel is now.

now that is a religious argument

 

[kyleb]

Also note that Israel isn't 100% Jewish, but rather has 20% minority of Arabs who weren't displaced by Israel, with the majority of them being Muslim. Most of that Israeli-Arabs protests against Israel's ongoing colonization of Palestinian territory and all the violence of the occupation that comes with it, as do many Israeli-Jews, but unfortunately not nearly enough to stop it.

 

[tiny-tim]

"exterminate …"

look at other related threads you’ll find the same even tiny-tim do so

Where? It is very wrong to accuse people without giving a reference

I certainly have not used religious arguments (though I have replied when others have misquoted the Torah or Koran).

just to make things right … the fact that Muslims will exterminate the Jews only who live in the holy land and agreed to the occupation of that land …

you think that will make things right?

or you think Muslims think that will make things right?

PEACE

exterminate first, then peace?

 

[Vanadium 50]

exterminate first, then peace?

"If you want peace, work for genocide".

 

[mheslep]

"If you want peace, work for genocide".

Idi Amin Dada?

 

[drizzle]

Where? It is very wrong to accuse people without giving a reference

I certainly have not used religious arguments (though I have replied when others have misquoted the Torah or Koran).

which make this true that you use religious books to prove your point, you and others. look in the right of return thread.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=285958&page=6"

besides these are not religious discussions, I’m not saying do God exist? these are facts have happened and documented by these books, you and I know that and probably others, as for the other quote I didn’t polish the Muslims off, their Quran demand them not to kill Jews or others because of their religion as you'll see in the last ref of this post.

Also note that Israel isn't 100% Jewish, but rather has 20% minority of Arabs who weren't displaced by Israel, with the majority of them being Muslim. Most of that Israeli-Arabs protests against Israel's ongoing colonization of Palestinian territory and all the violence of the occupation that comes with it, as do many Israeli-Jews, but unfortunately not nearly enough to stop it.

who serves in the army? and who of the civilians you mentioned are allowed to carry arms? There was a documentary titled (Occupation 101) posted earlier in another thread I think it was in the “who won israel vs gaza ??” thread;

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=285444&page=3"

it shows this clearly.

you think that will make things right?... exterminate first, then peace?

what Israel is doing since then and right now is the same thing that makes you get annoyed that much, and you (not in person but who ever supports Israel’s policy) are not suppose to see people get angry of what is going on there (or maybe you don't care ), targeting schools .. oh yah they ((Israel)) report there were rockets fired from there 2 years ago!? oh or maybe that’s why they shoot almost everywhere in Gaza, cause there were places fighters have gone by through the last several years!
that sounds like: you know that you can make excuses to yourself if you are aiming for something and you have the upper hand, off course you wouldn’t have to give any if you are doing right things and wouldn’t harm anyone!.

and by the way, if that happen (war by right) Islam (in general) forbidden Muslims to kill old people, women, children and cut trees! Only who fights, I’ll link this, it has several references of what I’ve said from Quran and prophet’s words (peace be upon him).

http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080104155333AAYQifQ"



off course you know that many Jews around the world don't agree of such a state there (Israel)

 

[drizzle]

"If you want peace, work for genocide".

isn't that what Israel doing?

 

[nottheone]

If it wasn't for Hamas there would be a Palestinian state now, all the territory that Israel took in the war would be returned, there would be peace and Israel would be loved by all the Arabs. This is definitely all Hamas's fault. And if you believe any of that I have the deed to a very large island just south of Ct for sale, and I am not giving it back to the people I took it from.

Israel will only allow peace if it's forcibly dragged, kicking and screaming, to the table. Get used to it, they will never willingly allow a Palestinian state on their own. As we did to native americans, they sent the Palestinians to a small piece of stinking desert and it is a lot easier to justify that then to justify a State of Palestinian Stinking Desert.

It will only happen one of two ways. Either we get a president with balls enough to sever relations with them if they don't do it (unlikely since presidents, balls and brains don't go together) or the European union embargo's them. The latter might happen eventually since Israel is superceded by only US in creating hatred.

We should force them to do it. Israel is a valuable ally and it's in our best interest for them to straighten out and fly right. Their conflict with the Arabs does not help us at all.

