Lets Dismantle the Settlements

This article reveals how the outposts by Jewish criminal settlers are turned into thriving settlements over a period of time. The recent demolition of outposts by IDF was a mere public relation stunt while the dreams of an Independent state remain a distant reality.

The opposition of Yesha settlement leaders to dismantling the illegal outposts, like the evasiveness of their great friend Ariel Sharon, show that neither he nor they are acting in good faith. The Yesha leaders are threatening that their people will dig in their heels at sites slated for evacuation, thereby compelling IDF troops to evict them by force. Between the lines, there have also been allusions to more active resistance and intentions to reoccupy the hills after the evacuation is complete, in order to make life more difficult for the army and basically, to taunt it.

**This proves yet again that in the eyes of the settlers themselves, as well as their political supporters, the so-called distinction between “legal” settlements and “illegal” outposts is nothing but a disingenuous trick. What is not legal today will become legal tomorrow. All they have to do is maneuver properly in the halls of power. As proof, they point, justifiably, to three decades of successful maneuvering - always with the support of their patron, Sharon - and to the fact that they have stubbornly kept a grip on almost every place they have put down stakes.

Their goal was, and still is, preventing the Palestinians from establishing a viable state. Every settlement, every outpost, every water tank propped up on poles on a hilltop, is meant to drive home to the Palestinians the hopelessness of their aspirations for an independent state on their own land. **

Today the settlers find it convenient for public discourse and their negotiations with the defense minister, a Labor party man, to revolve around the formal legal status of certain outposts. There are also grounds for believing that some of them were established with the express purpose of political distraction.

It is clearly in the interests of peace-seeking Israelis for the defense minister to stand firm against the onslaught of pressures orchestrated by the settlers. It is also in their interests that the IDF follow the defense minister’s orders to remove illegal settlements. But seekers of peace must not be led astray by this formalistic distinction between legal and illegal, which is largely an illusion.

In the final assessment, dismantling a couple of illegal outposts is nothing but a mockery of the poor. These outposts are the offspring of older settlements, some of them also established illegally at the time, but achieving a kind of pseudo-legitimacy over the years.

**Having been forced, in these troubled times, to wrangle over a handful of caravans, the settlers and their supporters are now trying to avoid the impression that any precedent has been set. By objecting to the evacuation and making political moves designed to minimize the number of outposts slated for removal, they are signaling to their Palestinian neighbors that the great campaign to crush their aspirations goes on. **

The settlements, and not just the outposts, are the obstacle to peace. That basic truth cannot be hidden, even if they scatter caravans on every rocky peak.

The drive for dismantling of settlements will come from within Israel. And I believe that the consensus is forming. The only thing that can work against it is terrorism from the palestinian side within Israel. Whcih will strenghten Sharon's idiotic hand.

The question I have to ask is if the settlements are dismantled will Hamas change its mantra of destruction of Israel?

Chaltahai: I think you are correct in your assessment. As of July 5 2001, 55% of Israelis favored dismantling settlements as part of peace agreement.
http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2001/p2israelipolla.html

There are also reports that support for dismantling settlements rose to 60% by May 2002.

Everyone knows that settlements will be dismantled just as they were in the Sinai when Israel and Egypt entered into a peace agreement. It is not an “IF” question; rather, it is a “WHEN” question.

As to Hamas, of course it will NOT change its mantra with or without Israeli settlements because settlements do not constitute the basis for their grievances. For Hamas, the state of Israel itself is an “illegal settlement.”

I believe settlements will be dismantled WHEN a moderate Palestinian majority emerges that is willing to accept the existence of Israel and which can control and/or exterminate the radical Hamas from its midst. IMO, the emergence of such a moderate Palestinian majority is also a “WHEN” question rather than an “IF” question.

Sure that is why settlements have been constructed in an increasing rate since the Oslo accord and continue to this day. Violation of international law and basic morality. If i can capture the land of another country and keep it. I see nothing wrong with what Iraq did in 1992.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *

As to Hamas, of course it will NOT change its mantra with or without Israeli settlements because settlements do not constitute the basis for their grievances. For Hamas, the state of Israel itself is an “illegal settlement.”

