Good Question. Why Does the State Department Endorse Palestinian Fight to Exclude Jews?

...The reason is that their goal is to create a Jew free state whose purpose will be to perpetuate the conflict against Israel, not end it. The state they envision will be, as I wrote last week, the true apartheid state in the Middle East in which parts of Jerusalem will become legal no go zones for Jews in much the same way, white South Africans made it illegal for blacks to live in parts of their own country. It is exactly for this perverted vision that Palestinians are taking to the streets to lob lethal weapons at Jews while the State Department treats the perpetrators as innocent victims and the actual victims as aggressors. That is the racism that the U.S. is endorsing by making an issue of Jews building in Jerusalem.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
27 October '14..

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu made headlines around the world again today with his assertion in the Knesset that he will defend the right of Jews to live in any part of his country’s capital. The statement and the expedited plans to build 1,000 new apartments in Jerusalem is drawing the usual condemnations from the international community as both an unnecessary provocation and a new obstacle to Middle East peace. But what Israel’s critics are missing is that the threats and actual violence coming from Palestinians about Jewish homes, is the best indicator that the sort of mutual coexistence that is essential to peace is currently not in the cards.

As the New York Times reports:

“If Israel wants to live in a peaceful society, they need to take steps that will reduce tensions,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, told reporters in a briefing. “Moving forward with this sort of action would be incompatible with the pursuit of peace.”

The Israeli move is being blasted as yet another example of Netanyahu worsening the already tense relationship between Israel and the United States. But Psaki’s willingness to jump on Netanyahu after repeatedly refusing in the last week to condemn statements from Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas in which he openly incited violence against Israelis, the State Department stand could easily be interpreted as an implicit approval of the PA position.

If so, then it should be understood that what the United States is doing here is saying that Palestinians are in the right when they demand that Jews be kept out of certain parts of Jerusalem. But far from disturbing the peace, the idea of building new apartments in existing Jewish neighborhoods in the city or moving into mixed or Arab majority areas not only repudiates the formula of territorial swaps that President Obama has repeatedly endorsed but also reinforces the notion that the Palestinian state that the State Department envisions will be one in which no Jew is allowed to live. That means the U.S. is backing a vision of a Palestinian apartheid state that is itself incompatible with any notion of peace and rationalizing the recent wave of Arab violence against Jewish targets in Jerusalem.

The Qatari Apartheid Fund

Seth Mandel..
Commentary/Contentions..
28 March '13..

As Jews in America were preparing for their second seder (or perhaps recovering from the first), during which they sang “next year in Jerusalem,” representatives of the states that make up the Arab League were trying to figure out how to prevent that from occurring. Specifically, Mahmoud Abbas–the man some people still fancifully claim is a brave man of peace–was pleading for help from the Arab states to stop Jews from being able to live in their eternal capital and the spiritual center of their universe.

His hateful speechifying was not in vain. Qatar–a country on a singular mission to empower jihadists throughout the region–pledged to establish a special apartheid fund in the hopes of raising $1 billion. It won’t be called an apartheid fund, obviously, but its beneficiaries speak the language of bigotry. The Jerusalem Post reports:

Abbas hailed Qatar’s announcement that it would establish a special fund for Jerusalem with a $1 billion budget to support the Arab residents of the city and foil Israel’s attempts to “judaize” east Jerusalem.

This has been a Palestinian complaint for some time. Under Israeli control, both Jews and non-Jews are permitted to live throughout Jerusalem. Between 1948 and 1967, when Jordan invaded and captured the city, Jews were not permitted to enter Jordanian territory. When Israel regained the Jewish capital, the apartheid policies were of course lifted and worshipers of any religion could live in the city and visit their respective holy sites.

The preferred Palestinian policy is one in which Arabs are permitted to live in any part of Jerusalem but Jews are forbidden from living in certain parts of the city. The State of Israel, obviously, rejects this. It isn’t quite clear how the Qatari apartheid fund is supposed to work. It can’t control housing policy in Israeli territory, but Qatari money is quite often put to violent purposes, so this is sure to raise alarm. On Monday, Haaretz had previewed the conference:

Fresnozionism - UN will vote for a racist, apartheid state and approve ethnic cleansing

Maen Areikat tells
reporters that Palestine
 will be free of Jews

Fresnozionism.org
14 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/un-will-vote-for-a-racist-apartheid-state-and-approve-ethnic-cleansing/






The Palestinians are so confident that their program will succeed that they have stopped trying to hide its real nature:

By Oren Dorell, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON – The Palestine Liberation Organization’s ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that any future Palestinian state it seeks with help from the United Nations and the United States should be free of Jews.

After 44 years of Palestinian-Israeli conflict, “it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated,” PLO Ambassador Maen Areikat says.

“After the experience of the last 44 years of military occupation and all the conflict and friction, I think it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated,” Maen Areikat, the PLO ambassador, said during a meeting with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. He was responding to a question about the rights of minorities in a Palestine of the future.

Such a state would be the first to officially prohibit Jews or any other faith since Nazi Germany, which sought a country that was judenrein, or cleansed of Jews, said Elliott Abrams, a former U.S. National Security Council official.

A Good Point on Who Supports Apartheid

Yisrael Medad
My Right Word
09 December '10
Posted before Shabbat

From Mark Paredes, the religion columnist for the Latter-day Trumpet newspaper, and who serves as a High Councilor in the Santa Monica Stake of the LDS [Mormon] Church:-

...it remains a mystery to me why Arab claims to land in Palestine have always involved the expulsion of Jews. When Transjordan (later Jordan, the first Arab state in Palestine) was created in 1922, the few Jews living east of the Jordan River were forced to leave. To this day no Jews live in the country of Jordan. When the Jordanians occupied Judea and Samaria (which they renamed the West Bank) and the eastern part of Jerusalem, they expelled Jews, destroyed synagogues, and paved some streets with Jewish headstones.

(Read full post "A Good Point on Who Supports Apartheid")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Obama's Jerusalem Apartheid

Daniel Greenfield
Sultan Knish
17 November '10

When Obama attacked Israel for building housing on Jewish owned land in Jerusalem, he was doing more than just pandering to his Muslim hosts with an obligatory dose of Israel bashing. He was diving once again into the ugly pool of bigotry, that first surfaced when he used Joe Biden as a proxy to launch a hate campaign against Israel over the same issue back in March.

And what it comes down to is Apartheid. Plain and simple.

Obama does not object to Arab Muslims living in Jerusalem. He objects only to Jews living in Jerusalem. The issue is not about "Israelis", as the media likes to present it, because Jerusalem Arabs and Jews are all citizens of Israel. What distinguishes them is race and religion.

The media and the administration only attack the municipal authorities of Jerusalem and the Israeli government for providing housing for its citizens-- when those citizens happen to be Jewish. If they are Arab and Muslim, then there's no problem. If they're Jewish on the other hand, then the alarm bells go off and the politicians and the press denounce them as enemies of peace. How does one describe that as other than "Apartheid"? What else is it, other than the belief that one group of people should be segregated by race and religion. Forbidden from living in places that are deemed to be the sole property of their Muslim conquerors.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Four simple questions for Palestinian advocates

Fresnozionism.org
13 August '10

Here are four simple questions that demand answers in the ongoing discussion about Palestinian Arab rights, wants and needs:

There’s lots of criticism of Israel for being an ethnically-based nation state. But the proposed ‘Palestine’ is defined as an Arab state, and if you ask Hamas, a Muslim Arab state. Why isn’t this also a problem for the critics of Israel?

Over and over again, it’s made clear that every last Jewish settlement must be evacuated from land that will become part of ‘Palestine’. Palestinian Arabs also vehemently reject any population exchange proposal, insisting that they will never give up their right to live anywhere between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. In fact, such proposals are not taken seriously by most Israelis, who believe that they would violate the rights of Israeli Arabs. So isn’t the Palestinian demand for a Jew-free state a racist or antisemitic one?

Arab supporters claim that Israel ethnically cleansed its territory of Arabs in 1948. In reality, almost of the Arabs that left did so voluntarily, as a result of the war which can reasonably be blamed on the Nazi Mufti, al-Husseini, and the territorial ambitions of Egypt and especially Jordan (see Efraim Karsh, Palestine Betrayed). Some Arabs, particularly those in the villages along the Tel-Aviv – Jerusalem road, were forcibly removed from their homes. But every last Jew that lived in the area conquered by Jordan, including East Jerusalem, was expelled at gunpoint.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Salam Fayyad Says (Yes or No?) to Jews Living in a Palestinian State

by Daniel Pipes
danielpipes.org
05 July '09
updated 06 January '10

Posted before Shabbat

(Daniel Pipes follows Fayyad's devolution to the 05 January '10 update at the end of the article. We can now say that Fayyad has clarified his intentions. Y.)

I have long argued that the presence of Jews living on the West Bank does not present a problem to a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, for a true resolution would allow them to live peaceably in a Palestinian state. We'll know the conflict has ended, I like to say, when the Jews of Hebron have no more need for security than the Arabs of Nazareth.

So, I read with considerable interest that Salam Fayyad, who calls himself the prime minister of the Palestinian Authority (a title I do not use, by the way), said roughly the same thing at a meeting of the Aspen Institute's Aspen Ideas Festival on July 4.

According to "Palestinian prime minister: Jews would be welcome in future state" by Brent Gardner-Smith in the Aspen Daily News, former CIA director James Woolsey noted that a million Arabs in Israel account for one-sixth of the Israeli population and that they "generally they enjoy the guarantees that Americans look for in the Bill of Rights." He went on to ask:

(Read full article)
.