Doc's Talk: Gush Katif, 28 Months After: 85% Still in Temporary Quarters

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Gush Katif, 28 Months After: 85% Still in Temporary Quarters

Hillel Fendel
The Gush Katif Residents Committee has released its latest report on the state of the families expelled during the Disengagement of 2005. The starkest finding: 85% of the expellees are still, 28 months later, living in temporary quarters. dditional numbers:

8,800 people in 1,667 families were thrown out of their homes in Gush Katif and lived for months in hotels, tents, and dormitories.

85% of them still live in communal frameworks in temporary pre-fab sites. A large number of those who do not currently live with their former neighbors plan to do so in the future when their community is rebuilt.

The caravan sites were built to last 2-4 years, but it is now clear that they will be in use for much longer - at least 6-8 years. "This fact has ramifications on many problems," the report states, "including a lack of public buildings, infrastructures, housing, employment, education, communal framework and operation, and more."

Unemployment among the expellees is still high - 23%. While nearly 2,000 people are working, well over 800 are still out of work. Among the latter, 317 - many of whom owned and ran thriving agricultural businesses - have despaired of finding work because of their age or their lack of professional training. Some of them never received unemployment or funds to help them adapt, while for the others, these funds have long run out.

The widespread unemployment that was extant until now, and which continues in many families, ate and eats into the compensation monies that were to have paid for permanent housing.

Out of 180 non-agricultural small businesses in Gush Katif, only 80 have returned to operation. Bureaucratic difficulties and holes in the Compensation law are largely responsible for the other 100, as well as for lack of compensation for the losses incurred in transferring the businesses.

Only 50 farmers, out of 400, have received land - and only a small portion of them have actually begun to produce.
"Many of the expelled residents are facing difficult psychological pressures," the report states, "as a result of the expulsion. Many of the families are suffering from economic difficulties because of the forced unemployment, their uncertain future, the dismantling of their community and loss of friends, the lack of space in their pre-fab home leading to dysfunctional family life and inability to host relatives, the exhausting bureaucracy, and the general pressures and instability."

The Permanent Sites Fiasco
The report includes details on the 25 planned future communities. In only one of sites have the families' permanent homes been built, and in one other location, construction has begun; in 23 of them, construction has not even begun.

Two out of the 25 permanent locations have infrastructures, five of them have partial infrastructures, and in one other a tender has been issued; in the other 17, work on infrastructures has not begun.

Most of the permanent sites face bureaucratic and legal tangles of an unfamiliar and surprising nature to most observers. For instance, some 60 families from the former town of Atzmonah are headed for Shomeriyah, between Be'er Sheva and Kiryat Gat. However, the necessary three square kilometers for farming have not yet been purchased by the government, the town has not yet been officially transferred to the appropriate government body, and government budgeting for 40 housing units has not yet arrived.

For another example, 30 families from three northern Gaza communities are headed for N'vei Yam, 15 kilometers south of Haifa - but the authorities have not been able to finalize an agreement with the kibbutz there, nor have the families yet been recognized as a community with rights.

Other situations in limbo include:

460 families from various Gush Katif communities are currently living in the transient Nitzanim location, near Ashkelon, but no progress is being made on the nearby permanent location.

Nearby, 380 families from N'vei Dekalim, the largest Gush Katif community, are residing in Nitzan, but various technical and other problems - with no solution in sight - are holding up their move to permanent quarters.

50 families from Moshav Katif would like to move to Amatzia, while 85 families from Ganei Tal, currently in Yad Binyamin, have long been awaiting their move to Chafetz Chaim, a few kilometers away; both projects are stuck.

50 families from Netzer Hazani are waiting in frustration for a final agreement with the government in order to finalize their move to Yesodot in the Yad Binyamin area. Other localities that continue to wait for expellees to make their permanent homes there are Bustan HaGalil in the Galilee (30 families from northern Gaza), Avnei Eitan in the Golan (22 from Kfar Darom, Netzer Hazani and elsewhere), Ariel in the Shomron, (20 from Netzarim), Maskiyot in the Jordan Valley (22 from Shirat HaYam and others), Tene-Omarim (15 from Morag), and many more.

An emergency plan is sorely needed, says the Gush Katif Residents Committee: "The Prime Minister must intervene in a massive manner to implement his authorities and/or put into action an emergency plan to establish the permanent communities - including budgeting, timetables, and rushed proceedings."

Tremendous Government Failures
"There is no doubt," the report states, "that the picture depicted here testifies clearly of tremendous failures and faulty action by the State. The period of residency in temporary sites is extending well beyond the period originally designated by the State, and it appears that none of the government ministries or offices have a real working plan for the coming period. It goes without saying that an urgent plan with clear timetables and full authorities for the middle-level and will circumvent the customary blocks will speed up the solution, and will save both national resources and suffering of the expellees."

Conclusion
"It is important to emphasize that despite all, the communities of Gush Katif continue to thrive and to act. Over 85% still live in our communal frameworks for the purpose of continuing our values and ideals, and the mutual help and support that was a mainstay of life in Gush Katif continues now as well. Torah and educational institutes are being established in new locations, as are informal educational frameworks for the youth, and volunteers work daily to maintain the protection of our communal frameworks and work towards the construction of the permanent towns."

"There is no doubt that once the proper tools are returned to us, the population of Gush Katif will once again be a strong, creative, productive and contributing sector."

Comment:This piece speaks volumes. First, our government and the Western leaders care not about "displaced" Israelis. The international community has not been mobilized to donate monies for our citizens to be properly cared for. Second, if 8,800 people cannot be taken care of, how can any one believe a large scale operation that displaces tens of thousands of citizens in the disputed territory can be accomplished? Ben Burion must be rolling over in his grave-this is not his vision nor is it the vision of Israelis grand parents who built this country-shame, shame upon you all.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk