US caves on settlements- again

This is an extension of my last post, really. Ban Ki-moon called settlements unacceptable and Clinton sometimes views them as inconvenient or whatever. We at one time had the brilliant idea to go with international law on this and so I had hope justice would be served when we said settlement building should be frozen. They should also be dismantled to be fair, but a freeze is a start.

Apparently, that is not our policy anymore. Because George Mitchell's gone? Who knows.

Our new position on settlements:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/in-jerusalem-clinton-hails-unprecedented-israeli-settlement-concessions-1.5060

And as I said in my last post, this settlement issue in which Israel is clearly in the wrong is used as an opportunity to call Palestinians out for throwing in obstacles and pretexts. And not only that! Oh no! Israel gets praise for unprecedented restraint! Good job on doing a little less illegal and unjust behavior?! Really? 

Note in the article how Clinton says patience has it's limits with respect to Iran. Ha! What is the limit on Israel?? The sky apparently! We will endure (not that we are the victims and have to endure squat) any amount of injustice and international law breaking from these criminals, but not others. That was in the same article. It shows perfectly the double standard and contradictions of the US.

More than ever, Palestinians and supporters should demand what Desmond Tutu did:

"I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights."

Counterproductive? Can we not say i-l-l-e-g-a-l ?

Israel OKs 1,100 new East Jersusalem settlement homes 

 The thing that initially caught my eye was Secretary of State Clinton calling this latest settlement building approval (1100 in Arab E. Jerusalem) counterproductive. Counterproductive?! There are so many things they are and counterproductive is way too conciliatory. They are illegal. They violate the Geneva Convention. They undermine the entire process since they are building on land that is internationally recognized to be the future Palestinian state in this two state solution everyone is so keen on nowadays. Their inhabitants burn olive groves, beat farmers, are armed and a danger to civilians and this after stealing the land they build on.

Another thing that comes to mind is the big deal Israel made (or tried to) about the Palestinians' big unilateral move in going to the UN to declare their state. The pot is calling the kettle black. Each new settlement, each expansion of an existing one is an entirely unilateral land grab. What is Israel so bent out of shape about with unilateral moves? I guess if Palestinians succeed in the UN, Israel may not have such a free hand in its unilateral moves! Israel wants Palestinians to beg and plead and offer their weapons, right of return and their capital in return for permission to have a state conditional on who knows what. Does Israel ask Palestinians before they build Jewish only "neighborhoods" (if you want to sanitize it) and Jewish only roads? No. They don't even have to have warrants to enter, search and destroy Palestinian homes even though their law requires it. They answer to no one. Can anyone wonder why Palestinians would want to go another route at the UN?

So that was initially what caught my eye, but look at that title? MSNBC is supposed to be liberal media? Settlement homes? That's how you describe something illegal? Maybe they felt the facts would color things the wrong way? Just report the facts. Illegal is illegal. 

And from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15080160

Palestinians Reject Israeli Offer on Settlement Freeze

Palestinians Reject Israeli Offer on Settlement Freeze
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11519969

Right on! I hope they don't fold on this.

On some issues, I'm a bit conflicted, like armed resistance vs non-violent resistance. I mean, I do support non-violence, but you have to have boatloads of popular support and even more international support to make this go anywhere. And what about the fact that Israel is allowed self-defense without question in all of its forms (arresting and holding children and innocents, using human shields, building walls on other peoples' land, building and protecting settlements on others' land, making people perform at checkpoints, etc), but you are not allowed to support self-defense (called armed resistance or terrorism, not self-defense) for Palestinians. I think non-violence can work, but there are obvious problems and inconsistencies that aren't really ever allowed into the conversation. Unless you want to be considered a terrorist, which since I've said this piece, you now think I am.

Back to the issue at hand. I'm not conflicted on this. No one should recognize Israel as Jewish until there is an independent Palestine (an actual one, not Netanyahu's "vision"). This kind of thing rules out a one secular state solution, which would be the best option (IMO) for all. Maybe not the most palatable at first, but has the best chance of providing equal rights for all- settlements would be irrelevant, Jews and Palestinians could enjoy right of return, everyone could go to all holy sites, etc.

The offer for Israel made this week is classic " (Barak's) generous offer" material. Israel makes a grand statement that it will now comply with international law- for 3 months- except in some areas- and if, most importantly, Palestinians recognize Israel as Jewish. Since it is becoming more well known that Palesinians do in fact recognize Israel and don't in fact want to push it into the sea, as the myth goes, Israel has upped the ante- now, recognize it as Jewish. Now this presents some problems. What happens to you and your rights given this recognition, the loyalty law, and the fact that there is no constitution to guarantee your rights (which Israel claims to give to all equally, but facts on the ground show otherwise)? If you are Palestinian Israeli, will you be "encouraged" to move from your home in some way. What protections are there?

Settlement freeze for 3 months in return for giving up your rights and maybe agreeing to be ethnically cleansed. Doesn't seem very generous to me. For recognizing a Jewish state, they should at the very least get an independent state, not a piddly partial temporary settlement freeze- but that still leaves the ominous implications for non-Jews...

Defending settlements- is this how Netanyahu takes risks for peace?

Palestinian shot dead in West Bank by Israeli soldiers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10725444


All Israel leaders say they are willing to take steps, make sacrifices, and take risks for peace. Interestingly, none will leave the settlers high and dry without IOF protection and other services. (This, then, begs the question are they more interested in peace or the "dream" of "Greater Israel?") All of these illegal settlements are protected as though they are Israeli soil. I wonder what would happen if the State of Israel treated settlers as foreigners? Maybe there would be a breakthrough in peace negotiations. Maybe, though, all those former soldiers and patriots (terrorists?) would just form their own services, police, etc.

Steaming Piles of Waste in the Middle East

The first of the two steaming piles, this one brought to you by Netanyahu:


Fibi Netanyahu: In 2001, PM boasted of manipulating Oslo accords
(and America)
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/39692/fibi-netanyahu/

This video, if not a fake, might give us some insight into our current "partner for peace" 's thinking. Obama said Netanyahu is willing to take risks for peace, but are we sure peace is Netanyahu's goal? It is really unclear, except when there is a photo op with an American President.

He boasts about defeating the Oslo accords in no uncertain terms, brags about how easily manipulated America and our policies are, and "...suggests that the only way to deal with the Palestinians is to “beat them up, not once but repeatedly, beat them up so it hurts so badly, until it’s unbearable” ."

When people unearth quotes such as Ariel Sharon's infamous one, ... :

"every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."

people generally say you are using criticism of Israel to hide your anti-Semitism, you can't prove he said that, etc then blame the Palestinians for being stubborn, placing preconditions, torpedoing negotiations, etc. It will probably be the same with this video.

And even if it's real, it's not like the US will change from blind support for Israel to supporting justice and human rights or anything. At least you'll be informed, though. And as pessimistic about the process as ever.


************************************************************

And the second pile:


Israel dumps waste on Palestinians- video
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201071731516628999.html

Not only are settlements illegal, they are dumping their waste from their illegal existence illegally on Palestinians. Netanyahu wants us to feel sympathy for these illegal land-stealing squatters to allow them exemptions from any settlement moratoriums so that they can build schools and "live normally", meanwhile issuing orders for demolition to native Arabs' homes inside Israel. Oh, Israel is demolishing them because they build without permits, you say? Israel won't give them permits to build because it is trying to "Judiaze," or ethnically cleanse, the area. No natural growth allowed for native Arab Israelis, but poor illegal settlers - who left their more legal home to further colonize "Greater Israel" and claim every hilltop (as in the famous 1998 quote) - deserve this. (???) Par for the course in the Palestine-Israel conflict!

A glaring double standard and steaming pile of waste. I guess that makes three. Sorry, I miscounted.

For more on settlements, I've got a tag to the right with 20 or so posts on that topic...

settler clash deemed intolerable?

I was encouraged by this headline, thinking the Israeli military might be coming to its senses and might start to see Palestinians as human beings with rights or something moving in that direction...

(here's the article)
Israeli military dubs settler clash 'intolerable'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8634754.stm


Until I saw this quote:

"Violence and raising hands up against IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] soldiers is crossing the line in an intolerable manner," the statement said.

Business as usual. Shame for throwing rocks at soldiers, but forget about how Israel itself is facilitating or participating in the subjugation and torture of an entire population.

In light of what I referenced here-
http://notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2010/04/more-settler-terrorism.html

the indignation at settlers' attacking the IDF is ridiculous!

US to abstain at UN on settlements???

Quote from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8591461.stm

"Meanwhile, the US is reportedly considering abstaining from a possible UN Security Council resolution against Israeli settlement expansion in East Jerusalem. The US usually blocks Security Council resolutions criticising Israel."

Part of me says- Wow. Really? Amazing.

On the other hand, since we are so opposed to this, shouldn't we be voting NO instead of just bowing out and abstaining???

Boycott! Sanction! Divest!

U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
http://usacbi.wordpress.com/


http://www.stopthewall.org/boycott/bds/cupe.shtml


http://www.bdsmovement.net/?q=node/9


http://www.bigcampaign.org/

NPR: Diane Rehm Show: Perspectives on the U.S.- Israel Rift

Perspectives on the U.S.- Israel Rift


This was a more interesting show. At least the Israel love fest was tempered a bit.


I'll just comment on some callers, here:


Dave in MA- I thought he had a very valid concern. 25%, though? Cut it all!

“Insults don’t get any worse than what Israel did to us last week. Israel has done this before. They continue to do it because they know there are no ramifications to its actions. This has to change. President Obama should withdraw 25% of Israel’s massive foreign aid immediately.”

Guest Ziad Asali: The US has to make clear what the interests are and it has an obligation to defend those interests. We need to assert the leadership of the President which is being challenged. Israel needs to be part of the solution and rearrange the political situation and be a player in the region with Arab states.

David Makovsky: That would be true if Israel didn’t want to negotiate, but they do. It was an unfortunate result of a perfect storm that they have to be sure it never happens again.


But it does happen! All the time! Israel may well want to negotiate, but it’s actions always make this impossible to see!


Eddie in MD is on the other side…

"I feel, as an American Jewish person, that Israel has made many concessions and continues to do so. Israel has had its back pushed to the waters, to the sea. I think it wants to have peace talks, but I think its made concessions and I don’t think the United States or anybody else should bully them into giving up what they feel they need. And I think somebody ought to think about the little guy, and that’s Israel, who’s trying to fight for its life in this world."

Israel is the little guy. (???) I'm glad he clarified, because I wouldn't have guessed that. Fourth largest (or best?) military in the world and attached at the hip to the world's superpower doesn't exactly scream little guy.

"what they feel they need" ??? What about the law? Jewish national aspirations have always been respected and supported. What about Palestinian national aspirations? Are Jews the only ones allowed to fight "for what they feel they need?" For Palestinians, now, it is less about what they feel they need and more about basics- water, food, shelter, employment.

And, really, who's pushing whom into the sea these days? When was the last time Palestinians were condemned for creating life threatening poverty, demolishing Jewish homes as government policy, occupying Jewish land and moving and building such that it can claim it outside of negotiation? When you can talk about ethnic cleansing openly and speak of another population's birth rate as a threatening to you as a bomb, you have truly arrived. You are no little guy. Actually, you are quite the bully by that point.


Ann in Washigton DC mentioned- Israel bringing extreme Jewish settler groups to worship at al Aqsa- a guest said that had stopped – he does admit it happened, though, so to call it conspiracy theory may not be truthful.

A guest called it conspiracy theory fueled by Rabbo, Dahlan when it isn’t true… ?
--I need to check this out..more research needed on this thing to see who is remembering incorrectly or stretching the truth.

Settlement announcement, Biden embarrassment, Israel apology, and after...

When this story broke, we saw these sorts of headlines:

As Biden Visits, Israel Unveils Plan for New Settlements- March 10, 2010

Israel Apologizes To Biden Over Settlement Announcement: We Didn't Mean To 'Taunt An Important Man' – March 10, 2010

Several headlines since have read ‘Clinton: Settlements Undermine Peace’ or ‘Settlement Announcement Insulting’.

And?? When are we going to do something about it?? Isn’t this same old, same old with this “special” relationship with Israel? When are we going to realize that this is a trend or indication of Israel’s motivation (or lack thereof) to be a part of the solution rather than an isolated, rare event that we (or more importantly, Palestinians) can afford to overlook?

And what of the insult? This is a continued, serious and blatant trashing of the Geneva Convention. Is this not a cause for concern on that front??

Israel announces new settlement construction just in time for one of Israel’s biggest fans, Vice President Joe Biden, to visit.

I remember writing him when he was head of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. He had a statement on his website mourning the “massacre” by Palestinian extremists of 10 Israelis on a bus. It is sad, for sure, but why no mention (not to mention mourning)- ever- of the scores and at times hundreds of Palestinian civilians that die in “unfortunate accidents” involving the Israeli military???

In return for this snub, he apparently arrives to dinner with Netanyahu 90 minutes late. Ooooh. That’ll teach ‘em. Is this how they hope to get Iran to slow or regulate its nuclear ambitions?? Yikes! Probably not. We don’t tend to cut Muslim countries any slack. Israel, on the other hand, would have to invade our country, take over Washington and begin Occupation and “Judaification” there, too, before we’d wake up and see there might be a problem and we just might have to do more than slap Israel on the wrist. I still think we might defer to them in this case. They are a tiny country under such an immediate existential threat, after all! (--I say sarcastically.)


And after the crisis, Israel is more defiant than before it:

Netanyahu says 'no concession' on Jewish settlements – March 21, 2010

"As far as we are concerned, building in Jerusalem is like building in Tel Aviv," Mr Netanyahu told his cabinet.

His position on the UN and international law is clear. Ignore it. It doesn’t exist- or at least it doesn't apply to Israel. It does exist, when it tells Palestinians to do something. The US allows them to indulge in this fantasy world.


Netanyahu reaffirms 'right to build' in Jerusalem- March 23, 2010

Settlements in occupied East Jerusalem were an "inextricable" part of the city, he said, and would remain part of Israel under any peace agreement.

"Therefore, building in them in no way precludes the possibility of a two-state solution."

If you are a magician, maybe…

He said Israel wanted Palestinians to be "our neighbours, living freely" and called on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to "come and negotiate peace".

The existence of settlements, their barricades, walls, towers, armed guards, Jewish only roads kind of precludes the whole “living freely”… not to mention that stuff takes up more stolen land and Palestinians are expected to be happy Israel is “ready” (in words) to give them a sliver of desert it can't for the life of them make bloom plus some towns isolated by massive Jewish-only fortresses??

“Come and negotiate peace” sounds like more of a dare than an actual extending of a hand in peace. Come and negotiate peace, I dare you. See how much more of this land we can take right out in the open under your nose with US approval while spitting in their face! Or maybe it’s an invitation to be a part of this spectacle.

Latest embarassment for US on Israeli settlements

http://www.linktv.org/mosaic/20100312/mosaic-news-3-12-10-world-news-from-the-middle-east

Highlights from this episode from 3/12/10:

Holmes condemns Israel for lining the fate of 1.5 million Gazans with the fate of Gilad Shalit.

City of Nations- The Western Har Homa settlement will be expanded by 50,000 units, the goal being to separate Bethlehem adn Beit Sahour from East Jerusalem which would separate Jerusalem from the West Bank.

The Jerusalem municipality wouldn't comment (surprise!), but they sent a letter saying City of Nations has bad info. They say the 50,000 units are allocated one third for Arabs and two thirds for Jews according to population. The City of Nations responded that Arab building in this case (as in any other) is obstructed by the Israeli Interior Ministry headed by the right wing Shas Party. The Jewish ones apparently aren't having any such problems.

Likud Knesset Minister Danny Danon – “no one- not the Americans and not the Palestinians can dictate to Israel whether it can build in its sovereign capital.” Construction will continue unabated.

Israel is the only one who thinks that E. Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza are part of Israel.

Danon says timing, not the issue was the cause of embarrassment during Biden’s visit (???)
Are you kidding? So, it would have been no big deal if Biden wasn’t visiting? We would still have the same position, would we not? Granted, we have softened that tough stance quite a bit, allowing them to do what they want in Jerusalem even though part of it is indeed Occupied Territory and as such is as much a problem to build on as the West Bank and Gaza. Biden present or not- they are still obstructing the peace process!

Another response to why build even though he’s endangering the peace process and alienating Obama, the EU, etc is that Netanyahu was pressured not to build Har Homa and it is thriving today. That’s the way this settlement will be in a few years. They know about the obstacle they create, but don’t care because there are no consequences. City councilman Yair Gabai said that the international community will have to come to terms with the fact that Jewish people will not give up on Jerusalem.

Who is going to push whom into the sea?? Given the construction and permit problems Arabs face in Israel and the ease and speed with which settlement projects are popping up, despite cries of violation of international law. would lead one to believe that Israel was trying to ethnically cleanse the area, rather than the other way around.

He’s a guest on the program, so there are more gems for sure…

*** *** ***

Biden scolds Israel over settlement plan
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6271YE20100310

Now there’s a headline. Satisfying at first. Then you realize this has happened how many times before and to what effect? We should be boycotting them for their actions in Gaza, ethnic cleansing and other violations of law. Instead we humbly accept their insincere apology (if they give one at all) and act as though it never happened. We praise them at every opportunity, speak at AIPAC functions, our Congress gets elected indirectly by settler groups, call them men of peace and never ever dare accuse them of not being a partner for peace, not even when their actions justify it.

*** *** ***

Netanyahu Apologizes As Biden Leaves Israel Amid Doubts on Talks
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703625304575115353730769376.html

If they’ve done nothing wrong, why apologize?

Netanyahu says he will try to avoid this in the future. He means, of course, the timing, not the illegal building on Occupied Territory.

Mr. Biden asserted the U.S.'s right to give Israel constructive criticism on its policy. "Sometimes only a friend can deliver the hardest truth," he said.

Yes, but what are they doing with that truth? They are laughing (and spitting) in our faces and continuing to act outside of the law. They are still murdering and stealing and committing massive violations of human rights and international law. What are we going to DO about that? Keep smiling and nodding like we have no idea what's going on? When other nations consistently do this sort of thing, we sanction; we don’t continue to politely inform and advise while they ignore the problem, obstruct peace, and run us over.

*** *** ***

EU's Ashton chides Israel over Jerusalem settler plan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8568206.stm

"The EU position on settlements is clear. Settlements are illegal, constitute an obstacle to peace and threaten to make a two state-solution impossible."

The EU seems to be one of the few delivering a message to Israel. They actually visit a variety of countries in a Middle East visit. The US checks in with Israel to see how and what we are supposed to think about what other leaders will tell us- if we even visit any other Middle Eastern countries. We sometimes suggest or criticize, but quickly backtrack and let them know that whatever they want to do is fine and they will have our full support no matter what. Some message. No wonder they take us so seriously.

If we aligned ourselves with the EU instead of Israel, one of the involved parties, maybe we could actually solve problems and help the situation.

Obama uses different language on the Israel Palestine issue, but the effect and actual policy are the same. I mean, I actually get the idea that the administration may understand that Israel is doing something that isn't in the interest of peace, but the effect is the same as with Bush- Israel can do whatever it wants with absolutely no consequences and often with our (at times tacit) approval. There has been no policy shift. When I see efforts of the sort used with apartheid South Africa, then I will see that "change I can believe in."

"Hebrew slogans" and another reason settlements should be razed

Maybe not razed- if they want one secular democratic state where all Jews and all Palestinians everywhere are welcome and have equal rights...


I read a BBC article and they referred to "slogans" written by students (more accurate= suspected terrorists). I mean ynetnews even recognized them as slurs.

The BBC is usually pretty good and brings out points critical of Israel where the US media fails miserably. For example, in many stories, this appears at the end:

"All settlements in the the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this."

This time the BBC was way off.


Anyway- the slogans.

One was "We will burn all of you." A slogan? Really? If this slur is in fact a slogan or mantra, then they've got a terrorist cell on their hands and heads need to roll.

When Palestinians- or anyone for that matter, says these types of things, we call them threats or worse. When accompanied by an attack, such as the arson here, it's attempted murder, except in this case.

I'll go along with "Price Tag" being a slogan (grafitti also defacing the building). Taking into account what it means, though, I'm going to have to go with slur or threat:

"Price tag" is the slogan adopted some months ago by extremist settlers who carry out reprisals against Palestinians in response to the evacuation of settlement structures by Israeli defense forces.

"Rabbi Shapira published a controversial book last year which includes discussion of interpretations of the circumstances under which Jewish law permits Jews to kill non-Jews."

"The rabbi has been condemned for writing a book called "The King's Torah" that says it is permissible to kill non-Jewish children if they pose a threat or as a deterrent for the future. It states that only a Jew who kills a Jew violates the commandment against murder."

Hmmm. Now what do we think of and do with Muslims who teach (or support those who teach*) this type of thing? I probably don't need to tell you.
*=seminary students and a Knesset member were protesting for his release

He refused to cooperate and is suspected of withholding information. He's getting off pretty easy. Ask a Palestinian what happens when they are suspected of knowing anything about a person they suspect might become a suspect. Ask a police officer what they think of someone who refuses to cooperate. I'm guessing they think that is a sign of guilt. Not, here, though.

What are they doing with this guy? Releasing him, of course! If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it must be a cow. Now at least they can say they "looked into it" and we in the US can feel good again about our support for normal life and natural growth in illegal settlements.

3 more reasons why the settlement freeze means nothing

This is news of the recent temporary “settlement freeze”. It is hailed as a great step toward peace by the US and Israel for which the Palestinians are now significantly indebted. Never mind that this is only a partial freeze on something that is completely illegal in the first place…

If there is any doubt that a settlement freeze means nothing, Israeli officials will spell it out for you:


***
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2010-01/25/content_12868104.htm

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday planted trees in West Bank settlements, in a move which he said sent a clear message that Israel would retain major settlement blocs under any peace deal with the Palestinians.”

The absurdity of that quote blows my mind.

Planting trees means you aren’t giving the land back?? If trees have so much meaning that way, what about those Palestinian olive and fruit trees that were uprooted by Israel to build those settlements?? If the US pushes some settlers out of the way, occupies a hill over there and plants some trees, can we get in on this action, too??

Planting trees in Israel. I've seen the ads. It sounds rather benign and eco-friendly, right? I never thought about it as engaging in breaking international law, but that's what you're doing.

This must be proof that if you say something enough times, it can in fact be true. Gold Meir said there are no Palestinians. Others have said Palestine was uninhabited before 1948. Prime Ministers after her have said, hinted, and acted the same way. The US pretty much believes it, given the way we're letting Israel ethnically cleanse the area.

***

http://www.jkcook.net/Articles3/0446.htm#Top

A new college in the Territories. Should be good news. I'm all for education. Except Palestinians aren’t allowed to attend or go near it. Chances are, they have been pushed off the land it sits on (and the surrounding area needed for Jewish only roads and "security" trenches, barbed wire, guard towers, etc).

The apartheid analogy is looking more valid each time Israel takes action.

It’s just one more thing that makes settlements look less and less temporary or negotiable. The only thing we can hope is that it doesn't sabotage the peace process and Palestinian self-determination. Maybe it will force the binational state idea back onto the table.

***

http://www.imemc.org/index.php?obj_id=53&story_id=57750

Soldiers Get “Free Space In Settlements” For Military Service

Giving soldiers land to thank them for their service. Sounds nice. And it is, given that you’re not the one it’s being taken from to thank soldiers for killing your family and stealing yours and your grandparents land.

Free space indeed! Like the whole land without people for people with no land lie.

“It is the second half of an initiative granting free higher education to soldiers who chose to study in colleges in the Negev and the Galilee.”

If it’s an issue of being able to visit and see the land they view with religious significance, fine. Let them visit. If they want a University or neighborhood on Palestinian soil, they should be paying Palestinians, following Palestinian laws and regulations, asking permission from Palestinians, working with Palestinians and allowing Palestinians access. Anything else is theft and should be a big problem for US-Israel.

Our anti-Israel biased media? Yeah. Right.

Sorry for the earlier typo (Our pro-Israel biased media. Yeah. Right.)- I was thinking of two different titles...


Our media is only slightly less biased towards Israel than our foreign policy.

I found this while looking for something else---

Don't drink while reading this; you'll have to clean the screen:

http://www.thebulletin.us/articles/2009/01/05/herb_denenberg/doc4961c29b5ed1a649711765.txt

My first thought was CNN and Wolf Blitzer, ex-AIPAC operative. Anti-Israel? Really?

The mainstream media may be reporting more now on various UN reports and human rights groups that document Israel's war crimes, but it has never said or implied Hamas is following the law or anything like that. Call me crazy, but when a group the US considers a terrorist group commits 13 murders it isn't going to generate the same hype as a close ally who commits 1300 murders and is accused of war crimes that it refuses to admit occurred. And let's say for the sake of argument that coverage was pro-Palestinian - our political position is staunchly pro-Israel regardless of Israel's crimes, US coverage, or anything else. We haven't forced them to comply with law as long as they've been a state. Bush (HW) came close when he withheld aid. Obama's talking a lot about settlements, but it looks like nothing will come of that- Israel still doesn't have to do anything. We don't care about what Israel did or didn't do in Gaza- we have even "convinced" Palestinians to comply with US/Israeli wishes. Why not give Palestinians the media thing, especially considering that it's not there to begin with?

*** *** ***
This site refutes a similar claim to the one above that CAMERA made:
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9711.shtml

Here are some terms that the US media uses that rather proves a pro-Israel bias. Example: calling settlements neighborhoods instead of illegal under international law.
http://www.counterpunch.org/rooij0912.html

Here is a discussion of an interesting book on the matter...
http://www.tikkun.org/article.php/mar09_levine

More on settlements...and terror...

An infrastructure of Jewish terror
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1113843.html


The law abiding state, country of laws thing has been repeated many times- seemingly in order to convince and not necessarily as a statement of fact. This article is one of many things that makes that clear.

The Haaretz link discusses how settlements are illegal at a minimum and could be associated with terrorism. We think of settlements as an issue of legality or illegality, but residents on the ground have much greater day to day concerns- their land, livelihoods, etc are disappearing. These concerns are the other side of the coin of a settler's "natural growth" or "normal life". It is the status quo while these never ending and often interrupted negotiations are taking place in Washington and New York.

Another point the article makes clear is how Israel doesn't intend to get rid of settlements or comply with law. Once you get that, you see the only option is the ICC, for which the opportunity may be passing quickly...

Gibson's Netanyahu interview this week

Full text:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/09/charlie-gibson-interviews-benjamin-netanyahu-the-full-transcript.html

Article:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/netanyahu-israels-prime-minister-worries-palestinians-iran/story?id=8644832


Basically Netanyahu brushes off the settlement freeze precondition, but adds that Palestinians must recognize Israel (as a precondition?) and Israel needs security (cease-fire or permanent disarming??) Precondition or otherwise, Palestinians or anyone would have to be stupid to even consider disarming!

We’re talking international law, here, versus Israel’s desire (recognition) and result (both recognition and security) of a resolution to the problem – OCCUPATION! Until the problem is addressed, they are just treading water. I’m not saying discussing the illegality of settlements is a bad thing, but the occupation discussion is the only one that will bring the “final status issues” to the forefront, like Obama recently said he wanted to do (has he been reading my letters!?).

The Occupation is the reason for the humanitarian crisis, the reason for the anger, the reason for the attacks on Israel. The denial/ignoring of the Occupation is the reason Israel feels it has a free hand to break the law (or feels it is not breaking the law) and many ordinary Israelis remain blissfully ignorant of the actual situation their neighbors are in.

Netanyahu on the settlement freeze and why it can’t be done:

“You know, they need kindergartens. They need schools.
They need health plans. They're living. I'm committed not to build new settlements. I am committed not to expropriate additional land for existing settlements. But people have to live. You can't freeze life.”

They’ve frozen life for Palestinians for decades. It CAN be done!! It may involve shelling peaceful protesters, bombing, assassinations, massacres, the targeting of civilians and vital infrastructure for demise, poverty, and starvation, like Israel’s done to Palestinians- but it can in fact be done quite effectively.

Normal life (used to be “natural growth”). Illegal settlers deserve normal life? Hmmm. Those breaking the law deserve to continue because it would be too inconvenient to change course? Yeah, let's adopt that here. Empty the prisons! It disrupts their life, after all. Conveniently, this "natural growth" is the status quo, by the way.

What about those from whom this land was taken to build these illegal settlements, those from who the land was taken to build the “security areas” and roads that surround such illegal monstrosities? They are illegal, exist at great cost to Israel (to “defend”), have cost Palestinians much in the very land they sit on as well as their normal life. And then there’s the water. Palestinians can’t get clean water, yet illegal settlers have carefully manicured lawns and full swimming pools. So forgive me if I don’t see the fairness, lawfulness, or sense in giving illegal settlers natural growth (AKA "normal life").

And when facts fail you, blame it on the Palestinians. And old tactic, hey, it works:

“And I think Mamoud Abbas has a great choice to make. We all do. But he has to decide: is he going to be an Arafat or an Anwar Sadat? If he’s an Anwar Sadat, he’ll find in me a partner for peace and we’ll make peace.”

Hmm. A Sadat. That would be good for Israel, wouldn’t it? Lose focus and save face yourself and forget about the Palestinian people or the rest of your allies in the region? When his historic chance came, he negotiated a separate peace with Israel that may or may not have gained him respect with the US, Israel and the world and a fat aid package instead of sticking to the plan that Arab states agreed to, which was to include holding Israel to UN resolutions and international law among other things. Instead, Palestinians did not get any guarantees on rights like- pre-67 borders, refugees, Jerusalem, a state, etc and they had the only serious military force that remotely had the ability and desire to protect them removed from the equation. A lose-lose situation for them.

An Arafat? Really? Some claim Arafat endorsed terrorism and that’s why he was so unacceptable. Abbas may want to stand by a settlement freeze that international law also demands and that’s somehow equivalent to endorsing terrorist methods??? Wow.

***

“There is a growing awareness in Washington, I believe in European
capitals and elsewhere, that the development or acquisition of Iran of nuclear weapons is something that endangers world peace. Iran is the major sponsor of world terrorism.”

Some would argue Israel is a state sponsor of terrorism and given the UN report on their violations, media blackouts, crackdowns on peaceful protestors, apartheid-like policies, they often act more like a terrorist regime than a democracy, albeit mostly in regard to Palestinians. It’s ironic they are so worried about Iran.

His emphasis on Iran is especially ironic given the UN report detailing Israeli war crimes and the fact that their own nuclear program is not open to IAEA inspectors, they are actively engaged in an arms race, refuse to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and until the infamous prisoner Vanunu forced it out of them, refused to admit they had any weapons or even a program.

I guess Iran’s really their only hope to avoid responsibility in past and present conflicts and to delay the peace process in which people are realizing they bear more responsibility than we have admitted before. The onus is increasingly on them, as it should be, and Iran’s the only way out of this.

Settler slideshow and talk of bias

Fervent Believers- a slide show:
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/09/13/world/20090913SETTLERS_4.html

#6 says volumes; #7 is terrorist activity, but you're not allowed to call it that. Remove the Jews with guns and replace them with Palestinians and the criticism of the kids, their parents (oooooh, see?, they teach their kids to hate!!), all Palestinians, all Muslims would be rampant and instantaneous. Settlers generally somehow escape this type of indictment and generalization.

Most of this is rather sympathetic toward these illegal settlers- praying above the sea of lights, washing a kid in the middle of rubble, religious ceremony of the devout. The same sort of photos in a major publication of Palestinian terrorists and those who sympathize with them would result in explosive riots. You can’t even discuss how having your family killed, land stolen, being a refugee three times over might drive one to fight and not care if you live or die. This is considered support for terrorism. Sympathizing and understanding Jewish terrorists and terrorism is second nature to us- they had the Holocaust, after all. Good enough. You don’t even have to say it. All is justified.

Sympathizing with illegal settlers who heckle, beat, and steal, however, is just one’s own opinion to which we all are entitled. Frequent additions include: Freedom of speech. Isn’t this country (/Israel) great? You can say what you think without consequences, unlike in those Arab countries.

Going back to sympathizing with Jewish terrorists being ok versus sympathy with Arab terrorists being a terrorist action itself... I think this sort of thing is where accusation of bias of something being too pro-Palestinian comes from. We are allowed to present the Jewish point of view without an Arab voice, but to present a Muslim or Palestinian POV without the Jewish response is pro-Palestinian and virtually unheard of in the mainstream discussion. Does presenting the (a, some, etc- as there are more than one) Palestinian perspective really indicate bias or does it only seem so because the news is dominated with the Jewish or Christian Zionist perspective? In the recent UN report that officially called Israel out for war crimes, this comes into play. More text was dedicated to Israeli war crimes, so Israel and others discount it as biased. End of discussion. Lets talk about Iran and how we are going to dupe the Americans into taking them out, too. No. More text is needed because exponentially more damage was inflicted by Israel and more accusations are presented (which Israel tries and fails to justify), so more investigation is needed. Also, Israel's crimes are disputed by Israel and the US (and it's veto power) and Hamas' crimes aren't disputed by very many at all so there isn't much to prove or discuss there.

Reactions to Obama's Middle East Peace Plan and Settlements

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8242387.stm

So, Israel is again made an announcement to build/expand settlements around the time of talks with the US on a settlement freeze. We are supposed to be a superpower or something, but little Israel sure knows how to make us look like a superfool! We need to boycott, divest and sanction if we want results. Clearly, the decades of asking nicely and ignoring the violations of law aren't inducing them to comply.

In the article, telling it like it is:

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to have it both ways."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8241247.stm

I have used a variety of metaphors to explain this, but here it is in plain terms. In the above article, Hanan Ashrawi telling it like it is:

"What Netanyahu is doing is clearly at the scale of a grand deception," said Fatah spokesperson Hanan Ashrawi.

"He thinks that he can deceive the rest of the world... but what he is doing under a variety of pretexts is the continuation of settlements and at the same time demanding a price in return."

Edit: Sept 10, 2009- 2 quotes below are from the article-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8246434.stm

Obama's ready to cave and give Israel what it wants in return for its doing nothing, but the EU's standing firm...for now:

The European Union expressed "serious concern" over Israel's latest moves to expand settlements.

"The European Union reiterates its call on Israel to immediately end settlement activities, including in East Jerusalem," the EU said in a statement.

And a profound truth from Erekat:

"If you could not convince the Israelis to stop settlement activity, will anybody in the Arab and Islamic world believe you can make Israel return to the '67 borders or withdraw from settlements?" he said.

******************

Israeli troops 'ill-treat kids'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8186905.stm

Seeing this, it reminded me of folks who have sent me pics of dead Israelis, Palestinian kids in suicide bomber gear, and other images to "see what I think." They ask how could I criticize Israel, why am I "anti-Semitic," why do I side with them- given the gruesome video or picture they forwarded to me. I could return the favor and send them an equally gruesome picture or video of Israelis beating, killing, and maiming Palestinian kids (there are plenty out there), but for the fact that I can't stand looking at these pictures and it makes me sick to see them used to prove whatever messed up, sane, or other point you may be trying to make.

Why I "side with them" is more likely due to my ability to state the obvious, my shock at the entity with the biggest advantage crying victim...and being believed (at least by Americans), a sense of (lack of) justice and shock at the fact that we aren't fighting for it- we're siding with the oppressor. No, I don't like the sight of dead Israelis. Nor do I think empathy for the oppressed should be the basis for accusations of bigotry.

My Obama-inspired, insane (but comprehensive) settlement rant

To start off-

Pictures:
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/israeli_settlements_in_the_wes.html

Question: The Palestinian who builds a canal on his own land gets arrested. Where do illegal settlers in settlements, outposts and demolished outposts go??

This conflict is replete with double standards. Where are the investigative journalists? Exposing these and who's perpetuating them could get you a nice journalistic prize..or sent to Guantanamo. Let's face it. If Israel's going to make us go to war with Iran, we can't very well close it, can we?

***

U.S., Israel inch closer to deal on settlement freeze
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1103115.html

“The two are reportedly close to a deal in which Washington would allow a limited number of projects in advanced stages of construction to be completed, but Israel would freeze all other building for an as-yet undetermined period of time.”

They also want to be rewarded with normalization of relations with Arab states if they dismantle illegal outposts. (???)

This is like if I hadn’t paid my taxes in a few years (or decades) and I decided to pay them… at the prodding/threatening of authorities. Jail doesn’t even enter into the discussion- on the contrary- I should be compensated for my extraordinary generosity. I have made great concessions, after all. Totally absurd, right?!

Settlements are illegal. Period. The article said the US is trying to “bridge the gap”?? That can only mean we are going to let them get away with breaking the law. And we thought Obama was different. I might be joining you non-voters in 2012! He’s bending on settlements. He’s letting Israel influence him on Iran, from the people he’s talking to and direction the policy is taking. If we attack Iran preemptively, he might as well be another Bush.

It's laughable that Israel is even attempting to justify *natural growth*+ (and we’re thinking about buying it!) while it denies building permits to Arab Israelis who want to build and demolishes their homes when they build in spite of these racist policies. Note that the Palestinians are Israeli citizens and actually DO own the land they want to build for the same reason Israel is arguing- natural growth.
*=http://www.peacenow.org/policy.asp?rid=&cid=6329 "Top 5 Bogus Excuses for Opposing a Settlement Freeze"
+="normal life" is the favored term of late because it is less controversial and is more all-inclusive. See http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443842941&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
***

Palestinians reject any Israel-U.S. settlement deal
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE56B0F520090712
Yeah?! As well they shouldn’t! A “deal” implies that Israel gets away with breaking the law. Continuing to break the law, that is.
***

US and Israel strike settlement deal: report
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/07/08/78170.html

Apparently, this is the US and Israel finding common ground:

“Israel has won an agreement from the United States for the continued construction of 2,500 housing units in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, an Israeli newspaper reported on Wednesday, despite U.S. calls for a settlement freeze.”

***

Here’s a little more on Israeli denial of Palestinian natural growth:

The Israel – Palestine Problem: The perspective of a New Zealand Muslim
http://www.aen.org.nz/journal/1/1/rahman.html

Home Demolition and Land Confiscation
http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=81&CategoryId=4
***

Israeli-US settlement freeze talks hit a dead end
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/07/01/77531.html

Besides the allowing Israeli natural growth and saying nothing about denying Palestinian natural growth, there’s the part where a good part of this so-called natural growth is in fact immigration, not natural growth.

“Ophran added Israel's claims of "natural growth" are bogus given that 40 percent of the settler increase is due to immigration to settlements either from within Israel or abroad.

"Natural growth in the settlements is not simply a matter of births from within but includes continuous flow of immigrants," Ophran explained.

Settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem have continued to expand at a rate higher than the population growth inside Israel. Some 180,000 additional Jews have been permitted to settle inside Israel’s Arab sector in East Jerusalem.”

Here’s a chicken and egg question, I guess. Are illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories growing more because of receiving more money or are they receiving more money because they are growing faster than the Israeli population in Israel?

Study: Settlements get more state funding than Israeli cities
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1101829.html

Study: Heavily Subsidized Settlements Skew Israeli Policies
Settlements Get More Funding than Cities, Study Shows
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/07/21/study-heavily-subsidized-settlements-skew-israeli-policies/

And the next question would be...since we give Israel so much money, are we contributing to the violation of the 4th Geneva Convention. Bush said we didn't have to worry about that, though, so we're cool. This article doesn't really talk about government spending, but it does talk about unsuspecting Americans "contributing" to this "cause".

Report: US dollars funding Israeli settlements
http://www.prisonplanet.com/report-us-dollars-funding-israeli-settlements.html


This may explain the growth:

Beautiful Two-Bedroom on One Disputed Acre: How much does an Israeli-settlement home cost?
http://www.slate.com/id/2220531/

About half as much. How’s that for incentive? The money the Israel government is spending on making these homes so attractively priced should be going toward compensation for Palestinians.


