Isabel Kershner, author of "Barrier, the seam of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict", outlines the stark, vivid and hyper-exaggerated lines that the radically ideological wing of the settlement movement use to describe the conflict:
These new mayors, like the Samaria council’s Gershon Mesika, reject what they see as the more compromising policies of the Yesha council, the settler movement’s longstanding umbrella group. They are particularly incensed by the Yesha council’s willingness to negotiate with the government over the removal or relocation of some West Bank outposts in exchange for official authorization of others. ... “Amona pretty much divided this public into two parts, the more militant activist part and the more passive part,” said Mr. HaCohen, an Orthodox hilltop youth pioneer and a founder of Shalhevet Ya. The people, he said, “have to decide whether they are on the side of the Torah or the state.” ... Representing the messianic, almost apocalyptic wing of the settler movement, Mr. HaCohen peppers his speech with talk of redemption and makes it clear that in his land of Israel, there is no place for Arabs. |
Mr HaCohen did not serve in the IDF. Today he seems willing to serve against them.
Read the full article here: Radical settlers take on Israel
Steve, you seemt to be developing a fashinable prejudice against the Jews who live in Yehuda and Shomron i.e the so-called 'settlers'.
Aren't these people also entitled to human rights?
And why should Jews be allowed to live anywher in the world except their ancient heartland?
Why is it a crime for Jews to live anywhere they like?
And is.t trying to create a Judenreihn West Bank called ethnic cleansing?
Posted by: | September 28, 2008 at 12:15
The above was written by me
Posted by: Gary | September 28, 2008 at 12:15
Yes Gary, I do it because its fashionable.
Gary, I don't have easy answers to your questions but I also believe your questions on their own belie a reality that we cannot close our eyes to.
I see a withdrawal from settlements beyond the security barrier as a necessary condition to securing the future of Israel. My opinions are hitherto informed by that premise.
By the way, why the "so-called" settlers? If I am informed correctly the settlers in the late 60s, 70s and 80s referred to what they were doing as "settlement". Hence they could be called "settlers".
I do believe they should be allowed to stay as residents or even citizens of a future Palestinian state or federation with Jordan. But then they would need to abide by its rules. And there would need to be an equitable distribution of resources.
I support the major settlement blocs. But I will never support the outlaws who attack the IDF or Palestinian civilians. The IDF is there for security.
Further, I dont care how left wing certain university professors are, attempts to kill them by blowing up their homes are criminal and the perpetrators should be brought to justice.
Posted by: Steve | September 28, 2008 at 14:00
I am not condoning the attack on Porofessor Sternehll'
s house however the man is NO saint.
He has encourgaged Arab terror attacks on Jews living in Yehuda and Shomron.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125186
Now small Jewish children have been killed by Arab terrorists, and Sternhell's words may have contributed to this.
Look at this
http://factsofisrael.com/blog/archives/000021.html
http://www.geocities.com/mxlibr/shalhevet/shalhevet.html
How do you feel when you look at this?
Posted by: Gary | September 28, 2008 at 14:14
I agree. He is NO saint.
Posted by: Steve | September 28, 2008 at 14:51