the united states will not allow anything to change in that region when most of the rest of the world sides with the palestinians in that the 2 countries should have the pre 1967 borders.
Yes. That is all the Palestinians and their allies want. :roll:
I think Hitler had similar demands and folks kept giving in. It's a quality foreign policy. If we don't learn from history - we are doomed to repeat it.
no comparison between hitler and the palestinian people. thats just lazy thought.
what the palestinians are asking for is nothing less than theyre due. but they are continually denied and oppressed by a govt who carries a big stick and the weight of western guilt on its shoulders. it is partly because of the inaction against hitler that we have this situation. no one gave a fuck about the jews cause they were seen as the 'other' and now we are bending over backwards to accomodate them and creating another 'other'
You are right that the comparison is a bit of an overstatement. It is clearly meant for effect. But, the point is still the same.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
yes they do want the pre '67 war borders. their only condition for returning to negotiations is that israel stops building settlements. instead israel has doubled the settlement expansions in the face of international anger. have you not read a single thread on the topic? israel is building settlements full of israeli zionist hardliners on land that was stolen from the palestinians. they will not leave. they keep taking more and more land. of course people are going to get fucking irate after the US constantly vetoes anything critical of israel at the un.
the only thing hitler demanded territorywise was he wanted the land in austria to be annexed and it was. he stole the rest of the land via war. that demand is nothing like what the palestinians are demanding. they are demanding their land back and israel is insuring that they can not take it back by force via sanctions, blockades, denying foriegn aid, and taking $4 billion us dollars a year in military assistance. the palestinian = hitler comparision is one of the most obscene comparisons i have ever read on the internet...
As I said above - the comparison is CLEARLY hyperbole. But, that does not blunt the point that what they are saying and what they will be willing to settle for are not the same. And in that, there are similarities. I did not mean to also invoke the full atrocities Hitler did (though there is also the kernel of truth there as well - their supporter, Ahmadinejad is proof positive).
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
As I said above - the comparison is CLEARLY hyperbole. But, that does not blunt the point that what they are saying and what they will be willing to settle for are not the same. And in that, there are similarities. I did not mean to also invoke the full atrocities Hitler did (though there is also the kernel of truth there as well - their supporter, Ahmadinejad is proof positive).
no, how are the palestinian demands like the nazis demands? how are them wanting their land back anything like hitler annexing land in austria? it is the palestinians' own land. please explain to me and everyone here how they are even remotely similar? they want their land back and they want to be recognized as their own country and understandably so. not only was the land stolen, but the conditions that the palestinians are forced to live under are substandard. they can not even import building supplies. also, hamas controls only part of the palestinian land, not all of it as some would have you believe.
ahmadinajad is not palestinian. he is iranian. he has his own interests at heart. you can not characterize the entire arab world by one leader in that region....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
As I said above - the comparison is CLEARLY hyperbole. But, that does not blunt the point that what they are saying and what they will be willing to settle for are not the same. And in that, there are similarities. I did not mean to also invoke the full atrocities Hitler did (though there is also the kernel of truth there as well - their supporter, Ahmadinejad is proof positive).
no, how are the palestinian demands like the nazis demands? how are them wanting their land back anything like hitler annexing land in austria? it is the palestinians' own land. please explain to me and everyone here how they are even remotely similar? they want their land back and they want to be recognized as their own country and understandably so. not only was the land stolen, but the conditions that the palestinians are forced to live under are substandard. they can not even import building supplies. also, hamas controls only part of the palestinian land, not all of it as some would have you believe.
ahmadinajad is not palestinian. he is iranian. he has his own interests at heart. you can not characterize the entire arab world by one leader in that region....
If you don't get it, you don't get. I don't think there's much more to explain. Thanks.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
edson, did germany give back the land it took during world war II? yes or no?
No. We took it back (or stole it as some folks might view it). It's all in your point of view. Good point.
no, we took much of it back as we advanced on germany and liberated countries, but the rest of it was surrendered when germany surrendered and worked out with the peace treaties. this is not the case in the 1967 war, and this comparison to the israel palestine conflict is apples to oranges, because the palestinians have not gotten that land back and more land continues to be stolen in the form of settlement expansion.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
edson, did germany give back the land it took during world war II? yes or no?
No. We took it back (or stole it as some folks might view it). It's all in your point of view. Good point.
no, we took much of it back as we advanced on germany and liberated countries, but the rest of it was surrendered when germany surrendered and worked out with the peace treaties. this is not the case in the 1967 war, and this comparison to the israel palestine conflict is apples to oranges, because the palestinians have not gotten that land back and more land continues to be stolen in the form of settlement expansion.
Kind of funny that you didn't answer my post answering your question to explain. You are correct - that aspect of it is apples and oranges. The point (which I clarified above) is that I don't take the Palestinians at their word. That is a PR move to get the world on their side. Fortunately, there are countries like the US that recognize this for what it is. For either of us to sit here and pretend that we know all the goings on that lead the US to the position we've held (and remember, the last 2 Presidents of different parties have come into office saying they will not allow certain things regarding Israel and immediately changed course - why do you think that is?) is silly. There is so much more to that conflict than we know. However, it seems to me that even slightly below the overly simplistic surface of - well, all they want is this tiny piece of land, why not give it to them - it is clear there is more than meets the eye.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
the united states will not allow anything to change in that region when most of the rest of the world sides with the palestinians in that the 2 countries should have the pre 1967 borders.
Yes. That is all the Palestinians and their allies want. :roll:
I think Hitler had similar demands and folks kept giving in. It's a quality foreign policy. If we don't learn from history - we are doomed to repeat it.
Sadly, Israel has not learnt from History. The oppressed have become the oppressors.
I don't see the problem with being 'soft'... I'm from a country considered 'soft' and we've never been the victim of a terrorist attack...
its not about being 'soft'.. its about being just.
think about this:
had the colonies not won the american war of inependence, those highly valued heroes of history such as jefferson and washington probably would have been hung for treason against the crown... its a mighty thin line at times.. not to mention dependent on ones perspective.
that's what was fascinating about going to Viet Nam and learning about the Amverican War and not the Viet Nam war, visiting the American War Crimes Museum. etc. There is a much different perspective when you are the loser.
Yes. That is all the Palestinians and their allies want. :roll:
I think Hitler had similar demands and folks kept giving in. It's a quality foreign policy. If we don't learn from history - we are doomed to repeat it.
Really? Nazi Germany was under a military occupation was it? Hitler and the Nazi's demanded an end to the occupation of their land by a racist military power?
Interesting. So just who was occupying Nazi Germany?
The following is excerpted from a speech delivered September 22, 2011 in New York City at the conference “The Perils of Global Intolerance: The UN and Durban III,” sponsored by the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and the Hudson Institute.
The Arab-Israeli conflict, is not really a conflict, it is a war – a war of the Arabs against the Jews. In many ways, this conflict has been a conflict between narratives. We who strongly support Israel have done a poor job in formulating a narrative which will combat the story spun by the other side. We can do better.
The Durban conferences, the request for UN recognition of a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood, and the general animus in the Middle East and elsewhere toward Israel and toward the Jews, what are they really about? Is the Durban conference and the claim that Israel is a racist nation really about reforming the people of Israel and curing them of their racism?
I think their real interest is to situate the Palestinian people within a narrative of victimization. This is their ulterior goal: to see themselves and to have others see them as victims of colonialism, as victims of white supremacy.
Listen to their language; it is the language of colonial oppression. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas claims that Palestinians have been occupied for 63 years. The word oppressed is constant, exploited. In this, there is a poetic truth; like poetic license, in a poetic truth a writer will bend the rules in order to be more effective.
I will give you one example of a poetic truth that comes from my group, black Americans. We make the following claims: America is a deeply, intractably racist society. It may not be as conspicuous today as it was before. Nevertheless, it is still there today structurally and systemically, and it still holds us back and keeps us from achieving the American dream.
To contradict this claim, one can come forward with evidence to suggest that racism in America today is about 25th on the list of problems facing black Americans. One can recount one of the great untold stories of America, namely, the moral growth and evolution away from that problem. This is not to say that racism is completely extinguished, but that it no longer prevents the forward progress of any black in the United States. There is no evidence to suggest that it does. Yet, this claim is still the centerpiece of black American identity – this idea that we are victimized by a fundamentally, incurably racist society.
Poetic truths like that are marvelous because no facts and no reason can ever penetrate. Supporters of Israel are up against a poetic truth. We keep hitting it with all the facts. We keep hitting it with obvious logic and reason. And we are so obvious and conspicuously right that we assume it is going to have an impact and it never does.
Why not? These narratives, these poetic truths, are the source of their power. Focusing on the case of the Palestinians, who would they be if they were not victims of white supremacy? They would just be poor people in the Middle East. They would be backwards. They would be behind Israel in every way. So this narrative is the source of their power. It is the source of their money. Money comes from around the world. It is the source of their self-esteem. Without it, would they be able to compete with Israeli society? They would have to confront in themselves a certain inferiority with regard to Israel – as most other Arab nations would have to confront an inferiority in themselves and be responsible for it.
The idea that the problem is Israel, that the problem is the Jews, protects Palestinians from having to confront that inferiority or do anything about it or overcome it. The idea among Palestinians that they are victims means more to them than anything else. It is everything. It is the centerpiece of their very identity and it is the way they define themselves as human beings in the world. It is not an idle thing. Our facts and our reason are not going to penetrate easily that definition or make any progress.
The question is, how do they get away with a poetic truth, based on such an obvious series of falsehoods? One reason why they get away with it in the Middle East is that the Western world lacks the moral authority to call them on it. The Western world has not said “your real problem is inferiority. Your real problem is underdevelopment.” That has not been said, nor will ever be said – because the Western world was once colonial, was once racist, did practice white supremacy, and is so ashamed of itself and so vulnerable to those charges, that they are not going to say a word. They are not going to say what they really think and feel about what is so obvious about the circumstances among the Palestinians. So the poetic truth that Palestinians live by carries on.
International media also do not feel that they have the moral authority to report what they see. On the contrary, they feed this poetic truth and give it a kind of gravitas that it would never otherwise have.
Consequently, we need to develop a narrative that is not poetic, but literal and that is based on the truth. What would such a narrative look like?
It would begin with the presumption that the problem in the Middle East is not white supremacy but the end of white supremacy. After World War II, the empires began to contract, Britain went home, France went home, and the Arab world was left almost abandoned, and in a state of much greater freedom than they had ever known before.
Freedom is, however, a dicey thing to experience. When you come into freedom, you see yourself more accurately in the world. This is not unique to the Middle East. It was also the black American experience, when the Civil Rights bill was passed in 1964 and we came into much greater freedom. If you were a janitor in 1963 and you are still a janitor in 1965, you have all these freedoms and they are supported by the rule of law, then your actual experience of freedom is one of humiliation and one of shame. You see how far you have to go, how far behind you are, how little social capital you have with which to struggle forward. Even in freedom you see you are likely to be behind for a long time. In light of your inability to compete and your underdevelopment, freedom becomes something that you are very likely going to hate – because it carries this humiliation.
At that point formerly oppressed groups develop what I call bad faith. Bad faith is when you come into freedom, you are humiliated and you say, “Well you know the real truth is I am not free. Racism still exists. Zionism is my problem. The State of Israel is my problem. That is why I am so far behind and that is why I cannot get ahead.”
You develop a culture grounded in bad faith where you insist that you are less free than you really are. Islamic extremism is the stunning example of this phenomenon. “I have to go on jihad because I am fighting for my freedom.” Well you already have your freedom. You could stay home and study. You could do something constructive. But “No, I cannot do that because that makes me feel bad about myself.” So I live in a world of extremism and dictators.
This is not unique to the Middle East. In black America we had exactly the same thing. After we got the civil rights bill and this greater degree of freedom, then all of a sudden we hear the words “black power.” Then all of a sudden we have the Black Panthers. Then we have this militancy, this picking up of the gun because we feel bad about ourselves. We feel uncompetitive and this becomes our compensation. It is a common pattern among groups that felt abandoned when they became free.
This is the real story of the Palestinians and of the Middle East. They will never be reached by reason until they are somehow able to get beyond bad faith, to get beyond this sort of poetic truth that they are the perennial victims of an aggressive and racist Israeli nation.
Challenging their narrative with this explanation will enable us to be more effective. Until now, we have constantly used facts and reason and have not progressed.
Durban is a perfect example of bad faith because Durban is way of saying Israelis are racist and they are our problem. Durban really is a way of saying I am not free. I am still a victim. That is the real purpose of Durban. The Palestinian unilateral claim for recognition from the UN is also a perfect example of bad faith. If Palestinians proceed to the Security Council, they will very likely be turned down, and will respond by saying: “I told you we were victims. I told you the West is racist,” and so on. It refuels the same sad identity.
The irony and the tragedy of all this is that it keeps these groups in a bubble where they never encounter or deal with the truth. This becomes a second oppression for all these groups. They have been oppressed once, now they are free and yet they create a poetic truth that then oppresses them all over again.
How are you going to have good faith if you are raised being told that the society in which you are trying to compete is against you, is racist? It is always the Palestinians who suffer, and will continue to suffer, because all of their energy is going into the avoidance of their situation rather than into being challenged by it and facing into it.
The strength of our argument is that it gives the Palestinians a way out. Development is the way out. The West can help you to compete. It may take a little while. But the alternative is a cycle of violence and hatred and poetic truths about constant victimhood.
The pattern of bad faith in certain places comes to embrace a kind of ethic of death. As Osama bin Laden claimed: in the West, you are all afraid of death, but we love death. Why would you love death? If you are not afraid of death then you are aggrandized; all of a sudden you are a big man. You are not a little, recently freed, inferior. Instead, you are somebody who manages, who conquers his world, who has power. For terrorism is power, the power of the gun. This poetic truth leads to a terrible, inconceivable fascination with death and violence and guns and bombs. It consumes a whole part of the world every single day – rather than the boring things that good faith requires, like going to school, raising your children, inventing software for instance, making money.
This is the way the narrative must be retold.
Shelby Steele is the Robert J and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow, Hoover Institute, member of the Working Group on Islamism and the International Order
It's truly amazing to me that anyone can be this full of shit.
Though I do find it slightly amusing that all Israel's apologists have up their sleeve is endless amounts of bullshit of the type we see in this piece above.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Yes. That is all the Palestinians and their allies want. :roll:
I think Hitler had similar demands and folks kept giving in. It's a quality foreign policy. If we don't learn from history - we are doomed to repeat it.
Really? Nazi Germany was under a military occupation was it? Hitler and the Nazi's demanded an end to the occupation of their land by a racist military power?
Interesting. So just who was occupying Nazi Germany?
Wow! You must have been trying to miss the point.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Yes. That is all the Palestinians and their allies want. :roll:
I think Hitler had similar demands and folks kept giving in. It's a quality foreign policy. If we don't learn from history - we are doomed to repeat it.
Really? Nazi Germany was under a military occupation was it? Hitler and the Nazi's demanded an end to the occupation of their land by a racist military power?
Interesting. So just who was occupying Nazi Germany?
Wow! You must have been trying to miss the point.
I missed the point? You said Hitler had similar demands to the Palestinians. The Palestinians demand that Israel abide by international law and the will of the whole World - excluding the U.S - by withdrawing to the 1967 borders.
So now enlighten me as to your 'point'. How are the demands of the Palestinians along with the whole World, similar to any demands that Hitler made?
I missed the point? You said Hitler had similar demands to the Palestinians. The Palestinians demand that Israel abide by international law and the will of the whole World - excluding the U.S - by withdrawing to the 1967 borders.
So now enlighten me as to your 'point'. How are the demands of the Palestinians along with the whole World, similar to any demands that Hitler made?
No. What I said was - the way Palestine just wants this sliver of land is reminiscent of how Hitler started. I did not mean to suggest (and I think I cleared this up later in the thread) that there is a threat of gas chambers. However, if you don't believe the Palestinian leadership and its allies and friends want Israel wiped off the map, you are extremely naive.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
edson, did germany give back the land it took during world war II? yes or no?
No. We took it back (or stole it as some folks might view it). It's all in your point of view. Good point.
no, we took much of it back as we advanced on germany and liberated countries, but the rest of it was surrendered when germany surrendered and worked out with the peace treaties. this is not the case in the 1967 war, and this comparison to the israel palestine conflict is apples to oranges, because the palestinians have not gotten that land back and more land continues to be stolen in the form of settlement expansion.
Israel won the war. Germany lost it. Big difference. When you win, you get to keep the other guys stuff.
The whole world IS the US, Byrnzie. I know it's hard for haters like you to swallow, but we're BOSS, and always will be....
