That being said, you are undeniably the most vocal poster on this subject. I find it interesting that you have gained your experience from cyber-stine.
That, and reading books, and watching documentaries, and talking with people, attending demonstrations, and corresponding on the subject with my local MP in England.
Out of curiosity, how many of those books, documentaries, people spoken with, demonstrations, etc. held roughly the views on Israel that you currently hold?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
That being said, you are undeniably the most vocal poster on this subject. I find it interesting that you have gained your experience from cyber-stine.
That, and reading books, and watching documentaries, and talking with people, attending demonstrations, and corresponding on the subject with my local MP in England.
Out of curiosity, how many of those books, documentaries, people spoken with, demonstrations, etc. held roughly the views on Israel that you currently hold?
Most of what I've read have been reports by organizations such as Amnesty, the U.N, Human Rights Watch, and B'tselem. Strangely, they mostly all hold the same views on Israel as me - that the occupation is illegal and that Israel wantonly and consistently commits crimes against humanity.
Maybe you think I should read the words of Jeffrey Goldberg, Allan Dershowitz, and IDF spokesperson Mark Regev instead? A bunch of lying, self-serving weasels.
I think that when you live inside an echo chamber you can't really claim to have perspective on an issue. I also think it's interesting how you characterize people who hold opinions that differ from your own. You seem very open-minded.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
I think that when you live inside an echo chamber you can't really claim to have perspective on an issue. I also think it's interesting how you characterize people who hold opinions that differ from your own. You seem very open-minded.
Pot - kettle - black
I seem to remember numerous occasions where you've dismissed Norman Finkelstein (just yesterday, in fact), and have attempted to paint Michael Neumann as a racist anti-Semite. And of course the International Court of Justice just 'got it wrong'.
I've definitely never called Michael Neumann a racist or an anti-semite. I know you think all of us who disagree with you on Israel like to fling around that accusation with careless abandon, but you know for a fact that I'm a bit more careful when it comes to that particular accusation.
I fail to see the irony here. Yes, there are people I disagree with. There are even people I disagree with so much that I resist giving their opinions a fair shake, which I admit is a minor fault. I'm not saying that you can't disagree with people. I'm just saying that someone who labels everyone who disagrees with them "a bunch of lying, self-serving weasels" is probably not a paragon of objectivity or open-mindedness.
As for pot-kettle-black, I don't think the author of "lying, self-serving weasels" should be accusing others of objectionably dismissing others' opinions.
Also, you still haven't really answered my question.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Palestinian hopes for two states 'not possible', says Israeli minister Bennett
Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett dismisses two-state solution as 'hopeless' and urges swift annexation of West Bank's Area C
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 June 2013
'...Naftali Bennett, who was appointed Israel's economics and trade minister following a strong showing in January's election, told a conference of settlers in Jerusalem that Israel should urgently annex large tracts of the West Bank currently under its control.
Referring to the idea of a Palestinian state, Bennett said: "Never have so many people invested so much energy in something that is hopeless."
The challenge, he added, was "how do we move forward from here, knowing that a Palestinian state within Israel is not possible ... We have to move from solving the problem to living with the problem." Annexation of "Area C", the 62% of the West Bank under total Israeli control, should proceed "as quickly as possible".
Bennett said: "The most important thing in the land of Israel is to build, build, build. It's important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere.
"This land has been ours for 3,000 years. There was never a Palestinian state here and we were never occupiers. The house is ours and we are residents here, not the occupiers."
so continuing the settlement expansion will damage the relationship between the netherlands and israel, yet sanctions to prevent such settlement expansion are off the table....what the fuck???
The Netherlands will veto EU sanctions over Israeli settlements: minister
The Netherlands will veto any moves by the European Union to impose sanctions if Israel presses ahead with building settlements on disputed territory east of Jerusalem, foreign minister Frans Timmermans is quoted as saying by news agency ANP.
Timmermans said sanctions are not 'currently on the agenda'. The minister met with Israeli and Palestinian representatives over the past two days as part of a visit to the Middle East.
The imposition of sanctions would hinder efforts to restart the peace talks and that should be prevented, Timmermans said, adding that it is of great importance to get US secretary of state John Kerry round the table with Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
'President Obama's initiative is not only the best, but the only option to get the peace process moving again,' he said in a briefing on Wednesday.
Nevertheless, building on the territory, known as E1, would negatively influence the bilateral relationship between the Netherlands and Israel, the minister said.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
About time. Hopefully they'll also go ahead with labelling all goods originating from the Occupied Territories so that people can choose to stop indirectly giving money to the thieving, racist bastards.
'Earthquake' directive will prohibit EU states from signing deals with Israel unless settlement exclusion clause is included
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 July 2013
The European Union has banned its 28 member states from signing agreements with Israel without an explicit exclusion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank or East Jerusalem, in a directive described by an Israeli official as an "earthquake".
The EU guidelines, adopted on 30 June, will prohibit the issuing of grants, funding, prizes or scholarships unless a settlement exclusion clause is included. Israeli institutions and bodies situated across the pre-1967 Green Line will be automatically ineligible.
