Terrorist Chic in France, From the Jeu de Paume Exhibit to Al Durah to Mohamed Merah

[shira]

Of course, all of this is nonsense. If not propaganda (like the famous pipe that is not a pipe), it is a display of lovingly presented photographs of propaganda. The artist is decidedly judgmental, presenting her fellow Bedouin who serve in the IDF as pathetic sell-outs to a colonial regime (they appear strikingly comfortable and secure with themselves in the photos), peppering her exhibit on French victims of the Nazi occupation with comments on how they turned around after liberation and became colonial oppressors in Indochina and Algeria. The unalloyed admiration for the “resistance to occupation” of the Palestinians, juxtaposed with that of the French resistance to the Nazis, plays on a common, if grotesque, theme of Palestinian propaganda—that the Israelis are the new Nazis and the Palestinians the new Jews.

How can the French, who know what Nazi occupation was like, compare their experience to that of Palestinians in the West Bank? How could they not notice that while the Nazis killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in occupied Europe as part of their deliberate policy of collective punishment, the Palestinians kill thousands of civilians as part of their “resistance”? How could they miss the difference between an “occupation” that kills 6 million Jews and one that produces a Palestinian population with the highest standard of living in the non-oil-rich Arab world? How can they glorify a movement that embraces and intensifies Nazi Jew-hatred? And why do they view Jews who attempt to protect themselves from that aggression through the eyes of those who foment hatred? How did such a profound moral disorientation occur, and why has it been elevated to the level of high art?

Yet every time hostilities broke out over the course of the decade, European papers overflowed with images of Palestinian victims, with nary a mention of Palestinian hate propaganda inspiring suicide terror. And not surprisingly, these lethal journalists have done everything possible to protect the sanctity of their icon, Al Durah, the image choc de l’Intifada. The European press did not report on the evidence indicating that the original broadcast by Charles Enderlin was based on material that shows extensive signs—enumerated yet again in the recent Israeli-issued Kuperwasser Report—of having been staged for the cameras. Rarely in the history of the modern press has a story with less substance had so much malevolent power.

The French might have found out more, when Enderlin and France2’s recent attempt to use the courts to silence his critics for “defamation of character” backfired. The judges in one case, despite being on France2’s side, asked to see the “rushes” of the cameraman upon whom Enderlin relied for his devastating broadcast. They discovered that the majority of “action sequences” were staged. They accordingly found his critic, Philippe Karsenty, innocent, and had harsh words for Enderlin’s journalistic principles. But rather than analyze that story and present the evidence to the public, journalists formed a petition in support of Enderlin, warning that the verdict threatened “freedom of the press.” And many of the most prominent people who signed did so without seeing the evidence. A medieval guild of journalists, communautaristes to the hilt—fought for their personal freedom to pass along lethal narratives unimpeded by independent critics and, not coincidentally, preserved their tarnished icon of hatred.

Thus, cognitively disoriented by both their media and their academics to such a degree, it is altogether possible for the curators at the Jeu de Paume to put up an exhibit celebrating mass murderers—and to believe that, in so doing, they were siding with the innocent and “speaking truth” to Israeli “power.” And so they raise war propaganda that targets their own culture to the level of high art.

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/139307/france-jeu-de-paume-ahlam-shibli?all=1

[Fantastic Anarchist]

1. Wonder why he put occupation in quotes ...

I tried to read the whole thing, but just couldn't.

Wow, Shira, just wow.

[shira]

3. Because most Palestinians live under Palestinian autonomy/governance in Gaza....

...and areas A and B of the West Bank.

Very few Palestinians live under Israeli occupation in Area C.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

4. Occupation is occupation, shira.

I don't really like talking to you like you're a little school girl, but when you use such sophistry, I have no other choice.

[shira]

5. Then go by the textbook definition of occupation. Use a dictionary...

You probably believe Gaza is still occupied too, right?

[shira]

6. Dictionary definitions of military occupation...

MERRIAM WEBSTER
: control and possession of hostile territory that enables an invading nation to establish military government against an enemy or martial law against rebels or insurrectionists in its own territory

Israel didn't invade the West Bank as they were attacked by Jordan in 1967. There has been no established military government in the W.Bank for the vast majority of Palestinians there since the mid 90's. And nothing at all in Gaza since 2005.

