Having been accepted in to the Catholic Church last month, the Quartet’s representative approach will be to follow the Vatican’s stance on Jerusalem, rather than that of an impartial interlocker. The Quartet, comprising of the USA, Russia, EU and UN, by virtue of its composition certainly cannot be considered an impartial neutral international body but one whose ultimate objective is to serve their economic masters, namely the major oil producing countries, followed in close proximity by those of the church.
When UK Prime Minister, Blair’s foreign policy with regard to the status of Jerusalem was that of the 1947 Corpus Separandum, to internationalize the city. Lest it be forgotten that when this failed to materialize in 1948 and the city was split between Israel and Jordan, only the UK and Pakistan recognized the Jordanian occupation. At the same time the UN attempted to give lip service to the Corpus Separandum by illegally occupying Government House (under the guise of it becoming UNTSO HQ) in a so called "No mans land" overlooking the City as if to send us a subtle message.
Initially, the UK as the Mandatory Authority on behalf of the League of Nations established its Government House to serve as the headquarters for the British high commissioner to Palestine in the Augustus Victoria Complex. In 1931 Government House moved to a purpose built elegant white sandstone chateau located in a 16-acre compound strategically located on a hilltop overlooking the Old City where this colonial edifice was hidden among pines and cypresses. The structure, built in an octagonal shape of locally quarried stone, was designed by architects A. Harrison and C. Holliday. Under its Arab-style roof domes are banqueting halls, while landscaped gardens offer views across to the Old City of Jerusalem and a well-appointed penthouse apartment in the impressive main tower crowns the entire structure. The unusual shape seems to have been a favorite of the architects. It is evident in the private apartment of the high commissioner as well as in the fountain – similar to those found in North African palaces – in the formal garden. Other distinguishing features of the building are its domes, interior arches, crossed vaults and a monumental four-meter high ceramic fireplace of Armenian tiles created by David Ohanessian. Clearly it was the British intention never to implement the purpose of the Mandate otherwise it would not have been built with Arab features. Opened in Sir Arthur Wauchope, the then High Commissioner for Palestine, it served as the residence of a number of British high commissioners.
The British Military Headquarters was located in the King David Hotel facing the Old City walls, located on the "Inner Parkway", subsequently Julian’s Way. The land was purchased from the Greek Orthodox Church in 1928 for $150,000. The hotel was built in 1929 at the height of the Arab riots and the Hebron massacre. Over 87 percent of the workforce were Jewish. The hotel being opened in January 1931. In 1939 the British Army expropriated 40 rooms and 17 offices on the top floor and subsequently established it as their headquarters. Of course this was several kilometers north from Government House.
At the termination of the Mandate on May 15, 1948, the Union Jack was lowered from the roof of the King David. The British High Commissioner Sir Alan Cunningham had left Jerusalem the day before. As fighting between Jews and Arabs broke out in the city, the hotel was turned into the Red Cross headquarters. The hotel's manager succeeded in reaching an agreement between the nascent Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the Jordanian Arab Legion (under its British Commander Glub) to declare the King David a demilitarized zone. However, this was not respected due to its vital location and the hotel once again remained in the battle zone, and the Red Cross who had taken over the building subsequently evacuated the building and it was taken over by the United Nations. However whilst the UN flag flew from the hotel’s flagpole, the hotel still remained in the firing line.
In the meantime, the Red Cross relocated to the abandoned Government House and due to the former’s presence it was considered a demilitarized zone, just like the King David. However, the complex was found unsuitable for the Red Cross purposes and it relocated. As with the King David Hotel, the UN followed on the heels of the Red Cross to occupy the complex and according to the story was finally leased (but from who nobody knows) to the United Nations in the same year for the amount of one dollar per year
In 1967 the Jordanian’s opened up the front with post 1948 Jewish Jerusalem by attacking Government House at 11:30 a.m. on 5 June and the IDF lost 21 troops in recapturing the complex and immediately handed it back to the UN.
Clearly, as representative of the Quartet, the new catholic, would be serving his new Papal masters well if he pressed their agenda for the Corpus Separandum. To effect this, what better place to administrate the City from than UK built Government House in Armon Hanatziv, with Spin Tony as the Governor General on behalf of the "International Community". He tried to use the complex on July 2007 as Quartet representative, fortunately with no success, but not for the lack of trying!
