Prisoners’ rights protest in Ramallah calls to end the Oslo accords

ActivismIsrael/PalestineMiddle East
on 56 Comments
Dylan 05
(Photo: Dylan Collins)

On Tuesday Palestinian youth in Ramallah marched to the head of the Palestinian Authority (PA) demonstrating against the more than one hundred political arrests that have taken place over the past month. The group of nearly 70 activists made their way from the city center to the al-Mukataa, the PA compound, and their chants focused on Oslo-era policies, which are viewed as the starting point for an aid-dependent economy and a harsh tightening of the occupation.

“The people want the downfall of Oslo,” yelled one young woman into the bullhorn that was passed amongst protesters—all of whom appeared under 30. Because of their ages when the demonstrators were children they lived in a Palestine that was not isolated and walled-in by the Israeli military. Their early memories do not include Qalandia, a mammoth checkpoint and the gateway between East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, said one protester. Rather, they know what freedom of movement felt like and want it back.

Dylan 01
(Photo: Dylan Collins)
Dylan 04(Photo: Dylan Collins)

Oslo did not only signify an agreement from the Palestinian leadership to grant Israeli authorities security control over parts of the West Bank. The peace agreement marks the founding of the lightly armed PA police force.

At yesterday’s protest, around 30 PA officers tried to block demonstrators from reaching the sidewalk in front of the government headquarters. Sprinting in front of protesters in groups of 20, they formed police lines that were easily broken by the swiftly paced youth. In turn, the youth then dashed ahead of the police, spinning the march into a run.

Dylan 06(Photo: Dylan Collins)
Dylan 02
(Photo: Dylan Collins)

Paradoxically both protesters and police mobilized with images representing the Palestinian cause. While demonstrators carried the Palestinian flag on poles or tied around their back like a cape, one PA policeman fastened his AK-47 with a Palestinian flag motif sweatband. The police and protesters now find themselves at a point of tension. While they both desire to rid their city of military occupation the protesters are bringing to the forefront usually unspoken sentiments that some Palestinians see the PA “tyrannical authorities.”

Up to 130 of the protesters’ comrades have been arrested with dozens of their members also beaten by PA police at a previous demonstration. Protesters and police have interacted so much over the past year they even recognize each other. (See Linah Alsaafin’s first hand account in the Electronic Intifada).

From a press release on October 2, 2012 by Palestinians for Dignity:

Our demonstartion today comes as a result of the wide campaign of arrests carried out by the Palestinian Security Forces (the Intelligence Services, the Preventive Security, and the Military Intelligence), which began on the evening of Wednesday, September 19, 2012, and continues to this day. According to statements released by a number of Palestinian human rights organizations (Addameer, the Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights, Al-Haq), the number of political arrests has topped 130. While some of those arrested have been released, more arrests have occured over the passed days, with the final number of those in detention still unknown. Some of those arrested have entered an open-ended hunger strike.

Although political arrests is a phenomenon that accompanied the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, over the rescent years it grew at a rapid pace. Under the pretext of division between Hamas and Fateh, the most basic human rights have been violated, namely the freedom to express one’s opinion and to engage in peaceful opposition to the governing regime.

All tyrannical authorities believe that when dissidents, activists, or even ordinary people are arrested, that causes the rest of the population to fear criticizing it, and therefore by just arresting 100 it will have effectively imprisoned the entire population with fear. In this way it will facilitate its control over the country. For this reason, the political detainee is often exposed to torture in prison. This has included shabah (hands bound behind back and legs tied), beatings, and prolonged sleep deprivation, according to human rights organizations. [sic]

Dylan 03
(Photo: Dylan Collins)

By targeting institutions that provide capital for the Israeli exploitation of resources in the West Bank, Palestinians for Dignity have differentiated themselves from other protest groups on the ground. They see the conquest of their land as a process that is not only driven by ideology, but is big profit for both Israeli and European corporations. They are looking for new political solutions that are outside of the negotiations framework that have allowed settlement construction and occupation security to expand into enterprises. 

During the past year Palestinians for Dignity shut down a United Nations building and in late July the group forced closed a European Union (EU) office after the EU expanded a trade agreements with Israel that would increase settlement imports to the European market. “As Palestinian youth, we are tired of the EU’s hypocrisy and its contemptuous policies that use aid and development programs to mask political cowardice and complicity in Israel’s crimes; it has to be made clear that all the financial support going to the PA is futile when the EU offers unconditional political, trade, academic and other forms of support for Israel,” said Palestinians for Dignity. 

Dylan Collins is a freelance photographer. His website is Dylan Collins Photography.

