UN political chief criticizes Israel for new settlement plans

[jdinasia]

That sort of propagandist tripe is not worth listening to.

The issue is that it is deflection and off topic.

[Jay Sata]

While the usual regulars wander off topic can I just remind you what the UN Security Council heard.

Briefing the Security Council on the situation in Jerusalem, Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary-general for political affairs, acknowledged that recent heightened tensions over unilateral actions, provocations and access restrictions at holy sites in Jerusalem are contributing to a volatile situation.

Of course he is correct and we have seen his words bear fruit in the deaths and violence of the last few weeks.

He clearly blames Israeli action and no matter how anyone tries to regurgitate the past the future looks like more of the same unless Netanyahu changes his attitude.

[petercool]

An inflammatory post removed.

Edit: And a post with messed up quotes.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Scott
Added

[jdinasia]

While the usual regulars wander off topic can I just remind you what the UN Security Council heard.

Briefing the Security Council on the situation in Jerusalem, Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary-general for political affairs, acknowledged that recent heightened tensions over unilateral actions, provocations and access restrictions at holy sites in Jerusalem are contributing to a volatile situation.

Of course he is correct and we have seen his words bear fruit in the deaths and violence of the last few weeks.

He clearly blames Israeli action and no matter how anyone tries to regurgitate the past the future looks like more of the same unless Netanyahu changes his attitude.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49200#.VGWwl5tdbCQ

It is clear from the UN that settlements alone are not the issue.

[chuckd]

I don't think anybody has denied that Palestine has it's internal problems, and it's own nasty aggressive, antisemite citizens.

The optimistic outlook is that if Israel acted in a way whereby the UN, the international community, and the majority moderate Palestinians had nothing to criticise it about, a unified state of Palestine would mind it's manners and toe the line....for fear of a return to the generations of bloodshed, if nothing else.

You and others leave out one major factor, Hamas.

Please explain how Palestinians will rid themselves of this cancer or strategies for making Hamas 'toe the line'.

The idea was put forward in an article in a thread a few months ago; If Israel was to concede it's crimes, make compensation for them, make peace based on "67 borders and land swaps, then Fatah will be seen as a saviour, the situation will be seen to be vastly better than most Palestinians have memory of, and Hamas will lose most of it's support.

Peace is too good to pass up on for average people who just want their children to grow up without fear of IDF aggression.

The security of knowing that the land you till will not be bulldozed for Israeli settlers. The peace of mind that your child will not be arrested (or shot) for no reason. The joy of living in a city (Gaza) that can import cinnamon for sweets, and crayons for the kids. The pleasure of being able to go fishing for profit or leisure without having to keep an eye out for gunships.

Etc, etc, etc. These things that will come immediately out of a fair peace deal will sway the majority and severely undermine Hamas.

Or do you think Israel has created too big a chip on the collective Palestinian shoulder that the majority will still hold a grudge?

One of the most important things to keep in mind is that most Palestinians, if not all, have suffered all their lives. A respite, a genuine change in living conditions, will be too valuable to risk losing. Give them a taste of a normal life and see who wants to revert to bloodshed.

You asked the same question a couple of months ago on this or another one of the countless threads about Israel.

I asked you what Palestine was prepared to give up if Israel agreed to all your demands.

You never responded.

You want to give it a shot this time around?

What is Palestine prepared to do in return for the Israeli concessions you have outlined?

[dexterm]

I don't think anybody has denied that Palestine has it's internal problems, and it's own nasty aggressive, antisemite citizens.

The optimistic outlook is that if Israel acted in a way whereby the UN, the international community, and the majority moderate Palestinians had nothing to criticise it about, a unified state of Palestine would mind it's manners and toe the line....for fear of a return to the generations of bloodshed, if nothing else.

You and others leave out one major factor, Hamas.

Please explain how Palestinians will rid themselves of this cancer or strategies for making Hamas 'toe the line'.

The idea was put forward in an article in a thread a few months ago; If Israel was to concede it's crimes, make compensation for them, make peace based on "67 borders and land swaps, then Fatah will be seen as a saviour, the situation will be seen to be vastly better than most Palestinians have memory of, and Hamas will lose most of it's support.

Peace is too good to pass up on for average people who just want their children to grow up without fear of IDF aggression.

