AS I SEE IT: Israel Wages A Policy Of Deliberate Destruction

[Purveyor]

By ANDREA WHITMORE
Special to The Star

Jimmy Carter’s best-selling book, “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid,” is causing quite a stir. Those who’ve read the book know that Carter writes about Palestine (as the title says), not Israel. Palestine is the area designated by the international community as Arab and includes the West Bank and Gaza.

I have not been to Gaza, but in 2004 visited the West Bank and Israel with Interfaith Peace Builders, an ecumenical group whose tours are often led by rabbis. In Israel, we met with soldiers, university students, settlers and peace groups. In Palestine (the West Bank) we visited the Christian Peacemaker Team in Hebron, walking first under a canopy of trash that illegal Israeli settlers throw down on the heads of the native people.

Settlers have poisoned sheep, forced the closure of native markets and attacked children trying to get to school. Peacemaker Team internationals, pledged to nonviolence, accompany the children. They, too, are attacked. While there, we saw a young American led to a doctor appointment because of a settler attack, her leg in a brace, her arm in a cast. Her co-worker was in the hospital with a collapsed lung and broken ribs. They’d been leading small children to school.

Israelis frequently close schools and universities in Palestine, often for months at a time. Roads in Palestine, where illegal Israeli settlers have hundreds of colonies, allow Israelis only. Special license plates assure this. Native roads are poor and often blocked by cement, mounds of dirt or soldiers. Palestinians must carry identity cards and can be stopped at the whim of any 18-year-old soldier.

---END OF EXCERPT---

http://www.kansascity.com:80/mld/kansascity/news/opinion/16736369.htm

[Jim Sagle]

1. Hogwash!

[LSK]

2. what part?

[Jim Sagle]

10. All of it. See details below.

[breakaleg]

3. Short, simple and to the point. It will fall on deaf ears, unfortunately.

[cali]

14. Oh, c'mon. You really can't see the use of hyperbole and

deliberately inflamatory rhetoric here? There's plenty to criticize about the Occupation without some of these spurious charges.

[breakaleg]

15. Not in this forum, as the responses in this thread indicate.

[cali]

17. You didn't answer the question.

And your statement that there isn't criticism of Israel's Occupation or treatment of the Palestinians in this forum (at least I think that's what you were saying) is absurd. As for the people pointing out the flaws and misstatements in the posted article, their doing so doesn't mean that they aren't critical of the Occupation.

[breakaleg]

18. So, you think Pelsar is critical of the Occupation?

What I meant by my post is that the realities of the occupation don't get much play around here. Israel is defended, there are excuses put forth, we're told that it's irrelevant to the conflict (this one is my personal favorite) and at most, if the incident happens to be caught on tape, then it's a one-off. It's not symptomatic of the problem, it's a rare event.

You see, those of us who want a fair settlement for the Palestinians can easily find criticism of their methods. Rockets, suicide bombers, it's not so difficult. I would think that the travesties of the occupation would be one area where supporters of Israel could also find criticism. Like the walled in communities they've created with their wall, or the treatment at the checkpoints, the actions of the setters. But no, they defend it, minimize it, or change the subject.

[pelsar]

20. in fact i am critical of the occupation...

however if one is really really interested in having a serious discussion about it, one must leave the "hyperbold, the lies, the fabrications behind. Accusations that cant be backed up with some serious information should be left out.....histories of the area, would have to be taken in to account..but most important of all, for a real discussion to take place....all questions to be answered......subjects may change (as they do in real conversations), but that doesnt mean one cant go back and re ask the question.......


More so one would have to be able to discuss the real concerns of the israelis (in this instance one on the left....)

any real discussion would have to take into account the real politics, scenarios that might or might not develop and have real answers for them....has yet to happen here, but i will give you credit, you did come the closest anybody has ever come......

so if your game...

i would lay down the following "rules"

all questions and their follow up to be answered
no accusations without real immediate info to back it up (to avoid the wasted time either backing it up or debunking it)
and avoid the word games (genocide type polices being a prime example)

[cali]

21. I'm not going to discuss what I think another poster thinks

but I will make the observation that I think you're proof that we see things through the prism of our own biases. I think there's ample criticism of both Israelis and Palestinians on this forum, and plenty of people from both sides who recognize that the Occupation is the crux of the matter.