The Israeli government will be required to state in any future agreements with the EU that settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are outside the state of Israel.
The binding directive, part of the 2014-20 financial framework, covers all areas of co-operation between the EU and Israel, including economics, science, culture, sports and academia. It does not cover trade, such as produce and goods originating in settlements.
An EU statement said the guidelines "set out the territorial limitations under which the commission will award EU support to Israeli entities … Concern has been expressed in Europe that Israeli entities in the occupied territories could benefit from EU support. The purpose of these guidelines is to make a distinction between the state of Israel and the occupied territories when it comes to EU support."
The move follows a decision by EU foreign ministers last December that "all agreements between the state of Israel and the EU must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967". All Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.
"The EU is trying to force Israel to adopt its position on settlements," said an Israeli official. "Israel will have to explicitly express in writing the EU's position. We don't believe the EU's position should be forced down our throats like geese." He said it was impossible for Israel to agree to such a demand.
The directive would affect "all realms of co-operation", he added, and would result in "rising tension and increased friction" and "create a lot of bad blood".
Another Israeli official told Haaretz, which disclosed the new guidelines, the move was an "earthquake" which unprecedentedly turns "understandings and quiet agreements that the [EU] does not work beyond the Green Line" into "formal, binding policy".
...Israel has become increasingly concerned about the EU adopting a more robust stance against settlements. Some member states are pressing for an EU-wide policy of labelling produce and goods originating in settlements to allow consumers to make informed choices on purchases.
[..]minister, Silvan Shalom, said: "Once again, Europe has demonstrated just how detached it is, how it can't really be a full partner to the negotiations."
About time. Hopefully they'll also go ahead with labelling all goods originating from the Occupied Territories so that people can choose to stop indirectly giving money to the thieving, racist bastards.
'Earthquake' directive will prohibit EU states from signing deals with Israel unless settlement exclusion clause is included
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 July 2013
The European Union has banned its 28 member states from signing agreements with Israel without an explicit exclusion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank or East Jerusalem, in a directive described by an Israeli official as an "earthquake".
The EU guidelines, adopted on 30 June, will prohibit the issuing of grants, funding, prizes or scholarships unless a settlement exclusion clause is included. Israeli institutions and bodies situated across the pre-1967 Green Line will be automatically ineligible.
The Israeli government will be required to state in any future agreements with the EU that settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are outside the state of Israel.
The binding directive, part of the 2014-20 financial framework, covers all areas of co-operation between the EU and Israel, including economics, science, culture, sports and academia. It does not cover trade, such as produce and goods originating in settlements.
An EU statement said the guidelines "set out the territorial limitations under which the commission will award EU support to Israeli entities … Concern has been expressed in Europe that Israeli entities in the occupied territories could benefit from EU support. The purpose of these guidelines is to make a distinction between the state of Israel and the occupied territories when it comes to EU support."
The move follows a decision by EU foreign ministers last December that "all agreements between the state of Israel and the EU must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967". All Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.
"The EU is trying to force Israel to adopt its position on settlements," said an Israeli official. "Israel will have to explicitly express in writing the EU's position. We don't believe the EU's position should be forced down our throats like geese." He said it was impossible for Israel to agree to such a demand.
The directive would affect "all realms of co-operation", he added, and would result in "rising tension and increased friction" and "create a lot of bad blood".
Another Israeli official told Haaretz, which disclosed the new guidelines, the move was an "earthquake" which unprecedentedly turns "understandings and quiet agreements that the [EU] does not work beyond the Green Line" into "formal, binding policy".
...Israel has become increasingly concerned about the EU adopting a more robust stance against settlements. Some member states are pressing for an EU-wide policy of labelling produce and goods originating in settlements to allow consumers to make informed choices on purchases.
[..]minister, Silvan Shalom, said: "Once again, Europe has demonstrated just how detached it is, how it can't really be a full partner to the negotiations."
Business as usual then for Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign. Why would a precondition of these so-called 'peace-talks' be that they last for a year? If that's not a giveaway as to the true purpose of these so-called 'peace-talks' then I don't know what is.
'...Israel's former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, wrote on Facebook that there was "no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, at least not in the coming years, and what's possible and important to do is conflict-management".
Naftali Bennett, economics minister, insisted construction on Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem would continue, regardless of talks.
...Israel is pushing for negotiations to last up to a year, fuelling concern among critics who believe Netanyahu is seeking to give the appearance of diplomatic co-operation while stalling for as long as possible on any outcome.
'...Eight hundred of the new homes will be built in colonies across the pre-1967 Green Line in Jerusalem – the part of the city the Palestinians want as the capital of their future state. Construction could take two years. All settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal under international law.
"No country receives orders about where it can and cannot build from other countries," said Ariel, a former head of the settlers' council, Yesha, But in an indication of bitter divisions within the Israeli cabinet, finance minister Yair Lapid described the move as a "big mistake" and said it was "not conducive for the peace process".
