Israeli raid, Jerusalem clashes ratchet tensions higher

[webfact]

Israeli raid, Jerusalem clashes ratchet tensions higher

By Ari Rabinovitch

 

A masked Palestinian stands next to a burning tyre during clashes with Israeli troops in the West Bank village of Khobar near Ramallah July 22, 2017. REUTERS/Mohamad Torokman

 

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel sent extra troops into the occupied West Bank on Saturday and its police broke up a crowd of stone-throwing Palestinians in Jerusalem as international concern mounted over the deadliest outbreak of violence between the two sides for years.

 

The Palestinian Health Ministry said one Palestinian was killed during a separate clash outside the city, taking the death toll from the past two days to seven. It did not provide details of how he died.

 

Three Israelis were stabbed to death on Friday while eating dinner in a West Bank settlement. Hours earlier, three Palestinians were killed in violence prompted by Israel's installation of metal detectors at entry points to the Noble Sanctuary-Temple Mount compound in Jerusalem's walled Old City.

 

Russia, the United States, the European Union and the United Nations - the so-called Quartet of Middle East peace mediators - said in a joint statement they were "deeply concerned by the escalating tensions and violent clashes taking place in and around the Old City of Jerusalem", and called for restraint on all sides.

 

Diplomats said the U.N. Security Council would meet to discuss the situation on Monday. Sweden, Egypt and France requested the meeting to "urgently discuss how calls for de-escalation in Jerusalem can be supported", Sweden's Security Council coordinator, Carl Skau, posted on Twitter.

 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the suspension of all official contact with Israel until it removed the metal detectors at the holy compound in Jerusalem, where Muslims pray at Al-Aqsa mosque. He gave no details, but current contacts are largely limited to security cooperation.

 

Israel's security cabinet was due to convene on Sunday and is expected to discuss alternative security measures that could be used to replace the metal detectors, according to two Israeli officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

 

WEST BANK RAID

 

In Jerusalem, Israeli police said they used riot gear to disperse dozens of Palestinians who threw stones and bottles at them.

 

Television footage showed police throwing stun grenades and using a water cannon to break up the crowd.

 

In the West Bank, Israeli forces raided the home of the Palestinian attacker who fatally stabbed the three Israelis and wounded another on Friday, the military said.

 

An Israeli military spokeswoman said the attacker's brother was arrested and that security forces were restricting movement of Palestinians from his village.

 

The stabbing victims were from the fenced-in West Bank settlement of Neve Tsuf. The attacker, Omar Alabed, who invaded their home, was shot and taken to a hospital for treatment, the military said.

 

Alabed posted a note on Facebook prior to the attack, writing: "I am going there and I know I am not going to come back here, I will go to heaven. How sweet death is for the sake of God, his prophet and for Al-Aqsa mosque."

 

Israeli Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman met with senior commanders in the West Bank to assess the situation and said the attacker's home would be promptly demolished, in line with Israeli policy. He called on Abbas to condemn the attack, describing it as a "slaughter".

 

Palestinian worshippers had clashed with Israeli security forces before Friday's attack. Tensions had mounted for days as Palestinians hurled rocks and Israeli police used stun grenades after the detectors were placed outside the sacred venue, known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as Temple Mount.

 

The Palestinian Health Ministry said two Palestinians died of gunshot wounds in two neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem, some distance away from the epicentre of tension. It later reported a third Palestinian fatality.

 

Israel decided to install the metal detectors at the entry point to the shrine in Jerusalem about a week ago after the killing of two Israeli policemen stationed there.

 

(Reporting by Ari Rabinovitch and Nidal al-Mughrabi and Ali Sawafta, additional reporting by Robin Emmott in Brussels and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Editing by Mark Trevelyan)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-24

[gamini]

As long as Israel occupies Palestian land these clashes will continue. You can't blame the Palestinians. They have been subject to abusive treament by the occupation forces.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, gamini said:

As long as Israel occupies Palestian land these clashes will continue. You can't blame the Palestinians. They have been subject to abusive treament by the occupation forces.

 

There are very few who imagine hostilities will cease even if an agreement is eventually signed. As for "can't blame" - guess that relates to a point of view, rather than set in stone. Violence is not an inevitable part of resistance to an occupation.

[DaddyWarbucks]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

There are very few who imagine hostilities will cease even if an agreement is eventually signed. As for "can't blame" - guess that relates to a point of view, rather than set in stone. Violence is not an inevitable part of resistance to an occupation.

"Violence is not an inevitable part of resistance to an occupation."

So true, and that is why the non-violent BDS movement is such a threat to the radical Zionists. The more their supporters try to pass laws in other countries to outlaw it, the stronger it becomes.