[Englander]

41. The Indefensibles don't even acknowledge that there is one.

I think there's ample criticism of both Israelis and Palestinians on this forum, and plenty of people from both sides who recognize that the Occupation is the crux of the matter.

Never mind the Occupation being the crux of the matter, they don't even acknowledge that there is
an Occupation. The WB is "disputed territory"(the correct phrase is Occupied Territory), the
Occupation of Gaza has finished (it hasn't), & I've seen suggestions that parts of the WB should be
annexed by Israel. Another time the reality that Jerusalem was annexed by Israel was denied. So,
any claims that "people from both sides.. recognize the that the Occupation is the crux of the
matter" isn't an accurate reflection of the views expressed down here.

[Shaktimaan]

37. you know what it is...

and I can only speak for myself here, but you and I argue about this issue a lot, and I am sure that you see me as someone who defends Israel regardless of the facts at hand. And I'll admit that I do a fair amount of playing Devil's Advocate here, such as when I post in defense of settlements, but it isn't just for the sake of arguing or because I actually support the occupation or settlements. Nor is it because I am unable to find fault with Israel's policies or actions. No matter how morally bankrupt settlers are or how damaging to the peace process areas like Hebron are there are always two sides to any issue. In this conflict especially it is critical to understand the real motivations behind every movement even the most extremist or unyielding ones. And the more objectively anyone can do this the more useful the exercise is.

There is never anything to be gained by making gross exaggerations about legality, atrocities, policies or actions here. Any real movement towards peace will have to take into account the actual needs and rights of both sides, as well as recognize that both sides have legitimate claims and grievances. Yet the purpose of much of the rhetoric I hear challenging the occupation is intended to radicalize people into supporting various organizations or spark outrage, not to honestly outline the situation or further any real understanding of the complex nature of the conflict.

So when I hear statements that casually describe the occupation as having no purpose other than to mask outright theft of Palestinian land or the purpose of the wall as being an effort to block the peace process I challenge them. I feel like I spend 90% of my posts arguing over what are essentially just facts, which is dumb. It is easy to look up whether or not a fact is accurate. More important are aspects of the conflict like discussing what real peace would require of the various players or what different groups' motivation stems from. These are the real issues and yet I find so many people refusing to look at them in anything other than black or white or attempting to understand them instead of just wanting to assign blame. Certainly there are times when blame can be easily placed but since everyone's motivations stem not just from the action preceding it but from perceived wrongs dating back 100 years, these times are few and far between.

So why bother defending trash like the Hebron settlers? Well, when peace is reached it will be the result of big concessions made on both sides. For instance, the PA may obtain east Jerusalem as their capital, but it seems really unlikely that they'll get sovereignty over al aqsa. On the other hand it is fairly definite that they will get all of Hebron. Now, if you look at Hebron solely as an illegal, colonial enterprise rooted in a desire to drive native Palestinians away from areas that Israel has no possible claims to then it will be difficult for you to understand what Hebron's value is or compare the impact of its loss for Israel against the cost of keeping it. And if you can't do this for Hebron then you equally can't for al aqsa.

It's easy to think of one side as being criminal or motivated by greed because then you can get good and angry instead of getting confused. And there is a tendency among liberals to stick up for the underdog or the oppressed without exception, arguing for the side of power leaves a bad taste in some people's mouths so they resolve to judge the conflict in absolutes or use wildly different standards when evaluating each sides' actions. Sadly, the main lesson I've learned here is that if two people who have relatively little at stake in the outcome of this war, such as Breakaleg and I, are unable to even move past basic rhetoric in our discussions then how can we reasonably expect the Israelis and Palestinians to actually forge a viable peace agreement?

[breakaleg]

39. I'm not sure that you addressed this post to me or not.

On the issue of motive. It's common to see as an explanation for something, like the settlement enterprise, Israel's official position on their reason for being there. Defense. I don't buy that. I don't accept my governments excuses for its actions at face value so why would I accept Israels? Both would be self serving more than truthful.