Your beliefs are old-world European anti-semitism, born out of jealousy for a highly intelligent group of people that have successfully navigated the pitfalls of European socialist's experiments...
June 5 1944 was as close as you ever got to a Jew-free world, Byrnzie.
And sorry, but there will never be a Palestine. Ever. (IMO)
The whole world IS the US, Byrnzie. I know it's hard for haters like you to swallow, but we're BOSS, and always will be....
Your beliefs are old-world European anti-semitism, born out of jealousy for a highly intelligent group of people that have successfully navigated the pitfalls of European socialist's experiments...
June 5 1944 was as close as you ever got to a Jew-free world, Byrnzie.
And sorry, but there will never be a Palestine. Ever. (IMO)
USA USA!!
:roll: :roll:
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
..Bulldozers flanked by Israeli troops razed four Palestinian homes near the ancient city of Jericho on Tuesday, with Israel saying they endangered a nearby archaeological site.
Ammar Fakhuri, the owner of one of the buildings, told AFP it was the third time that Israel had demolished properties he owned.
"They did it twice in the Old City of Jerusalem in 2004 and 2010 and now here," he said, adding that Tuesday's demolition was carried out by two bulldozers with an army escort.
A spokesman for the department within the Israeli defence ministry which administers the occupied West Bank, said the homes were built on government-owned land which was to be used by the nearby settlement of Vered Yericho.
The four structures were built "without permits on state-owned land designated for agriculture," civil administration spokesman Guy Inbar said.
They were built "near an archaeological site with the risk of endangering it," he added.
Inbar said the four structures were uninhabited and that the house owners, who came from east Jerusalem, had been warned to stop building, but had refused.
In August, a report by the UN agency for Palestinian refugees said that Israeli demolitions in the West Bank rose "alarmingly" in the first half of 2011, with 356 structures demolished in the first six months of this year, compared with 431 for the whole of 2010.
It said 700 people had been displaced by the demolitions in the first six months of 2011, compared with 594 in the whole of 2010.
UNRWA said the demolitions took place in Area C, the 60 percent of the West Bank which is designated as under full Israeli control, in which Israel has designated just one percent of land for Palestinian development.
Israel says its demolitions of homes are based only on whether the structures in question have the appropriate permits.
But the agency said the demolitions seemed to be concentrated in areas "targeted for settlement expansion."..
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
A spokesman said the homes were built on government-owned land.
The four structures were built "without permits on state-owned land designated for agriculture,"
They were built "near an archaeological site with the risk of endangering it,"
...the four structures were uninhabited and that the house owners had been warned to stop building, but had refused.
Again - this is all based on your perspective. I realize I just plucked certain quotes out, so it's slanted the way I want to see it. But, that's really no different than the writer ignoring these facts.
It seems we can slant this to look like they violated law.
Again, as I've said before - I don't pretend to know all the goings on a third of the globe away. But, I do know that copying what a particular writer opines (and this is an OPINION piece and not a NEWS piece) is not proof of your case.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Comments
You are right that the comparison is a bit of an overstatement. It is clearly meant for effect. But, the point is still the same.
As I said above - the comparison is CLEARLY hyperbole. But, that does not blunt the point that what they are saying and what they will be willing to settle for are not the same. And in that, there are similarities. I did not mean to also invoke the full atrocities Hitler did (though there is also the kernel of truth there as well - their supporter, Ahmadinejad is proof positive).
ahmadinajad is not palestinian. he is iranian. he has his own interests at heart. you can not characterize the entire arab world by one leader in that region....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
If you don't get it, you don't get. I don't think there's much more to explain. Thanks.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I don't get it and i would like you to explain. When you have the time, there's no rush i'm here everyday.
I will say it as clearly as possible (though I thought I actually said it).
You take these folks at their word (today).
I do not.
We will agree to disagree. We are not changing each other's mind.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
No. We took it back (or stole it as some folks might view it). It's all in your point of view. Good point.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Kind of funny that you didn't answer my post answering your question to explain. You are correct - that aspect of it is apples and oranges. The point (which I clarified above) is that I don't take the Palestinians at their word. That is a PR move to get the world on their side. Fortunately, there are countries like the US that recognize this for what it is. For either of us to sit here and pretend that we know all the goings on that lead the US to the position we've held (and remember, the last 2 Presidents of different parties have come into office saying they will not allow certain things regarding Israel and immediately changed course - why do you think that is?) is silly. There is so much more to that conflict than we know. However, it seems to me that even slightly below the overly simplistic surface of - well, all they want is this tiny piece of land, why not give it to them - it is clear there is more than meets the eye.
that's what was fascinating about going to Viet Nam and learning about the Amverican War and not the Viet Nam war, visiting the American War Crimes Museum. etc. There is a much different perspective when you are the loser.
