Israel destroys eight structures, mosque in Bedouin village

[Aidoneus]

Israel destroys eight structures, mosque in Bedouin village

Bulldozers sent by the Israeli Interior Ministry, on Monday destroyed eight structures and a mosque in a Bedouin village located in the Naqab (Negev). The residents of the area were furious over what they described as disrespect for their religion and vowed that "What was destroyed will be rebuilt". The Israeli Interior Ministry refused to comment on its latest operation.

"A country that doesn't respect religious sentiments is one that crosses the line", a Bedouin Negev resident told Yediot Aharonot website after bulldozers ruined a mosque and eight structures near the Ara'ra village, in accordance with an Interior Ministry order.

A force consisting of 200 policemen secured Monday morning the supervision and destruction teams, which acted on behalf of the Interior Ministry in destroying what they described as "illegal structures".

--snip--

http://www.albawaba.com/headlines/TheNews.php3?action=story&sid=266730&lang=e&dir=

a single event, but something of a long-standing trend.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. Message deleted by me...

The post I was responding to was deleted by the mods as I was replying, so my questions aren't really in any context anymore...


Violet...

[MikeGalos]

3. Gee

In another thread, people were saying that Israel should destroy illegal settlements. Guess that only applies when they're Jewish...

[Violet_Crumble]

4. There's an obvious difference, Mike...

The Bedouin who have had their homes and mosque destroyed are Israeli citizens inside Israel. The illegal settlements are built by Israeli citizens on territory that Israel as the occupying power is violating international law by allowing and encouraging them to remain....

But if you think this is solely a matter of whether one group is Jewish and the other isn't, I'm sure you have information on how many Jewish structures inside Israel have been demolished by the IDF ;)

Also, if any poster here were to believe that things only apply to some and not others based on their being Jewish or not, that'd make that person anti-Semitic. Wouldn't you agree?


Violet...

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

8. The problem with yr scenarios and conclusions...

Is that you appear to be totally ignoring the following...

Scenario A: The dismantling of any of the illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories is something anyone who's interested in a peaceful resolution that involves both Israelis and Palestinians having their own independent states should applaud. They're illegal under international law, after all. What I don't applaud is the way the GOI allows them to be rebuilt...

Scenaria B: Can you explain how the homes of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories are illegal under international law? Why shouldn't people condemn the destruction of these homes?

Scenario C: I'm not a 'Pro-PA' person, but I sure have a problem with the demolishing of the homes and mosques of the Bedouin. See below for reason...

Scenario D: As I've never seen anything about the destruction of homes inside Israel of Jewish citizens of Israel, it's safe to assume this doesn't happen. Most likely because the laws are made or implemented in such a way that it impacts on the Bedouin. Unless you want to try to argue that every law Israel makes is something we should all think is just great, it looks to me as though this particular law that allows the demolition of Bedouin homes needs to be changed...

If you don't know what claiming that people posting here think some rules should only apply to Jews means, how about you explain what you mean by it? I'm just trying to find out what you meant. So far you've explained it doesn't necessarily mean someone's anti-semitic, but that they could be mind-numbingly stupid. Obviously, as I pointed out to you, many people don't turn everything into a Jewish vs non-Jewish thing and do believe that things should apply to all people, no matter what their ethnicity/religion is, but on the circumstances, and in this case, it's clearly the fact that Israel is violating international law in the first place by allowing Israeli settlements to be built and remain in the Occupied Territories...

Violet...

on edit: added the word 'means' to one sentence due to my habit of thinking faster than I type at times...

[MikeGalos]

9. You're not pro-PA?

yeesh.

[Violet_Crumble]

10. No...

I'm not pro-GOI either, just in case you were wondering. The only thing I'm pro is for both Israelis and Palestinians to be treated with respect and for a resolution of this conflict to happen that ensures both safety and security, and states that are both independent and viable. You have a problem with that?


Violet...

[bemildred]

11. Oh oh oh ...

It's all so multi-dimensional.
I think my brain is going to pop.
:thumbsup:

[LeftistGorilla]

31. what a sad response...

yeesh

[Gimel]

22. Illegal buildings in Israel

Illegal structures are demolished, although there is a process of appeal. It does not matter if the home is Israeli Bedouin or Jew or other Arab. This does happen. If someone builds without a permit, the builder is hauled into court, fined, and the building is demolished. It happens on kibbutz or Mohaves in Israel, as well as private property. To promote anything else, such that individuals can do what they want, is to promote anarchy.

The situation in the OT is not a situation of local law. The "legality" of the settlements is a question of international law, and not that of local or country level. The final status is yet to be determined, so I don't see how any one individual person can say his or her opinion on the matter will make any difference.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. Bedouin land has been expropriated...

Israel doesn't recognise traditional land ownership. To take land, designate it state-owned land, and then destroy buildings on it because it doesn't comply with Israeli law regarding land ownership means that the law is pretty stinky and needs to be changed to recognise the traditional owners of the land...

That's right. I explained to Mike that the situation of the Bedouin in Israel is one of Israeli law, where the situation in the Occupied Territories is one of international law. There's no disputing in the latter case that Israel is violating international law by encouraging and allowing Israeli settlements in territory that Israel's occupying. The status of Israel as the occupying power is not something that is yet to be determined, and that the settlements are illegal is not a matter of opinion...

Violet...

[Gimel]

33. Complying with law

It may seem "stinky" to you, and of course it does seem unfair, but there are reasons other than "unfairness" that buildings that do not comply with the building codes must be destroyed. Unsafe buildings might collapse and there have been cases of this in Israel. Building codes must to adhered to to ensure the safety of the occupants.

On edit: Actually, this article only delt with buildings, not land. The bedouin village is mentioned, and no land was reported to have been lacking proper ownership. BTW, Isrel has recognized Bedouin land rights, so you are quite mistaken there:

Land Rights: In most countries in the Middle East the Bedouin have no land rights, only users’ privileges. Israeli Law is derived largely from Mandatory (British) law which in turn incorporated much Ottoman law. Under Israeli law, a person who has not registered his/her land in the Land Registry cannot claim ownership; but in the mid 1970s Israel let the Negev Bedouin register their land claims and issued certificates as to the size of the tracts claimed. These certificates served as the basis for the "right of possession" later granted by the government. Following the signing of the Treaty of Peace with Egypt, it became necessary to move an airport to a locality inhabited by 5000 Bedouin. The government, recognizing these land claim certificates, negotiated with the certificate holders and paid compensation to them. Most moved to Bedouin townships, built houses and established businesses.

In recent years the Ministerial Committee for the Advancement of Bedouin Affairs has undertaken to solve the problem of land ownership and has been assured of the necessary funds. The government is willing to leave some 20% of the land claimed in Bedouin possession and to compensate them for the remainder. In the past, tensions relating to land ownership have led to violence. A solution is now possible, but it requires the willingness and goodwill of both partners.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/Bedouin.html

[Violet_Crumble]

40. 'Unrecognised' villages...

The reason these villages are called unrecognised is that the traditional Bedouin ownership of the land isn't recognised...

This whole taking 80% of Bedouin land and compensating for it is quite nasty. I found some infomation on it here:

http://www.arabhra.org/article26/factsheet3.htm


"In 1976 the Land Settlement Department opened to finally settle Bedouin land claims, according to the following deal: it would recognise 20% of the total claim (with documented proof), would offer compensation for 30% (at 65% its value) and would expropriate 50%. To date agreements on these terms have been reached for 160,000 dunams; claims on 743,327dunams still remain outstanding."

I'm kind of curious. What exactly would constitute documented proof seeing as how there'd be no title deeds or registration of ownership of the land?

It looks very much like the Bedouin are being singled out in an attempt to move them to urban areas...

"Just over half of the Bedouin living outside the townships live in unrecognised villages. Under the Law of Planning and Construction (1965) their houses can be demolished. To speed up the sedentarisation process, in 1986 the Markovitz Committee (9) on unlicensed building, which did not consult any representative of the Negev Bedouin, recommended the demolition of 6,601 existing homes and all new buildings in the Negev. Subsequent governments have maintained this policy.

Aerial photographs of the villages are taken to check for new buildings. When a new construction is discovered, the owner is served with an adminstrative order to demolish the house. If they fail to do so, they are criminally prosecuted for unlicensed building. The policy turns homeowners into criminal defendants and makes the history of land ownership irrelevant. Defendants are fined and have to pay the costs of the demolition. As the Markovitz Committee recommended, these are double the cost of the house. After demolition, no consideration is given to where the evicted family will live.

According to the Association of Forty, there are currently 22,000 unrecognised houses in the Negev. In 1998, 370 houses were demolished by the authorities. Approximately 1,700 cases are currently being prosecuted in court. (10) These figures do not include those houses demolished by the owners themselves."


Violet...