The occupation of Palestinian land by Israel is the root cause of this conflict. Ending that occupation would be the first step in resolving it.

Certainly - by international consensus - Israel has a right to exist; but  there is no "right" to ethnic cleansing, no "right" to settler-colonial displacement, no "right" to discriminatory legislation, and no "right to a majoritarian, ethnocratic state that continues to deny the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.

Israel must change, and it will  change.  Moderate Israelis and increasing numbers of Jews worldwide are realizing that more and more.

 

 

[Morch]

6 hours ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

"Violence is not an inevitable part of resistance to an occupation."

So true, and that is why the non-violent BDS movement is such a threat to the radical Zionists. The more their supporters try to pass laws in other countries to outlaw it, the stronger it becomes.

The occupation of Palestinian land by Israel is the root cause of this conflict. Ending that occupation would be the first step in resolving it.

Certainly - by international consensus - Israel has a right to exist; but  there is no "right" to ethnic cleansing, no "right" to settler-colonial displacement, no "right" to discriminatory legislation, and no "right to a majoritarian, ethnocratic state that continues to deny the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.

Israel must change, and it will  change.  Moderate Israelis and increasing numbers of Jews worldwide are realizing that more and more.

 

 

 

Ah, so you wish to turn this into yet another B(d)s advocacy topic. Routine. And by the way, no - that doesn't threat or effect "radical Zionists", but all Israelis, and all Palestinians. As for it getting "stronger", I'd suggest supporting this with actual data, rather than wishful thinking.

 

And, another no - the conflict was there long before the Israeli occupation. Of course, some may adopt an extreme Palestinian view defining any Israeli presence between "the river and the sea" as unacceptable. This is not meant as a defense of Israel's occupation of the West Bank, but as less propaganda dominated point of view. As for the rest of the usual complaints heaped - may want to have a clue as to how the Palestinians envisage their own future state, then go on about legislation and such.

 

Calling for Israel to change is fine, turning a blind eye to the fact that this cuts both ways, is not.

 

 

 

[dexterm]

6 hours ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

"Violence is not an inevitable part of resistance to an occupation."

So true, and that is why the non-violent BDS movement is such a threat to the radical Zionists. The more their supporters try to pass laws in other countries to outlaw it, the stronger it becomes.

The occupation of Palestinian land by Israel is the root cause of this conflict. Ending that occupation would be the first step in resolving it.

Certainly - by international consensus - Israel has a right to exist; but  there is no "right" to ethnic cleansing, no "right" to settler-colonial displacement, no "right" to discriminatory legislation, and no "right to a majoritarian, ethnocratic state that continues to deny the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.

Israel must change, and it will  change.  Moderate Israelis and increasing numbers of Jews worldwide are realizing that more and more.

 

 

Hear hear. Very eloquently put.

 

Palestinians are entitled by law to resist illegal occupation by any means they can.

 

Palestinians have a legal right to armed struggle
It's time for Israel to accept that as an occupied people, Palestinians have a right to resist - in every way possible.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/07/palestinians-legal-armed-struggle-170719114812058.html

 

Israel and their apologists want it both ways...they condemn armed resistance then pass laws to suppress non violent passive resistance.

 

The racist supremacist ideology of Zionism is ultimately doomed to failure, because the indigenous Palestinians outnumber their occupiers, and a minority cannot continue to lord it over a majority forever.

Edited July 24, 2017 by dexterm

[Jingthing]

9 hours ago, gamini said:

As long as Israel occupies Palestian land these clashes will continue. You can't blame the Palestinians. They have been subject to abusive treament by the occupation forces.

How do you define Palestinian land? A very large portion of Palestinians define Palestinian land as river to the sea. That's why I would ask people spouting such rhetoric as above would specify what they mean. It makes a huge difference. 

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

More of the usual hypocrisy. Celebrating violence while claiming to reject it. A routine by now. There was no "apology", but a more balanced take on things. Calling anyone not embracing your extreme agenda and views an apologist is another tired routine. The nonsense bit about legislation is yet another twisted interpretation. One way or the other, those you like to call "apologists (meaning not agreeing with you), do not actually pass any laws. The rest is just the usual attempt to push as many negative descriptors as possible in one sentence.

 

You have nothing meaningful to add directly on topic, hence the run-of-the-mill one-sided commentary.

