AP's Old News

In this report, we read:

For the past 25 years, the international community has supported the establishment of a Palestinian state on the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip — lands captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war — as the best way to ensure peace in the region.

The logic is clear. With the number of Arabs living on lands controlled by Israel roughly equal to Jews, and the Arab population growing faster, two-state proponents say a partition of the land is the only way to guarantee Israel’s future as a democracy with a strong Jewish majority. The alternative, they say, is either a binational state in which a democratic Israel loses its Jewish character or an apartheid-like entity in which Jews have more rights than Arabs.

It also appeared in the NY Times. 

Let's clear this up, with facts.

The international community supported the establishment of an "Arab State" in the West Bank Judea and Samaria, note: not specifically "Palestine", in 1947 with the UN partition recommendation. The Arabs refused that, just as they refused the 1937 Peel Commission suggestion of partition and just as the first partition, when historic Palestine was truncated and its eastern regions were separated from the League of Nations original mandate plan and awarded to a recent arrival from Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Jewish settlements rights were disallowed in those areas while Arabs could continue to live in and come to the Jewish section of Palestine.

Furthermore, given the record of all lands yielded up or surrendered by Israel of the territories it gained in 1967 have been used as bases for hostile terror attacks, especially Gaza from which Israel supposedly "disengaged". To provide the Arabs with more such bases is quite the opposite of peace.

There is no logic in a two-state solution.

The so-called "demographic threat" is not as portrayed. The figures are actually in favor of the Jewish population.  But really. I detailed sources here. And you can search this blog going back over decade (using "demography", "demographic threat").

As for "democracy", if Arabs, or for that matter any non-Jewish minority, seek to de-Judaize the Jewish state, well, there are safeguards for that, or there will be. Otherwise, if all Jews need to exit the proposed state of "Palestine", why not all the Arabs exist Israel? Not that I am suggesting that but just pointing to the illogical thinking of some people who only care about Arabs.

The Jewish character need not be "lost" without a strong Jewish majority.  And, by the way, what is a "strong Jewish majority"? Is it 80%? 75%? 70%? 60%? What, indeed, is the cut-off? Or, what is Jewish? Do we have to regard all those who claim to be Jews as Jews? And what about the non-Jewish non-Arabs, the foreign migrant worker community? Are they a factor?

Of course, all this avoids the central issue: is the Arab conflict with Israel and Zionism one of territory or is it existential? That is, will the Arabs honestly and genuinely accept a Jewish state in any territory they consider Islamic? Do they recognize Jewish national identity?

Will Jews accept a state without Jerusalem in its entirety?

AP reporting still stuck in the past.

^

How To Spin and Bias The News

Here's an excerpt from a headline and lead-in from and AP story:

Theater & Dance
Israel culture minister probes troupes that shun settlementsBy Associated Press June 15

JERUSALEM — Israel’s polarizing culture minister has dispatched a contested questionnaire to theaters and dance troupes to find out whether they are performing in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, a first step toward changing regulations that will allow her to penalize cultural institutions that refuse to perform there.

I have placed in bold the words that were employed in an unfair fashion to affect how the reader should comprehend this story.  They are suggestive words, forcing one to arrive at a conclusion not necessarily supported by facts.

You have been warned.

And since it appears in dozens of outlets (I checked and saw Washington Post, ABC, UK's Daily Mail, etc.), without a change in verbs, adjectives or nouns, the semantic subversion is wide and extensive.

A Communist MK is simply noted as:

Dov Khenin, an opposition lawmaker,

The story also includes something else pertinent, that the cultural institutions were

asked whether they have refrained from performing in the northern and southern peripheries of the country 

Your "news".

^ 

The AP Story of Shvut Rachel and Shiloh

I escorted Karin Laub from AP around Shiloh, Shvut Rachel and the outlook from Givat Achiyah.

Here, from the Washington Post:

Excerpts from her story, "Israel legalizes unsanctioned settler enclave", appear below with my italicized comments in brackets []. Unfortuntely, we who are interviewed rarely get a chance to review the story before publication although quotations and additional 'factual' elements usually are run by us for approval.

But I will stress that from the outset her determination was to present a picture of "illegality" while I kept stressing "unauthorized" and referred to the reality all over Israel including kibbutzim whereby the bureacracy is overcome by first building and then all the necessary authorizations are arranged. And in Judea and Samaria, the difficulty is two-fold: not only a lazy and awkward and complex bureaucracy but also simple political considerations or prejudices can hold up legal construction by method of withholding an authorization or a signing-off on plans that are all perfectly in order.