[Gimel]

42. Previous usage

It seems that recognized ownership goes back to British Mandatory and Ottoman law. With changing land usage and modern land needs, the Bedouin, traditionally a nomadic tribe, are now largely settled. These changing life-styles are reflected in the land usage. As space is limited, these adjustments have to be made to accommodate everyone.

[Violet_Crumble]

43. There was no formal registration of Bedouin land ownership...

While the British respected the Bedouin ownership of the land, there was no formal registration of that ownership during the British Mandate, even though land was formally registered elsewhere in Palestine....

You make it sound as though the Bedouin have chosen to change their land usage and life-styles. Nothing could be further from the truth. They've no more chosen to change it than the nomadic indigenous people here did. They've been forced off their land and into urban areas by the government, where of course, being cut off from their traditional ties to the land, they're destined for a life of poverty. When 'adjustments have to be made to accommodate everyone' means the land has been taken to give to others (in this case building settlements for Jewish Israelis in the Negev) and excuses are used that space is limited, it would seem the logical and fair thing to do would be for Israel to not take in a large number of immigrants. I doubt the Negev could sustain a large number of people anyway, not unless there's some whizz-bang new way of turning largely uninhabitable desert areas into thriving urban areas, and in that case someone needs to sell that secret to the Australian government, seeing as large areas of this continent are sparsely populated for exactly the same reasons the Negev is. From what I've been reading, there's some real parallels between what's been done and still being done to the Bedouin as what was done to the nomadic indigenous people here back in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries...

This article from Oxfam talks about the Israeli governments plans for the Negev and what's happened to the Bedouin...

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/where_we_work/israel_palterr/bedouin.htm

Successive Israeli governments have made no secret of their desire to move the Bedouin off the land and into settlements of their own. The Negev constitutes 62 percent of Israel’s land area but accounts for only one in 10 of the population.

The government is backed by the Jewish Agency for Israel, which fronts its plan to bring another million Jews to Israel by 2010. The Negev is seen as a prime area for settlement, especially if settlers vacate colonies in the West Bank and Gaza in any eventual Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

Bedouin say they are continually harassed by Israeli officials unless they agree to move into seven recognised settlements. These are small, cramped clusters of houses established in the early 1980s with little or no land and precious little scope for expansion. About half the 130,000 Bedouin live in them.

Violet....

[Gimel]

46. It is obvious

that in a world that doubles it's population every 20 years, land is becoming a scarce commodity. However, the Bedouins were compensated for their land rights, and they did have land rights under the British Mandate and under the Ottoman Empire. Jews were forbidden to buy land under the Ottoman Empire, and discouraged from immigrating under the British Mandate.

History and life-styles change in part because of necessity, and in part because of social conformity, and although individuals may resent this and desire to live in the past, they are often impotent against the vast movement of time. This is universally known to be true.

[Aidoneus]

21. is this blinding density, or just trying to be cute?

You really don't see the gulf of a difference between these cases? Do you consider these Arab bedouin to be invaders & colonists, bussed in to prevent any effective existance of Israel?

[newyorican]

5. A very long trend...

as in from the beginning of the state of Israel. What's one more mosque when you've already got a couple of hundred under your belt?

[MikeGalos]

7. Care to back that up

The Israeli government has a long and proud history of total respect for religious groups and facilities. Something that neither Jordan (with it's destruction of numerous Jewish sites in Jerusalem) nor the PA (with their destruction of Jewish sites in their lands) can claim.

Either document your ridiculous claim of hundreds of destroyed mosques or withdraw it and issue a public apology!

[newyorican]

12. How many mosques were destroyed...

when Israel was created? Around 400-500 villages were wiped out, over half contained mosques. The math is rather basic and history is not ridiculous.

I'd be interested in hearing your take on how many mosques Israel has destroyed since it's inception.

On Edit: Miftah reports 531 Palestinian villages destroyed during Al-Nakba.

[MikeGalos]

13. Care to back that up

the 400-500 villages wiped out?

[GabysPoppy]

14. I am lost here

First it's hundreds of mosques and now we have villages. What's next bingo parlors?

I guess if you throw enough stuff against the wall something may stick.

[Violet_Crumble]

15. Let me assist you...

Newyorican originally said: 'What's one more mosque when you've already got a couple of hundred under your belt?'

He pointed out that around 400-500 villages were wiped out, half of which contained mosques. I'm not sure why you think bingo parlours come into this anywhere, as it was very clear from what newyorican said that approximately 200-250 mosques would have been destroyed...

Violet...

[newyorican]

17. Not really necessary...

anyone willing to deal with the issue honestly could see it.

[MikeGalos]

28. Ah

in other words, you made it up.

[newyorican]

29. Yes Mike...

I, all by myself, made up the story of Al-Nakba. Disregard the impossible time-line given my time on the coil, no need to cloud the issue with facts.

[number6]

18. assuming each village had a mosque

so how many Arab villages do you estimate Gaby ?
I read some articles on this, don't know if their true :shrug:

[newyorican]

19. Any article can misrepresent

But it does no good to pretend the Nakba didn't happen. It was the beginning of the refugee problem and resulted in UN res 194.

I too am curious, since there seems to be some disagreement over my "couple of hundred".

One of the naysayers should be able to step in and help us out with an estimate of how many mosques has Israel destroyed. But it'll have to wait cause I'm outta here til next year.

Happy New Year to ALL!

[newyorican]

16. Try researching Nakba...

for more information, if you're really interested. Sounds like your argument is with historians, my apologies if mentioning it upset you.

On edit: Still haven't heard any estimate from you on the # of mosques Israel has destroyed. Not that you have to answer, this being a somewhat free world and all.

[GabysPoppy]

26. Nakba

Nakba is an Arabic term meaning cataclysm or calamity.

The term is often used amongst Arabs to describe the outcome of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

IMO opinion Nakba is just a code word for denial of the existence of the State of Israel. Nothing more, nothing less.

[newyorican]

27. Well then...

you have more common cause with deniers of historical events than with those genuinely interested in discussion.

[Violet_Crumble]

44. Yep...

Some of the posts in this thread have taken on the feel of Keith Windshuttle, another denier of historical events that don't suit him...

If Gabyspoppy is actually interested on reading up on the Nakba and why it was a catastrophe for the Palestinians, Righteous Victims by Benny Morris is a good book to read. I'm reading it now and it traces the history of the conflict from 1881 to 2001, and it's got a fair bit on the events of 1948...

Violet...

[MikeGalos]

30. Let's see

Nakba: The disaster of the creation of a Jewish state in an otherwise ethnically pure region which can only be solved by the elimination of that state. A racist phrase which considers catastrophic any ethnic diversity in what is presumed to be an Arab-only region.

Are you really sure you mean to use that term or do you really agree with those who use this phrase to define the creation of Israel that the only possible end to this catastrophe is the complete, total and final elimination of any Jewish state in the region and an ethnically pure Arab region.

[newyorican]

32. Mike...

You seem willing to discuss anything, except how many mosques has Israel destroyed. That is the issue that kicked off this sub-thread, BTW.

[MikeGalos]

34. Well that's calling black white

I'm the one asking for actual documentation on the "destroyed mosques" and all I've gotten is undocumented guesses based on undocumented assumptions...

OH, and care to actually answer my question? That was what the post you replied to was about.

Here it is again so you don't have to browse back for it:

Are you really sure you mean to use that term or do you really agree with those who use this phrase to define the creation of Israel that the only possible end to this catastrophe is the complete, total and final elimination of any Jewish state in the region and an ethnically pure Arab region.

[newyorican]

35. That convoluted statement is not a question

This, however, is.

How many mosques has Israel destroyed?

The answer is numerical, not rhetorical tangents. An estimate will do.

[Lurking Dem]

36. I must be confused.

YOU were the one that claimed 200-250 mosques were destroyed. YOU were asked for a source to back that up.

I can't sit here and state, "Palestinians have killed 100 Israeli women in the last 2 hours" with no source to back up such a ludicrous statement and then bitch because you don't come up with a number.

<scratching head>

[newyorican]

37. I am sorry...

for your confusion.

The following probably sums up my feelings on this form of denial.

What drew my attention in this particular debate was a remark made by the student proposer from Christ Church. She made an eloquent case against what she saw as the inherent anti-Semitism of Holocaust deniers. Speaking with passion, she asserted that Holocaust denial be made a crime because it constituted an assault on a whole people's history. She said: "Imagine how it must feel for a Holocaust survivor to be told: you are a liar, your sufferings never happened, you have invented it all. Imagine your pain at knowing that not only did you suffer that horror but that it is denied. You still remember what happened, but you are told your memories are false." Irresistibly, the refugee issue came into my mind: without the term "Holocaust survivor," her sentence would have applied with equal force to the parallel issue of what may be called "Nakba Denial." The point of resemblance here is not between genocide and dispossession -- they are of course not equivalent -- but of denial that either event had ever happened.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/476/op5.htm

[MikeGalos]

38. You made a ridiculous claim

when asked to document it, you then picked a random percentage of another ridiculous claim that you refused to document.

