Christian housing faces Israeli encirclement

[Douglas Carpenter]

FEATURE-Christian housing faces Israeli encirclement

By Ivan Karakashian

link: http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSLB710547

"BEIT SAHOUR, West Bank, April 11 (Reuters) - Residents of a Palestinian Christian housing project in the West Bank village of Beit Sahour say Israel is encircling their community with a security road to separate them from a nearby Jewish settlement.

"With this situation they will put us in a cage, a zoo," said William Sahouri, 42, a resident and member of the project's housing committee. "We will not be able to expand."

The project lies close to Bethlehem, south of Jerusalem, where the Greek Orthodox Sahouri family live in a modern three-bedroom home, with two flat-screen televisions and a small bar displaying a collection of whiskies and other liquors.


snip: "Stepping out on the balcony of his master bedroom, Sahouri points to the Israeli security road, with electronic warning fences, that runs 30 metres (100 feet) from his apartment block. Only Israeli army vehicles can use the road, to patrol the area.""

snip: "I hereby announce the seizure of land for military purposes," said the order, accompanied by maps showing how the housing project would soon be cut off, along with a few other Palestinian homes and some farmland.

Across the valley from Beit Sahour lies the sprawling Jewish settlement of Har Homa, south of Jerusalem.

Construction began at Har Homa and Beit Sahour around the same time in the late 1990s. While Har Homa now houses thousands of Jewish families, the Beit Sahour site is still unfinished.

In 2002 the Israeli authorities issued orders for the demolition of the housing project. The orders have been frozen but still hang over the heads of the residents."

snip: "Israel's confiscation of land to build a settlement has hit the Beit Sahour community hard.

"The expropriation of properties has been flagrant," Habash said. "People lost hope that there is a possibility for peace."

link to full article:

http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSLB710547

.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

1. I ask everyone who calls him or herself a liberal or progressive Zionist...

No rockets flying from this Christian community -- what's the justification for this settler expansion? There is none.

Engaging in mutual cultural efforts for 50 years won't stop this blatant disregard for international law.

This IS what zionism is. This is what Zionism has always done in Palestine, under every single government. This is what Zionism will continue to do, because there is simply no pressure on TPTB to STOP THIS NOW!

It's time for Zionists of all persuasions -- espepcially those who consider themselves progressive and liberall -- to face this fact.

If you don't support BDS, what is your plan to stop this? you really think if palestinians are "sweet" enough, enough Israelis will consider them human beings, and suddenly decide to go to bat for them against their own government?

I ask everyone who calls him or herself a progressive Zionist to share you plan for peace. How do you stop THIS?

[Sezu]

3. Land seized for military purposes would not be seized

IF there were NO military purpose. That's not rocket science PM; do the math and you too can figure out how peace could be achieved. And, no liberal or progressive with a fair mind would try and put it ALL on Zionism as you just have because that would be dishonest and irrational.

[Douglas Carpenter]

4. there have hardly been missile flying out of Bethlehem - this land was seized

from people who are certainly not in anyway connected to terrorism and it was seized for expansionism. IT is dishonest and irrational to claim otherwise.

Here is a presentations organized by Open Bethlehem - an organization of the Christian community of Bethlehem demonstrating the vast web of settlements and infrastruction and annexation of land around Bethlehem and the draconian projects executed by the Israeli state which are strangling one of the oldest - continuous Christian communities in the world:

http://openbethlehem.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90&Itemid=71

.

[Sezu]

7. What is dishonest and irrational is for folks like you to

ALWAYS assume that the State of Israel is lying when it does something like expropriating land; something done by states everywhere for various reasons. Such a stereotyped, knee jerk tin foil hat reaction shows more about YOU than the reality of the situation.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. Most countries only expropriate their own land, though.

"Expropriating" land that isn't legally part of your country is called "war", usually.

[shaayecanaan]

12. Further, most countries that expropriate land are required to pay fair compensation

for said land. Certainly that is the case in most western countries.