[/QUOTE]

Hamas should talk! In researching, I've found no evidence even justifying a "Palestine"! The "Palestinians" seem to be refugees from other Arab nations that flocked to the area to find work after the reestablishment of Israel. Arafat himself is an Egyptian, born in Cairo! His own website can do no better than start the history of "Palestine" at 1916! I can find no historcal record of an ancient "Palestine" by which they might legitimately claim territorial rights to the region. I've posted numerous links justifying this position before, but, they have all been deleted within 5-10 minutes of posting, so, I won't waste my time!

While I may deplore and sympathize with the tragic conditions under which "Palestinians" find themselves, groups like Hamas, in their fanatical ignorance, do nothing to promote the "Palestinian" cause. History at least justifies Israels right to exist as a nation, far more so than that of the "Palestinians".

Peace To All Who Read This...

And you must think Al Roker is the man for stock tips. Palestine was a sub province of trasn-jordania under the ottoman empire for more than 100 years. Just like Kuwait was a former province of Iraq. The documentation on the existance of Palestine as a province in the middle east is extensive. I suggest you look up the info available at the Georgetown Uni. Middle East program.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Sure that is why settlements have been constructed in an increasing rate since the Oslo accord and continue to this day. Violation of international law and basic morality. If i can capture the land of another country and keep it. I see nothing wrong with what Iraq did in 1992.
[/QUOTE]

Illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories have doubled in size since the Oslo accords were signed in 1993. Yet the Israeli people have continued to vote in governments commited to continuing, expanding and maintaining these illegal settlements. That is a clear demonstration that the Israeli people (or a great section of them) are not interested in an equitable peace, with justice for all.

mrpockets

I dislike Hamas, so do you :) lets do a little research on who were among big Hamas supporters back in the day i.e. how it was created as an anti PLO organization.

So a Palestinian born in Jordan has less rights on teh land than an israeli born in Austria? hmmm does not seem logical..

Here’s a nice article that mrpockets might want to read while he is looking into what you suggested. :slight_smile:

Israeli Roots of Hamas Are Being Exposed](http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2902isr_hamas.html)

A half-hearted attempt by war criminal Sharon’s government on the settlements. Obviously its not in his heart to get these illegal settler terrorists out of occupied Palestinian land.

Another round to the settlers - Israeli government pulls back from its first attempt to expel Jews from an illegal outpost in the West Bank](Another round to the settlers | Palestine | The Guardian)

A fictitious debate

There is no difference between an “illegal outpost” and a “legal settlement”: the question of the settlements’ legality should not even be on the public agenda. The only thing that differentiates a “legal” settlement from an “illegal” outpost is a piece of paper, usually in the form of retroactive “laundering” of the outpost by the defense establishment. Yesterday’s outposts are today’s settlements and both are a disaster.

There are no “legal” settlements in the occupied territories and there is not one “illegal outpost” among those that are now being evacuated, which was not established without the knowledge and encouragement of the defense establishment. The latest theater of the absurd production in the infuriating history of the settlements project - entitled “evacuation of outposts” - is diverting people’s attention from the real point. And that is its only purpose. In this play, everything is illusion: the defense minister is supposedly presenting an alternative policy; the settlers are ostensibly uttering cries of outrage; and a few mobile homes are moved and then brought back the next day.

But the worst illusion lies in the fact that the illegal outposts are being turned into the main problem, while all the rest of this vastly expensive and vastly injurious enterprise is considered just, moral or smart. So it has to be said clearly: all the settlements, from Ariel to Asa’el, are an immoral phenomenon. They have entangled Israel in cycles of violence and bloodshed. If they had not set themselves the goal of thwarting every possibility of an agreement - and succeeding in their endeavor - we would now be close to the achievement of peace.

The settlement project is a warped endeavor. Its leaders coveted more and more land, settled on it by force or by permission - it makes no difference - and instilled fear in the hearts of their neighbors. Some of the settlers made the lives of the Palestinians so unbearable that they were compelled to leave.

The distinction that is often drawn between moderate, moral settlers, who are the majority, and the extremist, violent types on the margins, is also a baseless prevarication. All the settlers, to the last of them, made their homes in a country that is not theirs and on land that is not theirs. As such, they are all equally immoral. Even if the primary motivation of most of them was not ideological, their residence there reflects a criminal ideology. The insatiable expansionist campaigns - another hill, another vineyard - are no less grave than the punitive expeditions carried out by the “extremists” among them. It is not enough to clasp one’s hands in sorrow at the sight of settlers (who are never apprehended) murdering Palestinians who are harvesting olives: the Israeli society should have long since denounced the entire camp that settled in its backyard and is threatening to bring about the society’s destruction from there.