About Allison Deger

Allison Deger is the Assistant Editor of Mondoweiss.net. Follow her on twitter at @allissoncd.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

56 Responses

  1. giladg
    October 3, 2012, 11:24 am

    Allison, why don’t you sit down with some of the leaders of those assumed representing prisoners and also those representing students and ask them this two part question, with part two dependent on how part one is answered:
    1) “Do you accept that the Temple Mount or Nobble Sanctuary is the holiest site for Jews and was holy to Jews before it was holy for anyone else?”
    2.1) If Yes: “As the site is also the third holiest for Muslims, are you willing to come to some type of sharing agreement with Israel where Israeli’s and Palestinians can access the site under special arrangements?”
    2.2) If No: “Do you see any room for Jewish history and heritage regarding the holy sites, and if not why?”.

    Let us know how you go Allison. Be brave and make sure you get clear cut answers.
    If they avoid answering, make sure to let us know as well. You may learn something new about the conflict, something that may change your thinking on some issues. This is crunch time Allison. This is the time to be asking the hard questions and not allowing the talking points machine to dictate the discussion of the day.

    • Annie Robbins
      October 3, 2012, 11:48 am

      divert alert: way to not address the point of the article gilad.

      allison, thanks for the great report. what i find intriguing is:

      link to mondoweiss.net

      While there is broad support for the United Nations bid among Palestinian leaders and on the street, there are also growing calls for a far more drastic move: abandoning the Oslo agreements that have governed Palestinian-Israeli relations for nearly two decades, or dissolving the Palestinian Authority. After two evenings of sometimes-heated meetings this week, according to participants, Mr. Abbas told the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization that within 10 days of his return from New York he wanted a decision either to walk away from Oslo or to hold national elections and replace him.

      “Twenty years of Oslo and 20 years of a Palestinian Authority and 20 years of all the promises ended in fiasco,” said Zakaria al-Qaq, a professor of national security at Al Quds University. “They are trying to scare the Israelis, because the Israelis consider Oslo as a genius political achievement. They want to scare the Americans and the Europeans.”

      and this of course has the state department freaking out:

      link to mondoweiss.net

      i think they should walk away from oslo of course.

      • giladg
        October 3, 2012, 11:58 am

        Walking away from Oslo is one thing. There are issues, like the main issue that I have mentioned above, that are not going to go away and hang over everything. And until the Palestinians come to terms with sharing, and that sharing is the only way to move forward, all the other stuff is not important in the bigger picture. You see, I don’t believe they want to share. I believe that they believe that the Muslim world will one day march on Jerusalem and liberate it for them. They are mistaken on more than one account. The Jewish connection to the Temple Mount is the elephant in the room. I know what the significance is for Jews and the elephant is not in my room. It is in yours Annie, in Allison’s and in the room of every Palestinian who tells you that he/she wants peace. Ignoring this elephant tells you only one thing about their true desire for peace. The talk of settlements and apartheid roads are only a distraction from the main issue.
        The Palestinians are under huge religious pressure from Islamic governments not to compromise with Israel. If you want, I’ll explain to you why. In the meantime they distract themselves with the talk of exiting Oslo, as if something magical is going to happen to the economy afterwards. So blame Israel for all the woes of the world. What’s new.

      • seafoid
        October 3, 2012, 4:46 pm

        Gilad

        Israel is doomed. You can’t treat people the way your people treat the Palestinians.
        Settlements are going to bring Israel down. Don’t blame the goys when it comes to pass. It’s entirely self inflicted.

      • Dexter
        October 3, 2012, 5:00 pm

        A Jew whose roots are likely from Eastern Europe, whose family came to Palestine and stole everything under the sun, wants to talk about “sharing.”

        Aww, isn’t that sweet. No one on this blog takes you seriously Gilad. You are nothing more than a “token” Zionist, a dog that rolls over when told to.

        Imagine trying to have a rational conversation with a Nazi during WWII…this is really the same thing.

      • giladg
        October 3, 2012, 6:56 pm

        Dexter, your attitude is so typical of someone on the Left. “He’s crazy, I’m not going to listen to him. Fox News are a bunch of right wing idiots, we are not going to listen to them, Rush Limbaugh, he’s a right wing nut, we are not going to listen to him, Netanyahu is a right wing radical, we are not going to listen to him.” Well just who do you listen to on the other side Dexter? Why don’t you tell us.
        I won’t be surprised if you tell us that you watch and read CNN, MSNBC, the BBC, NYT, the Guradian, Independent and Al Jazeera for your “balanced” reporting. And that is why you know very little about anything Dexter. You are a useful idiot for the Palestinian cause, lazy and you suck up whatever they feed you. Your comment on Jews from Eastern Europe gives you away. You are the one who cannot be taken seriously.

      • Dexter
        October 4, 2012, 11:25 am

        Gilad,

        If you think CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, etc are anti-Israel or “liberal” outlets, then you are not only the Zionazi you have proven yourself to be, but you are also a moron of epic proportions.