 

[turbo]

Recently, we have heard from Sec of State Clinton that $900 M will be produced from the US to fund the rebuilding of Gaza. I would like to propose that this year's aid payment from the US to Israel be reduced by that same $900 M, since they are the ones who destroyed wells, pumping stations, waste treatment plants, schools, and hospitals that now must be rebuilt. I would place at least 50% of any other scheduled US-to-Israel aid on hold until Israel's government agrees to a 2-state solution resulting in a contiguous Palestine. It is high time that the US taxpayer stop paying for this madness. We have been financing the oppression of the Palestinians for decades with no peace in sight. Enough.

 

[Art]

Recently, we have heard from Sec of State Clinton that $900 M will be produced from the US to fund the rebuilding of Gaza. I would like to propose that this year's aid payment from the US to Israel be reduced by that same $900 M, since they are the ones who destroyed wells, pumping stations, waste treatment plants, schools, and hospitals that now must be rebuilt. I would place at least 50% of any other scheduled US-to-Israel aid on hold until Israel's government agrees to a 2-state solution resulting in a contiguous Palestine. It is high time that the US taxpayer stop paying for this madness. We have been financing the oppression of the Palestinians for decades with no peace in sight. Enough.

I'd go a lot further. Under international law the occupying force is responsible for feeding, clothing and housing civilians under it's control. As the occupying force Israel should be made to pay for all the reconstruction and food aid supplied to Palestinians. This would serve two purposes. First the cost of it would greatly increase Israel's enthusiasm to end it's occupation and secondly they would think twice about launching massive air, land and sea attacks if they had to carry the cost of putting everything back together again. If Israel refuses to live up to it's legal obligations then the UN should immediately implement a war crimes tribunal.

It is tragic that European and US taxpayers in providing humanitarian relief to Palestinians, by paying the costs of Israel's occupation for them, have in effect subsidised Israel for the past 40 years thus allowing them to evade any permanent solution for Palestinians.

Not only does Israel not offer any thanks to us taxpayers for carrying their burden they destroy the infrastructure we paid for and put every obstacle possible in the way of UN relief efforts.

 

[Proton Soup]

blah, these people simply a way for egypt, syria, et al. to fight a proxy war against israel because they are too cowardly to confront them head-on.

as for trying to extort israel into rebuilding gaza, i doubt that is going to happen. and i do wonder what we would lose in the process. probably a lot valuable middle-east intelligence that we rely on the israelis for.

 

[nottheone]

blah, these people simply a way for egypt, syria, et al. to fight a proxy war against israel because they are too cowardly to confront them head-on.

as for trying to extort israel into rebuilding gaza, i doubt that is going to happen. and i do wonder what we would lose in the process. probably a lot valuable middle-east intelligence that we rely on the israelis for.

It isn't cowardly to avoid fighting automatic weapons with muskets. And their intel gathering doesn't stop at our borders.

 

[Proton Soup]

egypt doesn't need muskets, they have tanks.

 

[kyleb]

blah, these people simply a way for egypt, syria, et al. to fight a proxy war against israel because they are too cowardly to confront them head-on.

Egypt's tin-pot dictatorship is propped up by billions in US aid to keep the population suppressed as they are increasingly enraged by Israel's treatment of Palestinians. Furthermore, the entire Arab legal backs the peaceful resolution to the conflict on the basis of international law as outlined in the Saudi Initiative and as they constantly vote for at the UN along with the rest of the world every year, with only US veto power allowing Israel's conquest of Palestine to continue.

as for trying to extort israel into rebuilding gaza, i doubt that is going to happen.

It won't, but it would be the just thing to do.

and i do wonder what we would lose in the process. probably a lot valuable middle-east intelligence that we rely on the israelis for.

This is like looking for intelligence in the bottom of a bottle, and drinking more to cure the hangover.

 

[tiny-tim]

As we did to native americans, they sent the Palestinians to a small piece of stinking desert …

Most of the desert of Palestine was given to Israel by the UN (the Negev desert, that large triangle that goes down to Eilat).

The West Bank and the Gaza strip are (mostly) not desert … the Gaza strip in particular is a reasonably fertile coastal plain.

Even the small desert part could be made fertile if the Palestinians wanted … the Israeli settlers did so, but the Palestinians destroyed everything and allowed the cultivated area to return to desert, when the settlers left.

UNWRA handouts have propped up the Gaza economy, apparently giving no incentive for agricultural development.

It is tragic that European and US taxpayers in providing humanitarian relief to Palestinians, …

Why don't the very rich Arab countries provide such relief?

Unfortunately, they like their Palestinian neighbours even less than the Americans do.