Palestinian leaders warned that continued settlement expansion could scupper the talks. Negotiator Mohammad Shtayyeh said it was "clear that the Israeli government is deliberately attempting to sabotage US and international efforts to resume negotiations by approving more settlement units three days before the first Palestinian-Israeli meeting". He added: "Israel continues to use peace negotiations as a smokescreen for more settlement construction."
'...Eight hundred of the new homes will be built in colonies across the pre-1967 Green Line in Jerusalem – the part of the city the Palestinians want as the capital of their future state. Construction could take two years. All settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal under international law.
"No country receives orders about where it can and cannot build from other countries," said Ariel, a former head of the settlers' council, Yesha, But in an indication of bitter divisions within the Israeli cabinet, finance minister Yair Lapid described the move as a "big mistake" and said it was "not conducive for the peace process".
Palestinian leaders warned that continued settlement expansion could scupper the talks. Negotiator Mohammad Shtayyeh said it was "clear that the Israeli government is deliberately attempting to sabotage US and international efforts to resume negotiations by approving more settlement units three days before the first Palestinian-Israeli meeting". He added: "Israel continues to use peace negotiations as a smokescreen for more settlement construction."
I swear its fucken ground hog day with Israel every time talks are about to start. And as usual, nothing ever comes from these talks.
I swear its fucken ground hog day with Israel every time talks are about to start. And as usual, nothing ever comes from these talks.
And now you're a prophet? You already know the outcome of talks that haven't even really begun yet? How about some optimism. The fact that they're even going to get back to talking to each other is a step in the right direction all by itself.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
israel deliberately inflames tensions in attempt to sabotage the peace talks.
again.
i guess they did it this time so they can blame the certain failure on the palestinians when they pull out of the talks as a direct result of the settlement expansion.
always have to find a way to play the victim.
it is fucking groundhog day.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I swear its fucken ground hog day with Israel every time talks are about to start. And as usual, nothing ever comes from these talks.
And now you're a prophet? You already know the outcome of talks that haven't even really begun yet? How about some optimism. The fact that they're even going to get back to talking to each other is a step in the right direction all by itself.
Ya I do and so do you. EVERYONE already knows ZERO is gonna come from these talks. Don't fool yourself into believing anything will come from them. As for optimism, I ran out of it after the hundredth so-called talks took place.
Hundreds of talks? By my count this will be only the third time the two sides have actually sat down to try to negotiate a final status agreement (the first two were Camp David/Taba and the talks between Abbas and Olmert in '08-'09).
As for intentionally undermining the talks before they begin...I agree that this latest settlement announcement is counterproductive, but I'm curious how you explain Israel's agreeing to release 100+ prisoners considered to be terrorists by Israelis despite the widespread unpopularity of doing so among the Israeli public?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Hundreds of talks? By my count this will be only the third time the two sides have actually sat down to try to negotiate a final status agreement (the first two were Camp David/Taba and the talks between Abbas and Olmert in '08-'09).
As for intentionally undermining the talks before they begin...I agree that this latest settlement announcement is counterproductive, but I'm curious how you explain Israel's agreeing to release 100+ prisoners considered to be terrorists by Israelis despite the widespread unpopularity of doing so among the Israeli public?
A-To me, it seems like hundreds of talks. I was being sarcastic and
B-You know for sure that if these 100+ "prisoners" were actually "terrorists" Israel WOULDN'T be releasing them. Lets be real here.
You're right, "terrorist" couldn't possibly describe any of these guys. :roll: From today's Haaretz:
Israel has published the names of 26 Palestinian prisoners who are to be released later this week as part of a U.S.-brokered deal that led to a resumption of Mideast negotiations.
Twenty-one in the group were convicted of killing Israelis or suspected Palestinian collaborators, while others were involved in attempted murder or kidnapping. Most have already served 20 years.
Among the 26 prisoners Israel will release on Tuesday are three members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, two from Hamas and one from the Islamic Jihad. Fifteen are residents of the Gaza Strip and will be released there; four come from Nablus, another four from Jenin, one from Bethlehem and one from Hebron.
Some of the convicted killers on the list are Salah Ahmed Ibrahim Mughdad who in the 1990s murdered 70-year-old Israel Tenenbaum; Samir Abdel Na'anish, convicted for the 1989 murder of Israeli soldier Benyamin Meisner in Nablus; Mahmoud Bad Almagid Saulha and Fauza Ahmed Husseini Saulha from Nablus who as minors stabbed to death teenager Baruch Heizler at a bus station.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Israel’s Supreme Court heard petitions on Sunday by families of some of the victims who opposed the release of convicted Palestinians. Outside the courthouse, relatives of the victims held a small, quiet vigil.
One of them was Gila Molcho, the sister of Ian Feinberg, an Israeli lawyer who was bludgeoned to death by a Palestinian man wielding an ax in Gaza in 1993 while he was working on a project there. Ms. Molcho held a framed portrait of her brother, who was 30.
