Olmert 'ashamed' at video of settler insulting Palestinian

[oberliner]

JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that he was flabbergasted by a homemade video posted on the Internet that shows a Jewish settler in the West Bank town of Hebron repeatedly insulting a Palestinian woman as a soldier stands calmly by.

"I saw the tape and I was ashamed... such arrogance and brutality cannot be tolerated," Olmert said in a statement.

The video which runs several minutes and was posted on the Ynet news site, shows a young female settler yelling at a Palestinian woman and repeatedly calling her "sharmuta" (whore) while an Israeli soldier looks on.

"A situation in which a young Jewish woman uses such language toward a Palestinian is quite simply shameful. I felt awful that a soldier was present and did not intervene," Olmert said.

The Israeli woman in the video "is a public disgrace" to Israeli settlers and "I expect them to clearly disassociate themselves from her actions," he added.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070114/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflictsettler_070114193542

[JohnyCanuck]

1. By all means steal their land and their olive groves,

but be polite and don't call 'em names while you're doing it.

[David__77]

2. I know, huh...

The leaders would prefer to sugar-coat the shit.

[harveyrunner]

58. Stifling debate on the I/P issue.

JVP

Jewish Voice for Peace announces the launch of two new blogs, The Third Way and Muzzlewatch.


JVP Director of Policy and Tikkun columnist Mitchell Plitnick will be posting regular commentary on the Middle East in his new blog The Third Way: A Different View of the Middle East. Go here to see his latest post on the Syria-Israel peace talks.


http://blog.mideastanalysis.org

JVP's Director of Communications Cecilie Surasky and others will be posting to Muzzlewatch, a blog that tracks efforts to stifle open debate about US-Israeli foreign policy.

Read breaking news about a cancellation of a talk by Professor Joel Beinin at a San Jose prep school.


http://www.muzzlewatch.org


Enjoy, tell your friends, and start a dialogue in the comments sections.

Peace,

Jewish Voice for Peace

[grassfed]

3. Video of settlers attacking Palestinians

Palestinians harassed by Jewish settler in Hebron cage (p1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2AaDg7-zD0

Palestinians harassed by Jewish settler in Hebron cage (p2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nhlw7WK8gzo

Settler riot in Tel Rumeida (occupied Palestine) part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkVDyfuvhDE

more http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=settler+palestinians&search=Search

[Scurrilous]

9. Slideshow: Settler Graffiti in Hebron

http://www.cpt.org/gallery/slideshow.php?set_albumName=album03


Hebron Palestinians under attack from settlers

<snip>

"In the four and a half months Christian Peacemaker Team (CPT) members have been present in Hebron, we have heard countless stories of Israeli settler youth attacking Palestinians. Palestinian residents have reported that they believe settler children are encouraged or at least permitted by their parents to attack Palestinians because the settler youth are minors and not likely to be punished. Or, other Palestinians say, they learn the habits from the settler adults. Incidents that we, have witnessed or heard about may be viewed by some as "bullying," but put into the political and ideological context are more significant.

Approximately 400 Israeli settlers and 120,000 Palestinians populate Hebron. Twelve hundred Israeli soldiers are stationed in the city, primarily to protect the settlers. The settlers are often armed with Uzis or sidearms and are considered even by other West Bank settlers as extreme. Throughout Hebron, graffiti written by the settlers in Hebrew say such things as, "Death to the Arabs," "Hebron is a Jewish city," and "Why are the Gentiles still living?"

Against this backdrop of militarisation, armed settlers, and racist graffiti, come regular attacks against Palestinian shops and people by both settler adults and youth. Palestinian residents feel they have no way of addressing the attacks by the settler children, in particular. The treatment by the Israeli authorities toward settler youth obviously differs from the treatment toward Palestinian children. When Palestinian youth have thrown stones at soldiers or settlers, they have faced rubber bullets and tear gas from the Israel Defence Forces. By contrast, when settler children attack Palestinians, there seems to be a "hands off" policy.

Several Palestinian families, for example, live next to the Israeli settlement of Tel Rumeida. This area is surrounded by several Israeli military checkpoints and houses some of the more radical Israeli settlers. Palestinian neighbours of Tel Rumeida are regularly harassed or physically attacked by settlers, often youth.

One Tel Rumeida settlement resident, Israeli Baruch Marzel, is a leader in the outlawed Jewish Kach movement, classified by the US state department as a terrorist organization. In the last week, CPT members witnessed or heard about four attacks by one of Marzel's daughters, aged about nine or ten. She, with other settler children, have stoned and hit Palestinian adults and children and have cursed them, calling them "dogs." All of these assaults have occurred within five feet of Israeli soldiers. When a Palestinian began to complain to the Israeli police after one of the attacks, a soldier who witnessed the incident said of the settlers, "They're just kids."

http://www.peacenews.info/issues/2396/pn239606.htm

[rurallib]

4. In truth, Olmert most likely ashamed that she was caught.

Now he has to act like he cares.