LEGAL DICTIONARY
Military occupation occurs when a belligerent state invades the territory of another state with the intention of holding the territory at least temporarily. While hostilities continue, the occupying state is prohibited by International Law from annexing the territory or creating another state out of it, but the occupying state may establish some form of military administration over the territory and the population. Under the Martial Law imposed by this regime, residents are required to obey the occupying authorities and may be punished for not doing so. Civilians may also be compelled to perform a variety of nonmilitary tasks for the occupying authorities, such as the repair of roads and buildings, provided such work does not contribute directly to the enemy war effort.

Although the power of the occupying army is broad, the military authorities are obligated under international law to maintain public order, respect private property, and honor individual liberties. Civilians may not be deported to the occupant's territory to perform forced labor nor impressed into military service on behalf of the occupying army. Although measures may be imposed to protect and maintain the occupying forces, existing laws and administrative rules are not to be changed. Regulations of the Hague Conventions of 1907 and, more importantly, the 1949 geneva convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War have attempted to codify and expand the protection afforded the local population during periods of military occupation.

Again, this doesn't apply to most Palestinians in the W.Bank, and certainly not to Gazans.

But hey, you learned something today - right?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

7. Nice snipping of the definition there, shira.

You also forgot:

2 a: the possession, use, or settlement of land

3 a : the act or process of taking possession of a place or area

b : the holding and control of an area by a foreign military force

c : the military force occupying a country or the policies carried out by it

That's probably why you didn't provide a link, eh?

Also, you may not consider Palestinian land occupied, but the UN, United States, and virtually every other country in the world does.

Excerpt from Wiki:

The West Bank and Gaza Strip are also referred to as the Palestinian territories or "Occupied Palestinian Territory". The Palestinian Authority, the EU,[1] the International Court of Justice,[2] the UN General Assembly[3] and the UN Security Council[4] consider East Jerusalem to be part of the West Bank and occupied by Israel; Israel considers all of Jerusalem to be its capital and sovereign territory.

International law and Israeli settlements (separate Wiki article on International law and settlements)

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law,[1][2][3][4][5] but Israel maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War, due to lack of a legal sovereign of these territories.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]
Numerous UN resolutions have stated that the building and existence of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are a violation of international law, including UN Security Council resolutions in 1979 and 1980.[10][11][12] UN Security Council Resolution 446 refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention as the applicable international legal instrument, and calls upon Israel to desist from transferring its own population into the territories or changing their demographic makeup. The reconvened Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions has declared the settlements illegal[13] as has the primary judicial organ of the UN, the International Court of Justice[14] and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Let's look at the relevant parties now. Maybe, they aren't up-to-date on your cherry-picked definition, though.

UN:

The report of the International Fact-Finding Mission on Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) states that a multitude of the human rights of the Palestinians are violated in various forms and ways due to the existence of the settlements.

“These violations are all interrelated, forming part of an overall pattern of breaches that are characterized principally by the denial of the right to self-determination and systemic discrimination against the Palestinian people which occur on a daily basis,” said a news release on the report.

The UN Human Rights Council, based in Geneva, dispatched the Mission in March 2012 “to investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.”

Gee, doesn't the UN know about your selective definition?

The US position in their State Department Report is subtitled, Israel and the Occupied Territories, with the following qualifier to include Gaza:

ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES 30
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2012
United States Department of State • Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor

THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES 2012 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT
(INCLUDING AREAS SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Palestinian Authority (PA) has a democratically elected president and
legislative council. The PA exercised varying degrees of authority over the West
Bank due to the Israel Defense Forces’(IDF) continuing presence, and none over
Arab residents of East Jerusalem due to Israel’s extension of Israeli law and
authority to East Jerusalem in 1967. Although PA laws apply in the Gaza Strip,
the PA had little authority in the Gaza Strip and none over Israeli residents of the
West Bank. In the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) elections,
candidates backed by Hamas, a terrorist organization, won 74 of 132 seats in
elections that generally met democratic standards. In 2007 Hamas staged a violent
takeover of PA government installations in the Gaza Strip. Prime Minister Salam
Fayyad continued to govern the West Bank during the year. Both PA and Israeli
security forces reported to civilian authorities. Hamas maintained control of
security forces in the Gaza Strip.

