Harry’s Place

Stop confusing Inayat!

Otherwise agreed. This is going to be painful but now’s the time to make some sweeping changes and set the tone for the Israeli government to follow.

The problem is that the Israeli government never seems to deal seriously with these extremists, who rarely serve serious prison time.

You make it appear as though the problem were just one of lack of punishment.

And no, that’s not the problem. The problem is that Israel builds roads for the settlers, provides water and electricity to the settlers, approves construction projects for the settlers, sets up checkpoints for the settlers’ sake and, in general, gives them all the infrastructure they need to keep on with their criminal activities in the West Bank.

It’s not just a matter of turning a blind eye to the settlers’ crimes. It’s a matter of throwing the full State support behind those law breakers.

I can’t begin to express the outrage I feel

If you don’t write to Israel’s MKs to ask them to stop the settlers. If you don’t refuse to support Israel until they are eradicated. If you don’t recognize that Israel’s legitimacy is compromised by the settlers’ rampages. If you don’t blame equally the Palestinians and the Israelis for the support given to each one’s own terrorists. If you don’t state clearly that the state-subsidized settlers are as major an obstacle to peace as anything the Palestinians do. Then you’re not really outraged, and pretending to be so is, unfortunately, an instance of bad faith.

Jews have been in Hebron for thousands of years. It has great meaning for them certainly as great as Jerusalem has for the Arabs. Just as Arabs and jews live side by side in Jerusalem, they need to accomodate each other in hebron.

Will it take the death of a soldier or policeman at the hand of a settler before the government cracks down? I fear that’s not an unimaginable event anymore.

And, I have to add, the possible blinding of a policeman after acid was thrown in his face by ……….. scum.

“…And more than ever, it’s time to evacuate the Jewish settlement in Hebron…”

This comment indicates a total contempt for justice.

The contributor advocates imposing draconian extrajudicial punishment on an entire community, based on their Jewish race and Israeli nationality, for crimes committed by a few of their number. There is more bloodshed and violence at some English Saturday afternoon football matches than that committed in Hebron today.

When the Hebron Jews arrived in 1968, 20 years after the West Bank had been cleansed of its Jews in an orgy of murder and mayhem, they were greeted with courtesy and respect by Hebron’s Arab leaders. The cornerstone of Kiryat Arba was laid by none other than Mayor Ja’abari. All men of good will should strive to restore the good relations that existed then. Only recently there was a meeting between Jewish and Arab leaders in the city aimed at doing just that. This is the path that should be taken, not ethnic cleansing of Jews.

Ben:

“When the Hebron Jews arrived in 1968, 20 years after the West Bank had been cleansed of its Jews in an orgy of murder and mayhem, they were greeted with courtesy and respect by Hebron’s Arab leaders.”

I must admit that I have not visited Hebron since 1986 with Bne Akiva. We were introduced to the Jewish community there. I must admit I was shocked by the rigid and racist ideology of that particular group and their visceral hatred.

It was such a disappointment to have to listen to the swill that was on offer there, so intellectually and religiously shallow and laced with hatred. Any residual sympathy I may have had ebbed away quickly.

For me, the cave of Machpela was a blunted, saddening experience.

Larry Shapiro Jews have been in Hebron for thousands of years. It has great meaning for them certainly as great as Jerusalem has for the Arabs. Just as Arabs and jews live side by side in Jerusalem, they need to accomodate each other in hebron.

True.

But the ones removed yesterday are really not the kind of Jews who can live peaceably in Israel next to persons of any other religion and should therefore be removed.

Gene repeats his “Ethnic Cleansing” desires. Comments that would grace MPAC UK or any other extremists Islamist site. A gift to The Guardian & Independent.

He can’t separate the rights of Jews to live in Hebron from their disgusting behaviour. Its a police matter and a time to crack a few heads and put some in prison.

Read The Mandate for Palestine 1922.

Gene, do you support an Apartheid Palestinian State where no Jews are allowed to live - despite a UN Mandate to the contrary?

Alright. So some extremist Jews showed their collective asses. Where are the AK-47s? Where are the grenades? Where are the mounds of human carcasses?

Israeli settlers reacting to the court-ordered evacuation of a house in Hebron.

AND

The problem is that the Israeli government never seems to deal seriously with these extremists, who rarely serve serious prison time

So Gene, they don’t deal seriously with them YET they make a court order and carry it out. Don’t you think the two statements have a degree of mutual exclusivity?

“They rarely serve prison time” - so how many serve prison time?

You don’t know what you want, do you? In one sentence you want more of them put in prison and the next your solution is Ethnic Cleansing of the lot of them.

Your statements are every bit as extreme as these settlers (and Hamas), some of whom express Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians (very few of them I would think). I would put as many of them in jail as it takes to cool them down and read them the riot act.

But the Jews of Hebron are ONLY going to jail - nowhere else.

Gene - good post. Gene’s detractors - just read the article linked to, shut up for five minutes, and think about whether defending the most extreme element in Israeli society is in any way sensible. I know, and you know, these people do not represent Israel. It must be stopped.

So Gene, when the Palestinians of East Jerusalem attack Israelis and send some of their worst to kill Israelis in so many ways do you think we should “Crack Down” or “Ethnically Cleanse” them too!

Gene, you have a busted argument and do yourself a disservice by expressing such an uneducated rant when you really don’t know diddly squat about the rights of Palestinians and Jews in this region.

Theirie

“It must be stopped” - Yes!

“They must be Ethnically Cleansed” - No!

Do these people represent Israel? - the ones who riot don’t. Israeli society is clearly disgusted with them too. The dilemma is that they have a right to be in Hebron but NOT a right to treat the local Palestinians so badly.

Maven - the two-state solution, 101. Israel will control Israel. Palestine will control Palestine. If Israel is allowed to determine who is and isn’t allowed to live there (i.e. the 4 million refugees who have been evicted from Israel aren’t allowed to return to their homes) then you can hardly call the eviction of a few hundred people from Hebron in Palestine, who have illegally occupied homes by force, “ethnic cleansing”. I would hope that a sovereign Palestinian Government would allow Jews to live in Hebron, as long as they do so in a legal manner, and don’t go round stoning innocent people - in which case they should be locked up.

can hardly call the eviction of a few hundred people from Hebron in Palestine, who have illegally occupied homes by force, “ethnic cleansing”.

Indeed its not. But Gene wants them ALL out and that IS Ethnic Cleansing.

I would hope that a sovereign Palestinian Government would allow Jews to live in Hebron, as long as they do so in a legal manner, and don’t go round stoning innocent people - in which case they should be locked up.

I agree they should be citizens of a Palestinian State (subject to negotiations) and if they stone people they are STILL citizens of a Palestinian State in the same way that Israel Arabs from East Jerusalem who kill Israelis are still Israelis.

I actually think it should work like this:-

. Settlers get dual citizenship

. If they prefer it they can move back to Israel.

. Expansion of existing settlements by natural growth to be discussed. If Settlers want to buy adjacent land or grow upwards then so be it.

. For five years settlers and Israel are responsible for their security with a transitional arrangement for Palestinians to be responsible for them. That might mean day One with a Palestinian security official plugged-in

. Appoint a Palestinian Transition Minister to work with an Israeli counterpart.