[Tom Joad]

5. Right. Ashamed. Really. No change expected.

The money to keep these illegal settlements in Hebron will keep rolling in. Sent by Olmert and courtesy US taxpayers. Thank Olmert, and your local congressperson.

[Shaktimaan]

13. Actually, Israel is not allowed to use any US aid in the territories.

[Violet_Crumble]

14. Can you explain how the US stops Israel from doing that? n/t

[Shaktimaan]

16. Of course not.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that they are doing it? Or are you just making assumptions based on something unrelated?

[Violet_Crumble]

17. Then yr not sure if US aid is being used in the Occupied Territories...

btw, asking you a question isn't me making an assumption. It's me asking a question in the hopes I'll get an answer...

[Shaktimaan]

18. Your right, I apologize.

Didn't mean to be obnoxious.

Nope, I have no idea if Israel is violating the terms of their agreement with the US. But most people around here seem to take it for granted that Israel is so guilty of any accusation they dream up that they can rightly just put it out there as established fact with no evidence other than the smug assumption that only they truly know what is going on. Considering the rampant misinformation and ignorance of key historical facts that seem to be commonplace here I am not surprised that people see this issue as clear and obvious. It is anything but.

I have yet to meet anyone who has a solid understanding of the relevant history who sees the issues surrounding this conflict as cut and dry. Because of this we have an obligation to be as accurate and honest as possible when discussing it. Mistakes are one thing, as I said there is a lot of misinformation out there. But if we can refrain from presenting opinion as verified fact then that would probably be good.

[Tom Joad]

19. You are the one who suggested Palestinians are "understandably"

hated (and "understandably massacred" whererever they go.

Seems like you have the most cut and dried view as any i've seen in these parts.

[Shaktimaan]

20. Not at all.

First of all, I didn't say that. I said that there were occasionally reasons that they were massacred referring to the specific times that they attacked their host country first, massacring people themselves and were retaliated against. Most folks who would otherwise be unsympathetic to any group who initiated unprovoked war against a neighboring state seem to give the Palestinians a pass and then misplace blame for the consequences they face following their defeat.

Second, I don't view this conflict as cut and dry. I have rarely, as of yet, even voiced a personal opinion on the subject. You are confusing my challenging of people's double standards and false statements as being driven by a prejudice towards Israel. If people here were as falsely critical of the Palestinians as they are of Israel you would see me react the same way towards them.

I am interested in an honest discussion of the facts as that is the only road to any kind of justified settlement. Dissenting opinions are expected, but replacing history and truth with rhetoric is unwarranted. For instance, you are free to disagree with the settlement movement in Israel, (as I happen to), but once you start blaming it wholesale for the conflict, referring to it as "illegal stolen land" in its entirety or equating the entire Israeli population's ethics with the kipot srugot's, you are drifting into fantasyland. And perpetuating fantasyland facts is worse than just unhelpful, it is actively harmful to the entire peace process.

[pelsar]

21. interesting statement....

have rarely, as of yet, even voiced a personal opinion on the subject. You are confusing my challenging of people's double standards and false statements as being driven by a prejudice towards Israel.

i've had the very same experience here.....in fact most of my posts, for a very long time didnt even express my opinion on the conflict one way or another, i would be busy challenging false information, partial information as well as the default: its israels fault, that seems so prevalent here. Instead of receiving, for the most part, further details, as i would request i received the label "israel apologist". and the posts would usually end at that point.

honest discussions are relatively rare here, with few willing to be able to back up blanket and broad accusations with physical evidence, historical fact beyond the headlines. When one does get a real discussion, its interesting in that the views are not that far apart, for those that believe in liberal values, that is.

and most interesting of all, if you keep asking questions or enter in the world of "consequences for ones actions" not only does it bring an end to discussions but eventually many posters will even refuse to enter in a discussion you.......seems communication is not a treasured value on some parts of the DU, unless of course you agree with them (interesting view: i'll discuss it with you, as long as we agree.....)

[Shaktimaan]

22. I noticed that

not only does it bring an end to discussions but eventually many posters will even refuse to enter in a discussion you.

I've only been here a few days and I've already been blocked by at least one person. :) It would be comical were it not depressing.

[pelsar]

23. but its the irony that i "love"

on the far right wing or left (not much difference between the two), i expect the: if you dont agree with me you must be a facist and therefore you will be blocked syndrom. However in the "progressive world" communication is supposed to be a valued asset, one that should never be closed.....and of course we will hear that here all that time: negotiation (i.e. talk, communicate) and no violence.

so what do we see here, happen in real action?....not only do we have people who refuse to communicate within a discussion but they actually block those that they disagree with?....and they expect better of israelis who have to deal with not just words but bombs as well, when they themselves can even deal with mere words on an internet site?......

