Inflated Palestinian Population Figures Lie Behind Talk of 'Demographic Time Bomb,' Israeli Expert Says
Ben Cohen, Senior Editor, The Algemeiner, December 30, 2014
http://bit.ly/1tyaite

The latest demographic survey of the Palestinian population by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics overestimates the number of Palestinians resident between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan by around 1.2 million, a leading Israeli expert on demography has told The Algemeiner.

Ambassador Yoram Ettinger, a former Israeli diplomat who now works as lecturer and consultant and is well-known in policy circles for his research on Palestinian and Israeli demography, said that the Palestinian statistics, released yesterday, "are inflated by more than 1 million in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and by almost 400,000 in Gaza.”

According to the Palestinian statistics bureau, there are over 6 million Palestinians living west of the Jordan; Ettinger calculates the number at 4.8 million.

The inflated numbers are a key factor behind the current claim that Palestinians will outnumber Jews living in Israel and the Palestinian territories by 2016. Similarly false claims have been made in previous years, triggering the politically-loaded conclusion that Israel, in supposedly becoming a country where a Jewish minority rules over an Arab majority, has effectively emerged as an apartheid state.

Ettinger identified several methodological flaws in the official Palestinian count. "According to their own records, they include over 400,000, mostly in Judea and Samaria, who are abroad for more than a year,” he said. This contradicts, Ettinger said, the "international standards” which dictate that a person who lives outside his or her country for more than a year should not be included in a count of the resident population.

"The only entity that doesn't follow this practice is the Palestinian statistics bureau,” Ettinger said.

The 300,000 Arab residents of eastern Jerusalem who carry Israeli identity cards comprise a similar problem in terms of population count, Ettinger observed, as they are "counted twice, in the Israeli count of the number of Israeli Arabs, and the Palestinian count of the number of residents of the West Bank.” The 105,000 Palestinians who received Israeli citizenship between 1997 and 2003 by virtue of marrying Israeli Arab citizens – a pathway canceled by an Israeli Supreme Court decision in 2003, which denied automatic citizenship through marriage to residents of several Arab and Muslim countries that do not have diplomatic relations with Israel – are also "doubly counted,” Ettinger said.

All these numbers, Ettinger emphasized, grow every year, "because many of these people produce children who are added to the numbers.” In October 2014, he noted, the Palestinian deputy interior minister even said that "100,000 children born to overseas Palestinians had been added to the overall count.”

When it comes to migration patterns, Palestinian statistics are equally problematic, Ettinger said. Since there is no net immigration into Palestinian areas, population surveys assume no net emigration – yet, Ettinger pointed out, data collected by the Israeli border police, who control all 13 land, sea and air exit points into Israel and the Palestinian territories, demonstrates that in 2013, net emigration stood at 20,000, with similar numbers recorded over the four previous years. Significantly, this does not include Gaza, where no count has been conducted since the Israeli withdrawal in 2005, but Ettinger asserted that "those who deal with Gaza say the number of emigrants is much higher, as a result of war, instability and the disintegrating economy.”

Once adjustments for the Palestinian errors are made, Ettinger said, a different picture of Arab settlement emerges: 1.7 million in the West Bank (as opposed to the 2.83 million claimed in the Palestinian survey, which includes eastern Jerusalem) and 1.4 million in Gaza (instead of the 1.79 million in the Gaza Strip claimed in the survey.) Interestingly, the Palestinian survey gives a lower account of the number of Palestinians resident in Israel – 1.46 million, as opposed to the 1.7 million claimed in the Israeli count – though this is likely connected to the manner in which residents of eastern Jerusalem are counted by Palestinian and Israeli sources respectively.

With 6.5 million Jews resident in Israel, Ettinger said, there is a clear Jewish majority of 66 percent in Israel and the West Bank – that figure dips to 58 percent if Gaza is factored in. Moreover, he said, birth patterns are now weighted towards the Jewish population: the Palestinian fertility rate has dropped from 5 babies per mother in 2000 to 2.9 now, while the Jewish birth rate "is slightly over three and increasing.” Among the reasons for the drop in the Palestinian birth rate is the growing popularity of contraception, increasing access to higher education, and a trend towards urbanization, which means that Palestinian women are marrying later in life.

The Jewish population has additionally been boosted by favorable migration patterns – according to Ettinger, Israel "is now benefiting from the highest number per capita ever of returning expatriates” – and increasing fertility among the secular Jewish population. This includes the descendants of the 1 million Jews who came to Israel from the former Soviet Union during the 1990s, whose fertility rate exceeds two children per family, as well as the burgeoning Israeli middle class, who twenty years ago would have had one or two children per family, and who presently have three or four.

While Ettinger's revisions are unlikely to stall the continual talk of a "demographic time bomb” toppling Israel's Jewish majority, his calculations are, he said, regarded as far more reliable by experts on demography. The prevalence in the media of the Palestinian figures is, he argued, partly down to the international protocol of regarding statistics assembled by national authorities as beyond reproach. "It is assumed that central statistics bureaus are above politics,” he said.

From  CAMERA (with minor editing)…..

Top Ten MidEast Media Mangles for 2014:

1. Hate-Indoctrination and Incitement Ignored

No issue was more  neglected by most of the media than the demonizing of Israel and the Jewish people by the Palestinians and the wider Muslim/Arab world. Instead of reporting the hate-indoctrination  for what it is -- a central driving force for violence and  a fundamental threat to peace -- media outlets such as The New York Times typically ignored the phenomenon or characterized it as merely an accusation by Israelis rather than an objective reality.

Few instances of such media malpractice were as blatant as The Times' censoring of Secretary of State John Kerry's strong denunciation of incitement as the cause of the massacre of Jews at prayer in Jerusalem's Har Nof synagogue.  Kerry's emphatic statement was first included in an online version of the New York Times story but later entirely excised by the time the printed account reached readers.

2. Gaza War Distortions

Covering the Israel-Gaza conflict, the popular press promoted numerous myths. In a devastating expose after the fighting, former AP reporter Matti Friedman  summarized the media's impact in Tablet:

The lasting importance of this summer’s war, I believe, doesn't lie in the war itself. It lies instead in the way the war has been described and responded to abroad, and the way this has laid bare the resurgence of an old, twisted pattern of thought and its migration from the margins to the mainstream of Western discourse -- namely hostile obsession with Jews. The key to understanding this resurgence is not to be found among jihadi web masters, basement conspiracy theorist, or radical activists. It is instead to be found first among the educated and respectable people who populate the international news industry.

  "Friedman touches on serious distortions  including hugely disproportionate focus on relatively modest faults of the Jewish state and at the same time journalistic neglect of the suffering of millions across the globe and of their tormentors. He makes the key point that, contrary to what might appear to be intense journalistic interest in the plight of the Palestinians, reporters actually do not have real curiosity about the breadth and depth of that community. Only as Palestinians intersect with Israel do they come into view -- not for themselves.”

Former BBC correspondent Richard Miron blogged his agreement, expanding on the ramifications of the botched coverage:

The media must also account for itself and for its own conduct including apparent omissions and failures in the reporting of the conflict. It must question where reporting may have ended and emoting began, if it held Israel to a standard apart from all others, and why it allowed Hamas a free pass in controlling the flow of information. Its coverage had consequences in fueling the passions (and hatred) of many on the streets of Paris, London and elsewhere towards Israel, and by extension towards Jews.”

3. Parroting Hamas’ Inflated Civilian Casualty Claims

One of the  fallacies hyped by news outlets regarding the summer conflict was the claim that “the vast majority” of casualties in Gaza were civilians. Such claims cropped up in the BBC, The Los Angeles Times, CNN and countless others. The statistics were promoted by the Gaza Health Ministry and reported at face value by many journalists, despite the fact that this ministry is run by Hamas and has every incentive to inflate civilian casualty figures to garner world sympathy. Gaza residents were even instructed to lie about civilian casualties to the press, a critical point almost entirely ignored by the media.

Subsequent itemized Israeli studies showed roughly half the casualties in Gaza were combatants. While  this documentation helped blunt  some of the rote parroting of Hamas claims, the “vast majority” fallacy was repeated only ten days ago by Reuters. Israeli tactics limited civilian casualties to roughly a one-to-one civilian to combatant casualty rate, a remarkable ratio in urban fighting where fighters are entrenched, in bunkers and tunnels and using civilians as human shields.

