Trending Topics:

Halper vows to rebuild Palestinian home destroyed five times by Israeli soldiers

on 40 Comments
Malak Shawamreh, outside her destroyed home

The other night the Israelis demolished all structures in a Bedouin community outside Anata in the occupied West Bank. The Shawamreh house in that community has been demolished five times by the Israelis.

Pictured is Malak Shawamreh, age 5, daughter of Salim and Arabiya Shawamreh. Salim works for the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD). The house is named after his wife. See the rest of Ryan Rodrick Beiler’s shots of the destroyed/ethnically-targeted community of Anata here.

Here is the ICAHD report on the incident:

Israeli authorities demolished Beit Arabiya (“Arabiya’s House”) last night (Monday, January 23rd) for the fifth time, along with structures in the East Anata Bedouin compound. Beit Arabiya, Located in the West Bank town of Anata (Area C) just to the northeast of Jerusalem, is a living symbol of resistance to Occupation and the desire for justice and peace.

As its name suggests, Beit Arabiya is a home belonging to Arabiya Shawamreh, her husband Salim and their seven children, a Palestinian family whose home has been demolished four times by the Israeli authorities and rebuilt each time by ICAHD’s Palestinian, Israeli and international peace activists, before being demolished again last night.

At around 11p.m. Monday, a bulldozer accompanied by a contingent of heavily armed Israeli soldiers appeared on the Anata hills, to promptly demolish Beit Arabiya, along with residential and agricultural structures in the nearby Arab al-Jahalin Bedouin compound. 3 family homes were demolished along with numerous animal pans, and 20 people including young children were displaced, left exposed to the harsh desert environment.

While standing in solidarity with Palestinians, ICAHD staff and activists were repeatedly threatened by Israeli soldieries. ICAHD Co-Director Itay Epshtain was beaten and sustained minor injuries. Beit Arabiya was issued a demolition order by Israeli authorities back in 1994, following their failure to grant a building permit. It has since been demolished four times, to be rebuilt by ICAHD activists.

Following a reissue of the demolition order last Thursday, came last night’s fifth demolition. ICAHD Director, Dr. Jeff Halper, standing astride the ruins, vowed to support Salim and Arabiya in rebuilding their home. “We shall rebuild, we must rebuild forthwith, as an act of political defiance of the occupation and protracted oppression of Palestinians” said Halper.

Beit Arabiya has become a symbol of resistance to the Judaization of the Occupied West Bank and Israeli demolition policy. “ICAHD is as determined as always to rebuild the home, and endure in its struggle to bring about justice and peace” added Halper.

Salim and Arabiya, along with their neighbors and friends stood last night and watched as this tragedy unfold once again. Arabiya and Salim have dedicated their home as a center for peace in the memories of Rachel Corrie and Nuha Sweidan, two women (an American and a Palestinian) who died resisting home demolitions in Gaza.

In the past decade ICAHD has hosted numerous visitors at Beit Arabiya, and based its annul rebuilding camp at the house, rebuilding 185 demolished Palestinian homes. Only earlier this month, ICAHD extended an invitation to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing to visit Beit Arabiya during her country visit to the Occupied Palestinian Territory scheduled for later in the month.

“It is our hope, that while we cannot extend the same hospitality to the Special Raportueor, Prof. Raquel Rolnik will visit the ruins of Beit Arabiya, and report on the utter cruelty, and illegality of Israeli policies and practices, and that members of the international community will follow in her footsteps”. ” said ICAHD Co-Director Itay Epshtain. 

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

40 Responses

  1. annie
    January 25, 2012, 10:14 pm

    look at the all knowing expression in her face. to see this happen to your home at such a young age.

    • Walid
      January 26, 2012, 12:29 pm

      The photo of the furniture all over the place reminds me of the ones posted by Blumenthal in July 2010 of al-Arakib when Israeli highschoolers were bussed-in to participate in the destruction of the village as part of their summer camp training and indoctrination; I’m sure you’ll remember them too when you see them again but I’m posting for the benefit of those that hadn’t heard this grotesque story:

      The “Summer Camp Of Destruction:” Israeli High Schoolers Assist The Razing Of A Bedouin Town
      On 07.31.10, By Max

      AL-ARAKIB, ISRAEL — On July 26, Israeli police demolished 45 buildings in the unrecognized Bedouin village of al-Arakib, razing the entire village to the ground to make way for a Jewish National Fund forest. The destruction was part of a larger project to force the Bedouin community of the Negev away from their ancestral lands and into seven Indian reservation-style communities the Israeli government has constructed for them. The land will then be open for Jewish settlers, including young couples in the army and those who may someday be evacuated from the West Bank after a peace treaty is signed. For now, the Israeli government intends to uproot as many villages as possible and erase them from the map by establishing “facts on the ground” in the form of JNF forests. (See video of of al-Arakib’s demolition here).

      Phptos: Moments before the destruction of the Bedouin village of al-Arakib, Israeli high school age police volunteers lounge on furniture taken from a family’s home. [The following four photos are by Ata Abu Madyam of Arab Negev News.
      One of the most troubling aspects of the destruction of al-Arakib was a report by CNN that the hundreds of Israeli riot police who stormed the village were accompanied by “busloads of cheering civilians.” Who were these civilians and why didn’t CNN or any outlet investigate further?

      I traveled to al-Arakib yesterday with a delegation from Ta’ayush, an Israeli group that promotes a joint Arab-Jewish struggle against the occupation. The activists spent the day preparing games and activities for the village’s traumatized children, helping the villagers replace their uprooted olive groves, and assisting in the reconstruction of their demolished homes. In a massive makeshift tent where many of al-Arakib’s residents now sleep, I interviewed village leaders about the identity of the cheering civilians. Each one confirmed the presence of the civilians, describing how they celebrated the demolitions. As I compiled details, the story grew increasingly horrific. After interviewing more than a half dozen elders of the village, I was able to finally identify the civilians in question. What I discovered was more disturbing than I had imagined

      Arab Negev News publisher Ata Abu Madyam supplied me with a series of photos he took of the civilians in action. They depicted Israeli high school students who appeared to have volunteered as members of the Israeli police civilian guard (I am working on identifying some participants by name). Prior to the demolitions, the student volunteers were sent into the villagers’ homes to extract their furniture and belongings. A number of villagers including Abu Madyam told me the volunteers smashed windows and mirrors in their homes and defaced family photographs with crude drawings. Then they lounged around on the furniture of al-Arakib residents in plain site of the owners. Finally, according to Abu Matyam, the volunteers celebrated while bulldozers destroyed the homes.

  2. mudder
    January 25, 2012, 10:22 pm

    Blessed are you who are poor
    Blessed are you who weep.
    Malak has no place where she may lay her head.

  3. mudder
    January 25, 2012, 10:29 pm

    A truly haunting photo.

  4. seafoid
    January 26, 2012, 4:43 am

    Why don’t ICAHD build a house for the family in Israel ? It would draw more attention to the issue.

    • Shmuel
      January 26, 2012, 5:25 am

      Why don’t ICAHD build a house for the family in Israel ? It would draw more attention to the issue.

      How so? The Shawamrehs are not allowed to live in Israel (although they are twice refugees, originally from the Naqab/Negev).

      I was present at one of the demolitions (the second I think) of the Shawamreh home, and it is one of the most heart-wrenching things I have ever seen – the furniture, the clothing, the toys, the family, the soldiers, the bulldozer.

      There were a group of protesters – Israeli and Palestinian, kept at a distance by the army. In a symbolic act of defiance that posed absolutely no threat to any of the soldiers (the distance was far too great), some of the Palestinians began to throw stones. The army responded with rubber-coated bullets, seriously wounding a young Palestinian man (who survived, but lost a kidney as a result of his injuries).

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 7:47 am

        Even if they just got a couple of media people and a TV crew and started digging to draw attention to the fact that there is no room in the Jewish state or the territory it occupies for Palestinian property rights.