 

Edit: as a reminder (been through this before), here are some details on the author of the piece you linked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Cohen_(attorney)

I'll take anything either of you opines on these issues with a truckload of salt.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Morch

[DaddyWarbucks]

40 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

More of the usual hypocrisy. Celebrating violence while claiming to reject it. A routine by now. There was no "apology", but a more balanced take on things. Calling anyone not embracing your extreme agenda and views an apologist is another tired routine. The nonsense bit about legislation is yet another twisted interpretation. One way or the other, those you like to call "apologists (meaning not agreeing with you), do not actually pass any laws. The rest is just the usual attempt to push as many negative descriptors as possible in one sentence.

 

You have nothing meaningful to add directly on topic, hence the run-of-the-mill one-sided commentary.

 

Edit: as a reminder (been through this before), here are some details on the author of the piece you linked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Cohen_(attorney)

I'll take anything either of you opines on these issues with a truckload of salt.

Your post - from beginning to end - is an argumentum ad hominem.

Why don't you address and debate the issues instead of attacking fellow members?

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

Your post - from beginning to end - is an argumentum ad hominem.

Why don't you address and debate the issues instead of attacking fellow members?

No, it isn't. Why don't you go play moderator elsewhere?

Pointing out double standards, hypocrisy, and inaccuracies is apparently not to your liking. That is, if it goes against your views. Apparently no such issues when the poster your support goes on labeling anyone not seeing things his way an apologist and worse.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2017 by Morch

[DaddyWarbucks]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

No, it isn't. Why don't you go play moderator elsewhere?

Pointing out double standards, hypocrisy, and inaccuracies is apparently not to your liking. That is, if it goes against your views. Apparently no such issues when the poster your support goes on labeling anyone not seeing things his way an apologist and worse.

 

 

There you go again.

[Morch]

Just now, DaddyWarbucks said:

There you go again.

Of course. When you make an ad hominem post, it's alright. When your post is answered, it isn't.

 

[Scott]

Continue with off-topic posts and you will be suspended.  

 

Final Warning.  

[dexterm]

Looks like common sense has at last prevailed, and Netanyahu's cabinet have taken the advice of their security services to remove the offensive metal detectors, which they should have done before the deaths of 7 people.

 

Shin Bet warns, Cabinet ignores
"Israel’s Security Cabinet met on Thursday to decide whether or not to remove the metal detectors from the entrance to the holy compound. Shin Bet advised they should be removed. But Bibi was more worried about what his hard-right rivals would say than by what Palestinians would do."
http://jfjfp.com/

 

Maybe another case of too little too late..history of politics.

 

[Morch]

18 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Looks like common sense has at last prevailed, and Netanyahu's cabinet have taken the advice of their security services to remove the offensive metal detectors, which they should have done before the deaths of 7 people.

 

Shin Bet warns, Cabinet ignores
"Israel’s Security Cabinet met on Thursday to decide whether or not to remove the metal detectors from the entrance to the holy compound. Shin Bet advised they should be removed. But Bibi was more worried about what his hard-right rivals would say than by what Palestinians would do."
http://jfjfp.com/

 

Maybe another case of too little too late..history of politics.

 

 

It would seem that for some, common sense, is something that's expected only of Israel. Palestinian contributing their fair share to aggravating and prolonging the crisis is acceptable, though, and goes without comment. One side's religious nutters and domestic politics are an issue, the other side's aren't even mentioned.

 

The link above tells nothing of how and why an acceptable solution was apparently found, it's just a re-hash of similar articles from the same source - which is by the way, Haaretz, and not the venue linked. 

 

The crisis was, apparently, resolved due to a parallel related crisis arising between Israel and Jordan. The solutions to both are pretty much a trade off. Israel would remove the metal detectors, and install an advanced system of cctv's instead, while Jordan will drop its demand to disregard diplomatic immunity in the case referred to on this topic:

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/993862-jordanian-man-killed-two-people-wounded-at-israeli-embassy-in-jordan-police/

 

Other than Netanyahu and his government making bad choices, again, this crisis demonstrated several other standing issues pertaining to ME diplomacy and relations between the various parties: (a) US involvement is still a factor, (b) There is a convergence of interests between Israel and non-religious elements on the Arab side, which can be a basis for cooperation, (c) The Palestinians getting sidelined by Arab countries when it fits.

 

[dexterm]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

It would seem that for some, common sense, is something that's expected only of Israel. Palestinian contributing their fair share to aggravating and prolonging the crisis is acceptable, though, and goes without comment. One side's religious nutters and domestic politics are an issue, the other side's aren't even mentioned.

 

The link above tells nothing of how and why an acceptable solution was apparently found, it's just a re-hash of similar articles from the same source - which is by the way, Haaretz, and not the venue linked. 