There is no doubt that the settlement enterprise is the biggest success story of modern Zionism. For the past three decades, a small public has been dictating the national agenda.

-more-

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by underthedome:

**All the settlers, to the last of them, made their homes in a country that is not theirs and on land that is not theirs. As such, they are all equally immoral. Even if the primary motivation of most of them was not ideological, their residence there reflects a criminal ideology. The insatiable expansionist campaigns - another hill, another vineyard - are no less grave than the punitive expeditions carried out by the "extremists" among them. It is not enough to clasp one's hands in sorrow at the sight of settlers (who are never apprehended) murdering Palestinians who are harvesting olives: the Israeli society should have long since denounced the entire camp that settled in its backyard and is threatening to bring about the society's destruction from there. **
[/QUOTE]

I agree. Every settelement is immoral, and a criminal act by successive Israeli governments. They have doubled in size since the Oslo accords were signed in 1993, whenh Israel committed itself to peace. The setlements are not just immoral and illegal, they are instruments of war, and impediments to peace. Every single settelement should be removed, or the Palestinian's compensated equitably.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
A fictitious debate

There are no "legal" settlements in the occupied territories and there is not one "illegal outpost" among those that are now being evacuated, which was not established without the knowledge and encouragement of the defense establishment.

But the worst illusion lies in the fact that the illegal outposts are being turned into the main problem, while all the rest of this vastly expensive and vastly injurious enterprise is considered just, moral or smart. So it has to be said clearly: all the settlements, from Ariel to Asa'el, are an immoral phenomenon.

The settlement project is a warped endeavor. Its leaders coveted more and more land, settled on it by force or by permission - it makes no difference - and instilled fear in the hearts of their neighbors. Some of the settlers made the lives of the Palestinians so unbearable that they were compelled to leave.

[/QUOTE]

Need i say more? The article says it all

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *

Need i say more? The article says it all
[/QUOTE]

I wonder how much dollars Bush will give Sharon who is in DC these days? Will he use those extra dollars to build more settlements?

A heartbreaking article. For one group of people, more residences and settlements are built; for another, it’s a process of constant demolition and destruction. Gideon Levy, the author of this article, is a Jewish Israeli columnist for the Ha’aretz - i suppose he, too, must be anti-Semitic :rolleyes:

Scenes from the rubble, Ha’aretz, 29 October 2002

…] Yehiya Hindi stands on the edge of the crater of what used to be his house, in the center of the camp. His hair disheveled and his face pallid and covered with dust, throwing into relief the bristles of a budding beard. He wears jeans and a T-shirt, and they too are dust-drenched. With great concentration he is following the movement of the scoop, his gaze rising and falling.

He has not moved from this spot for months, spending day after day, hour after hour here. When we asked if we could speak to him he refused to move, lest his gaze drift even for a second from the dust of his home.

Hindi is afraid to miss even one action of the scoop, for if he does he will thereby lose the last chance to save his life, he believes. In the ruins below, he says, are 17,000 Jordanian dinars, his entire life’s savings. He has been looking for the money for weeks on end. First he dug and dug - we saw him digging the last time we were here. Now he watches the bulldozer intently, occasionally approaching to dig again. Then he watches the scoop in its motion toward the dump truck, in the hope that at the last minute he may yet be able to salvage something.

So far he has not found even one dinar, and he has nothing left. His face is an open book of weariness and despair. Every time the scoop digs its teeth into the ground, it is like a final glimmer of hope. The chances of finding bills amid this sea of dust are less than negligible. Still, hoping against hope that something will happen, Hindi holds a nylon bag - empty for now. Maybe he will be able to fill it. Another day or two and all hope will be gone. A Swedish UN staffer stares indifferently at the heartrending scene. The bulldozer takes out another scoop, nearly the last, from the Hindi home, and next to nothing is left. The dump truck is full.

To access article in its entirety, click here.

Of course he isnt anti-semtic. He is one of Hitlers Youth. Honestly it is a shame to see such posters on gs. They are not representative of the american population at all. No man should suffer so. It is inhumane. But to the israeli people the palestinians are worse than dogs and people wonder why they are hated so much in the islamic world. The israeli people have no justification for any of these actions. You reap what you sow. They are no reaping death. No compassion from me.