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. well exactly! Expropriating land that is Occupied Territory is NOT legal or practiced by everyone

The comparison is beyond ludicrous.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. 41%to 42% of the West Bank? Come on get real!! That is how much land is now off limits to the

Palestinians according to B'tsellem - The Isaeli Infomation Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories

There are approximately 450,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, (*now closer to 500,000)including East Jerusalem. According to B'tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights, " the built-up area of the settlements in the West Bank covers 1.7 percent of the West Bank, the settlements control 41.9 percent of the entire West Bank".* http://www.btselem.org/English/Maps/Index.asp

As appears from the map, while the built-up area of the settlements in the West Bank covers 1.7 percent of the West Bank, the settlements control 41.9 percent of the entire West Bank.

full PDF map: http://www.btselem.org/Download/Settlements_Map_Eng.pdf

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621.html%3Fnclick_check%3D1&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2Fdiscuss%2Fdu

===================================



From: B'tselem

LAND GRAB:

Israel’s Settlement Policy in the West Bank

link to full report:

http://www.btselem.org/Download/200205_Land_Grab_Eng.doc

""

Introduction

In December 2001, a long article appeared in Ha’aretz under the headline “Five Minutes from Kfar Saba – A Look at the Ari’el Region.” The article reviewed the real estate situation in a number of “communities” adjacent to the Trans-Samaria Highway in the vicinity of Ari’el. The article included the information that most of the land on which these “communities” were established are “state-owned land,” and that “despite the security problems and the depressed state of the real estate market, the situation in these locales is not as bad as might be expected.”

The perspective from which this article was written (the real estate market) and the terminology it employs largely reflect the process of the assimilation of the settlements into the State of Israel. As a result of this process, these settlements have become just another region of the State of Israel, where houses and apartments are constructed and offered to the general public according to free-market principles of supply and demand.

This deliberate and systematic process of assimilation obscures a number of fundamental truths about the settlements: the “communities” mentioned in the article are not part of the State of Israel, but are settlements established in the West Bank − an area that has been occupied territory since 1967. The fundamental truth is that the movement of Israeli citizens to houses and apartments offered by the real estate markets in these “communities” constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The fundamental truth is that the “state-owned” land mentioned in the article was seized from Palestinian residents by illegal and unfair proceedings. The fundamental truth is that the settlements have been a continuing source of violations of the human rights of the Palestinians, among them the right to freedom of movement, property, self-determination, and improvement in their standard of living. The fundamental truth is that the growth of these settlements is fueled not only by neutral forces of supply and demand, but primarily by a sophisticated governmental system designed to encourage Israeli citizens to live in the settlements. In essence, the process of assimilation blurs the fact that the settlement enterprise in the Occupied Territories has created a system of legally sanctioned separation based on discrimination that has, perhaps, no parallel anywhere in the world since the dismantling of the Apartheid regime in South Africa.

As part of the mechanism used to obscure these fundamental truths, the State of Israel makes a determined effort to conceal information relating to the settlements. In order to prepare this report, B’Tselem was obliged to engage in a protracted and exhaustive struggle with the Civil Administration to obtain maps marking the municipal boundaries of the settlements. This information, which is readily available in the case of local authorities within Israel, was eventually partially provided almost one year after the initial request, and only after B’Tselem threatened legal action.
The peace process between Israel and the Palestinians did not lead to the evacuation of even one settlement, and the settlements even grew substantially in area and population during this period. While at the end of 1993 (at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Principles) the population of the settlements in the West Bank (including settlements in East Jerusalem) totaled some 247,000, by the end of 2001 this figure had risen to 375,000.

The agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority entailed the transfer of certain powers to the PA; these powers apply in dozens of disconnected enclaves containing the majority of the Palestinian population. Since 2000, these enclaves, referred to as Areas A and B, have accounted for approximately forty percent of the area of the West Bank. Control of the remaining areas, including the roads providing transit between the enclaves, as well as points of departure from the West Bank, remains with Israel.

This report, which is the continuation of several reports published by B’Tselem in recent years, examines a number of aspects relating to Israeli policy toward the settlements in the West Bank and to the results of this policy in terms of human rights and international law. The report also relates to settlements in East Jerusalem that Israel established and officially annexed into Israel. Under international law, these areas are occupied territory whose status is the same as the rest of the West Bank.

This report does not relate to the settlements in the Gaza Strip. Though similar in many ways to their counterparts in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip settlements differ in several respects. For example, the legal framework in the Gaza Strip differs from that applying in the West Bank in various fields, including land laws; these differences are due to the different laws that were in effect in these areas prior to 1967.

This report comprises eight chapters.