 

The crisis was, apparently, resolved due to a parallel related crisis arising between Israel and Jordan. The solutions to both are pretty much a trade off. Israel would remove the metal detectors, and install an advanced system of cctv's instead, while Jordan will drop its demand to disregard diplomatic immunity in the case referred to on this topic:

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/993862-jordanian-man-killed-two-people-wounded-at-israeli-embassy-in-jordan-police/

 

Other than Netanyahu and his government making bad choices, again, this crisis demonstrated several other standing issues pertaining to ME diplomacy and relations between the various parties: (a) US involvement is still a factor, (b) There is a convergence of interests between Israel and non-religious elements on the Arab side, which can be a basis for cooperation, (c) The Palestinians getting sidelined by Arab countries when it fits.

 

>>It would seem that for some, common sense, is something that's expected only of Israel. Palestinian contributing their fair share to aggravating and prolonging the crisis is acceptable, though, and goes without comment. 

 

Israel is illegally occupying Palestinians, not the other way around!
Israel is the only side with a standing army and the power to impose any restriction they like unilaterally without consultation.

 

If Netanyahu makes a dumb, provocative collective punishment move, it's not the responsibility of Palestinians to appease him, collaborate with him to help him out of a tight spot. Their job is to call it as they see it...yet another Israeli checkpoint, more swaggering Israeli attempts to impose creeping sovereignty on occupied East Jersualem and the al Aqsa mosque..the one place where Palestinian worshippers had some degree of autonomy.

Edited July 25, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, dexterm said:

>>It would seem that for some, common sense, is something that's expected only of Israel. Palestinian contributing their fair share to aggravating and prolonging the crisis is acceptable, though, and goes without comment. 

 

Israel is illegally occupying Palestinians, not the other way around!
Israel is the only side with a standing army and the power to impose any restriction they like unilaterally without consultation.

 

If Netanyahu makes a dumb, provocative collective punishment move, it's not the responsibility of Palestinians to appease him, collaborate with him to help him out of a tight spot. Their job is to call it as they see it...yet another Israeli checkpoint, more swaggering Israeli attempts to impose creeping sovereignty on occupied East Jersualem and the al Aqsa mosque..the one place where Palestinian worshippers had some degree of autonomy.

 

Despite standing denial, conflicts are never one-sided. Confrontation and crisis can be responded to in any number of ways. Ignoring the fact that related Palestinian actions were not necessarily reasonable or contributed much to peaceful resolution of the current episode is a choice.

 

There was no claim that the Palestinians are the occupying force. There was no denial of Israel's military advantage. What is denied, and not routinely not addressed in your posts, is that there is no imperative dictating that the Palestinians have to pick a violent path. For example, rather than immediately engaging in sermons highlighting confrontation, rejection and violence, religious leaders could have calmed things down and do their best to reach an alternative solution.  Again, a matter of choice. And despite standing nonsense, this choice is rejected.

 

Not arguing the wisdom of the Israeli government's decision making, but placement of the metal detectors was in now way "collective punishment". Similarly there was nothing said about "appeasement", or helping Netanyahu out of a tough spot - that's just how you choose to formulate things. Whether Palestinian leaders choose confrontation, with the expected toll over exhausting the possible avenues to a peaceful solution is another choice. 

 

Seems like the preference is given to confrontation and bloodshed, and that possible attempts to calm things down are painted negatively. For someone repeatedly claiming to be against violence, your standing position is odd, at best.

[Galactus]

murdered Israel is on the run again! 

so Israelis stole those lands and now they dont even let Palestinians do their religious activities in their one and a half millennium holy place!

Israel doesnt want peace, they just want ethnic cleansing and occupy all the land belongs to Palestinians.

Israel wants blood and land and rant. that is what they want and israel looks like doesnt want to stop until it gets them.

 

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Galactus said:

murdered Israel is on the run again! 

so Israelis stole those lands and now they dont even let Palestinians do their religious activities in their one and a half millennium holy place!

Israel doesnt want peace, they just want ethnic cleansing and occupy all the land belongs to Palestinians.

Israel wants blood and land and rant. that is what they want and israel looks like doesnt want to stop until it gets them.

 

 

 

Same old incoherent nonsense.

 

To remind, the current crisis started with three Islamic zealots opening fire on policeman stationed near the compound's gates. There is not "stolen land" in conjecture with the Temple Mount. It was not designated as part of the Palestinian territory. Other than immediately following the shooting mentioned above, Palestinians were not prevented from praying at the compound. The decision to hold the prayers outside was the Waqf's. Muslim worshipers visiting Mecca face harsher security measures and stricter surveillance. Not only that, but as far as I recall, security is handled by a British firm.

The rest of the rant is the usual vehement slogans - if you haven' been paying attention, seems like a solution has been reached after all.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2017 by Morch