4. Coverage of Klinghoffer Opera Controversy

Coverage of the October 2014 staging of the controversial opera “The Death of Klinghoffer” largely neglected any serious inspection of the libretto and the substantive concerns of many in the public about the cultural promoting of anti-Jewish stereotypes and the inversion of victim and terrorist in the work. Though persuaded to cancel the simulcast of the opera , reducing the potential audience by hundreds of thousands, New York’s prestigious Metropolitan Opera nonetheless staged the production. The editorial boards of the New York Times and Boston Globe decried the cancellation of the broadcast. And The New York Times continued to justify the opera.

5. AGAIN: The New York Times Dramatically Slants Op-Eds Against Israel

The New York Times is nearly seven times more likely to publish opinion columns primarily critical of Israel than those primarily critical of the Palestinians, continuing a pattern of bias previously documented at the newspaper, a new CAMERA analysis has found. The newspaper is also twice as likely to publish opinion pieces that predominantly support the Palestinian narrative about which side deserves more sympathy or criticism than pieces that predominantly support the Israeli narrative. New York Times { Personal observation: Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren does not differentiate between objective reporting and pushing her personal viewpoint …as revealed in her tweets…and her editors seem to prefer advocacy over straightforward journalism.}

6. Yahoo News Promotes Antisemitic Hate Site

The hate site Veterans News Now (VNN) has been promoted a number of times on the front page of Yahoo, one of the most visited sites on the internet. VNN is an extremist site whose output includes Holocaust denial and 9/11 conspiracy mongering and is run by Debbie Menon, a fanatical Jew-hater who has approvingly shared text that claims “Jews toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse” and that “It is a marvel that the American people do not rise up and drive every Jew out of this country.” James M. Wall, former editor of The Christian Century, a magazine that caters to liberal (mainline) Protestants in the United States, is also helping to mainstream VNN by having his articles published on the site and by agreeing to serve as an “associate editor” for the publication.

7. Medical Journal The Lancet Infected with Anti-Israel Bias

On July 23, 2014 the medical journal The Lancet published “An open letter for the people in Gaza.”  There was neither medical nor journalistic excellence in the piece. Instead, it was  an anti-Israel screed replete with mischaracterizations, important omissions, flat out falsehoods and unsubstantiated accusations. {Personal observation:Several professional Associates have have submitted materials directly to Richard Horton, Lancet's editor…Richard (ELS-CAM) Horton <richard.horton@lancet.com,  Lancet staff….astrid.james@lancet.com, r.cooney@lancet.com, …and Karen Antman. Dean of the Boston University medical school… We Karen Antman <kha4@bu.edu>. As Camera noted, Lancet has not as yet issued a retraction and/or correction. This is of particular concern since Lancet is delving increasingly in political matters and US government agencies are major funder, directly and indirectly, of Lancet. }

8. Jon Stewart’s Unfunny Slant against Israel

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart grossly mischaracterized the 2014 Gaza conflict. Stewart implied that Israel and Hamas are both happy to be engaged in conflict when, as David Horovitz wrote in the Times of Israel analysis:

Hamas is avowedly committed to the destruction of Israel and holds to a perverted interpretation of Islam that claims killing Jews, Christians and non-believing Muslims is your guaranteed path to paradise if you also die in the process. Israelis, by contrast, would much rather live and let live. He ignored the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization engaged in suicide bombings, individual killings, kidnappings, and incessant rocket fire at Israel. (We left Gaza unilaterally in 2005, under international pressure, hoping that the security risk would be worth it, and that we’d be rewarded with tranquility rather than rocket fire, but I wouldn’t expect Stewart to go back that far.)

To the extent that viewers -- many of them young -- rely on Stewart as a legitimate news source his know-nothing attempt at humor could have serious consequences. 

9. CNN’s Confused Journalism

During Operation Protective Edge, CNN’s coverage was, at best, mixed. Some of the lowlights include:

1) In a July 25 interview with Wolf Blitzer, senior Palestinian official Nabil Shaath insisted that one thousand Palestinians in Gaza had been killed at the time, and that “700 of them are women, children and elderly civilians.” Shaath’s number was egregiously off the mark but, as CNN anchors did in many similar interviews, Blitzer passively allowed baseless charges against Israel to pass without even the slightest challenge. 

