News Stories

[Haak]

Correct me if i'm wrong but I remember hearing somewhere that Israeli settlers are currently 25% of the population in West Bank. Is that true?

[Ithekro]

It seems to be THE issue along with the border that hangs up all the talks of late though. Settlements and the 1967 green line. The Palestinians want the Green Line. Israel has settlements all over the West Bank if that map I posted earlier is at all accurate.

The question is, "is what the media shows accurate?" Likely not since the news thrives on sensationalism. How many evictions are expansions of existing settlements outside their boundies? How may are "new' settlements? How amny are evicting squatters "invading" settlements? We don't know as the media does not cover that in the West as it is boring to most viewers.

[Darkbeat]

Originally Posted by Haak

Correct me if i'm wrong but I remember hearing somewhere that Israeli settlers are currently 25% of the population in West Bank. Is that true?

Population-wise yes, but they are mostly collected in large centers like Maale Adumim and Beitar Illit, both of which are only just over the green line. A large population essentially confined to a tiny portion of the land.

As I said, it's roughly 500,000 Israeli Jews in the West Bank. There are more Israeli citizens if you count the Israeli Arabs, but most people only consider Jews to be settlers.

EDIT: @Ithekro New settlements don't exist, only new "outposts" which are razed on a daily basis. Indeed, the Israeli government announced this week the removal of 200 "homes" in outposts alone. That's a lot when you consider most outposts are just a couple of guys in some caravans on a hill.

[Ithekro]

Is there a more definate map of settlements verse "outposts" and a clear definition of both and anything else that Israel has and or claims within the West Bank?

Also what about whatever it is that seems to be cutting off most of the West Bank form Jordan? That was the area that surprised me the most.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

my point was that the settlements grow as all cities grow.
not as a result of mass migration of people to them, but as a result of people living their lives there.
couples get married, children are born, towns grow.

like Darkbeat pointed out, its not a result of some government conspiracy to annex territories, but a simple fact of life.

Settlements are located in strategic locations of the country, such as high hills, near water and near major roads.

On the other hand, Palestinian homes are demolished all the time displacing families that have lived there for generations in order to make way for road ways, check points or settlements.

All these settlements are interconnected by a system of roads and check points which isolates the natives in ever small pockets leading to a fragmentation of the whole country, which in turn makes life for Palestinians very difficult and miserable. They are basically a repressed society in a chunk of land that acts as a prison. Israeli soldiers are everywhere and they place entire cities under curfew many times a year. There is virtually no economy and most of the population is unemployed.

So now don't tell me that settlements just are, and they are a natural fact of life. Like I said, there are many Jews against Israel policies, including army officials, but they are quickly silenced by the media and pay a steep price for speaking out.

[Darkbeat]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Settlements are built inside Palestinian territory every year. They are located in strategic locations of the country, such as high hills, near water and near major roads.

On the other hand, Palestinian homes are demolished all the time displacing families that have life there for generations in order to make way for road ways, check points or settlements.

I assume you have proof of these claims?

All these settlements are interconnected by a system of roads and check points which isolates the natives in ever small pockets leading to fragmentation of this whole country, which in turn makes life for Palestinians very difficult and miserable. You are basically a repressed society in a chunk of land that acts as your prison. Israeli soldiers are everywhere and they place entire cities under curfew many times a year. There is virtually no economy and most of the population is unemployed.

1. Road/Check Points were agreed to by the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords.

2. The Map posted on the previous page shows were Israeli soldiers maintain a presence, also in areas agreed to by Oslo. These areas comprise a small minority of the West Bank.

3. The Palestinian economy is actually booming. Their biggest contributor is (surprise!) Israel, which provides billions of shekels in aid every year, along with electricity, water, mobile phone service etc etc to the entire population. They also pay the wages of the PA government, which at the present time is Fatah (though they are over their tenure by a year) who's charter still calls for the destruction of the "Zionist State".

4. 20,000-30,000 Palestinian Arabs were recently made unemployed as the PA government issued a law that forbids their citizens from being employed in helping build homes for Jews, ie, extend settlements. Breaking this law would be execution. Don't lay the blame for unemployment solely at Israel's feet. http://goo.gl/UYmKg

So now don't tell me that settlements just are, and they are a natural fact of life. Like I said, there are many Jews against Israel policies, including army officials, but they are quickly silenced by the media and pay a steep price for speaking out.

Who cares if there are Jews against Israel's policies? That doesn't change a damn thing.

The settlements are there. The people live there. They work there. They have kids who marry and continue the cycle of life there. You can talk about how horrific all these Jews being so close to hostile neighbors is for such hostile neighbors, but that doesn't fix anything.

Fact is, they exist and that isn't going to change. What now?

[Ithekro]

Some might debate on if they have lived there for generations (in the long term sense of the word). Some have only been there for maybe 40 or 50 years (which technically is generations given the birth rate).

Some have lived there for hundreds of year or more. Others certainly have not.

The debate is whole owns what and who can claim what as a country after things are settled. The seeming Jewish stance is sort of like the old fashion land grabbing stance in the American West. "I own this now and built on it, so therefore it is mine" Regardless on if it is Indian Lands, Mormon Lands, State Lands, or whatever. If someone could take that land from him then it was theirs...be it some other person, an Indian raid, the Railroad, or the Government.

Modern times don't think that way most of the time. Anti-colonialism and Anti-Imperialsim have shown that. (In soms respects Anti-nationalism seems to come up from time to time in this context as well). The Israelis took that land a while ago, and should probably have kept them all, but it is considered unlawful to claim new territories in a war of defense. Since Israel was attacked in the Six Days War, by international law they would have no right to conquered territories (which I think is bullshit, really). But then that has been the case since before the UN existed. Likely as a result of the Great War, but not having an effect on the Great War.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Resolution_242 for details on the aftermath of the Six Days War, and likely the start of this problem. United Nations Security Council Resolution 242...I think all Israel hates that one.

[sona-nyl]

There were many jews living in the west bank until 1929 when most had to flee after the massacre in Hebron. Its no surprise that people want to live there again just like they always did before.

[Darkbeat]

242 is interesting, the US for example was proud to have championed removing the "all" from the demand Israel withdraw from the settlements.

That said, there's always been a Jewish presence beyond the green line, if even it ended for a temporary period such as after the 1929 Hebron Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre arab terror before the state of Israel/settlements even existed?!) It's impossible to prove or say who belongs or who doesn't at this point. Either which way there seems to me to be too much pontifical diatribe about the settlements and precious little realistic ideas of where to go from here.

My original point still was and is how and why these Jewish-owned houses that make up 1-3% of the disputed territory is a more serious and pressing issue to some than Syria slaughtering it's own civilians etc. The Middle East is a strange, strange place.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

I assume you have proof of these claims?

What do you define as proof? I have investigated on the issue by for years, basically thanks to a journalist called John Pilger. But beyond that and the countless documentaries out there I have no more "proof".

Fact is, they exist and that isn't going to change. What now?

If it were up to me I would merge Palestine and Israel into one nation encourage both peoples, through a series of economic reforms, to live next to each other, go to the same schools and share the same government administration.

Hell, if it were up to me I would make the earth a single country... But yeah.. there is nothing I can do about Isreal and Palestine.

---

If you want to judge the accuracy of the information I present then why not go the source itself?

http://johnpilger.com/

In a series of extraordinary interviews with both Palestinians and Israelis, John Pilger weaves together the issue of Palestine. He speaks to the families of suicide bombers and their victims; he sees the humiliation of Palestinians imposed on them at myriad checkpoints and with a permit system not dissimilar to apartheid South Africa's infamous pass laws. He goes into the refugee camps and meets children who, he says, "no longer dream like other children, or if they do, it is about death."

[Darkbeat]

You'll forgive me if I don't. I try to avoid watching propaganda.

By source I meant something neutral, you know, like a mainstream news source that actually has to try not to be biased.

If I recall correctly, Pilger claimed the Arab Spring was proof the "US is fascist" and pretty much uses every piece of unrelated "news" to attack the West. It's Israel's fault Jews live in the West Bank, it's Israel's fault Syria kills it's own people, it's Israel's fault there was no milk in the work coffee machine etc etc.

[sona-nyl]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

If it were up to me I would merge Palestine and Israel into one nation encourage both peoples, through a series of economic reforms, to live next to each other, go to the same schools and share the same government administration.

The thing is that Israel is a jewish state. The sole reason for its existence is to be a safe place for jews. If they merged Israel and Palestine the amount of muslims living there would soon outnumber the jews. Considering how a lot of the people there feels about them it wouldn't be safe for the jewish population anymore.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

You'll forgive me if I don't. I try to avoid watching propaganda.

By source I meant something neutral, you know, like a mainstream news source that actually has to try not to be biased.

There is absolutely no such thing in human affairs that can be consider objective and neutral, whether you like it or not, the decisions that we make will always carry a degree of bias. In my opinion mainstream is by far the most deluded source of news out there because it is actively manipulated by economic interests. John Pilger and other independent journalists out there report on what they consider important with little or no interests for money. They became journalists due to passion for what they do and money and power have not been able to buy them.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

By source I meant something neutral, you know, like a mainstream news source that actually has to try not to be biased.

I would think it"s pretty hard to use something that doesn't exist as proof.

[Ithekro]

The situation seems like it gets worse every time it comes up.

I do wonder how many crazies (political or otherwise) are going to try to start something to "make the world end" in late 2012.

[Hooves]

I was thinking of something like that Ithekro. For some reason, with all this spout about 2012 being the end of the world. Some people will try to influence things and try to make it happen... For reasons I will never understand.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

I assume you have proof of these claims?

I saw a pretty good documentary by Haim Yavin about it, love to link you, but it's impossible to track down.

The settlements are there. The people live there. They work there. They have kids who marry and continue the cycle of life there. You can talk about how horrific all these Jews being so close to hostile neighbors is for such hostile neighbors, but that doesn't fix anything.

Fact is, they exist and that isn't going to change. What now?

If they moved there, they can just as easily move somewhere else. They have no particular claim to that land...

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

By source I meant something neutral, you know, like a mainstream news source that actually has to try not to be biased.

Rather then purely focus on Israel's treatment of palestinians, I think another important issue is to look at how the Arabs living within Israel live. The state of Israel puts the welfare of one set of it's citizens (Jews) ahead of another set of citizens (Arabs). The Bedouin are a real case in point, here's a group that's indigenous to the region, have consistently served in Israeli armies in the past voluntarily, and yet who the Israeli state at best ignores, and at systematically destroys their communities and denies them basic services and education, all the while promoting new Jewish farming communities in the same region, even though Bedouin are dependent on Pastoral agriculture.

I think the following 3 BBC articles illustrate it nicely. And before anyone says anything, I first found out about this while watching an Israeli news documentary (the aforementioned Haim Yavin one).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8303634.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ht/6400501.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/...es/1763445.stm

Israel needs to treat all it's citizens equally. Of course the PA has it's own share of homegrown problems, but there's a crucial difference, Israel is a functional Democracy and government, Palestine is not. Israel has to step up, these millions of poor displaced arabs aren't going to dissapear, and no one else will take them. They're Israel's problem, whether they like it or not, and they have to deal with it. So long as the current situation continues Israel is just going to continue to have it's own terrorist factory right on it's doorstep.

The problem isn't land, and it isn't who owns what. It's economics. Israel is wealthy, and jewish citizens own everything, the Arabs have nothing, and no stake in the status quo. What do you think that's going to lead to?

There is only way to peace, prosperity, and prosperity can only take place within a framework of security and free movement of goods, Arab businesses have no security within which to grow, and it's impossible to move goods through all the security checks. And the next Israeli shell or bomb could destroy there entire business. Why bother to build anything? Instead just go to the local aid shelter for the free food and continue to subsist...

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

What do you define as proof? I have investigated on the issue by for years, basically thanks to a journalist called John Pilger. But beyond that and the countless documentaries out there I have no more "proof".

*WARNING GODWIN'S LAW IN NOW IN EFFECT*

Calling Pilger a journalist is like calling Hitler a humanitarian.

John Pilger isn't qualified to work at the Weekly World News let alone any other paper.
Here's the full story on Pilger.
http://www.brookesnews.com/061704pilger.html

Oh and I know how you loooooove videos so here's one in Pilger's own words at the Socialism 2009 conference:

He's a socialist hypocrite, who enjoys attacking America without mentioning the Imperialism of the USSR or China (when it invaded Tibet) or the whole goal of Marxism which is total domination of the world as stated by Marx himself.

The fact that you adhere to anything Pilger says is telling of why you don't understand the world around you Sugetsu.
I'm not trying to get on you, but please start reading outside the echo-chamber of these socialists.
As I continue to research Marxism (I'm now reading Ruhle Otto's biography of Marx) I've learned that there really is no difference between Marxism and Modern Socialism other than the method by which they plan to implement socialism.
Marxism is violent, revolutionary overthrow of the established order while socialism is the slow, progressive change via legislation.
Neither is beneficial to humanity and neither have your interests at heart.

Ronald Reagan once said:

How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.

He was a wise man.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

*WARNING GODWIN'S LAW IN NOW IN EFFECT*

Calling Pilger a journalist is like calling Hitler a humanitarian.

John Pilger isn't qualified to work at the Weekly World News let alone any other paper.
Here's the full story on Pilger.
http://www.brookesnews.com/061704pilger.html

Oh and I know how you loooooove videos so here's one in Pilger's own words at the Socialism 2009 conference:

He's a socialist hypocrite, who enjoys attacking America without mentioning the Imperialism of the USSR or China (when it invaded Tibet) or the whole goal of Marxism which is total domination of the world as stated by Marx himself.

The fact that you adhere to anything Pilger says is telling of why you don't understand the world around you Sugetsu.
I'm not trying to get on you, but please start reading outside the echo-chamber of these socialists.
As I continue to research Marxism (I'm now reading Ruhle Otto's biography of Marx) I've learned that there really is no difference between Marxism and Modern Socialism other than the method by which they plan to implement socialism.
Marxism is violent, revolutionary overthrow of the established order while socialism is the slow, progressive change via legislation.
Neither is beneficial to humanity and neither have your interests at heart.

Ronald Reagan once said:

How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.

He was a wise man.

The world you see is that of politically divided societies. You stamp a label on a point of view based on your "advanced knowledge" of the geopolitical system. To claim that Pilger is not a qualified journalist shows that you haven't bothered to look much into his work. He is by far one of the very last true journalists out there, he has stated that his mission is to expose the dirty policies of the west and that he has done.

On top of that you give a link to from a pseudo-news right wing website headed by Mr. Crozier who is a fan of Pinochet... the website has a direct link to Rush Limbaugh website for God's sake.

He doesn't talk much about the USSR or Cuba, or north Korea simply because those regimes are dead and have no broad influence over the globe.

The video you linked is great by the way, I have already seen it. I hope you learned something from it, and do some research on Edgar Bernays and Ayn Rand. Those two are the ideological masters of the current United States and your beloved Ronald Reagan.

Reagan was just an actor who had no voice of his own and was controlled like a puppet by corporate interests.

You see, I like Obama, Piger doesn't and I understand why he does. But just as Pilger I highly respect intellectuals, and Obama is one of them. But in the end, a politician is a politician, and as politician YOU CANNOT change the world, because in order for you to get elected you must abide by your donor's wishes. This is why Run Paul has been ignored by the media, and why in this year he has been trying hard to become more "main stream". To believe in politics as a tool for change is just a form of self delusion.

John Pilger reports on things that nobody in the corporate backed media bothers reporting, such as corporate crime, imperialism, coercion, economic black mail and much more, and for this he has been recognized all over the world.

[Ithekro]

Who is the more foolish, the fool, the fool who follows him, or the fool who quote him in or out of context?