The security of knowing that the land you till will not be bulldozed for Israeli settlers. The peace of mind that your child will not be arrested (or shot) for no reason. The joy of living in a city (Gaza) that can import cinnamon for sweets, and crayons for the kids. The pleasure of being able to go fishing for profit or leisure without having to keep an eye out for gunships.

Etc, etc, etc. These things that will come immediately out of a fair peace deal will sway the majority and severely undermine Hamas.

Or do you think Israel has created too big a chip on the collective Palestinian shoulder that the majority will still hold a grudge?

One of the most important things to keep in mind is that most Palestinians, if not all, have suffered all their lives. A respite, a genuine change in living conditions, will be too valuable to risk losing. Give them a taste of a normal life and see who wants to revert to bloodshed.

You asked the same question a couple of months ago on this or another one of the countless threads about Israel.

I asked you what Palestine was prepared to give up if Israel agreed to all your demands.

You never responded.

You want to give it a shot this time around?

What is Palestine prepared to do in return for the Israeli concessions you have outlined?

Recognize Israel within the 67 borders and allow Israel to keep all the land they stole in 1948 over and above the 1947 partition plan. Sounds pretty generous to me.

[Ulysses G.]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

[dexterm]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

OK for Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan maybe, but in the 21st century you cannot win land by warfare...it's contrary to the Geneva Convention.

Besides, Israel started the 48 war

It was Israel who began the war by violating the 1947 partition plan and ethnically cleansing Palestinians. Jews had occupied most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948, that was even before the end of the British mandate.

The Jewish historian Avi Shlaim ridiculed your myth in his book "the Iron Wall"...."This popular-heroic-moralistic version of the 1948 war has been used extensively in Israeli propaganda and is still taught in Israeli schools. It is a prime example of the use of a nationalistic version of history in the process of nation building. In a very real sense history is the propaganda of the victors, and the history of the 1948 war is no exception."

Another of your myths busted, UG

Edited November 14, 2014 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

Why do you keep posting links that directly contradict what you have posted or don't even mention it at all? The Jews did not start the war and everyone (but you) knows it. From YOUR link:

"The assault occurred as Jewish militia sought to relieve the blockade of Jerusalem by Palestinian forces"

The Jews were responding to Palestinian forces.

Jamal Husseini - the Palestinian Arab delegate to the United Nations in 1947-48 - told the UN Security Council on April 16, 1948:

"The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight."

I have not even mentioned anything to do with Avi Shlaim's mad theories. I have no idea why you keep bringing them up when they have nothing to do the subject.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Jay Sata]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

OK for Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan maybe, but in the 21st century you cannot win land by warfare...it's contrary to the Geneva Convention.

Besides, Israel started the 48 war

It was Israel who began the war by violating the 1947 partition plan and ethnically cleansing Palestinians. Jews had occupied most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948, that was even before the end of the British mandate.

The Jewish historian Avi Shlaim ridiculed your myth in his book "the Iron Wall"...."This popular-heroic-moralistic version of the 1948 war has been used extensively in Israeli propaganda and is still taught in Israeli schools. It is a prime example of the use of a nationalistic version of history in the process of nation building. In a very real sense history is the propaganda of the victors, and the history of the 1948 war is no exception."

Another of your myths busted, UG

The ethnic cleansing continues via the settlements and occupation of the West Bank.

Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary-general points the finger squarely at Israel and in telling the truth undermines all your bluster UG.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Jay Sata

[Ulysses G.]

Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary-general points the finger squarely at Israel and in telling the truth undermines all your bluster UG.

Sorry, I have never heard of him. Apparently you have found someone in the UN who agrees with your point of view. Well that certainly proves you are right.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[jdinasia]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

[Jingthing]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Sure is, if you're going for maximum Israel demonization rhetoric.

[Seastallion]

I don't think anybody has denied that Palestine has it's internal problems, and it's own nasty aggressive, antisemite citizens.

The optimistic outlook is that if Israel acted in a way whereby the UN, the international community, and the majority moderate Palestinians had nothing to criticise it about, a unified state of Palestine would mind it's manners and toe the line....for fear of a return to the generations of bloodshed, if nothing else.

You and others leave out one major factor, Hamas.

Please explain how Palestinians will rid themselves of this cancer or strategies for making Hamas 'toe the line'.

The idea was put forward in an article in a thread a few months ago; If Israel was to concede it's crimes, make compensation for them, make peace based on "67 borders and land swaps, then Fatah will be seen as a saviour, the situation will be seen to be vastly better than most Palestinians have memory of, and Hamas will lose most of it's support.