What’s not to work?

If Gene can piss off both Maven and th Hamas supporting Hasbara Buster, then I suspect he’s 100% correct.

Irie: ‘the 4 million refugees who have been evicted from Israel’

- where do you get such inflated figures from. The descendants of the original refugees weren’t evicted from Israel.

The widely accepted figure is 750,000 who fled in 1948.

Irie wrote -

(i.e. the 4 million refugees who have been evicted from Israel)

Yes and the 40 million Irish Americans evicted from Irieland.

Is it wrong of me to point out that in a tactical… and even strategic… sense the Israeli government realizes that having this particular group of settlers in that position could cause umpteen-dozen IDF casualties in the case of a general Palestinian or Hizbullah uprising?

Removing them was not only the right decision for political reasons but security reasons as well.

If Gene can piss off both Maven and th Hamas supporting Hasbara Buster, then I suspect he’s 100% correct.

Your comment has little value.

“suspect he’s correct” simply means “I can’t be bothered to work this out for myself”. You simply only have a ’suspicion’ but call upon no information or facts to support that suspicion.

You base right and wrong on the concept of “pissing people off”.

Like I said, a comment that contributes nothing. Let’s get you thinking: “Do Jews have a right to live in Hebron?”

Jews have the right to live in these areas

present day Jordan

present day Israel

The Golan

Gaza

Judea and Samaria

These were clearly the lands promised to the Jews as their National Homeland in the San Remo Treaty in 1920

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Remo_conference

The Arabs were gaining areas of land about 500 times greater.

But did not want the Jews to get ONE five hundredth

Jews may now side with the Arabs and I mean the Arab ruling elites but will get no thanks for this in return.

Gene and DavidT will be laughed at as they are herded into a new Holocaust by their historical tormentors of antisemitism.

Removing them was not only the right decision for political reasons but security reasons as well.

This is what the Israeli govt did in Gaza. Agains, Jews had every right to live there. By removing the Jews from Gaza they just cleared space for Hamas to have a launch pad for missiles, rockets and mortars.

Once bitten - twice shy.

One solution is to completely wipe out Hamas and anyone else in a terrorist group. For the Palestinians to declare all terrorist groups to be illegal (as Israel di on Independence) and then proceed without the threat of terrorism and violence.

Yes, the settlers who engage in violence must be put in prison. If their violence leads to a backlash by local Palestinians then it is sort of justified.

The mentality of many of the Jewish community in Hebron is very disturbing and from the outside it looks as though the Israeli government has failed to take decisive action. And yet we should avoid tarring everyone with the same brush, just as we should avoid condemning all muslims because of the actions of a minority. The issue of ethnic cleansing of Jews as carried out in gaza and as is likely to be required in parts of Judea and Samaria is nowhere more sensitive than in Hebron, because of the ‘29 massacre as much as the religious significance. There are no glib solutions to this; Hebron is a microcosm of the whole conflict.

Jews have the right to live in these areas

But did not want the Jews to get ONE five hundredth

You are correct from the historical context and the Mandate For Palestine 1922 has never been rescinded.

However, I think we must deal with today’s reality. Unfortunately, a Palestinian State is a victory for terrorism. The only solution is to let the Palestinians have a State but recognise the rights of Jews to also live on the land. Any other solution is just the creation of a Palestinian State that Is an Apartheid Etnic Cleansing Terrorist State (to echo Israel’s detractors).

I am not sure David T supports Gene in Ethnic Cleansing of Jews from Palestine since I don’t remember him offering support when Gene raised it before. Of course I can’t speak for him but only record this as an impression. (Its not a comment designed to request David T to say Yay or Nay)

750,000 is the accepted number that were evicted, yes. Forget I mentioned it - we can have that discussion another day.

The issue of ethnic cleansing of Jews as carried out in gaza and as is likely to be required in parts of Judea and Samaria is nowhere more sensitive than in Hebron, because of the ‘29 massacre as much as the religious significance. There are no glib solutions to this; Hebron is a microcosm of the whole conflict.

The Mandate for Palestine clearly acknowledged the Jewish historical rights to places like Judea and Samaria. By 1948 there had been Arab Ethnic Cleansing of Jews from those area. Then Jordan and Egypt annexed West Bank and Gaza in defiance of the Mandate that says “no foreign power may exercise any control over Mandated Palestine”

In 1967 West Bank and Gaza were liberated by Israel and the Jews moved back - as was and is their right.

750,000 is the accepted number that were evicted, yes. Forget I mentioned it - we can have that discussion another day.

And 850,000 are the number of Jews who fled from pogroms in Arab countries before and around 1948. If I remember rightly it was mostly from The Yemen.

Spot on, Gene.

Utter, utter filth.

They are and for Jews to be racist after all they have suffered is appaling, they are scum.

Its time to put them on trial for their violence and racism.

Its not the same as saying they should ALL be removed. That would be collective punishment and to show a sign that they are there illegally when they aren’t. I cannot argue that if they have stolen land and forced Palestinians off it then that is illegal. But Hebron has always had a Jewish presence and they had to have lived somewhere in Hebron.

Good post, Gene, and a necessary one.

Jewish settlers came to Hebron under a subterfuge and a lie, protected by dishonest politicians who spoke with a forked tongue (Yigal Allon and Yisrael Galili). They claim the right to be there because of of the ancient Jewish community there: they even have original deeds on individual houses! Well, the map of Israel proper (and much of West Jerusalem) is littered with thousands and thousands of houses, hundreds of villages, to which Palestinian refugees hold the original deeds. If we are saying that, for the sake of an equitable solution, hundreds of thousands and millions of Palestinians must forgo the original place of abode of their families – well, it is hardly an injustice to require this from few hundred Jews in Hebron and Gush Etzion.

The simple fact is that either the settlements – and not just in Hebron – are rolled back urgently or a real prospect of a two-state solution will sooner-or-later collapse. Those who wish for a one-state solution (Hamas and Yesha Council alike) will rejoice, everybody else will be locked into permanent nightmare.

The IDF should have acted ages ago against the settlers and their goons. This action, belated as it might be, is hopefully a new beginning. Although, knowing how for the last few decades the settlers literally groomed IDF officers and destroyed the careers of those who were unwilling to collaborate with them, I am not holding my breath.

Spot on, Gene.

Is this “Spot On they are racist scum who should be jailed” or “Spot On, all Jews should be ethnically cleansed from Palestine because criminal racist scum can’t control themselves”?

They claim the right to be there because of of the ancient Jewish community there: they even have original deeds on individual houses! Well, the map of Israel proper (and much of West Jerusalem) is littered with thousands and thousands of houses, hundreds of villages, to which Palestinian refugees hold the original deeds. If we are saying that, for the sake of an equitable solution, hundreds of thousands and millions of Palestinians must forgo the original place of abode of their families – well, it is hardly an injustice to require this from few hundred Jews in Hebron and Gush Etzion.

And this is precisely why the British proposed a partition because the homogeneous distributions of Jews and Arabs meant lots of local violence and killing. By the necessity to survive Jews created areas where they could live in safety and defend themselves and that also crystallised areas of predominant Arab populations.

The British tried to make a partition based on the major population areas of Arabs and Jews. That was rejected and in 1948 the Arabs attacked. This crystallised into Israel and West Bank and Gaza under Jordan and Egypt.

The Mandate for Palestine states that Palestine is to be inhabited by Jews and Arabs. Israel exists to fulfil that Mandate whereby Jews and Arabs live there and so why is it any different when applied to The West Bank.

Should thousands and millions of Jews ALSO forgo their rights to Judea and Samaria?

I don’t defend their rights on any zealous religious basis only on the political arrangements made by The Mandate and historical presence.

There is no easy solution except that a Palestinian State allows Jews and Arabs to live in it as they do in Israel. Is that unfair. I don’t see Judea and Samaria as a land grab for Israel.

Its possible that Jews might live in an eventual Palestinian state. That might be the test of the maturity of palestinian society, as well as the maturity of the Jewish communities in the Palestinian areas. But these things take time - look at Belgium.

Is this “Spot On they are racist scum who should be jailed” or “Spot On, all Jews should be ethnically cleansed from Palestine because criminal racist scum can’t control themselves”?

I suggest that if you are going to have a two state solution — then some people are going to have to move, Palestinians and Israelis. If you insist on calling any territorial concession by Israelis or settlers ‘ethnic cleansing’– what then is your solution?

“Utter, utter filth”.

From someone who wants to ethnically cleanse 100,000s of thousands of Jews so he can hagn his head up high at goyish dinner parties. Go fuck yourself.

If you insist on calling any territorial concession by Israelis or settlers ‘ethnic cleansing’– what then is your solution?

My Ethnic Cleansing comment is to do with the 100% removal of Jews from Palestinian areas because I believe that this is what Gene wants. I believe he is for All Settlers Out ( He could tell me I am wrong).

I am not opposed to adjustments and throwing out of clearly opportunist attempts to settle.

In fact, the Jews would be safer if they were to amalgamate their settlements and have fewer larger ones. The small ones can’t be defended.

Somce concessions should be made, by BOTH sides.

There already are two states: Israel and Jordan. That is all that is required. Israel on the West of the River Jordan and Jordan on the East.

Given that any Israelis who have committed criminal actions against the Israeli Police should be charged and if guilty punished, it is now time that the Jordegyptian squatters were removed from a) Judea and Samaria and b) Gaza. They have NO right to be there at all. Absolutely NONE. Israel, incorporating Judea and Samaria is THE homeland for the Jewish people.

From someone who wants to ethnically cleanse 100,000s of thousands of Jews so he can hagn his head up high at goyish dinner parties. Go fuck yourself.

• 100,000 of thousands is 100,000,000, some 17 times the entire size of humanity.

• I take it “hagn” to mean “hang”. You don’t “hang your head high”, you hold it high. You hang it down in shame.

• “Go fuck yourself”: can you be specific what exactly are you recommending?

Moron!

“Utter, utter filth”.

From someone who wants to ethnically cleanse 100,000s of thousands of Jews so he can hagn his head up high at goyish dinner parties. Go fuck yourself.

No! David T has not said he is in favour of removing all the settlers. He is quite rightly calling these racist settler scum “utter filth”. Can anyone disagree?

This doesn’t mean that Hebron should disappear.

“The problem is that the Israeli government never seems to deal seriously with these extremists, who rarely serve serious prison time. ” – Gene.

According to an Israeli friend the “extremists” are remarkably previleged in several areas of life to which other non-observant Israeli’s are subject. It is not too frequently reported what these people get up to. But if you believe yourself to be justified by God and or five thousand years of history in your disgusting views, what chance dialogue?

These and Hamas to deal with, hardly a cheering prospect.

Israel can keep selling the National Religious down the river in the hope that the Arabs will stop trying to kill them and the Europeans will hug them, but neither will ever happen. What might happen is that the National Religious will decide they’ve had enough and then you can work on how to sustain the Zionist project with Charedim and Chilunim alone. The National Religious are taught from birth to give loyalty to the state, a state that then proceeds to piss on them and, what’s more, scapegoat them for all its problems. I’ve met Dati l’Umi types who are no less “post-zionist” than the hard left, they’ve had it. Now they are a small minority, but they can only increase, and they should because a Jewish State that expels Jews, when they know it won’t even bring peace, is worthless.

The IDF will, in that case, be unable to sustain itself, Israel will be finished. In the meantime, maybe the IDF should be sent to clear out the “settlement” of Herzliya instead, see how you like it.

Given that any Israelis who have committed criminal actions against the Israeli Police should be charged and if guilty punished, it is now time that the Jordegyptian squatters were removed from a) Judea and Samaria and b) Gaza. They have NO right to be there at all. Absolutely NONE. Israel, incorporating Judea and Samaria is THE homeland for the Jewish people.

You are WRONG!

The Mandate For Palestine 1922 CLEARLY states that Palestine is a place for Arabs and Jews, with Jews being given teh right to establish The Jewish National Home and so have political rights over Palestine.

The Mandate clearly states that Arabs and Jews have equal rights to live there and enjoy the same religious freedoms and equal rights to all institutions like hospitals and Jews.

Your statement is no different from rabid settlers.

I know that West Bank and Gaza were captured by Jordan and Egypt illegally (as regards the statutes of The Mandate) but the people living there also do have the rights to live there enshrined in The Mandate.

“No! David T has not said he is in favour of removing all the settlers. He is quite rightly calling these racist settler scum “utter filth”. Can anyone disagree?”

Who else has David T ever called utter filth? The 95% of Palestinians who voted for parties formally committed to the destruction of Israel? Zanu PF supporters? How about muggers? They’re crime is small, but not compared to chanting racist slogans. The Syrian government, Shi’ite militias, Hutus?

No it’s only Hebron settlers who use racist epithets. That and BNP members.

David T is interested in scapegoating people because he wants ethnic cleansing. He can and should go fuck himself.

I know that West Bank and Gaza were captured by Jordan and Egypt illegally (as regards the statutes of The Mandate) but the people living there also do have the rights to live there enshrined in The Mandate.

The ‘people’ there gave up their rights when a) they tried to destroy Israel five times and b) expelled Jews from the rest of the Middle East. A lesson was taught to the Germand and Japanese for their genocidal aggression in WW2, when will it be taught to the “Jordegyptians”?

He can and should go fuck himself.

He can fuck himself? Is he possessed of physical attributes denied the rest of us.

I think we should be told…

*Their, as you can see I am fuming.

And it’s true, the Falashas shouldn’t be expelling Jews, they are no less settlers than anyone else. That doesn’t justify racist abuse of a fellow Jew, no-one thinks it does, but a lot of Jews are quite racist. Don’t get my elderly relatives started on Schwarzers, that doesn’t mean they are “utter, utter filth”. That’s ridiculous.

All Israel is a settlement, established in war (unlike West Bank settlements). Jews have no more right to live in Tel Aviv than Hebron.

David T is interested in scapegoating people because he wants ethnic cleansing. He can and should go fuck himself.

You left out a VERY IMPORTANT WORD!

“IF”

If David T is interested in scapegoating people because he wants ethnic cleansing. He can and should go fuck himself.

