Gaza pullout question

[a_unique_person]

Is he? Where is the reference where he states this?

And what is "Palestinian"? Was there some nation of Palestine (with a formal government, laws, taxes, borders, a legal system, a formal military, etc.) at some point?

I am talking about something as simple as property rights.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57936&highlight=illegal

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/585154.html

quote:

Under Likud, illegal outposts received NIS 70 million

By Akiva Eldar, Haaretz Correspondent

The Housing Ministry allocated at least NIS 70 million to build infrastructure and erect public structures in 82 illegal outposts in the West Bank during the prime ministerial terms of Benjamin Netanyahu (1996-1999) and Ariel Sharon (2001-2004), Haaretz has learned from an appendix to attorney Talia Sasson's report on the outposts.

The document also shows that most of the illegal outposts reported by Sasson were established on privately owned Palestinian land.

According to the Sasson report's appendix, 15 of the outposts are located entirely on private land; 39 are partially on private land and partially on state-owned land, or on land whose ownership rights are in question; and 26 lie entirely on state-owned land. Sasson writes in the appendix that an outpost built even partially on privately owned Palestinian land cannot retroactively receive legal status.




Advertisement

As a result, 54 of the 87 outposts reviewed - out of a total of 105 outposts - are "irreparable," the appendix concludes.

The figures in the appendix, correct for June 2004, reveal that the funds were allocated to 753 families and a few dozen bachelors and students who settled in 61 illegal outposts during Netanyahu's term in office, and another 600 individuals who settled in outposts that were established during Sharon's period as prime minister and are slated for immediate evacuation according to the road map peace plan.

The appendix also reports that five outposts that were set up during Yitzhak Rabin's term as prime minister received more than NIS 10 million in funding. Sasson writes that in addition to the 87 outposts about which she managed to accumulate data, there are another 18 outposts about which no clear figures exist.

The sums noted in the appendix do not include tens of millions of shekels allocated to the outposts by the Defense Ministry, the Jewish Agency Settlement Division, regional councils and donors from Israel and abroad. The Jewish Agency did not furnish data on the funds it invested in the outposts and said only that it funded initial encampments, planning, production means and generators.

The Housing Ministry allocated the largest sum - NIS 5.2 million for infrastructure and NIS 750,000 for public structures - to the Nof Harim outpost that was set up in 1995 when Labor MK Benjamin Ben-Eliezer held the position of housing minister. The outpost was established in part on privately owned Palestinian land - without the approval of the cabinet, the defense minister or planning and building authorities.

 

[Freakshow]

I am talking about something as simple as property rights.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57936&highlight=illegal

You stated "Sharon is withdrawing from Gaza because it is Palestinian." Where is your reference for that claim? Where is the quote that shows that is indeed his motivation?

 

[kimiko]

And Israel accepted that deal, and the palestinans didn't.

Precisely. So they shouldn't establish residential areas outside what the UN accepts as Israeli.

 

[Freakshow]

Precisely. So they shouldn't establish residential areas outside what the UN accepts as Israeli.

I would argue that the reasons the deal was rejected by the Palestinians should be studied and considered, to compare it to more recent motivations of behavior in the middle east. If the causes for both are largely bigotry and hatred, then my sympathy to their cause is rather limited.

 

[a_unique_person]

You stated "Sharon is withdrawing from Gaza because it is Palestinian." Where is your reference for that claim? Where is the quote that shows that is indeed his motivation?

The 'five fingers', he has accepted the strategy of making it a part of Israel has failed. Unfortunately, it was the process of violence that led him to that conclusion, not a process of peaceful negotiation.

 

[zenith-nadir]

You stated "Sharon is withdrawing from Gaza because it is Palestinian." Where is your reference for that claim? Where is the quote that shows that is indeed his motivation?

I asked a_u_p twice to provide the dates when Gaza is Palestinian land. He did not answer that question. You asked a_u_p to provide evidence when Gaza is Palestinian land he did not answer the question either.

I provided the statements of Middle East envoy Dennis Ross who was personally there during the negotiations in 2000 and he clearly stated Arafat rejected:

• 97 percent of a contiguous West Bank.
• The Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem
• That east Jerusalem would become the capitol of the Palestinian state.
• That Israel would have gotten completely out of Gaza.
• An elevated highway, an elevated railroad between Gaza and the West Bank
• $30 billion compensation for refugees.