But now, to her story:

SHVUT RACHEL, West Bank (AP) -- Israel has quietly [I would think the media 'noise' last week was heard even at AP's editorial offices]legalized one of the oldest and largest of the unsanctioned [Shvut Rachel was sanctioned and authorized and recognized in 1991 and has been registered as a neighborhood of Shiloh as it sits on land officially and legally zoned as part of Shiloh which was done in the mid-1980s] settler enclaves dotting the West Bank, a step denounced by the Palestinians and Israeli activists as a show of bad faith ahead of talks next week between the Israeli leader and President Barack Obama [actually, the belated authorization was dictated by the Peace New appeal to the High Court of Justice which finally required the Civil Adminsitration and Ministry of Defence to do what they should have done years ago].

The dispute over settlements has confounded [in truth, it is but one of many things confounding negotiations, foremost among them the refusal of the Arabs to come to the table, to accept ther parameters, to agree to security needs, to recognize refuggee resettlement outisde, to stop incitement, etc.] Washington's attempts to revive Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, mostly on hold since 2008. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to stop construction [wait, wasn't there a 10-month moratorium? it is referred to farther below but only as coming from man Israeli spokesperson] and the Palestinians say they won't negotiate while Israel unilaterally determines the borders of their state through settlement-building.

...The stalled talks and dispute over settlements is bound to come up when Netanyahu meets Obama on Monday.

Shvut Rachel, home to 95 Israeli families, was established 21 years ago on a hilltop in the heart of the West Bank [after Arab terrorists killed 2, Rachela Druk and Yitzhak Rofe and wounded others including children, one, Harel Bin-Nun, was to survive but was then killed in 1998 by other terrorist at Yitzhar] - an area Israel would likely have to withdraw from to make way for a Palestinian state. The settlers grabbed the land without government permission [the land was not "grabbed without permission". the land was allotted to Shiloh. True, plans for construction there had not been made but after the murders of Rachela and Yitzhak, a group of Yeshiva students led by Yossi Shuker z"l set up home on the hill a 10-minute walk from my house and within a short time, full government permission was received].

Now that approval seems at hand. A planning committee last week retroactively legalized 115 apartments already built or under construction in Shvut Rachel, according to government officials and the community's acting mayor, Yaakov Moshe Levi. The move apparently resulted from pressure by peace activists to stop construction there.

In its decision, the panel also approved in principle nearly 500 more apartments, though a construction start would require further permits and could be years away, government officials said.

Hagit Ofran of Israel's Peace Now group says this amounts to establishing a new settlement, contrary to pledges by successive governments over the past two decades not to do so. Israel's Defense Ministry rejected that characterization, saying Shvut Rachel is a neighborhood of the nearby government-sanctioned settlement of Shiloh [which, indeed, it is. as I pointed out to Karin, come election time, the voting booth for Shvut Rachel is always located in Shiloh. they are not recognized as an nindependent entity by the Ministry yof the Interior].

Ghassan Khatib...denounced the Shvut Rachel decision as an escalation of Israel's practices.

...half a million Israelis already live on war-won land, [a war the Arabs precipitated and launched. Israel gained the lands which were originally slated to become part of the historic Jewish homeland by the decision of the League of Nations in a defensive military operation] in more than 130 government-sanctioned settlements and some 100 unauthorized outposts [with a population of some 350,000 which is over 10% of the total population, a situation beginning to mirror that of the Arab minority in Israel] set up by settlers who are open about their desire to impede any partition.

...Spokesman Mark Regev insists the current Israeli government "has shown more restraint on the issue of settlements than any previous government," referring to a 10-month construction slowdown in 2010. He reiterated that the fate of settlements must be determined in negotiations [yes, it is a final-status issue] and that Israel is willing to resume talks immediately.

But a visit to the West Bank's heartland suggests that an Israeli withdrawal would be increasingly difficult. Settlers control many hilltops, their communities flourishing with government support, including for unauthorized outposts.

Shvut Rachel and Shiloh [see map below], which also won retroactive approval for some 100 apartments last week, have spawned five more nearby outposts [Achiyah, Keida, Adei-Ad, Esh Kodesh, Givat Harel and Gal Yosef actually. oh, and the retreat called Yishuv HaDa'at]. Settlers operate vineyards [see pictures below] on 3,000 acres that produce more than 50,000 bottles of wine a year, as well as an olive press that produces 12 percent of Israel's domestic olive oil, said New York-born Yisrael Medad, a Shiloh resident.