Are you saying it’s a shame i’m posting on Gupshup? :confused:

i forgot to mention that an archived list of Gideon Levy’s articles may be accessed via the ZMag website. Wonderful, wonderful guy - his articles really break through the fog of disinformation and deceits. If only we had more Gideon Levys and Edward Saids in this world.

There is no difference between an “illegal outpost” and a “legal settlement”: the question of the settlements’ legality should not even be on the public agenda. The only thing that differentiates a “legal” settlement from an “illegal” outpost is a piece of paper, usually in the form of retroactive “laundering” of the outpost by the defense establishment. Yesterday’s outposts are today’s settlements and both are a disaster. A Fictitious Debate

Absolutely Nadia. Girls can only be right so many times, before a guy starts to get ticked off :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley:

http://smilies.networkessence.net/ups/dvx_rune/smooch.gif

I was refering to the american posters, though it isnt related to the thread at all. Just a normal rant/flame bait posted together. I will edit it.

Settlement funding threatens Israeli coalition

Interesting spin on events: the Israeli defence minister has threatened to pull out of the coalition over the $100 million allocated to Sharon’s illegal occupiers. $100 million for only 200,000 settlers :eek:

Damn I wish I was Jewish :hehe:

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

October 29, 2002

Settlement funding threatens Israeli coalition

From Stephen Farrell in Jerusalem

ISRAEL’S Government is threatening to tear itself apart over funding for controversial Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.

Eager to assert his left-wing credentials, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, the Defence Minister, has threatened to pull his Labour Party out of the ruling coalition over its level of support for the enclaves.

The move could force early elections for the coalition Government of Ariel Sharon, the Prime Minister, which would otherwise have been secure for another ten months.

Labour has said that it will vote against the Government’s budget tomorrow unless the £100 million allocated to settlers goes instead to pensioners, single-parent families, students and poor areas.

Labour has made threats before to withdraw from Mr Sharon’s coalition, but has so far failed to do so, knowing that it has little support in the polls among an increasingly right-wing Israeli electorate.Mr Ben-Eliezer has, however, staked much of his credibility on this issue.

Mr Sharon, one of the prime movers of settlement policy throughout Israel’s history, is unlikely to budge. Only yesterday, he rejected calls for a settlement freeze in the United States’s road map for Middle East peace, while saying that he accepted the broad principles. Speaking to the Israeli parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, Mr Sharon said that exceptions needed to be made for the “natural growth” of the settlements.

More than 200,000 settlers live in 145 Jewish settlements across the West Bank and Gaza. Their presence is regarded as a provocation by Palestinians, who see the territory as their future homeland.

The settlements are viewed as an illegal presence on occupied land by most countries and as an obstacle to peace even by successive US administrations.

Yet settlers argue that they have the right to live on the land that they regard as their biblical birthright and they reject any notion of Palestinian sovereignty.

Mr Sharon’s right-wing Likud Party was in negotiations last night with far-right and religious parties to secure enough votes to pass the budget without the help of Labour, his largest coalition partner.

He has said that he will carry on with a “narrow” coalition, but most analysts believe that it would create tensions and demands by minority parties that would lead to an early end to the Government.

Likud criticised Labour yesterday for jeopardising the fate of the “national unity” Government, accusing Mr Ben-Eliezer of forcing the crisis for internal party reasons.

Limor Livnat, the Education Minister, said: “Any rational person can understand the political cynicism behind this. It was done out of the political distress of one candidate.”

Yassir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, postponed a parliamentary session due to vote on his Cabinet reshuffle yesterday after Israel banned 13 Palestinian legislators from travelling to Ramallah for the meeting. Officials said that ten Palestinian Authority members were stopped at a checkpoint in Gaza, along with the Minister of Supplies, and two were unable to leave Hebron. The Israeli Army cited security reasons for the ban.

Re: Settlement funding threatens Israeli coalition

Judge, that $100 million was an increase on top of the hundreds of millions (probably billions) that these Jewish settlers already get as whole, from the Israeli government, and the overseas Jews. No doubt now that Sharon is free to cobble to together a more right wing government with Jewish fanatics, settler-supporting and racist parties he will be pandering more and more to the settlers.