• Chapter One presents a number of basic concepts on the principal plans implemented by the Israeli governments, the bureaucratic process of establishing new settlements, and the types of settlements.
• Chapter Two examines the status of the settlements and settlers according to international law and briefly surveys the violations of Palestinian human rights resulting from the establishment of the settlements.
• Chapter Three discusses the bureaucratic and legal apparatus used by Israel to seize control of land in the West Bank for the establishment and expansion of settlements. The chief component of this apparatus, and the main focus of the chapter, is the process of declaring and registering land as “state land.”
• Chapter Four reviews the changes in Israeli law that were adopted to annex the settlements into the State of Israel by turning them civilian enclaves within the occupied territory. This chapter also examines the structure of local government in the settlements in the context of municipal boundaries.
• Chapter Five examines the economic incentives Israel provides to settlers and settlements to encourage Israelis to move to the West Bank and to encourage those already living in the region to remain there.
• Chapter Six analyzes the planning mechanism in the West Bank applied by the Civil Administration, which is responsible for issuing building permits both in the settlements and in Palestinian communities. This mechanism plays a decisive role in the establishment and expansion of the settlements, and in limiting the development of Palestinian communities.
• Chapter Seven analyzes the map of the West Bank attached to this report. This analysis examines the layout of the settlements by area, noting some of the negative ramifications the settlements have on the human rights of the Palestinian population.
• Chapter Eight focuses in depth on the Ari’el settlement and the ramifications of its establishment on the adjacent Palestinian communities. This chapter also discusses the expected consequences of Ari’el’s expansion according to the current outline plan. "

link to full report:

http://www.btselem.org/Download/200205_Land_Grab_Eng.doc


.

[LeftishBrit]

9. How to stop this?

My suggestions are as generally:

(1) Pressure from the USA. That happens anyway as the USA holds the purse-strings. Let's have more pressure in the direction of stopping the settlements, rather than just being a good little ally and buying American weapons.

(2) Reforming the electoral system, so that governments won't depend to the same extent on small pro-settler parties. This might not make a big difference to Likud governments (they're RW anyway) but it would make a difference to Labor and possibly Kadima governments. When was there last a government that didn't have to rely on the small parties?

'Engaging in mutual cultural efforts for 50 years won't stop this blatant disregard for international law.'

No, but contact MIGHT make citizens less accepting of unjust policies toward people they know, and more ready to put pressure on TPTB. In any case, no one is saying that cultural contact is all that's needed. The ultimate solutions must be at a political-diplomatic level.



'This IS what zionism is.'

No - it is a bad Israeli policy, not the whole of Zionism. You'd be the first to rightly object if someone took an oppressive policy of certain Muslim theocracies and said e.g. that 'oppression of women IS what Islam is'. And most here would rightly object if someone referred to a repeated pattern of American destructive and counterproductive military interventions over the last 45 years and said 'this IS what America is'.

These are things that Israeli governments, some Islamic theocratic governments, and American governments *do*; not what Zionism, Islam and America *are*. This is not just a trivial semantic point: in dealings with individuals or groups or countries, it is possible (though not often easy) to convince them that they are *doing* something wrong and should change; but generally impossible to convince them that they or their basic cultures *are* something wrong, and counterproductive to try.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

10. I disagree. As a land-settling colonial movement, that has never stopped colonizing land since

1897... I think it's pretty fair to say this IS Zionism.

As always, I think you are very generous to Labor and Kadima. While being "pro-settler" may not be written into the party plank... it's stretching it to insinuate that pro-settler parties twisted arms since 1967.

I don't make that statement to be provocative. Land expropriation and settlement needs to end. I think it's time to move beyond a national liberation theology/ideology. It's time for you Zionists to become post-Zionists and focus on the state you have!

[Vegasaurus]

17. So all immigrants are "colonizers"?

Anyone who settles in a new country is a colonizer?

Tell that to the billions who have resettled all over the globe.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

19. Are we pretending Zionism isn't a colonial movement?

C'mon Veggie. That's beneath even you.

[shira]

22. are we pretending zionism was a colonial movement back in the Ottoman days, and the Turks decided

not to crush this threat immediately?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

25. Zionism was a colonial movement from day one.

Land without a people for a people without a land!!

Woo hoo!!

[shira]

32. you must have a low opinion of the Turks then

were they too stupid not to know what was going on?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

34. Do accept the right of Palestinians to an independent sovereign state?

It's sad that you supporters have to engage in denial. It is what it is...or it was what it was. Admitting the historic characer of Zionism doesn't invalidate Israel now, anymore than admitting that the Americans did to natives invalidates this country.