Instead Arafat walked out of those negotiations and the Palestinians launched the current 5-year-old intifada because Sharon "visited" the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Talk about losers.

So what does a_u_p do? He ignores the repeated calls for evidence to back up his claims - that Gaza is historically Palestinian land - and instead posts an article about the Israeli housing ministry.

At this point it is painfully obvious to anyone reading this that a_u_p is not interested in evidence or truth he is interested in continuing the MYTHS that Oslo delt with settlements - which it did not - and that this conflict is about settlements - which it is not.

And there is no better place to dispell these commonly-held myths than on a skeptics message board.

 

[zenith-nadir]

I would argue that the reasons the deal was rejected by the Palestinians should be studied and considered, to compare it to more recent motivations of behavior in the middle east. If the causes for both are largely bigotry and hatred, then my sympathy to their cause is rather limited.

Remove all the turnspeak and propoganda and the real reason the deal was rejected by Arafat because Arafat refused to accept that muslims should have to go onto Jewish land to visit Haram al-Sharif.

Dennis Ross - the guy who was actually there during the negotiations - illustrated it:

In fact, during the 15 days there, he never himself raised a single idea. His negotiators did, to be fair to them, but he didn't. The only new idea he raised at Camp David was that the temple didn't exist in Jerusalem, it existed in Nablus.

and

He supposed to give, on Jerusalem, the idea that there would be for the Israelis sovereignty over the Western Wall, which would cover the areas that are of religious significance to Israel. He rejected that.

Arafat threw away everything - 97 percent of a contiguous West Bank, the arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem, east Jerusalem as the capitol of the future Palestinian state, Israel completely out of Gaza, an elevated highway plus an elevated railroad between Gaza and the West Bank and $30 billion compensation for refugees - because of that one point - Haram al-Sharif.

Arafat was given a hero's welcome upon his return to Gaza from Camp David for refusing to compromise on Jerusalem (photo: AP)

[edited to add]

'Tomorrow Jerusalem,' Abbas exults - Aug. 14, 2005 8:38

Less than three days after he urged Palestinians to refrain from excessive celebrations over the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Friday presided over a huge celebration in Gaza City where he declared: "Today we are celebrating the liberation of Gaza and the northern West Bank; tomorrow we will celebrate the liberation of Jerusalem."

 

[a_unique_person]

I asked a_u_p twice to provide the dates when Gaza is Palestinian land. He did not answer that question. You asked a_u_p to provide evidence when Gaza is Palestinian land he did not answer the question either.

I provided the statements of Middle East envoy Dennis Ross who was personally there during the negotiations in 2000 and he clearly stated Arafat rejected:

• 97 percent of a contiguous West Bank.
• The Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem
• That east Jerusalem would become the capitol of the Palestinian state.
• That Israel would have gotten completely out of Gaza.
• An elevated highway, an elevated railroad between Gaza and the West Bank
• $30 billion compensation for refugees.

Instead Arafat walked out of those negotiations and the Palestinians launched the current 5-year-old intifada because Sharon "visited" the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Talk about losers.

So what does a_u_p do? He ignores the repeated calls for evidence to back up his claims - that Gaza is historically Palestinian land - and instead posts an article about the Israeli housing ministry.

That's because it's where they live.

At this point it is painfully obvious to anyone reading this that a_u_p is not interested in evidence or truth he is interested in continuing the MYTHS that Oslo delt with settlements - which it did not - and that this conflict is about settlements - which it is not.

And there is no better place to dispell these commonly-held myths than on a skeptics message board.

Oslo did deal with settlements, there were to be more negotiations, which never amounted to anything. The Palestinians, as far as I can tell, knew then they had been taken for a ride.

 

[zenith-nadir]

That's because it's where they live.

When was Gaza Palestinian land a_u_p. It's a simple question which you can answer with simple dates.

Oslo did deal with settlements, there were to be more negotiations, which never amounted to anything. The Palestinians, as far as I can tell, knew then they had been taken for a ride.

Allow me to post the text of Oslo for the 500th time:

Permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, Israeli settlements in the area, security and borders were deliberately excluded from the Accords and determined as not prejudged.