2) On July 29, “CNN Tonight” broadcast a segment showing a film clip of Hamas terrorists emerging from a tunnel inside Israel. This footage was put out by Hamas, aired on Al Aqsa TV, and showed the terrorists attacking Israeli soldiers. Host Don Lemon questioned correspondent Martin Savidge about the tunnels, asking “Does this [video] make Israel’s point about the danger it faces?” Savidge replies that “the attacks were on soldiers, which could be considered legitimate targets. So in some ways, this is very compelling in supporting Hamas’ argument that, no, these tunnels are being used to wage a war, not to go after civilians.” In truth, the IDF thwarted an attempted infiltration by Hamas terrorists into Kibbutz Sufa and provided footage of the attempted infiltration. The Israeli Shin Bet exposed a Hamas plot for a massive attack on civilians via the Gaza tunnels to be carried out on the Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.

3) On the CNN Web site, an “informational” piece stated, “The tunnels have, for some time, also been used as vital supply lines to Gaza, through which food and other necessities have been transported.” CNN must surely know – and must inform viewers – that the tunnels used to smuggle supplies were located on the Egypt‑Gaza border while the tunnels used by terrorists to attack Israel have been dug under the Israel‑Gaza border.

More recently, in coverage of the bloody slaughter of four rabbis during morning prayers by cleaver-wielding Palestinian terrorists, CNN headlines and clips erased Palestinian culpability. Original online headlines and on-screen captions equated the victims with the killers:

• “4 Israelis, 2 Palestinians killed in synagogue attack, Israeli police say”
• “4 Israelis, 2 Palestinians dead in Jerusalem”

In another gaffe, a CNN ticker referred to the attack as a “deadly attack on Jerusalem mosque.”

10. NPR Backsliding into Old Anti-Israel Habits?

In a July segment of On The Media, host Brooke Gladstone concealed essential background about her guest speaker, Philip Weiss, instead presenting him as a mainstream, credible expert with no substantive challenge whatsoever given to his statements. Gladstone introduced Weiss without any indication of his fringe views, calling him simply the “co-editor of Mondoweiss.net,” failing to inform listeners that Weiss is an avowed anti-Zionist who supports the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign to weaken and dismantle the Jewish state and whose blog feverishly lambasts the Jewish state with one-sided and frequently inaccurate charges. Across the network’s schedule, NPR hosts repeatedly fail to challenge the false claims of anti-Israel guests. Not infrequently, NPR shows lack a balanced approach, distort and obscure the facts and conceal essential information.

CHINA, ISRAEL AND THE JEWS. ESSENTIAL LESSONS FOR ALL US DECISION-MAKERS.

This program was linked at ISRAPUNDIT.ORG    the 1st 24 min. with Dr. Harold Rhode is an excellent discussion of Islam, China and US government mindset. It is a “must listen” assignment for all military officers and civilian decision-makers.

http://www.voiceofisrael.com/chinese-enigma-french-jews-peril-liberal-conscience-stirs/?auto=1

Why are the Chinese so fascinated by Israel and the Jews? Just how bad is the situation for Jews in France? And what to make of remarks about Israel and anti-Semitism by a liberal academic icon and a BBC executive? With guests Dr. Harold Rhode and Michel Gurfinkiel.

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger…challenging conventional wisdom and providing information and assessments unavailable in the "elite media."

From Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

A.     Linked below  are a few  "politically-incorrect" articles on issues which are relevant to the national security of the US and Israel and their bilateral relations.

The documents aim at generating second thoughts (out of the box thinking), challenging conventional wisdom and providing information and assessments unavailable in the "elite media." 

The documents are based on Ambassador Ettinger's  40 years of  experience  - as a researcher, diplomat (Ambassador), lecturer, writer and consultant to members of Congress and Knesset -  in the areas of Middle East politics and US policy in the Middle East ( see CV{ Section B},below).

