Gershom Gorenberg in Foreign Policy:
"The classic definition of chutzpah is murdering your parents and begging for the mercy of the court because you're an orphan. Adding thousands of settlers to existing communities so that later you can claim that evacuating them would be too great a trauma could be another definition."
Except Israel has evacuated 1000's of settlers twice before. Perhaps it is chutzpah to state otherwise?
The ugly reality is that several hundred thousand will have to be removed for any chance of a stable final-status agreement. It is delusion to think otherwise; a fragmented and non-contiguous Palestinian state riven with corridors to numerous small colonies is not going to work. This bickering over a 'freeze' is just the preliminary skirmish. We Americans know very well that we will end up paying the tab for relocation of the colonists. It is in our interest to stop this 'natural growth' nonsense immediately. Every new colonist we pay to move in now via our massive subsidies is another we will have to pay to move out later. Enough is enough. We should force their hand now. If Israel wants to annex the Occupied Palestinian Territories and become a Jewish-minority apartheid state pariah, then they are a doomed cause and we should quit throwing good money after bad and cut them adrift now.
Just for reference, Gorenberg made the point of Phil's quote specifically relative to the point allowing natural growth to then move them, NOT relative to the individuals that have lived there for 20, 30, 40 years, for whom it really is their homes, for some of the children the only place that they've lived. But, as many have stated the best outcome is if the ones that reside in the West Bank, then become Palestinian citizens. Thats if they regard the specific land as that important. They should be entitled to all the rights of citizens, including equal due process under the law. "Remove them" is a square peg solution to an curved square hole. It looks like it should fit, but doesn't.
Most of the settlements cannot support themselves if left inside Palestinian State. They rely on work in Israel proper. If commuting will become difficult, only those for whom Land is more important than Israel will remain. IF, and it is a big if, they accept Palestinian law, they may well stay. But how many will accept Arab neighbours in their mist, and, for example, obligation for their children to be schooled in the state schools?
It's chutzpah alright. The settlement sob story has run out of steam. It is now seen for what it has always been, an illegal land grab. Israel is just pulling another fast one when it tries to convince us that it is our problem. It always was and always will be Israel's problem. Our first priority should be to stop it becoming a bigger problem for Israel by not sending any more of the money that constructs and sustains the settlements. When the matter of is brought to the attention of the authorities, they become inexplicably coy and patronizing, thereby making themselves, to a degree, complicit in the land grab. "Internal Revenue Service receives an IRmep criminal complaint about US nonprofit organizations laundering money and benefiting from IRS granted tax exemption, but refuses to comment on enforcement action: New York US Attorney Michael J. Garcia receives a formal criminal complaint on US-Israel charitable money laundering activity in his jurisdiction, but refuses to comment about possible law enforcement action." http://www.irmep.org/ila/moneylaunder/ Not interested? Well you should be because everyone else is.
So the debt-ridden US taxpayers, their children yet to be born already so harnessed, interest rates charged the USA by foreign countries to go up, will have the cost of Jewish settler transfer (and Palestinian equitable adjustments) added to their burden? What will such increased debt buy them and their children? And this will be on top of current annual aid to Israel, Egypt, and Jordan, all in the best interests of Israel? If so, does this suggest Calfornia, for starters, should be bailed out? And all of this with the increasing disparity of income within the states, ever more transfered to the top 5% of the USA? A medieval serf gave one third of his work each year to the lord of the manor; we are already at that level for most working Americans.
Then they would choose to move back to Israel.
All 400,000 Jewish colonists arrived in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967 will have to go. The whole point of these later settlers arrivals is to take attention away from the earlier ones, as with Lieberman's "settlements that everybody agrees are no longer settlements". They're all settlements, no matter how many bigots want to normalise them.