“Don’t let them come home as heroes,” she said of the prisoners to be released. “We will be left holding the pictures.” Weeping, she added, “They are terrorists, not soldiers.”
Abdel Aal Said Ouda Yusef, jailed since 1994 for throwing explosives and being an accessory to the killing of Mr. Feinberg and another man, appeared on the list of those to be released this week.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Israel’s Supreme Court heard petitions on Sunday by families of some of the victims who opposed the release of convicted Palestinians. Outside the courthouse, relatives of the victims held a small, quiet vigil.
One of them was Gila Molcho, the sister of Ian Feinberg, an Israeli lawyer who was bludgeoned to death by a Palestinian man wielding an ax in Gaza in 1993 while he was working on a project there. Ms. Molcho held a framed portrait of her brother, who was 30.
“Don’t let them come home as heroes,” she said of the prisoners to be released. “We will be left holding the pictures.” Weeping, she added, “They are terrorists, not soldiers.”
Abdel Aal Said Ouda Yusef, jailed since 1994 for throwing explosives and being an accessory to the killing of Mr. Feinberg and another man, appeared on the list of those to be released this week.
And yet the so-called leaders of Israel don't seem to make that list year after year..... :fp:
I don't know about always, but for this one, many thanks.
In all seriousness, I agree that the settlement announcement is messed up. I'm just saying that in light of the prisoner release, what I'm seeing is mixed signals from the Israelis. What that says to me is that the Israeli government is split over the talks. The prisoner release has to come from the very top. Given the unpopularity of releasing terrorists, Netanyahu's going to take a political hit for doing so. He wouldn't take that hit for no reason. So it seems to me that Netanyahu really does want to get these talks off the ground. I also don't think he'd take the pain from the prisoner release just for talks that he had no intention of allowing to go anywhere. Now, I have no idea how far he's willing to go for a deal, but however far it is is too far for the hard-right wing of his government. They're obviously the ones pushing the settlement agenda, and they're probably hoping that this announcement makes it harder for the talks to get traction. My guess is that Netanyahu is letting them get away with the announcement because it buys him a little more room to maneuver politically on his right flank and because he doesn't want to enter negotiations with the Palestinians looking weak having just agreed to release prisoners just so he could get to the negotiating table in the first place. On top of that, he's feeling the pressure from the new EU regulations on settlement products, which the Palestinians know. My guess is that the settlement announcement is Netanyahu's way of reminding the Palestinians of what's at stake and what cards he's holding before they start talking.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
As for intentionally undermining the talks before they begin...I agree that this latest settlement announcement is counterproductive, but I'm curious how you explain Israel's agreeing to release 100+ prisoners considered to be terrorists by Israelis despite the widespread unpopularity of doing so among the Israeli public?
PR. Dog n pony show.
I tried to look up details about the cases listed above, and see if they constituted a true definition of terrorism or not, because Israel doesn't have a leg to stand on in making that claim. I couldn't find any articles about the crimes themselves, mostly links screaming 'terror' regarding the prisoner release, for the first five pages or so of results. I'm guessing, as always, Israel/hasbara are playing fast and loose with the definition of that word.
Going by most of those descriptions, every murderer in the world could be called a terrorist. I could be wrong, but most of these crimes sound like typical thuggery, not terrorism, despite which group the perp may be affiliated with. The majority of these crimes don't sound racially motivated, let alone politically. Also, many of these prisoners have already served 20+ years...so essentially, Israel is granting these prisoners the same rights it grants it's own citizens - a 30 year sentence with the possibility of a third deducted by parole....of course the difference being, many arabs being released go from prison to prison-like conditions in the OPT.
This PR stunt also attempts to portray an image of mercy at a time Israel's justice minister pushes a bill to allow the force-feeding of prisoners who are on hunger strikes to protest unlawful incarceration and torture.
As for your last post.....it's sickening how israel continues to in-fight over just how hard they should fuck the palestinians; pulling out isn't even an option.
As for intentionally undermining the talks before they begin...I agree that this latest settlement announcement is counterproductive, but I'm curious how you explain Israel's agreeing to release 100+ prisoners considered to be terrorists by Israelis despite the widespread unpopularity of doing so among the Israeli public?
PR. Dog n pony show.
I tried to look up details about the cases listed above, and see if they constituted a true definition of terrorism or not, because Israel doesn't have a leg to stand on in making that claim. I couldn't find any articles about the crimes themselves, mostly links screaming 'terror' regarding the prisoner release, for the first five pages or so of results. I'm guessing, as always, Israel/hasbara are playing fast and loose with the definition of that word.
Going by most of those descriptions, every murderer in the world could be called a terrorist. I could be wrong, but most of these crimes sound like typical thuggery, not terrorism, despite which group the perp may be affiliated with. The majority of these crimes don't sound racially motivated, let alone politically. Also, many of these prisoners have already served 20+ years...so essentially, Israel is granting these prisoners the same rights it grants it's own citizens - a 30 year sentence with the possibility of a third deducted by parole....of course the difference being, many arabs being released go from prison to prison-like conditions in the OPT.