Looks like the US State Department didn't get the memo.

The Israeli Supreme Court Decision of 2005

The ruling was based on several different lines of reasoning.

1- The court ruled that it had jurisdiction over the case, and that it involved only a dispute between Israel and the UN, rather than a dispute between Israel and the Palestinians or another party.

2- The court ruled that provisions of international law regarding right to self defense are inapplicable, since there is no state involved other than Israel:

3. On the other hand, the court ruled that the West Bank is occupied territory, asserting that:

95. The Court notes that, according to the first paragraph of Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, that Convention is applicable when two conditions are fulfilled: that there exists an armed conflict (whether or not a state of war has been recognized); and that the conflict has arisen between two contracting parties. If those two conditions are satisfied, the Convention applies, in particular, in any territory occupied in the course of the conflict by one of the contracting parties.

The European Union

"The European Union's Decision on the Occupied Territories"
Op-Ed, Agence Global
July 24, 2013

BEIRUT -- The most significant development on the Arab-Israeli scene last week was not John Kerry’s announcement of a vague agreement by Palestinian and Israeli leaders to resume negotiations for a final status peace agreement. It was the European Union’s formal decision to have its 28 member states differentiate between Israel and the 1967 occupied territories, and to refrain from any official dealings with Israeli institutions in the occupied areas.

The World Court

World Report 2012: Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories

Serious human rights violations continued in 2011 in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). Israeli soldiers used unnecessary lethal force against demonstrators in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and across the border in Lebanon. Israeli military attacks in Gaza and policing operations in the West Bank resulted in the deaths of at least 37 civilians.

Israel continued to block exports from, and many imports to, the Gaza Strip, hindering the rebuilding of Gaza’s devastated economy. In the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, Israel demolished a record number of Palestinian homes under discriminatory practices, imposed severe restrictions on Palestinian freedom of movement, continued to build unlawful settlements, and arbitrarily detained peaceful protesters, including children.

Maybe, you're just in denial?

Excerpt from Ha'aretz.

Occupation? What occupation?
How do we resolve the contradiction between our extreme morality and our blatantly immoral circumstances? Simple: We go into denial.

Every person is endowed with a certain denial mechanism they can use to avoid the shame, fear, guilt and pain involved in coping with their improper actions. Instead of facing their failure, accepting reality and dealing with it, they simply enter a state of denial. But denial extracts a heavy price from the denier. The mental effort involved in self-deception causes serious emotional harm. Someone who denies facts is declaring that they have a mental problem. They need treatment.

For 46 years we have been in this situation. We are denying one of the most significant phenomena of our national existence, if not the most central one: the occupation. We can use the well-worn metaphor of the huge elephant in the room, whose presence we deny. Elephant? What elephant? Here? We tiptoe around the elephant and avert our gaze so we won’t have to look at it. After all, it doesn’t exist.

Could that be you, shira?

Forgive me if my sources are a bit more wordy than your cherry-picked definition, shira.

[shira]

9. And the legal definition you used only applies to area C of the West Bank....

...where maybe 2-3% of all Palestinians are.

97-98% of Palestinians are not occupied.

I'm also uninterested in politicized definitions of what a military occupation constitutes. The legal, dictionary definition is what counts.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

10. Keep standing on that island, shira.

I'm sure it won't get too lonely.

[shira]

11. Humor me. Gaza is still occupied. True or False? n/t

[Fantastic Anarchist]

12. Effectively, yes.

And by legal definitions, international consensus, international law, yes. But that's just a red herring, anyway, and you know that.

[shira]

13. Ridiculous. Looks like you need a bogeyman, a cause...

Here's Hamas saying Gaza is not occupied...
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/Hamas-says-Gaza-not-occupied-UN-disagrees

It's not occupied by any legal definition. I suppose Israel could withdraw every settler and IDF officer from the W.Bank and you would still claim it's occupied.



Are you a flat-earther too?

I think I get more intelligent responses from evangelical fundamentalists selling Jews4Jesus.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

14. I happen to agree with the international community in their view of occupation ...

... effectively/indirectly rather than your silly apologetics.

Of course, you resort to ad hominem, too. A sign of a weak argument, to be sure.

[Shaktimaan]

24. Ah yes.

The same international community that has singled Israel out, alone among all other UN member states, as ineligible to participate in all critical facets of UN policy making, such as sitting on the security council or helping draft legislative treaties, like the Rome statute. (They let Israel participate in events at the New York based office only. Except for SC stuff obviously.) The same intl community that saw fit to pass more human rights resolutions against Israel than the rest of the world combined.

Incidentally, exactly what part of the definition of occupation does Israel meet in Gaza?

[azurnoir]

15. what shira keeps to herself is the reason most Palestinians in the West Bank live in Area's A or B

and that is what could be called ethnic herding or expelling Palestinians from 60% of the West Bank that comprises Area C and packing them into the 40% that is Areas A 17% of the West Bank and the only zone in which the Palestinians have complete control or Area B the 23% where Palestinians have 'civil' control but the IDF control security

[Fantastic Anarchist]

16. Pro-occupiers are pretty desperate.

The irony is that the occupation is not good for Israel.

[oberliner]

17. This is 100 percent untrue

Nothing written here is based in reality.

Look at the population centers pre-1967 in the West Bank for evidence.

[azurnoir]

19. Naftali Bennett makes somewhat the same claims

Not long ago, Israeli Minister of Economy Naftali Bennett, former chairman of the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Council, called on Israel to impose sovereignty unilaterally on Area C and then grant Israeli citizenship to Area C’s local Palestinian residents, whom he said numbered 50,000.

The above proposal considers Area C an independent region, separate from the rest of the West Bank. Yet the division of the West Bank into Areas A, B and C does not reflect a geographic reality, but rather an administrative division made as a part of the Interim Agreement of the Oslo Accords. The division was to have been temporary and to have enabled an incremental transfer of authority to the Palestinian Authority. It was not designed to address the needs of long-term demographic growth. Nonetheless, this “temporary” arrangement has remained in force for nearly twenty years.

http://www.btselem.org/publications/201306_area_c

a map of the West Bank the red is area c

[shira]

20. So when did this "ethnic herding" from area C to areas A and B happen?

Or were you totally making that up?

[azurnoir]

21. Look up Susiya as but on example

The Palestinian village of Khirbet Susiya has existed in the South Hebron Hills at least since the 1830s. Its residents have traditionally earned a living from herding sheep and growing olive trees. In 1983, the Israeli settlement of Susiya was established near the village, on Palestinian land that had been declared state land by Israel. In 1986, the Civil Administration declared the village’s land an archeological site, the land was confiscated “for public purposes” and the Israeli army expelled its residents from their homes. At the time, about 25 families were living in Khirbet Susiya, in caves and structures. Having no other option, the families relocated to other caves in the area and to flimsy wood frame shelters and tents they placed on agricultural land a few hundred meters southeast of the original village and the archeological site.

In July 2001, a short time after Palestinians killed Yair Har Sinai, a resident of the Susiya settlement, the Israeli military again expelled the village residents. During the expulsion, carried out without warning, soldiers destroyed residents’ property, demolished their caves and blocked their cisterns. Following the submission of a High Court petition by 83 of the residents via Attorney Shlomo Lecker, the court in September 2001 issued an interim order that prohibited further destruction pending a ruling on the petition. With the caves ruined, the people of Khirbet Susiya were obliged to build temporary shelters and tents to live in.

The Civil Administration refused to prepare a master plan for the village that would enable its residents to build homes legally and connect to water and electricity supplies. Instead, the Civil Administration issued demolition orders for the new structures which, they alleged, were not covered by the interim order. In February 2004, the petition was amended, and the villagers asked to be permitted to submit building permit applications. After more than three years, with residents’ application to the planning authorities having failed, the High Court in June 2007 decided to vacate the petition. The judges ruled that the petition had been utilized to the fullest extent, since the residents had tried and failed to “kosher” construction in their village. Notwithstanding, the judges added that this should not be construed as expressing an opinion regarding “the question of appropriate solutions with respect to the population to which the petitioners belong.” The court permitted the petitioners to submit applications for building permits within 45 days of the verdict, and they did so. In September 2008, the Civil Administration denied all the applications “on the basis of a series of planning- and land-related reasons.”

http://www.btselem.org/south_hebron_hills/susiya

unlike some here I have no need to make things up

[Shaktimaan]

23. I don't get it.

When were the residents of this village forced from area c to areas a or b. You've pointed out instances of harassment and oppression, I understand that. But your point was that the Palestinians in area c were being "ethnically herded" from there to a or b. Has that actually happened?

[azurnoir]

25. Palestinian Bedioun forced from areac to area a

According to Shlomo Lecker, an Israeli human rights attorney representing the Bedouins in the E-1 zone, the intent of the Israeli government is to gradually push all Bedouins out of Area C, the 62% of the West Bank that falls under complete Israeli civil and military control, and relocate them to Area A, under complete control of the Palestinian Authority. Currently, around 27,500 Bedouins live in Area C, around 55% of the total Bedouin population of the West Bank. By pushing the Bedouin out of Area C and into Area A, the Bedouin would fall under PA jurisdiction and completely out of Israel’s.

The Israeli plan to uproot the Bedouin communities is part of a broader “quiet transfer” strategy, which entails the progressive displacement of the Palestinian population into small and impoverished enclaves, making the realization of Palestinian self-determination impossible. The Oslo Accords framed the administrative division of the West Bank into three areas of control (Areas A, B and C) as a temporary measure, to enable the progressive transfer of power to the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been bending international law to its advantage, turning its administrative power in Area C in a tool to massively displace the Palestinian population as part of the broader plan of a Jewish only land. This aim is evident when one examines figures of house demolition. Palestinians account for about 20% of what is deemed by the Israeli government as illegal construction, however over 75% of the demolitions target Palestinian homes.

According to a study conducted by the United Nations Relief and Work Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), since 1997 around 150 families of Palestinian Bedouin refugees have been forced out of their homes in the Jerusalem district to make room for the settlement of Ma’ale Addumim, Israel’s third largest settlement bloc. Disruption of the sense of spatial security due to the merging of separate kinship groups in the same area is one of the consequences of displacement. This leads to social isolation and to the restriction of women’s movement, perceived by men as endangered by the presence of unrelated communities.

International law prohibits the transfer of “protected persons” such as the Bedouins unless it is mandated by military urgency or serves the needs of the local population. Even under such circumstances, the solution must only be adopted on a temporary basis.

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/details.php?id=p3o7zia4531ydb63re903

also see

“Area C” meaning they are under full and exclusive Israeli control. Area C is home to an estimated 180,000 Palestinians and includes the major land reserves for any development of the entire West Bank. Israel prohibits Palestinian construction and development on some 70 percent of Area C, using various rationales to prohibit construction, such as “state lands” or “firing zones.” The Israeli authorities' planning and construction policy almost completely ignore the needs of the local population: it refuses to recognize most of the villages in the area or draw up plans for them, prevents the expansion and development of Palestinian communities, demolishes homes and does not allow the communities to hook up to infrastructure. Thousands of inhabitants live under the constant threat of expulsion for living in alleged firing zones or “illegal” communities.

In theory, Israel retains complete authority only in Area C of the West. In practice, Israel’s control of Area C adversely affects all Palestinian West Bank residents. Scattered throughout the vast expanses of Area C are 165 “islands” of Area A- and B-land that are home to the major concentrations of the Palestinian population in the West Bank. The land reserves that surround the built-up sections of West Bank towns and villages are often designated as Area C, where construction and development by Palestinians are prohibited, or severely restricted. Israeli government policy thereby stifles many Area A and B communities, denying them the opportunity to develop. This has led to a shortage of land for construction, causing a steep price hike in the cost of the few available plots, a dearth of open areas, and a lack of suitable sites for infrastructure and industrial zones. When, for want of an alternative, residents of these areas build homes without permits on nearby land – owned by them but classified “Area C” – they live under the constant threat of demolition.

Some Area C residents, harmed by Israel’s planning and building policy, have petitioned Israel’s High Court of Justice for redress. However, of the dozens of petitions submitted, the court has not intervened regarding Civil Administration considerations in a single case, thus enabling the continuation of this harmful policy.

http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20130605_area_c_report

[Shaktimaan]

26. Again..

You've linked to an accusation that Israel is ethnically displacing all the bedouins from area c to area a but neither article cites an example of such a thing actually occurring. The closest thing is this example cited in your first link. But it only affects 2,300 people and none of them have yet to be displaced anyway.

You say that Israel's doing this terrible thing. So show me when and where it has happened. We're not talking about other aspects of settlements or oppression as cited in your second link. This is referring to a specific, very serious accusation of long term planning and executing of ethnic cleansing. How can you sit there and insist that such a thing is in progress without even one example?

[azurnoir]

27. Israel demolishs Palestinian homes in area c and refuses building permits to Palstinians in area c

so where are they going?

your attempt to disguise, clean up, or deny the obvious are entertaining indeed please don't stop, they are a statement in and of themselves

[Shaktimaan]

28. Who says they went anywhere.

Do you actually have examples of bedouins (or anyone really), being expelled from area c to area a?

Btw, I love this:

About 80 percent of the Bedouins living in what Israel terms the "Adummim bloc", who are expected to be expelled in coming months, are 1948 refugees who once lived in the Negev, in southern Israel. Two-thirds are under age 18. All of them have lived for decades in unrecognized villages.

How is it that 2/3rds of the bedouins are under 18 and 80% lived in the Negev in 1948? How is it that 2/3rds are under 18 but EVERYONE has lived for DECADES in unrecognized villages?

[azurnoir]

29. playing word games are we?

but that is easily explained to any thinking person, of the total Bedouin population 2/3 are minors however 80% of the families had lived in the Negev prior to 1948

[oberliner]

31. You've gotten better over the years at what you do

I mean that sincerely.

[Shaktimaan]

32. I'm not the one obfuscating.

And as a thinking person I realize that saying 80% of these bedouins have refugee status dating back to the nakba is very different from saying that they are all refugees from Israel, when in fact it's likely none of them has ever set foot in Israel in their lifetimes.

Also as a thinking person I know that 18 is less than 20; the lowest possible number if years that might qualify as "decades."

I also know why none of those villages were recognized officially and that issue rests with the bedouins themselves.

But I digress. You were going to prove that Israel's been herding Palestinians out of area c into b and a. Sounds like a huge conspiracy. Like the sort of thing that someone would write down somewhere when it occurred. I haven't yet seen anything like that written down anywhere though. How about you?

[azurnoir]

33. well first I comend you for only waiting 10 days before you kicked this again

however I stand by my explanation and huge conspiracy hardly and as I proved cit has been being written about for years, Israel has not uprooted all the Palestinians in Area C all at once, just demolish homes for being illegally built (no permit) and continually deny building permits to Palestinians to replace the demolished homes and the problem will take care of itself so to speak. What are Palestinians to do live in caves-oops can't do that either it seems

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/08/us-palestinians-israel-shepherds-idUSBRE87712U20120808

[Shaktimaan]

34. Two separate issues.

Demolishing houses is one thing.
Herding Palestinians out if area c is quite another.

The fact that these houses were being built means that they didn't already exist there. In other words, this is usually the result of Palestinians expanding their villages, (which were always granted a or b area status), only to find the structures demolished one the idf got wind of it.

You see. These aren't Palestinians who have always been living in area c who are now being "herded" into b and a as you suspect. Rather it is structures built at the edges of a or b (but within c). That are demolished.

Now we can reasonably argue the ethics of such a practice (depending on how pervasive it is in actuality.) but that's not what we're discussing. We're discussing the conspiracy to herd Palestinians FROM area C INTO areas b and a. A conspiracy for which you've brought absolutely ZERO evidence what-so-ever. The most you can offer, as proof, in what is probably the most reported on, most photographed, most accurately, heavily documented conflict so far this century... Is circumstantial crapola.

