Earlier this week the Washington Post continued the plague of the neoconservatives by running a piece by Elliott Abrams in favor of the Israeli colonies, and including this ugly statement:
An entity. Abrams is free to think anything he likes. The tragedy is that this religious-chauvinist view gets any airtime in a newspaper that still influences policy. Well at least today the Post ran a great letter by Gregory Eow and Brian Rush Simpson, denouncing the settlements. Eow and Simpson have been to the West Bank and had their eyes opened. How unfair that just when J Street and Obama are trying to change course, the Post gives room for Abrams's op-ed, but doesn't give Eow and Simpson space for an op-ed of their own. Eow and Simpson make this point better than I do:
Previously, we had thought it was Palestinian intransigence that
prevented a two-state solution. A look at the settlements demolishes
this explanation. The settlements and the maze of Israelis-only roads
and military checkpoints to sustain them makes clear that successive
Israeli governments — Labor and Likud alike, as Mr. Abrams noted –
have actively pursued policies aimed at colonizing the West Bank.
That prevents the establishment of a viable and contiguous
Palestinian state, and we are saddened that the conversation has
degraded to the point that we now discuss whether illegal land grabs
ought to be frozen rather than uprooted.
ABRAMS: "Ten years of settlement activity would have resulted in a larger area for the Palestinian state."
ME: Ergo, maximizing settlement activity will result in the largest area for a Palestinian state. Oh, I get it…the one-state solution: Greater Palestine!
"successive Israeli governments — Labor and Likud alike… — have actively pursued policies aimed at colonizing the West Bank.
We used to say that Likud talks about building settlements, Labor builds them.
Aw it's only been going on for 40+ years–only another 40 or so to go; then Greater Israel will just be unique in how many nice zoos it has–caution-don't feed the animals.
Consider this: if we were to refer to Arab residential locations in Israel as "settlements" and suggest that Israel, for peace, must be granted freedom from Arab colonization so that it could have a viable and contiguous Jewish state, would Eow and Simpson agree? Would they even go as far as to insist on Arabs relinquishing all their settlements, thus creating an all-Jewish state in Israel to match, what they imply, will be an all-Arab state in a future "Palestine"? Is this the way to peace?
Yisrael,
Seeing as the Arabs have lived there for at least a couple of centuries (I'm thinking longer), I don't think they can be called settlements. West Bank settlements, which are built on land legally owned by Arabs, contain people that have moved there willingly with the aim of colonising the land and making it part of Israel, are exactly what they're called – illegal settlements.
To add, when you live in your settlement, do you see it as part of Palestine or as part of Israel? (I'm pretty sure it's the latter). Are the Arabs living in Israel calling for the land that they reside in, to be part of a Palestine – I don't think they are.
Joachim Martillo used to do business in Israel. Now he supports Divestment
Here's a preview of Hamastan:
CNN) — A Saudi mother is expected to appeal a judge's ruling after he once again refused to let her 8-year-old daughter divorce a 47-year-old man, a relative said.
Sheikh Habib Al-Habib made the ruling Saturday in the Saudi city of Onaiza. Late last year, he rejected a petition to annul the marriage.
The case, which has drawn criticism from local and international rights groups, came to light in December when Al-Habib declined to annul the marriage on a legal technicality. His dismissal of the mother's petition sparked outrage and made headlines around the world.
The judge said the mother, who is separated from the girl's father, was not the legal guardian and therefore could not represent her daughter, the mother's lawyer, Abdullah al-Jutaili, said at the time.
The girl's husband pledged not to consummate the marriage until the girl reaches puberty, according to al-Jutaili, who added that the girl's father arranged the marriage to settle his debts with the man, who is considered "a close friend."
Harry, did this happen in Gaza as a result of Hamas? NO
Is Britain to blame for a miscarriage of justice in the US? NO
Please take your Muslim and Arab hatred somewhere where it's wanted.
Here's a more comprehensive coverage of Fenton's diversionary article:
• Although there is no gender equality in the Middle East (including in Israel), the phenomena of sexism and misogyny are global—not peculiar to Islam, or to the Middle East.
• The status of women varies widely in the Middle East, and one should not project the norms in Saudi Arabia—one of the most sexist and oppressive states in the region—onto the larger Muslim world.
• Many of the causes for the inferior status of Middle Eastern women are indigenous, but the West—especially the U.S.—has exacerbated this oppression.
• link to fpif.org
Citizen
Didn't anyone ever teach you to READ properly? You're only supposed to pay attention to material critical of the Muslim world.
Why not let Fenton be your guide? He quite sensibly avoids subversive literature written by the very women who have been in the trenches courageously fighting inequality for decades, such as RAWA, the organization of Afghan women who repeatedly cite America's dreadful and murderous policies in their country as a leading source of ongoing suffering and misery for women.
Neither the US nor Jehadies and Taliban,
Long Live the Struggle of Independent and Democratic Forces of Afghanistan!
http://www.rawa.org/events/sevenyear_e.htm
Iraqi women were much, much, much better off before the United States so kindly liberated them. They had virtual equality, written into law, before the U.S. sent Iraq into a downward spiral by first destroying the place and then for 13 years making recovery impossible by a deadly, inhuman blockade.
Syrian women have near-equality now.
And gender equality is in some respects an illusion in the United States.
And don't forget the main thing Fenton didn't want to discuss: Any human, including arab females,
have as their first concern, they and their families physical safety, having food on the table, a roof over their heads, etc–time after that to grow female equality before the law–same re homosexuals. Strafe babies & young kids with free F-16s & Apache helicopters on burn & run missions, then
tell us so what–arab men like little girls? Atta boy, Fenton!
Isn't Israel one of the world leaders in human trafficking? Young women forced into prostitution in Israel.
What's your opinion of that Harry?