This PR stunt also attempts to portray an image of mercy at a time Israel's justice minister pushes a bill to allow the force-feeding of prisoners who are on hunger strikes to protest unlawful incarceration and torture.
As for your last post.....it's sickening how israel continues to in-fight over just how hard they should fuck the palestinians; pulling out isn't even an option.
Drowned, you're missing the point. Call them murderers if you want. What's significant is that this is actually a big deal for the Israelis. This is not something they would do lightly just for a bit of PR. Besides, the PR on this is terrible with the group that matters most to the Israeli government, namely the people that elect them. They wouldn't be doing this just to get a momentary PR boost among an international constituency that they don't really care all that much about.
As for pulling out, that's what these talks are about. A final status deal means Israel pulls out and the Palestinians get a state. It amazes me that you can't step back and see the forest for the trees. What's important isn't that there are right-wingers in the Israeli government that don't want a deal. What's important is that the ultimate decisionmakers in the Israeli government want to get to the table badly enough to risk taking some major political pain to get there.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
What's important is that the ultimate decisionmakers in the Israeli government want to get to the table badly enough to risk taking some major political pain to get there.
...Israel is pushing for negotiations to last up to a year, fuelling concern among critics who believe Netanyahu is seeking to give the appearance of diplomatic co-operation while stalling for as long as possible on any outcome.
Palestinian hopes for two states 'not possible', says Israeli minister Bennett
Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett dismisses two-state solution as 'hopeless' and urges swift annexation of West Bank's Area C
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 June 2013
'...Naftali Bennett, who was appointed Israel's economics and trade minister following a strong showing in January's election, told a conference of settlers in Jerusalem that Israel should urgently annex large tracts of the West Bank currently under its control.
Referring to the idea of a Palestinian state, Bennett said: "Never have so many people invested so much energy in something that is hopeless."
The challenge, he added, was "how do we move forward from here, knowing that a Palestinian state within Israel is not possible ... We have to move from solving the problem to living with the problem." Annexation of "Area C", the 62% of the West Bank under total Israeli control, should proceed "as quickly as possible".
Bennett said: "The most important thing in the land of Israel is to build, build, build. It's important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere.
"This land has been ours for 3,000 years. There was never a Palestinian state here and we were never occupiers. The house is ours and we are residents here, not the occupiers."
Drowned, you're missing the point. Call them murderers if you want. What's significant is that this is actually a big deal for the Israelis. This is not something they would do lightly just for a bit of PR. Besides, the PR on this is terrible with the group that matters most to the Israeli government, namely the people that elect them. They wouldn't be doing this just to get a momentary PR boost among an international constituency that they don't really care all that much about.
As for pulling out, that's what these talks are about. A final status deal means Israel pulls out and the Palestinians get a state. It amazes me that you can't step back and see the forest for the trees. What's important isn't that there are right-wingers in the Israeli government that don't want a deal. What's important is that the ultimate decisionmakers in the Israeli government want to get to the table badly enough to risk taking some major political pain to get there.
I don't feel that I'm missing any point, we simply disagree...I don't think the ultimate decision makers want to get back to the table at all. I think they're stalling and stealing, same as they have been for decades.
You say in one post that the EU settlement regulations are putting pressure on Netanyahu and may be influencing his decisions....but in this post they don't care about the international constituency? Which is it?
What's important is that the ultimate decisionmakers in the Israeli government want to get to the table badly enough to risk taking some major political pain to get there.
...Israel is pushing for negotiations to last up to a year, fuelling concern among critics who believe Netanyahu is seeking to give the appearance of diplomatic co-operation while stalling for as long as possible on any outcome.
Palestinian hopes for two states 'not possible', says Israeli minister Bennett
Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett dismisses two-state solution as 'hopeless' and urges swift annexation of West Bank's Area C
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 June 2013
'...Naftali Bennett, who was appointed Israel's economics and trade minister following a strong showing in January's election, told a conference of settlers in Jerusalem that Israel should urgently annex large tracts of the West Bank currently under its control.
Referring to the idea of a Palestinian state, Bennett said: "Never have so many people invested so much energy in something that is hopeless."
The challenge, he added, was "how do we move forward from here, knowing that a Palestinian state within Israel is not possible ... We have to move from solving the problem to living with the problem." Annexation of "Area C", the 62% of the West Bank under total Israeli control, should proceed "as quickly as possible".
Bennett said: "The most important thing in the land of Israel is to build, build, build. It's important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere.
"This land has been ours for 3,000 years. There was never a Palestinian state here and we were never occupiers. The house is ours and we are residents here, not the occupiers."
Ah, this guy is a real peach.
This was just a few weeks ago:
Here is the Jerusalem Post's report on the rightwing leader's comments during a Cabinet meeting about releasing Palestinian prisoners:
According to Yediot Aharonot, Bennett said, “If you catch terrorists, you simply have to kill them.”