Really? Nazi Germany was under a military occupation was it? Hitler and the Nazi's demanded an end to the occupation of their land by a racist military power?
Interesting. So just who was occupying Nazi Germany?
It's truly amazing to me that anyone can be this full of shit.
Though I do find it slightly amusing that all Israel's apologists have up their sleeve is endless amounts of bullshit of the type we see in this piece above.
It's someone who supports the holocaust.
I didn't characterize the holocaust as anything.
If you're going to try and pretend to be clever then you'll need to do better than this.
fixed that right up for ya Binaural.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Wow! You must have been trying to miss the point.
I missed the point? You said Hitler had similar demands to the Palestinians. The Palestinians demand that Israel abide by international law and the will of the whole World - excluding the U.S - by withdrawing to the 1967 borders.
So now enlighten me as to your 'point'. How are the demands of the Palestinians along with the whole World, similar to any demands that Hitler made?
No. What I said was - the way Palestine just wants this sliver of land is reminiscent of how Hitler started. I did not mean to suggest (and I think I cleared this up later in the thread) that there is a threat of gas chambers. However, if you don't believe the Palestinian leadership and its allies and friends want Israel wiped off the map, you are extremely naive.
Israel won the war. Germany lost it. Big difference. When you win, you get to keep the other guys stuff.
Yes you did. A slip that you probably didn't mean to make, and you are running from it now.
BYRNZIE, are you a Holocaust denier?
Your beliefs are old-world European anti-semitism, born out of jealousy for a highly intelligent group of people that have successfully navigated the pitfalls of European socialist's experiments...
June 5 1944 was as close as you ever got to a Jew-free world, Byrnzie.
And sorry, but there will never be a Palestine. Ever. (IMO)
:roll: :roll:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Israel demolishes Palestinian homes near Jericho
http://news.yahoo.com/israel-demolishes ... 56259.html
..Bulldozers flanked by Israeli troops razed four Palestinian homes near the ancient city of Jericho on Tuesday, with Israel saying they endangered a nearby archaeological site.
Ammar Fakhuri, the owner of one of the buildings, told AFP it was the third time that Israel had demolished properties he owned.
"They did it twice in the Old City of Jerusalem in 2004 and 2010 and now here," he said, adding that Tuesday's demolition was carried out by two bulldozers with an army escort.
A spokesman for the department within the Israeli defence ministry which administers the occupied West Bank, said the homes were built on government-owned land which was to be used by the nearby settlement of Vered Yericho.
The four structures were built "without permits on state-owned land designated for agriculture," civil administration spokesman Guy Inbar said.
They were built "near an archaeological site with the risk of endangering it," he added.
Inbar said the four structures were uninhabited and that the house owners, who came from east Jerusalem, had been warned to stop building, but had refused.
In August, a report by the UN agency for Palestinian refugees said that Israeli demolitions in the West Bank rose "alarmingly" in the first half of 2011, with 356 structures demolished in the first six months of this year, compared with 431 for the whole of 2010.
It said 700 people had been displaced by the demolitions in the first six months of 2011, compared with 594 in the whole of 2010.
UNRWA said the demolitions took place in Area C, the 60 percent of the West Bank which is designated as under full Israeli control, in which Israel has designated just one percent of land for Palestinian development.
Israel says its demolitions of homes are based only on whether the structures in question have the appropriate permits.
But the agency said the demolitions seemed to be concentrated in areas "targeted for settlement expansion."..
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I have to admit
Again - this is all based on your perspective. I realize I just plucked certain quotes out, so it's slanted the way I want to see it. But, that's really no different than the writer ignoring these facts.
It seems we can slant this to look like they violated law.
Again, as I've said before - I don't pretend to know all the goings on a third of the globe away. But, I do know that copying what a particular writer opines (and this is an OPINION piece and not a NEWS piece) is not proof of your case.