Eye On Israel/Palestine

Shia, Sunni just two ends of the same candle.

My first anti-Semitic comment.

Damn Arabs.

My second.

<looks at ceiling for cracks...shrugs>

Re Muslims--- How (already seeing Setanta in action) do the Wahhabis, Shia, Sunni and Sufi relate?

Who was first?

And, more importantly, shouldn't we all be funding Sufi proliferation? I read a fabulous article about Sufis. They're our best hope, I think, in the Middle East.

If a newspaper quotes (according to what you wrote):

when the actual quote is:

thereby distorting and therefore deliberately falsifying what was written or said so that it means the opposite of what, in reality, was meant...
well, gee, I don't know... you believe that is "reputable?"
Okay.

We are on a different page of reality from each other.

Ah, but Farhad, I am only here to vent.
You and others will believe whatever it is you believe.
I want to scream.
Normally, I am an evenhanded fellow who stays away from this sort of contentious dialogue because I realize that it serves no purpose.
But, there are days when I remember Koby Mandell, a 13 year old American boy who was playing in the desert one day when he and his friend, Yosef Ishran, were taken by Palestinian Arabs to a cave where they were tied up and bludgeoned to death by large rocks to leave their murdered, bloody corpses to be discovered by their parents...
(But this would never happen in a Muslim country.)
There are days when I remember Vadim Norzitch and Yosef Avrahami, two Israeli soldiers who took a wrong turn in Ramallah in 2001 and sought refuge in a Palestinian police station where they were literally torn apart by a mob of savage Palestinian Arabs who proudly displayed their hands, drenched in the blood of these two innocents, to the world.
(But this would never happen in a Muslim country.)
Occasionally, I ponder the 41 part television series based on the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," a vicious anti-semitic rant published by the Russian Czar's Secret Police to incite the peasants to murder Jews, that was put on Egyptian TV in 2002.
(But this would never happen in a Muslim country.)
There are days when I watch the Iranian TV series on how the Jews rip out the eyeballs of young Arab girls in order to put them into blind Jewish eyes...
But... these things could never, ever happen in a Muslim country...
The depressing list is endless and it goes on and on...
There are days when I think about the vicious; insane; murderous; vile; lies and butcheries performed by Muslims in Muslims countries... and, I become just a bit ticked off.

Hey, but most of the time, I'm just like everybody else.
What can ya do, eh? That's life, right?
Thank G-d it could never happen in a Muslim country...

hehehe Moishe...I have actually seen the same thing attributed to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards by the Israeli TV...I guess they recycle the same clips for different purposes...anyways..your stories truly made me saddd knowing Israelis treat Arabs with nothing but respect and wouldn't harm a child would they?? You can sit here and tell me stories all you want but according to your own stories holocaust was much more horrendous...with all said you still haven't refuted my theory

A billion little Farhads inhabit this planet.
And Israel should give them more power because it is the "right thing" to do?

6 billion little moishes and farhads inhabit this planet.

Yes indeed.
But gravy, gravy - the "hehe" "I have actually seen the same thing attributed to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards by the Israeli TV" is such a stupid lie that it makes refutation or discourse nigh well ridiculous. Everything Farhad wrote was imaginary tit for tat...
Whereas I, in all of my vehement, if not even irrational, anger at least was responding to reality.
For instance: "Zahra's Blue Eyes" - Episode 1: Preparations for Stealing Palestinian Children's Organs is a real Iranian television show.
The Muslim countries are full of this vile crap.
But, I suppose, to many, it is all of one cloth.
Everything is relative.
No good.
No bad.
Just depends on your point of view.
So it goes....

It is not just muslim countries that are full of the crap that bothers you (and anyone who would impartially look at it, which ironically probably includes Farhad, though you have painted him into a corner).
There are also real occasions where "the other side" (to you) are suffering at the hands of "your side", if one could impartially look at it, and maybe you can, or you are rightly too close to the pain to see it, or justify it as self-defense.

It is vicerally satisfying to lump all moslems as haters of Jews, but it is not true. Just as it is easy(and untrue) to lump all jews into arab-hating whatevers.The answer to antisemitism can't be xenophobia and muslim-hating.

Everything is relative?
bad things are bad regardless of who does and who receives, and villifying the "enemy" doesn't vindicate one's own wrongdoings or make them right.