National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror reportedly responded by saying that “this is not legal.”
Bennett then allegedly retorted, “I have killed lots of Arabs in my life – and there is no problem with that.”
Comments
Out of curiosity, how many of those books, documentaries, people spoken with, demonstrations, etc. held roughly the views on Israel that you currently hold?
Most of what I've read have been reports by organizations such as Amnesty, the U.N, Human Rights Watch, and B'tselem. Strangely, they mostly all hold the same views on Israel as me - that the occupation is illegal and that Israel wantonly and consistently commits crimes against humanity.
Maybe you think I should read the words of Jeffrey Goldberg, Allan Dershowitz, and IDF spokesperson Mark Regev instead? A bunch of lying, self-serving weasels.
Pot - kettle - black
I seem to remember numerous occasions where you've dismissed Norman Finkelstein (just yesterday, in fact), and have attempted to paint Michael Neumann as a racist anti-Semite. And of course the International Court of Justice just 'got it wrong'.
Really, the irony here is off the scale.
I fail to see the irony here. Yes, there are people I disagree with. There are even people I disagree with so much that I resist giving their opinions a fair shake, which I admit is a minor fault. I'm not saying that you can't disagree with people. I'm just saying that someone who labels everyone who disagrees with them "a bunch of lying, self-serving weasels" is probably not a paragon of objectivity or open-mindedness.
As for pot-kettle-black, I don't think the author of "lying, self-serving weasels" should be accusing others of objectionably dismissing others' opinions.
Also, you still haven't really answered my question.
Fair enough, it was another poster: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=185395&p=4308806&hilit=Michael+Neumann#p4308806
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... n-hopeless
Palestinian hopes for two states 'not possible', says Israeli minister Bennett
Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett dismisses two-state solution as 'hopeless' and urges swift annexation of West Bank's Area C
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 June 2013
'...Naftali Bennett, who was appointed Israel's economics and trade minister following a strong showing in January's election, told a conference of settlers in Jerusalem that Israel should urgently annex large tracts of the West Bank currently under its control.
Referring to the idea of a Palestinian state, Bennett said: "Never have so many people invested so much energy in something that is hopeless."
The challenge, he added, was "how do we move forward from here, knowing that a Palestinian state within Israel is not possible ... We have to move from solving the problem to living with the problem." Annexation of "Area C", the 62% of the West Bank under total Israeli control, should proceed "as quickly as possible".
Bennett said: "The most important thing in the land of Israel is to build, build, build. It's important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere.
"This land has been ours for 3,000 years. There was never a Palestinian state here and we were never occupiers. The house is ours and we are residents here, not the occupiers."
The Netherlands will veto EU sanctions over Israeli settlements: minister
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2 ... o_eu_s.php
Wednesday 19 June 2013
The Netherlands will veto any moves by the European Union to impose sanctions if Israel presses ahead with building settlements on disputed territory east of Jerusalem, foreign minister Frans Timmermans is quoted as saying by news agency ANP.
Timmermans said sanctions are not 'currently on the agenda'. The minister met with Israeli and Palestinian representatives over the past two days as part of a visit to the Middle East.
The imposition of sanctions would hinder efforts to restart the peace talks and that should be prevented, Timmermans said, adding that it is of great importance to get US secretary of state John Kerry round the table with Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
'President Obama's initiative is not only the best, but the only option to get the peace process moving again,' he said in a briefing on Wednesday.
Nevertheless, building on the territory, known as E1, would negatively influence the bilateral relationship between the Netherlands and Israel, the minister said.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... ion-clause
EU takes tougher stance on Israeli settlements
'Earthquake' directive will prohibit EU states from signing deals with Israel unless settlement exclusion clause is included
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 July 2013
The European Union has banned its 28 member states from signing agreements with Israel without an explicit exclusion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank or East Jerusalem, in a directive described by an Israeli official as an "earthquake".
The EU guidelines, adopted on 30 June, will prohibit the issuing of grants, funding, prizes or scholarships unless a settlement exclusion clause is included. Israeli institutions and bodies situated across the pre-1967 Green Line will be automatically ineligible.
The Israeli government will be required to state in any future agreements with the EU that settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are outside the state of Israel.
The binding directive, part of the 2014-20 financial framework, covers all areas of co-operation between the EU and Israel, including economics, science, culture, sports and academia. It does not cover trade, such as produce and goods originating in settlements.
An EU statement said the guidelines "set out the territorial limitations under which the commission will award EU support to Israeli entities … Concern has been expressed in Europe that Israeli entities in the occupied territories could benefit from EU support. The purpose of these guidelines is to make a distinction between the state of Israel and the occupied territories when it comes to EU support."
The move follows a decision by EU foreign ministers last December that "all agreements between the state of Israel and the EU must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967". All Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.
"The EU is trying to force Israel to adopt its position on settlements," said an Israeli official. "Israel will have to explicitly express in writing the EU's position. We don't believe the EU's position should be forced down our throats like geese." He said it was impossible for Israel to agree to such a demand.