1.  Exposing the demographic bogey (Jewish demographic tailwind; no Arab demographic time bomb). 

2.  Israel also fights America's battle.

3. A nuclear Iran's chief target would be the USA: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy.

4.  Islamic terrorists are no "lone wolves."

5.  US-Israel two-way-street relations: Israel's unique contributions to the US national security and economy.

6.  Is the Palestinian issue the crown jewel of Arab policy makers (The Middle East "talk" VS. "walk")?

7.  Who are you, Mahmoud Abbas?

8.  A Palestinian state – would it further US interests?

9.  Are the "settlements" an obstacle to peace?

  

10.  Can Israel afford to concede the mountain ridges of Judea & Samaria (West Bank)?

More documents are posted at The Ettinger Report: http://www.TheEttingerReport.com

B.     Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger,CV

1.  Professional Background:

*A Consultant to Israel’s Cabinet Members, to Israeli legislators and a lecturer in the US, Canada and Israel on Israel’s unique contributions to US interests, the foundations of US-Israel relations, the Iranian threat, the Palestinian issue, the Jewish-Arab demographic balance, etc.

*(Since 1993) Frequently interviewed on Israeli and US TV and radio and published in Israel's dailies, as well as in the US.

*Executive Director of "Second Thought – A U.S. Israel Initiative," dedicated to generate out-of-the-box thinking on US-Israel relations, Middle East affairs, the Palestinian issue, Jewish-Arab demographics, etc.

*(1989-1992) Minister for Congressional Affairs – with the rank of Ambassador - at Israel’s Embassy in Washington, DC, dealing with bilateral commercial, military and diplomatic ties, foreign aid, etc.

*(1988-1989) Director of the Government Press Office in Jerusalem, coordinating contacts between government officials and overseas journalists.

*(1985-1988) Israel’s Consul General in Houston, Texas, furthering ties with politicians, businessmen, oilmen, ranchers, Hispanics, Blacks, Evangelical leaders and Jewish communities in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and New Mexico.

* Member of the American-Israel Demographic Research Group (AIDRG), which has documented a one million gap in the number of Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

*(Since 1993) President of "US-Israel Opportunities, Ltd", a consultancy on US and Mideast policies, focusing on Israel’s relations with the US Congress, as well as on US investments in Israel.

*(Spring, 2003) Lecturer on “US Politics” - Hebrew University Executive MBA Program.

*(1997-2000) The Alabama Trade Representative in Israel.

*(Since 1993) Editor of Straight From The Jerusalem Cloakroom/Boardroom newsletters on national security and US investments in Israel, disseminated to over 5,000 movers and shakers in Washington, DC and throughout the US.

*(1976-1985) Editor/founder of the Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, a newsletter, disseminated in 5 languages among policy-makers in the US, Europe, Latin America, Canada, India and Japan.  The newsletter dealt with Mideast politics, US policy in the Mideast, international terrorism, the Palestinian issue and the peace process.  

*(1984) Lecturer on Mideast Politics at the Hebrew U. School of Overseas Students.

*(1975-1976) Deputy Director of the American Cultural Center in Jerusalem.

*(1971-1973) Information Officer at Israel’s Consulate General in Los Angeles.

2.   Educational and Personal Background

*(1971) M.S. in International Management, UCLA.

*(1971) Certified Public Accountant (CPA), California.

*(1969) B.A. in Business Administration, University of Texas at El Paso.

C.     Topics of Speaking Engagements (PowerPoint Presentations July, 2014)

     Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger…..

1. The US-Israel Two-Way Street (Israel's unique contributions to the US economy and national security).

2. The war in Gaza – regional implications.

3. The enemy of my enemy is my enemy (Can the US afford a nuclear Iran?).

4. *No Demographic Arab Time Bomb; a Robust Jewish Demographic Tailwind.

5. *Is Israel Isolated? (Israel embraced by the global business community).

6. *The Foundations of the US-Israel Covenant – Shared values from the Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers to 2014.

7. The Palestinian Issue – Is it the Core of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, the root cause of Middle East turbulence, the crown jewel of Arab policy-making, or a core cause of anti-US Islamic terrorism?

8. The Impact of the Proposed Palestinian State on Vital US Interests.

9. US policy in the Middle East – a case of fundamental misperceptions.

10.  *The Palestinian Refugees – Why? Whose responsibility? How many? Where did they come from? The global context? Jewish refugees! 