Steven Erlanger wrote a relatively balanced article, Israel, on its Own, Is Shaping the Borders of the West Bank, in the New York Times, April 19 in which he holds that the impact of the controversial Israeli settlement expansions--which are contrary to its obligations under the Road Map, and the US administration's expectations--and the routing of the separation wall will be smaller than what it is being made out to be. He went on to provide statistics in support of his claim:

The provisional border would leave one quarter of Israeli settlers on the Palestinian side.

The Israeli Supreme Court has obligated Sharon to place the separation wall "much closer" to the 1948-'49 Armistice lines, the so called Green Line.

It is so much closer, in fact, he contends, that even including the three major Israeli settlement blocs of Ma'ale Adumim, Ariel, and Gush Etzion the land that the Israelis plan to incorporate would amount to about 8 percent of land on the Palestinian side of the Green Line, or just three percent more than the 5 percent that President Clinton had proposed in the 2000 Oslo Accords.

That means, he stresses, that by that provisional 8 percent 99.5 percent of Palestinians would live on the Palestinian side of the barrier in 92 percent of the West Bank, with 74 percent of Israeli settlers living on the Israeli side.

That 8 percent, he points out, is better than the 100 percent of Palestinian land that Sharon wanted to expropriate for Israeli settlement building.

The Palestinian contention is, of course, that all Israeli settlements on the Palestinian side of the Green Line are illegal, and that the 8 percent of Palestinian land that Israel intends to incorporate constitutes some of the best Palestinian land for housing and agriculture.

They reject the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel who rejects the Palestinian claim for it as the capital of their future state.

Ultimately what the Palestinians object to is the unilateralist approach by the Israeli government which they fear is "shutting the door for negotiations and ultimate peace, and putting more Palestinians effectively into prison," as Saeb Erekat, a Palestinian negotiator, is quoted by Eralger as saying.

Basically what Erlanger is arguing about is the fate of populations, not land disputes. "Eight percent is half of what the figure was last summer, before the Israeli Supreme Court told the government to move the barrier closer to the green line. The new route has sharply reduced the number of Palestinians caught inside the barrier: fewer than 10,000 of the two million Palestinians in the West Bank.

"Those figures do not include East Jerusalem, which contains about 175,000 Israelis and about 195,000 Palestinians," he writes.

He then goes on to cite more stats:

177,000 Israeli settlers--about 74 percent of the total in the West Bank--live on the Palestinian side of the Green Line, but within the new route of the separation wall.

26 percent, or about 63,000 live on the Palestinian side of the new route of the separation wall.

These 63,000 settlers, some of the most rabidly ideological, and religiously fanatical of settlers who live in settlements such as Ofra and Beit El, pose a potential threat to any kind of peace settlement that may be arrive at by both sides, or even a unilateral transfer as the settlers in the Gaza Strip portend to be.

Israel continues to stress that the separation barrier is a temporary security measure, but it is building on its side of it as if it were a permanent border.

Israel is continuing to construct settlements in violation of its first-stage Road Map obligations, but they point out that the Palestinians have met their own first-stage obligations to dismantle terrorist organizations. The Palestinian Authority, for its part, is attempting to incorporate these different factions into its security organizations. The Israelis say they want complete dismantlement, not co-optation. They forget that they themselves co-opted their own terrorist organizations, namely Irgun Zvai Leumi be-Yisrael (Irgun) and Lohamei Herut Israel (LEHI), into the Israel Defense Forces when they fought their war of independence against the Arabs.

Erlanger goes on to point out that Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has yet to keep his promise to US President George W. Bush to "dismantle illegal settlement outposts built after March 2001--at least 24 of the 105 illegal outposts disclosed in an Israeli study."

As regards the settlements themselves, there is a discrepancy between how Sharon's ministry defines what the Road Map refers to as "freezing of settlement growth" and how the US administration defines it.

Israel is planning to build 3,500 new housing units in a 4.6 square mile area known as E1 adjacent to Ma'ale Adumim, which would house about 14,000 new settlers. Israel holds that that area is a part of Ma'ale Adumim which already has a population of 32,000 settlers.

"Large municipal boundaries around smaller communities are a standard Israeli device, critics say, to make it seem that new settlement construction is merely "thickening" existing settlements. The official municipal boundaries of Ma'ale Adumim are huge, larger than Tel Aviv's, and stretch nearly to Jericho. The settlement is built up on only about 15 percent of its official area.