        Where do I get my information on the conflict in Palestine from? It’s called scholarship — and it seems most non-Zionists who frequent this blog are educated, which is why I/they cannot be deceived by your pre-programmed Zionist “history,” “facts,” or “arguments.” We know what you are: that little kid whose roots are in Eastern Europe, but was gullible enough to believe a that little fairytale called “redemption” (I’m willing to bet your family even changed your last name to fit right in, didn’t they?).

        But let me remind you of something: you and your “tribe” did not wander the earth for 2,000 years as a genetically unchanged “people,” only to miraculously find yourselves back in the promised land. Crazies who believe in fantasy like this — i.e. YOU — should not be taken seriously. That is why I refuse to engage people like you in substance. It’s a no-win situation; akin to arguing with a two year old. Rather, I just make sure to remind indoctrinated Zionists like you exactly what they are: racists who hide their bigotry behind so-called logical arguments.

        Nazis, Afrikaners, slave-owners, and segregationists: this is the company you are ideologically inline with Gilad. Yet, you don’t seem to mind. More than sad, it is downright pathetic; I’d say it was sad if you were not beyond redemption, but you clearly are. You are the prototype fool that Zionist leaders love, a person who blindly grabs his tin hat and gun and says “where are the natives?!”

        You have no knowledge of history, no conception of justice, no understanding of truth. You would have clearly been better off living in past centuries…

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 1:19 am

        While there is broad support for the United Nations bid among Palestinian leaders and on the street, there are also growing calls for a far more drastic move: abandoning the Oslo agreements that have governed Palestinian-Israeli relations for nearly two decades, or dissolving the Palestinian Authority.

        The success of the UN bid would tend to eliminate the option of retaining the status quo. The terms of the Oslo Accords would become a moot point. That’s why the Israeli’s are threatening to react either by implementing sanctions or by annexing Area C. The agreements on criminal jurisdiction are already being ignored by the PA with regard to their complaint against Israelis in the ICC. The recognition of a Palestinian State inside the 1967 borders would make Areas A, B, and C a Palestinian jurisdiction, not an Israeli one.

        Article 10(2) of the 2003 Basic Law expressed the aim of becoming a party to the regional and international declarations and covenants that protect human rights. The success of the statehood bid would remove the last legal obstacle that stands in the way attaining that goal. The treaty bodies could provide for more accountability than exists under the current framework. Neither Israel nor the PA make formal reports or answer to the monitoring bodies for their human right abuses.

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 8:50 am

        Hostage says: The recognition of a Palestinian State inside the 1967 borders would make Areas A, B, and C a Palestinian jurisdiction, not an Israeli one.
        ======================================
        An armistice line is not a border, borders between states are determined by the states that share the border. Are you saying that the UNGA has the power to delimit the border between two states?

      • Shingo
        October 4, 2012, 9:48 am

        An armistice line is not a border, borders between states are determined by the states that share the border.

        Not necessarily. Israel declared it’s borders in 1948 along the lines laid out by UNGA181. The armistice line became the defecto border when the PLO conceded the territory between the 1948 borders and he armistice line in 1993.

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 10:02 am

        An armistice line is not a border, borders between states are determined by the states that share the border. Are you saying that the UNGA has the power to delimit the border between two states?

        That’s a fairly nonsensical argument. Any international line of demarcation can serve as a legal frontier between states. See for example the statement of three permanent members of the Security Council on that subject: Tripartite Declaration Regarding the Armistice Borders : Statement by the Governments of the United States, The United Kingdom, and France, May 25, 1950 link to avalon.law.yale.edu

        The permanent armistice lines of demarcation were adopted by Israel and the neighboring states under the auspices of two Chapter VII UN Security Council resolutions, 62 and 73. Those resolutions established the international lines of demarcation as provisional enforcement measures under Article 40 of the UN Charter and instructed the parties to observe and implement the agreements until a final negotiated settlement is concluded.

        General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), “The Declaration On Principles Of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations And Co-Operation Among States In Accordance With The Charter Of The United Nations” reflects the applicable customary law and treaty obligations on the subject. It provides that:

        Every State… has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.

        During the Security Council’s 433rd meeting, the Israeli foreign minister, Abba Eban, stated that the armistices were “a provisional settlement which can only be replaced by a peace agreement” and:

        The armistice lines do not merely separate armed forces. They mark the clearly defined areas of full civil jurisdiction. The Government, the courts, the legislatures, the security authorities of each respective State operate smoothly and unchallenged up to the appropriate armistice line. These lines thus have the normal characteristics of provisional frontiers until such time as a new process of negotiation and agreement determines the final territorial settlement. They are also stabilized by the mutual undertakings of the parties and by the fullest international sanction for as long as the Armistice Agreements are valid.

        The Armistice Agreements are not peace treaties. They do not prejudice the final territorial settlements. On the other hand, the provisional settlement established by the Armistice Agreements is unchallengeable until a new process of negotiation and agreement has been successfully consummated.

        link to un.org

      • mig
        October 4, 2012, 10:22 am

        @mondonut :

        An armistice line is not a border, borders between states are determined by the states that share the border. Are you saying that the UNGA has the power to delimit the border between two states?

