web analytics
August 27, 2016 / 23 Av, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘refugees’

Merkel Uses the I Word in Pointing Finger at Terrorist Refugees

Thursday, July 28th, 2016

Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday has agreed publicly that Germany is “at war” with Islamist terrorists, but insisted that they would nevertheless not erode German values or cause her to change her refugee policy.

“A rejection of the humanitarian stance we took could have led to even worse consequences,” Merkel said at a press conference in Berlin, adding that the terrorists “wanted to undermine our sense of community, our openness and our willingness to help people in need. We firmly reject this.”

She defended her open door policy for refugees, said she feels no guilt for the violent attacks those refugees have carried out in Germany, and insisted she had been right to permit those hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees to enter a year ago.

Still, Merkel did call a spade a spade, berating Islamist extremists for biting the German hands that feed them. “Taboos of civilization are being broken,” Merkel said. “These acts happened in places where any of us could have been.”

She was referring to a string of attacks Germans have endured in the space of one week: an axe attack on a train, a mass shooting in Munich that left nine dead, a machete attack that killed a pregnant woman, and a suicide bomb in Ansbach. Three of the attacks were carried out by refugees.

“The fact that [the] men who came to us as refugees are responsible mocked the country that took them in, mocks the volunteers who have taken so much care of refugees. And it mocks the many other refugees who truly seek protection from war and violence with us, who want to live peacefully,” Merkel said.

“I didn’t say eleven months ago that it would be easy,” she said. “I am still convinced today that ‘We can do it’. It is our historic duty and historic task in these times of globalization. We have already achieved so much in the last 11 months.”

Merkel is counting on the EU migrant deal with Turkey, which she negotiated, and the closure of the Balkan Route, will slow down the rush of asylum seekers into Germany. “An influx like last year’s will not happen again, but I cannot say that we will not take in any more refugees,” she said.

Merkel introduced a nine-point plan to defeat domestic terror, including improved monitoring of suspects and improved intelligence co-operation with the US and the Europeans. She is also determined to speed up deportations of rejected asylum seekers. The Ansbach suicide bomber had been rejected but was able to stay in Germany.

“I believe we are in a fight, or for that matter at war with ISIS,” Merkel said. “We are not in any way in a fight or war with Islam.”

The next German federal elections will take place in late summer or early fall, 2017, unless the Merkel government loses a no confidence motion.

David Israel

Finally: Congress Asking UNRWA for Real Number of Palestinian Refugees

Friday, July 15th, 2016

Both houses of Congress are at work to modify funding bills for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), as part of an effort to investigate the very legitimacy of the decades-old agency, Michael Wilner reported in the Jerusalem Post Friday. Both the House and the Senate want the State Department to, once and for all, define the term “Palestinian refugee,” and while they’re at it, reveal how many are receiving aid from UNRWA.

UNRWA was established in 1948 to assist the 750,000 Palestinians who had left Israel. Since then UNRWA has been a promoter of the Palestinian cause, funding as many as 5 million “refugees,” the majority of whom never left the homes where they were born in the Gaza Strip, the “West Bank,” eastern Jerusalem, or other Arab countries, to the tune of $1.23 billion annually, $250 million of which is donated by US taxpayers.

Many in Congress have been saying, since about 2012, that the majority of Palestinians are permanently settled, and should not be under the jurisdiction of a refugee agency.

Needless to say, Wilner points out, “such a finding would fundamentally change the narrative of the decades-old conflict.”

The first Palestinian census was completed 15 years ago, and the head of the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) admitted then that the census was, in effect, “a civil intifada” rather than a scientific survey. In 2011 the Bureau attempted to correct that blatant misrepresentation, claiming that 2.6 million Palestinian Arabs inhabit Judea and Samaria.

But Israeli demographer Yoram Ettinger challenged those numbers, claiming they overstated the real number of Arabs there by as much as 66%. He explained that the PCBS’s total counts 400,000 Palestinians living overseas, and double-counts 240,000 Jerusalem Arabs. It also undercounted Palestinian emigration.

In 2014, UNRWA came up with the figure of 5 million Palestinian refugees living in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, and the US responded by providing hundreds of millions of dollars for UNRWA’s health, education, and social service programs.

“UNRWA is sort of becoming an entitlement program of the Middle East, and the desire is to increase transparency on who actually are refugees relevant to that conflict,” a senior Senate aide familiar with the language told Wilner, suggesting the new bill “goes to the heart of the debate over UNRWA funding.”

