top
Palestine
Palestine
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

US will accept Israel settlements

by BBC (reposted)
The US ambassador to Israel says that Washington expects Israel to retain control over large Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Dan Kurtzer told Israel Radio that it was unrealistic to expect a full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank in any final status agreement.

He denied reports that he had said there was no such understanding between the US and the Israelis.

He said he was reiterating pledges by President Bush on the issue.

During a visit by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the White House last April, President George W Bush said a permanent peace deal would have to reflect "demographic realities" in the West Bank regarding Israel's settlements.

Palestinian officials criticised Mr Kurtzer's comments.

"The United States can't decide on behalf of the Palestinians and can't decide final status negotiation issues by itself.

"We urge the United States to have Israel stop settlement activity," senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said.

Expansion planned

Earlier this week, the Israeli government said it was planning to build 3,500 extra homes at the West Bank settlement of Maale Adumin, to the east of Jerusalem.

Palestinian officials called on the US to help block the expansion, saying if it went ahead it could prevent East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a future Palestinian state.

The international community considers all settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

About 400,000 Jewish settlers live in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem - alongside more than four million Palestinians.

Israel has occupied Gaza and the West Bank, including east Jerusalem, since 1967.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4382343.stm
by AFP (reposted)
The US ambassador in Tel Aviv has said Israel will be able retain sovereignty over large Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank in any final-status agreement

Dan Kurtzer's remark on Friday contradicts earlier reports that there had been a misunderstanding with Washington over the issue.

"US policy is the support that the president has given for the retention by Israel of the major Israeli population centres as an outcome of negotiations," Kurtzer told Israel public radio.

"It is very, very clear to both the United States and Israel what this means."The ambassador was responding to a report in the top-selling Yediot Ahronoth daily, which quoted him as saying Washington had not made any such promise to Israel.

According to the paper, Kurtzer "refuted" the much-repeated Israeli claim that there is an "understanding" with Washington that in a comprehensive future agreement with the Palestinians, Israel would retain sovereignty over large West Bank settlement blocs.

No factual basis

"I tell you that no such understandings were ever reached, and I checked the matter with Washington to receive backing for this," the paper quoted Kurtzer as saying, attributing it to "a misunderstanding" by Sharon's office.

"This story has no basis in fact," Kurtzer said, adding that he intended to explain as much to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

"I will reiterate to the prime minister the absolute adherance of the United States to the understandings that were reached last April between the prime minister and the president of the United States," he said.

"That is what is real, not these inaccurate quotes."

The understandings reached last April were outlined in a letter sent by US President George W. Bush to Sharon in which the US leader stressed that the final borders of any lasting settlement must take into account the demographic realities on the ground.

"In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949," the letter said.

"It is realistic to expect that any final-status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities."

Misinterpreted?

"The fact is that there is no misunderstanding between our two governments," Kurtzer said. "Our policy remains absolutely clear and absolutely firm and it is in black and white in a letter that the president gave to the prime minister."

Asked how his comments could have been so radically misinterpreted, Kurtzer said he could not answer for those behind the story.

"There is a very charged political atmosphere and people will have to answer to their own consciences why they would misrepresent, misquote, (and) totally inaccurately reflect the things I said," he answered, attributing it to a "misunderstanding by junior officers".

Shimon Shiffer, who wrote the article, was not immediately available to comment on the ambassador's remarks.

Israel has interpreted Bush's letter as carte blanche to hold on to the large settlements where most of the 240,000 Jewish settlers live, and the route of the West Bank separation barrier, which will include large blocs such as Ariel and Maale Adumim, has been designed to reflect this.

With 28,000 residents, Maale Adumim, which lies just east of Jerusalem, is the most populous settlement in the West Bank. Ariel, which lies deep in the northern West Bank, is one of the next largest settlements, with 16,000 residents.

Under international law, all Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal.
AFP

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/66309261-F6D9-49B2-979D-7B1616BC404D.htm
by Mike (stepbystepfarm <a> mtdata.com)
These two things are NOT inconsistent

"The US ambassador in Tel Aviv has said Israel will be able retain sovereignty over large Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank in any final-status agreement"

" Under international law, all Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal."