        “His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom request the Secretary-General of the United Nations to place the question of Palestine on the Agenda of the General Assembly at its next regular Annual Session. They will submit to the Assembly an account of their administration of the League of Nations Mandate and will ask the Assembly to make recommendations, under Article 10 of the Charter, concerning the future government of Palestine.

        In making this request, His Majesty’s Government draw the attention of the Secretary-General to the desirability of an early settlement in Palestine and to the risk that the General Assembly might not be able to decide upon its recommendations at its next regular Annual Session unless some preliminary study of the question had previously been made under the auspices of the United Nations. They therefore request the Secretary-General to summon, as soon as possible, a special Session of the General Assembly for the purpose of constituting and instructing a Special Committee to prepare for the consideration, at the regular Session of the Assembly, of the question referred to in the preceding paragraph.”
        I have the honour to be, Sir,
        Your obedient Servant,

        (Signed) Alexander Cadogan

        Devil is the details…

        link to unispal.un.org

      • talknic
        October 4, 2012, 11:30 am

        mondonut October 4, 2012 at 8:50 am

        “… borders between states are determined by the states that share the border.”

        Sometimes, however no Independent Sovereign State existed in Palestine on May 14th 1948. The State of Israel was established, effective May 15th 1948, in accordance with UNGA res 181, which is enshrined in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel. The Israel Government confirmed Israel’s borders on 22nd May 1948 in a statement to the UNSC link to unispal.un.org

        ” Are you saying that the UNGA has the power to delimit the border between two states?”

        Hostage wrote. “The recognition of a Palestinian State inside the 1967 borders would make Areas A, B, and C a Palestinian jurisdiction, not an Israeli one.”

        “recognition of” by the UN GA is not delimiting the border ‘by the UN GA’.

        However, there is no such thing as the ‘1967 border’. Israel has never legally annexed any territories to its actual legally recognized sovereign extent of May 15th 1948. The 1949 Armistice Agreements specifically did not change any borders, they only set Armistice Demarcation Lines.

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 12:27 pm

        Hostage says: That’s a fairly nonsensical argument.
        =====================================
        None of your extensive quoting contradicts that the Armistice lines are not a border as legal frontiers for the purposes of civil jurisdictions do not rise to the level of international borders. In fact most of what you quote refers to the negotiations and agreements between states that I referred to…

        “instructed the parties to observe and implement the agreements until a final negotiated settlement is concluded.”

        “until a new process of negotiation and agreement has been successfully consummated.”

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 12:30 pm

        Shingo says: The armistice line became the defecto border…
        ===========================
        That is both incorrect and the typical wishful thinking of PA supporters. The fact of the matter is that the Armistice line is not an international border, defecto or otherwise.

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 12:42 pm

        talknic says: Sometimes,
        =======================
        Not sometimes, always. If a new state emerges within the West Bank they would inherit existing borders and but it would have to negotiate where territory is either disputed or claimed by more than one party. And regardless of what happened in 1948, Israel is now claiming territory that Palestine would also claim. The legal international border between Israel and the nascent state of Palestine will exist when the two states agree to one. The UN has no power to set borders or establish borders.

        Subsequently areas A, B and C would not automatically fall to Palestinian jurisdiction.

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 1:34 pm

        None of your extensive quoting contradicts that the Armistice lines are not a border as legal frontiers for the purposes of civil jurisdictions do not rise to the level of international borders.

        In fact the Tripartite Declaration contradicts you on that exact point. It specifically referred to them as “Armistice Borders” and the General Assembly’s codification of customary international law cites armistice lines as examples of international lines of demarcation. Borders are nothing more than international lines that delineate and demarcate the frontiers of states.

        Like all Zionist blowhards I notice that you can’t cite any recognized authority who supports your nonsensical claims.

        However, there is no such thing as the ’1967 border’.

        *The verbatim record of the General Assembly discussion of resolution 58/292 indicates the words “pre-1967 borders” were intentionally adopted to replace the words “Armistice Line of 1949”. See A/58/PV.87, i.e.

        Thirdly, the last preambular paragraph of A/58/L.61 has now been made into operative paragraph 2 in the revised text, with the words “pre-1967 borders” replacing the words “Armistice Line of 1949”.

        The resolution was adopted using that operative language.

        The 1949 Armistice Agreements specifically did not change any borders, they only set Armistice Demarcation Lines.

        The Armistice Demarcation lines can’t ever be altered without Israel’s consent. They have indicated the limits of the civil jurisdiction of Israel’s Courts since at least 1950. Annexation is nothing more than the de jure application of a State’s municipal laws to a new territory.

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 1:56 pm

        If a new state emerges within the West Bank they would inherit existing borders and but it would have to negotiate where territory is either disputed or claimed by more than one party.