As for the Hebron settlers. I can't think of a single solitary reason to defend them. I think their actions are so outrageous that whatever excuse they may have is completed negated. You don't correct a wrong by committing wrongs yourself.

I agree it's about compromise. It's just unfortunate that it's not also about justice or fairness. Because that means Israel will get far more than it should.

I responded to a post of yours a few weeks ago where I explained how I came to hold my current views. I don't know that you saw it.

[pelsar]

40. why they exagerate.....and just plain make up stuff....

its here i've always been perplexed...why would somebody actually believe that there are 'massive non violent demonstrations"...or that israel needs the west bank to steal the water, or even that Hizballa is actually defending lebanon by using its milita to create a state within a state..

but then i was always under the assumption that to get to the end goal of peace, one must keep to the facts and try to understand the concerns of the other....but that was wrong.

the end goal is not peace for many here...its a select form of justice...one that only they understand, not the "players". I've learned that its not the human rights, the killings etc...they just serve as the method of getting to the "justice". (which is why israel is blamed for everything possible including palestinian wife beating!) That justice, obviously has different definitions for everyone, especically those of different cultures. Here its the western version (yes ironic, given that were talking about the middle east).....and yes it is a form of colonialism, in that they are saying that they're version of 'justice" is the right one. Most talk about the 67 borders, some the Taba agreement, every so often we hear about the 48 borders...so even that is a bit confusing, and we havent even gotten to the palestinians yet.

but thats the jist of if, i've also come to learn that "post occupation" is "no ones concern (except perhaps for the israelis and palestinians). Meaning that if post occupation there is a civil war/war against israel, etc and 1,000s are killed/cities destroyed, well "its none of their business" (I've heard this from several). Perhaps its the age of "instant gratification" that pushes that niave immature attitude, but its hardly a responsable one..at least as far as the people who are actually involved. But thats also part of it, ignoring that actions have consequences, pretending they dont, is one way of avoiding the responsability...and again it keeps things simplistic and easy to understand.

granted it makes it far more confusing......(was life under the shah better than under khomeni?-first people hung were the "left/liberals... ) and thats probably why they keep to the simple version of events and exagerate to make it even clearer...and avoid a serious discussion without the hyperbole.....


but this is part of the rampart ethnocentrism that runs through here:
Now, if you look at Hebron solely as an illegal, colonial enterprise rooted in a desire to drive native Palestinians away from areas that Israel has no possible claims to then it will be difficult for you to understand what Hebron's value is or compare the impact of its loss for Israel against the cost of keeping it. And if you can't do this for Hebron then you equally can't for al aqsa.

the concept that if they dont understand, then it has no meaning/worth. For the settlers of Hebron and other israelis, its value to them is equal to that of muslim view al aska (or someother holy place....), its not a matter of understanding, its a matter of accepting it....that its has a value to jews and israelis. One doesnt seem to see that here, but then it would mean giving some sort of "rights" to the settlers..further confusing the issue..which is obviously to be avoided at all costs.

[Shaktimaan]

4. really?

Israelis frequently close schools and universities in Palestine, often for months at a time.
I guess that's true. If you mean "Palestinian teachers on strike" when you say "Israelis."

In the United States we’ve been taught that Arabs are somehow lesser;
That's sad, I was never taught this. Where the hell did this guy go to school?

Roads in Palestine, where illegal Israeli settlers have hundreds of colonies
Hundreds? I don't think so.

Palestinians are restricted to small enclaves, walled ghettos.
Unless they're not. Then, you know, they aren't.

This is the end game for the Israeli government, a “state” for the native people with few contiguous borders, no control over borders or trade
Actually, they control their border with Egypt. It isn't Israel's fault that the Egyptians won't allow the Palestinians control over it.

People are poor because they cannot move from place to place to trade.
So when they could move from place to place, as in 99.99% of the previous 1000 years, they were wealthy? Besides, not everyone's poor. Suha Arafat seems to be doing well. Where'd she get her money I wonder?

Children are starving. Water is scarce. Israelis have usurped supplies. Palestinians sometimes don’t have enough to drink.
And they have to give up their first born to the Israelis so they can make matzoh with the blood.

all of it happening on land legally designated theirs.
I must have missed that. When were all of the territories legally designated to belong solely to the Palestinians? Oh right, in your alternate reality.