I have seen NO remarks by David T that suggests he want ALL settlers removed from Palestine.

He/We are commenting on the racist scum in Hebron, not all residents of Hebron and not ALL settlers.

I would support a Middle East based on common standards of political rights, where “national minorities” are able to live as citizens, participating fully in the political, social and economic life of the countries in which they live.

I most certainly would not support the explusion of Jews or any other national minority from a Palestinian state, in which they were living peacefully and as good citizens.

However, that does not require Israel to provide an ongoing military presence, and other incentives, to secure the ability of utter utter bastards to terrorise their neighbours, and physically and racially abuse Israelis who are serving their country in the security services.

Go fuck yourself.

You are under no obligation to read or comment on this blog.

The ‘people’ there gave up their rights when a) they tried to destroy Israel five times and b) expelled Jews from the rest of the Middle East. A lesson was taught to the Germand and Japanese for their genocidal aggression in WW2, when will it be taught to the “Jordegyptians”?

Its true that the Arab side denied they wanted a State alongside Israel in 1948 and in many wars since then and in the denial of Israel existing by Hamas today.

I don’t intuitively feel that the reward for terrorism and hatred towards Jews should be a State. However, the modern reality is that we can emulate the ancient Land Of Israel in modern times.

There is a modern Israel of a status and permanence that didn’t exist in ancient Israel.

Law must be obeyed and The Mandate For Palestine states that Jews may also live in Palestine. My solution is to make them dual citizens of Israel and a Palestinain State with guarantees on their security.

How many Palestinians have Hebron settlers ever killed by the way? How many in the last 14 years? Certainly far less than the Israeli government with their “Hey let’s withdraw and then launch periodic airstrikes to look like we know what the hell we’re doing” policy.

It is the Kadima elite who are utter, utter filth. A few racist yobbos doesn’t cut it.

“I most certainly would not support the explusion of Jews or any other national minority from a Palestinian state, in which they were living peacefully and as good citizens.”

You know full well it is a pre-condition of any peace deal, peace deals you support on this blog. You also know full-well what happened in Gaza.

You use your blog to demonise people in order to support the State Dept./Israeli left-centre policy of ethnic cleansing, then you lie and equivocate about it.

That’s a lot worse than calling someone the N word.

David T, I am pleased I didn’t misrepresent you and I share your comments. In fact the removal of these racist scum would probably ensure a more stable Palestinian State.

I see it as a Golden Opportunity. With Jewish/Israeli investment in a Palestinian State through industry and commerce out of Jewish settlements then Palestine could become as developed as Israel and when people are affluent they don’t tend to want to kill.

All Israel is a settlement, established in war (unlike West Bank settlements). Jews have no more right to live in Tel Aviv than Hebron.

They have THE SAME RIGHT under The Mandate for Palestine 1922.

You know full well it is a pre-condition of any peace deal (expulsion of Jews from Palestine)

I don’t believe that. No Palestinian Statesman would say “The State of Palestine must be free of Jews”.

Tell you what though, if they can say that and get away with it then my answer would be to say “OK then, all Israeli Arabs, shove off to your Arab Only State”. I mention this to establish its absurdity - it won’t happen.

Ethnically cleanse an area because the folks are rude? What total nonsense. If they break the law, arrest them, otherwise let them be.

when people are affluent they don’t tend to want to kill.

You’re being ironic, right? Islamic terrorism is a middle-class disease first and foremost, like the majority of anti-establishment actions.

There needs to be a two state solution in Palestine.
One state for those who believe in evolution and one for those who don’t.

ha, ha, ha

The readership of this site has morphed from liberal imperialist/Zionist to Likudnik and now is mainly Greater Israel followers of Kach and Kahane Chai.

A predictable conclusion

resistor, go back to the Angry Arab. You are better liked there.

“My Ethnic Cleansing comment is to do with the 100% removal of Jews from Palestinian areas because I believe that this is what Gene wants. I believe he is for All Settlers Out ( He could tell me I am wrong).”

Maven, from the video footage, these settlers don’t look like they’ve been living there for thousands of years. Some look like they’re only in their mid twenties.

You’re being ironic, right? Islamic terrorism is a middle-class disease first and foremost, like the majority of anti-establishment actions.

I believe my use of the word ‘tend’ leaves scope for the opposite to occur.

I should re-state a pre-condition. Hamas has to be completely destroyed and a Palestinian State must outlaw terrorist groups and organisations.

Here’s a dilemma. If a Palestinian State exists and becomes a full member of the UN then if Hezbollah attacks Israel the Palestinian State is obliged to help defend Israel - should Israel ask it.

A predicable conclusion

Whilst being absurdist and provocative you have stumbled on to a truth - the morphing of the Palestinian position from being one of a secularist land war by the PLO/Fatah into ideologically fuelled racism by Hamas has certainly pushed many doves on the Israel side into a far more hawkish position.

Maven, from the video footage, these settlers don’t look like they’ve been living there for thousands of years. Some look like they’re only in their mid twenties.

UNBELIEVABLE! Are you denying that parents of ages in thousands of years aren’t allowed to have children?

Did you expect a video, and invention of teh 20th century, was going to show us film of ancient Israel?

Can you appreciate how stupid your comment is? (and so desrving of a stupid response)

Why is Maven harping on about the 1922 Mandate for Palestine. Wasn’t that ended when Israel declared independence in 1948? Are you, Maven, calling for a return of Israel and Palestine to British control?

Seriously, why can’t some people (Maven, G and Morgoth in particular) accept the basic framework that both sides agree to - the two state settlement? Do they think they know better than the people of Israel and Palestine what is good for them?

TheIrie - Pretty funny, coming from you.

Why is Maven harping on about the 1922 Mandate for Palestine. Wasn’t that ended when Israel declared independence in 1948?

DOH!!! You answered your own question. The BRITISH police presence in the region, known as The British Mandate, ended in 1948 but the framework document The Mandate For Palestine 1922 still exists and hasn’t been officially ended.

Are you, Maven, calling for a return of Israel and Palestine to British control?

See, you answered it. You associated the ending with the Britsish going home and not the tearing-up of The Mandate for Palestine 1922.

“UNBELIEVABLE! Are you denying that parents of ages in thousands of years aren’t allowed to have children?”

Maven, if they’ve been living there for thousands of years why do you yourself call them “settlers”, as in: “I believe he is for All Settlers Out”

Either they have been living there for thousands of years or they are settlers. Which is it?

“The Mandate For Palestine 1922 still exists and hasn’t been officially ended” That was a document enforced by the League of Nations. How can it possibly still apply?

If Jews remain in the land that becomes a Palestinian state under the 2-state solution, then they must either be Palestinian citizens and live under the laws of the Palestinian State; or they must be Israeli nationals and live under whatever laws govern foreign nationals of any stripe in that State. But they can’t remain in Palestine with Israeli citizenship and the protection of the Israeli government and military. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

On the same token, if all Jews are to be expelled from areas that will be in Palestinian control, all Arabs will have to be expelled from Israel.

You can’t have your cake and eat it.

Gene - good post. Gene’s detractors - just read the article linked to, shut up for five minutes, and think about whether defending the most extreme element in Israeli society is in any way sensible. I know, and you know, these people do not represent Israel. It must be stopped.