Deputy Prime Minister Ramon, had been sending out trial balloons to divide the city before Annapolis and Olmert has on more than one occasion loudly hinted he was prepared to cede parts of the city, whilst Abbas wants the whole of the Old City. Now Olmert is openly talking of capitulating to pressure to divide the city – no doubt under Blair’s influence. Lest it be forgotten, several years ago one very senior Israeli politician promised the Vatican that the city would be internationalized and they could control it.
What a feather in Blair’s cap if he could get a compromise deal by internationalizing the City thereby making us once more subservient to the non Jews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL UNDER SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS 252 (1968), 267 (1969) and 271 (1969) and GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 2254 (ES-V)
Addendum
1. Since the publication of the report of 18 February 1971 (A/8282, S/10124), a further exchange of communications concerning the status of Jerusalem and the United Nations premises at Government House in Jerusalem has taken place between the Secretary-General and the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations.
2. On 8 March 1971, the Permanent Representative of Israel addressed the following note to the Secretary-General in reply to the latter's two communications of 26 January 1971 (A/8282 and S/10124, para. 4):
"The Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations presents his compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and has the honour, on instructions of his Government, to refer to the Secretary-General's two notes dated 26 January 1971 (A/8282, S/10124), one dealing with the premises known as Government House and the other dealing more generally with building construction in Jerusalem.
"The Permanent Representative of Israel is instructed to state that these two communications have been carefully examined and that the Government of Israel's position remains as it has been conveyed to the Secretary-General in its various communications on the subject. At the same time, the Government of Israel wishes to place on record its reservations to the various legal and other considerations advanced in those two notes, and more particularly to the references made in them to claims of the United Nations 'to the occupancy and possession of the whole of the premises' of Government House.
"The Permanent Representative of Israel avails himself of this opportunity to renew to the Secretary-General of the United Nations the expression of his highest consideration."
5. On 12 April, the Secretary-General sent the following note to the Permanent Representative of Israel:
"The Secretary-General of the United Nations presents his compliments to the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations and has the honour to refer to the Permanent Representative's note of 8 March 1971 in response to two notes from the Secretary-General of 26 January 197 - one relating to the status of Jerusalem and the other to the question of the return to the United Nations of the whole of its premises, as constituted on 5 June 1967 - at Government House in Jerusalem.
"The Permanent Representative's reply of 8 March 1971 is to the effect that the Secretary-General's two communications have 'been carefully examined and that the Government of Israel's position remains as it has been conveyed to the Secretary-General in its various communications on the subject'. At the same time, the Government of Israel wishes to place on record its reservations to the various legal and other considerations advanced in those two notes, and more particularly to the references made in them to claims of the United Nations 'to the occupancy and possession of the whole of the premises of Government House.'
"The Secretary-General notes that, presumably because of the reservations referred to in the above reply, no copy of the reported Jerusalem 'Master Plan' has been provided, nor has any information regarding it been furnished to the Secretary-General, notwithstanding the requests contained in his notes of 10 December 1970 and 26 January 1971.
"In so far as the Permanent Representative's reply of 8 March 1971 relates to the Secretary-General's note of 26 January 1971 regarding the status of Jerusalem, that reply will be communicated to the Security Council and the General Assembly pursuant to the Secretary-General's obligations to report under the relevant resolutions.
"In so far as the Permanent Representative's reply relates to the Secretary-General's communication of 26 January 1971 requesting the return of the whole of the United Nations premises at Government House as constituted on 5 June 1967, the Secretary-General notes that the reply contains no direct response to this request. Nor is any precise information given on the exact terms of the reservations which are at present held by the Government of Israel regarding the Secretary-General's request.
"The Secretary-General observes that the reservations referred, to in the Permanent Representative's note are now raised for the first time. They were not mentioned when part only of the Government House premises was returned to the United Nations. At that time the position of the Government of Israel, set out in the Permanent Representative's letter of 22 August 1967, indicated no such reservations, although the Secretary-General had previously expressly preserved the rights of the United Nations to the occupancy and possession of the whole of the Government House premises as constituted when UNTSO was forced to evacuate them on 5 June 1967. The Secretary-General would also observe that it was in reliance on the preservation of these United Nations rights that the Secretary-General authorized the return of the Chief of Staff of UNTSO and his staff to the lesser area, in the circumstances and under the conditions indicated in the Secretary-General's report to the Security Council of 11 August 1967 (S/7930/Add.27). As the reservations referred to in the note under reply relate in part to 'legal... considerations', it may be mentioned that one way of resolving any differences now arising would be to have resort to the procedure for settlement laid down in section 30 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.