11.   US Pressure on Israel – myth & reality.

12.  The muscle of the US Congress in the areas of foreign policy and national security (a bastion of systematic support of US-Israel cooperation).

13.   *The Mountain Ridges of Judea & Samaria: Are they indispensable to the survival of the Jewish State?

D.    Get his e-book, "Jewish Holidays Guide for the Perplexed": https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/499393 (click pdf)

www.TheEttingerReport.com, Facebook    Twitter    LinkedIn   

Is Israel stealing private Palestinian land? 

 Moshe Dann, JPOST 12-29-14

One of the most serious accusations against Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is that Israel systematically steals or “seizes” private Palestinian land.

One of the most serious accusations against Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is that Israel systematically steals or “seizes” private Palestinian land. Not only would that be illegal, it would also be immoral. The source for this charge is not only the Palestinian Authority/Hamas, anti-Israel media and Arab propaganda, but an agency of the Israeli government: Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT).

COGAT, a unit of the Defense Ministry, is responsible for “implementing government policy in Judea and Samaria.” But COGAT not only “implements,” it also makes policy. And, as separate, independent military-legal administration, it is virtually unaccountable to anyone except the defense minister and the prime minister.

They are responsible for this misrepresentation of fact.

COGAT and the IDF legal advisor, in cooperation with the attorney general’s office, the state prosecutor’s office, the Justice Ministry and the High Court, routinely decide that land claimed by Arabs are valid. These claims, however, based on massive distributions of state land throughout Judea and Samaria during the Jordanian occupation, lack supporting evidence of ownership. Nevertheless, COGAT recognizes the claims as valid, thus supporting charges that Israel steals private land.

Based on COGAT’s decisions, which are not reviewed by district courts – the only judicial body mandated to determine matters of land ownership – NGOs supporting Arab claims appeal to the High Court, which relies heavily on COGAT as the government’s authority. COGAT defends its decisions by citing the land registry (taba) for Judea and Samaria, which lists names of “owners,” mostly villages and tribes who were given state land during the early 1960s. None of the land was purchased, most of the land was never used, no taxes were paid and the original Arab recipients of land are no longer alive. To whom does this disputed land belong? According to Ottoman and British Mandate law, gifted land could not be inherited without approval by the sovereign.

Moreover, land that was given by the sovereign could be claimed as private only if the land was used continually (usufruct) for 10 years and taxes were paid.

Otherwise, unused land reverts to the sovereign by law. Jordan changed this law and registered the land as privately owned, permanently, without conditions.

But since Jordan was never acknowledged as the legitimate sovereign over this territory, its occupation and anti-Jewish laws – including prohibiting non-Jordanian citizens from owning land and incurring the death penalty for selling land to Jews – have no validity.

COGAT disagrees.

The status of land in Judea and Samaria was further confused by former High Court chief justice Dorit Beinish who, at the end of her term, decided unilaterally that hazakah, the right to claim title to land by working it and paying taxes, applied only to Arabs, not Jews.

Since COGAT considers the land registry for Judea and Samaria “confidential,” it restricts access to it by Jews, making it nearly impossible to challenge Arab claims of private ownership or for Jews to acquire land. COGAT’s secretive procedure is backed by the High Court which defends COGAT’s rule as a government agency. COGAT refuses to explain why its rules prevail exclusively and why access to public documents is forbidden. Regavim, an NGO, challenged the legality of COGAT’s position specifically with regard to land surrounding the Jewish community of Psagot.

Regavim claimed that COGAT’s policies discriminate against Jews. The Jerusalem District Court agreed, awarded the case to Regavim, and ordered COGAT to make available land records of the surrounding area; COGAT has appealed to the High Court.

According to Ari Briggs, spokesman for Regavim, COGAT’s policy restricts access to the land registry for Judea and Samaria only to people who are “connected to the land” – and defines those people exclusively as Arabs.

Regavim’s legal challenge is to force COGAT to end its discriminatory policy and allow equal access to Jews. Not only did COGAT appeal the District Court’s decision, it also forbade access to the land registry by military order – thus transforming what should be a normal administrative process into their own exclusive domain.