        I think people need to understand the refugee issue . any Jew can fly into Lod and claim citizenship. The Shawamrehs aren’t even allowed a place to live and no question of a passport.

        I met Jeff Halper a few years ago and have read his book “an Israeli in Palestine” but I think he’s another one of these committed Israelis who is working for an Israel that is no longer salvageable.

        Plus I think the book should have been called “a Jew in Palestine”

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 8:25 am


        I think the strategy that Shawamrehs have pursued (together with Jeff Halper and the ICAHD) has been both wise and courageous. They have sought to highlight one aspect of the injustices that they have suffered and continue to suffer, as Palestinians – exposing the Israeli apartheid system for what it is.

        I think he’s another one of these committed Israelis who is working for an Israel that is no longer salvageable

        I disagree. Halper is one of the most realistic Israelis I know.

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 9:14 am


        He still believes in the 2 state solution. Israel strangled it.
        I would put Jeff Halper in the same boat as Uri Avnery. Very moral people who want to hang onto Zionism.
        The Israel they imagine can pull itself away from the occupation and grow up
        was murdered in 1977 when the Likud took over.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 26, 2012, 9:28 am

        I think he’s another one of these committed Israelis who is working for an Israel that is no longer salvageable. What kind of Israel is that? I quite like how Halper thinks in general and I suspect you’re putting him in the wrong box.

        [edit] I now see your followup post. I think you’ve got Halper all wrong.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 26, 2012, 9:55 am

        I’ll see if I can find something that demonstrates the difference between Halper and Avnery – but not now.

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 10:01 am

        I’ll see if I can find something that demonstrates the difference between Halper and Avnery

        How about this – from a 2003 interview:

        Jeff Halper: The Israel-Palestine conflict is often framed in terms of territory: ending the occupation, a viable Palestinian state, and what that means in terms of territory. But two states and a complete end of the occupation, even in the best scenario, is not really the best solution. The whole Palestinian state would be on only 22% of the country, divided between the West Bank and Gaza. The State of Israel today, within the 1967 borders, represents 78% percent of the country. So even in the ideal situation, if the entire occupation ended and Israel pushed back to 1967 borders, the Palestinian state would be in only 22% of the country. Israel can’t compromise on any more than that – even that is a question mark.

        But Israel does want a Palestinian state because it needs to get rid of the three and a half million Palestinians currently living in the Occupied Territories. If it can’t send them out of the country, it at least wants to enclose them in a little Bantustan-type state. And so, the issue is framed in terms of territory, and what gets lost is the issue of control.

        The issue is this: will the Palestinians in the end have a state that has potential for economic development, that has real political sovereignty, that has control of its borders, that has control of its resources, like water? Will Palestinians have a state that is a coherent territory that people can move freely within? Is it a real state, even if it’s a small one, or is it really a Bantustan controlled by Israel?

        And so, the matrix of control talks about how Israel controls the Palestinians: through incorporating the West Bank into Israel-proper with roads, through connecting electrical systems, water systems, urban systems, and so on. It talks about Israel keeping military control, about Israel keeping control of parts of the country like Jerusalem and parts of West Bank, which in the end will leave the Palestinians with non-viable islands.

        The matrix of control talks about the use of planning and law, and administration bureaucracy to control the movements, building, and commercial activity of the Palestinians. In other words, what the matrix of control says is that besides the issue of military control, and besides the issue of territory, Israel exerts a lot of control over Palestine. It controls the water, it controls the borders, it controls Jerusalem, it controls their army, it controls their freedom of movement. And unless we dismantle the matrix of control, we haven’t really done anything. The difference between a real Palestinian state, even if it’s small, and a Bantustan, is the matrix of control.

        Now, I don’t think we can dismantle the matrix of control. I think it has gone too far, and that the occupation is permanent. We are in a state of apartheid. But not everybody agrees with me – Uri Avnery doesn’t agree with me, the people who are in favour of a two-state solution still think that we can end the occupation, or that we can roll it back enough that a Palestinian state will emerge. But the danger in being for a Palestinian state is that if you don’t understand the control dimensions, then you are actually agitating for a Bantustan. I mean, Sharon also wants a Palestinian state; he wants a state that is completely controlled by Israel. So if you only look at territory and you don’t look at the issue of control, you end up advocating a Bantustan.

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 10:08 am

        And what does he suggest in his book? That the neighbouring countries should join a confederation. Turn it into someone else’s problem. No question of Jews in Israel surrendering anything. Or of Israeli Jewish responsibility for the mess. And forget about the right of return. Jews control 95% of the resources in the Zionist space and this is somehow sustainable.

        What neither he nor Avnery get is that the Israel they love doesn’t exist any more. It has raped the Palestinians for so long that it has somehow become a part of them . The people who might have led a different Israel have all been wiped out politically by the settlers, the russians and the orthodox. Israeli society has become so brutalised by the occupation that it can’t return to whatever fantasy state they imagine. The matrix of control is now a matrix that controls Israelis too.

        Halper is still a Zionist. That wonderful mystery of the return to Zion . I’ll have another look at his book this evening.

      • eljay
        January 26, 2012, 10:13 am

        >> In other words, what the matrix of control says is that besides the issue of military control, and besides the issue of territory, Israel exerts a lot of control over Palestine. It controls the water, it controls the borders, it controls Jerusalem, it controls their army, it controls their freedom of movement. And unless we dismantle the matrix of control, we haven’t really done anything. The difference between a real Palestinian state, even if it’s small, and a Bantustan, is the matrix of control.


        I can’t help but be struck by the astounding hypocrisy of Zio-supremacists who insist that Jews, having suffered at the hands of others, are entitled to a powerful, militarized state in order to ensure that they are never again in that position…and who then insist that Palestinians, having suffered – and still suffering! – at the hands of others, are not entitled to that same right.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 26, 2012, 10:18 am

        Thanks, Shmuel. And also this one

        And then comes the hardest question of all: If it was we who eliminated a viable two-state solution – the creation of a truncated Palestinian prison-state on 15% of historic Palestine a la South Africa’s Bantustans will not solve the conflict – then how shall we end our century-old conflict? How shall we deal with the bi-national entity that is Israel/Palestine, largely our own creation?

        In order to avoid these questions, we have developed a number of mechanisms, delaying forever a political solution being only one of them. It is enough for us to merely assert our support for a two-state solution in order that we be considered peace-minded and reasonable. Two-state supporters require only the notion of a Palestinian state, a never-ending process towards it, to escape confronting the reality we created. As long as a Palestinian state can be held out as a possibility, the pressure’s off. Thus many Israelis, Diaspora Jews and others – including such searching and otherwise radical figures as Noam Chomsky and Uri Avnery, together with Peace Now, Brit Tzedek, Rabbis Michael Lerner and Arthur Waskow and members of Rabbis for Human Rights – cling tenaciously to the two-state solution, all refusing to admit it is no longer viable.

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 10:25 am


        I haven’t read Halper’s book, but I have spoken to him and read many of his articles over the years. He supports BDS and the Palestinian ROR. He doesn’t say that Jews shouldn’t surrender anything, but that he believes that they won’t. Big difference. Very un-Avnery.

        Read his analysis of the UN statehood bid, for example, in which he wrote the following:

        Perhaps not agreeing on a particular solution, we should be able to agree on a set of principles that must guide any attempt to achieve a just solution. At a minimum they would be:

        A lasting peace inclusive of all the peoples living in Palestine/Israel;
        A peace that provides economic viability to all the parties;
        A peace based on human rights, international law, and UN resolutions;
        An addressing of the refugee issue, based on the right of return and Israeli acknowledgement of the role it played in driving the refugees from the country;
        Addressing the security concerns of all the parties and countries in the region; and
        Addressing the other outstanding regional issues that stand in the way of equality, justice, peace, and development.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 26, 2012, 10:27 am

        Halper suggests to move towards a regional confederation. Do you dislike the idea in itself or because it will be derailed by Israel so that it will end up a regional confederation that absorbs the palestinians while leaving Israel as the isolated jewish state?