That calls for an explanation, doesn't it. Well it's legal for Israel to keep Jerusalem and environs in the final settlement if the Palestinains agree to it. Agree to it as the price of the things for which circumstances may require the Palestinains to have to ASK (not demand form Israel) and without which they cannot survive.

That's the reality here. We can reasonably demand that the Israelis end the occupation entirely over all territory captured in the '67 war including Jerusalem. Totally withdraw, evacuate the settlers, their troops, anmd allow the the Palestinains to form their own state. But is that enough for the Palestinians to survive? Well that depends, depends upon your expectations on how much help they would then receive form the Arab world, the rest of the world, and in particular, how much cooperation from Egypt and Jordan (the previous occupiers from '48-67).

See what can be DEMANDED does not include use of Israeli port facilities and airports. It does not include transit rights across Israel (that's the SHORT way, but assuming that sufficient highways were built in Egypt and Jordan and a ferry service established across the Red Sea between the two parts of "Palestine" have a route -- to DEMAND transit "by right" there must be no alternative). It does not include being able to have jobs in Israel. It does not even include the infrastructure of the "settlements" being left behind in usable condition rather than bulldozed to rubble.

So we now have to talk about expectations. Can the Palestinians expect help sufficient for them to be able to say "NO!" about bargaining away Jerusalem and environs? Or do we have to assume that this help will NOT be forthcoming and the Palestinians forced to bargain with the Israelis. What are the expectations of the Israelis, the Palestinians, the US Ambassador to Israel, et al.

I'll tell you what I think. I do NOT expect the world to step forward with help on the scale that would be necessary. We're talking about things like building airports, converting some sleepy Gaza fishing village into a port facility capable of handling modern freighters, highway capacity through the desert in Egypt and Jordan (of no use to them so somebody else must pay for it). And trust in the cooperation of Egypt and Jordan -- and you know, sometimes you can better trust a deal made with an open enemy than with a supposed friend.

I think instead of providing help the world will prefer to bitch and moan about the harsh bargain terms the Israelis can impose in exchange for leaving the sttlement infrastructure intact, use of Israeli port facilities and airports, transit routes across Israel, and job permits. See how mean the "Zionists" are to make the Palestinians "pay" for what they must have to survive. I think that what we are seeing slowly unfold is a "silent negotiation" (politically impossible to actually negotiate) where one side and then the other simply "does" something indicating the shape of the eventual settlement.

For example, the Israelis seem to be indicating that the infrastructure of the "settlements" will be left intact, Talking about transit routes, talking about numbers of job permits, etc. You thnk that the Palestinians imagine that there isn't going to be a "price"? That the Israelis are going to do these things out of the goodness of their hearts so that the Plasetinains can survive?
by Critical Thinker
>>>"Well it's legal for Israel to keep Jerusalem and environs in the final settlement if the Palestinains agree to it."<<<

Assuming you were alluding to E. Jerusalem and environs, I don't fully concur with this argument as E. Jerusalem never belonged to the Palestinians to begin with (and you're the last I need to remind of the ethnic cleansing of Jews from that part of the city during 1948. Furthermore, Israel needs no permission to maintain its hold of any portion of the surroundings that aren't legally Arab owned.

>>>"That's the reality here. We can reasonably demand that the Israelis end the occupation entirely over all territory captured in the '67 war including Jerusalem."<<<

Again, assuming you were speaking of E. Jerusalem, I differ with what you deem a reasonable demand. That's damn unreasonable. Israel needn't forfeit the eastern part of the city.
by Sefarad

"Who is obsessed with this issue? Who gets to have their voice heard more? "

Answer:

The people who are always criticizing Israel. They critisize Israel for things that happen in any country. They critizise Israel because it defends itself. They critizise Israel for things that have been invented.



by RWF (restes60 [at] earthlink.net)
[Who is obsessed
by Sefarad Friday, Mar. 25, 2005 at 12:24 PM


"Who is obsessed with this issue? Who gets to have their voice heard more? "

Answer:

The people who are always criticizing Israel. They critisize Israel for things that happen in any country. They critizise Israel because it defends itself. They critizise Israel for things that have been invented.]

those who politically support Israel, posting comments and articles numerous times on this website per day, are rational

one of them, CT, appeared went to the extreme of engaging in spam attacks against the site

(the US educational system may be poor, but I do have the ability to understand one of his posts the first time that I read it, and don't require multiple repostings)

but, those who disagree are "obsessed"

an especially humorous statement, given that I post on a variety of topics on this site, most of which have nothing to do with Israel and the Palestinians

as an aside, I believe that both sides of this argument put too much of an emphasis upon legality when it comes to the settlement issue

after all, US law prevented women from voting until the 1920s, provided for segregation until the 1950s, and the internment of Japanese Americans was upheld by the US Supreme Court

did the legality of these provisions at the time make them any less objectionable?

my views about unfettered Israeli settlement of the occupied territories while Palestinians are denied the right of return to places that many were forcibly and violently ejected from in the late 1940s, with their property subsequently seized by the state of Israel in the 1950s under color of law, is well known

--Richard
by MECA, the Justice Guy

This is a step in the right direction. However, I believe the US ambassador should be more equitable to the Palestinians. That is, the US might want to allow the Palestinians to reopen some schools in the West Bank that have previously been closed.

The ones that were converted to detention centers to imprison Palestinians, including in some cases Palestinian children, should at least be allowed to have playgrounds for the kids.

The U.S. should provide for a phase-in of a few of the 1000 or so Palestinian schools that were converted to detention centers since the beginning of the 2nd Intifada.

The information about the detention center closings was taken from a website of a "peace" or "rights watchdog" group calling itself "Amnesty International". Another organization reported similar numbers: it referred to itself as UNICEF.

Thank goodness America is holding up to its role as an Honest broker in the ongoing peace process.



by Critical Thinker
>>>"those who politically support Israel, posting comments and articles numerous times on this website per day, are rational

one of them, CT, appeared went to the extreme of engaging in spam attacks against the site

(the US educational system may be poor, but I do have the ability to understand one of his posts the first time that I read it, and don't require multiple repostings)"<<<

Sorry to realize that both gehrig and you have come to view my stubborn insistence on keeping three comments -- each on a separate thread -- visible as a spam attack.
Did you ever become intrigued as to why my comments are eventually left up? Because I don't yield to muzzling. Whether others choose to emulate my way of dealing with censorship is another matter. BTW, I'm enjoying you're unique display of humor.


>>>"as an aside, I believe that both sides of this argument put too much of an emphasis upon legality when it comes to the settlement issue

after all, US law prevented women from voting until the 1920s, provided for segregation until the 1950s, and the internment of Japanese Americans was upheld by the US Supreme Court

did the legality of these provisions at the time make them any less objectionable?

my views about unfettered Israeli settlement of the occupied territories while Palestinians are denied the right of return to places that many were forcibly and violently ejected from in the late 1940s, with their property subsequently seized by the state of Israel in the 1950s under color of law, is well known"<<<

Well, the legality issue can be used from the other end, namely, to say that even if int'l law did explicitly in no uncertain terms forbid Israeli/Jewish settlement in the disputed territories (I appreciate that you can at least refrain from referring to people using the more justified phrase 'disputed' as "cretins" and what have you as another here does), why fuss over it, since Settlement/resettlement activity can be conducted in manners that don't wrong Palestinians and Jews have a historical and religious ties to Judea-Samaria.
§?
by ?
"since Settlement/resettlement activity can be conducted in manners that don't wrong Palestinians and Jews have a historical and religious ties to Judea-Samaria"

Sure if you consider the West Bank part of Israel. If not, settlements are in what will become Palestine if a 2 state solution is ever reached. In which case, the settlers would have to either become Palestinian citizens or move back to Israel. Its hard to not see settlements as an attempt to either make a future Palestinian state smaller or such an outcome impossible since I doubt the settlers want to stop being Israelis when they setup settlements.