        You’re great at making circular arguments, but the ICJ disposed of Israel’s claims that the status of the occupied Palestinian territory is “disputed”. It advised that the territory has been under belligerent occupation since 1967. It also advised that the 4th Geneva Convention applies and the prohibition against the acquisition of territory by war. Do you know of another international court with jurisdiction to decide what the applicable law says on the subject?

        Judge Rosalyn Cohen Higgins specifically addressed that point:

        This is not difficult – from Security Council resolution 242 (1967) through to Security Council resolution 1515 (2003), the key underlying requirements have remained the same – that Israel is entitled to exist, to be recognized, and to security, and that the Palestinian people are entitled to their territory, to exercise self-determination, and to have their own State.

        link to icj-cij.org

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 5:34 pm

        Hostage says: Like all Zionist blowhards…
        =======================================
        1) What part of the word “Armistice” do you not understand? Armistice border or Armistice line, it makes no difference – they are the lines/borders of the Armistice. They are not international borders as agreed to by the parties that share them.

        2) And you want a quoted recognized authority to declare that what is not a border actually is not a border? How about the actual Armistice agreement with Jordan “…”The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.”

        3) The UNGA. Really? They “changed” their language? BFD.

        4) Again with attributing what others said as mine, you are pulling quotes from your buddy Talknic and throwing them at me.

      • mondonut
        October 4, 2012, 5:45 pm

        Hostage says: You’re great at making circular arguments, but the ICJ disposed of Israel’s claims that the status of the occupied Palestinian territory is “disputed”… Do you know of another international court with jurisdiction to decide what the applicable law says on the subject?
        =================================
        I do not know of an international court with jurisdiction to decide this, including the ICJ. They do not have jurisdiction and an advisory settles nothing. More importantly and to your point, they purposely did not settle the borders. They declared that the Palestinians have the right to self determination and I would agree, but they never declared that the entirety of Judea, Sumeria and East Jerusalem would be their territory.

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 9:02 pm

        I do not know of an international court with jurisdiction to decide this, including the ICJ.

        Resolution 181(II) C. Declaration enumerated a number of basic human rights and property rights and required that Israeli acknowledge them in a declaration. The resolution also stipulated that the ICJ had jurisdiction to settle any dispute over those rights:

        Chapter 4: Miscellaneous Provisions

        The provisions of chapters 1 and 2 of the declaration shall be under the guarantee of the United Nations, and no modifications shall be made in them without the assent of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Any Member of the United Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the General Assembly any infraction or danger of infraction of any of these stipulations, and the General Assembly may thereupon make such recommendations as it may deem proper in the circumstances.

        Any dispute relating to the application or interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.

        On two occasions during the hearings on Israel’s application for membership in the UN, Mr. Eban said that Israel had made the required declaration and that it had incorporated the rights in the fundamental laws of State – as required by the resolution. His declarations and undertakings were noted in the resolution that admitted Israel as a full member of the UN.

        See pages 2-3 of the .pdf A/AC.24/SR.48 and page 7 of the .pdf A/AC.24/SR.51

        *The UN considers the minority protection plans that it concluded after WWII to be legal agreements that are still in force. E/CN.4/367, Date: 7 April 1950 (see Chapter III The United Nations Charter And The Treaties Concluded After The War, resolution 181(II) of 29 November 1947, “The Future Government of Palestine”, pages 22-23)

        The UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People subsequently reported to the Security Council that:

        19. In this respect, it was pointed out that Israel was under binding obligation to permit the return of all the Palestinian refugees displaced as a result of the hostilities of 1948 and 1967. This obligation flowed from the unreserved agreement by Israel to honour its commitments under the Charter of the United Nations, and from its specific undertaking, when applying for membership of the United Nations, to implement General Assembly resolutions 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, safeguarding the rights of the Palestinian Arabs inside Israel, and 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, concerning the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes or to choose compensation for their property. This undertaking was also clearly reflected in General Assembly resolution 273 (III).

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 9:23 pm

        1) What part of the word “Armistice” do you not understand? Armistice border or Armistice line, it makes no difference – they are the lines/borders of the Armistice.

        Armistices are inherently “international” in nature, since they are governed by the rules of “customary international law” that were first codified in the annex to the Hague IV Convention of 1907. The 1949 agreements are also governed by the powers conferred on the Security Council by Article 40 of the UN Charter – which is also a multilateral international treaty.

        Those and other legally enforceable international obligations, like the prohibition against threats or use of force in violation of the UN Charter, were also codified in the “Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.” It contained a specific reference to the prohibition against the use of threats or force to violate international lines of demarcation, like armistice lines or borders.

        So, are there any other parts of the term “Armistice” you don’t understand?

      • mig
        October 5, 2012, 1:59 am

        @mondonut :

        I do not know of an international court with jurisdiction to decide this, including the ICJ.