But the point is, quit painting ongoing settlement activity as some sort of security measure, or as punishment. Face the fact that the land grabs must stop NOW. Land grabbed since '67 must be returned. We all know these are the parameters for peace. I worry that when you justify ongoing land grabs, you demonstrate that neither you, nor the gov't of Israel, aren't really interested in a peace settlement.

Can I ask you flat you: do you support a two-state solution to this conflict? While I've seen reams that you've written defending Israel and castigating Palestine, it occurs to me that I've never really read anything you've written about peace.

Do you support the right of Palestinians to an independent state? Do you support the 2-state solution?

[shira]

36. yes

As for your the main arguments you made, you were corrected in posts #18 and #30.

Can I ask you flat you: do you support a two-state solution to this conflict? While I've seen reams that you've written defending Israel and castigating Palestine, it occurs to me that I've never really read anything you've written about peace.

Do you support the right of Palestinians to an independent state? Do you support the 2-state solution?

I support a 2 state solution and the right of Palestinians to their own independent state.

But first and foremost, what needs to happen initially is that a civil Palestinian society must be established. Get rid of the hate factories, outlaw violent "resistance", start state-building, etc. This should have been done long ago.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

37. Interesting that the gov't of Israel did everything in its power to PREVENT

the establishment of a Palestinian state based on the rule of law.

I've discussed my own family's experience in this context ad nauseum.

Another fine example is that when the first intifadah broke in in 1988, nonviolent activitst Mubarak Awad was among the first to be deported.

Your previous posts correct nothing dear, Shira.
y
Zionists generously agreed to partition in 1947? ROTFLOL! I guess so, considering they ONLY OWNED 7% OF THE LAND! That was mighty big of 'em indeed!

LOL!

[shira]

39. interesting that the govt of Israel offered to end the refugee camps once and for all

and the Palestinian leadership rejected it. Nice blow to civil society, huh?

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=960

And Mubarak Awad is hardly non-violent. Anyone who thinks violent "resistance" isn't immoral (and is apathetic to it) is hardly a "non-violent" Gandhi-like peace activist.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/18/opinion/l-the-limits-of-mubarak-awad-s-moderation-180288.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/D/Deportation

Finally, as to 1947, Jews owned 9% of the land while Arabs owned 21%. The British Govt owned the remaining 70%. And let's face it, even if the 1947 plan allotted just 9% of the area for Israel, that too would have been rejected by the Arab league.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

42. Nothing like an AJC letter to the editor to serve as "proof" in defining

the character of a Palestinian.

Keep those CAMERA reports coming!!!

Shira, I know full well that the gov't of Israel put every barrier possible in place to PREVENT the return of moderate, educated Palestinians who would create Palestinian civil society.

I'm not talking about camps. I'm talking about 1995... when there was a chance for peace.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

28. If you attempt to supplant rather than integrating , you're a coloniser.

If you move somewhere and attempt to integrate into into a society already there, you're an immigrant.

If you move somewhere and attempt to set up a new society, replacing the one already there (or to join people who have recently done so), you're a coloniser.

[shira]

31. so the Arabs who mass immigrated to Israel once there were plenty of jobs for

them (and more opportunity) in the late 19th century and early 20th century - they joined up with or worked with the Jewish people there already, and were therefore, according to your definition - colonizers - because they wanted to join this 'new society'?

[LeftishBrit]

26. It's time to ..focus on the state you have

Well, yes. As far as I'm concerned 'Zionism' simply means support for the continued existence of Israel. I'll be delighted when the world reaches a point where no special word is needed for that, just as there isn't a special word for 'supporter of the continued existence of France or New Zealand'.


'Land expropriation and settlement needs to end.'

Agreed.


'As always, I think you are very generous to Labor and Kadima. While being "pro-settler" may not be written into the party plank... it's stretching it to insinuate that pro-settler parties twisted arms since 1967.'

Generous - maybe. Not enthusiastic, anyway. If I lived in Israel, I wouldn't vote for Kadima, or - unless it moved drastically to the left - Labor. However, I am not sure when there was last a Labor government that didn't depend on the backing of at least one RW party. And that IMO affects things profoundly. (With regard to Likud, or unity governments that include Likud, you wouldn't expect dovish or anti-settlement attitudes anyway.)

I don't have much of a 'national liberation theology/ideology'. I just think that the Israelis and Palestinians should both have the right to live in a secure state, and that at present means a two-state solution.