In an ideal world we wouldnt have citizenship and peopel from Israel could setup villages in the West Bank and Palestinians could move to what is now Israel and setup villages there. But with the only peaceful outcome thats realistic looking like it will be a two state solution...
§.
by .
On Sefarad's obssessionsby a friend Friday, Mar. 25, 2005 at 3:52 PM

Everything Sefarad is sending these days is quickly eaten by the website mice.

She sent some posts replying to Richard but all of them got eaten too.

Sefarad has been mainly posting about Israel and the Palestinians, the reason being that she is very concerned about what's going on in the world. However, this is not her only interest:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/12/1710154.php

http://bayarea.indymedia.org/news/2005/03/1725957.php

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/12/1711802_comment.php

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/12/1556107.php

Sefarad's friend


add your comments

Sefaradby

ah Sefarad

Friday, Mar. 25, 2005 at 4:11 PMA

troll who hates Cuba, Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Basques, and supports the Christians in Lebanon. Let me guess you also hate Hugo Chavez, supported the US backed coup against him (but claim it had no US backing), supported the US backed overthrow of Aristide (but claim it had no US backing), think Mumia should die, think the peopel killed in Gujarat brought things on themselves (but deny that the BJP was involved), support the Patriot Act (but claim it doesnt actually change things), were
§.
by .

Sefarad

by ah Sefarad

Friday, Mar. 25, 2005 at 4:11 PM

A troll who hates Cuba, Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Basques, and supports the Christians in Lebanon. Let me guess you also hate Hugo Chavez, supported the US backed coup against him (but claim it had no US backing), supported the US backed overthrow of Aristide (but claim it had no US backing), think Mumia should die, think the peopel killed in Gujarat brought things on themselves (but deny that the BJP was involved), support the Patriot Act (but claim it doesnt actually change things), were a big fan of Reagan in the 80s, andsupported the US backing of the Mjuahaden in Afghanistan (but somehow miss the connection between the people the US armed and Bin Laden and the Taliban). You may live in Spain but between your perfect English and fascist taste for US stupidity and unilaterlism you truely a US citizen at heart.
by Critical Thinker
CT: ...since settlement/resettlement activity can be conducted in manners that don't wrong Palestinians and Jews have historical and religious ties to Judea-Samaria.

>>>"Sure if you consider the West Bank part of Israel. If not, settlements are in what will become Palestine if a 2 state solution is ever reached. In which case, the settlers would have to either become Palestinian citizens or move back to Israel."<<<

You're talking about this outcome as if it's a done deal waiting to materialize itself. Let me temper your enthusiam -- that's not what's going to happen necessarily. Perhaps they'll eventually be some compromise or "unilateral" resolution of the land control issue by Israel that leaves either a significant or small percentage of Judea-Damaria in Israeli hands.
by ?
"Judea-Damaria"? Ive noticed a huge increase in the number of proIsrael supporters who no longer call the West Bank the West Bank... its doesnt bode well for peace or a two state solution if the reasons behind this change in langauge is comming from where I think its comming from
by Critical Thinker
To me you seem sufficiently intelligent to notice that its primarily a matter of semantics.

It's Judea-Samaria. Sorry for the typo.

Somehow I figure you aren't concerned at all that the Arabs call the Temple Mount Haram a-Sharif rather than Jabl al-Muqadis. Why would this not bode ill for peace too?

.
by ANGEL
There was just another Arab Conference where again it was mentioned that the Arab World would recognize Israel's right to exist in its pre 1967 (Green Line) borders, If the Palestinian People were allowed to have their tiny State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza.

Let us not make the settlements the Problem...

Once you have the Palestinian State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza. You are on the Road to Peace and the Israeli Arabs have a better chance of equality as the Jewish Settlers will have a better chance at Peace. After all what is wrong with the State of Israel with a Jewish majority and an Arab minority?....And what is wrong With Palestine with a Palestinian majority and a Jewish minority?....Nothing if both nations were at Peace instead of One Group under the Brutal Occupation and Oppression of the Other.

Once you have a Palestinian State the Israeli Arabs who do not like living in Israel can move to Palestine, Just like the Jewish settlers who do not like living in the West Bank and Gaza under Palestinian Rule can move to Israel Proper.
Do the right thing and Peace Will Follow......