[breakaleg]

5. Is that straight out of Israel PR 101?

[Shaktimaan]

6. Dude...

The Palestinian children are not starving.

This article was retarded by any measure.

[pelsar]

7. he forgot to add...

"genocide" like policy, "the palestinian massive non violent demonstations"...need westbank to steal water, concentration camp gaza, IDF targets children about the age of 13, intention of destroying al aksa, poisen gas, new weapons that kills but leave no trace, aids laced candies, the cause of palestinian husbands beating their wives, israeli/jews control congress, hizballa is only protecting lebanon.....(and this is the short list)

[breakaleg]

8. Where are you getting this from? Stop making shit up. It makes you look bad.

[Shaktimaan]

9. He isn't making anything up.

He's listing other, common claims against Israel that are as equally ludicrous as the accusations made in the above article as a way of calling out article's said retardedness.

[Tom Joad]

12. The problem is that there are just too many witnesses these days,

too many people going into Palestine and relating first-hand knowledge, too many human rights groups relating the same information, the case is just being proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is this massive crime being committed against the Palestinian people.

Israel cannot count on the support (or silence) of liberal-progressive organizations like they used to.

Sounds good to me. And i think for anyone who wants real peace to come to the Middle East.

[pelsar]

13. the real problem is "post occupation"...

and all of those people who are now complaining about human rights of the palestinians, will suddenly go quiet and scurry back to their warm suburban homes when the real problems come up.....

and they will say: its none of our business (or so i've come to learn)...so when a weak PA govt, theocratic hamas, or weak, corrupt fatah, takes the reign and cant control their own jihadnikim and missiles still fly into israel..or worse, a sudan version of territorial control or as in Hizballas lebanon, which assures far more "rights violations" than are now occurring......both within their territory and without, (still attacking israel)

the collective "its none of our business" will surly be heard from the living rooms across the globe (for they will have left long ago....), and they will wash their hands of the issue, pat each other on the back, all while the killing continues.....

[breakaleg]

16. This thread is about the current, ongoing occupation.

[Tom Joad]

22. Maybe the arguement must be made against future fantasies because the present

brutal apartheid Israeli regime cannot be defended. Certain amount of logic there, you must admit.

[pelsar]

27. fantasies?

leaving lebanon just brought kidnappings, attacks and missiles...leaving gaza brought the same......

is this belief of yours, is there some kind of evidence, pointing in the direction that peace is guaranteed after the occupation is removed (btw does you definition include tel aviv? as in islamic jihad and hamas or perhaps not as in fatah?) or is it just a belief based on........?

[LSK]

19. wow

You dispute the settlement program that has been in existance for years?

You dispute the West Bank wall that is going up?

You dispute the system of roads going from settlement to settlement that restricts Palestinians from using it?

You dispute the Israelis use of the Jordan river valley?

You dispute the severe restrictions the Israelis have put on entering/leaving Gaza and their denied use of shipping there?

You dispute UN Resolution 242???

You cant be serious.

[Phx_Dem]

23. Restrictions

All the restrictions in the OTs (security fence, checkpoints, closures etc.) is due to Palestinian violence against the Israelis. None of these measures existed to any degree before Intifada II. The only thing holding up the creation of a Palestinian state is the lack of good PA leadership.

[LSK]

24. Restrictions which exist on land that is not Israels per UN Res 242

[Phx_Dem]

26. Per res 242

Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

http://www.mideastweb.org/242.htm

Israel is not in violation of 242, the idea is to reach a negotiated agreement between both sides.

[Shaktimaan]

25. I never said any of those things.

I challenged specific statements made by the author. By all means, back up his assertions with credible evidence if you can. I'll even list a few to get you started.

• Palestinian children are starving.

• The Israelis closed Palestinian schools and universities for months at a time.

• Hundreds of colonies exist in Palestine.

• The Palestinian territories have been legally designated as belonging solely to the Palestinians.

Think you can do it? Or is it your strategy to just put words in my mouth, debunking arguments that I never made? It certainly must be easier than refuting what I actually said. More pointless, true, but certainly much easier.