[Sezu]

27. While I agree with the two state solution, do you think

either could at this time, live in secure states? Israeli withdrawal has led to increasing violence not only with the Palestinians but among the Palestinians. The odds of Hamas opening up a second front in the West Bank against JEWS(read their charter) has most Israelis scared to death hence the move to the right.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. I think the first option is the one that will work...

When it comes to pressure from the US, it has to be something a bit stronger than the 'this is unhelpful' squeaks the Bush administration made. I don't know if you read this article PM posted yesterday, but it's a really good one on what pressure should be applied and how....

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/10/can_the_united_states_put_pressure_on_israel_a_users_guide

When it comes to yr second option, I don't know what interest there is in Israel for them to change their electoral system, or even if many people there think it needs changing...

[azurnoir]

2. Hopefully this will help to put to rest the

Muslim (terrorist)vs Jew (victim)meme that has been at the base of this for so long, I must wonder too how do the US Christians that so support Israel view this?

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. a Zogby opinion poll of Palestinian Christians in Bethlehem

http://openbethlehem.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=113&Itemid=17

"The first question was directed to Muslims asking if they have Christian friends, 87.5% answered that they do have Christian friends, whereas 12.5% answered that they do not have Christian friends.

The second question was directed to Christians asking whether they have Muslim friends, 92.2% answered that they do have Muslim friends, whereas 7.8% answered that they do not have Muslim friends."


"76.4% believe that the main cause of the emigration of 400 Christian families in the past few years is due to the Israeli aggression and occupation,

3.1% only believe that it is due to the rise of Islamic movements.
-

66% of the Christians believe that Israel deals with the Christian Heritage of Bethlehem with brutality or indifference.

When asked about the reason that caused almost 400 Christian families to emigrate in the last few years as shown in the United Nations report 76.4% of the population in general respond that the Israeli aggression and occupation is the main cause of emigration rising to 78% among Christian respondents and only 3.1% blame it on the rise of Islamic movements. 12.1% believe that it is because of the two above-mentioned factors together.

Concerning the question whether any family member has had land confiscated by the Israeli authorities to build the Wall, settlements or by-pass roads 13.9% answered that many relatives have had their land confiscated, 26.8% answered that they have some relatives whose land has been confiscated, 8.7% answered that they have one relative whose land was confiscated. However, 54.7% of Christians answered that they have at least one relative whose land was confiscated as opposed to 37.7% among the Muslims. 20.1% of the Christians say that many of their relatives have emigrated recently, as against 5.4% Muslims responding to the same question.

link to full poll results on PDF file:

http://www.openbethlehem.org/images/stories/OpenBethlehemFinalReport.pdf

.

[azurnoir]

6. Thank you for the polls although the results are exactly

what I had feared the propaganda that it is Muslims not Israel mistreating and taking land from Christian Palestinians among Americans has sunk in quite well

[ProgressiveMuslim]

8. As always, crickets on the hard questions. nt

[shira]

18. you think this is zionism?

If the article is honest and factual, this is terrible news. As we know, however, much that is reported on I/P isn't exactly honest and accurate.

Need I remind you that "Zionism" agreed to the 1947 partition plan of bantustans and cantons for the Jews who made up the majority population in those areas? Arab leadership was and still isn't grown up enough to accept any Jewish right of determination in that region of the world. They opted for war instead; they lost more land. Their bad.

That it took the Palestinians some four decades after Israel's establishment to begin to grudgingly accept the idea of a two-state solution is conveniently ignored.

That it took the Arab League, which was ultimately the backer of Palestinian intransigence, until 2002 to come up with an offer of peace (right after 9/11, and therefore hardly more than a PR damage control exercise), counts for nothing.

That Israel has already returned the vast majority of territories it captured in 1967 -- who cares!!!

That Israel withdrew unilaterally from Lebanon and Gaza -- so what!

Nothing, absolutely nothing will stand in the way of those who like to claim that Israel is relentlessly bent on territorial expansion.

Everyone with any serious interest in the subject knows that the Clinton parameters of December 2000 define the parameters of the negotiations on territorial issues, and surprise, the most current proposal (rejected by the PA, of course) reflected this and would have given the Palestinians 98.5 percent of the pre-1967 Westbank/Gaza territory, plus a connection between the Westbank and Gaza -- but hey, why bother with this!

Nothing should ever stand in the way of the territorial expansion myth! And of course, all of this simply reflects an impeccably objective, completely neutral take on the I/P conflict!

Now, cue the crickets. :eyes:

[ProgressiveMuslim]

20. Shira, why is Israel stealing land from Christians? Can you answer that?

Now cue crickets.