The directive would affect "all realms of co-operation", he added, and would result in "rising tension and increased friction" and "create a lot of bad blood".
Another Israeli official told Haaretz, which disclosed the new guidelines, the move was an "earthquake" which unprecedentedly turns "understandings and quiet agreements that the [EU] does not work beyond the Green Line" into "formal, binding policy".
...Israel has become increasingly concerned about the EU adopting a more robust stance against settlements. Some member states are pressing for an EU-wide policy of labelling produce and goods originating in settlements to allow consumers to make informed choices on purchases.
[..]minister, Silvan Shalom, said: "Once again, Europe has demonstrated just how detached it is, how it can't really be a full partner to the negotiations."
It is about time. Great news.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... alks-doubt
'...Israel's former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, wrote on Facebook that there was "no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, at least not in the coming years, and what's possible and important to do is conflict-management".
Naftali Bennett, economics minister, insisted construction on Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem would continue, regardless of talks.
...Israel is pushing for negotiations to last up to a year, fuelling concern among critics who believe Netanyahu is seeking to give the appearance of diplomatic co-operation while stalling for as long as possible on any outcome.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/a ... eace-talks
'...Eight hundred of the new homes will be built in colonies across the pre-1967 Green Line in Jerusalem – the part of the city the Palestinians want as the capital of their future state. Construction could take two years. All settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal under international law.
"No country receives orders about where it can and cannot build from other countries," said Ariel, a former head of the settlers' council, Yesha, But in an indication of bitter divisions within the Israeli cabinet, finance minister Yair Lapid described the move as a "big mistake" and said it was "not conducive for the peace process".
Palestinian leaders warned that continued settlement expansion could scupper the talks. Negotiator Mohammad Shtayyeh said it was "clear that the Israeli government is deliberately attempting to sabotage US and international efforts to resume negotiations by approving more settlement units three days before the first Palestinian-Israeli meeting". He added: "Israel continues to use peace negotiations as a smokescreen for more settlement construction."
I swear its fucken ground hog day with Israel every time talks are about to start. And as usual, nothing ever comes from these talks.
And now you're a prophet? You already know the outcome of talks that haven't even really begun yet? How about some optimism. The fact that they're even going to get back to talking to each other is a step in the right direction all by itself.
israel deliberately inflames tensions in attempt to sabotage the peace talks.
again.
i guess they did it this time so they can blame the certain failure on the palestinians when they pull out of the talks as a direct result of the settlement expansion.
always have to find a way to play the victim.
it is fucking groundhog day.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Ya I do and so do you. EVERYONE already knows ZERO is gonna come from these talks. Don't fool yourself into believing anything will come from them. As for optimism, I ran out of it after the hundredth so-called talks took place.
As for intentionally undermining the talks before they begin...I agree that this latest settlement announcement is counterproductive, but I'm curious how you explain Israel's agreeing to release 100+ prisoners considered to be terrorists by Israelis despite the widespread unpopularity of doing so among the Israeli public?
A-To me, it seems like hundreds of talks. I was being sarcastic and
B-You know for sure that if these 100+ "prisoners" were actually "terrorists" Israel WOULDN'T be releasing them. Lets be real here.
Israel has published the names of 26 Palestinian prisoners who are to be released later this week as part of a U.S.-brokered deal that led to a resumption of Mideast negotiations.
Twenty-one in the group were convicted of killing Israelis or suspected Palestinian collaborators, while others were involved in attempted murder or kidnapping. Most have already served 20 years.
Among the 26 prisoners Israel will release on Tuesday are three members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, two from Hamas and one from the Islamic Jihad. Fifteen are residents of the Gaza Strip and will be released there; four come from Nablus, another four from Jenin, one from Bethlehem and one from Hebron.
Some of the convicted killers on the list are Salah Ahmed Ibrahim Mughdad who in the 1990s murdered 70-year-old Israel Tenenbaum; Samir Abdel Na'anish, convicted for the 1989 murder of Israeli soldier Benyamin Meisner in Nablus; Mahmoud Bad Almagid Saulha and Fauza Ahmed Husseini Saulha from Nablus who as minors stabbed to death teenager Baruch Heizler at a bus station.
Israel’s Supreme Court heard petitions on Sunday by families of some of the victims who opposed the release of convicted Palestinians. Outside the courthouse, relatives of the victims held a small, quiet vigil.
One of them was Gila Molcho, the sister of Ian Feinberg, an Israeli lawyer who was bludgeoned to death by a Palestinian man wielding an ax in Gaza in 1993 while he was working on a project there. Ms. Molcho held a framed portrait of her brother, who was 30.
“Don’t let them come home as heroes,” she said of the prisoners to be released. “We will be left holding the pictures.” Weeping, she added, “They are terrorists, not soldiers.”
Abdel Aal Said Ouda Yusef, jailed since 1994 for throwing explosives and being an accessory to the killing of Mr. Feinberg and another man, appeared on the list of those to be released this week.