Article 5: Transition and permanent status

The five-year transitional period would begin with the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and Jericho area. Permanent status negotiations would commence as soon as possible between Israel and the Palestinian representatives. It was understood that the negotiations should cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.

Annex 2: Israeli forces withdrawal

An agreement on the withdrawal of Israeli military forces from the Gaza Strip and Jericho area. This agreement will include comprehensive arrangements to apply in the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area subsequent to the Israeli withdrawal.

Structure, powers and responsibilities of the Palestinian authority in these areas, except: external security, settlements, Israelis, foreign relations, and other mutually agreed matters.

That is the text and that is the truth. Anyone can Google it and NOWHERE in Oslo does it deal with the issue of settlements. Settlements were to be delt with in FUTURE negotiations. Period. End of myth.

 

[a_unique_person]

When was Gaza Palestinian land a_u_p. It's a simple question which you can answer with simple dates.

For the time they lived there. When was it ever Israeli land? When was the USA ever American Land?

Allow me to post the text of Oslo for the 500th time:



That is the text and that is the truth. Anyone can Google it and NOWHERE in Oslo does it deal with the issue of settlements. Period. End of myth.

Yes, the issue of soveriengty, handing over, settlements, to be disussed. Only it never was. You can argue 'bad faith' all you want, everyone knows what it is when you deny the obvious. The notion that there would ever be peace (the whole point of oslo) with settlements being decided, is absurd.

 

[zenith-nadir]

For the time they lived there. When was it ever Israeli land? When was the USA ever American Land?

When was Gaza Palestinian land. Simple dates will do.

Yes, the issue of soveriengty, handing over, settlements, to be disussed. Only it never was. You can argue 'bad faith' all you want, everyone knows what it is when you deny the obvious. The notion that there would ever be peace (the whole point of oslo) with settlements being decided, is absurd.

Absurd to you.... I guess because all these years you have been saying that Oslo delt with settlements - which it doesn't. Now that it has been proven repeatedly on JREF that Oslo deliberately excluded permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and Israeli settlements your whole house of cards comes crashing down.

Eventually, one day, I know you are smart enough to come to the realization that at a certain point it becomes impossible to blame Palestinian misfortunes on everyone else.

 

[a_unique_person]

When was Gaza Palestinian land. Simple dates will do.Absurd to you.... I guess because all these years you have been saying that Oslo delt with settlements - which it doesn't. Now that it has been proven repeatedly on JREF that Oslo deliberately excluded permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and Israeli settlements your whole house of cards comes crashing down.

Eventually, one day, I know you are smart enough to come to the realization that at a certain point it becomes impossible to blame Palestinian misfortunes on everyone else.

When they lived there, obviously. The fact that there are over a million Gazans to about 6000 Israelis gives some indication of the fact.

 

[a_unique_person]

When was Gaza Palestinian land. Simple dates will do.Absurd to you.... I guess because all these years you have been saying that Oslo delt with settlements - which it doesn't. Now that it has been proven repeatedly on JREF that Oslo deliberately excluded permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and Israeli settlements your whole house of cards comes crashing down.

Eventually, one day, I know you are smart enough to come to the realization that at a certain point it becomes impossible to blame Palestinian misfortunes on everyone else.

It's not my house of cards that comes crashing down, bad faith means that it's the people on both sides who die and suffer because for some, it's more important to stick to an point rather than concern for people and their issues.

 

[zenith-nadir]

When they lived there, obviously. The fact that there are over a million Gazans to about 6000 Israelis gives some indication of the fact.

The reason you cannot answer the question put to you several times now is because Gaza was never Palestinian land. Yet Gaza has been continuously inhabited for more than 3,000 years. Palestinians may "live" there but it was Philistine land, Greek land, Persian land, Ottoman land, British land, Egyptian land and then Israeli land.

I am not deligitimizing the Palestinians or that they will have Gaza for a state. I am debunking the myth that Gaza is historically Palestinian land.

t's not my house of cards that comes crashing down, bad faith means that it's the people on both sides who die and suffer because for some, it's more important to stick to an point rather than concern for people and their issues.

Since Oslo DID NOT deal with permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and Israeli settlements there is no bad faith issue. Oslo didn't deal with settlements, it was very specific about that and nowhere in Oslo does it say there shall be a halt to settlement building. So there is no bad faith.