[Violet_Crumble]

24. Rolling a few posts into one here..

I've only been here a few days and I've already been blocked by at least one person. It would be comical were it not depressing.

You've been here a bit more than a few days, and don't consider yrself unique being blocked by at least one person. I found myself on a blocked list within a few hours of Skinner announcing the new system and I'm sure I'll be added to more as time goes on. It's not depressing, it's just people using the new system, and I'd be surprised if there's not a large majority of DUers using it right now. Unlike you and pelsar, I don't automatically attribute the motive of blocking or refusing to enter into discussion with someone as being them just being so one-eyed they can't handle differing opinions. I've added a small number of people to my blocked list and the reason is overwhelmingly that they have a long history of being abusive towards me and even when encouraged to add something constructive to the discussion will opt instead to go with insults and abuse. I'm sure they'll run around going 'ooh! Violet blocked me because she has no answer for my insightful laying out of facts and information!!' Well, if that's how they want to see it, they can go for their lives, but I know that's not the case :)

On edit: Okay, I checked yr profile and you joined on the 1st of january so I guess that could be seen as a few days. Regardless, if this system had been in place back when new DUers arrive and get abusive etc, I'd have not hesitated to block them...




From an earlier post in this thread. You said:

"Second, I don't view this conflict as cut and dry. I have rarely, as of yet, even voiced a personal opinion on the subject. You are confusing my challenging of people's double standards and false statements as being driven by a prejudice towards Israel.

How is claiming that Israel withdrew militarily from the entire West Bank during Oslo anything but a false statement? Coz it sure wasn't a fact.

And how is this not a personal opinion? 'Remind me of when the IDF beat up or tortured any journalists, I can't seem to find anything about it happening anywhere. Most be the pro-Israel lobby and Jewish media conglomerates killing all the stories.'

Before I arrived at DU, I used to debate reproductive rights, and one of the fave tactics of the anti-choicers was to claim that while they had *facts* on their side, those who disagreed with them were running on nothing but personal opinion and false statements. That sort of mindset doesn't gel with me too well when someone's claiming they want an honest discussion of any issue...

[Shaktimaan]

25. Let's see here...

How is claiming that Israel withdrew militarily from the entire West Bank during Oslo anything but a false statement? Coz it sure wasn't a fact.

It also isn't something I said.

And how is this not a personal opinion? 'Remind me of when the IDF beat up or tortured any journalists, I can't seem to find anything about it happening anywhere. Most be the pro-Israel lobby and Jewish media conglomerates killing all the stories.'

There is a difference between a personal opinion and an incorrect fact. This is an example of an incorrect fact. You can tell because I said "I was wrong about that, thanks for correcting me" after being corrected.

That sort of mindset doesn't gel with me too well when someone's claiming they want an honest discussion of any issue...

An honest discussion is fine. That doesn't change the fact that a whole lot of people here have a lot of basic facts about the conflict wrong. And I mean BASIC facts. That says to me that they are drawing their conclusions first and then are just looking for evidence to support it. Now everyone does that to some extent in these forums. But not usually about the key issues.

don't consider yrself unique being blocked by at least one person.

Did you actually just take time out of your day to tell me that I'm not special? :rofl:

Before I arrived at DU, I used to debate reproductive rights, and one of the fave tactics of the anti-choicers

Anti-choicers?
Isn't calling them something like that just an attempt to muddy the argument by making it about how you view them instead of being about the facts of the case? It's the same as when pro-lifers call pro-choicers "anti-lifers." Are pro-choice people against life? No, of course not. It's a stupid attempt to belittle the viewpoints of the other side by calling them by a more negative sounding name, despite whether or not it is really accurate. Just like saying that Israel practises apartheid or calling someone a Nazi. It is a way to stifle debate, instead of encouraging it. Because once you have someone start to explain WHY they aren't a Nazi, you've won the debate. Sometimes without ever even having to talk about the subject.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Yes, you did say that...

About Israel pulling out of the West Bank during Oslo:

"They pulled out of the West Bank militarily, ceding police and administrative duties to the PA." I can give you the link if you still don't remember saying it...

Did you actually just take time out of your day to tell me that I'm not special?

No, I didn't. I was hoping that you'd recognise that yr not unique and would have read and digested what I said about the motives for people blocking each other. Obviously I hoped in vain...


Anti-choicers?
Isn't calling them something like that just an attempt to muddy the argument by making it about how you view them instead of being about the facts of the case? It's the same as when pro-lifers call pro-choicers "anti-lifers." Are pro-choice people against life? No, of course not. It's a stupid attempt to belittle the viewpoints of the other side by calling them by a more negative sounding name, despite whether or not it is really accurate. Just like saying that Israel practises apartheid or calling someone a Nazi. It is a way to stifle debate, instead of encouraging it. Because once you have someone start to explain WHY they aren't a Nazi, you've won the debate. Sometimes without ever even having to talk about the subject.

Oh-kay. I see. So I take it after reading that you'll never be seen calling anyone *anti-Israel*?

[Behind the Aegis]

30. "Entire" n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

33. They were talking about the entire West Bank....

Here's the link to the post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=161579#162337

Now if they weren't actually meaning the entire West Bank, maybe they should have said they were talking about a small part of the West Bank...

[Shaktimaan]

45. actually, BTA is right

In any case, I'm sorry if it was confusing. But if I remember correctly, we were talking about Palestinian vs. Israeli efforts for peace and I was drawing an illustration of how the Palestinians haven't acted in their best interests by rewarding (and not punishing) Israel when they've made concessions. What I was talking about were the requirements under Oslo and the benefits the PA enjoyed from them.

I wasn't trying to imply that Israel completely left the WB. If I wasn't 100% specific it was because I assumed that everyone here has enough knowlege of the situation to know what I was referring to.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. No, he wasn't...

There was no confusion on yr part or mine. You said Israel had militarily withdrawn from the West Bank. If you'd meant to say there was a withdrawal from Jericho that's what you would have and should have said. 'If I wasn't 100% specific'?? How about 'If I wasn't approximately 98% specific'? That'd be closer...

[Shaktimaan]

47. I don't know what to tell you violet.

That's what I meant. I assumed you would realize that I wasn't talking about the entire west bank.

[Violet_Crumble]

48. Explain to me why you expect people to realise you weren't talking about the entire West Bank...

This is what you said: 'Israel gave the Palestinians a lot of help at that time. They helped provide resources for the PA's establishment. They pulled out of the West Bank militarily, ceding police and administrative duties to the PA.'

If were talking about a tiny part of the West Bank (I recall you were trying to equate that to my scenario where there was an independent Palestinian state) why not just say that instead of expecting people to mind read?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

54. If yr interested in facts...

Then posting 'They pulled out of the West Bank militarily, ceding police and administrative duties to the PA.' isn't factual and it's ridiculous to later on claim that people should have actually read it as "They pulled out of a tiny part of the West Bank militarily..." It's not a matter of believing you or not. It's a matter of that claim you made being totally incorrect....

[Shaktimaan]

56. No, I didn't qualify the statement at all.

Had I said that they withdrew from ALL of the west bank it would have been incorrect. But I did not say "all" or "some" leaving the amount unsaid. That does not make the statement wrong. It makes it unspecific. If you assumed that I mean that they left the entire west bank then you made an incorrect assumption. If you were unsure as to the extent of the withdrawl I referenced then you could have asked me to be more specific.

As evidence, (I can't believe I'm doing this,) I'd like to reference exhibit A. U.N. security council resolution 242, part 1, section i.

"Withdrawl of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict."

Now, if what you are saying is correct then this resolution is referring to ALL of the territories. Yet we learn otherwise in exhibit B, a quote from Arthur Goldberg, American Ambassador to the UN who led the delegation when this resolution was drafted.

"The notable omissions-which were not accidental-in regard to withdrawal are the words 'the' or 'all' and 'the June 5, 1967 lines'....the resolution speaks of withdrawal from occupied territories without defining the extent of withdrawal."

So regarding the accuracy of my statement, we see that since it is considered sufficient language for the UN security council to use in drafting resolutions we can infer that it's good enough for DU. Although my statement may have been ambiguous it was in no way "incorrect."

But aside from the point itelf... I'm unsure as to why this is such an important point that it warrants so much energy. We all know the facts of the Israeli pullout extent, if not then, certainly now. I explained what my unspecific statement was intended to mean. Yet I'm getting accused of making totally incorrect claims, of lying, of "attempting to rewrite history," etc. Is this point really so relevant to the overall discussion, especially considering that the facts themselves are not in dispute, just the manner in which I said them?

Does it really qualify for the accusation that I'm attempting to "rewrite history?" :rofl:

[Violet_Crumble]

57. Then perhaps in future you should try saying what you mean...

You said that Israel withdrew from the West Bank. That's a specific area, unlike the several territories from 242 you try to drag into this discussion. You were also replying to a thread where I was giving a scenario where there was a viable and independent Palestinian state, so yr reply informing me that Israel had withdrawn from the West Bank was incorrect. If you'd said Israel had withdrawn from Gaza, you would be correct...

Again, I have NOT accused you of lying, so please stop replying to my posts saying yr being accused of lying. Nor have I accused you of attempting to "rewrite history". What I have done is pointed out that you have made an incorrect claim and seem incapable of admitting that what you should have said is that the withdrawal was to be only from a very small part of the West Bank...

[Englander]

52. The intention of that paragraph was very clear.

The intention was to rewrite history, & to make the false claim that the idf had withdrawn from the
WB. Not parts of it, but all of it.

