Israeli settlers demonstrate against removal of West Bank checkpoints

[oberliner]

Bethlehem – Ma’an – Israeli settlers blocked a road in the southern West Bank on Friday morning in protest of Israel’s reported intention to remove military checkpoints.

The demonstration took place at the Tarqumiya checkpoint, west of the city of Hebron. No violence was reported.

On Wednesday Israel dismantled one military checkpoint south of the city of Tulkarem. The military has stated its intention to remove other roadblocks, but these reports have not been independently verified.

http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=36255

[MADem]

1. "Right-wing Israeli settlers living in the West Bank claim that the checkpoints are important for

their security."

And people in hell want ice water...

I think these rightwingers had better think real hard about packing up and moving over the line, or getting used to the idea of integrating themselves into PALESTINIAN society (good luck with that). Doing a "Neighborhood Watch" at the checkpoints will get real old, and make them easy targets, too. Stupid! They need to just give it up and move along. They're not "settlers" by any defninition of the word--they're "squatters" and they need to get up out of their squat and hike out of there. It's not "their" land, at least that's their government's view.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

2. Judah Magnes must be rolling in his grave.

A black day indeed.

[oberliner]

3. A black day?

Checkpoints are being removed in spite of settler protests.

Why is this bad?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

4. In terms of settler demands. A new low: interlopers demanding that indigenous residents be treated

like animals. Disgusting.

These are the people with whom the people of Palestine should share their state?

[oberliner]

5. No these are not people with whom Palestinians should share their state

These are people who should be removed from what becomes the future Palestinian state when the two-state solution is finally implemented.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

6. Glad to hear you say that.

[Dick Dastardly]

7. God has authorized these settlers, so these settlers should not be removed and they should not be

stopped from moving to these hilltop outposts or settlements outside the main blocks. The religious extremist settlers are about 25% of the settler population and the hilltop outposts and settlements outside the main blocks is where these religious extremist settlers are mostly concentrated. Since they say they are authorized by god then let god protect them, let them know they will not be given state protection and when the two state solution is finally implemented they will be proud new citizens of the Palestinian state, not Israeli citizens anymore and with no rights to move back to Israel.
How many of these fundies will be willing to risk that? hopefully not many and they will all move back. If they dont move back then at least Israel gets rid of a lot of its right wing fundies. Pawning these fundies off on Palestine if they dont move back is unfortunate for Palestine but oh well dats da breaks sometimes when you have your own country. Maybe the Palestinians can put their own fundies with their newest Palestinian fundy citizens and kill two birds with one stone so to speak. Put checkpoints and a security fence around these settlements to keep their fundy poison contained and they will either kill each other off or learn to live together. In either case the problem is solved and there are less right wing fundies running around.

[henank]

8. Why do you think

that settlers should be removed from a future Palestinian state? Should the new Palestine be allowed to be Judenrein just like Saudi Arabia? And if Jews (aka settlers) should not be allowed to live in Palestine, should Israel be allowed to expel its Arab residents? If not, why not? Why the double standard?

[oberliner]

9. Because they are Israeli

And Israel would have to give up that land to a future Palestinian state.

If they want to stay Israeli, which I assume they do, they would have to relocate to Israel.

Regarding your other questions, the two situations you describe are not analogous in my view. Arab Israelis are Israelis whereas the Israeli settlers living in the West Bank are not Palestinians (they are Israelis).

[henank]

10. If they were willing to live

under Palestinian rule (which admittedly is unlikely) do you still think they should be removed? Don't other countries have foreign nationals living there with different visa statuses?

You see, what you're advocating is yet another Judenrein Muslim state. And yet the one Jewish state that exists in the world you will not allow to make purely Jewish. Israel has to accept its non-Jewish citizens. But Palestine will be allowed to expel and/or not admit Jews and/or Israelis.

Nice.

[Douglas Carpenter]

11. if you are suggesting a single-state or bi-national-state where Israeli-Jews and Palestinian-Arabs

can live as equals on either side of the line they choose, that idea could have support among many Palestinians. But I gather it would have little popularity among Jewish-Israelis.

The status quo of Israelis living in superior conditions and a privileged status on illegal, apartheid settlements on confiscated and Occupied Palestinians land is hardly a case of people living as equals. Ending such a case of outrageous discrimination is hardly a case of Judenrein.

The Palestinian citizens of Israel are either internally displaced refugees or they are living where they have lived for generations. The settlers knew that they were moving on to occupied land in breach of international law.

The only conceivable alternative to removing the illegal, apartheid settlements is to integrate the settlements and to establish a single and/or binational state.