All those articles you've read about bad faith and Oslo are sour grapes and propoganda. On September 13, 1993 representatives of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) signed the "Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements", a document also known as the "Oslo Accords". Oslo did not say there shall be a halt to settlement building and Arafat signed on the dotted line.

If Oslo had said there shall be a halt to settlement building and Arafat signed on the dotted line then yes, Israel would have been acting in bad faith, but it didn't. Period. End of myth.


{edited to add}

Oslo failed because the democratic world, including Israel, thought that peace could be made with a dictatorship.
Natan Sharansky

 

[a_unique_person]

The reason you cannot answer the question put to you several times now is because Gaza was never Palestinian land. Yet Gaza has been continuously inhabited for more than 3,000 years. Palestinians may "live" there but it was Philistine land, Greek land, Persian land, Ottoman land, British land, Egyptian land and then Israeli land.

I am not deligitimizing the Palestinians or that they will have Gaza for a state. I am debunking the myth that Gaza is historically Palestinian land.

Since Oslo DID NOT deal with permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and Israeli settlements there is no bad faith issue. Oslo didn't deal with settlements, it was very specific about that and nowhere in Oslo does it say there shall be a halt to settlement building. So there is no bad faith.

All those articles you've read about bad faith and Oslo are sour grapes and propoganda. On September 13, 1993 representatives of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) signed the "Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements", a document also known as the "Oslo Accords". Oslo did not say there shall be a halt to settlement building and Arafat signed on the dotted line.

If Oslo had said there shall be a halt to settlement building and Arafat signed on the dotted line then yes, Israel would have been acting in bad faith, but it didn't. Period. End of myth.


{edited to add}

Oslo failed because the democratic world, including Israel, thought that peace could be made with a dictatorship.
Natan Sharansky

Yeah, well, we know how much store is placed in Nate by the current Israeli leadership, don't we.

 

[Mycroft]

Yeah, well, we know how much store is placed in Nate by the current Israeli leadership, don't we.

Complete non sequitur. What Sharansky thinks about the cirrent administration has nothing to do with his observations about Oslo. They would be the same even if he approved of teh current administration.

 

[webfusion]

I have a question, also

OK, lets' ask ourselves, what kind of society promulgates this display of burning hatred, this thrill at the destruction of Jewish homes, this kind of celebration of brutal violence, this indoctrination of children?

By this photo, I am instantly reminded of Kristallnacht.


Disgusting.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Re: I have a question, also

OK, lets' ask ourselves, what kind of society promulgates this display of burning hatred, this thrill at the destruction of Jewish homes, this kind of celebration of brutal violence, this indoctrination of children? Disgusting.

Key word. CHILDREN. The caption of the photo is:

Palestinian youths burn a model of a Jewish settlement during a demonstration organized by a youth organization affiliated to the ruling Fatah movement in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah Sunday Aug. 14, 2005. (AP Photo/Khalil Hamra)

link here

The ruling party of the Palestinian Authority incites hatred of Israel and jews to children. Truely sick. This is why Oslo failed a_u_p.

I have never seen an Israeli demonstration where Palestinians flags or models of Palestinian villages were burnt in public. If someone has such evidence I would like to see it.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: I have a question, also

Key word. CHILDREN. The caption of the photo is: The ruling party of the Palestinian Authority incites hatred of Israel and jews to children. Truely sick. This is why Oslo failed a_u_p.

I have never seen an Israeli demonstration where Palestinians flags or models of Palestinian villages were burnt in public. If someone has such evidence I would like to see it.

It's not 'the' reason. As for the children, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=suicide&itemNo=608350

Avid surfers from several Gush Katif communities are threatening to take their boards out to sea on evacuation day and commit mass suicide by drowning. Settlement secretariats, psychologists and social workers have known about the plans of these young men, aged 16-21, for several weeks.

they are all being subject to stress and abuse. I would like to see the whole sorry mess ended as soon as possible.

Did it ever have to get so bad?

 

[zenith-nadir]

Re: Re: Re: I have a question, also

It's not 'the' reason. As for the children, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=suicide&itemNo=608350
they are all being subject to stress and abuse. I would like to see the whole sorry mess ended as soon as possible.
Did it ever have to get so bad?

And that's the whole point a_u_p. The jewish kids are taught to surf while the Palestinian kids are taught to burn Israeli effigies, Israeli flags and jewish symbols.