[Jim Sagle]

59. Nonsense! The "Cannot Reply" button is just a kewl way to facilitate discourse!

:D

[Englander]

6. Right.

What he's actually ashamed about is the fact that the incident was filmed, not that racist abuse
is ignored by the Most-moral-army in Hebron. If this incident hadn't been filmed by B'Tselem we
wouldn't hear about Ollie's flabbergasting. The same with the blairite's reaction to the Saddam
execution, the outrage was aimed at the manner of the filming of the execution, not the execution
itself. Not that there's any relation between the two films, but the reaction to the two films is
similar.

[Shaktimaan]

7. Why do you feel...

Tom: That the settlement in Hebron is illegal?

Englander: That the abuse is racist in nature?

[Violet_Crumble]

12. Don't you agree that the Hebron settlers are there illegally and the abuse is racist?

If not, I'd like to hear yr explanations as to why you *feel* that way....

Also, before you go any further, you might want to read 'Among The Settlers'

An excerpt from it:

'Across from Hadassah House is a school for Arab girls, called Córdoba, after the once-Muslim Spanish city. On one of its doors someone had drawn a blue Star of David. On another door a yellowing bumper sticker read, “Dr. Goldstein Cures the Ills of Israel.” The reference is to Baruch Goldstein, a physician from Brooklyn, who, in 1994, killed twenty-nine Muslims when they were praying in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, just down the road. Across the closed door of a Palestinian shop someone had written, in English, “Arabs Are Sand Niggers.”

Jewish invective is answered by Muslim insults; over another door was a hand-painted verse from the Koran, attesting to the undying perfidy of the Jews. Nearby, peeling off a wall, was a poster dedicated to a ten-month-old Jewish girl named Shalhevet Pass, who was shot through the head three years ago by a Palestinian sniper. “May God Avenge Her Blood,” it read. Pass’s father is in jail in Israel; last July, the police found eight bricks of explosives in the trunk of his car.

A group of yeshiva students appeared, walking in the direction of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, a two-thousand-year-old stone palace. It sits atop the cave in which, tradition holds, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their wives are buried. It is because of the tomb that Hebron is considered a holy city. The yeshiva boys wore flannel shirts and jeans. They had the wispy beards of young men who have never shaved.

Two Arab girls, their heads covered by scarves, books clutched to their chests, left the Córdoba School, and were walking toward the yeshiva boys.

“Cunts!” one of the boys yelled, in Arabic.

“Do you let your brothers fuck you?” another one yelled. I stopped one of the students and asked why he was cursing the girls. He was red-faced, and his black hair was covered with a blue knit skullcap.

“What are you, a goy?” he asked.

The girls fled down the street, and the boys disappeared. I asked the soldier guarding Hadassah House why he hadn’t intervened. “They didn’t hurt them,” he said.'

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/040531fa_fact2_a

[oberliner]

27. Is Hebron not somewhat of a unique situation?

After all, it is a city that was ethnically cleansed of it's Jewish minority and the site of several important Jewish holy places and historic synagogues which were desecrated during the Jordanian occupation.

Not meant to justify any of the incidents described in your posts but important information I think to be aware of.

[Englander]

28. "Ethnic cleansing"?

Interesting misuse of language, there. Which incident/s are you referring to?

I thought the only ethnic cleansing in the region was the Nakba?

http://www.palestineremembered.com/index.html

[Behind the Aegis]

29. Hebron.

...

When the massacre finally ended, the surviving Jews were forced to leave their home city and resettled in Jerusalem. Some Jewish families tried to move back to Hebron, but were removed by the British authorities in 1936 at the start of the Arab revolt. In 1948, the War of Independence granted Israel statehood, but further cut the Jews off from Hebron, a city that was captured by King Abdullah's Arab Legion and ultimately annexed to Jordan.

When Jews finally gained control of the city in 1967, a small number of massacre survivors again tried to reclaim their old houses. Then defense minister Moshe Dayan supposedly told the survivors that if they returned, they would be arrested, and that they should be patient while the government worked out a solution to get their houses back. Years later, settlers moved to parts of Hebron without the permission of the government, but for those massacre survivors still seeking their original homes, that solution never came.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/hebron29.html

[Englander]

31. Gee, y'think?

That a thread about Hebron, & any question in that thread, would automatically refer to anything
that might have happened in Hebron? I meant *when*.

Nothing in that link provides any evidence to support the claim of "ethnic cleansing". Describing
a pogrom as ethnic cleansing carries as much credibility as describing the Gaza disengagement as
ethnic cleansing. ie, it's an abuse of logic/language/history.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. 1936

Since you missed it the first time...

When the massacre finally ended, the surviving Jews were forced to leave their home city and resettled in Jerusalem. Some Jewish families tried to move back to Hebron, but were removed by the British authorities in 1936 at the start of the Arab revolt. In 1948, the War of Independence granted Israel statehood, but further cut the Jews off from Hebron, a city that was captured by King Abdullah's Arab Legion and ultimately annexed to Jordan.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/hebron29.html

Ethnic cleansing refers to various policies or practices aimed at the displacement of an ethnic group from a particular territory. ... In broader definitions it is effectively a synonym of population transfer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing

Also, the removal of Israelis from Gaza was ethnic cleansing, but it wasn't the first time.