Since 2008, COGAT has prevented the operation of a sewage treatment plant between the Arab village of Silwad and the Jewish community of Ofra because, COGAT ruled, it is built on “private Palestinian land” which belongs to the village. The attorney general and the High Court have ordered that the project – which would serve all residents of the area – be removed.

COGAT also opposes plans to widen the road near the Adam Junction because it infringes on “private Palestinian land.” Asked for details about who owns the land in question, COGAT has refused. And COGAT is the law.

The government could rectify this discriminatory and undemocratic system by appointing independent courts to adjudicate land disputes and determine ownership, and/or by extending the jurisdiction of District Courts as recommended by a commission of legal experts headed by the late justice Edmund Levy.

The High Court could also require that disputes over land ownership be heard first by District Courts before any appeals, as is commonly practiced in all democratic countries.

Inexplicably, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to allow the government to discuss the Levy Commission’s report.

Adopting the Levy Commission’s recommendations – not glib rhetoric about Jewish statehood – is the true expression of Jewish sovereignty.

The author is a PhD historian, writer and journalist.

   

Share on Facebook 

The US president is not omnipotent Yoram Ettinger 12-28-14 White House and State Department officials contend that, irrespective of Congress, President Barack Obama can apply effective diplomatic, commercial and national security pressure and coerce Israel to partition Jerusalem and retreat from Judea and Samaria to the 9-15 mile-wide pre-1967 sliver, surrounded by the violently turbulent and unpredictable Arab street. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro recently voiced this inaccurate underestimation of the power of Congress -- which has traditionally opposed pressure on Israel, echoing the sentiments of most constituents -- saying, "What is unmistakable about our foreign policy system is that the Constitution provides the president with the largest share of power." The assertion that U.S. foreign policy and national security are shaped by presidential omnipotence can be refuted by the U.S. Constitution as well as recent precedents. The Constitution was created by the Founding Fathers, who were determined to limit the power of government and preclude the possibility of executive dictatorship. They were apprehensive of potential presidential excesses and encroachment, and therefore assigned the formulation of foreign policy and national security to both Congress and the president. Obviously, the coalescing of policy between 535 legislators constitutes a severe disadvantage for the legislature. According to the Congressional Quarterly, the U.S. Constitution rectified the mistakes of its predecessor, the Articles of Confederation, upgrading the role of Congress to the primary branch of the U.S. government. "Hence, the first article of the Constitution is dedicated to Congress. The powers, structure, and procedures of the national legislature are outlined in considerable detail in the Constitution, unlike those of the presidency and the judiciary." Unlike all other Western democracies -- where the executive branch of government dominates the legislature, especially in the area of international relations and defense -- the U.S. Constitution laid the foundation for the world's most powerful legislature, and for an inherent power struggle over the making of foreign policy between the legislature and the executive, two independent, co-equal and co-determining branches of government. Moreover, while the president is the commander in chief, presidential clout depends largely on congressional authorization and appropriation in a system of separation of powers and checks and balances, especially in the areas of sanctions, foreign aid, military assistance, trade agreements, treaty ratification, appointment confirmation and all spending. Congressional power has been dramatically bolstered since the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair and globalization, which have enhanced the involvement of most legislators in international issues, upgraded the oversight capabilities of Congress, dramatically elevated the quality and quantity of some 15,000(!) Capitol Hill staffers and have restrained the presidency. However, Congress has often abdicated its constitutional power in the area of foreign policy, failing to fully leverage the power of the purse: funding, defunding and "fencing." Legislators prefer to focus on domestic issues, which represent their constituents' primary concerns and therefore determine their re-electability. Hence, they usually allow the president to take the lead in the initiation and implementation of foreign and national security policies, unless the president abuses their trust, outrageously usurping power, violating the law, assuming an overly imperial posture, pursuing strikingly failed policies, or dramatically departing from national consensus (e.g., the deeply rooted, bipartisan commitment to the Jewish state). Then, Congress reveals impressive muscle as befits a legislature, which is the most authentic reflection of the American people, unrestrained by design, deriving its power from the constituent and not from party leadership or the president, true to the notion that "the president proposes, Congress disposes." For example: On August 1, 2014, Democratic senators forced Obama to separate the $225 million funding of Iron Dome batteries from the highly controversial $2.7 billion immigration and border security bill.  Since 1982 the Senate has repeatedly refused to ratify the Convention on the Law of the Sea, and since 1999 it has rejected ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The January 2013 defense authorization bill tightened restrictions on the transfer of terrorists from Guantanamo to the U.S. In May 2009, Majority Leader Harry Reid foiled Obama's attempt to close down the detention camp. On February 17, 2011, Obama reluctantly vetoed a U.N. Security Council condemnation of Israel's settlement policy, due to bipartisan congressional pressure.  In September 2012, a $450 million cash transfer to the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt was blocked by Congress.  The 2012 budget cut into Obama's foreign aid spending request by more than $8 billion.  In 2009, bipartisan congressional opposition prevented the appointment of Charles Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council.  In 1990-1992, Congress approved a series of amendments, expanding U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation to unprecedented levels despite presidential opposition. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush failed in his attempt to cut Israel's foreign aid by 5 percent due to congressional opposition. In January 1975, the Jackson-Vanik Amendment was signed into law, in defiance of the president. Congress ended U.S. military involvement in Vietnam (the 1973 Eagleton, Cooper and Church Amendments), Angola (the 1976 Clark Amendment) and Nicaragua (the 1982-1984 Boland Amendments). In 1991, Senator Daniel Inouye fended off administration pressure to withdraw an amendment to upgrade the port of Haifa facilities for the Sixth Fleet: "According to the U.S. Constitution, the legislature supervises the executive, not vice versa."  Will the 114th Congress follow in his footsteps, or will it abdicate its constitutional responsibilities?