Republicans in both houses have launched parallel efforts to compel the State Department to go on the record with who qualifies as a “Palestinian refugee,” and the combined version of the law, once passed, will compel the secretary of state to provide “a justification of why it is in the national interest of the United States to provide funds to UNRWA.”

The bill’s language continues: “Such justification shall include an analysis of the current definition of Palestinian refugees that is used by UNRWA, how that definition corresponds with, or differs from, that used by UNHCR, other UN agencies, and the United States Government, and whether such definition furthers the prospects for lasting peace in the region.”

And, naturally, “the committee directs that such report be posted on the publicly available website of the Department of State.”

Finally, it should be noted that there are two distinct definitions of the term “refugee” in international law.

A refugee, according to the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, is a person who is outside their country of citizenship because they have well-founded grounds for fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, and is unable to obtain sanctuary from their home country or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country; or in the case of not having a nationality and being outside their country of former habitual residence as a result of such event, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to their country of former habitual residence.

It is rare for a refugee status to extend beyond the lifetime of the original refugee, because normally it is expected that their offspring will have settled someplace else.

Not so regarding Palestinian refugees, according to UNRWA’s definition of the term, which includes the patrilineal descendants of the original “Palestinian refugees,” limited to persons residing in UNRWA’s areas of operation in the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.

JNi.Media

The absurdity continues: 41% of Palestinians in Palestinian Territory are “Refugees” from Palestine (update)

Thursday, June 23rd, 2016

Today is World Refugee Day, and as they do every year, the fake Palestinian “refugees” are pretending to be real refugees.

The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics released figures for the occasion. Out of all residents in the West Bank and Gaza, 41.6% are considered “refugees.”

No one blinks at such absurdity.

pal graph

If they are Palestinian and live in what the UN and their leaders call the State of Palestine, where exactly are they refugees from?

Moreover, the PCBS says that some 40% of all “refugees” live in Jordan.But the vast majority of them are full Jordanian citizens. So why are they considered “refugees”?

This is all before the question of why, alone among all “refugee” populations, Palestinians are the only ones whose refugee status is automatically renewed every generation.

There is no way under UNRWA’s definition for Palestinians to lose their refugee status. Even if a peace plan would suddenly appear and the Palestinian leaders agree to stop  insisting on the fake “right to return”, UNRWA would have no means to take them off the roles.

The “refugee” status is permanently bestowed upon all Palestinians until they somehow all cram back into their alleged ancestral homes, in the same villages. Because if you say that they can move to a neighboring village in Israel and no longer be considered refugees, then why can they not live as citizens of “Palestine” in Nablus as non-refugees?

The refugee issue is a thinly veiled attempt to destroy the Jewish state. It has nothing to do with real refugeehood and calling Palestinians refugees is an insult to the millions of real refugees who are truly suffering today. And UNRWA is fighting to get as much of the world’s refugee relief budget as it can, causing real refugees to be even worse off.

Happy World Refugee Day.

UPDATE: The PLO Negotiations Affairs Department tweeted this:

download (2)I responded:

Only if you assume a bizarre definition of “refugee”

 

They the blocked me.

Elder of Ziyon

EU, UNHCR Show How Different Palestinians are From Real Refugees

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

As mentioned, the Palestinians and UNRWA try very hard to pretend that a significant number of worldwide refugees are Palestinian.

But when you dig only a little bit beneath the surface, you see that no one really believes it, and the only reason that Palestinian “refugees” are recognized as refugees by anyone is because the UN insists that they are.

Exhibit A, from a statement on World Refugee Day by the EU:

We call on all partners to strengthen the international framework for refugee protection and resettlement through global responsibility-sharing and solidarity.

Resettlement? No one is calling for Palestinians to be resettled! But if they are refugees, shouldn’t they be included in the massive worldwide push to resettle refugees? Why aren’t they?

Exhibit B, from the UNHCR annual report (which tries hard to include the pretense that Palestinians under UNRWA’s definition of refugee are real):

unhcr1

True, this is a list of people under UNHCR’s mandate; But look at the categories and how they apply to “Palestine”:

They would claim to have about 2.5 million “refugees.” But how many are seeking asylum? The question doesn’t even make sense for Palestinians under PA control, it is only relevant to real refugees.

In fact, UNCHR says there are some 3.2 million refugees seeking asylum elsewhere. But virtually none of them are Palestinian, and the very few who do seek asylum are refugees from Syria or Gaza, escaping death from ISIS or Assad or Hamas – real refugees, not the fake ones who claim to be refugees from pre-1948 Palestine.

