Here's the itinerary for a trip organized by the UK YACHAD two-state solution group, found by clicking on the word "debate" here:



Or am I mistaken and those "communities" are also "Palestinian", aka Arab?

Of course, if the trip had been organized, say, in 1938 by British Jews supporting the efforts of Peace Now, sorry, Brit Shalom, then "Palestinian" would have referred to Jews anyway.

The vagaries of the conflict Jews of the Diaspora have with the national homeland of the Jewish People.

^

You all know that I prefer "communities" to settlements".

And who gets to live in "communities"?

The Beduin of Judea and Samaria.

Yep.

Here:

According to Israeli human rights group BTselem, the first phase is planned to begin as early as January 2012, and would forcibly evict approximately 2,300 people – who are currently living in about 20 communities in proximity to the Israeli settlement of Ma’ale Adumim – and transfer them to a new location near the Abu Dis garbage dump, just east of Jerusalem.

We never win?

^

The PA exhibits commonsense:

PA lightens ban on working in settlements Jewish communities to ease Palestinian unemployment

Figures show number of Palestinians employed in settlements Jewish communities has increased to nearly 35,000; PA legislation barring employment there would be an economic blow to Palestinian population...

...The settlements Jewish communities and laborers who work in them have a mutually beneficial relationship, and settlement Jewish community construction relies on Palestinian labor. Many Palestinian workers who do not have permission to work in Israel proper find employment in the settlements Jewish communities.

According to Israeli figures from September 2009 that were provided to the PA's donor countries, 22,000 Palestinians were working with Israeli permission in the settlements Jewish communities, including the settlements' Jewish communities' industrial zones. Non-governmental organizations have said, however, that about 10,000 other Palestinians are working in the settlements Jewish communities without formal permission, mainly in seasonal agricultural work.

^


^

^


Here.

On his "crunch" suggestion.


.

CNN and Peace Now?

Construction has started for about 600 new housing units in the West Bank since the Israeli settlement freeze ended late last month, the group Peace Now said Thursday.

Or AP?

A list of 544 housing starts in West Bank settlements since end of freeze 3 weeks ago

If you ask me, neither are correct.

But then we have this:

U.N. envoy Robert Serry called the AP report "alarming." He said settlement construction is "illegal under international law" and "will only further undermine trust."

- - -

West Bank Success Story

The Palestinians are flourishing economically.
Unless they live in Gaza.

By Michael B. Oren

Published Aug. 13 in The Wall Street Journal

Of course, the presence of Jews in that area, the economic links and interdependence is neglected and unmentioned.

Tsk, tsk, Michael.

Spotted this item:

Communities Secretary Hazel Blears has quit the cabinet, increasing pressure on UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Communities?

Yes, in England there's a Communities and Local Government Ministry and it publicizes itself thus:

We would all like to be part of a safe, prosperous and healthy community. A community where everyone has the right to the same opportunities, freedom and respect. Somewhere we can be proud of.

Communities and Local Government is working hard to create thriving, sustainable, vibrant communities that improve everyone's quality of life. To achieve this we are:

* building more and better homes - and reducing homelessness
* improving local public services
* regenerating areas to create more jobs
* working to produce a sustainable environment
* tackling anti-social behaviour and extremism

In Ontario, Canada, a similar Ministry of Community and Social Services' goal

...is to build thriving and inclusive communities sustained by the economic and civic contributions of all Ontarians. The ministry’s mission is to build resilience and remove obstacles that impede opportunity and participation in community life. It does this through policy development and program support for a broad range of services aimed at supporting Ontario’s most vulnerable citizens.

Well, since I live in a community, maybe this is an idea to be pushed.

Daniella Weiss' operation.

Called Rechasim - The Heights.

Four sites: Sela; Migron; Ma'alot Halchoul; Kol Tziyon.

You all know that I refuse to use the term "Jewish settlement" to describe my home and the other 150+ cities, towns, villages and communities in Yesha.