WHY IS ISRAEL SUSPICIOUS OF UNITED NATIONS?

Steven Shamrkak  12-27-14

for more information please visit: www.shamrak.com 1. Before 1990, Security Council passed 175 resolutions, 97 were directed against Israel (It is 55% of all resolutions). 2. Before 1990, UN General Assembly voted on 690 resolutions, 429 were directed against Israel (It is 62% of all resolutions). 3. The UN was silent when Jordanians destroyed 58 Synagogues in Jerusalem . 4. The UN was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives . 5. The UN was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. 6. The UN was silent while for 18 months Israel was terrorized by indiscriminate suicide bombing campaign unleashed by PA leadership. 7. There are 60 Muslims countries in the UN. As well as many more are others Arab oil dependant states. 8. Due to an institutional bias against Israel , it is the ONLY MEMBER of the UN that will NOT BE PERMITTED MEMBERSHIP ON THE SECURITY COUNCIL. (T he Palestinian Authority gained its non-member observer state status at the UN in November 2012 with 138 votes.) 9. Israel is the only country excluded from the UN's regional group system... Since Israel does not belong to any group, it is the only country of 190 member states that is not eligible to serve on the numerous UN commissions... 10. In recent years, the UN Commission on Human Rights has annually passed five resolutions condemning Israel . This year, they passed seven. By contrast, each of the following countries/regions has been the subject of only one resolution: Afghanistan, Burundi, Congo, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Myanmar, Russia/Chechnya, Sierra Leone, Southeast Europe and Sudan... 11. Nov. 29 is the United Nations Day of International Solidarity with the Palestinian People. No other people have a UN Day of Solidarity! 12. Israel is the only state to which a special investigator with "an open-ended mandate to inspect its human rights record" is assigned by the UN. 13. It is the only state targeted by two special committees and special units of the UN Secretariat ostensibly devoted to the Palestinians but in reality dedicated to Israel-bashing worldwide, costing millions of dollars a year. 14. UNIFIL, the UN force stationed on the Israel-Lebanon border, hid a videotape of Israeli soldiers being abducted by Hezbollah in October 2000. After finally admitting to having the tape, the UN would only show an edited version (in which Hezbollah faces were hidden) to the Israeli government. 15. UNESCO, in Paris , began passing resolutions about protection of Jerusalem holy sites and access for Muslims in 1968. No resolutions about protection or Jewish access were passed from 1946 to 1967 when Jordan controlled Jerusalem and barred Jews from entering.