"Given the proximity to Jerusalem, the passions on both sides are intense. Israelis want E1 to provide contiguity of Jewish settlement around Jerusalem, while Palestinians want it to ensure contiguity of Palestinian settlement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank," writes Eralger in his article.

Sharon said last week that, "it is the Israeli position that the major Israeli population centers will remain in Israel's hands under any future final-status agreement, with all related consequences."

It will be interesting to see how the US reacts to Sharon's staunch position, and any actual moves by Israel as concerns E1 and the expansion of other settlements such as Betar Illit.

Here is what I do not understand. Perhaps it can be explained.
Why is it that the above statement in bold is accepted as anything resembling the truth?
Israel is attacked on a daily basis by terrorists. Every single day. Coming from Gaza or the West Bank (in addition to Lebanon and Syria).
They are attacked every day by terrorists who claim affiliation with Palestinians.
So, the crux of Mr. Erlanger's argument - that Israel is still building "settlements" while the PA "have met their own first-stage obligations to dismantle terrorist organizations." is a lie. A simple bald faced untruth. It ain't so. It's patently ridiculous.
But it is presented as a fact; a truth; reality.
Now, in my world, someone who presents a total lie as truth makes their whole argument and reasoning suspect. Very suspect.
And that is the nutty part of this Palestine/Israel debate - those who want to claim Palestinians are simply... doing whatever it is that comes naturally (I am at a loss for words when I try to cover the justifications for the idea that makes "Palestinians" the victims of these farcical attacks against Israel) while Israel is somehow the villain in this scenario...
It is so strange.



That is simply this week's news....
Source

Your source's veracity is questionable, moishe.

Mr. Erlanger didn't say that "the PA 'have met their own first-stage obligations to dismantle terrorist organizations.'"

I stated that the Palestinian Authority, for its part, is attempting to incorporate these different factions into its security organizations.

Your mischaracterization of my commentary is itself a lie, Moishe.

I wrote the post about Mr. Erlanger's article as a summary with my own commentary added.

I don't usually do this, but here's a post of the Erlanger article:

The New York Times

April 19, 2005
Israel, on Its Own, Is Shaping the Borders of the West Bank
By STEVEN ERLANGER

AALE ADUMIM, West Bank, April 16 - They're building away here in Israel's largest settlement, with Palestinian workers laboring on new apartment houses overlooking the red-brown hills of the West Bank.

Israel's intentions to keep building next to this suburb about three miles from Jerusalem have set off a small furor with the Bush administration, which is putting pressure on Israel to keep a commitment to freeze settlement growth.

But the construction and planning at Maale Adumim and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to pull 9,000 Israeli settlers out of the Gaza Strip this summer are only parts of a far larger and more complex transformation of the Israeli-Palestinian landscape, and of Mr. Sharon's policies themselves.

In effect, Israel under Mr. Sharon is unilaterally moving to define its future borders with a Palestinian state - with the scheduled withdrawal from Gaza and from four small settlements in the northern West Bank, with the "thickening" of settlements near Jerusalem and the Israeli border, and with a new route for the Israeli separation barrier approved by the cabinet on Feb. 20.

Palestinians are furious that Israel is moving without waiting for negotiations. But the likely impact of the provisional new border on Palestinian life is, perhaps surprisingly, smaller than generally assumed, and it would leave about a quarter of Israeli settlers on the Palestinian side.

Pressed by the Israeli Supreme Court and the United States, Mr. Sharon has pulled the separation barrier much closer than it had been to Israel's 1967 boundaries, which were the armistice lines of the 1948-49 Arab-Israeli war and became known as the green line.

Even including the three major Israeli settlement blocs of Maale Adumim, Ariel further north and Gush Etzion in the south, the land between the green line and the barrier is 8 percent of the West Bank - close to the 5 percent in the proposal that President Clinton was putting forward in 2000, at the end of his negotiations with the Palestinians and the Israelis.

And even that provisional, unilateral 8 percent, before final-status negotiations begin, means that 99.5 percent of Palestinians would live outside the barrier, in 92 percent of the West Bank, with 74 percent of Israeli settlers inside it.

"The real point is being lost in the spat over Maale Adumim," said David Makovsky, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "The contours of the debate over the West Bank have shifted under our eyes.