[LeftishBrit]

12. It isn't comparable to the Arab Israelis

The settlers are not just an ethnic/religious minority group; they are *foreigners*, and were so from the beginning. Not immigrants to Palestine, but representatives of a foreign country. They do not regard themselves as Palestinians, and in at least some cases moved there, or were put there, as a means of postponing the end of the occupation.

If they were willing to live under Palestinian rule, then they should be allowed to stay, but this is exceedingly unlikely.

The Mizrahi Jews in their countries of origin *were* much more comparable to the Arab Israelis, and were undoubtedly treated much worse - but this is not the same sort of situation.

[shaayecanaan]

20. Re:

The Mizrahi Jews in their countries of origin *were* much more comparable to the Arab Israelis, and were undoubtedly treated much worse - but this is not the same sort of situation.

Rubbish.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Why do you believe a Palestinian state should have no right to decide who to grant citizenship to?

After all, that's a basic right that every other state has, so why do you believe differently to that when it comes to a Palestinian state? It's the state who decides on an individual basis whether or not it will grant citizenship to citizens of other countries who want to live there, not the right of the individuals. Or do you think these extremist settlers are somehow above the laws that every other person has to follow and they can just infest wherever they like with their hatred and extremism?

And if you'd read what Oberliner was saying, you'd know that he wasn't advocating the nonsense you accused him of (btw, clumsy use of Nazi jargon. Why is it that some people are incapable of talking about the I/P conflict without dragging the Nazi era into it?). Oberliner clearly said that the extremist settlers, not all Israelis or all Jews, weren't the sort of people who should live in a Palestinian state, and anyone with a shred of intelligence would know why - after all, the extremists have assaulted and sometimes murdered innocent Palestinians, and are an active and very willing part of the occupation. And another difference you seem intent on ignoring - while the extremist settlers aren't citizens of a Palestinian state, Israeli-Arabs are citizens of Israel.

And yet the one Jewish state that exists in the world you will not allow to make purely Jewish.

Apart from the obvious fact that Oberliner doesn't wield even a skerrick of influence when it comes to the demographics of Israel and can't allow or disallow anything, you come across as being annoyed that Israel has Arab citizens. Isn''t that the exact same attitude that the extremist settlers have?

[henank]

14. You misunderstand me

I'm sorry if you got the wrong impression. I wasn't referring to Oberliner directly by using "you". It was more a general "you" addressed to the people who agree that Israelis should not be allowed to live in the future Palestine. I purposely used the word Judenrein despite its Nazi origins - to show how Nazi-like the attitude is of not allowing Jews to live in a country or territory. For example the Saudis.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. It should have no right to take race into account when making that decision.

A Palestinian state should have no more right to discriminate against Jews than Israel has any right to discriminate in favour of them.

[geek tragedy]

17. Yeah, I'm sure those settlers would pay taxes to an Arab

government.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

21. Discriminating on grounds of behaviour is fine.

And, as you say, I'm sure the vast majority of settlers would not choose to live as citizens of a Palestinian state.

But those, if any, who did should be allowed to.

[geek tragedy]

22. I would tend to agree.

An academic point, of course.

[oberliner]

15. Israel should remove the settlements and the settlers

In the interest of peace and in order to give the two-state solution the best chance for success, Israel needs to remove those settlers who are living on whatever land that is being allocated to the new Palestinian state in this scenario.

The newly created Palestinian state ought to be able to set its own policies regarding immigration and the status of foreign nationals. In an ideal world, Israelis and Jews would be free to visit sites within this new Palestinian state and go through whatever legal channels are set up if they wish to immigrate there, similarly Palestinians should be free to visit sites in Israel and go through similar channels if they wish to immigrate there.

One critical difference that you seem to be overlooking is that the Arabs who live in Israel live there as Israeli citizens. They follow Israeli law, vote in Israeli elections, etc. They are as much Israeli as anyone else in the country. The settlers, on the other hand, though they live in the West Bank, are not Palestinian - they are Israeli. They follow Israeli law and are not subject to any Palestinian legal authority. Thus, moving those Israeli settlers out of the newly created Palestinian state and into Israel is not in any way analogous to forcing Israeli Arabs to leave Israel.

[IndianaGreen]

18. LMAO

We are inexorably moving toward a one-state solution, the only question is whose version of the one-state solution will prevail.

Two-state solution is as dead as Egypt's Pharaohs.

[shaayecanaan]

19. It wont be a Judenrein state...

For one thing the Samaritans, who are Jewish and Palestinian, will probably continue to live in Nablus in the West Bank.

The PLO charter makes it quite clear that indigenous Palestinian Jews are Palestinians and are entitled to reside in any future Palestinian state.