And yet the so-called leaders of Israel don't seem to make that list year after year..... :fp:
Ya you win yosi, just like ALWAYS you win :roll:
In all seriousness, I agree that the settlement announcement is messed up. I'm just saying that in light of the prisoner release, what I'm seeing is mixed signals from the Israelis. What that says to me is that the Israeli government is split over the talks. The prisoner release has to come from the very top. Given the unpopularity of releasing terrorists, Netanyahu's going to take a political hit for doing so. He wouldn't take that hit for no reason. So it seems to me that Netanyahu really does want to get these talks off the ground. I also don't think he'd take the pain from the prisoner release just for talks that he had no intention of allowing to go anywhere. Now, I have no idea how far he's willing to go for a deal, but however far it is is too far for the hard-right wing of his government. They're obviously the ones pushing the settlement agenda, and they're probably hoping that this announcement makes it harder for the talks to get traction. My guess is that Netanyahu is letting them get away with the announcement because it buys him a little more room to maneuver politically on his right flank and because he doesn't want to enter negotiations with the Palestinians looking weak having just agreed to release prisoners just so he could get to the negotiating table in the first place. On top of that, he's feeling the pressure from the new EU regulations on settlement products, which the Palestinians know. My guess is that the settlement announcement is Netanyahu's way of reminding the Palestinians of what's at stake and what cards he's holding before they start talking.
I tried to look up details about the cases listed above, and see if they constituted a true definition of terrorism or not, because Israel doesn't have a leg to stand on in making that claim. I couldn't find any articles about the crimes themselves, mostly links screaming 'terror' regarding the prisoner release, for the first five pages or so of results. I'm guessing, as always, Israel/hasbara are playing fast and loose with the definition of that word.
This site loves the word as much as any other, but it's the best I could find that includes a description of the crimes:
http://bbcwatch.org/2013/08/12/upcoming ... m-the-bbc/
Going by most of those descriptions, every murderer in the world could be called a terrorist. I could be wrong, but most of these crimes sound like typical thuggery, not terrorism, despite which group the perp may be affiliated with. The majority of these crimes don't sound racially motivated, let alone politically. Also, many of these prisoners have already served 20+ years...so essentially, Israel is granting these prisoners the same rights it grants it's own citizens - a 30 year sentence with the possibility of a third deducted by parole....of course the difference being, many arabs being released go from prison to prison-like conditions in the OPT.
This PR stunt also attempts to portray an image of mercy at a time Israel's justice minister pushes a bill to allow the force-feeding of prisoners who are on hunger strikes to protest unlawful incarceration and torture.
As for your last post.....it's sickening how israel continues to in-fight over just how hard they should fuck the palestinians; pulling out isn't even an option.
I take that back yosi, drowned out wins.
As for pulling out, that's what these talks are about. A final status deal means Israel pulls out and the Palestinians get a state. It amazes me that you can't step back and see the forest for the trees. What's important isn't that there are right-wingers in the Israeli government that don't want a deal. What's important is that the ultimate decisionmakers in the Israeli government want to get to the table badly enough to risk taking some major political pain to get there.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/j ... alks-doubt
...Israel is pushing for negotiations to last up to a year, fuelling concern among critics who believe Netanyahu is seeking to give the appearance of diplomatic co-operation while stalling for as long as possible on any outcome.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/j ... n-hopeless
Palestinian hopes for two states 'not possible', says Israeli minister Bennett
Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett dismisses two-state solution as 'hopeless' and urges swift annexation of West Bank's Area C
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 June 2013
'...Naftali Bennett, who was appointed Israel's economics and trade minister following a strong showing in January's election, told a conference of settlers in Jerusalem that Israel should urgently annex large tracts of the West Bank currently under its control.
Referring to the idea of a Palestinian state, Bennett said: "Never have so many people invested so much energy in something that is hopeless."
The challenge, he added, was "how do we move forward from here, knowing that a Palestinian state within Israel is not possible ... We have to move from solving the problem to living with the problem." Annexation of "Area C", the 62% of the West Bank under total Israeli control, should proceed "as quickly as possible".
Bennett said: "The most important thing in the land of Israel is to build, build, build. It's important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere.
"This land has been ours for 3,000 years. There was never a Palestinian state here and we were never occupiers. The house is ours and we are residents here, not the occupiers."
You say in one post that the EU settlement regulations are putting pressure on Netanyahu and may be influencing his decisions....but in this post they don't care about the international constituency? Which is it?
This was just a few weeks ago:
Here is the Jerusalem Post's report on the rightwing leader's comments during a Cabinet meeting about releasing Palestinian prisoners:
According to Yediot Aharonot, Bennett said, “If you catch terrorists, you simply have to kill them.”
National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror reportedly responded by saying that “this is not legal.”
Bennett then allegedly retorted, “I have killed lots of Arabs in my life – and there is no problem with that.”
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/07/netanyahu ... oblem.html
Pretty sad statement on Israeli politics (and public opinion), that a guy like this can hold office. unreal.