"In all the circumstances of the case, and taking into account both current works by the Israel authorities within and bordering upon Government House property as constituted on 5 June 1967 as well as the absence of a direct reply to the specific request of the Secretary-General in his note of 26 January 1971, the Secretary-General is constrained to reiterate that request, namely, for the unreserved return to the United Nations of the remainder of its Government House premises.
"The Secretary-General avails himself of this opportunity to renew to the Permanent Representative of Israel the assurances of his highest consideration."
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Monday, July 31, 2006
A MESSAGE TO MARGARET BECKETT
UK - USA SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
I understand you have issued a formal complaint to the Government of the United States with respect to the refueling stop at Prestwick Airport of cargo planes transporting laser guided missiles and other military equipment to Israel.
In the light of Prime Minister Blair's recent statement, that the UK is a good friend of Israel in both good and bad times and not just a fair weather friend, as well as agreeing that the terrorist organisation Hizbollah has to be eliminated, I find your approach reprehensible.
It would appear that whilst transport of weapons and military equipment from the USA to other theatres of war, either for their own use or the use of UK or Coalition forces is acceptable, only in the case of Israel is there a furore and Her Majesty's Secretary of State at the Foreign Office has to protest.
It has to be questioned why double standards are being employed. After all the UK government sanctions UK weapons manufacturers to export to Arab and other countries, fighter aircraft, navel vessels of all descriptions, tanks, missiles, rockets and a whole variety of ammunition, without batting an eyelid. The export of such material is considered so sensitive that no government department publishes detailed statistics. Only in the case of Israel has HM Foreign Office sought to ban or delay the export of such material, in some cases where total pre-payment had been made.
It is time for you to explain the basis and rationale for your decision.
Indeed, multipurpose material was exported without question to Iraq that resulted in the Scott Enquiry, much of whose recommendations are still not implemented. As you are aware, the Hizbollah rockets fired into Israel over the last two weeks originating from countries such as Syria and Iran, contain small diameter spherical ball bearings.
It is to be doubted if the Foreign Office or any other government department has put an immediate ban on the export of such material, the raw materials used for this item and the equipment used to make this item. In addition, has the transit of such material through the UK been banned?
I understand you have issued a formal complaint to the Government of the United States with respect to the refueling stop at Prestwick Airport of cargo planes transporting laser guided missiles and other military equipment to Israel.
In the light of Prime Minister Blair's recent statement, that the UK is a good friend of Israel in both good and bad times and not just a fair weather friend, as well as agreeing that the terrorist organisation Hizbollah has to be eliminated, I find your approach reprehensible.
It would appear that whilst transport of weapons and military equipment from the USA to other theatres of war, either for their own use or the use of UK or Coalition forces is acceptable, only in the case of Israel is there a furore and Her Majesty's Secretary of State at the Foreign Office has to protest.
It has to be questioned why double standards are being employed. After all the UK government sanctions UK weapons manufacturers to export to Arab and other countries, fighter aircraft, navel vessels of all descriptions, tanks, missiles, rockets and a whole variety of ammunition, without batting an eyelid. The export of such material is considered so sensitive that no government department publishes detailed statistics. Only in the case of Israel has HM Foreign Office sought to ban or delay the export of such material, in some cases where total pre-payment had been made.
It is time for you to explain the basis and rationale for your decision.
Indeed, multipurpose material was exported without question to Iraq that resulted in the Scott Enquiry, much of whose recommendations are still not implemented. As you are aware, the Hizbollah rockets fired into Israel over the last two weeks originating from countries such as Syria and Iran, contain small diameter spherical ball bearings.
It is to be doubted if the Foreign Office or any other government department has put an immediate ban on the export of such material, the raw materials used for this item and the equipment used to make this item. In addition, has the transit of such material through the UK been banned?
In case you are unaware of the damage these items can cause take a careful look at the photographs
Monday, July 24, 2006
An Open Letter to Dr Kim Howells - Your visit to Beirut
As Minister of State for the Middle East at the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office it was necessary to weigh your words carefully during your visit to Beirut - but you failed abysmally. Your comments were not worthy of a government minister.
