Jerusalem: The European Union conceals a policy of Annexation

ORIGINAL FRENCH ARTICLE: Translated Monday 2 January 2006, by Henry Crapo
http://www.humaniteinenglish.com/article36.html


"Article denounces the refusal of the European Union to receive and publish a report by European diplomats on post in Jerusalem and Ramallah, a report finding a determined policy of the Israeli government aimed at annexation of Jerusalem West. Lower on this page, find an interview with European parliamentarian Francis Wurtz, an editorial by Dominique Bari, and excerpts from the report and recommendations."

(snip)

For several months now, the diplomats of the European Union posted to Jerusalem and Ramallah have been working to edit a report accounting for the Israeli policy in the region of greater Jerusalem. A long report without ambiguity, together with a resumé and recommendations drafted by the diplomats themselves, which we publish on page 4 (see below), but which has not been made public. The Israeli strategy of "fait accompli" is there studied and revealed in broad daylight. For the first time, a text originating from the diplomatic corps places side by side the expansion of colonies in the Cisjordan, the construction of the wall "of separation" or "of security", and the destruction of Palestinian homes in Jerusalem-East, only to arrive at the conclusion that "it is a matter of a deliberate Israeli policy — the end being the annexation of Jerusalem-East", that this "limits the perspectives for any agreement acceptable to the Palestinians on the final status of Jerusalem", and that "the Israeli initiatives radicalize a Palestinian population of Jerusalem that has been, until now, relatively peaceful". There is thus clearly a consistency in the acts of the Israeli, having nothing to do with questions of security, in fact nothing other than the continuation of the colonization of Palestinian territories.

New threads must be based on a recently-published news item or op-ed piece. They may not be based on editorial cartoons or photographs. Citations and references should include a link to the original source.

Exceptions will be allowed if, based on prior approval, the moderators feel a thread is appropriate.
All threads must be based on material originally published no more than 3 weeks ago. The "clock" does not restart if an article is republished. Exceptions will be allowed, if based on prior approval, the moderators feel a thread is appropriate.

source

where everything and anything to do with I/P is published and discussed.

Nothing to do with anything you've said or posted, but I was just wondering where they'd got to...

btw, I wish the person who insists on posting the forum rules would take the time to read this bit of the rules (which btw I know I'm breaking right now but quite happy to do so)

'Do not post accusations of anti-Semitism, racism, bigotry, personal attacks, plagerism, duplicate threads or any other rules violation.'

:P

...it's not in an approved source, though it appears this story seems to indicate some degree of censorship (self or otherwise).

Makes it very convenient to drones that can claim is hasn't appeared in "the new york times, haaretz, washington post, time...even the guardian".

Things that make you go hmmm...

On Edit: Should be a sarcasm emote after "approved source"