"They aren't getting enough building permits!" Which, in and of itself, could be worthy of outrage. But not when it comes gift wrapped in such abstruse hyperbole as a government plan that amounts to nothing less than ethnic cleansing.

No no no no. You're going to need SOMETHING kinda, even a little bit REAL if you want to make those kinds of assertions. Which you most certainly (I'm laughing here FYI) do not have at ALL! All you have are reports of demolished buildings and rejected construction permits.

Just because a families house wasn't allowed to be built where they requested, IS NOT FUCKING PROOF THAT THEY WERE ETHNICALLY CLEANSED AS PART OF A GRAND GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY TO "ethnically herd" (btw:HA!) THEM INTO A SPECIFICALLY GERRYMANDERED AREA. All that is, is a far fetched conspiracy theory. We know this because for all your searching you've yet to discover ANYONE who this ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO!

[azurnoir]

35. If ones home is demolished and one is not allowed to build another it most certainly is the same

where are the homeless Palestinians to go? you claim they haven't always lived in area C and it is you that has attempted to place the word conspiracy here not me, you'll have to do better really

and as the one yakking on about made up conspiracies I'd advise you to take your own advice keep it real

[Shaktimaan]

36. Christ

Fine then. Palestinians are being herded into areas b and a FROM area c?

Document it. when did this happen, please show me already.

If you want to know where I got that stuff about denied building in area c happening at the edges of areas a and b (implying that anyone living there had JUST left areas a and b to migrate INTO c, before being disallowed... Well, I got all of that... Every bit, from the links you provided.

[azurnoir]

37. I already have provided links

if you wish to whitewash or outright deny this fine but this is hardly the first time I've said that Palestinians are being removed from area c but it is the first time anyone has protested or denied it, why, do the current 'negotiations' have anything to do with it?
eta so now it's if they move close enough to areas a or b, wow why should they have to move at all, why are building permits being denied?

[shira]

18. LOL @ 'ethnic herding'. Where'd you find that utter bull crap? n/t

[azurnoir]

22. Palestinians in Area B live under Israeli Military 'security' control

and Palestinian civil 'authority' also Israeli military enters Area A whenever it sees fit

[Scootaloo]

2. How interesting, propaganda complaining about propaganda.

[muxin]

8. You amazed me

looks like you have an endless list of every stupid crap on the planet to be shared here and you never get tired

[azurnoir]

30. Perhaps your source needs an update Karsenty LOST the case on appeal

from your OP, who apparently either relies on the memory hole, is uninformed himself, or is just plain dishonest

The French might have found out more, when Enderlin and France2’s recent attempt to use the courts to silence his critics for “defamation of character” backfired. The judges in one case, despite being on France2’s side, asked to see the “rushes” of the cameraman upon whom Enderlin relied for his devastating broadcast. They discovered that the majority of “action sequences” were staged. They accordingly found his critic, Philippe Karsenty, innocent, and had harsh words for Enderlin’s journalistic principles. But rather than analyze that story and present the evidence to the public, journalists formed a petition in support of Enderlin, warning that the verdict threatened “freedom of the press.” And many of the most prominent people who signed did so without seeing the evidence. A medieval guild of journalists, communautaristes to the hilt—fought for their personal freedom to pass along lethal narratives unimpeded by independent critics and, not coincidentally, preserved their tarnished icon of hatred.

except that Karsnty lost and was fined here from one of your favorite sites, it should be of comfort for some here that Ederline is called a virulent anti-semite though

Karsenty fined 7000 Euro for Defamation

This is a victory of a state owned press using its immense financial and political resources to bully independent critics. in principle, this is bad news for freedom of speech (which as Brandeis famously pointed out demands that we have a thick skin, and which Charles Enderlin famously does not have). Given the terrible damage that Al Durah did – a poster-boy for the linked phenomena of virulent anti-Semitism and global Jihad – this decision is nothing short of suicidal for a Western democracy.

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2013/06/27/karsenty-fined-7000-euro-for-defamation/