So look at this, instead of village we get:-

2 Israelis rescued after entering Palestinian community

Two Israelis who entered a Palestinian community east of Bethlehem were detained by Palestinian security forces and were removed unharmed in coordination with Israeli authorities.

Dani Dayan, Chairman of the Yesha Council, on Al-Jazeera on Jewish communities.

He appears at 2:55 until 5:40, give or take a second:



He reminds me of me.

A Ra'anana-based businessman, Montreal native who made aliya in 1976, Sheldon Schreter, published an opinion piece in the Jerusalem Post, "For the cause, the settlements must go".

Some excerpts:-

Israelis seem to have lost their belief in the rightness of our cause...How did we get to this situation, and how do we get to a better place?...Huge energies, vast resources and endless creativity were poured into the settlements in territories conquered in 1967.

...I recently read David Shulman's Dark Hope, which is an eyewitness report on the abominations committed in the West Bank in the name of the Jewish people...my contention [is] that they are profoundly, dangerously wrong in mortgaging the entire Zionist enterprise to the cause of the settlements. In so doing, they have unintentionally caused grievous damage to the rightness of our wider national cause, on two levels.

First, the perception of the essential rightness of our cause by the nations of the world...It is criminally foolish to underestimate or scoff at its importance. Maintaining it is tough, as our enemies market the calumny that Israel is merely a colonial implant, another apartheid South Africa, or, at best, Europe's export of its Jewish problem to the Middle East. The most important proof in the arsenal of our enemies is precisely the settlements, and the accusation that we are stealing the land and livelihoods of our neighbors...

SECOND IS the impact settlements have had on our internal consensus and belief in the rightness of our cause...The settlements thus undermine both the external perception others have of us, and our own internal perception of the rightness of our cause. As such, in utter contradiction to the intentions of so many of their residents, settlements wind up weakening rather than strengthening us, and seriously endangering the existence of the one Jewish state we do have.

There is a bizarre, paradoxical connection between the settlers' yearning for the whole land of Israel and the Arab demand for a single, secular, democratic state of all its citizens: Both would have the consequence of destroying Israel.

WITHDRAWING from the settlements will not appease our enemies, nor should we leave unilaterally, without guarantees, safeguards and milestones. But withdraw we should...We have to relinquish our profound internal split over Greater Israel in order to unite effectively in favor of pre-1967 Israel (plus minor, negotiated additions). Our shared belief in the rightness of our cause - without which we shall fall - cannot be rebuilt so long as we are occupying and dispossessing another people.

It will be tragic to leave the sites associated with our cherished collective memories...

So, if I manage to convince most Israelis that the communities are part of Israel's national, cultural, historical and religious ethos and that without that ethos, Israel will not be Israel but some Cannanit Hebrew-speaking state;

and if I convince most Israelis that a withdrawal from the territories will bring with it an existential security threat;

and if I convince the majority of Israelis that no Arab is willing to settle for the continued existence of Israel in any border configuration and that after 1967+ boundaries, we will be forced to face demands for 1949, then 1947 and then - the right of return (but not necessarily in that order);

and if I am successful in all the above, then I have solved Schreter's problems and we can get on with the business of reconstituting the Jewish National Home in its historic homeland.

That's not too difficult a task.

The State Department has an essay on the Arab-Israel conflict up, composed by William Quandt, and I spotted this

Carter's ambitious vision of a comprehensive peace was dealt a harsh blow in mid-1977 with the election of Menachem Begin as prime minister of Israel. Begin headed the Likud Party, whose central tenet was that Israel had a right to keep all of what he called "Judea and Samaria," or the West Bank. This ran directly counter to the views of those who had crafted U.N. Resolution 242, as did Begin's insistence on Israel's right to build civilian settlements in these territories. Carter and his team were frustrated by Begin's intransigence, but they pushed forward,

Oh, really?