Jewish communities in Gaza
The Jewish community in Gaza was destroyed during the Crusades, but returned and was rebuilt with the return of the Mamluk occupation. In February 1799, when the French forces led by Napoleon entered the city, it was struck by a terrible plague which caused the Jews to move to other areas in Palestine. By the year 1886, thirty Jewish families had returned to Gaza, but they were deported by the Ottomans during World War I. Jews returned to Gaza after the war ended but they were forced to leave once again after the 1929 massacres. Following these riots, and the death of more than 150 Jews in Gaza, the British prohibited Jews from living in Gaza to quell tension and appease the Arabs. Some Jews returned, however, and, in 1946, kibbutz Kfar Darom was established to prevent the British from separating the Negev from the Jewish state. <2>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza#Jewish_communities_in_Gaza

[Englander]

35. No, it isn't.

That, patently, isn't ethnic cleansing.

Clue for the literacy-challenged;

Hebron & Gaza aren't listed at that Wiki article as egs of ethnic cleansing, & aren't described as
ethnic cleansing by any credible commentators/historians.

An explanation of what actually *is* ethnic cleansing;

Ethnic Cleansing - An Attempt at Methodology
http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol5/No3/art3.html#TopOfPage

[Violet_Crumble]

41. Something to keep in mind about Wiki.

Anyone who has an internet connection can go to Wiki and claim Hebron and any other number of things are an egs of ethnic cleansing, so even if someone had added it to Wiki's list of examples, it wouldn't prove anything other than showing that letting every Ordinary Joe with an internet connection loose to create and edit encyclopedia articles sometimes results in people insisting that because someone is said there It Must Be True!!!

[Englander]

50. Absolutely.

In this instance, that hasn't happened, Hebron doesn't feature as an eg of ethnic cleansing, which
should make anyone who claims that it is pause for thought. That an online encyclopedia that is open
to anyone making claims & posting articles that can be about anything they like, regardless of the
actual history, doesn't even claim that what happened at Hebron should be described as ethnic
cleansing.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[oberliner]

36. Here's what I was referring to

Hebron was home to a small but long-established Jewish community.

In 1929, a large number of those Jews were massacred and the remainder were forced to flee.

When the Jordanians occupied the city, Jews were not permitted to return and the city remained free of Jews until the end of the Jordanian occupation.

The city went from having a centuries old Jewish community to being cleansed of Jewish people via massacre and expulsion and refusing the right of those Jews to return to their homes.

Remnants of that community were destroyed, including a large number of synagogues, and cemetaries and holy places were desecrated.

That historical background I think is important to keep in mind, regardless of the terminology one uses to describe the experience.

[Englander]

49. Yeah, that's what I thought.

Describing that as ethnic cleansing is an abuse of language/history/logic, & I'd suspect that anyone
who did actually, describe what happened as ethnic cleansing (this also applies to the Gaza
disengagement) is immune to being able to accurately describe what happened.

For eg, here's the numbers involved - less than 100 killed in the August '29 massacres, & less than
1000 evacuated. What happened was horrific, but to describe that as meaning that Hebron was cleansed
is a serious abuse of logic/language/history.

Here's an accurate description of what happened, minus the emotive language;

'Tuesday, 18 February, 2003, 15:13 GMT
The hostility of Hebron

>snip

In 1929, before the foundation of the modern state of Israel, as the Zionist movement sought to establish a Jewish state in British-ruled Palestine, Palestinian rioters killed 69 Jews in Hebron and the British evacuated the remainder of the Jewish community.

For the Israelis who arrived in 1967, moving back to their roots was a religious duty and part of a process of messianic redemption.

On the eve of the Jewish feast of Passover in April 1968, a group of Orthodox Jewish families went to Hebron with their children, posing as tourists.

They rented, then occupied, a small Palestinian-owned hotel, refusing to move out.

Eventually these people were allowed to stay in a military camp by the then Labour government and later to build a Jewish settlement nearby called Kiryat Arba, which served as a base for their subsequent entry to the heart of the town.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/israel_and_the_palestinians/issues/1683017.stm

[Violet_Crumble]

34. No more unique than the towns and villages in Israel where the same thing happened to Palestinians

n/t :)

[oberliner]

40. Agreed.

I just meant unique among areas in the Palestinian Authority which contain Jewish settlements.

Hebron had been home to a significant Jewish community long before the Zionist movement was founded.

It was a community that survived significant anti-Jewish discrimination throughout the Middle Ages and became a center of Jewish learning throughout the period of Ottoman rule.