[shira]

21. you're assuming you know all the parts of this recent story are honest and accurate

how many stories and tales of woe WRT to all that is I/P have, in the past, turned out to be replete with obfuscations, myths, half-baked storytelling, and outright lies?

ps
I notice you neglected to respond to the majority of my last post. Why?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

23. This story isn't from the Electronic Intifadah. It's Reuters. And you can't respond

because what the gov't of Israel has done is indefensible.

You try to change the subject and frankly, it's transparent as hell and pathetic.

You don't answer because you can't answer.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

24. See you in 2 days, which is when you usually pop back to get the "last word"

and claim crickets.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

29. Day one is gone. Perhaps day two...

[shira]

30. still here, PM.......and unlike you, I answer questions posed to me

This story is a rehash of material from 6-7 years ago - and going back to 1997. Here's some background material on it for you to consider:

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=3&x_article=37
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2007/12/lost_in_translation_at_haaretz.html

You even brought it up here at DU (and check the comments out from that time)...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x205449


“I believe that we should annex the Har Homa neighborhood, a neighborhood against which my movement fought a stupid campaign. Har Homa has a territorial contiguity with the State of Israel. To say that Har Homa disturbs the contiguity of the Palestiian territory, and to turn this in to a possible cause for war is rubbish, it's stupidity.”

— Peace Now leader Professor Amiram Goldblum



And FWIW, I didn't change the subject. You stated that this is what Zionism always was and still is about. I provided you some facts that utterly refute that nonsense and it now appears you're backing down from that bold statement.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

33. LOL -- CAMERA is your unbiased sourced! Sorry -- just spit coffee all over my computer.

Your answer is no answer at all.

[shira]

35. you asked, I supplied you with facts not reported in the OP

[ProgressiveMuslim]

38. Shira, your CAMERA quotes prove nothing.

Acquiring land from an occupied people -- even by eminent domain -- is still stealing.

Sorry dear. Wrap it up in rationalization till your blue in the face.

A pile of shite by any other name smells as foul.

[shira]

40. sure they do

The article shows that most of the land acquired by legal (monetary) means was Jewish owned. Had that been lost to a Palestinian govt for no compensation, then THAT would be stealing. Besides, no one in Israel including Yitzak Rabin at the time, or the Peace Now leader quoted earlier, believes this is controversial. No one lived on the land and it was mostly forest. It's not a settlement by anyone's definition and Israeli Arabs are to reside in 30% of the housing.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

41. Land theft justification #13: "BUT IT'S NOT BEING USED."

I wonder if anyone ever did a study of how much Palestinian land was confiscasted by settlers BECAUSE IT WASN"T BEING USED.

I remember full well working with a palestinian farmer outside Jerusalem to move stones from his land so he could farm more of it to prevent a land grab in 1988. We did so under the watchful eye of a gun-toting settler with his young son and dog. Dollars to donuts his land is gone.

From Ariel to Har Homa, every settlement built on occupied land is illegal under international law. Period.

NEARLY HALF A MILLION SETTLERS are the barrier to peace. Your defense of them is stirring though. Tell me, in private conversation do you refer to the West Bank as Samaria?

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Hey, the whole Terra Nullis thing worked for the British when it came to Australia...

Like, the Aboriginals weren't using the land and there were no houses anywhere, so it was open to be grabbed. Only problem is that mindset was one that was acceptable a few hundred years ago, but those who use it now to support the settlement venture in the West Bank seem to be caught in a time-warp and haven't cottoned on yet that such thinking is soooo 19th century....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

44. Shira, is there any settlement in the West Bank that you declare illegal and immoral?

Just curious.

[shira]

45. what we're talking about is not a settlement

I've stated several times before I'm opposed to settlements. It's bad form on the part of Israel. It's also stupid b/c they know, like the Sinai or Gaza, some will have to eventually be abandoned in a future deal. Great waste of money and resources IMO.

Do you believe that all territory beyond the 1967 borders is "holy" and that land swaps are out of the question in final status talks? IOW, for a Palestinian state you want Israel completely 100% behind the 1967 borders? Israel offering land swaps that amount to 100% of that area is unacceptable?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

46. You don't consider Har Homa a settlement? nt

[shira]

47. would you mind answering my questions first? I answered yours.

[Jefferson23]

13. Arrogance, I'll take it because I can approach to fellow human beings, and

fuck anyone else who stands in their way.