Hypocrisy and double standard does not lead to peace, and people are not blind and they can see the truth as it really is.

Thirty-six years of war should be enough for such a small number of people, when you consider the World Population.
Allowing the Palestinian People to have their small state in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza can solve this conflict.
There are 1,200,000 or so Arabs living inside Israel Proper.
There are 400,000 or so Jews living inside the West Bank and Gaza.
Trying to remove all the settlement can be an almost undoable task.
So Set the Borders for Israel to it Pre 1967 Border (Green Line) and have the State of Palestine inside the West Bank and Gaza.
If the U.N. can decide the Borders of Israel in 1948,
The U.N. can decide the Borders of Palestine in 2005.
You would end up with Israel with a majority Jewish Population and Palestine with a majority Muslim Population.
This would allow for the Israeli Military to Guard and Control the Israeli pre 1967 borders instead of confiscating Palestinian Land and Demolishing Palestinian Homes in the West Bank and Gaza that only goes to fuel the need for the Palestinian People to fight for their Freedom.
The Jews who do not like living in the new Palestinian State can feel free to move to Israel if they so choose.
The Arabs living inside Israel can feel free to move to the new Palestinian State if they so choose.
Almost every nation on earth has more then one ethnic group or religious group, so why not Israel and Palestine?
It would sure be better then the never-ending conflict we have right now.

Who has died and how in this struggle for Palestinian Freedom?
CLICK HERE > http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html
by yup yup
"Hypocrisy and double standard does not lead to peace"

Which is exactly why the Israelis are going to keep right on being double-dealing hypocrites. They don't want peace, not really. They of course SAY that. It's a political necessity to SAY that. But if they really wanted peace, they'd quit with the relentless grabbing of land and building of new settlements. It's so simple: if you sincerely want peace, you'll stop doing that. Clearly, to keep doing it is to keep the Palestinians infuriated, which sabotages peace. On the other hand, if you don't really want peace, but are just saying that, and what you really want is to just keep grabbing more and more land, then you'll WANT the Palestinians to stay infuriated and violent, because that lets you off the hook on being fair to them...

It's just classic sleazola politics, that's all.
by gotta love 'em
"...most posts to this site about international related issues do not deal with Israel-Palestne yet ... a good percentage of the comments do."

These netops workers rarely if ever post newswire items, because they don't want to INITIATE such discussions. That would increase attention to the Israel/Palestine topic, which is contrary to their agenda. They're job here is to do thought police duty in the comment threads initiated by other people's Israel/Palestine articles, and this they do with their signature fanatic zeal. It all makes perfect sense once you understand why they're really here.
by Critical Thinker
Yeah, it's all about what the Palestinians want and what the Palestinians feel; it's all about what the Israelis should and should not do, never about the Palestinian part in exacerbating the matters. It's all about Israelis building and expanding Jewish communities, never about Palestinian cessation of incitement, terror and other forms of violence. The Israeli side's feelings never matter tiddley. It's all about continually lying for the Palestinians' sake about "land grabbing", it's all about treating the Palestinians as being violent as if they've got no non-violent options.
by ANGEL
>>>Everything Israel does is wrong.<<<
No….Only that they are building a wall inside the West Bank instead of on the Israel Proper, Border.
And….Only that they will not allow the Palestinians to have their Viable Palestinian State.

>>>Everything the Palestinians do is right.<<<
No….It is wrong to kill Israelis, but It is wrong also to kill more Palestinians than the number of Israeli dead….The number at Present is more then 3 Palestinian dead to one Israeli dead.

>>>The Israelis make concessions, that's wrong, since they should give everything to the Palestinians.<<<

As of the latest Arab conference, it is agreed that Israel will be recognized in its pre 1967 (Green Line) border, if the Palestinians are allowed to have their tiny State called for in the Road Map to Peace in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza only 22% of what is TODAY….Israel, West Bank and Gaza. Not to much to ask for Peace after over 35 years of conflict.