        This really crystallize in overall this whole jargon what we are doing in here. The moment when Israel become member state of UN, it agreed UN charter.

        Article 93

        “All Members of the United Nations are ipso facto parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice.”

        link to un.org

        ICJ :

        “The Court can only deal with a dispute when the States concerned have recognized its jurisdiction. No State can therefore be a party to proceedings before the Court unless it has in some manner or other consented thereto.”

        link to icj-cij.org

        “States Entitled to Appear before the Court”

        Article 35, paragraph 1, of the Statute provides that the Court shall be open to the States parties to the Statute, and Article 93, paragraph 1, of the Charter of the United Nations provides that all Members of the United Nations are ipso facto parties to the Statute.
        The following 193 States are currently Members of the United Nations (the dates on which some have made declarations recognizing as compulsory the jurisdiction of the Court are also listed):

        Israel 11 May 1949

        link to icj-cij.org

    • xanadou
      October 3, 2012, 4:34 pm

      It’s time that the UN re-read the original conditions for the creation of Israel, and the many, ignored, resolutions, then read the riot act to Israel that it may face a forfeiture of its claims in view of its lack of ability to negotiate.

      Israel’s neighbors are running out of willingness to tolerate a racist and unhinged nuclear state. Perhaps a suggestion for red line for Israel ought to be considered or consider, say, millions of their neighbors with an equally capricious claim to the much-tortured land? They are Semites with a long and continuous residency in an area known as the Sultanate Caliphate, and for centuries longer than the Jewish claims to the land, and which Caliphate was decreed by a capricious Western dictat as ‘no more’ post WW2.

      • Walid
        October 4, 2012, 3:55 pm

        “Israel’s neighbors are running out of willingness to tolerate a racist and unhinged nuclear state.” (xanadou)

        Not all of them, xanadou, some of them are actually happy to have it around and busy threatening Iran. It’s the old enemy of my enemy thing. They somehow go back to remembering what Israel is really about when it starts making noises about how the Arab States should take in the Palestinians.

    • seafoid
      October 3, 2012, 4:49 pm

      1) “Do you accept that the Temple Mount or Nobble Sanctuary is the holiest site for Jews and was holy to Jews before it was holy for anyone else?”

      It was a holy site long before the Jews turned up. The Jebusites worshipped in Jerusalem before the Jews did and they probably followed on from a previous grouping. Most holy sites around the world predate modern religions. We don’t know for how long Mount Kailash in Tibet has been worshipped but it goes way earlier than the foundation of Buddhism, for example.

      • giladg
        October 3, 2012, 7:11 pm

        Seafoid, as the information you relay to us about the Jebusites comes from the Bible, you should then go on and tell us what the Bible says about the Jewish people. So thank you for strengthening the Jewish position on Jerusalem for us. It is nice to see that someone on this blog places belief and importance in the Bible.

      • Shingo
        October 4, 2012, 9:52 am

        So thank you for strengthening the Jewish position on Jerusalem for us.

        That’s not what he did at all, he demonstrated that it was uniquely significant to Jews, so your unique connection the place is kinda BS.

      • giladg
        October 4, 2012, 12:14 pm

        Shingo, how many times is Jerusalem mentioned in the Bible in connection to Jews? How many time are Palestinians mentioned in the Bible? About as much as Jedi Warriors and Nubians from the outer galaxy are. And now you are going to tell us that Jebusites are the true Palestinians, who where actually the founding generation for Mohammad and all of Arabia.

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 2:27 pm

        Shingo, how many times is Jerusalem mentioned in the Bible in connection to Jews? How many time are Palestinians mentioned in the Bible? About as much as Jedi Warriors and Nubians from the outer galaxy are.

        Genesis 21:34 claims that Abraham dwelt in the land of the Philistines for many days. The Ottomans were still calling the region of Gaza, Ashdod, and Askelon by the same name “Arz-i Filistin” (the “Land of Palestine”) centuries later. See ”The Arabs and Zionism Before World War I”. University of California Press, . ISBN 0-520-02466-4
        link to books.google.com

      • Dexter
        October 4, 2012, 3:22 pm

        Hey McFly…the bible is NOT real…wake the f_ck up!

        Jesus Christ

      • giladg
        October 4, 2012, 6:05 pm

        There is not one iota of evidence connection the modern day Palestinians to the Philistines. The Greeks gave the area the name Palestine when at that time, Jew living in Palestine were technically also called Palestinians. But no one called themselves Palestinians until after the PLO conference in 1962.

      • Shingo
        October 5, 2012, 12:47 am

        There is not one iota of evidence connection the modern day Palestinians to the Philistines

        Yeah right, they’re only referred to Philistines in the surrounding Arab States.

        The Greeks gave the area the name Palestine when at that time, Jew living in Palestine were technically also called Palestinians.

        That applied to everyone living in the region, not just Jews.

        But no one called themselves Palestinians until after the PLO conference in 1962.

        Everyone who carried a passport in Palestine carried a Palestinian passport in 1920.

      • MRW
        October 5, 2012, 2:37 am

        But no one called themselves Palestinians until after the PLO conference in 1962.

        Except of course the “Government of Palestine” in 1934. See passport stamp in passport of Baruch Zuckerman:
        link to passportland.com

        “Government of Palestine, Frontier Control, 30 July 1934, Jaffa.”

      • Hostage
        October 5, 2012, 5:45 am

        There is not one iota of evidence connection the modern day Palestinians to the Philistines.

        LOL! well there was even less evidence of a connection between the inhabitants of the Russian Pale of Settlement and the ancient Jews.

        The Palestinians actually inhabited the Land of Palestine mentioned in the histories of the ancient Greeks, Romans, and Jews. The Greek term for Palestine used by the ancient historians corresponded to the word used in the Bible for the Philistines.

        The Greeks gave the area the name Palestine when at that time, Jew living in Palestine were technically also called Palestinians.

        There is no evidence in the account of Herodotus that the Greeks were acquainted with the presence of any Jews in the region. In any event, Josephus recorded that the Jews didn’t inhabit the towns of the coastal plain at that time. They were supposedly a non-maritime people living in the central mountainous region of Palestine. Herodotus recorded that the Syrians of Palestine built ships for the Persians in payment of tribute. That corresponds to what we know about the Baal worshiping Canaanites and Phoenicians who founded societies around the Mediterranean, like Carthage.

      • RoHa
        October 5, 2012, 7:34 am

        “But no one called themselves Palestinians until after the PLO conference in 1962.”

        Are you saying that if they didn’t call themselves Palestinians, they didn’t live there, or that they had no rights even if they did live there?

      • Hostage
        October 4, 2012, 2:22 am

        1) “Do you accept that the Temple Mount or Nobble Sanctuary is the holiest site for Jews and was holy to Jews before it was holy for anyone else?”

        David purchased the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite to serve as the site for the altar of the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:22).

        There was direct connection between worship, spirituality, and threshing floors throughout the ancient world and that fact is reflected in the Hebrew scriptures. Jacob’s sons and all the elders of the land of Egypt traveled to a threshing floor on the other side of Jordan where they all eulogized him and mourned his death for seven days (Genesis 50:10-11).

        Threshing floors were considered sacred places to the fertility cults and were used for licentious fertility rites. Hosea 9:1 contains a reference to the payment of wages to harlots or prostitutes “at every threshing floor”.

        The rituals of the ancient Israelites included a “heave offering” or “gift of the threshing floor” (Numbers 15:20).

        In Ezekiel 8:14 the reference to the women who were “making the Tammuz weep” (or “lamenting for Tammuz” in Breton’s LXX) “by the entrance of the gate of the house of the Lord”, were being portrayed in the role of fertility cult Temple prostitutes.

        So it’s very likely that the site was used for worship long before David made the legendary purchase. Note that Ornan already had everything on hand that was necessary to make an offering before David even approached him with the proposition of selling him the property.

      • seafoid
        October 4, 2012, 4:36 pm

        “So it’s very likely that the site was used for worship long before David made the legendary purchase”

        Of course it was. Why did they pick that site in the first place?
        Why did the Spanish build so many churches on the ruins of Aztec temples? Prestige.

      • RoHa
        October 5, 2012, 7:40 am

        ‘Threshing floors were considered sacred places to the fertility cults and were used for licentious fertility rites. Hosea 9:1 contains a reference to the payment of wages to harlots or prostitutes “at every threshing floor”. ‘

        Ancient agricultural practices suddenly got a lot more interesting.

        “Such arms to take a man and press
        In agricultural caress
        His head to hers, and hold him there
        Deep buried in her chestnut hair.”

        (Betjeman)

  2. HarryLaw
    October 3, 2012, 12:08 pm

    The Israelis want to Annexe Area C and more, they just need more time to establish more facts on the ground and more Palestinians to expel, the Palestinians would be left with uneconomic bantustans/Reservations surrounded by Israeli settlements. Who would finance this arrangement, why the US and EU of course, but only if the prisoners behave themselves. Abbas and Co are going to have to act quickly and with determination at the General Assembly with their non member State recognition application and more importantly ICC complaint or all will be lost, including the PA.

  3. mondonut
    October 3, 2012, 2:32 pm

    “The people want the downfall of Oslo,” … Their early memories do not include Qalandia, a mammoth checkpoint and the gateway between East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, said one protester. Rather, they know what freedom of movement felt like and want it back.

    Perhaps this is not what they meant, but do they somehow believe that the downfall of Oslo will provide freedom of movement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank?

    • Annie Robbins
      October 3, 2012, 3:10 pm

      do they somehow believe that the downfall of Oslo will provide freedom of movement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank?

      do you somehow believe Oslo provided freedom of movement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank?