THEIRIE

I agree.

4 million refugees

But you had to spoil it.

Wow. These ‘national religious’ settlers really aren’t the brightest bulbs in the PR department, are they? And then some of the comments here are similarly unpleasant - any talk of removing the settlements as part of a compromise with the Palestinians is presented as a desire for ‘ethnic cleansing’? Absolute madness. But then, I’m ‘goyish’, which seems to count for less in G.’s books.

goyish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FFS

What do you think this is? Some sort of Jewish MPACuk!!!!!!!!!!!

The brutal fact is that most of the settlers will have to leave the Occupied Territories for any realistic hope of peace and a two-state solution to be possible.

The comparison with Arab citizens of Israel is misguided and misleading. The settlers never lived there, they didn’t come with the consent of local population – they come protected by the power of arms of the Occupying Force (in the sense of international law) although, in fairness, they have often obtained this protection by deception and lies, The entire purpose (explicitly stated, time and again) of the Settlement Project is to annex the Occupied Territories and create a Greater Israel, in which Palestinians are at best not even second-class citizens but disfranchised cheap labour without political rights – and at worse “nudged” to leave. (It is enough to read the filth from various spokespeople of Kahane Jugend on this thread to see where all this comes from.)

The settlements are a cancer in the Israeli society. Like a cancerous growth, they have subverted the greater body of the state, sucked its resources, mislead its centres of perception and injected toxins into its tissues. In very large measure, the occupation, with all the disaster it revisits on both Israelis and Palestinians, is due to settlers and their unholy alliance with their twin brothers, Islamic fundamentalists. The blood of both Israeli and Palestinian victims of the violence is on them, as is the monumental waste of resources, resources that could have been used to make two states into a Land of Milk and Honey. And perhaps the worst of it, the two fundamentalist camps have dehumanised their own “sides” and subverted them morally. Young (mostly) men on both sides, often not much more than kids, do things that should cover their own and their peoples’ heads with shame – and when you trace the chain of evidence, you invariably stop at the two fundamentalist camps.

So yes, they will have to go. And insofar as the overwhelming majority of settlers (not all of whom are fundamentalist wingnuts) – yes, they will have to be evacuated to Israel proper. Israel will solve the problem of its own refugees exactly like Palestine will solve the problem of its own. And, all things said and done, israel will have the easier deal.

And the earlier all this starts, the better the chances of somehow saving everybody from a permanent disaster.

I would expect that there will be Jews who will continue to live in places like Hebron, conducting themselves with propriety, as citizens of a Palestinian state, with the option of moving to Israel if they choose to do so, as any Jew may.

A goyish what? Surely it’s an adjective?

Next, I’d suggest a re-read of Gene’s post if you think he’s offering any succour to these thugs.

“On the same token, if all Jews are to be expelled from areas that will be in Palestinian control, all Arabs will have to be expelled from Israel.

You can’t have your cake and eat it.”

Don’t be stupid.

The same deal would apply. Become a citizen of Israel or choose to remain a foreign national.

Maven: The Mandate for Palestine 1922

Why you keep harping on about this silly mandate is beyond me. This Machiavellian handiwork was forced upon two peoples; with one side unashamedly favoured over the other, not to mention that it has since been superseded and made redundant by events since!
You must be fucking stupid [which you evidently are] to think that the disadvantaged other [Palestinians] will agree to and abide by it.

You are one funny geezer!

Jews have the right to live in these areas

present day Jordan

present day Israel

The Golan

Gaza

Judea and Samaria

These were clearly the lands promised to the Jews as their National Homeland in the San Remo Treaty in 1920

This is a clearly legalistic argument, so let’s deal with it legalistically.

The San Remo Treaty did NOT promise the Jews those territories. It stated:

The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people (…)

It said “the establishment in Palestine.” It did not say “in all of Palestine.” Nor did it say “the establishment of Palestine as a national home.” So long as a homeland for the Jews is established, and it’s in Palestine (irrespective of whether it’s in 22%, 44% or 100% of Palestine), the terms of the Mandate are not violated.

While I agree that the Jews living in Ariel and other peaceful settlements should be allowed to continue living in Palestine, it should be clear that it would be an arrangement based on humanitarian reasons, and not on any right conferred upon them by the Balfour declaration or the British Mandate terms.

Those theoretical considerations aside, it’s clear the only solution is to create a single binational state from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. The ill-advised Israeli policy of settlement expansion has yielded a situation in which it’s impossible to unscramble an egg.

For the record, my position is pretty close to Muffin’s @11:56 am; though it’s fair to say that we disagree on how to deal with Hamas.

The Ynet report excerpted in the original post includes the following quote by a man described as “one Border Guard officer of Ethiopian descent”:

“I just didn’t know what to do with myself,” he said.

If he is telling the truth, then the blames lies with his superior officers, who failed to give the troops clear orders on how to handle potentially violent confrontations with aggressive settlers.

Those theoretical considerations aside, it’s clear the only solution is to create a single binational state from the Jordan to the Mediterranean.

There are only two circumstances in which a single political entity can be produced out of two warring nations.

- Conquest; or

- Co-operation

Do you think that an Arab conquest of Israeli Jews would be any more successful than the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza? If so, I’d be interested to know why you’d think that.

You might be right. However, to succeed, it would be necessary to carry out a campaign of terror, ethnic cleansing and genocide, infinitely beyond that which you’d deplore, were Israel carrying it out.

However, if that’s what you think it will take, or if you don’t think that is necessary, I’d be interested to see your thinking.

Co-operation is a more successful model. You’re an Argentinian Jew, I think, and so there’s no reason for you to have more than a passing familiarity with the last 60 years of European politics.

In Europe, we have managed - not without flaws and not perfectly - to create a Union, based on common standards of civil, political, and social rights, including voluntarily pooled sovereignty, common citizenship rights and free movement of persons.

We’ve done that in the same 60 years that the Middle East has achieved poverty, bloodshed, and misery.

By and large, I tend to favour models with a track record of working.

Either they have been living there for thousands of years or they are settlers. Which is it?

They have been living there for thousands of years. The young people you see may look in their twenties but they are actually about 3-400 years old. Many of them came from Brigadoon in he Sumaria Hills,

If you persist in asking (what I pompously) call a stupid question then you’ll get a stupid answer.

Proper Answer: Why are they settlers? Because they have lived there for thousands of years. During the Hebron Massacres of 1927 many were killed and fled for their lives. Until 1948 the area was almost without Jews. When Israel won the 1967 War and regained West Bank as part of Mandated Palestine so Jews began to return to where they had been driven.

Its NOT thousands of years since Jews last lived there.

That was a document enforced by the League of Nations. How can it possibly still apply?

Do I HAVE to write “The Mandate for Palestine For Dummies (especially called TheIrie)”?

All League of Nations documents and Resolutions automatically passed to the UN with the same force of law and validity.

The settlers never lived there, they didn’t come with the consent of local population – they come protected by the power of arms of the Occupying Force (in the sense of international law) although, in fairness, they have often obtained this protection by deception and lies

I only need to read this far to know the rest is BS.

Its absolutely true that a settler of below 60 never lived there, but buba and zaider might well have lived there.

David, you put your finger on the major fallacy of the proponents of “one state” – whether Greater Israel or Greater Palestine.

The impossibility of imposing by fiat, force of arms or starvation, a solution on either side, while the side in question views it as a total existential disaster, stares you in the face. Of course, no Greater Israel is possible in the long term without Palestinian genocide and no Greater Palestine is possible in the short term without Israeli (and probably Jewish) genocide. We are really talking about something as awful as that.

So why do the one-state proponents advocate it? Either because they are ignorant and deluded, or because they are willing to pay the price tag of genocide. And they, whether G, Morgoth or Hasbara Buster, should be honest (what a vain hope!) to admit it.

Had they really wanted cooperation between the two sides, they would have supported a two-state solution, followed by a Middle Eastern economic block, followed by a Middle Eastern version of EU: not by forcing people or killing them when they disagree but by gradually building trust and common purpose. Had they really wanted – but they don’t.

The same deal would apply. Become a citizen of Israel or choose to remain a foreign national.

WRONG! All Jews have the right to be Israeli Citizens. I can’t believe Israel will ask Jewish settlers to apply. I’ll bet that they are probably 100% Israeli citizens already.

Should we ask all Israeli Arabs to give up Israeli citizenship if they have a Paletinian STate to go to? (No)

In Europe, we have managed - not without flaws and not perfectly - to create a Union, based on common standards of civil, political, and social rights, including voluntarily pooled sovereignty, common citizenship rights and free movement of persons.

Err, no. That was the American Nuclear Umbrella that allowed the profoundly flawed and anti-democratic “EU” to form.

Surely if Jews want to live in Palestine, they have a right to, as either citizens of Palestine as Arab Israelis are citizens of Israel, or as holders of some kind of residency permit.

I can’t think of any other instances where a people have the right to live in a country in which they do not hold citizenship or formal residency, and with the protection of a foreign army.

Maven, by my count you’ve commented on this post 28 times, making essentially the same point. Give it a rest.

Why you keep harping on about this silly mandate

Its silly? Why, because it doesn’t permit you to deny the rights of Jews to their National Home.

When you read it what did you find ’silly’ about it? Oh, you DIDN’T read it?

is beyond me.

So is an episode of Postman Pat I suggest.

This Machiavellian handiwork was forced upon two peoples;

You don’t know it - do you???

The Mandate ALSO created The Lebanon, Syria and Jordam (with Jorddan stealin Trans-Jordan) Shall we unconstitute all the countries and start again.

What TWO people’s? Jordanians, Lebanese, Syrians, Israelis, Jews, Christians, Arabs - how do you cut it to TWO?

with one side unashamedly favoured over the other,

When The Lebanon, Syria and Jordan were created The Jews had no rights of settling there. Hence it was a racist settlement AGAINST Jews.

Can’t be bothered with the rest. When 100% of 50% is wrong why should I bother with the rest of the BS?

29

It said “the establishment in Palestine.” It did not say “in all of Palestine.”

It didn’t say NOT all of Palestine either? SInce it said Palestine it must MEAN Palestine.

It was actually envisaged as ONE State but the British conceded it must be TWO States. However, the Arabs said No to a State and so they don’t have one until they say Yes - and then based on the facts on the ground while they preferred attacks and War to saying Yes.

Nor did it say “the establishment of Palestine as a national home.” So long as a homeland for the Jews is established, and it’s in Palestine (irrespective of whether it’s in 22%, 44% or 100% of Palestine), the terms of the Mandate are not violated.

Nice of you to give 100% but I think Israel and Palestinians prefer it like it is with a Palestinian State to be founded.

Should we ask all Israeli Arabs to give up Israeli citizenship if they have a Paletinian STate to go to? (No)

I think either some substance is dulling your senses or you’re being willfully obtuse.

Israeli Arabs are citizens of Israel, just as I’m proposing that Jews living in territory which will form part of the Palestinian State become Palestinian Citizens.

So, you have Palestinian Jews and Israeli Arabs.

You can also have Israeli citiznes living in Palestine as foreign nationals, just as you have Swedish citizens living in Palestine as foreign nationals. You can also have Palestinian Arabsliving in Israel as foreign nations. It really is that simple.

The bottom line is that, like in any other country, if you are not already a citizen, you chose to remain as a foreign national (with fewer rights) or you elect to become a citizen.

I honestly don’t understand why - since this is the case the world over - you find this so hard to grasp.

30.

What should I do. Ignore the BS or am I not allowed to help people when they are wrong.

Anyway, I’ll give it a rest. Just happened to be at home today.

Had they really wanted cooperation between the two sides, they would have supported a two-state solution, followed by a Middle Eastern economic block, followed by a Middle Eastern version of EU: not by forcing people or killing them when they disagree but by gradually building trust and common purpose. Had they really wanted – but they don’t.

The problem is this.

The debate - on the Anglo-American Left and Right - has been dominated by people who are, quite frankly, lunatics. We’re talking pan-arabists, Caliphate obsessives, and their supporters. In the UK have significantly been a motley collection of

- pro-USSR Communists who in the past simply recycled the foreign policy goals and racism of those they took their political lead from.

- Trots, who largely just plagiarised their arguments from the first group

- a rag-bag of freelance racists, Third Worldists, and weirdos

Since the failure of Communism, the political anchor that the ideal of the ‘binational socialist state’ provided has been pulled up. Sometimes it’ll be mentioned as a touchstone, but mostly nobody bothers, because it is obviously not on the cards, and never will be.

So, we’ll never hear a sensible answer from these guys to the question: “how exactly do you see this panning out, then” because they don’t know, and don’t care.

You could make precisely the same point about the “Judea and Samaria” nuts - although, frankly, their voice is not as dominant on that side of the argument as the nuts of the far Left are on theirs.

But the truth is, everybody knows what a successful regional political structure - that protects political, social, and economic rights - looks like, because we’ve got one.

We should be discussing how to get to there, from where we are here.

But we don’t because the people setting the Agenda are the likes of Greenstein, and Jonathan Cooke and Seauauamus Milne, and Kaboom Tamimi, and all these other cretins.

Perhaps we spend too much time fighting them, rather than putting forward a positive argument for a regional democratic framework.

“Its absolutely true that a settler of below 60 never lived there, but buba and zaider might well have lived there.

So it is your contention then that, regardless of one’s own citizenship, one has the right to go and settle anywhere that gramdma lived more than 60 years previously? I hope you don’t work as an immigration advisor!

I can’t think of any other instances where a people have the right to live in a country in which they do not hold citizenship or formal residency, and with the protection of a foreign army.

Armenia?

Western Sahara?

Wow. Nothing seems to get people going like I/P and abortion.

But I still maintain, a Mac is a far superior machine to a PC running Windows.

‘But I still maintain, a Mac is a far superior machine to a PC running Windows.’

Gimme a break, Macs are useless buggy pieces of shit.

Genius. Give everyone in I/P a Mac - peace would ensue.

I just like the stability and ease of use of a Mac.

Plus, they’re very stylish machines.

I’m thinking of buying one of the new MacBook laptops actually.