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 10:50 am

        The Jordanians and the Lebanese have suffered enough already without having to solve Israel’s Palestinian problem. Imagine the whites in South Africa expecting Botswana to help out with their Zulu problem.

        What do Israelis expect will happen at the end? That the Palestinians will all magically disappear?

        And if the Jews of Israel didn’t want to end up as a regional pariah maybe they could have spent the last 60 years building up regional trade and cultural links . Of course they were always far too smart to engage with the Arabs. The only reason Israelis learn arabic is to feed CAMERA and facilitate torture sessions.

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 11:02 am


        You can take issue with Halper’s regional confederation proposal, but that does not make him a “believer in the 2ss” (which he is absolutely not) or a Zionist in any way that resembles Avnery’s Zionism.

        Halper’s confederation proposal and the reasoning behind it (including his analysis of the desirability and feasibility of other solutions) is explained here:

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 11:05 am

        It’s the idea that the Israelis won’t give up anything that I find naive. There is no point in talking about regional stability and peace under the current system where Israel has a GDP per head of $28000 and Gaza is crucified at less than $1000 per head. A few miles down the road from Tel Aviv where a beer can cost $6 , over 70% of Gazans are dependent on aid agencies to live.
        That is not sustainable. The whole political economy of Israel is not sustainable. I wonder how Halper sees Israel coping with climate change and peak oil. Israel isn’t very good at coping.

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 11:28 am


        It’s a thought exercise (not that different from this one, for example). Personally, I don’t find it very compelling (and certainly no more “realistic” than any other solution), although I do agree with his basic analysis and guiding principles.

        You have mischaracterised Halper’s approach as one that somehow favours Israel, hangs onto Zionism, believes in a 2ss, and rejects Palestinian ROR. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s all there in the links I have provided. Give the man a little more credit than that. He deserves it.

      • Walid
        January 26, 2012, 12:00 pm

        “Halper is still a Zionist. ”

        So is Avnery, seafoid, although he attaches a sanitized label to it by branding himself a post-Zionist. We now know him as a Galahad type of guy crusading for justice for the Palestininians but when he set out a long time ago, he was one of the bad guys but this isn’t talked about. From 38 to 42, he was in Irgun that he left because he didn’t (after 4 years) like their ways and in the 48 war, he was a squad commander in the Givati Brigade and later in Samson’s Foxes commando unit. I still think he’s a good guy today and read his great articles, but can’t forget how he started out as part of the ethnic cleansers.

        Uri Davis commenting on Avnery’s “March of the Orange Shirts” wrote:

        “Uri Avnery’s piece is interesting, if only because of his failure to recognize that the origins of the “March of the Orange Shirts” and his correctly projected possible “[Orange] March on Jerusalem” have their origin in the the war crimes and crimes against humanity of ethnic cleansing of the indigenous people of Palestine, the Palestinian Arab people, perpetrated by the Israeli army in the course of and in the wake of the 1948-49 war.

        Rather than come out clean, apologize for and regret his role in the said war—Avnery seems to doggedly take pride in his role as a soldier with the Giv’ati Brigade commando unit of “Samson’s Foxes” and the founder editor of the fascist publication BA-MAAVAQ. He should, thus, not be too surprised when six or so decades later today’s fascists in Israel embrace as their standard, inter alia, his own complicity and the complicity of his kind of peace activists, including deceased and surviving members of the Israeli Communist Party, in the ethnic cleansing of 1948.”

      • seafoid
        January 26, 2012, 2:32 pm


        I think he says a lot of good stuff about the tragedy and maybe he has moved on since that book but in it he looks at 4 options

        1 Palestinian state
        2 Palestinian bantustan along the lines of Danon
        3 Binational state
        4 Regional confed

        He says 1 and 2 won’t fly because of the matrix
        3 out of the question because Jews won’t agree
        4 is the answer

        So I was wrong about him being in favour of the 2ss. He just thinks no chance for the binational state and the idea of a confederation seems to me to be for the fairies. So if he doesn’t support the binational state then it’s back to the 2ss.

        He says the Occupation is the root of the problem. It isn’t. The root of the problem is Zionism and 1948 . How did so many Palestinians end up in Gaza anyway ?

        He is different to Avnery, fair enough. The matrix analysis is top class. I admire his human rights work and his passion for justice but I don’t think Zionism can be saved . And the damage the Israelis have done to their own society in getting to 2011 will only intensify in the years to come. They are going to break their Jewish state.

        Did you ever read “the Jewish prison” by Jean Daniel ?

      • Shmuel
        January 26, 2012, 4:16 pm


        You’re getting closer to a fair representation of Halper’s views, but still no cigar.

        As for being for the fairies, what solution-oriented approach isn’t? That’s why Halper’s activism is solidly rights-based. But he also happens to be an academic (nobody’s perfect), and academics like to theorise – even about fairies.

        Did you ever read “the Jewish prison” by Jean Daniel ?


      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 26, 2012, 5:11 pm

        Seafoid, if would be a much better fit if you would have attributed your point of view “The root of the problem is Zionism and 1948 “ to Halper. He doesn’t fit your idea of zionism.

      • seafoid
        January 27, 2012, 3:51 am

        He’s an outlier on the Zionist spectrum. But he still believes that Zionism can be redeemed. Maybe a good example of someone in a similar position would be Phyllis Bennis apropos the Democrats ;)

        Anyway all of these sympa Israelis have been ruthlessly sidelined and marginalised by the Machine so it’s onwards to the denouement. It’s very sad to see how power and short termism work to deny access to the wheel to the people who could ultimately steer the ship away from the rocks .

        The best Israeli analysis of the mess that I have come across was Shir Hever’s Political Economy book.

      • Shaktimaan
        January 27, 2012, 4:48 am

        Except Jordan and Lebanon are far more involved regarding the Palestinians, it is not possible to extricate them from the situation. Any real peace treaty that’s enacted will have to be a regional one, not one that is just between Israel and Palestine.

        If we are going to begin discussing compensation paid between Israel and Palestine then also, we must consider Lebanon and Jordan. Certainly no other nation has come close to oppressing the Palestinians on the level that Lebanon has. And what sort of compensation should be due to West Bank Palestinians who were stripped of their Jordanian citizenship rights? Both nations have overseen more Palestinian deaths than Israel committed in 65 years time.

        I’m not sure how Israel could have forged trade or cultural links 60 years ago considering the barely dormant state of conflict and the Arab League’s embargo against them. They would have loved to trade with the Arab states like they do now. But I don’t think it would have been likely.

      • Walid
        January 27, 2012, 6:18 am

        “Any real peace treaty that’s enacted will have to be a regional one, not one that is just between Israel and Palestine.”

        Shaktimaan, you sure don’t sound like you know the score with these Zionist talking points, especially the history, failure and abandonment of the Arab embargo. Jordan already has a peace treaty and not realy anxious to have another 2 or 3 million or so Palestinians added to the existing ones at its borders. The Arabs gave up the RoR long ago and even the 2002 offer barely mentioned it in passing and that at the insistence of Lebanon as the Arabs did not want to include it at altogether in the proposal. The Palestine Papers told you that the Palestinian Authority in its negotiations was practically foregoing the issue. And now Hamas, the last of the Palestinian resistance left standing, left Syria and moved to more Israel-friendly countries that don’t give a hoot about the RoR. Palestinians in Jordan are in most part already citizens of that country, those in Syria are practically living there as citizens and those in Lebanon would be made citizens to make Israel happy only if the US and Israel, after their failed 2006 attempt, succeed in fracturing Lebanon by disarming Hizbullah, which thankfully they can never do.

      • seafoid
        January 27, 2012, 6:47 am

        LOL. What sort of compensation should be given to Palestinians who were dispossessed by Israel in 1948 , habibi ?

        “no other nation has come close to oppressing the Palestinians on the level that Lebanon has.”

        clue: it’s due south of Lebanon

      • Walid
        January 27, 2012, 8:32 am

        For Israel, compensation flows only in one direction and it’s towards Israel, never from Israel. Looks like it doesn’t want to set a precedent by paying compensation to the families of the Turks it assassinated on the Mavi. So far it has collected over 60 billions in compensations not counting the freebies on subs from the Germans and from the US about the same amount in guilt-money and from the Swiss that were spooked into paying another billion or so. The estimated amount due to the Palestinians on property stolen by Israel in current dollars is over 500 billion.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 27, 2012, 8:39 am

        SeafoidHe’s an outlier on the Zionist spectrum. But he still believes that Zionism can be redeemed.
        Halper doesn’t deserve the negative connotations of zionism. If you start with the word zionist carrying the whole negative load that we’ve come to associate with it,
        then I disagree with interpreting it so broadly that Halper is a zionist.
        It leads everyone to the wrong conclusions.
        If you emphasize a definition of zionism the way Jerry Haber for example chooses to define it,
        see here ,
        then you might call Halper a zionist but then the negative load doesn’t apply.

      • seafoid
        January 27, 2012, 6:42 pm

        Sorry, the page you were looking for in the blog The Magnes Zionist does not exist.

      • Shaktimaan
        January 30, 2012, 12:17 am

        Again, this is an excellent example of how any comprehensive treaty will be a regional one. UNSC resolution advocates a “just settlement of the refugee problem”. This obviously refers to the Palestinians but also includes the Jewish refugees from Arab nations who are also deserving of compensation for their lost land, possessions and back accounts.

        Palestinians have recently been losing their citizenship rights wrt Jordan by the thousands. But it is a complex issue that has its roots in Jordan’s decision to disregard the citizenships of all Palestinian-Jordanians living in the OPT in 1988. This is just a single example of legal wrongs perpetuated against the Palestinians that were not committed by Israel which should be considered when deducing compensation for refugees from different areas.

        The estimated amount due to the Palestinians on property stolen by Israel in current dollars is over 500 billion.

        Really? That sounds like a lot. How was that figure arrived at? Does it factor in any of the compensation due to the descendants of Jewish refugees from areas of Palestine that fell under Arab control post 49?

      • Shaktimaan
        January 30, 2012, 1:02 am

        those in Lebanon would be made citizens to make Israel happy only if the US and Israel, after their failed 2006 attempt, succeed in fracturing Lebanon by disarming Hizbullah, which thankfully they can never do.

        So, I’m not sure what you’re aging here. It sounds like you mean that Lebanon will only make Palestinians citizens if Israel succeeds in crushing Hezbollah, which they can’t do.

        So….. Lebanon is doomed to continue its unparalleled oppression of its Palestinian residents for the foreseeable future? Any comment on this?

  5. seafoid
    January 26, 2012, 4:56 am

    I have given up on Zionism. It can’t be reformed without its ideologues coming to the understanding that Palestinians are the equal of Jews and deserving of the same rights. And the Zionist machine works on assuming the opposite. Dogs in Greater Israel have more rights than Palestinians.

    • Walid
      January 27, 2012, 8:17 am

      seafoid, at the annual Herzliya conference that each year discusses improved methods to keep the Palestinians down and various other security innovations and concerns, this year’s program includes “what will happen in a post-Assad Syria and Lebanon”, or the “Shifting Balance of Power for Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt and Turkey for the Middle East. Among the 250 or so speakers will be Prince Hassan of Jordan that will deliver the conference opening keynote speech, Saeb Erekat, and Salman Shaikh of the Qatar Brookings that will discuss the “Arab Spring”. Amazing how these guys can attend the disparaging of Palestinians and other Arabs.

      This year’s program and speakers:

      Shaktimaan still thinks Arabs can’t get along with Israelis.

      • Shaktimaan
        January 29, 2012, 11:23 pm

        Shaktimaan still thinks Arabs can’t get along with Israelis.

        I do, Walid? That’s funny, I don’t recall ever saying anything remotely like that. Certainly no one asked me if I think that.

        You are welcome to critique anything I say as long as you are honest and use factual information. But I’m going to have to ask you to refrain from making up false statements and attributing them to me. If my beliefs are truly worthy of criticism then you probably would not need to make up anything about me or attribute false quotes to me. It does nothing to benefit your argument at any rate.

  6. Tuyzentfloot
    January 26, 2012, 7:36 am

    Halper also wrote about this on +972 ( ) and there he described the recent demolitions as price tag attacks by the IDF. I interpret the choice of words as a challenge to a dominant perception of everything critical about Israel: the bad apple, or good cop/bad cop. The bad apple can be hilltop youth, or it can be the settlers. The IDF in those cases are still the good guys. The current rightwing government can be the bad apple. The far right can be, or the haredi fundamentalists who demonstrate in camp uniforms or who spit at a child on the street. My newspaper published an op-ed that defended the Haredim against the bad apples who abused nazi comparisons.

    I wouldn’t say the perceptions are wrong, but they’re very limiting and safe.

  7. Walid
    January 26, 2012, 8:15 am

    A bit more on what’s happening on the WB. with Israel’s never-ending foul deeds; from Gulf News yesterday:

    “… Area C comprises 62 per cent of the West Bank and is under full Israeli security control, as stipulated in the Oslo Accords, signed between the Palestinians and Israel in 1993 and ratified in 1995 to include further Israeli security measures around Jericho and in the Jordan Valley.

    Why former leader Yasser Arafat signed away what remained of Palestine at Oslo is another painful question altogether for the Palestinians, but the evidence nearly 20 years later is irrefutable: Israel is carrying out a systematic, and not so subtle, colonisation of Palestine.

    Everyone knows this now. It’s no secret to any visitor and Europeans are well-placed to see and experience the nitty-gritty details of the Israeli neo-colonial machine. And for those who still believe in a peace settlement, their voices are becoming increasingly critical and unspoken. This was exemplified in the recent report by the European Union Heads of Mission (HoMs) on Area C and Palestinian State-Building, leaked in Brussels early this month, but published in July 2011.

    Not since the UN Special Envoy for the Middle East Peace Process, Alvaro de Soto’s ‘end of mission report’ in May 2007 has there been such explosive material to condemn the illegal Israeli military occupation and militarised Jewish colonisation of Palestinian territory.

    Again, the numbers say it all: when the Israeli occupation began in 1967, there were about 250,000 Palestinians in Area C while now there are a little over 50,000. Palestinian construction is prohibited in around 70 per cent of Area C according to the Israeli Civil Administration.

    Then there are the Israeli-designated ‘nature reserves’, which occupy about 10 per cent of the West Bank. Half of this 10 per cent for the preservation of wildlife and animals overlaps rather inconspicuously with ‘closed military training zones’ for the perpetuation of the Israeli occupation. If the trend is not clear by now, here is another basic statistic: a total of 45 cisterns and rainwater structures in Area C of the West Bank have been demolished by the Israeli authorities since 2010, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

    Why would Israel intentionally destroy Palestinian cisterns? France figured that one out now. In an official report on The Geopolitics of Water, published in December 2011, the French Parliament calls Israel’s exploitation of Palestinian water resources, a “new apartheid”.

    Water politics

    What is more revealing still: the 450,000 illegal Jewish colonists on Palestinian land use more water than the 2.3 million Palestinians in the West Bank. Anyone who has seen the sprinkling system of the green-gardened hill-top Jewish fortresses will not be entirely surprised.

    Furthermore, the Palestinians have no access to the Jordan River. This severely depleted river is exploited by Israel (60 per cent) and by neighbouring Arab countries (40 per cent), according to the French report — although given the sickly status of the river those percentages hardly seem to matter…”

  8. Andre
    January 27, 2012, 8:38 pm

    I have enormous respect for people like Jeff Halper.

Leave a Reply