"We love the land and we build here, and after that we get formalization," the 65-year-old said during a tour of the area Tuesday.

In Shvut Rachel and the area's five other unsanctioned enclaves, the government has lent a hand, even while withholding formal approval. The Housing Ministry under settler patron Ariel Sharon, later Israel's prime minister, built 68 homes in Shvut Rachel just months after it was established, even though it lacked permits, said Moshe Levi, the acting mayor.

The government also provided water, electricity and other services, just as it does for other unauthorized settler enclaves set up since the late 1990s in response to calls by Sharon for settlers to seize the hilltops.

Israel's Defense Ministry denied last week's decision means an outpost has been legalized. It described Shvut Rachel as a neighborhood of Shiloh, home to about 300 families. The two communities are about a half-mile (kilometer) apart, on neighboring hilltops separated by a valley.

"This is not an isolated outpost. This is a neighborhood of Shiloh," a Defense Ministry spokesman said of Shvut Rachel, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with briefing regulations.

Shvut Rachel is part of Shilo's municipal boundaries, Medad said.

However, a 2005 government-commissioned report classified Shvut Rachel as an outpost - as it has with other unauthorized enclaves, even if they were set up within the municipal boundaries of a mother settlement [and that report was specious and ideologically-driven by someone who ran for the Knesset on the estreme left-wing Meretz Party].

Moshe Levi said Shilo and Shvut Rachel have separate budgets and administrations.

Talia Sasson, an Israeli lawyer who wrote the 2005 report on outposts, said she was concerned the Shvut Rachel decision could pave the way for the retroactive legalization of more outposts...

Sharon promised Washington to dismantle outposts built after he took office in March 2001. The Defense Ministry official said three outposts have been removed. The military has also removed mobile homes and other structures in other enclaves, but settlers routinely return to the sites.

Now the Netanyahu government appears to be backing away from Sharon's promise. In January, Netanyahu appointed a three-member committee to review land and legal issues in each outpost.

The panel was told illegal construction on private West Bank land should be removed, and was asked to put in order the planning and zoning status of Israeli construction on public lands, said committee member Alan Baker...Ofran, the settlement monitor, said the recent government decisions have sent a clear message to the settlers: "You build illegally where you want ... and the government of Israel will approve it for you retroactively."

Well, as we know, what is legal can become illegal by the stroke of a pen or the raising of a hand in a parliamentary vote and the very same way can become legal.

What is more difficult a procedure is to correct media biases and errors.


P.S. Dan Bality's picture :

and then mine

Yaakov Moshe-Levi with Karin

what a parcelization and construction approval map look like

and here is a view Issachar P. of this morning - the valley innundated with water:

And a map to orient yourselves:

More here (Feb. 28, 2012, acting mayor Yaakov Moshe Levi points at the housing plan of the Svut Rachel settlement on the map, in the Jewish West Bank settlement of Shvut Rachel, near Nablus.) and also here (the Jewish West Bank settlement of Shvut Rachel, left, and the Jewish settlement of Shilo, right, near Nablus.)

____________

UPDATE

The following data has now been supplied to me:

695 units have been authorized for construction.
611 units in Shvut Rachel. Out of these, 90 are for existing structures and 521 for new buildings.
84 units for Shiloh, in the new neighborhood T'chelet St., 28 existing and another 56 new.
All these authorizations are not yet the final approval.

In other words, the apartment buildings in Ramat Shmuel are still awaiting.

^

The Sport of Grave Smashing

The Associated Press report by Matti Friedman on the mapping the Mount of Olives necropolis by Israel has a small but significant misrepresentation:

A Jewish group in Jerusalem is using 21st-century technology to map every tombstone in the ancient cemetery on the Mount of Olives, a sprawling, politically sensitive necropolis of 150,000 graves stretching back three millennia.

The goal is to photograph every grave, map it digitally, record every name, and make the information available online. That is supposed to allow visitors to find their way in the cemetery...beset for many years by neglect, it is among the oldest cemeteries in continuous use in the world.

Is this: "beset for many years by neglect" - a correct portrayal?

No.

There is no neglect but Arab criminal and nationalist-motivated desecration.

And the AP knows.