Furthermore, the entire Arab legal backs the peaceful resolution to the conflict on the basis of international law as outlined in the Saudi Initiative …

(i assume you mean the Arab League)

They don't back it with money.

And they back a peaceful resolution, as you say, so they are against the military efforts of Hamas

blah, these people simply a way for egypt, syria, et al. to fight a proxy war against israel because they are too cowardly to confront them head-on.

Egypt are not cowards. Egypt fought an honourable war in 1973, and has made and kept an honourable peace ever since Anwar Sadat.

Egypt has no intention whatever of fighting Israel.

Egypt is anti-Hamas, and the economic sanctions against the Gaza strip are a joint Egyptian-Israeli affair.

 

[kyleb]

Most of the desert of Palestine was given to Israel by the UN (the Negev desert, that large triangle that goes down to Eilat).

You missed his point. However, sure, the UN gave Israel the Negev which cut Palestinians off from the Gulf of Aqaba, even though Palestinians owned far more land in the Negev at the time of the partition.

Even the small desert part could be made fertile if the Palestinians wanted … the Israeli settlers did so, but the Palestinians destroyed everything and allowed the cultivated area to return to desert, when the settlers left.

I'd ask you to prove your claim here that everything was destroyed, but I know you can't.

UNWRA handouts have propped up the Gaza economy, apparently giving no incentive for agricultural development.

Rather, Gaza's attempts to build their economy though agriculture have been rotting under Israeli blockade:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/18/AR2006031801329.html

Why don't the very rich Arab countries provide such relief?

Why do you ingore that they do? Here is one example:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/19/saudis-offer-1-billion-to-repair-gaza/

Unfortunately, they like their Palestinian neighbours even less than the Americans do.

The Arab nations aren't the ones backing Israel's conquest of Palestine with diplomatic, economic and military aid, is is us Americans who do that. Again, the Arab League backs the peaceful resolution to the conflict on the basis of international law as outlined in the Saudi Initiative, and as they constantly vote for peaceful resolution at the UN along with the rest of the world every year, while we only offer refusal along with hollow gestures of sympathy.

They don't back it with money.

What, you want them to pay Israel to respect international law? Or are you just rambling on with your absurd claim that Arab nations don't give Palestinians aid?

And again, Egypt's tin-pot dictatorship is propped up by billions in US aid to keep the population suppressed as they are increasingly enraged by Israel's treatment of Palestinians.

 

[nottheone]

egypt doesn't need muskets, they have tanks.

The analogy that went over your head was that their weapons, including their tanks, are relatively muskets compared to Israeli weapons. The Israeli's have the brains to design first class weapons and the funding (from US) to make them. You need to get past your prejudices and look at things objectively.

 

[tiny-tim]

Arab League aid promises

Why don't the very rich Arab countries provide such relief?

Why do you ingore that they do? Here is one example:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/19/saudis-offer-1-billion-to-repair-gaza/

hmm … I'll believe that when I see the actual money.

Here's a http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1215929.stm" showing that of $1bn promised by the Arab League countries six moths earlier, only $8mn had arrived …

and this http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/26/AR2008072601797_pf.html" …

In 2002, when oil prices were hovering around $21 a barrel, nearly two dozen Arab nations joined to pledge yearly contributions of $660 million to support the Palestinian Authority's annual budget. Now, even with oil prices more than six times higher and the Palestinian Authority bordering on financial ruin, only a handful of Arab countries are sending even a small portion of the money they promised, according to data examined by The Washington Post.

Out of 22 Arab nations that made pledges, only three -- Algeria, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates -- have contributed funds this year, while oil-rich countries such as Libya, Kuwait and Qatar have sent nothing and still owe the Palestinian government more than $700 million in past-due pledges.
…
One senior U.S. official … said he is puzzled by their failure to meet their pledges in a period of phenomenal oil wealth.
…
Arab diplomats … said there is little trust that the Palestinian Authority will use their contributions wisely …
…
"Most of them make the pledges reluctantly, on the basis that the United States wanted them to do it," said Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland.

though I have to admit (I was unaware of this) that Saudi Arabia does appear to have fulfilled its promises …

Many members of the Arab League that committed to make annual contributions do not have oil riches and have paid on average about 4 percent of what they pledged since 2002, according to U.S. figures. But some of the worst offenders are oil producers. Through the first half of 2008, Bahrain has paid 13 percent of its total pledges, Libya 14 percent, Oman 23 percent, Kuwait 35 percent, Algeria 73 percent and the United Arab Emirates 92 percent.
Saudi Arabia has paid just shy of 100 percent …

 

[kyleb]

Sure, the Saudis are rich enough to overlook the fact that much of their charity gets sucked up Fatah's corruption and wasted by their complacency with Israel's ongoing colonization of the West Bank, while other Arab nations are more fugal, but claiming they don't give aid to Palestinians is a misrepresentation.