"People associate Sharon with being Mr. Settlement and react with a certain churlishness, saying he's trying to trade Gaza for the West Bank. But the real story is how Mr. Settlement, who wanted to build on 100 percent of the West Bank, is down to 8 percent. If we're talking about Maale Adumim, it means that Sharon sees this as the main battleground, not Elon Moreh or the Jordan Valley."

Palestinians do not see that as a victory. They argue that all Israeli settlements beyond the green line are illegal. They reject the annexation of East Jerusalem in 1967 and say that the 8 percent of the West Bank inside the barrier is among the best land for housing and agriculture. Unilateralism, they say, is no substitute for negotiations.

Saeb Erekat, the veteran Palestinian negotiator, said, "If this project is carried out, it will mean shutting the door for negotiations and peace and putting more Palestinians effectively into prison."

Eight percent is half of what the figure was last summer, before the Israeli Supreme Court told the government to move the barrier closer to the green line. The new route has sharply reduced the number of Palestinians caught inside the barrier: fewer than 10,000 of the two million Palestinians in the West Bank.

Those figures do not include East Jerusalem, which contains about 175,000 Israelis and about 195,000 Palestinians.

About 85,000 Palestinians, the Defense Ministry says, live with Israeli identity cards on the Israeli side of the barrier. The Palestinian population is growing by about 3.3 percent annually, and the Israeli population by less than 1 percent.

Thousands more Palestinians live in areas like Qalqilya, which are no longer formally behind the barrier, but where they must cross through gates that can be sealed quickly.

Still, Israelis argue, the hardships of the barrier are now less severe and affect fewer Palestinians than before. Israeli officials point out that even the final proposal being considered at the end of Mr. Clinton's negotiations awarded some West Bank land to Israel, with land transfers to the Palestinians to make up the difference. And the Palestinians, in every negotiation so far, have seemed ready to cede Maale Adumim to the Israelis for other land.

Ariel may be a different matter, given how far it sticks out into the West Bank. But even with Ariel, the Israeli government has agreed with Washington not to fully enclose the area, which would trap thousands of Palestinians in enclaves. Instead it uses local fences around settlements and increased army patrols.

Within the new route of the barrier but outside the green line are some 177,000 Israelis living mostly in these large settlement blocs - about 74 percent of Israeli settlers. The other 26 percent, about 63,000, live in the West Bank beyond the barrier.

That 26 percent, some in isolated, heavily guarded settlements or in small outposts, are likely to find themselves stranded in an independent Palestine or having to move, for it is highly unlikely that in any negotiation this notional Israeli border, along the barrier's route, will move farther into the West Bank.

Mr. Sharon's barrier has spelled out the future for those settlers, but removing them could make the coming Gaza evacuation seem like a walk in the park, especially when talking about fiercely ideological settlements like Ofra and Beit El.

Israel argues that the barrier is not a border but merely a temporary security measure that can be moved or removed in accordance with negotiations. But Israel is building inside the new route - at Maale Adumim, for example - as if it will be a border, or close to one.

Mr. Makovsky has analyzed the changing route of the barrier and done population estimates, village by village, with census figures and a C.I.A. projection of annual population growth rates. "Clinton was down to 5 percent of the West Bank, and here you are down to 8 percent before final-status negotiations," Mr. Makovsky said. "It has to be modified and agreed upon by the parties, but before our eyes we see the rough shape of a two-state solution."

While the politicians argue, nothing stops.

Settlement construction is continuing on the West Bank, though more slowly than was the case two years ago, in apparent violation of Mr. Sharon's commitment in the first stage of the road map to freeze settlement growth. Mr. Sharon says the road map is not yet in force because the Palestinians have not met their own first-stage obligation to dismantle terrorist organizations. The population of West Bank settlements is increasing by about 5.6 percent a year.

Nor has Mr. Sharon yet kept his promise to Mr. Bush to dismantle illegal settlement outposts built after March 2001 - at least 24 of the 105 illegal outposts disclosed in an Israeli study.

In the meantime, Mr. Sharon and Washington continue negotiating what a freeze means, with Israel being pushed to define where existing construction stops within large settlement areas like Maale Adumim, which was established in 1975. Israeli officials say Washington will allow construction within existing built-up areas but not outside them.

Even that position, which American officials will not publicly confirm, seem to violate Israel's promises under the road map to freeze settlement growth after March 2001, including natural growth.