      • mondonut
        October 3, 2012, 4:14 pm

        Annie Robbins says: do you somehow believe Oslo provided freedom of movement between East Jerusalem and the West Bank?
        =================================
        Your comment makes no sense at all, I in no way implied that it did. Maybe a little less mockery and a bit more in addressing the actual (and legitimate) question.

      • Inanna
        October 3, 2012, 8:04 pm

        Your question is prefaced by your own qualification: “perhaps that is not what they meant”. And it isn’t. So when you ask a stupid question, none of us have the obligation to answer it, despite your sense of entitlement.

  4. HemiFaulk
    October 3, 2012, 5:02 pm

    Looks like a solid report to me, good work.

    “They see the conquest of their land as a process that is not only driven by ideology, but is big profit for both Israeli and European corporations. They are looking for new political solutions that are outside of the negotiations framework that have allowed settlement construction and occupation security to expand into enterprises. ”

    link to latitude.blogs.nytimes.com

  5. xanadou
    October 3, 2012, 5:06 pm

    It’s time that the UN re-read the original conditions for the creation of Israel, and the many, ignored, subsequent Resolutions, then read the riot act to Israel that it may face a forfeiture of its claim to a state, in view of its bad faith and inability to negotiate.

    Israel’s Semitic neighbors are running out of willingness to tolerate a racist and unhinged belligerent state. Can Israel afford to contemplate millions of their neighbors with an equally capricious claim to the much-tortured land, once and for long continuous centuries their home known as the Sultanate Caliphate? The Caliphate was decreed by a capricious Western dictat as ‘no more’ post WW2. What the a foreign entity giveth, it can, apparently, take away. Perhaps its time for Israel to agree to a red line on a calendar and start to negotiate, or join the long list of defunct states and tribal areas in the foreseeable future. Time, and the world’s good will is no longer on Israel’s side.

  6. Walid
    October 4, 2012, 12:54 am

    The protest is really about the collaboration with the bad guys and the political arrest of the 130 anti-Israel activists is part of it. The demonstrators aren’t arguing the merits of Oslo, they know it was a gimmick. The collaboration wasn’t much different with Arafat.

  7. Sassan
    October 4, 2012, 4:34 am

    Do you guys ever report on the fact that Hamas is abusing Palestinians in Gaza? link to google.com

    • Shingo
      October 4, 2012, 8:57 am

      >> Do you guys ever report on the fact that Hamas is abusing Palestinians in Gaza?

      Do you guys ever report on the fact that Israel is inflicting far more abuse than Hamas?

    • Donald
      October 4, 2012, 3:13 pm

      I usually take HRW seriously and so trust them on this report on Hamas torture. HRW has also done a good job covering Israeli war crimes over the years.

    • Blake
      October 5, 2012, 6:03 am

      Sassan: Most of Gaza’s residents are refugee families who were forcibly pushed out by Zionist terrorist gangs during 1947-49 and forced into a concentration camp 24 miles by 7, in which non-Jews, who originally made up over 70 % of the inhabitants, were expelled. In violation of international law, they have been prohibited from returning to their homes & have lived under crippling Israeli occupation for decades. Palestinian land is continually confiscated by Israel for Jewish-only use.

      Now how is Hamas to blame for that?

  8. giladg
    October 4, 2012, 7:24 am

    Hey Allison, why don’t you skip on over today to Jerusalem to see how the Palestinians are rioting on the Temple Mount and all because they don’t like the fact that Jews want to pray, to the same G-d, from the same site. You should ask some of your peace seeking prisoner rights protestor friends to explain to you how they feel about Jews and Jewish history. Take face wipes with you to clean up after they sound off.

    • Cliff
      October 4, 2012, 9:25 am

      You must be a wormy loser to attach yourself so thoroughly to an inclusive country club ideology like the settler brand of Zionism that you continually push here.

      We aren’t buying what your selling, crazy.

      • giladg
        October 4, 2012, 12:02 pm

        What you should be doing Cliff, is doubting what you are currently buying from the Palestinians, unless you are a Palestinian yourself of course. But even if you are a Palestinian Cliff, for the sake of peace, you need to start acknowledging that there is another nation, another people, who also have a long and distinguished history in the same places that are import to the Palestinians.

  9. Hostage
    October 4, 2012, 10:18 am

    why don’t you skip on over today to Jerusalem to see how the Palestinians are rioting on the Temple Mount and all because they don’t like the fact that Jews want to pray, to the same G-d, from the same site.

    Here’s your reality check : White Shirts in Jerusalem cry ‘Butcher the Arabs’ link to mondoweiss.net

  10. Bubba
    October 8, 2012, 1:37 pm

    Photos by Dylan Collins were very effective and brought Ms Deger’s words to life. It is a great combination. I hope to see more in the future.

Leave a Reply