When the UK was attacked during WW2 by V1 and V2 rockets the Royal Air Force bombed major German cities relentlessly. It ill behoves that you were sharply critical of the Israel Defence Force tactics in Lebanon. I don't recollect you making such criticism of the tactics of what the British media, in particular the state radio BBC, call "militants or guerrillas" when terrorists, suicide bombers and Hamas Terrorists' rockets were murdering Jewish children and people in cold blood since the 1950's.
You do not apparently realize that this is Israel's battle for survival. It is not an exercise in a far off country to try out newly developed British weapons and tactics or saturate bombing and rockets like the Cruise and other missiles used by the Coalition to attack Iraq.
Britain has not had to defend these shores since the conclusion of the Second World War but has been active in many theatres of war including its defending overseas territories it occupies which were acquired by force in previous centuries. You should question the UK's right to remain in the Falkland Isles for a start, located so far away from the UK.
Indeed you should have saved your criticism for the people of Lebanon who permitted Hezbollah to occupy the area in the first place, just like they permitted the terrorists of the PLO in the late 1970's.
Why not direct your attention to criticizing the permanent members of the UN Security Council, of which the UK is one, followed by the International Community, who turned a blind eye to the arming of Hezbollah to the teeth with such lethal weapons and permitted Hezbollah, Lebanon, Syria and Iran to ignore Security Council Resolution 1559 of 2 September 2004.
When the UK was attacked during WW2 by V1 and V2 rockets the Royal Air Force bombed major German cities relentlessly. It ill behoves that you were sharply critical of the Israel Defence Force tactics in Lebanon. I don't recollect you making such criticism of the tactics of what the British media, in particular the state radio BBC, call "militants or guerrillas" when terrorists, suicide bombers and Hamas Terrorists' rockets were murdering Jewish children and people in cold blood since the 1950's.
You do not apparently realize that this is Israel's battle for survival. It is not an exercise in a far off country to try out newly developed British weapons and tactics or saturate bombing and rockets like the Cruise and other missiles used by the Coalition to attack Iraq.
Britain has not had to defend these shores since the conclusion of the Second World War but has been active in many theatres of war including its defending overseas territories it occupies which were acquired by force in previous centuries. You should question the UK's right to remain in the Falkland Isles for a start, located so far away from the UK.
Indeed you should have saved your criticism for the people of Lebanon who permitted Hezbollah to occupy the area in the first place, just like they permitted the terrorists of the PLO in the late 1970's.
Why not direct your attention to criticizing the permanent members of the UN Security Council, of which the UK is one, followed by the International Community, who turned a blind eye to the arming of Hezbollah to the teeth with such lethal weapons and permitted Hezbollah, Lebanon, Syria and Iran to ignore Security Council Resolution 1559 of 2 September 2004.
Friday, May 05, 2006
UN SOVEREIGNTY OVER JERUSALEM - JEWISH PRIDE AND DIGNITY?
The inability of the UN Security Council to immediately censor Iran when it commenced operation of their nuclear processing facilities bodes ill for the UN when one contrasts how in the past the Security Council has immediately convened, sometimes within 24 hours, to censor Israel at the behest of resolutions proposed by Arab and Muslim states, as a result of actions taken by Israel in self defense. Is it that China and Russia, who also hold the veto on the Council, have a different agenda to the USA, UK and France?
Examining the records of the Security Council one will find that the majority of resolutions passed by that body have condemned Israel’s self defensive actions as if this has been the world’s major concern in the last 58 years. This is despite the horrendous wars and military actions around the world in Europe, Africa, SE Asia and the Levant where many tens of thousands innocent bystanders have been killed.
It is even more strange there was a complete silence by both the Security Council and the General Assembly in condemning the nuclear proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by Pakistan who originated the “Muslim” bomb. It is unacceptable that the father of the “Muslim” bomb, Dr Kahn, who illegally transferred nuclear processing technology to other countries outside Pakistan including Iran and Iraq, has not been brought to justice by the UN at the International Court for breaching the Non Proliferation Treaty whilst Pakistan has maintained a low profile and not even charged him. This, from a state which is engaged in a trade and political boycott of Israel!
At this Yom Ha’atzmut Israel should exercise Jewish pride and dignity with respect to the UN. She should demand the removal of the headquarters of UNTSO (Middle East) from Government House in Jerusalem which they have occupied since 1948 when they received it from the departing British. After all there are “Peace Treaties” in place with Egypt and Jordan so the only area subject to the “Truce” is Lebanon.
Lets be frank and question why it was acceptable that 20 IDF soldiers of the Jerusalem and 161 Brigades lose their lives in 1967 in retaking Government House, then situated in no-mans land, from the Jordanian intruders only to hand it back to the UN within a few days, thereby de facto denying our sovereignty in our homeland?
Examining the records of the Security Council one will find that the majority of resolutions passed by that body have condemned Israel’s self defensive actions as if this has been the world’s major concern in the last 58 years. This is despite the horrendous wars and military actions around the world in Europe, Africa, SE Asia and the Levant where many tens of thousands innocent bystanders have been killed.
It is even more strange there was a complete silence by both the Security Council and the General Assembly in condemning the nuclear proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by Pakistan who originated the “Muslim” bomb. It is unacceptable that the father of the “Muslim” bomb, Dr Kahn, who illegally transferred nuclear processing technology to other countries outside Pakistan including Iran and Iraq, has not been brought to justice by the UN at the International Court for breaching the Non Proliferation Treaty whilst Pakistan has maintained a low profile and not even charged him. This, from a state which is engaged in a trade and political boycott of Israel!
At this Yom Ha’atzmut Israel should exercise Jewish pride and dignity with respect to the UN. She should demand the removal of the headquarters of UNTSO (Middle East) from Government House in Jerusalem which they have occupied since 1948 when they received it from the departing British. After all there are “Peace Treaties” in place with Egypt and Jordan so the only area subject to the “Truce” is Lebanon.
Lets be frank and question why it was acceptable that 20 IDF soldiers of the Jerusalem and 161 Brigades lose their lives in 1967 in retaking Government House, then situated in no-mans land, from the Jordanian intruders only to hand it back to the UN within a few days, thereby de facto denying our sovereignty in our homeland?
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
WHY ISRAEL IS NOT A DEMOCRACY
Too often the mantra is repeated that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East - if only the meaning of democracy was understood!
The existing unelected Israeli government has made a mockery of democracy in that not only did the party "Kadima" not exist at the time of the last elections but also its policy is diametrically opposite to the platform on which the ministers were originally elected. This is nothing but a betrayal of the Israeli electorate and shows the complete abandoning of Judaism's moral and ethical teachings and integrity of those involved. It also points to the abandonment of the rule of law, since not in their wildest moments could those who ratified the Electoral Laws in the Knesset, when the third Jewish Commonwealth was founded in 1948, envisage a government betraying the electorate with not only an about turn on policy but also abandoning the party that was elected to govern. As a result provision to deligitimize such unthinkable action was not incorporated. It is as if the Israel Chief Rabbi suddenly became the Pope
The deafening silence by the worldwide Jewish communities in the Diaspora to these immoral and unethical actions bodes ill, given the carte blanche acceptance by both the religious and lay leadership. Such acquiescence to these actions by Communal Institutions appears to indicate they operate under similar ground rules. At this critical juncture it is unethical for them to continue to remain silent with the forthcoming Israeli election due at the end of this month.
This Purim farce has to stop immediately. Our religious leadership should emulate Mordechai H'Yehudi who was observant and a devoted Jew and proud representative of our people who stood up to kings and rulers rather than, as all our leaders appear to do, acquiesce to the current world political and religious leaders' demands.
The existing unelected Israeli government has made a mockery of democracy in that not only did the party "Kadima" not exist at the time of the last elections but also its policy is diametrically opposite to the platform on which the ministers were originally elected. This is nothing but a betrayal of the Israeli electorate and shows the complete abandoning of Judaism's moral and ethical teachings and integrity of those involved. It also points to the abandonment of the rule of law, since not in their wildest moments could those who ratified the Electoral Laws in the Knesset, when the third Jewish Commonwealth was founded in 1948, envisage a government betraying the electorate with not only an about turn on policy but also abandoning the party that was elected to govern. As a result provision to deligitimize such unthinkable action was not incorporated. It is as if the Israel Chief Rabbi suddenly became the Pope
The deafening silence by the worldwide Jewish communities in the Diaspora to these immoral and unethical actions bodes ill, given the carte blanche acceptance by both the religious and lay leadership. Such acquiescence to these actions by Communal Institutions appears to indicate they operate under similar ground rules. At this critical juncture it is unethical for them to continue to remain silent with the forthcoming Israeli election due at the end of this month.
This Purim farce has to stop immediately. Our religious leadership should emulate Mordechai H'Yehudi who was observant and a devoted Jew and proud representative of our people who stood up to kings and rulers rather than, as all our leaders appear to do, acquiesce to the current world political and religious leaders' demands.
Friday, August 19, 2005
A MESSAGE TO SHARON
DON'T WE HAVE ANY HUMAN RIGHTS?
YOU HAVE NO PITY ON YOUR OWN PEOPLE
Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com
Gush Katif Expellees Find the State Unprepared
Friday, August 19, 2005 / 14 Av 5765
While government officials are pleased with the pace of the ongoing expulsion, the former residents of Gaza are seeking to organize for their first Sabbath in exile from Gush Katif.
Disengagement Authority Director Yonatan Bassi boasts the level of preparedness for the families, insisting the government has made unprecedented efforts to assure their new life gets off to a good start. However, inspections of absorption locations reveal that quite the contrary is true.
Gush refugees are being placed in single hotel rooms, with two beds, to accommodate parents and multiple children. There are no provisions for laundry, acceptable kosher food, daycare and many other problems, leaving the residents with the trauma of being abandoned by the same government that threw them out of their homes.
One of the residents of the town of Gadid who chose to voluntarily leave Tuesday, Tzvika Goddesman, told Israel Radio this week that the families were informed that Jerusalem hotel rooms are their new homes for the next ten days. Goddesman said that they were not given a hint as to what awaits them afterwards.
In the meantime, synagogues in Jerusalem have adopted the former Gush families, seeking to meet their basic needs, laundry, Sabbath food, basics for the children and so-forth. In various cities around the country, groups of volunteers are spontaneously organizing to try and provide material and emotional support for the now-homeless Jewish families. Expellees from Netzer Hazani went en masse to the Western Wall (Kotel) Thursday night, where they were received warmly by many worshippers, who began to sing and dance in their honor. The Netzer Hazani community is seeking to remain together whatever the arrangements are that will be made for them, but state agencies have been unable to live up to commitments to that effect.
Shas party leader Knesset Member Eli Yishai is demanding the establishment of a governmental board of inquiry into the failure of the government to see to the minimum needs of families expelled from Gaza this week.
Yishai stated that he would not have believed the horrors being endured by the families had he not seen it with his own eyes. In one case, he reported, a family was abandoned at a bus stop, left to fend for themselves after being thrown out of their homes.
Government officials admit there are problems, but insist that "overall, the families are provided for."
YOU HAVE NO PITY ON YOUR OWN PEOPLE
Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com
Gush Katif Expellees Find the State Unprepared
Friday, August 19, 2005 / 14 Av 5765
While government officials are pleased with the pace of the ongoing expulsion, the former residents of Gaza are seeking to organize for their first Sabbath in exile from Gush Katif.
Disengagement Authority Director Yonatan Bassi boasts the level of preparedness for the families, insisting the government has made unprecedented efforts to assure their new life gets off to a good start. However, inspections of absorption locations reveal that quite the contrary is true.
Gush refugees are being placed in single hotel rooms, with two beds, to accommodate parents and multiple children. There are no provisions for laundry, acceptable kosher food, daycare and many other problems, leaving the residents with the trauma of being abandoned by the same government that threw them out of their homes.
One of the residents of the town of Gadid who chose to voluntarily leave Tuesday, Tzvika Goddesman, told Israel Radio this week that the families were informed that Jerusalem hotel rooms are their new homes for the next ten days. Goddesman said that they were not given a hint as to what awaits them afterwards.
In the meantime, synagogues in Jerusalem have adopted the former Gush families, seeking to meet their basic needs, laundry, Sabbath food, basics for the children and so-forth. In various cities around the country, groups of volunteers are spontaneously organizing to try and provide material and emotional support for the now-homeless Jewish families. Expellees from Netzer Hazani went en masse to the Western Wall (Kotel) Thursday night, where they were received warmly by many worshippers, who began to sing and dance in their honor. The Netzer Hazani community is seeking to remain together whatever the arrangements are that will be made for them, but state agencies have been unable to live up to commitments to that effect.
Shas party leader Knesset Member Eli Yishai is demanding the establishment of a governmental board of inquiry into the failure of the government to see to the minimum needs of families expelled from Gaza this week.
Yishai stated that he would not have believed the horrors being endured by the families had he not seen it with his own eyes. In one case, he reported, a family was abandoned at a bus stop, left to fend for themselves after being thrown out of their homes.
Government officials admit there are problems, but insist that "overall, the families are provided for."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)