[breakaleg]

28. How about this?

On the night of January 14/15 2003, the Israeli Army sealed the entrances off and closed by military order two higher educational institutions in Hebron (Hebron University and the Palestine Polytechnic University) after delivering the relevant orders to the presidents of both colleges.

These actions were carried out, according to an Israeli Army spokesman, because these colleges "endorsed terror and acts of vengeance as part of their curriculum" and that although the Israeli Army does not wish to harm the innocent Palestinian population, "it has a duty to prevent education that incites murder of Israelis". The initial closure order, dated 10 January 2003, and signed by the Commander of the Central Region of the Israeli military forces in the West Bank, General Moshe Kaplinski, was activated for fourteen days, containing within it a clause that allowed for an extension of up to six months, which was subsequently implemented.

In defiance of the Israeli military order, students of Hebron University re-opened the university on 12/13 June, which led to the resumption of some classes in the main campus shortly afterwards. However, soldiers reinforced the closure on 30 July, once again bringing education to a halt in the main university buildings. The six-month closure order was extended by a further month on two occasions, thereby ensuring that both institutions were to remain closed by Israeli military order until 9 September 2003. The Israeli Army unexpectedly opened both colleges on 15 August 2003 since when lectures have resumed in both Hebron University and Palestine Polytechnic University.

http://right2edu.birzeit.edu/news/article122


------------------------

There are about 121 settlements in the occupied territories, NOT including East Jerusalem, so that number is actually higher. So, not quite "hundreds" but enough so that your claim that there aren't any is splitting hairs. I don't think that number includes the illegal outposts either. I believe that is in the neighborhood of 90.

The only group who deny the occupied territories belong to the Palestinians, are Israel. Hardly impartial.

[Shaktimaan]

32. better...

but the author stated Israelis frequently close schools and universities in Palestine, often for months at a time

So, two universities were closed for a few months. I would think that would be bad enough without needing to exaggerate or lie when discussing it. Remember, I am not defending any specific practices here, just challenging this article's innaccurate claims.

The same goes for the settlement number. There are 120 (or 121 from your source) settlements, not hundreds. It's not splitting hairs, it's flat out exaggeration.

As for land rights, Israel does not deny that most of the territories belong to the Palestinians, they stated that already. But that doesn't mean that the territories have been legally designated as belonging to the Palestinians, which is what he said. Get that word. Legally. He just made it up. Like the rest of this stuff.

Again, this isn't about the conflict itself. It is about bias and honesty.

[Scurrilous]

36. More:

<snip>

Birzeit University Under Military Occupation

"Through the years, 15 of the University students have been shot and killed in the wake of demonstrations that called for an end to occupation. Scores of students and faculty have often been detained for lengthy periods without trial and some have even been deported in a flagrant violation of the Fourth Article of the Geneva Conventions.

In 1973, just as Birzeit's development into a full-fledged university was nearing completion, Israel closed the campus by military order for two weeks. This was the first of many military ordered closures. Between 1979 and 1992, the University was closed 60% of the time. The 15th and last closure lasted for 51 months, from January 8, 1988 until April 29,1992. During this prolonged period of closure, the University continued to operate underground with small study groups in makeshift arrangements outside the campus. Under such conditions, many students needed as long as 10 years to complete their four-year degree courses.

In 1980, the Israeli occupation authorities issued military order number 854 which granted them full military control over such university matters as hiring of faculty, admission of students and the curriculum. The order affected Birzeit as well as all other higher educational institutions in the occupied territories. Fortunately it was rescinded shortly afterwards due to the local and international protest it generated.

To date, while the University has not been closed in over seven years, it still faces great obstacles in carrying out its mission in spite of the Oslo peace agreements between the Palestinians and the Israelis; violations of human rights continue unabated and students are often arrested and detained sometimes for being members of the student council. Student from Gaza are often barred to travel to the West Bank to enroll at Birzeit. Moreover, the University is facing prolonged financial crisis due to the stalled peace process and the resulting poor economic situation."

http://www.birzeit.edu/p/ps?url=about/history1&id=50207

[Shaktimaan]

38. I think you're missing the point.

This is not about individual school closures. This is about backing up the article's assertion that Israel frequently closes schools and universities for months at a time. This school says that they've been open continuously for the past 7 years, yet the last closure due to Israeli action ended in 1992, probably because of Oslo. So, according to this link, the most recent closures were not Israel's doing and happened when Ramallah was under PA control.

