Peace Now makes no bones about being a Zionist organization(they initially supported the war on Lebanon. Some peace group), but has admitted a great deal of settlements are on legally owned Palestinian land. If you think about it, all Jewish Israelis are living on Palestinian owned land.
Related
HOW ISRAEL CONTROLS WHAT YOU READ
The Orwellian named CAMERA: Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
CAMERA is a particularly vile far right Zionist propaganda organ that distorts the truth into absurdity on a regular basis.
---
Peace Now committed to truth
CAMERA's condemnation of Peace Now report nothing but spin, distortion
Ori Nir Published: 03.29.07, 10:31 / Israel Opinion
CAMERA’s continued criticism of Peace Now’s report on West Bank settlement construction on private Palestinian land (Tamar Sternthal: “Wildly inaccurate report” – 21 March 2007) is odd.
It’s peculiar because the newly submitted official Israeli government data, with which Peace Now updated its November 2006 report on this issue, strongly substantiates the original report. The official data, which Peace Now was able to receive from the West Bank’s Civil Administration after a long legal battle, leave no room for doubt about Peace Now’s findings: Large portions of the West Bank land in control of the settlers – as much as one third – are privately owned by Palestinians.
This finding has serious implications for Israel’s security and for the legality of these settlement sites under Israeli law.
You would think that the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America would be interested in presenting the facts - accurately. But since CAMERA’s Sternthal did such a poor job with them in her commentary, let’s review:
The original Peace Now report was based on Civil Administration data, dated 2004, which was leaked to Peace Now by a credible source. Peace Now held off for a long time before releasing its report, hoping that the government would respond positively to its request to provide the official data. Unfortunately, this didn’t happen, and Peace Now was forced to sue the government under Israel’s freedom of information law.
When the government did eventually respond, it argued that release of the data could damage Israel’s foreign relations. Peace Now understood this as a clear indication both that the government recognized how embarrassing and compromising the facts were, and that the government was ready to go to great lengths to avoid releasing the data.
Peace Now subsequently decided to release its report, based on the leaked data, in part to challenge the government to release what clearly ought to be in the public domain. This tactic appears to have worked, and shortly after the report’s was published, the government agreed to settle out of court and released the official data.
This new dataset is dated 2007. The information is fresh and it is official. And it generally substantiates the findings of November’s report. Yes, there are discrepancies between the two reports but they reflect differences between the two datasets, not errors in Peace Now’s thesis or analysis.
The whole truth
In some cases, the new data paint a picture that is worse than originally reported: In some settlements, the percentage of privately owned Palestinian land is larger than what the 2004 database showed. In other cases, the percentage of privately owned Palestinian land is smaller than what the 2004 database showed.
One such settlement is Ma’ale Adumim, the second-largest settlement in the West Bank. What CAMERA fails to note, or tries to hide, is that this one case accounts for nearly the entire difference between the 2004 and the 2007 data. If you leave Ma’ale Adumim out of the analysis, the remaining discrepancies amount to only 1%.
What is the reason for the differences between these two sets of data? There is no clear answer. Those who may know sit in the Civil Administration, and they are not telling. We can only speculate: Possibly, there were land acquisitions between 2004 and 2007, or, more likely, some of the land could have been declared “State Land.” It is also possible that the differences are a result of the reexamination of West Bank land status by a newly appointed Civil Administration taskforce (known as the “Blue Line Team.”)
Whatever the reason, Peace Now has not tried to hide the discrepancies, regardless of whether they paint a better or worse picture of the situation. Peace Now promptly updated the public with all of the new data right after completing its analysis earlier this month.
CAMERA, however, seems more interested in discrediting Peace Now than in telling the story straight. It is yet another example for how an organization that purports to promote “accuracy” offers nothing more than spin and distortion.
Peace Now has done its utmost - and will continue to do so - to bring the best available information about settlements into the public domain. Unlike CAMERA, it does not fear the truth and does not distort it. It certainly was not Peace Now who created the damaging facts on the ground in the West Bank.
What happens in the West Bank impacts the security and wellbeing of all Israelis. Peace Now and its American sister organization believe that Israelis and their friends in America have the right to know the truth about it. The whole truth.
Ori Nir, former West Bank correspondent for the Israeli daily Haaretz, is the spokesman for Americans for Peace Now, a Zionist organization that promotes Israel's security through peace.
Showing posts with label land. Show all posts
Showing posts with label land. Show all posts
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Academic slams Israel for land grab
Web posted at: 3/29/2007 8:20:5
Source ::: The Peninsula
by Mohammed Iqbal
Doha • Dr Ilan Pappe is the only Jewish academic in Israel who is vehemently critical of Zionism and the formation of the Israeli state in the land of Palestine.
A senior lecturer of political science at Haifa University, Pappe says that he is now planning to migrate to the UK with his family, as he has found it increasingly difficult to live in Israel with his “unwelcome” views and convictions.
“I was boycotted in my university and there had been attempts to expel me from my job. I am getting threatening calls from people every day. I am not being viewed as a threat to the Israeli society but my people think that I am either insane or my views are irrelevant. Many Israelis also believe that I am working as a mercenary for the Arabs,” said Pappe in an interview with The Peninsula yesterday.
On his first-ever visit to a Gulf state, Pappe was in Doha yesterday at the invitation of the Qatar Foundation to speak at the Doha Debates. He believes that two independent states cannot co-exist in the land of Palestine and the only lasting solution to the issue is formation of one state, shared by Jews, Arabs and other communities living there. He also feels that there is no immediate solution to the crisis and only international pressure can force Israel to end the occupation and the continuing atrocities against the Palestinians.
"Over the past six years, the Israeli government has become more oppressive, thanks to the strong support from the Bush administration. They now feel that they can do anything they want," said Pappe.
He was born in Israel in 1954 of German parents who fled Nazi oppression during the1930s. They migrated to Palestine directly from Germany, years before the formation of the Israeli state in 1948.
Pappe's transformation from a "typical" Jew to a strong critic of Zionism started in the Eighties while he was studying history in England. "I re-examined the events of 1948, which changed my perceptions and I realised how the Israeli state was formed at the expense of the Palestinians. I don't subscribe to the view that a community which has a claim to a land that goes back thousands of years had the right to occupy it by dispossessing indigenous communities," Pappe said.
He noted that the Jews constituted a mere one per cent of the Palestinian population before the Israeli state was formed. The West, he felt, was supportive of Israel because of its "guilt complex" about the Holocaust and the oppression of the Jews.
"The Nazi movement and the Holocaust were not just German phenomena but a part of European history. The Western countries thought they can bury this chapter forever by creating a Jewish state in Palestine. But later they realised that the Palestinian issue is much more complex that what they had calculated," said Pappe.
There is a glimmer of hope with international public opinion growing against Israel, even among the powerful Jewish community in the West. There is a movement formed by a group of Jews in the US which called `Not in My Name'" As the name itself implies, members of this group do not want atrocities being committed by Israel to be attributed to Jews across the world. They are clearly trying to distance themselves from crimes being committed by Israel in the occupied territories.
The historian felt the George W Bush administration is mainly responsible for the current situation and the US policy towards Israel would change with a change in the government. "The policy of supporting Israel and seeking friendship with the Arabs cannot go hand-in-hand," said Pappe.
A bit surprisingly, he said: "I support Hamas in its resistance against the Israeli occupation though I disagree with their political ideology. I am for separating state from religion," said Pappe.
He feels that Israeli democracy is meant only for Jews and there is no space for other communities. "Any state that perpetrates occupation cannot be called a democratic state," he commented.
Source ::: The Peninsula
by Mohammed Iqbal
Doha • Dr Ilan Pappe is the only Jewish academic in Israel who is vehemently critical of Zionism and the formation of the Israeli state in the land of Palestine.
A senior lecturer of political science at Haifa University, Pappe says that he is now planning to migrate to the UK with his family, as he has found it increasingly difficult to live in Israel with his “unwelcome” views and convictions.