I hope this shows people how ludicrous statements are often presented as fact and backed up only by indignation.

[newyorican]

39. Well...

if you're stuck in the denial phase see post # 37. If you're quibbling about the correct number of destroyed mosques I'd still like to hear your estimate.

1) If you'd like a closer look at what's on the web here you go (even though googling nakba comes up with this rather quickly). http://www.alnakba.org/villages/villages.htm They may not have all 531 villages (source: MIFTAH) posted yet.

2) Here is a rather lengthy, but interesting piece from Ilan Pappe, historian, Haifa University. WERE THEY EXPELLED? – THE HISTORY, HISTORIOGRAPHY AND RELEVANCE OF THE PALESTINIAN REFUGEE PROBLEM


3) If you are really interested you might try reading The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem By Benny Morris where is was documented that over half the villages had mosques. If you're going to argue against historians, might as well read what they are saying so you can attack it coherently.

[Aidoneus]

41. What is the ridiculous claim?

The safe figure I have read of in the past relating to this is estimated to have been 400 mosques seized or destroyed in '48. That works out to roughly one from each village that was overrun and depopulated in the process of creating what would become Israel.

As for the time between then and now, a couple years ago I believe the head of the Islamic Movement in Israel estimated 1000-2000 (the exact number escapes me) mosques having been seized or destroyed in the whole time period. Of course, the person making this claim is not a Zionist, so I don't suppose you acknowledge any legitimacy to such claims made by such a figure, and thus will keep on with that "LIES! LIES!"/"hear no evil" act. :shrug:

[Aidoneus]

20. numbers vary slightly in different researches

I'll opt for the lazy route and stick with what is on hand, quick, and self-explanatory.

list of Palestinian villages depopulated/destroyed (remove the space between ".org/" and "atlas/" to view):--
http://www.arij.org/ atlas/maps/Names%20of%20the%20Depopulated%20Palestinian%20Villages%20in%201948%20and%201967.gif

and a map of these (again, remove the space between ".org/" and "atlas/" to view):--
http://www.arij.org/ atlas/maps/Depopulated%20Palestinian%20Villages%20in%201948%20and%201967.gif

And if you would like and request such (but give me a few minutes for this one), I could also come up with a list of Israeli/Jewish settlements in the lands and the names of those Palestinian villages that were depopulated/destroyed to allow the former to be.

[Gimel]

23. Depopulation

If villages are depopulated, they are vacant. If someone moves away and leaves structures, those structures are either re-inhabited or destroyed for the population that exists.

Despite the fact that the Israel government at the time of statehood pleaded with Arabs to remain in their homes, they chose to leave them.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. I agree with the first part of yr post...

The whole idea of not allowing the owners who fled during war-time to return is wrong, as is describing it as 'someone moving away'. It's not like they all packed up one day and decided to move out on a whim because they found somewhere more to their liking...

I find it highly unlikely that the Israeli government of the time would have pleaded with the Arab population to remain in their homes. If they had, it would be logical that when the war ended, the Israeli govt would have allowed them to return, which it didn't. In June 1948, the Israeli cabinet decided not to allow refugees to return and the IDF was to use live fire to prevent any from returning to their homes. Ben-Gurion wanted as few Arabs as possible in Israel, and had previously openly supported the transfer of the Arab population, as did Moshe Sharett....

Violet...

[Saudade]

45. Why tell lies?

"Despite the fact that the Israel government at the time of statehood pleaded with Arabs to remain in their homes, they chose to leave them.
leave."

A report by the IDF intelligence branch called "The Emigration of the Arabs of Palestine in the Period 1/12/1947 - 1/6/1948," (Cited in Benny Morris' 1/86 article in Middle Eastern Studies) studied the departure of 391,000 arabs and assigned three major causes to this exodus:

1. Direct, hostile jewish operations against arab settlements;

2. The effect of our hostile operations on nearby settlements...especially the fall of large neighboring centers; and

3. Operations of the dissidents. (Meaning: Stern Gang and Irgun)

'...at least 55% of the total of the exodus was caused by our operations and their influence,' while Irgun and Stern groups "directly caused some 15% ... of the emigration." Other causes of Palestinian flight were "jewish whispering operations aimed at frightening away arab inhabitants" and "ultimate expulsion orders" by the army and the Haganah.

In summary, evidence from the IDF itself shows that fully 72% of the Palestinian refugees during this period were expelled by Israeli military force.