Peace is too good to pass up on for average people who just want their children to grow up without fear of IDF aggression.

The security of knowing that the land you till will not be bulldozed for Israeli settlers. The peace of mind that your child will not be arrested (or shot) for no reason. The joy of living in a city (Gaza) that can import cinnamon for sweets, and crayons for the kids. The pleasure of being able to go fishing for profit or leisure without having to keep an eye out for gunships.

Etc, etc, etc. These things that will come immediately out of a fair peace deal will sway the majority and severely undermine Hamas.

Or do you think Israel has created too big a chip on the collective Palestinian shoulder that the majority will still hold a grudge?

One of the most important things to keep in mind is that most Palestinians, if not all, have suffered all their lives. A respite, a genuine change in living conditions, will be too valuable to risk losing. Give them a taste of a normal life and see who wants to revert to bloodshed.

You asked the same question a couple of months ago on this or another one of the countless threads about Israel.

I asked you what Palestine was prepared to give up if Israel agreed to all your demands.

You never responded.

You want to give it a shot this time around?

What is Palestine prepared to do in return for the Israeli concessions you have outlined?

Even going back to the post before the post you quote, I don't see any question that I pose. Never mind, I can make allowances for throat algae.

Obviously what Palestinians "give" is a cessation of resistance and reaction to illegal, immoral, and inhumane actions.

[jdinasia]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Sure is, if you're going for maximum Israel demonization rhetoric.

No, simply using international law

If I were demonizing Israel you would know it.

Edited November 14, 2014 by jdinasia

[Ulysses G.]

He knows it already.

[Seastallion]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Sure is, if you're going for maximum Israel demonization rhetoric.

"Maximum Israel demonisation" is calling a spade a spade, a settlement a settlement, truth?

According to you, then, any truthful criticism of Israel is demonisation?

Sounds sort of like the Thai defamation law.

[dexterm]

"The assault occurred as Jewish militia sought to relieve the blockade of Jerusalem by Palestinian forces"

"sought to relieve the blockade"....That's a nice euphemism for the Jewish terrorist gang Irgun (led at the time by Menachim Begin future PM of Israel) walking through the village of Deir Yassin hurling grenades into innocent Palestinian homes and shooting any who tried to escape.

"The Deir Yassin attack, along with attacks on Tiberias, Haifa, and Jaffa, put pressure on Arab governments to invade Palestine. News of the killings had aroused public anger in the Arab world, which the governments felt unable to ignore."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

as I said above...Israel deliberately started the 1948 war in order to ethnically cleanse Palestinians to make way for their own colonies.

[Ulysses G.]

The Deir Yassin attack was in 1948. You seem to think that was somehow different from all the Arab and Jewish violence that preceded it. The Civil War in Mandatory Palestine actually started following the United Nations General Assembly vote for the Partition Plan for Palestine on 29 November 1947.

Organized anti-Jewish violence started in the beginning of 1920 when Palestinian Arabs Arab villagers attacked Tel Hai, a Jewish settlement in the Galilee near the Syrian border. In 1921, Arab rioters and policemen with knives, pistols and rifles took to the streets of Jaffa, beating and murdering Jews, and looting Jewish homes and stores. Everyone knows about the 1929 Hebron Massacre, once again started by Arabs. There were lots and lots of Arabs attacks on Jews and they did not respond in any serious way until 1936 when they finally had enough. The Arabs would soon regret starting a fight that they could not finish.

Claiming that Israel "started" the 1948 war ignores all historical evidence otherwise, but that is what you do with practically every post, so nothing new there. As usual, your link says the direct opposite of what you are claiming about Deir Yassin and says nothing about it "starting the 1948 war". You seem to believe the maxim that “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." Providing a link that proves the lie is a lie sort of defeats that premise.

"it was the first time Jewish forces had gone on the offensive, as opposed to responding to attacks"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

Edited November 14, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Jay Sata]

UG

You try to drag up all sorts of ancient history but you don't seem able to challenge the UN political chief for the simple reason he is stating facts.

They are that the settlements in the West Bank, illegal by a UN motion are a key to the troubles that constantly lead to unrest.

Are you in some way missing your vocation in Thailand and perhaps better qualified to address the UN?

[Jingthing]

So if the settlements never happened there would be no conflict? That's absurd.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Morch]

While the usual regulars wander off topic can I just remind you what the UN Security Council heard.