“I was boycotted in my university and there had been attempts to expel me from my job. I am getting threatening calls from people every day. I am not being viewed as a threat to the Israeli society but my people think that I am either insane or my views are irrelevant. Many Israelis also believe that I am working as a mercenary for the Arabs,” said Pappe in an interview with The Peninsula yesterday.
On his first-ever visit to a Gulf state, Pappe was in Doha yesterday at the invitation of the Qatar Foundation to speak at the Doha Debates. He believes that two independent states cannot co-exist in the land of Palestine and the only lasting solution to the issue is formation of one state, shared by Jews, Arabs and other communities living there. He also feels that there is no immediate solution to the crisis and only international pressure can force Israel to end the occupation and the continuing atrocities against the Palestinians.
"Over the past six years, the Israeli government has become more oppressive, thanks to the strong support from the Bush administration. They now feel that they can do anything they want," said Pappe.
He was born in Israel in 1954 of German parents who fled Nazi oppression during the1930s. They migrated to Palestine directly from Germany, years before the formation of the Israeli state in 1948.
Pappe's transformation from a "typical" Jew to a strong critic of Zionism started in the Eighties while he was studying history in England. "I re-examined the events of 1948, which changed my perceptions and I realised how the Israeli state was formed at the expense of the Palestinians. I don't subscribe to the view that a community which has a claim to a land that goes back thousands of years had the right to occupy it by dispossessing indigenous communities," Pappe said.
He noted that the Jews constituted a mere one per cent of the Palestinian population before the Israeli state was formed. The West, he felt, was supportive of Israel because of its "guilt complex" about the Holocaust and the oppression of the Jews.
"The Nazi movement and the Holocaust were not just German phenomena but a part of European history. The Western countries thought they can bury this chapter forever by creating a Jewish state in Palestine. But later they realised that the Palestinian issue is much more complex that what they had calculated," said Pappe.
There is a glimmer of hope with international public opinion growing against Israel, even among the powerful Jewish community in the West. There is a movement formed by a group of Jews in the US which called `Not in My Name'" As the name itself implies, members of this group do not want atrocities being committed by Israel to be attributed to Jews across the world. They are clearly trying to distance themselves from crimes being committed by Israel in the occupied territories.
The historian felt the George W Bush administration is mainly responsible for the current situation and the US policy towards Israel would change with a change in the government. "The policy of supporting Israel and seeking friendship with the Arabs cannot go hand-in-hand," said Pappe.
A bit surprisingly, he said: "I support Hamas in its resistance against the Israeli occupation though I disagree with their political ideology. I am for separating state from religion," said Pappe.
He feels that Israeli democracy is meant only for Jews and there is no space for other communities. "Any state that perpetrates occupation cannot be called a democratic state," he commented.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
A racist law we cannot accept
Last update - 02:23 27/03/2007
A law we cannot accept
By Haaretz Editorial
The Citizenship Law continues to burden the law books and cause damage to the reputation of democracy in Israel. The blow to the right of Arab Israeli citizens to choose to live here with their partners is sweeping and detrimental to the rights of Arab citizens.
The amendment to the Citizenship Law was approved by the High Court of Justice exactly a year ago, with a majority of six justices in favor and five opposed. But it was obvious then that the approval was conditional and temporary, and would require significant changes if the state were to opt to make it permanent. Justice Edmond Levy, who joined the majority opinion and in essence legitimized the illegitimate, was of the opinion that he was voting in favor of extending the law by only two months. Meanwhile, the law was extended repeatedly, and this week it was extended for more than a year.
The state's promise to the High Court of Justice to make changes to the law - after the former president of the Supreme Court, Aharon Barak (who led the minority view), said that the prohibition was not proportional and that it undermined the constitutional right to equality and family - was not carried out. Even though a committee examining special humanitarian cases was established to evaluate each case independently (since the law states specifically that humanitarian issues cannot serve as the basis for the presence of a partner or a child in Israel) in practice, there is very little flexibility. If the centrality of the humanitarian argument is rejected at the outset, it is doubtful whether the committee has any practical significance.