 

[Art]

More evidence of changing attitudes towards Israel

Britain drops Israel embassy move

The UK Foreign Office has dropped plans to move the British embassy in Tel Aviv into a skyscraper because of concerns over the building owners.

A spokeswoman said it was not satisfied with the company's involvement in settlement activity in the West Bank - which contravenes international law.

Israel's ambassador to London said the decision was "appeasement to those who slander Israel".

The UK has recently moved to toughen its policy towards Israeli settlements.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7926850.stm

And

UK restores links with Hezbollah

Britain says it is re-establishing contacts with the political wing of the Lebanese movement Hezbollah.

The move follows "positive political developments" in Lebanon, officials from the UK Foreign Office said.

It comes about 10 months after Hezbollah signed a unity accord in Lebanon and joined the government.

Only last year, the government put Hezbollah's military wing on a list of proscribed organisations over its alleged training of insurgents in Iraq.

"We are exploring certain contacts at an official level with Hezbollah's political wing, including MPs," said a spokesperson for the Foreign Office.

The spokesperson said the UK was doing "all it can" to support Lebanon's unity government, of which Hezbollah's political wing is a part.

"Our objective with Hezbollah remains to encourage them to move away from violence and play a constructive, democratic and peaceful role in Lebanese politics, in line with a range of UN Security Council Resolutions."

The spokesperson said Britain would continue to have no contact with Hezbollah's military wing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7927025.stm

 

[kyleb]

I am dissapointed that the BBC doesn't mention the name of the tycoon holds ownership in the skyscraper allong with ties to the settelment industry. At least http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5847932.ece" goes that far:

The embassy had frozen plans to move into a new tower block part-owned by Lev Leviev, Israel's wealthiest man, who made his fortune in diamonds.

And on the subject of diamonds, questions into his dealings there don't get much mainstream press, but http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/31549/":

Leviev’s alliance with Angola’s central government, which won the country’s civil war, led to his gaining primary control of the country’s rough-diamond supply in 2000. A security company contracted by Leviev was accused this year by a local human-rights monitor of participating in practices of “humiliation, whipping, torture, sexual abuse, and, in some cases, assassinations.” Leviev’s formal response to the report did not directly address the abuses but touted his charitable activities in Angola.

Also of note is http://nymag.com/realestate/vu/2007/10/38348/" :

As late as July, Mann and Leviev neither confirmed nor denied the condo rumors. They were “exploring their options.” But residents were on edge, their fears running from massive rent hikes to flat-out evictions, and for some, the worst-case scenario happened almost immediately. Over the spring and summer, as lease after lease expired and got renewed, the building’s market-rate renters saw their rents rise by jaw-dropping sums all across the price spectrum. Apartment 3KS, a two-bedroom, went from $6,000 a month to $14,865. The monthly rate for one five-bedroom went overnight from $24,000 to $35,000. It is rumored that the monthly rent for at least one particularly spacious unit rose to $54,000—an impressive figure even for the rarefied Manhattan luxury-rental market.

This goes down to the heart of what is wrong with Israel; as long as we have tycoons like that pushing the settlement industry, the possibly of a peaceful resolution to this conflict is bleak.

 

[Art]

The US is also beginning to change it's public stance in relation to Israel,

Clinton rebukes Israel over demolition plan

Orders to bulldoze Palestinian apartments in East Jerusalem spark first criticism by US Secretary of State

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticised Israel's plans to demolish more than 80 Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem as "unhelpful" and a violation of its international obligations.

In the first public rebuke of a specific Israeli policy since the new US administration took office, Mrs Clinton indicated the plan contravened the provisions in the five-year-old internationally agreed "road-map" that calls for a halt to all settlement activity.

Mrs Clinton said after meeting the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbbas: "Clearly this kind of activity is unhelpful and not in keeping with the obligations entered into under the 'road-map'... It is an issue that we intend to raise with the government of Israel and the government at the municipal level in Jerusalem."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ukes-israel-over-demolition-plan-1637734.html

 

[kyleb]

That isn't a really change in stance as Rice called Israel's actions "unhelpful" too, it is just lip-service.