[Shaktimaan]

55. Hebron's significance goes betond just having been a city with a substantial Jewish population.

It is home to the oldest Jewish commuinity known to date. Jews have inhabited Hebron for thousands of years (with small breaks due to pogroms and the like.) It holds a special significance to religious Jews, much the same way Jerusalem does for Arabs. Hebron also contains the Tomb of the Patriarch which is the second holiest site to said religious Jews. This isn't to say that Hebron is destined to always be Jewish or that the settlers are merely rationally claiming land that's rightfully theirs. Obviously it's more complicated than that.

But in terms of being a special case that can't be judged solely through the lens of colonialism or land aquisition, Hebron certainly qualifies. I would also venture that its significance does make it unique compared to many of the areas that Palestinians lost. While I'm sure an emotional connection to that land existed as well it is not the same as losing a place of such religious and historical significance as Hebron. It would be more akin to the Arabs losing Medina or Jerusalem which I'm sure you agree holds a greater importance to many Palestinians. As such you can't really just lump it in with every other settlement if you want to give an accurate picture of the motives behind settling there and the long historical connection Jews have to the city. I mean, for whatever you think of what's going on there, Jews were living there since before Islam even existed. Labeling it simply as "land stolen from the Palestinians," as many do is a half-truth at best.

[Scurrilous]

8. Settler filmed cursing Palestinian neighbors questioned

"YiIfat Elkobi, the Hebron resident filmed cursing at her Palestinian neighbor in a video published by Ynet last week, arrived at the Hebron police department Monday morning for questioning.

About 20 protesters were outside the police station in support of Elkobi."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3352401,00.html

Settler suspected of assaulting Palestinian woman released under restrictions

"Hebron police has released Yifat Elkobi, the Jewish settler accused of assaulting a Palestinian woman in Hebron, under restricted limitations.

Elkobi was filmed while cursing a Palestinian woman in Hebron. According to the police, she is suspected of being involved in a number of other assault incidents."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3352490,00.html

[Tom Joad]

39. Let's see. If killing 7 Palestinians gets you weekend furloughs... what are the chances

of this person even being arrested?

Israel is supposed to be the place in the Middle East that respects women's rights? Yet a woman can be assaulted on the street, with ample evidence, and no charges forthcoming.

[oberliner]

42. Assaulted on the street?

I'm sorry but incidents where a woman yells insults at another woman and calls her names are more than commonplace in countries that respect women's rights.

Do you believe that women have more rights in other countries in the Middle East than they do in Israel?

[Tom Joad]

43. Palestinian women in Hebron are routinely beaten. So are boys and girls.

Rocks are thrown, fists are used.

That's not commonplace in the US. What happens in Hebron can only be compared to Black kids going to a white school in mississippi in the 50's or 60's. Look at the videos yourself, there are many.

Arrest record by Israeli police of Israeli offenders is not exactly noteworthy. They have arrested Jews who support the rights of the Palestinian residents. The police and the soldiers are used only to protect the Israeli settlers, with very rare incidences of any law being applied to Israeli settlers.

[oberliner]

44. The incidents cited are certainly to be condemned.

I will not dispute your claims about incidents that have taken place in the Occupied Territories.

However, I would direct your attention to this report by Human Rights Watch outlining the many discriminatory laws and practiced enforced by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza which have created a climate where violence against women and girls among the Palestinians is alarmingly prevelant.

I stand by the assertion that women are treated significantly better in Israel than in any country in the Middle East.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/11/07/palab14496.htm

The 101-page report, “A Question of Security: Violence Against Palestinian Women and Girls,” based on field research conducted in the West Bank and Gaza in November 2005 and early 2006, documents dozens of cases of violence ranging from spousal and child abuse to rape, incest and murders committed under the guise of family “honor.” There is increasing recognition of the problem, and some PA officials have indicated their support for a more vigorous government response, but the PA has taken little action to prevent these abuses. As a result, violence against women and girls is often unreported, and even when it is, it usually goes unpunished.

“PA officials across the political spectrum appear to view security only within the context of the ongoing conflict and occupation, all but ignoring the very real security threats that women and girls face at home,” said Farida Deif, a researcher in the Women’s Rights Division of Human Rights Watch and co-author of the report.

A combination of discriminatory laws that condone and perpetuate violence and the virtual absence of policies to assist victims of abuse have left Palestinian women and girls with little protection. All Palestinians suffer from the deficiencies of the existing criminal justice system in the OPT, but women pay a particularly high price for officials who are often unwilling to respond adequately to gender-based violence.

Discriminatory criminal legislation in force in the West Bank and Gaza has led to virtual impunity for perpetrators of such violence and has deterred victims from reporting abuse. These laws include provisions that: reduce penalties for men who kill or attack female relatives who commit adultery; relieve rapists who agree to marry their victims from any criminal prosecution; and allow only male relatives to file incest charges on behalf of minors. These laws deter women and girls from reporting abuse and provide virtual impunity for perpetrators.

[Englander]

51. Where's the relevance?

What's a HRW report about the PA got to do with Hebron?

Here's a HRW report that isn't irrelevant;

CENTER OF THE STORM
A Case Study of Human Rights Abuses in Hebron District
April 2001

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/israel/index.htm#TopOfPage

[MrPrax]

10. 'Looks' bad?

Why not an extreme makeover to wash away perceptions...much easier than actually changing policies and tactics.

Israel looking for an extreme makeover

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has met with public relations executives, branding specialists and diplomats in Tel Aviv to brainstorm about improving the country's image

______

"...Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has "met with public relations executives, branding specialists and diplomats à in Tel Aviv to brainstorm about improving the country's image by using the marketing insights first developed to sell peanut butter and Pontiacs," the newspaper reported.

"When the word 'Israel' is said outside its borders, we want it to invoke not fighting or soldiers, but a place that is desirable to visit and invest in, a place that preserves democratic ideals while struggling to exist," Livni was quoted as saying by Reuters.
...
David Saranga, the counsel for media and public affairs at the Israeli Consulate in New York, told PR Week that the government was in consultation with a number of public relations and advertising firms and had not yet decided what the re-branding campaign would focus on. Saranga did point out that two important groups that the government wanted to reach are "liberals" and people aged 16 to 30.

Ambassador Gideon Meir, deputy director general for media and public affairs at Israel's Foreign Ministry, recently spent time in the U.S. meeting with media professionals working in the various Israeli consulates across North America. Meir told Haaretz's chief U.S. correspondent that he would "rather have a Style section item on Israel, then a front page story."

SperoNews

[Scurrilous]

11. American image overhaul in PA

Aggressive campaign by USAID offices in Israel, Palestinian territories aimed at improving America’s image among Palestinians; ‘Americans think they can buy our sympathy with pretty pictures, but we know that the economic situation we are facing now is a direct result of them boycotting our government,’ Ramallah resident says

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3352682,00.html

<snip>

"The colorful billboard stands tall on a wall in the center of Ramallah showing a girl dreaming of becoming a teacher. Another one grabs the attention of passersby with the picture of a boy holding a stethoscope imagining himself as a doctor. The sentence at the bottom reveals a deeper thought and inspiration: “We support your future.”

These kinds of posters, placed around the inner city of Ramallah, are frequent reminders of an aggressive campaign by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) offices in Israel and the Palestinian territories as the agency focuses its promotional tools in an attempt to improve the US’ image among Palestinians.

When asked how they perceive USAID's new advertising campaign, Palestinians are divided.

"These billboards are placed anywhere and they make the city ugly," says 25-year-old Zaid Moqdad. "But I don't complain about the USAID's campaign because they are not a commercial organization. They are helping the people without taking any benefit out of it. So if they want to show what they do, it is fine by me."

Mohammad Hassan, 43, rapidly glancing at the advertisement poster, holds a very different opinion.

"Palestinian people are not stupid. Americans think they can buy our sympathy with pretty pictures, but we know that the economic situation we are facing now is a direct result of them boycotting our government, and thus our people."

[Scurrilous]

15. Sneh: Law not enforced with regard to Hebron settlers

<snip>

"The laws are not being enforced sufficiently and promptly in Hebron, especially with regard to Israeli settlers, Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh (Labor) said on Monday during a visit to the city.

Sneh's scheduled visit was widely covered following last week's broadcast of a video showing a female settler swearing and attacking an Arab family in Hebron's Tel Rumeida neighborhood. Palestinian residents said attacks by this woman and other settlers have been going on for a long time.

The woman, Yifat Alkobi, was questioned by police on Monday on suspicion of several violent attacks on Palestinians, including the attack on the house of the Abu Aisha family that was broadcast on television last week."


<snip>

"Alkobi was released under restrictions after questioning and the police will consider whether to press charges against her. She filed a counter-complaint against the Abu Aisha family, saying they had provoked her.

Sneh and Peretz's political aide, Hagai Alon, visited the Abu Aisha's house, which is surrounded by iron bars like a cage, in an attempt to protect themselves from the settlers' attacks. They were accompanied by Hebron Brigade Commander Colonel Yehuda Fuchs.

"We cannot allow the fact that people live in cages because someone is harassing them in an area we control," Sneh said. The ministerial committee set up on Sunday to deal with the settlers' law violations in Hebron will have its hands full, Sneh said.

Sneh was received with curses by radical right-wing activists in Hebron."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/814070.html

[Tom Joad]

38. Go to the Tel Rumeida Project website...

These are the people who are working to bring justice and the world's attention to the plight of Palestinian residents who suffer from the organized racism of Hebron's illegal settlers (see Geneva Conv, article 49 for why the settlers are illegal).

Tel Rumeida Project

It's volunteers risk their lives on a daily basis. The Palestinians who have chosen to remain in their homes do the same. It is a very dangerous place.

Contributions to support this project are needed. May there be a hundred videocams. May we continue to embarrass the apartheid leadership.