Here is an AP report from March on the site:

...many of the tombstones have been smashed, litter is strewn around and tethered donkeys defecate on top of graves. The ancient cemetery is just one point of contention in the struggle for control of Jerusalem, an explosive issue in decades of Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. Some Israelis claim Palestinians from surrounding east Jerusalem neighborhoods attack visitors two to three times a week, sometimes stoning funeral processions. They accuse Arabs of building illegally on top of graves, using tombstones as goalposts for soccer games and lobbing firebombs to desecrate the cemetery.

June in a JTA report:

Jewish graves vandalized at Mount of Olives


JERUSALEM (JTA) -- More than a dozen graves at the Mount of Olives cemetery in Jerusalem were vandalized, the latest in a series of attacks on one of Judaism's oldest cemeteries.

On June 14, some 14 graves were damaged by Arab youths wielding sledgehammers, according to private security guards stationed at the iconic cemetery located in eastern Jerusalem. At least five of the damaged gravesites are those of Americans buried in the cemetery, according to Rabbi Moshe Bezalel Buzokovsky of the Chevra Kadisha.

The recent damage is in addition to vandalism sustained at the cemetery last month on Nakba Day, or Catastrophe Day, when Arabs mark the declaration of the state of Israel. During riots, Palestinians hurled large rocks and boulders toward the graves, chipping and breaking at least 15. Arab youths also vandalized or destroyed nearly 40 newly installed surveillance cameras in the cemetery, according to the International Committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim. Har HaZeitim is the Hebrew name for the Mount of Olives.

And we can go back to 1948:

During the period of Jordanian rule, the cemetery was destroyed and desecrated, and 38,000 of its tombstones and graves were smashed to smithereens. Since Jerusalem's reunification...attempts by Palestinians to damage the cemetery have never totally abated, and there have been periodic attacks on Jewish mourners escorting their dead for burial.

How could AP get something like that so wrong? What we call "language laundering"?

Always go easy of those nasty Arabs who commit such perversions.

^

AP's Bias

Notice this in an AP report on the Egyptian opening of the border with Gaza:

"The tunnels have been used to bring in all manner of products, as well as people. Israel charges Hamas has used the tunnels to import weapons, including rockets that can reach main population centers in Israel's center."

After dozens of recorded reports, films, visits by journalists in the tunnels, etc., all AP can do is write that "Israel charges...". As if it's all fake and only Israel makes that absurd claim.

Simple, almost unobtrusive but deadly nevertheless.

It's not a fact - only an Israeli "charge".

^

AP Is Not Only Biased But Wrong

So, this is AP history:

Palestinians were marking the "nakba," or "catastrophe" — the term they use to describe their defeat and displacement in the war that followed Israel's founding on May 15, 1948.

So, no war started on December 1, 1947?

Well, since Wikipedia is quite available to journalists, what does it say there?

This:-

Soon thereafter [the Partition recommendation of November 29, 1947 - YM], violence broke out and became more prevalent. Murders, reprisals, and counter-reprisals killed dozens on both sides.

In December 1947 and January 1948 an estimated nearly 1000 people were killed and 2000 injured. By the end of March, the figure had risen to 2,000 dead and 4,000 wounded. These figures correspond to an average of more than 100 deaths and 200 casualties per week in a population of 2,000,000.

Jewish soldiers take up positions at Mishmar Ha'emek, a settlement whose defenders repulsed repeated Arab attacks and inflicted a significant defeat on the Arab Liberation Army. From January onwards, operations became more militaristic, with the intervention into Palestine of a number of Arab Liberation Army regiments which divided up around the different coastal towns and reinforced Galilee and Samaria. Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni came from Egypt with several hundred men of the Army of the Holy War. At the time, military assessments were that the Palestinian Arabs were incapable of beating the Zionists.

Having recruited a few thousand volunteers, al-Husayni organized the blockade of the 100,000 Jewish residents of Jerusalem...

And how does an Arab source report the history of the 1947-1949 war? How about PASSIA?

In Nov. 1947, the UNGA voted...for the majority scheme (UN Res. 181), recommending the partition of Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state with an international enclave comprising Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Palestinians (two-thirds of the population and owning most of the land) rejected the resolution. The ensuing disturbances culminated in the first Arab-Israeli war, after the Jewish Agency declared the establishment of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 in the part of Palestine allocated to the Jews in UN Res. 181. The balance of power was very unequal with a wellequipped and trained Zionist army fighting against poorly armed Palestinian resistance groups, and many Palestinian civilians fled in panic after Jewish forces committed a series of massacres in their villages. Before the entry of the Arab armies, the Zionist forces launched two offensives - one from Tel Aviv and one from Jerusalem itself (Dec. 1947-May 1948) - which resulted in the conquest of West Jerusalem and the corridor leading to the coast - in violation of the UN Partition Resolution.