Briefing the Security Council on the situation in Jerusalem, Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary-general for political affairs, acknowledged that recent heightened tensions over unilateral actions, provocations and access restrictions at holy sites in Jerusalem are contributing to a volatile situation.

Of course he is correct and we have seen his words bear fruit in the deaths and violence of the last few weeks.

He clearly blames Israeli action and no matter how anyone tries to regurgitate the past the future looks like more of the same unless Netanyahu changes his attitude.

I'm aware of your aversion to supplying links (thanks, jdinasia), but still taken aback at your selective reading:

“Palestinian and Israeli leaders and people should make no mistake: there will never be a substitute to their own responsibility in bringing the necessary change and achieving peace,” he concluded.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49200#.VGWwl5tdbCQ

I would suggest some reading on restrictions, regulations and general management of the Temple Mount.

[Morch]

I don't think anybody has denied that Palestine has it's internal problems, and it's own nasty aggressive, antisemite citizens.

The optimistic outlook is that if Israel acted in a way whereby the UN, the international community, and the majority moderate Palestinians had nothing to criticise it about, a unified state of Palestine would mind it's manners and toe the line....for fear of a return to the generations of bloodshed, if nothing else.

You and others leave out one major factor, Hamas.

Please explain how Palestinians will rid themselves of this cancer or strategies for making Hamas 'toe the line'.

The idea was put forward in an article in a thread a few months ago; If Israel was to concede it's crimes, make compensation for them, make peace based on "67 borders and land swaps, then Fatah will be seen as a saviour, the situation will be seen to be vastly better than most Palestinians have memory of, and Hamas will lose most of it's support.

Peace is too good to pass up on for average people who just want their children to grow up without fear of IDF aggression.

The security of knowing that the land you till will not be bulldozed for Israeli settlers. The peace of mind that your child will not be arrested (or shot) for no reason. The joy of living in a city (Gaza) that can import cinnamon for sweets, and crayons for the kids. The pleasure of being able to go fishing for profit or leisure without having to keep an eye out for gunships.

Etc, etc, etc. These things that will come immediately out of a fair peace deal will sway the majority and severely undermine Hamas.

Or do you think Israel has created too big a chip on the collective Palestinian shoulder that the majority will still hold a grudge?

One of the most important things to keep in mind is that most Palestinians, if not all, have suffered all their lives. A respite, a genuine change in living conditions, will be too valuable to risk losing. Give them a taste of a normal life and see who wants to revert to bloodshed.

Since no link is presented I'll relate to this notion as it appears in your post.

The Fatah may or may not come out as a savior, this is very far from an assured outcome. Fatah popularity isn't that great, and credit for winning independence can easily be hijacked by Hamas, which would almost certainly claim it the result of its armed struggle. Attributing the Palestinian public a special level of political awareness and savvy which will help them make the "right" choice is all very nice, just not a reality.

Peace is indeed to good to lose. But this does not happen overnight. Takes a long while for the fruits of peace to bear and become obviously precious enough to play a factor in maintaining it. Rather, a new peace deal just brokered is quite a fragile affair, with a lot of potential for infractions, misunderstandings and whatnot. The euphoria following signing a peace treaty or proclaiming independence is also relatively a short term effect, when the harsh realities of dealing with the less glamorous aspects come up.

Things will not change that quickly for the average Palestinian. The economy may take a severe hit, dealing with Palestinian police might prove as annoying as dealing with the IDF, and the potentials for short term frustrations are actually dangerous.

Back to the Hamas, not even sure that the fantasy scenario in which it loses its power and influence so quickly is a good thing. Consider all the Hamas fighting force out of a job, and still with access to firearms and the like. How is that to be countered?

Land ownership will be a mess. Israeli settlements in the West Bank are mostly on lands where owners weren't around, where ownership was disputed or held by previous authorities/administrations, and lands sold by owners. Re-distributing it would be a legal nightmare. Safe to say that the rich will get rich applies.

A change in living conditions? Electricity prices will soar, work permits in Israel may be an issue, some Israeli manufacturers will pull out, and the new state will have to take care of the infrastructure needs of more people. No way this is going to be a smooth ride.

A lot of potential for Hamas (if not worse) resurgence, even if the rosy fantasy scenario about it losing its power becomes real.

[Morch]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Looking at your avatar.

Looking at your post.

Some of the settlements were around prior to 1947, on lands legally purchased.

[Morch]

You and others leave out one major factor, Hamas.