The head of the committee is appointed by the Interior Minister, and it can be assumed that his views will hover over it. It is possible that a minister stricter than Roni Bar-On will be appointed in the future, who may not permit any such requests. In fact, the law allows the minister to prevent categorically the reunification of families with Arab citizens from countries in the region or the territories.
MK Zahava Gal-On, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and Adalah have not despaired of the possibility that the law will be revoked by the High Court of Justice, since their petition against the law still stands, and the view of Barak, who assumed the law would be rescinded for being unconstitutional unless it is changed, still echoes. Establishing a committee with such limited authority to examine special cases does not satisfy the petitioners and they are hoping that the High Court of Justice will also not be satisfied with this minimal development.
The main problem with the Citizenship Law in its new format is the lie inherent in its content - as if it is purely a security-related issue. When the state wants to annex[steal] territory, it ignores the security risk of including hundreds of thousands of hostile Palestinians. A large part of the requests for reunion come from residents of East Jerusalem, from whom it would have been possible to disengage some time ago if it were not for the delusional dream of unifying all the parts of the city.
The Citizenship Law does not further the country's security, but rather damages it by broadening the gap between the rights of Israel's Jewish and Arab citizens. It would have been better to do away with this amendment to the law and for the Interior Ministry to reject or approve requests for family reunification on an individual basis, on the basis of the opinion of security sources, just as it has been throughout the state's existence.
A law we cannot accept
By Haaretz Editorial
The Citizenship Law continues to burden the law books and cause damage to the reputation of democracy in Israel. The blow to the right of Arab Israeli citizens to choose to live here with their partners is sweeping and detrimental to the rights of Arab citizens.
The amendment to the Citizenship Law was approved by the High Court of Justice exactly a year ago, with a majority of six justices in favor and five opposed. But it was obvious then that the approval was conditional and temporary, and would require significant changes if the state were to opt to make it permanent. Justice Edmond Levy, who joined the majority opinion and in essence legitimized the illegitimate, was of the opinion that he was voting in favor of extending the law by only two months. Meanwhile, the law was extended repeatedly, and this week it was extended for more than a year.
The state's promise to the High Court of Justice to make changes to the law - after the former president of the Supreme Court, Aharon Barak (who led the minority view), said that the prohibition was not proportional and that it undermined the constitutional right to equality and family - was not carried out. Even though a committee examining special humanitarian cases was established to evaluate each case independently (since the law states specifically that humanitarian issues cannot serve as the basis for the presence of a partner or a child in Israel) in practice, there is very little flexibility. If the centrality of the humanitarian argument is rejected at the outset, it is doubtful whether the committee has any practical significance.
The head of the committee is appointed by the Interior Minister, and it can be assumed that his views will hover over it. It is possible that a minister stricter than Roni Bar-On will be appointed in the future, who may not permit any such requests. In fact, the law allows the minister to prevent categorically the reunification of families with Arab citizens from countries in the region or the territories.
MK Zahava Gal-On, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and Adalah have not despaired of the possibility that the law will be revoked by the High Court of Justice, since their petition against the law still stands, and the view of Barak, who assumed the law would be rescinded for being unconstitutional unless it is changed, still echoes. Establishing a committee with such limited authority to examine special cases does not satisfy the petitioners and they are hoping that the High Court of Justice will also not be satisfied with this minimal development.
The main problem with the Citizenship Law in its new format is the lie inherent in its content - as if it is purely a security-related issue. When the state wants to annex[steal] territory, it ignores the security risk of including hundreds of thousands of hostile Palestinians. A large part of the requests for reunion come from residents of East Jerusalem, from whom it would have been possible to disengage some time ago if it were not for the delusional dream of unifying all the parts of the city.
The Citizenship Law does not further the country's security, but rather damages it by broadening the gap between the rights of Israel's Jewish and Arab citizens. It would have been better to do away with this amendment to the law and for the Interior Ministry to reject or approve requests for family reunification on an individual basis, on the basis of the opinion of security sources, just as it has been throughout the state's existence.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)