That's quite a revisionist version. But we do have there Arabs fighting Jews pre-May 1948.

Here are some random items:

JERUSALEM, Saturday, Dec. 27 -- An immigration official of the Jewish Agency for Palestine was shot dead yesterday by Arabs in an attack on a convoy in which Mrs. Golda Meyerson, acting head of the Agency's Political Department, was traveling. Mrs. Meyerson was unhurt.

and

PALESTINE KILLINGS JUMP TO 16 IN DAY; FIGHTING STIFFENS; Haifa Is Worst Trouble Spot With 4 Arabs, 5 Jews Slain -- Wounded Total 51

That was December 1947 from the New York Times.

Yes, AP. A war actually preceded Israel's founding.



(k/t = BT)

^

Not Then, then Not Now

An Israeli government official acknowledged Saturday that the crucial issue of the future status of Jerusalem was unlikely to be resolved in negotiations with Palestinians this year, reflecting the abiding gaps between the sides.

The official, Mark Regev, a spokesman for the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said...he did not think Jerusalem’s future could be revolved so quickly. “We will outline a methodology for an agreed framework on how to deal with Jerusalem in the future,” he said.

He spoke after the chief Palestinian negotiator, Ahmed Qurei, said the two sides had agreed recently to start drafting a paper defining their respective positions on the various topics under discussion.

But Mr. Qurei, responding to Mr. Regev’s remarks, made it clear in a telephone interview on Saturday that a mere framework would be unacceptable. “If there is no Jerusalem, there will be no agreement,” he said.

To understand this Arab view, check out, for example, this drivel. And to understand theur chutzpah, reflect on this:

In November of 1948, a truce came into force throughout the city, and at the beginning of 1949 an armistice agreement was concluded between Israel and Jordan. Among other matters, it was agreed that a special committee would be established in order to formulate agreed plans inter alia on matters on which agreement in principle already existed, including free access to the Holy Places and the reopening of the cultural and humanitarian institutions on Mount Scopus (Article 8), but these commitments were not honoured by Jordan. Furthermore, the Jordanians demolished most of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City with its synagogues, and also destroyed a number of gravestones in the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.

...In 1950 a conference of dignitaries from the areas conquered by Jordan in 1948 was convened in Jericho, and following their resolution the King of Jordan proclaimed the annexation of the West Bank and Jerusalem to his kingdom. This act was recognized by only two states -- Great Britain and Pakistan, and Great Britain added a reservation that the recognition did not apply to Jerusalem. The members of the Arab League expressed their opposition to these measures.

And let's recall the Partition Resolution the Arabs so much want to revive where it is written:

C. Declaration...

Chapter 1. Holy Places, Religious Buildings and Sites

1. Existing rights in respect of Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall not be denied or impaired.

2. In so far as Holy Places are concerned, the liberty of access, visit and transit shall be guaranteed, in conformity with existing rights, to all residents and citizens of the other State and of the City of Jerusalem, as well as to aliens, without distinction as to nationality, subject to requirements of national security, public order and decorum. Similarly, freedom of worship shall be guaranteed in conformity with existing rights, subject to the maintenance of public order and decorum.

3. Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall be preserved. No act shall be permitted which may in any way impair their sacred character. If at any time it appears to the Government that any particular Holy Place, religious building or site is in need of urgent repair, the Government may call upon the community or communities concerned to carry out such repair. The Government may carry it out itself at the expense of the community or communities concerned if no action is taken within a reasonable time.

Did they behave according to that decision?

No.

So where do they come off demadning Jerusalem? Their behavior doesn't get them Jerusalem now when they didn't want the Jews to have it then.

==============

P.S.

Read how AP Diplomatic Writer Anne Gearan mauls it:

Jerusalem's modern history is tortured: The United Nations proposed international jurisdiction for Jerusalem when it wrote the mandate for a Jewish state in 1947, but the plan fell apart the next year when the 1948 war divided the city between Israeli and Jordanian control. Israel captured the Old City in the 1967 war, reuniting the city under its disputed jurisdiction.

It fell apart? Just like that?
The 1948 war divided the city or the Arabs, who launched a war of aggression, against a UN decision, divided the city and refused for 19 years to unite it?

Israel claims all the city as its capital, and maintains the seat of government there. The Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of a future state.

--By