The very definition of asylum is “the protection granted by a nation to someone who has left their native country as a political refugee.” 

Refugees naturally want to seek asylum, right? But Palestinian “refugees” don’t! So why are there essentially no UNRWA “refugees” seeking asylum elsewhere?

In fact, European countries would never consider “refugees” under UNRWA’s definition to be eligible for asylum.  Their rules for accepting asylum are specific and apply only to those who are real refugees, e.g., those who have “a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group.” – in other words, not Palestinians. 

World Refugee Day is a wonderful occasion to highlight how bogus the “refugee” status of Palestinians really is.

Elder of Ziyon

Who Were the 1948 Arab Refugees?

Tuesday, June 7th, 2016

Contrary to conventional “wisdom,” most Arabs in British Mandate Palestine – and most of the 320,000 1948 Arab refugees – were migrant workers and descendants of the 1831-1947 Muslim immigrants from Egypt, the Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, as well as from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, North Africa, Bosnia, India, Afghanistan, etc.. Britain enticed Arab immigration and blocked Jewish immigration.

Thus, between 1880 and 1919, Haifa’s Arab population surged from 6,000 to 80,000, mostly due to migrant workers.  The eruption of WW2 accelerated the demand for Arab manpower by the British Mandate’s military and its civilian authorities.

Moreover, Arab migrant workers were imported by the Ottoman Empire, and then by the British Mandate, to work in major civilian and military infrastructure projects.  Legal and illegal Arab migrants were, also, attracted by economic growth, which was generated by the Jewish community beginning in 1882.

According to a 1937 report by the British Peel Commission (featured in the ground-breaking book, Palestine Betrayed , by Prof. Efraim Karsh), “during 1922 through 1931, the increase of Arab population in the mixed-towns of Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem was 86%, 62% and 37% respectively, while in purely Arab towns such as Nablus and Hebron it was only 7% and a decrease of 2 percent in Gaza.”

Irrespective of occasional Arab emigration from  British Mandate Palestine – due to intra-Arab terrorism, which has been an endemic feature in the Middle East – the substantial wave of Arab immigration from 1831-1947 triggered dramatic growth of the Arab populations in Jaffa (17 times), Haifa (12 times) and Ramla (5 times).

According to Joan Peters’ momentous book, From Time Immemorial (Harper & Row, 1984), which was written in consultation with Prof. Elie Kedourie, the “Olympus” of Middle East history and politics, “The 1931 census [documented] at least 23 different languages in use by Muslims plus an additional 28 in use by Christian Arabs – a total of 51 languages.  The non-Jews in Palestine listed as their birthplaces at least 24 different countries….”

In 1917, the Arabs of Jaffa represented at least 25 nationalities, mostly Egyptians, but also Syrians, Yemenites, Persians, Afghanis, Hindus and Baluchis.  The “British Palestine Exploration Fund” documented a proliferation of Egyptian neighborhoods in the Jaffa area: Abu Kebir, Sumeil, Sheikh Munis, Salame’, Fejja, etc. Hundreds of Egyptian families settled also in the inland, in Ara’ Arara’, Kafer Qassem, Taiyiba and Qalansawa.

The (1831-1840) conquest of the Land of Israel, by Egypt’s Mohammed Ali, was solidified by a flow of Egyptian and Sudanese migrants settling between Gaza in the south, Tul-Karem in the center and the Hula Valley in the north.  They followed in the footsteps of thousands of Egyptian draft dodgers, who fled Egypt before 1831 and settled in Acre. In 1865, the British traveler, H.B. Tristram, documented, in The Land of Israel: a journal of travels in Palestine , Egyptian migrants in the Beit-Shean Valley, Acre, Hadera, Netanya and Jaffa.

According to the August 12, 1934 issue of the Syrian daily, La Syrie, “30,000-36,000 Syrian migrants, from the Hauran region, entered Palestine during the last few months alone.”   The role-model of Hamas terrorism, Az-ed-Din el-Qassam, who terrorized Jews in British Mandate Palestine, was Syrian, as was Kaukji, the chief Arab terrorist in British Mandate Palestine during the 1930s and 1940s.

Libyan migrants settled in Gedera, south of Tel Aviv. Algerian refugees escaped the French conquest of 1830 and settled in Safed alongside Syrians and Jordanian Bedouins in Tiberias. Circassian refugees, fleeing Russian oppression (1878) and Moslems from Bosnia, Turkmenistan, and Yemen (1908) further diversified the Arab demography west of the Jordan River.

