In this Democratic primary, it was shifting faster than ever. Candidates were taking positions that the party would have warned against just a year or so earlier.
5. In view of the heavy fighting, which was approaching close to the UNDOF headquarters at Camp Faouar and the mission’s positions in the central part of the area of separation, the Force Commander briefed both parties early in September on the Force’s plans to relocate its personnel and assets should the Nusra Front or other extremist fighters who posed a clear threat to the mission endanger the safety and security of the United Nations personnel. It should be noted here that from information posted on social media as well as in the course of its efforts to secure the release of the peacekeepers, the United Nations learned that its personnel had been taken and held by members of the Nusra Front. There were indications that the Nusra Front intended to detain additional UNDOF personnel and take from UNDOF more weapons and vehicles as opportunities arose. (…)
12. Crossing of the ceasefire line by civilians, primarily shepherds, was observed on an almost daily basis. On 24 October, United Nations observation post 73 observed 12 IDF soldiers who detained one civilian between the Alpha line and the Israeli technical fence south-east of the observation post and subsequently took him away. IDF informed UNDOF that they released the person within one hour at the same location. On 27 October, position 80 observed two IDF soldiers east of the technical fence returning from the direction of the Alpha line towards the technical fence. UNDOF observed IDF opening the technical fence gate and letting two individuals pass from the Bravo to the Alpha side. Following the evacuation of UNDOF personnel from position 85 on 28 August, UNDOF sporadically observed armed members of the opposition interacting with IDF across the ceasefire line in the vicinity of United Nations position 85.
UN troops monitoring the 1974 ceasefire between Israel and Syria have witnessed interactions between members of the Israeli Defence Forces and the Al Nusra Front who have taken over a large part of the Golan Heights.
Netanyahu’s general, implied statement on the Golan Heights draws from political ideas developed by various right-wing figures over the past year, who argue that the situation in Syria and the takeover of ISIS and other Al-Qaida-affiliated groups of large portions of the country may allow Israel to receive international recognition of 1981 the annexation of the Golan Heights.
Syria used to exist, but soon will no longer exist. The validity of the arrangements that defined the borders and the countries in the Middle East after World War I has expired, and the region can now expect many years of instability. In such a situation, Israel must reformulate its geostrategic interests – not only on the Syrian front – by looking far into the future, rather than deep into the past.
His announcement prompted widespread international condemnation. But for most Palestinians such declarations mean nothing. We’ve heard many statements of support over the years, and nothing ever changes. Cynicism is widespread; by now, many of us would prefer straight talk. As Gideon Levy, a columnist for Haaretz, wrote recently, referring to Mr. Netanyahu’s plan: “Let him turn the reality in this territory into a political reality, without hiding it any longer. The time has come for truth.”
Netanyahu’s recent announcements, like a pledge to annex parts of the West Bank he made three days before the April 9th elections, have barely registered in the campaign of Blue and White, the centrist party co-led by Generals Benny Gantz, Moshe „Bogie“ Ya’alon, and Gabi Ashkenazi (all former chiefs of the Israeli Defense Forces) along with former finance minister Yair Lapid
If Benjamin Netanyahu succeeds in prolonging his tenure as Israel’s prime minister following Tuesday’s election, the proposition that Israelis and Palestinians will be condemned to live in one state forever is likely to become inescapable. That would mean a choice between a country that is secular and democratic but binational, or a Jewish apartheid regime.
In other words, if “Bibi” wins, the doomsayers about Israel are finally going to be proved right.
Many of the burning issues that are facing Israel barely got a look-in during the election campaign that’s mercifully drawing to a close: the ballooning deficit, the rising housing prices, the climbing cost of living, the burning need to integrate the ultra-Orthodox and Arab communities into the job market, to name just a few. And then of course, the lack of any prospect for a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and an end to the occupation got nary a mention, but you knew that already because you’ve been paying attention and that has become a cliché.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said Tuesday that he would move swiftly to annex nearly a third of the occupied West Bank if voters returned him to power in the election next week, seizing what he called a historic opportunity from a sympathetic White House to give Israel “secure, permanent borders.”
Over the past few days, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intentions and modus operandi have been exposed. It once again turns out that he seeks to get rid of all the checks and balances that he views as impediments to his continued rule, and also to annex the settlements to Israel, including even the most isolated and extreme ones, under a new system of government he has invented – “Jewish sovereignty.”
It’s therefore morally wrong and deceitful to portray Israel’s occupation of Palestine within the definition of an „occupation,“ as specified in the Fourth Geneva Conventions, as temporary and for the benefit of the occupied population. The oppressive reality we live under is evident, as well as Israel’s plan to turn its occupation into annexation for the expansion of its colonial-settlement enterprise – a war crime under international law that is being fully endorsed by the U.S. administration.
Most officials of mainstream American Jewish organizations have never been to the places Tlaib and Omar planned to go. They’ve never talked to Palestinians whose homes are about to be bulldozed because they lack the building permits that, as non-citizens under military rule, they can’t get. They’ve never heard Palestinian parents explain the terror they feel when Israeli soldiers come in the middle of the night to take their children to be interrogated, often for days, in the absence of a lawyer.
Tell me, Kahol Lavan, have you lost your minds? Did you get sunstroke? Were you blinded by the neon lights at the office of your political strategist Moshik Teumim? This is your election campaign – war before everything?
Israel’s Civil Administration approved the proposed plans this week and construction is currently pending. Among units approved include 537 in Alon Shvut, 18 in Ma’aleh Adumim, 66 in Efrat and 96 in Kiryat Netafim.
„What is painfully happening here is the biggest and most dangerous demolition operation outside of war operations,“ Walid Asaf, the Palestinian minister in charge of monitoring Israeli settlements, said in a video from the site.
„This operation aims to cut off Jerusalem from Bethlehem (in the southern West Bank),“ he added.
Residents fear another 100 buildings in the area in a similar situation could be at risk in the near future.
Forces deploy at dawn days after top court approves order to evict Wadi Hummus residents, in a move activists are concerned sets a precedent to affect thousands
In less than 24 hours, 42-year-old Ismail Obeidiya, his wife Nida, and their six kids, could be made homeless. It’s a terrifying reality that Obeidiya is struggling to grapple with, his unease and frustration more palpable with every word.
“We fought so long and so hard, for years, to try to save our home. But in the end, the Israeli courts, the ‘High Court of Justice’ as they say, could not offer us any justice,” Obeidiya told Mondoweiss from the front yard of his home.
The Obeidiyas’ home is one of 10 buildings slated for an unprecedented mass demolition by Israeli authorities in the occupied East Jerusalem town of Sur Bahir.
While Israeli demolitions of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem are commonplace, typically under the pretext that the homes were built without Israeli-issued permits, the homes in question stand on ‘Area A’ and ‘Area B’ land under the control of the Palestinian Authority (PA), as designated by the Oslo Accords.
Israel’s Supreme Court yesterday gave the green light for the state to demolish 13 apartment blocks built in “Area A” of the occupied West Bank, but which now lie inside the route of the illegal Separation Wall.
According to Haaretz, Palestinians say that the ruling “sets a precedent that will enable the demolition of thousands of buildings in the West Bank”.
Israel has a right to annex at least some, but “unlikely all,” of the West Bank, the United States ambassador, David M. Friedman, said in an interview, opening the door to American acceptance of what would be an enormously provocative act.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has promised to begin annexing Jewish settlements in the West Bank, a move that would violate international law and could be a fatal blow to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Among the senators who signed the resolution are two presidential contenders, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The resolution was crafted by Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and signed by Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein of California, Tammy Duckworth, from Illinois, and Dick Durbin, also from Illinois.
“Unilateral annexation of portions of the West Bank would jeopardize prospects for a two-state solution, harm Israel’s relationship with its Arab neighbors, threaten Israel’s Jewish and democratic identity, and undermine Israel’s security,“ the resolution states.
Donations can be via bank deposit to:
Branch 574 (Hapalmach)
Account no. 160213
Swift code poalilit
You can also send checks by mail, payable to:
c/o Yehuda Agus, POB 360
Every donation, no matter how small, will help us continue our important work on the ground. Your donations will not be used to pay overhead, salaries, or administrative fees. Ta’ayush is an all-volunteer organization and contributions go directly to covering the costs of our activities and defending out activists in court.
In solidarity and gratitude,
MachsomWatch is a volunteer organization of Israeli women who are peace activists from all sectors of society. We oppose the Israeli occupation in the area known as the West Bank, we oppose the appropriation of Palestinian land and the denial of Palestinian human rights. We support the right of Palestinians to move freely in their land and oppose the checkpoints which severely restrict Palestinian daily life.
In keeping with our values, we work towards a two state solution in the 1967 borders, or any other mutually agreed upon solution that will allow both Israelis and Palestinians to live in freedom,security, democracy and dignity in their homeland.
But diplomatic “achievements” like the Bundestag decision are not just a distraction from Israel’s real problems that the Netanyahu government continues to ignore. They also remove a nonviolent Palestinian method of protest, and as a result are likely to cause damage to the future relations between the two peoples and to the security of Israeli citizens. Even those who are not convinced of the purity of the political motivations of the BDS movement must understand that the delegitimization of nonviolent Palestinian protest pushes the Palestinians, who are fighting for their national liberation, toward violence.
By most indications, the plan would not involve the creation of a Palestinian state, as the United States has sought for the last quarter-century under presidents of both political parties.
But just as they have done in their sometimes highly leveraged real estate businesses, Mr. Trump and Mr. Kushner hope to use other people’s money to achieve their goals.
A blend of warranted guilt feelings, orchestrated and taken to sickening extremes by cynical and manipulative Israeli extortion, caused the federal parliament on Friday to pass one of the most outrageous and bizarre resolutions since the end of World War II. The Bundestag has defined the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel as anti-Semitic. Benjamin Netanyahu and Gilad Erdan rejoiced. Germany ought to be ashamed.
From now on, Germany will consider every supporter of BDS to be a Jew-hater; saying “the Israeli occupation” will be like saying “Heil Hitler.” From now on, Germany cannot boast of its freedom of speech. It has become an agent of Israeli colonialism.
“I congratulate the German Bundestag on the important decision that recognizes the BDS as an anti-Semitic movement and declares that it is forbidden to fund it. I particularly appreciate the Bundestag’s call on Germany to stop funding organizations working against Israel’s existence. I hope that the decision will lead to concrete steps and call on other countries to adopt similar legislation,” Netanyahu wrote on Twitter.
In Friday’s resolution vote, which took place on the eve of the show’s final, Germany’s lower house said the actions of the BDS were reminiscent of the „terrifying“ Nazi campaign against Jewish people under Adolf Hitler.
We, Jewish and Israeli scholars, many of whom research Jewish history and anti-Semitism, express concern about the rise in anti-Semitism around the world, including in Germany. We view all forms of racism and bigotry as a threat that must be fought and encourage the German government and parliament to do so.
At the same time, we wish to sound alarm about a parallel trend: the growing tendency of labeling supporters of Palestinian human rights as anti-Semitic.
This trend is now escalating in Germany. Two German parties, the FDP and AfD, have tabled resolutions at the Bundestag that equate the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement with anti- Semitism. Coalition parties CDU /CSU and SPD are preparing a joint resolution that does so, too. This conflation is incorrect, unacceptable and a threat to the liberal-democratic order in Germany.
Benjamin Netanyahu has a solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict. If you haven’t heard of it, it‘s because you haven’t read chapter eight of his book “A Durable Peace” (the updated 2000 edition of his previous book „A Place Among the Nations,“ published seven years earlier). The chapter, also named “A Durable Peace,” is the plan Netanyahu formulated, based on the lessons from his first term in office after he lost the election in 1999.
According to a district court decision from three weeks ago and a Supreme Court decision earlier this week, the municipality was granted the right to demolish all the houses in the neighborhood – amounting to some 60 buildings, home to 500 families.
Supreme Court Justice Yosef Elron rejected the residents‘ appeal of the demolition order at the beginning of this week.
Four U.S. lawmakers who have long proved staunch supporters of Israel express concern over the prime minister’s campaign promise ■ Other lawmakers single out Netanyahu’s ‚full-throated embrace of the far right’s extreme agenda‘
In response to a voter’s question about his policy toward Israel and Palestinian rights, O’Rourke reiterated his support for a two-state solution and accused Netanyahu of having “joined forces with far-right parties who are inherently racist in their speech and the way that they want to treat their fellow human beings in that part of the world.”
He then went further, telling reporters in a gaggle afterward that Netanyahu is a “racist.”
Die überwiegende Mehrheit der Israelis weiss immer noch nicht, dass über 130.000 Einwohner der Golanhöhen während des Krieges von 1967 aus ihren Dörfern, Städten und Gemeinden vertrieben wurden. Tatsächlich ist das Gebiet in den letzten Jahrzehnten für die meisten Israelis zu einem „Konsens“-Thema geworden, so dass viele keinen Grund sehen, es zurückzugeben. Während also Präsident Trump letzte Woche die Welt vor den Kopf stieß, indem er die Annexion des Golan durch Israel anerkannte, feierte in Israel fast jeder diesen Schritt.
NORTHERN Ireland would become a “protectorate” of an unaccountable EU if the backstop was introduced, the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) has warned. Robin Swann said unionists who voted Remain did not do so because they wanted to leave the UK and it was “dishonest and deceitful” to portray them as such.
It was the Europeans who insisted that the Irish border must be resolved before our future relationship with the EU could be discussed. Of course, they knew the border could not be fixed until the future relationship was decided. They were laying a trap to tie the UK to European laws beyond Brexit.
Indeed, the comments by the Scottish Conservative Leader last weekend highlighted the strength of support across the United Kingdom for maintaining the Union.
Ruth Davidson’s position is not borne out of enthusiastic support for leaving the European Union; she was an advocate for Remain. However, Ruth Davidson recognises the impact of placing an international style border down the Irish Sea. She understands that such an outcome would be seized upon by separatists within the United Kingdom.
The DUP wants to see a sensible deal which maintains the constitutional and economic integrity of the United Kingdom. We will stand up for Northern Ireland but most important is the Union between us all. It is very clear that those same objectives are shared by many others across the United Kingdom. Both those who were ‘Leave’ as well as those who were ‘Remain’recognise that the four countries are stronger together.”
David Mundell told MPs that preserving the integrity of the UK as the country leaves the EU was a “red line” for him and other Scottish Conservatives including Ruth Davidson.
But he said the Prime Minister felt the same way, batting away suggestions that he told her he would quit over any Brexit deal that boosted the case for Scottish independence.
Budget votes are viewed as an issue of confidence in a government – meaning defeat would trigger calls for a general election
(13.10.2018) The head of the Northern Irish party that props up British Prime Minister Theresa May’s government said on Saturday she would prefer no Brexit deal to a bad deal, saying the current proposal would permanently annex Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom.
(12.10.2018) Even if May can get a version of the so-called Irish backstop through the U.K. parliament without DUP votes, the party could use its position as the leading unionist political force in Northern Ireland to try to prevent it from ever being implemented — and in the process block power sharing with nationalist politicians permanently.
“We are going to squeeze their balls until their ears bleed,” the party official said.
(8.10.2017) At the outset of Brexit, all sides openly agreed there should be no border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, but it now seems the Europeans were being sneaky when they made the pledge. It has now emerged they are keen to see a border between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, despite them being the same country.
Given most people are confused by the geography of the UK it is worth quickly recapping before I go any further.