Please explain how Palestinians will rid themselves of this cancer or strategies for making Hamas 'toe the line'.

The idea was put forward in an article in a thread a few months ago; If Israel was to concede it's crimes, make compensation for them, make peace based on "67 borders and land swaps, then Fatah will be seen as a saviour, the situation will be seen to be vastly better than most Palestinians have memory of, and Hamas will lose most of it's support.

Peace is too good to pass up on for average people who just want their children to grow up without fear of IDF aggression.

The security of knowing that the land you till will not be bulldozed for Israeli settlers. The peace of mind that your child will not be arrested (or shot) for no reason. The joy of living in a city (Gaza) that can import cinnamon for sweets, and crayons for the kids. The pleasure of being able to go fishing for profit or leisure without having to keep an eye out for gunships.

Etc, etc, etc. These things that will come immediately out of a fair peace deal will sway the majority and severely undermine Hamas.

Or do you think Israel has created too big a chip on the collective Palestinian shoulder that the majority will still hold a grudge?

One of the most important things to keep in mind is that most Palestinians, if not all, have suffered all their lives. A respite, a genuine change in living conditions, will be too valuable to risk losing. Give them a taste of a normal life and see who wants to revert to bloodshed.

You asked the same question a couple of months ago on this or another one of the countless threads about Israel.

I asked you what Palestine was prepared to give up if Israel agreed to all your demands.

You never responded.

You want to give it a shot this time around?

What is Palestine prepared to do in return for the Israeli concessions you have outlined?

Recognize Israel within the 67 borders and allow Israel to keep all the land they stole in 1948 over and above the 1947 partition plan. Sounds pretty generous to me.

Is that the official Hamas position?

And before you toss in one of your old, debunked links - try looking at more recent statements. In case the counter claim is something to do with the fabled unity government (also debunked many a time), consider the PA was not even able to conduct the Arafat memorial ceremony in Gaza, and that there is still no apparent agreement regarding the Hamas's armed wing.

[Jay Sata]

Hamas are blamed for everything by the Israeli lobby network but there is an old saying....

The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know.

Witness the rise of ISIS and the brutal nature of their agenda. With Syria so close to Israel the prospects exist

of a new and more radical force who would take sides with the Palestinians.

It is not just the mushrooming of settlements in the West Bank that ignite ill feeling on the part of the long term residents.

The new villages built by the invaders are always built on top of high ground and usually with no sewage network or water.

Wells are bored which extract what little exists so that during the summer months there are shortages. Sewage floods the Palestinian villages making the olive groves unusable.

This from Haaretz

Nearly one-third of sewage treatment facilities in the West Bank settlements are either not up to code or not in operation, according to a state report. As a result, a third of the settlements sewage is continuing to pollute the environment and to endanger groundwater sources, it warns.

The survey, conducted by the Environmental Unit of the Israel Nature and National Parks Protection Authority, was carried out in 2012 on behalf of the Civil Administration and the Environmental Protection Ministry. Unlike other, similar studies, it included comprehensive testing not only of all sewage collection and treatment facilities in the settlements, but also in the surrounding areas.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.527209

Edited November 14, 2014 by Jay Sata

[jdinasia]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Looking at your avatar.

Looking at your post.

Some of the settlements were around prior to 1947, on lands legally purchased.

Was that before or after the bombing of the hotel?

Was that in the West Bank or Gaza?

[Jay Sata]

Getting back to the issue of the settlements what and where are they leading to .

If Israel genuinely wants a negotiated peace they will have to be handed back or demolished.

[Morch]

The Palestinians rejected the borders that were offered to them in 1948 and declared a war that they lost. Israel "stole" nothing.

Absolutely every settlement is theft.

Looking at your avatar.

Looking at your post.

Some of the settlements were around prior to 1947, on lands legally purchased.

Was that before or after the bombing of the hotel?

Was that in the West Bank or Gaza?

Not sure which hotel you refer to (Kind David?) or how it is even remotely relevant.

The Gush Etzion original settlements, for example, land bought in the 1920's. Were abandoned following Arab attacks years before partition (twice), and then again once hostilities after partition started:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gush_Etzion

Might not make the decision to re-settle a wise one, and obviously there are legal issues. Theft? Not quite.

[Jingthing]

Getting back to the issue of the settlements what and where are they leading to .

If Israel genuinely wants a negotiated peace they will have to be handed back or demolished.

Like Gaza?