Eviction of Palestinian outpost exposes double standard on settlements

[Scurrilous]

The consequences of the the Israeli government decision go beyond the action against the Palestinian community in Bab Al-Shams. By evicting the residents, Netanyahu has made a mockery of the Israeli High Court and, in turn, the rule of law.

<snip>

"In the early hours of Sunday morning, hundreds of Israeli soldiers stormed the newly-founded Bab Al-Shams village, evicting Palestinian and international activists. The eviction took place despite an injunction by the High Court of Justice. However, Palestinians at the site were notified ahead of time that they will be removed regardless of the decision.

The Bab Al-Shams village was created only three days ago by over 250 Palestinians and internationals as a nonviolent response to Israel’s recent decision to build settlement units in the E1 area. According to Irene Nasser, an activist who was present at the scene last night, activists at Bab Al-Shams were arrested and later released at the Qalandiya checkpoint near Ramallah. Six Palestinians were injured during the eviction and taken to hospitals in Ramallah and Jerusalem.

The Israeli government’s decision to ignore the High Court injunction and evict the Palestinians from E1 was justified by urgent security needs. However, there was no further explanation regarding said security threat. (In Israel, the term “security threat” can often be used as a license for any oppressive actions toward the Palestinian people.) It is probably that Prime Minister Netanyahu, who ordered the eviction, made the hasty decision due to considerations having to do with the upcoming elections, rather than with security. However, the consequences of the the Israeli government decision go beyond the action against the Palestinian community in Bab Al-Shams. Netanyahu has made a mockery of the Israeli High Court and, in turn, the rule of law.

According to Haaretz, the village was built mostly on private Palestinian land, rather than “state land.” Therefore, the government’s decision lacks any legal standing, since the Palestinians were not given a chance to defend their case in court.

Palestinians have little faith in the Israeli legal system, as those living in the West Bank are subject to a military court system and do not have the same civil rights as Israelis. Despite the fact that they have some access to the High Court, most Palestinians simply don’t trust the Israeli judiciary system. However, with just a few blunt, anti-democratic measures against Palestinians, the High Court sided with the Palestinians against the state. The eviction of Bab Al-Shams will diminish whatever trust Palestinians had in Israeli courts."

http://972mag.com/eviction-of-palestinian-outpost-exposes-double-standard-on-settlements/63807/

[oberliner]

1. Saw the headline - knew it had to be 972mag

I promise I guessed it before I got to the link.

Interesting bio from the author:

"Aziz Abu Sarah is a Palestinian resident of Jerusalem who divides his time between Jerusalem and Washington D.C."

Does that mean he is an Israeli or no?

Is a Palestinian resident of Jerusalem the same as a Palestinian citizen of Israel?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

2. So instead of discussing the article you wish to say what about the magazine and author?

Can you refute anything in the article, or is this just an exercise in clucking your tongue?

[oberliner]

3. There are numerous articles on this same topic

What exactly did you want to discuss? I am happy to oblige.

Myself, I am curious to understand more about the author. He seems like an interesting guy.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. "There are numerous articles on this same topic."

The question was on this article, and my question as to why you were moving away from it instead of addressing it.

[oberliner]

5. No one has made a comment on this article

Maybe there just isn't really anything to say about it?

If there was, one would think at least one or two others might have done so.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

6. The question wasn't if anybody or "no one"

has made a comment on this article.

The question was why instead of discussing the article you wish to say something about the magazine and author?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113428159#post1


Instead of making a comment on the article, "Eviction of Palestinian outpost exposes double standard on settlements," your comments surround the author and 927mag.

I was just curious if you have an issue, pardon the pun, with 927mag.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113427791#post34


Do you consider them unreliable?

[delrem]

7. E1 is a hot topic on I/P.

The article says something that might go without saying in other circumstances, but in context of Israel's expansionist settler program it says something that needed to be put on record, including redistribution in OPs at the DU IP group.

I read the article. Just because I don't have anything new to say about the subject doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the OP. I don't appreciate your catcalls. They are disingenuous.

I don't believe anyone who says they're for a "2 state solution" after all this time, all the settlements, and who still makes light of Israel's continued expansionism. Just as I *know* that Netanyahu has another and opposite agenda than the one he pretends to in public, I know in my heart that people who make light of continued Israeli expansionism have another agenda.