Do you think that an Arab conquest of Israeli Jews would be any more successful than the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza?

I clearly don’t think that. The cooperation model you go on to describe is what I have in mind.

The Apple Cult get’s a ripping by the Simpsons. Everybody slags of Microsoft for their huge corporate position and the fact that they are targets for malware… you wait, Apple is in for the same treatment!!

get’s?!

I clearly don’t think that. The cooperation model you go on to describe is what I have in mind.

In that case, we need to start talking about how we in the European Union got to where we are now.

I’d love it, if in 60 years time, the main popular argument in the Middle East was over the acceptable level of bendiness of cucumbers.

That being the Middle East, David, it is more likely to be aubergines than any other five-a-day. Which, all said and done, proves the superiority of the Middle Eastern mind. (Or at least palate.)

There is clearly going to be renewed pressure, under the Obama administration, for the adoption of a two-state solution, which may or may not include the right of the settlers to remain in Judea and Samaria either indefinitely or for the duration of a limited transition period. One hint of the kind of pressure that Israel may expect is the rumoured appointment of Daniel Kurtzer as presidential special envoy to the Middle East (where “presidential” means he would report directly to Obama, bypassing Hillary Clinton and the State Department). Another hint is the recent travel schedule undertaken by Robert Malley on behalf of the International Crisis Group, which has been the subject of an unusually animated exchange of correspondence in Melanie Phillips’ Spectator blog. A third hint came in a recent note in the Forward, drawing attention to dovish attitudes on the part of Rahm Emanuel when he was a staffer at the Clinton White House.

The two-state solution is however seen by many people, including myself, as a mirage or pipe dream, an unattainable object of desire, an unrealistic expectation. It is a good thing, on the whole, that the two sides should go on talking, but I find it very difficult to believe that they will ever arrive at a workable solution, for a variety of reasons, including one basic reason, which has recently been set out clearly and succinctly by Giora Eiland:

‘Israeli support of the “land for peace” principle has declined sharply; according to a survey published by the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, only 28 percent of the Jewish population supported this principle as of 2007, compared to 56 percent in 1997.1

‘This point is of immense importance. Generally, when two sides sign an agreement, each assumes the other genuinely intends to honor the agreement. When this premise is missing, it is difficult to be convinced that the price exacted as part of a give-and-take is worthwhile. Many Israelis are concerned that pursuing such an agreement is a lose-lose situation—Israel will pay its part within the framework of the agreement, but the Palestinians will not meet their end of the bargain.’

‘Israel will pay its part within the framework of the agreement, but the Palestinians will not meet their end of the bargain.’

Like they stopped all settlement building during Oslo?

Sorry, I forgot to give the source of that Eiland quote:

Giora Eiland, Rethinking theTwo-State Solution (Policy Focus #88), Washington Institute, September 2008

Marvin, do you make your purchasing decisions based on the Simpsons? I’d never thought of doing that.

“Nigger”??

Hebrew doesn’t have a pejorative word for Africans. What word are they translating as “nigger”?

Hebrew doesn’t have a pejorative word for Africans. What word are they translating as “nigger”?

Kooshone? Or even “kooshi” is often used in a pejorative sense.

David T and Muffin have made the points that need to be borne in mind, and we shouldn’t forget that there are a lot of extremists outside of the West Bank, who would like nothing more than for this conflict to go on and on and on, for 100s of years.

In doing so it feeds their own pathological hatreds, but doesn’t make Israel any safer or allow the Palestinians to live a good quality of life that they deserve.

So when considering the Middle East you have to ask yourself:

do you REALLY want peace? or continuing levels of low intensity war?

Peace is not on the table, Modernity, not from the Arab side.

Like they stopped all settlement building during Oslo?

We can go back and forth like a see-saw. I could equally quote The Roadmap where the first action required of any party in a sequence of confidence-building steps is for the Palestinians to “Immediately and unconditionally cease incitement and violence…”

Within two days of signing the Palestinians broke that with shootings and stabbings.

Who started it is now lost in the mists of time.

The progressive way forward is (as David T says) to summarise where we are, where do we want to be and plot a route.

I will accept that there are intransigent people in the process but don’t say they are all Israeli. It seems to me that Israel is always asked for concessions because they are seen as a liberal-minded democracy whereas you couldn’t get Palestinians to agree on the colour of a football strip or whether the referee should be Fatah or Hamas.

morgoth,

please, don’t take the piss

admit it, you couldn’t give a damn about the Jews, as long as they are fighting arab/muslims you’ll side with them, that’s the level of your support?

time and again you have shown utter contempt for Jewish beliefs and history, apparently its only your extreme loathing of Islam that’s made you side, temporarily, with the Israelis

if, however, you have jettisoned your strange quasi-Satanic beliefs then all well and good, and if you really want peace in the middle east, then it would make a pleasant change

Maybe the idiot settlers just said “nigger”. Thanks to America & Britain that word is known around the world.*

Morgoth: Has not the experience of your homeland of Northern Ireland enlighten you to the folly of “To Hell or Connaught” type solutions?

*Otherwise how would Northern Italians know to use that slur about their darker complexion countrymen from southern Italy and Sicily?

Hebrew doesn’t have a pejorative word for Africans. What word are they translating as “nigger”?

They said it in Yiddish.

Go stuff it Hasbara Buster.

Correct me if I am wrong, but does not the IDF deploy a full brigade of 3,000 troops in order to protect the 400 Jewish settlers in Hebraon? If so, that would a gross misuse to have so many troops needed to protect so few settlers. It would only be a matter of common sense to remove the Hebron settlers so as to free the troops for more needed jobs.

And yes, those settlers and their supporters who rioted are indeed scum.

Ciertas zonas de Av. Alberdi presentan un aspecto bastante céntrico:

[IMG]http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa267/abraham_benyosef/Rosario%20urbana/Imagen042-1.jpg[/IMG]

“…The brutal fact is that most of the settlers will have to leave the Occupied Territories for any realistic hope of peace and a two-state solution to be possible….”

If they have to leave, peace will not follow. Instead a war against an Israel with strategically inferior borders will very likely ensue.

For the 2-state solution that will have been effected will be totally asymmetrical. On the one hand, there will be a Jewish state with a large Arab minority, on the other an ethnically pure apartheid Palestinian state with irridentist ambitions. In other words, the “solution” will be a defeat for Israel, and the completion of the first stage of the “salami” strategy for destroying Israel as promulgated by the vile ethnic cleanser of Jews, President Habib Bourgiba of Tunisia.

Tom Segev recently suggested that speaking the truth about the past (the item in question was the career of Amin al Husseini) is harmful to the prospects for peace. He was rightly upbraided for his cynicism. Equally, speaking the truth about the war to be fought from indefensible positions that the anti-settler fanatics are leading Israel to, is essential. It is a matter of life or death for all Israelis.

Hi Ben, so is that the real reason that Israel continued to build settlements during Oslo and the government always knew that there would never be a negotiated settlement and the Palestinian violations of Oslo are hence irrelevant to the outcome?

The Mandate ALSO created The Lebanon, Syria and Jordam (with Jorddan stealin Trans-Jordan) Shall we unconstitute all the countries and start again.
What TWO people’s? Jordanians, Lebanese, Syrians, Israelis, Jews, Christians, Arabs - how do you cut it to TWO?

And I suppose these murderous settlers are being dragged from their settlements in the suburbs of Amman, Damascus or Beirut!
You really are a dim-witted idiot, aren’t you?

“…so is that the real reason that Israel continued to build settlements during Oslo…”

Yossi Beilin, Israel’s deputy foreign minister said publicly in the years after the signing of the Oslo agreements, that no Jewish resident will have to leave the West Bank. The Oslo agreement was not an agreement to ethnically cleanse the West Bank of its Jews, neither was it an agreement to establish an apartheid Palestinian state where Jews were forbidden from residing.

<And I suppose these murderous settlers are being dragged from their settlements in the suburbs of Amman, Damascus or Beirut!
You really are a dim-witted idiot, aren’t you?

But of all the events in the world you’ve zoned in on this one. Out of a whole world this dominates your mind. Why not let it go? You have no stake in this, let it go, calm down, shush.

But of all the events in the world you’ve zoned in on this one. Out of a whole world this dominates your mind. Why not let it go? You have no stake in this, let it go, calm down, shush

Well unless you have been living under the tundras of the Alaskan wilderness, whatever happens in this pesky little corner of the world affects all of humanity.
I suppose you better catchup with the rest of of humanity.

I’m surprised that throughout Oslo the Israeli government was so keen to encourage new arrivals to Gaza and the West Bank to take up occupancy there as future citizens of a Palestinian state, which is what Oslo was leading to. Why would you move to a country with whom your own was negotiating its independence?

In deed the more I think about it the odder it seems that Israel,m which encourages Jews to make aliyah. would be encouraging Israelis to move OUT of Israel to what would soon become a foreign country if negotiations succeeded.

The only explanation I can think of is that they wanted to increase their share of the land available to decrease the amount available to the existing population. Would that be it? Because if it was, this was a violation of Oslo, just as the Palestinians renounced Oslo by failing to renounce violence, and you cannot honestly say that either party was sincere.

Or perhaps there is some other reason for Israel being so eager to send Jews abroad.

“So why do the one-state proponents advocate it? Either because they are ignorant and deluded, or because they are willing to pay the price tag of genocide. And they, whether G, Morgoth or Hasbara Buster, should be honest (what a vain hope!) to admit it.”

One day sovereignty over Judea and Samaria will be divided between a) Israel and b) some Arab political entity characterised primarily by despotism and the stoning of young women (and economic retardation, so I guess a least the land will be payed her Sabbaths). At this point I would hope Israel gets as much as possible and the way to ensure this is to ramp up the settlement programme (as part of a multi-pronged demographic approach).

What matters is not the current political entity of the State of Israel, which has its good and bad points, but will go the way of all flesh eventually. What matters is that the people of Israel are firmly implanted in the land of Israel and that they can never be forced out again.

In the meantime, if the Kadimah government wants to buy State Dept. money to spend on the next election campaign by turfing Jews out of their homes, said Jews should protect themselves with all necessary force short of outright rebellion under the right of self-defence enshrined in the law of civilized nations.

Again, racism is un-acceptable and no Jew should ever be stigmatized for the colour of his or her skin, but if you want to look for “utter, utter filth” I suggest you take a ganders at the Kenesset.

“…Israel.. would be encouraging Israelis to move OUT of Israel to what would soon become a foreign country…”

A foreign state perhaps, but a core part of the historic homeland of the Jewish people. All nationally-conscious Jews regard the West Bank as an integral part of the historic homeland of the Jewish people. It is as natural for a Jew to live in Tekoa or Hebron as it is for one to live in Jerusalem or Beer Sheva.

Just as Palestine Arabs live in Israel, so Israeli Jews live in the West Bank.

The West Bank is also strategically vital for Israel’s security, especially the high ground overlooking the Shfelah, and the Jordan valley. Israel’s need to safeguard its security was not reliquished in the Oslo agreements, neither were the rights of Jews to reside in the West Bank.

The troublemakers and hooligans in Hebron should be arrested, and dealt with properly by the legal system. This stands to reason. But the Jewish community of Hebron should not be destroyed.

On Yom Kippur there were riots in Acco, involving Jews and Arabs. Should the Arabs of Acco be deported?

How about the riots in the Banlieus of Paris? Should it’s inhabitants be expelled from France?

We are were we are. There are many arguments for and against the settlement of Judea and Samaria, I for one disagree with it, but there is no just reason for the forceful expulsion of people from their homes just to implement a political solution.

Good relations between Jews and Arabs in those territories does in some places exist, and can flourish in the right conditions.

Did Oslo give them the right to remain citizens of Israel in a future Palestinian state, not subject to the laws of Palestine?

And you are proposing that a government accept as residents a population whose purpose in being there is to protect the security interests of a foreign power. What would be their likely residence status? If citizens, I imagine they could be tried for treason.

And thanks, G. for expressing the emergent anti-Zionism of the Israeli far right.

“…And you are proposing that a government accept as residents a population whose purpose in being there is to protect the security interests of a foreign power….”

Do not misrepresent my words.

The rights of Jews to reside in the West Bank is not contingent on the security rights of the Israeli state. The security rights of the Israeli state are not contingent on the rights of Jews to reside in the West Bank.

Israel is the aggrieved party in this dispute. It was Jews who were completely ethnically cleansed from the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1948. It was the Israeli state that was subjected to genocidal aggression in 1948 and 1967. All questions of right and wrong start from these two stark facts.

“…Did Oslo give them the right to remain citizens of Israel in a future Palestinian state, not subject to the laws of Palestine?…”

As far as I know, the Oslo agreement did not address this issue in detail.

If the laws of the Palestinian state resulting from an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement make it impossible for Jews to live as equals in the West Bank, whether as residents or citizens, like Arabs do in Israel, then the agreement is not a peace agreement, but is a sham and a fraud perpetrated on the Jews.

I wish you hadn’t brought in Ha’aretz to substantiate an already good enough argument. That’s akin to bringing in the Guardian to support just cause for Israel-hatred.

This scum have to go. They are bringing peace-loving Israelis into disrepute. Not all the West Bank settlers are of this ilk but they, too, will have to leave eventually if peace comes and the Palestinians want to build their own state, or they could have the choice of becoming Palestinian citizens.

In answer to previous

Everything is to play for.

Why accept a status quo. If the Irish had done so in 1916 then Britain would still rule. Britain in 1916 had been in power for hundreds of years.

The fact is that in 1920 all of Palestine was offered the Jews. Since then the Jews have lost 90 per cent of this.

THIS HISTORY IS NOT KNOWN, NOT EVEN BY ISRAELI PEOPLE!!!

That is my point. To understand the history. The Fascist Left in ISM et al argue that the state of Israel is colonist and imperialist etc.

Yet they (the Jews) lose 90 per cent of the land offered at San Remo.

The Arabs will never accept Jews on this area of the earth, or indeed on any area, as long as they are led by the descendents of Hajj Amin el Husseini, the monster of the Holocaust.

You note that every piece of land offered the “Palestinians” they insist on being Judenfrei.

This is Nazism for sure.