>>>But, no, the Jews don't want to cooperate . They are so selfish. This is a plot by the Jewish lobby.<<<

If the Jews were really co-operating and working towards Peace the number of settlers in the area that should be used for the Viable Palestinian State would not have gone from around 100,000 in the late 1990’s to around 400,000 today.

Now that this did occur we should not make these settlements the Problem.

We should go ahead and allow this Viable Palestinian State to be formed in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza.
Then you can allow the Jews who do not want to live in Palestine to Move to Israel Proper on their own if they choose too.

Just like you can allow the 1,200,000 or so Arabs in Israel Proper to move to Palestine if they choose to.

As far a the resistance goes “To end the resistance to the occupation, end the occupation that allows for the resistance” There is a reason for this resistance, people do not choose to die for no reason. Even right now U.S. Military men are dieing are they bad because they are dieing or is there a reason. (over 1500 Military men/women have died in the War in Iraq.

by Sefarad
Sefarad:>>>Everything Israel does is wrong.<<<

Angel: "No….Only that they are building a wall inside the West Bank instead of on the Israel Proper, Border.
And….Only that they will not allow the Palestinians to have their Viable Palestinian State. "

Sefarad: They are building the fence to prevent terrorists attacks. Where the fence has already been installed there have been no terrorist attacks any more.

It is the Palestinians who haven't wanted to have their own state.

Sefarad: >>>Everything the Palestinians do is right.<<<

Angel: "No….It is wrong to kill Israelis, but It is wrong also to kill more Palestinians than the number of Israeli dead….The number at Present is more then 3 Palestinian dead to one Israeli dead. "

Sefarad: So killing Israelis isn't so wrong, since anyway the Israelis are responsible for the killing of Israelis.

Why is it wrong that more terrorists die than innocent people?

Sefarad: >>>The Israelis make concessions, that's wrong, since they should give everything to the Palestinians.<<<

Angel: "As of the latest Arab conference, it is agreed that Israel will be recognized in its pre 1967 (Green Line) border, if the Palestinians are allowed to have their tiny State called for in the Road Map to Peace in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza only 22% of what is TODAY….Israel, West Bank and Gaza. Not to much to ask for Peace after over 35 years of conflict. "

Sefarad: First of all, the Arab conference has made decisions over Israel not taking Israel into account.

Secondly, the Palestinians don't have their own state because they haven't wanted it. They only want to expel the Jews from Israel.

After so many years of conflict always created by the Palestinians, who can believe they will stop this time?

Sefarad: >>>But, no, the Jews don't want to cooperate . They are so selfish. This is a plot by the Jewish lobby.<<<

Angel: "If the Jews were really co-operating and working towards Peace the number of settlers in the area that should be used for the Viable Palestinian State would not have gone from around 100,000 in the late 1990’s to around 400,000 today.

Now that this did occur we should not make these settlements the Problem. "

But anyway the settlements are now the problem, aren't they? So when the Palestinians commit some other terrorist attacks, we'll have the excuse.

Angel: "We should go ahead and allow this Viable Palestinian State to be formed in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza.
Then you can allow the Jews who do not want to live in Palestine to Move to Israel Proper on their own if they choose too.

Just like you can allow the 1,200,000 or so Arabs in Israel Proper to move to Palestine if they choose to. "

They could have had their own state in 1948 and afterwards they have been given more opportunities.

Angel: "As far a the resistance goes “To end the resistance to the occupation, end the occupation that allows for the resistance” There is a reason for this resistance, people do not choose to die for no reason. Even right now U.S. Military men are dieing are they bad because they are dieing or is there a reason. (over 1500 Military men/women have died in the War in Iraq."

There is no occupation by the Israelis. There is no Palestinian resistance: Hamas, Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs are not the resistance, but terrorist organizations.



by ANGEL
>>>There is no occupation by the Israelis. There is no Palestinian resistance: Hamas, Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs are not the resistance, but terrorist organizations.<<<

And this is why after more then 35 years there is no Peace.
Because Israel is allowed to have a Superior Military that can drop Bombs on the Palestinian People.
And any group that fights against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People are automatically called terrorist by Israel.
Since the Israeli military kills people and destroys people’s property should they not also be called terrorists?