If there were one binational secular democratic state, most of these final status, hot button issues would be solved. Settlements, human rights, water rights (maybe), refugees, borders, security, Jerusalem, access to holy sites.

Would there be apartheid? Maybe. Civil war? Only if it was forced on them and the people didn’t choose it themselves.

Stalemate...is that the best we can do?

People make fun of PC terms like vertically challenged, domestic engineer and the like, but equally ridiculous descriptions are common and completely acceptable when talking about Israel.

Israeli- Palestinian stalemate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8083107.stm

Funny how when Israel refuses to comply with international law and gets caught, they are in a 'stalemate'. When Palestinians refuse to give up internationally recognized rights and continue to fight for them, they are terrorists, stubborn, missing "opportunities", etc. But, this whole thing is steeped in double standards. Hamas is a terrorist organization and we shun them and starve Palestinians because of it, yet we have embrace(d) and revere(d) current Israeli terrorists like the FM Avigdor Lieberman and past ones like Sharon, Rabin, Shamir, Begin, Ben-Gurion and the like. Israel can elect whomever they want, be it a terrorist or whomever; Palestinian elections don't count unless the US and Israel like the results. It makes sense to let Israel handle Palestinian affairs and life, but it didn't make sense to let Hitler control the fate of the Jews. Israel talks about a demographic and security threat rather than the Palestinian population, with virtually no consequences; when Jews and African Americans are spoken of like this we think Holocaust, hatred, bigotry, racism, ethnic cleansing, Nazis, KKK, and other abhorrent nouns, but Israel is assumed innocent even in the face of hard evidence to the contrary. Israel is thrust upon the Middle East without consulting the inhabitants and is given 55% of the land (and why they complain about enemies on every side when they chose to sit a bunch of Europeans in that spot is yet another mystery), then takes 80%, then all, ignores UN resolutions 194 and 242 (except the part that gives it legitimacy), builds settlements, walls, violates international law, is involved in ethnic cleansing and yet the onus is still always somehow on Palestinians to make concessions. What exactly do they have left to concede, even if one were to convince ones self that this were anywhere near just or fair?

And can someone please explain why Palestinians are the problem when Jews and Arabs traded, talked, made agreements and generally coexisted in harmony up until the point where the Zionist experiment moved to the Middle East ~1945??

Palestinians want the right to return (and a state) to where they were expelled from in 1945-1948 in all of historic Palestine. Jews believe they have been refugees for 2000 years and want a Jewish state in all of Palestine. Palestinians have to concede that the European Jews aren't going back home, though that may be the fair solution. Jews must concede that Palestinian refugees have the right to return to their family homelands their national aspirations are as valid as Jews'. Since both groups want all of the land, they should all share one secular state to ensure the rights of all are respected.

The Jewish state idea. One might say that this is another Jewish concession in a secular state, but when keeping a Jewish majority trumps democracy and human rights and is maintained by policies resembling ethnic cleansing, you've got to ask yourself how fair, feasible, and legal this is. We're not talking about saving a native population from demise, here. We're talking about massive immigration of a people with a different culture on a mission to squeeze out the native (non-Jewish) population.


Oh well. Time to go back to the real world. Forget history, human rights, justice, etc. What UN? Amnesty Who? Still building settlements? Here's another $3 million.

When are those Palestinians going to demilitarize so there'll be peace?

***
While reading a book, The Lemon Tree, I was alerted to this response to "Barak's generous offer":
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15502

If Hilary were KKK, what would our reaction be?

If she got to be the Secretary of State, there would be outrage, and rightly so. She wouldn't make it that far, thankfully, in this country. But in Israel...

We, however, are much more forgiving when it comes to foreign terrorists. We apparently have lost our discretion. George W. Bush took it too far, but this same old pattern of marginalizing elected Palestinian leaders on the basis of terrorism while schmoozing with Israeli terrorists and racists is really sending the wrong message. Or perhaps we don't really want freedom and justice for Palestinians and Israelis. It is possible I have superimposed my own hope for the region on our government. Maybe peace isn't really the goal.

I have continued to see pictures of Clinton and Lieberman together this weekend and today and it makes me mad and at the same time hopeless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QzmC9-SLvs

This picture of the two of them together undermines our position on illegal (all) settlements. He's a settler and represents Netanyahu's government, who doesn't acknowledge the authority of any UN Resolution unless it is the part that created Israel or ones that condemn Arab states.

Having Clinton meet with Lieberman both personally as a settler and bigot and politically as a terrorist representative of his hard line government kind of makes our so-called strong language disappear in thin air. Does anyone know why we are recognizing the legitimacy of this guy, his agenda and beliefs? By talking and standing next to him, Clinton and Obama are essentially saying that we will talk the talk, but could care less if they walk the walk (as usual). Possibly most importantly, we are accepting his status and legitimacy of being able to represent Israel even though he doesn't live there (he is in violation of the very thing we are speaking against) and is illegally staking a claim to Palestinian land. We are talking to a terrorist, but won't include democratically elected Hamas. I guess it's ok to talk to Jewish or Western terrorists. Those Arab terrorists, or those Israel designates a terrorists, are the ones that are off limits. That picture of Lieberman and Clinton together says we are giving legitimacy to the horrible things Lieberman has said about Arabs. This is not the way toward peace. Justice is the only way, but this Netanyahu/Lieberman government only wants to secure Jewish majorities, hegemony, and superiority in every way possible. They can't be bothered with peace at a time when American constituencies are educating themselves on Israel's war crimes and are increasingly against settlements and occupation.

If we want peace, why are we talking to or standing anywhere near this guy? I mean, when we have found Palestinian leaders unacceptable, we have gone in search of ones we feel are more moderate, so why not do that with Israel?