Well, let's permit Begin the last word:-

During the last few days a campaign of incitement conducted by certain circles has been launched against the Government of Israel and against me personally. Only a few months ago these same circles pronounced words of praise for Israeli actions that led to the signing of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, for our love of peace and our desire to achieve peace with all our neighbours, who to this day, however, refuse to join the peacemaking process.

These circles, in referring to Jewish settlement in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza district, do not shrink from employment the term "provocation". This is perhaps the most distasteful element in the whole incitement campaign. One recalls times when it was asserted that the presence of Jews was of itself a provocation; and if now there are Israelis of certain outlooks who accept the assumption that the presence of Jews alongside of Arabs in our historic homeland, Eretz Israel, is a provocation - then shame on them. By so doing they follow the evil path of the enemies of the Jewish people.

Distortions, too, the product of cynicism or ignorance, are published about our settlement in our land. The New York Times, for example, alleges that I promised someone that we would never carry out settlement work in areas of Eretz Israel "seized" - so the paper writes - "from the Arabs". There is absolutely no foundation to this allegation. At Camp David I promised President Carter that during the three months of negotiations with Egypt about the peace treaty we would abstain from establishing settlements. The three months ended on December 17, 1978. During those months a debate arose between us and the Americans on this matter. That debate was laid to rest a few weeks ago when the Secretary of State, Mr. Cyrus Vance, affirmed before a Congressional Committee that the obligation to which I had committed myself consisted of this and nothing more - three months only.

Ever since my first visit to President Carter on July 22, 1977, I have stated and reiterated that we have an absolute right to settle in all parts of Eretz Israel, as this is our land, parts of which, in the east and in the south, were conquered in 1948, by aggression and invasion, by Jordan and Egypt. Under no circumstances did I ever agree with the thesis, whatever its origin may be, alleging. that our settlements are illegal or that they are an obstacle to peace.

There are circles abroad which rely on minority votes in the Knesset, or on the official Opposition, or on a demonstration by groups of Israeli citizens, or on an article by an opposition member defeated in democratic elections, in order to justify their criticism of the Government of Israel and of me personally. One cannot but express wonder at this approach, which is clearly anti-democratic. In a democracy, not a minority but the majority decides, and foreign countries conduct relations with the legitimately elected government, not with groups of demonstrators or authors of opposition articles.

Since forming the present Government we have not misled anybody, on every occasion, and particularly during the twelve days of the Camp David discussions, we declared and reiterated -

(a) That Jerusalem is the eternal, indivisible capital of Israel.

(b) That we have the full right to settle in all parts of Eretz Israel, and that such settlement is also a vital security need to prevent the murder of our citizens and children.

(c) That under no circumstances will we permit the establishment of a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza district.

We have promised autonomy to the Arab inhabitants of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza district. We wish to carry out this promise in accordance with every word we signed in the Camp David agreement.

The true meaning of the Camp David agreement is this: Autonomy for the Arab inhabitants of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza district, Jews and Arabs living together in Eretz Israel, and security for Israel and all its citizens.

Therefore, we shall pay no attention to abuse, spoken or written, in Israel or abroad. We shall ensure, as elected representatives and spokesmen of the nation, the peace of the people of Israel in the Land of Israel.

and another word:-

I feel bound to open my address by responding to two pronouncements that were heard in recent days from across the border.

President Sadat announced that he will not tolerate the presence of Israeli civilian settlements following the signing of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.

From this rostrum, let me say with all due respect and friendship to President Sadat, that such inflexibility and intransigence as expressed in the words "will not tolerate" cannot serve the peace-making process. We do not employ expressions of this kind since we want an agreement and the signing of a peace treaty.

I informed Sadat in Ismailiya that our army is in Sinai legitimately because the Six-Day War was, in the highest sense of the term, a war of legitimate defence. I had only just begun to cite the words "throw them into" when President Sadat, in Ismailiya, completed the phrase and said, "the sea."

As for an additional opinion, try this one:-