That is why Mr. Bush was so upset, and publicly so, about the announcement that Israel was planning 3,500 new units in a 4.6-square-mile area known as E1, adjacent to Maale Adumim, enough to house 14,000 new settlers.

The mayor of Maale Adumim, Benny Kashriel, says the community of 32,000, with its flowerbeds and shopping mall, is widely accepted as part of Israel and will stay that way, so that new construction is necessary to survive. "We're building in Maale Adumim territory," he said. "We're not expanding at all."

Large municipal boundaries around smaller communities are a standard Israeli device, critics say, to make it seem that new settlement construction is merely "thickening" existing settlements. The official municipal boundaries of Maale Adumim are huge, larger than Tel Aviv's, and stretch nearly to Jericho. The settlement is built up on only about 15 percent of its official area.

Given the proximity to Jerusalem, the passions on both sides are intense. Israelis want E1 to provide contiguity of Jewish settlement around Jerusalem, while Palestinians want it to ensure contiguity of Palestinian settlement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Mr. Sharon says the plan will go ahead, even if not immediately. "It is the Israeli position," he said, standing next to Mr. Bush last week, "that the major Israeli population centers will remain in Israel's hands under any future final-status agreement, with all related consequences."

For Dror Etkes of Peace Now, there is no quick or painless solution. "Israeli society is going through a very hard period and has to learn to redefine itself after 40 years as a non-occupying country," he said. "This is not going to end easily."

Oh.
Excuse me.
Now, although I am perfectly clear that you did not write this (unlike your previous post where I wrongly assumed that you were quoting verbatim from someone else's writing), I must conjecture that, as you question the veracity of the source, you also question the veracity of the information presented.
Because, if that is not the case, then there is really no point to questioning the source, is there?
Unless you simply wanted to ignore the actual, factual information presented.
But, as that must not be the case, I give you:

Source
But, perhaps this source too is questionable.
Try these:
Ynetnews
Scotsman.com
New4Colorado.com
This is simply what is happening this week.
Last week; two weeks ago; three weeks ago; four... and so forth and so on.
But you contend:

Now that I am clear that this is your peculiar belief, then I would pose the exact same question:
Why is your belief system -

anything resembling truth?
Because, unless you doubt the veracity of the accuracy in reporting of the continued attacks against Israel, then it is quite obvious that the Palestinians have not met their own first-stage obligations to dismantle terrorist organizations.
And yes, for you to so proclaim as a fact, is, indeed, a lie.

And I do apologize for my misunderstanding. I believe I am a bit clearer now.
Mr. Erlanger was not lying.
You were.
Thank you for the clarification.

The Palestinian Authority is attempting to incorporate the different militant factions into its security organizations, Moishe.

Nowhere did I write that they have met their own first-stage obligations.

That's your mischaracterization of what I wrote.

Your mischaracterization of what I wrote is a lie, Moishe.

Thanks for the additional sources, by the way.

Last Update: Sunday, May 1, 2005. 11:08pm (AEST)
Israel arrests would-be suicide bomber
Israeli security forces have arrested a suspected would-be suicide bomber in the West Bank city of Tulkarm.

It is the first Israeli operation in the area since Tulkarm was handed over to Palestinian control a month ago.

Israeli soldiers moved into Tulkarm to arrest Muhammed Shalhub after learning that the 19-year old Palestinian had recorded a videotape in which he described his plans to carry out a suicide bombing.

Tulkarm's Governor has criticised the Israeli raid as a violation of the handover agreement.

But Israel says it reserves the right to enter Palestinian towns to stop what it calls "ticking bombs".

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority has vowed to end street patrols by armed militants.

It has also threatened to use force to prevent them at the start of a law-and-order drive by President Mahmoud Abbas.

Hamas militants have reacted angrily to the order for an end to such patrols, which have continued despite a cease-fire agreed by armed factions at the behest of Mr Abbas.

"We will allow no patrols in the Palestinian street except for those of the Palestinian Authority," Interior Minister Nasser Youssef said.

"In case dialogue with the factions fails, the Palestinian Authority will take the initiative and impose its control by force."

Masked militants began patrols during the conflict, at the same time setting up booby traps and obstacles to hamper Israeli raids.

Such patrols are also a way for the militants to show their local strength.

Mr Abbas prefers to negotiate with the militants rather than crack down on them, as Israel has urged.

But last week Mr Abbas ordered forces to use an "iron fist" to prevent cease-fire violations.

- ABC/Reuters

Source