>>>There is no occupation by the Israelis. There is no Palestinian resistance: Hamas, Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs are not the resistance, but terrorist organizations.<<<

And this is why after more then 35 years there is no Peace.
Because Palestinians are allowed to have Terrorist Groups that can detonate Bombs against the Israeli People.
And any soldier that fights against the Terror and Destruction of the Israeli People is automatically called a terrorist by professional defenders of Palestinian violence.
Since the Israeli military only kills people and destroys people’s property after an attack has been committed against Israelis, why should they also be called terrorists?
by ANGEL
And once again the ANGEL imposter has some strong views, but he/she does not believe in these view strongly enough to post them in his/her own name or handle...as far as that goes he/she cannot even post then.....in shall we say....Anti-ANGEL to show that he/she is against the views of the ANGEL

>>>You cannot have Peace with Occupation and Oppression...
by ANGEL Tuesday, Mar. 29, 2005 at 6:05 AM<<<the ANGEL Imposter> The real ANGEL would never tell such lies.

Now for what ANGEL did say:

You cannot have Peace with Occupation and Oppression
by ANGEL Monday, Mar. 28, 2005 at 9:19 PM

>>>There is no occupation by the Israelis. There is no Palestinian resistance: Hamas, Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs are not the resistance, but terrorist organizations.<<<

And this is why after more then 35 years there is no Peace.
Because Israel is allowed to have a Superior Military that can drop Bombs on the Palestinian People.
And any group that fights against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People are automatically called terrorist by Israel.
Since the Israeli military kills people and destroys people’s property should they not also be called terrorists?




by ANGEL
And once again the ANGEL imposter has lots of weak views, and even he/she does not believe in these views strongly enough to post them in his/her own name or handle...as far as that goes he/she cannot even post then.....in shall we say....Anti-ANGEL to show that he/she is against the views of The ANGEL

>>>You cannot have Peace with Occupation and Oppression...
by ANGEL Tuesday, Mar. 29, 2005 at 6:05 AM<<<the real ANGEL> The ANGEL imposter would never tell such truth.

Now for what the ANGEL imposter said:

You cannot have Peace with Occupation and Oppression
by ANGEL Monday, Mar. 28, 2005 at 9:19 PM

>>>There is no occupation by the Israelis. There is no Palestinian resistance: Hamas, Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs are not the resistance, but terrorist organizations.<<<

And this is why after more then 35 years there is no Peace.
Because Israel is allowed to have a Superior Military that can drop Bombs on the Palestinian People.
And any group that fights against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People are automatically called terrorist by Israel.
Since the Israeli military kills people and destroys people’s property should they not also be called terrorists?
by Sefarad
Angel:

"Because Israel is allowed to have a Superior Military "

Sefarad:

Israel is allowed to have a military as any other country is.
Wasn't the Israeli military strong, there wouldn't have been Israel or Israelis for a long time now.

Angel:

"that can drop Bombs on the Palestinian People"

The Israeli Military doesn't drop bombs on the Palestinian People. It drops bombs on the Palestinian Terrorists, who murder the Israeli People.

Angel:

" And any group that fights against the Occupation and Oppression of the Palestinian People are automatically called terrorist by Israel. "

Sefarad:

Israel is occupying nothing.
Some Palestinians are oppressing the Palestinian People, since they are trying to avoid peace by any means and keeping the Palestinian People in permanent war.

Those same Palestinians who are oppressing the Palestinian People are killing innocent Israeli citizens, and they are doing so by terror (blowing-up of terrorists, launching of Qassam rockets, etc.).

The name for the people committing terrorist acts is "terrorists"

Angel:

"Since the Israeli military kills people and destroys people’s property should they not also be called terrorists? "

The Israeli military doesn't kill people in general and doesn't destroy people's property in general. It kills terrorists and destroys their hidy-holes and arsenals.

Would the PA uproot the terrorists' infrastructure and arrest the terrorists, the Israeli military wouldn't do what it is forced to do in order to defend Israel and the Israeli People.






We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network