"But hang on," you say, "they can do what they want with their money, it is not as though we are paying for for it." OK, read this edited version of something I posted earlier, and draw your own conclusions. "Here is a bit of local gossip. "Billionaire Frank Lowy, Australia's second-richest person, set up a secret Liechtenstein bank account to hide at least $US68 million ($70 million) from tax collectors, a US Senate panel said. Lowy, founder of Westfield Group, the world's biggest shopping mall owner, concealed assets with the help of bankers at LGT Group,… a bank owned by Liechtenstein's royal family, and UBS AG, Switzerland's biggest bank, … the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report said. … Assets from the LGT account were given to charities in Israel, he said. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/26/231... Then there was this on Mondoweiss last week. "An Israeli friend of mine whose father chauffeured PM … told me that the huge donations that go to Israel go through the PM office first. 10% or 20% is taken off the top, and the rest put into the donor's bank account that they can access via a debit card but usually it's "onward-forwarded" to accounts in (Liechtenstein), Austria, or Bermuda. My friend's father made some of those bank runs. FYI. Posted by:MRW | July 30, 2008 at 06:37 PM" http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/26/231... So if I don't want to pay too much tax, I can donate the money to an entity in Israel which will then make the bulk of the money available via debit card for me (and my pals) to spend? Have I got that right? Great idea, the tax that I would have paid now goes to "charity" in Israel where maybe it can help fund "settlements" and other good works. The taxpayers will also have a warm glow knowing they are funding my charitable works. It's another win-win-win situation!" This guy is the apple of the Ozzie political mileau's eye. He is currently being lionized by them because he promises to bring the soccer World Cup to our wide brown land. Lowy's son clams up at US Senate grilling …"Senator I'm sorry, I mean no disrespect, but on the advice of my counsel I assert my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United States constitution and decline to answer your question," he said. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/26/231...
From Epistemic to Bureaucratic Islamophobia
Isn't Zionism practically the definition of Chutzpah? Atzmon: Atzmon: No Jewish Palestine Connection Drybones: How Jewish Zionists Self-Indoctrinate
Right, we can't have any inter-racial/ethnic mixing. After all, this is not the USA where it does not matter on principle as our laws and trending demography shows clearly. In each case, the same group holds bipolar view and influences us to accept that as natural. And pay for it!
When will the USA masses wake up and smell the double standard?
Witty says, have some heart, some of the Israeli Jewish settlers have been there 40 years; at the same time, he does not show similar sympathy for the dispossessed Palestinians who were there centuries before Jews kicked them out.
YEs it is. They kill Palestinians in a slow way, and milk the USA cash cow regularly, and then claim they are the victims of both the Arabs and, lately with Obama, his victim also.
It's a real pity that Lowy story didn't (as far as I know) find its way into 9/11 Truth circles — Lowy was co-owner with Silverstein of the WTC.
Point of fact: Arch-Enemy of "Settlements" Jimmy Carter actually visited one today, Neve Daniel, 10 minutes drive south of Jerusalem. He had never been there before. He surprised journalists by saying that places like Neve Daniel should remain part of Israel "forever" and should never be vacated. Jimmy Carter actually said that just a few hours ago. Many of the "settlements" were actually Jewish towns and villages over 100 years ago. Arab ethnic-cleansing removed the Jews. Jews returned to their hometowns after 1967. It is the Arabs who are guilty of stealing land, not the Jews. Facts. Inconvenient for MondoBigots, but facts, all the same.
Parts of a couple of the settlements were Jewish towns and villages.
Actually, Chutzpah is attacking the fledgling internationally recognized country of Israel with the hope of wiping them out and then when the residents of that country choose not commit national suicide just a few years after a third of their people were wiped out and fight and win, the attackers claim to be victims. Chutpah is "offering" Israel a 10 year Hudnah when you can't even have a 10 minute ceasefire with your fellow Palestinians even after you signed a peace treaty in your holy city of Mecca.
You shot yourself in the foot here… It is the ARAB who cannot support themselves. Look at Gaza. Disconnect from Israel and, boom, they are ALL unemployed. Why do you think those Arabs MOVED to Israel a century ago from the East Bank? They were looking for jobs among the Jews who were building a real economy. Now, a century later, these Arabs have invented a nationality (Palestineanism) and claim that they have always lived here. That is rich!!! You really stepped in it this time. :-)
Pals in Israel centuries ago? They MOVED into Israel from the EAST BANK looking for jobs less than 100 years ago. Census figures bear this out. You are so clueless… why do you rant so much?