This unusual Arab/Muslim demographic diversity is evidenced by popular Israeli Arab family names, which are a derivative of their countries of origin: al-Masri (Egypt), al-Obeidi (the Sudan), al-Lubnani (Lebanon), Halabi (Syria), al-Mughrabi (Morocco), al-Djazair (Algeria), al-Yamani (Yemen), al-Afgahni (Afghanistan), al-Hindi (India), al-Hijazi (Saudi Arabia), al-Baghdadi (Iraq), Bushnak (Bosnia), Khamis (Bahrain), Turki (Turkey), etc.

Arieh Avneri, a pioneering historian of Arab and Jewish migration, documented ( The Claim of Dispossession , 1980) 205,000 Moslems, Christian and Jews in 1554, 275,000 in 1800 and an unusual surge to 532,000 in 1890, resulting from accelerated Arab immigration.

In fact, Mark Twain wrote in 1869 ( The Innocents Abroad ) :  “Of all the lands there are for dismal scenery, Palestine must be the prince…. The hills are barren…. The valleys are unsightly deserts…. Palestine is desolate and unlovely.”

Thus, contrary to the myth of the 1948 Arab refugees – aiming to delegitimize Israel – Arabs have not been in the Land of Israel from time immemorial; no Palestinian people was ever robbed of its land; there is no basis for an Arab “claim of return;” and most of the 320,000 Arab refugees – who were created by the 1948 Arab invasion of Israel and their own collaboration with the invasion – were recent immigrants and foreign workers (from neighboring Arab countries) in the Land of Israel.

Yoram Ettinger

The Myth of the Palestinian Refugees

Tuesday, May 24th, 2016

1. The circumstances and numbers of the 1948/49 Palestinian refugees have been dramatically distorted, in order to delegitimize Israel.

2. In March, 1976, Mahmoud Abbas told the PLO newspaper, Filastin A-Thawra: “Arab armies forced Palestinians to leave their homes.”  On October 2, 1948, The London Economist wrote: “the most potent factor [triggering the Arab flight] were the announcements by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to evacuate… and that Arabs accepting Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades….”

3. On June 8, 1951, the Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha told the Lebanese daily, Al Hoda: “In 1948, the Arab leadership advised Arabs in Palestine to leave their homes temporarily.”  Syria’s Prime Minister, Khaled al-Azam, admitted, in his 1973 memoirs: “We brought destruction upon the refugees, by calling on them to leave their homes.”

4. On April 28, 1948, Sir Alan Cunningham, the last British High Commissioner in Palestine stated: A total evacuation was urged by higher Arab quarters. John Troutbeck, Head of the British Middle East Office, in Cairo (June 1949): “The refugees know who their enemies are – their Arab brothers who persuaded them to leave their homes…”

5.  Ismayil Safwat, Commander-in–Chief of the Arab Liberation Army (March 23, 1948): “The Jews have not attacked any Arab village, unless attacked first.”

6. The Palestinian leadership – e.g., Haj Amin Al-Husseini and Hassan Bey Salameh – collaborated with Hitler, seeking Nazi support to settle “the Jewish problem” in Palestine in accordance with the practice employed in Europe. On January 9, 2013, Mahmoud Abbas stated: “We pledge to continue on the path of the martyrs…. We must remember the Grand Mufti of Palestine, Haj Amin Al-Husseini….”

7. The Commander-in-Chief of the Arab Liberation Army, Fawzi el-Kaukji, a notorious Nazi collaborator, threatened in August, 1947 threatened: “Should the UN vote the wrong way, we will initiate a total war… murder, wreck and ruin everything….”  On Nov. 24, 1947, the Acting Chairman of the (Palestinian) Arab Higher Committee, Jamal Al-Husseini, threatened: “Palestine shall be consumed with fire and blood if the Jews get any part of it.”

8. Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha, the first Secretary General of the Arab League told the Egyptian daily Akhbar al Yom on October 11, 1947: “…This will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre, which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacres, or the Crusaders’ wars…. Each fighter deems death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise….The war will be an opportunity for vast plunder… ”

9. During the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, the Arabs in Palestine terrorized their Jewish neighbors in order to abort the establishment of the Jewish State.  They defied the November 29, 1947 UN General Assembly Resolution 181;  Article 80 of the 1945 U.N. Charter (that includes the “Mandate of Palestine,” which stipulates a Jewish state in the entire area west of the Jordan River); the July 24, 1922 League of Nations’ “Mandate for Palestine,”; the April 1920 San Remo Conference of the First World War Allied Powers, which resolved to establish a Jewish national home on both sides of the Jordan River; and the November, 1917 Balfour Declaration, which was the basis for San Remo.