Regardless, since the Oslo Accords were enacted 15 years ago Israel has not closed the university and the article in question is from 2007.

Maybe you aren't missing the point, now that I think about it. I assumed that you were trying to prove the article's accuracy at first, but this link seems to refute his statements rather than back them up. If you are in fact trying to debunk his inaccuracies then I apologize. You're doing a bang up job.

[LSK]

29. Schools

"Although all students from UNRWA schools are from Qalqilya itself, twenty percent of teachers from UNRWA schools reside outside town. The month of October 2003 was particularly difficult due to the tight closures. Teachers were delayed, and on occasions denied access. "

"The Al Quds Open University has a campus in Qalqilya with 50 teachers and 1,400 students. Thirty teachers and 50 percent of the students are from outside Qalqilya and face difficulty reaching campus. On 14 and 15 December when the DCO checkpoint was closed, 50 percent of students were absent. The University does not keep a detailed inventory of student absences, but confirmed many lost days due to both student and teachers absence. "

http://www.un.org/unrwa/emergency/barrier/profiles/qalqilya.html

"The Agency runs elementary and preparatory schools. However, the main problem facing UNRWA's education programme in the West Bank is overcrowding with an average of 50 pupils per classroom. Due to the growth in the school population and the shortage of school buildings, 24 schools are run on a double shift basis, i.e. they share the same school building, and 21 schools operate in rented premises. In addition, many schools have been damaged by Israeli military activity since September 2000."

http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/westbank.html

[Shaktimaan]

33. OK, so...

students from one town have been inconvenienced and once, in an extreme example, for two days half of them were absent.
And, the UN's relief organization runs its schools poorly.

Were you going to show me examples of the IDF frequently closing schools for months on end? I forgot after reading through all this unrelated stuff.

[LSK]

30. West Bank settlement statistics

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

Ok maybe not hundreds, but its not a small number either.

[Shaktimaan]

34. Ah, but we aren't discussing whether there are too many settlements in Palestine.

We are discussing whether the author of the article was being honest and factually accurate. He was not. And not just once or in a small way. He made gross exaggerations and fabrications throughout the article. This is one example.

[LSK]

31. UN Res 446

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/ba123cded3ea84a5852560e50077c2dc?OpenDocument

The Security Council,

Having heard the statement of the Permanent Representative of Jordan and other statements made before the Council,

Stressing the urgent need to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 1/ is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,

1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

2. Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and the consensus statement by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976 2/ and General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, 32/5 of 28 October 1977 and 33/113 of 18 December 1978;

3. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;

4. Establishes a Commission consisting of three members of the Security Council, to be appointed by the President of the Council after consultations with the members of the Council, to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem;

5. Requests the Commission to submit its report to the Security Council by 1 July 1979;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the Commission with the necessary facilities to enable it to carry out its mission.

7. Decides to keep the situation in the occupied territories under constant and close scrutiny and to reconvene in July 1979 to review the situation in the light of the findings of the Commission.


Adopted at the 2134th meeting by 12 votes to none, with 3 abstentions (Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America).

[Shaktimaan]

35. Thanks for posting.

But I'm not sure which assertion of the author's it is supposed to support. It doesn't say anything about starving children or school closures. It certainly doesn't say that the territories are legally the property of the Palestinians, in fact, when this resolution was voted on Israel was occupying the West Bank from Jordan. This resolution occurred a decade prior to any proposal to have a two state solution with Palestinian sovereignty over the West Bank. When this resolution happened, Jordan had just gotten through with slaughtering thousands of Palestinians, stripping the citizenships of the remaining ones and expelling them from Jordan to Lebanon.

Also, not to beat a well-dead horse, but you realize that this is a NON-BINDING U.N.S.C. resolution, right? It lists suggestions, not requirements.

[Tom Joad]

11. The footnotes. See B'tselem page for details. & do something about it.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Statistics/
Great resource.

Join the June 10th March on Washington to End the Occupation!
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/
Endorse it, get your group/union whatever to do likewise.
Off the internet and into the streets!