10.  In 135 CE, the Roman Empire renamed/misrepresented Judea as Palestina – a derivative of Phillistia/Phillistines, who were not Arabs, but an Aegean (Greek) Sea tribe – in an attempt to eradicate Judaism from human memory. In 2016, the issue of the Palestinian Arab refugees, is dramatically misrepresented, as a tool to eradicate the Jewish State.

Yoram Ettinger

HRW Says “Refugee Camps Should Be demolished, Refugees Integrated”

Monday, May 16th, 2016

{Originally posted to the author’s website, Elder of Ziyon}

Kenneth Roth: Far more humane to let refugees integrate in society than to confine them in dead-end camps.

The article says:

David Miliband, the former UK foreign secretary, has called for an end to the refugee camp system and the reform of humanitarian institutions “that were designed for yesterday’s problems, not tomorrow’s”.

Wealthy nations should accept the most vulnerable 10% of the world’s 19.5 million refugees, Miliband said, and provide economic support to less wealthy countries to integrate new arrivals as full-time residents.

Referring to the case of Dadaab in Kenya, the world’s biggest refugee camp, which houses 330,000 Somalis across the border from their home country, Miliband, who is the president of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), said there should be a “new deal” for poorer countries that host refugees.

Why is the cost of hosting refugees falling on the world’s poorest states?
Lucy Hovil
Read more
“The new bargain is that a small number of people – probably up to 10% of refugees, the most vulnerable – are relocated to the richer countries, to the west and elsewhere, because of their medical needs, because they’re orphans etc,” he said.

“But then, [for] the large majority of people, the only real hope for them is to become productive residents of the countries that they’ve fled to.

“That’s a massive call on the countries concerned, but if we can ensure they get international financial support and build up their economies, then it becomes a chance to avoid the kind of Dadaab situation of long-term housing [of] people in places that become magnets for criminality, never mind for terrorism.”

Yet HRW has not once called for Arab countries to permanently integrate second, third and fourth generation Palestinian “refugees” whose numbers keep increasing every day.

HRW has a fact sheet listing all the ways Arab countries discriminate against Palestinians. In one “legacy” document that was written in the 1990s, HRW does admit

All nations should assist in finding durable solutions to refugee problems. Ideally, this consists of giving each displaced person three options: local integration, third-country resettlement, and voluntary repatriation. In the Middle East context, countries where Palestinians now reside should offer them the option of full local integration. Palestinian families, many having lived in these countries for more than fifty years, have built lives there which they should be granted the option of continuing to lead. Similarly, the international community should be generous in offering the possibility of third-country resettlement to those who might desire it, and in providing aid to assist the permanent settlement of those who choose to remain in the region as well as those who choose to exercise their right to return.

But then adds:

Neither the options of local integration and third-country resettlement, nor their absence, should extinguish the right to return.

So even in HRW lukewarmly allows that Arab countries should, ideally, offer this option, they are vehemently against the idea that fully integrated Palestinians ever abandon their wish to destroy Israel by telling them that they alone have a permanent and everlasting “right to return” to lands they never lived in.

Yet even though HRW claims that every refugee has a right of return forever, in fact only Palestinians are associated with this right. HRW doesn’t call for refugees from the same time period in Pakistan and India to have the “right of return.”

In the 20 years or so since writing that, HRW has been utterly silent about demanding Arab countries integrate Palestinians into the societies where they have been treated like second-class aliens for nearly 70 years.

But now with a brand new refugee crisis, of people who have been forced out of their homes in only the past few years, return isn’t even mentioned and resettlement is pushed as the number one option.

2003 HRW fact sheet about the “right to return” in Croatia shows HRW’s hypocrisy:

When displaced persons are unable to return to their homes because their property has been destroyed or claims against a current occupant are unsuccessful, they are entitled to compensation.

Meaning that the “right to return” is only the right to return to one’s specific family home, not to have descendants have the right to move to a country en masse.

Yet this idea that the right to return only exists when the specific property is still there is completely missing from any discussion about the Palestinian “right to return,” which is considered a blanket right as well as an individual right, with no limitations on circumstances.

Ken Roth is once again proven to be a hypocrite, who only supports “return” for one set of people and who is all but silent on giving them the right to nationality in the countries in which they were born.

 

Elder of Ziyon

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/hrw-says-refugee-camps-should-be-demolished-refugees-integrated/2016/05/16/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: