SOB’s Grins & Grumps

Everything Between Heaven and Earth and Beyond

  • Copyrights and Contact

    Henric C. Jensen
    All images and Artwork are
    © 2006-2018 Henric C. Jensen
    Mail

  • October 2021
    S M T W T F S
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
    31  
  • Categories

  • Meta

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

Archive for the ‘Palestine’ Category

What would Cheney Know about Peace…?

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on March 24, 2008


JERUSALEM (CNN) — Vice President Dick Cheney arrived Saturday night in Israel, where he pledged America’s “enduring and unshakable” commitment to the security of the Jewish state as it approaches its 60th anniversary.

Dick Cheney and Ehud Olmert
Cheney met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to kick off a weekend of talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders.”Our two countries have been more than just strong allies. We’ve been friends, special friends,” Cheney said at a news conference with Olmert.”Both our nations share the ideals of liberty, equality, human dignity and representative government.”

“Both our nations have stood firm against forces of terror and intimidation. … We are natural allies,” Cheney added.

He reaffirmed that the United States was committed to Israel’s “right to defend itself against terrorism and rocket attacks and other threats from forces dedicated to Israel’s destruction.”

In turn, Olmert called Cheney “a very good supporter and friend of the state of Israel.”

Nothing new. Nothing surprising. It would have been nice to hear something about the Settlements… Now, this was followed by this:

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) — A Mideast peace agreement will require “painful concessions” by Israelis and Palestinians who must work together to defeat those “committed to violence,” Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday.

Dick Cheney and Mahmoud Abbas

After meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Cheney stressed the U.S. commitment to the creation of an independent Palestinian state, saying it was “long overdue.”

“Achieving that vision will require tremendous effort at the negotiating table and painful concessions on both sides,” said Cheney, whose stop in Ramallah came just two months after President Bush’s trip to the West Bank.

Abbas, a moderate, controls the West Bank and is battling Hamas militants who have taken charge of Gaza from Abbas-allied forces and have bombarded southern Israel with rockets.

“Terror and violence do not merely kill innocent civilians, they also kill the legitimate hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people,” Cheney said.

In their meeting, Abbas asked Cheney to help stop Israeli settlement expansion and military operations targeting militants, said Saeb Erekat, an Abbas aide.

Nothing new. Nothing surprising. Nothing that will bring Peace.

Why is that? Because there really isn’t anything Cheney can do about the situation. The only ones’ that can are the Israeli People and the Palestinian People. Only when both people want peace more than they want to hate each other and be “right” will there be peace.

Besides, what would Dick Cheney, the greatest war-monger of them all, know about Peace? He makes money off war, he doesn’t want peace in the Middle East, cause that would cost him a lot of money. Peace in the Middle East means not only less money, but less reason fore the US to “do their thing”, which is and has always been “Divide and conquer” and “Go there so we can steal, plunder and kill”, at least when there’s been a Republican in the White House.

Posted in Israel, Middle East, Palestine | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Very Interresting Discussion

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on July 8, 2007


Police: Settlers’ Papers on Hebron Building Were Forged | Jerusalem Post

Saturday July 7, 2007, 4:34 pm
Now, this should generate a lemmings-trail of “note-its” from the Far Left Anti-Zionists in this site, and yet it hasn’t – I wonder why? I think I am going to let one of my Alter-Egos post my Israel-critical news, because people seem to assume that if it’s me posting news it must be “contaminated” somehow. Come on People, get this on the front page!

Saturday July 7, 2007, 4:56 pm
Silly,
I don’t think you’re “contaminated”, I don’t always agree with you, but you make some good points.

The whole Israel issue is very complex with one reaction after the next fueling constant chaos. The military exchange is only part of the issue, settlements, road blocks and sanctions add to the tension.

What is your impression of the settlement problem in the conflict?

Saturday July 7, 2007, 5:16 pm
XX,

I think it plays a big role – it would be so much more easy to put forward good, just and viable solutions for all parties involved, if there were no settlements in the Territories. Above all, it would give Israel a bargaining chip: “Look, we are keeping our part of the International Agreement of 1947”. Dale Commented on this in HRN saying that Israel has lost the moral High ground it had back in 1948. That is true. Very true. With the Settlements in the Territories dismantled, some of that high ground would be re-gained, which I think would eventually swing the pendulum from polarization to middle-ground Internationally. Any Palestinian and/or Arab hatred/armed violence against Israel would turn against them in that context.

Or that is my hope – because then pressure could be put on the PA to make peace and start building a Palestinian Sovereign State.

Saturday July 7, 2007, 5:56 pm
The other side of the Story:

Hevron Decries State Prosecution’s Forgery Allegations

Sunday July 8, 2007, 10:42 am
Silly, thanks for providing the other link, I figured there was more to this and that it hadn’t been resolved or confirmed yet.

I agree on most of what your saying, but with only 1/3 of the population in 1948 attempting to claim control over the remaining 2/3, I don’t think Israel had much moral high ground then either.

One problems both sides are faced with is, the people expected to resolve the conflict, don’t have total control over all the people involved. Each government is full of individuals, with individual goals and idea about what is fair and reasonable, passed on to them is the task of controlling their people. So, simply having the right idea and intent to solve the problem isn’t enough, the people need to cooperate.

Without the ‘right of return’, I don’t think the Palestinians will ever fully accept a less than fair partition of land, but I do think they would accept Israel if the borders were fair, even Hamas. With the current balance of leverage, mainly in world opinion, Israel does not have the motivation or political power at home to make such concessions.

The ultimate goal is a truly peaceful relationship between Palestine Israel and all their neighbors. This requires both sides to feel the issue was resolved in a fair and just manner. The problem is, even withdrawing to 1967 borders isn’t going to satisfy the Palestinians who feel they were forced from their land by 1/3 of the population and are now told they can never return. Israel justifies their right to the land from many angles, but what they need the power to do is justify the Palestinians right to a fair partition.

Palestine has the motivation and the power available, all they need is the right plan. This has been my main message to them.

Shifting the balance of power is probably the only way this situation will be resolved. To do this, the Palestinians could to take control of their future and declare peace without negotiating terms. Israel relies on Palestinian violence to justify ‘security zones’ of occupation, all raids inflicting casualties, road blocks, check point searches, sanctions and more. By unconditionally ending violence, all of these justifications are lost, and world opinion would sway on Israels response to this. World opinion would also sway on Israel’s ability to control certain armed settlers, and out of bounds settlements. This would appeal to them as a semi immediate gain in conditions and a long term gain in leverage. It’s a simple political strategy with good motivation that can be passed straight to the people, providing that elusive control governments lack in ending the violence.

Think about it Silly, and let me know what you’re thinking.

Sunday July 8, 2007, 3:27 pm

“I agree on most of what your saying, but with only 1/3 of the population in 1948 attempting to claim control over the remaining 2/3, I don’t think Israel had much moral high ground then either.”

I disagree with this for the simple reason that in 1948 Israel was content to accept the Partition Plan under UN resolution 181 and can hardly be blamed for the all out Arab attack on her before the ink on the Declaration of independence had even dried. – Nor can she be blamed for the lies spread and exaggerated by Arab Leaders. One also have to keep in mind that we are talking about here (per the agreement between Britain and France on the division of the Ottoman Empire) are the Jews in all of what once was the Ottoman Empire from Iraq to Algeria and Morroco, and they can hardly be called 1/3 of the population in comparison to the Palestinians living in Palestine.

“Without the ‘right of return’, I don’t think the Palestinians will ever fully accept a less than fair partition of land, but I do think they would accept Israel if the borders were fair, even Hamas. With the current balance of leverage, mainly in world opinion, Israel does not have the motivation or political power at home to make such concessions.”

I agree with the “right of return” to some degree and the partition of land – but I doubt you will agree with what I am to say next:

The problem with this reasoning, XX is that in 1947-1948, the land partition WAS fair – or let’s say it was satisfactory Let’s not forget the fact that (trans)Jordan annexed 50% of what was supposed to be for the Palestinians of the British Mandate, and Egypt 60% of what was supposed to be the Gaza Strip in the partition plan, leaving the Palestinians with the West Bank and a minute part of the Gaza Strip – (all one needs to do to see this is take a look at the original Partition Plan Map and a map of the British mandate of Palestine). No, that’s not fair – but you cannot blame Israel for what the Arabs did. You need to ask/demand (whichever you prefer) that Jordan and Egypt return to the Palestinians what they stole back then.

The problem with right to return is that who is and who is not a Palestinian refugee is highly disputable. No other people claims to be refugees in 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation – the Palestinians do – they have even managed to, in my mind, manipulate the International Community into creating a specific “refugee” category for them, so that they can perpetuate the idea of being victims. Yes, to right of return of those who are actually refugees without special provisions who have valid papers that show they lived inside Israel in 1947-1948 or 1967 or is an under age child of someone living inside Israel in 1947-1948 or 1967, that is acceptable – That would also mean the right of return for ALL refugees (without special provisions) to their countries of origin from (as put forward by the UN definition of who is entitled to right of return), i.e Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Iraq etc, from where the Palestinians have been expelled or deported to camps because the Arab League “forbids” the host nations to assimilate or naturalize them. If we implement “the right to return” in all fairness, we have to do so with regard only to refugees directly affected by the 1948 and 1967 wars – this means a load of Palestinians really don’t belong either in Palestine nor inside israel, and if they want to live there, they’ll have immigrate like everybody else – if they get invitations to immigrate, like Jews from all over the World are invited to immigrate to Israel – great let them come, I say.

“The problem is, even withdrawing to 1967 borders isn’t going to satisfy the Palestinians who feel they were forced from their land by 1/3 of the population and are now told they can never return. Israel justifies their right to the land from many angles, but what they need the power to do is justify the Palestinians right to a fair partition.”

Israel have already done that – Israel fully expected the Palestinian Arabs to take possession of their half of the Land, which was rightfully theirs according to all International Laws.

What the Palestinians need to UNDERSTAND is that the partition WAS fair, and that they have been lied to by the Arab League and it’s members and are unfortunately continued to be lied to by people who say things like “you are 2/3 being controlled by 1/3”. IF the Arabs and subsequently the Palestinians back in 1948 had accepted the Partition under UN Resolution 181 unconditionally like the Jews did, they would have had their Sovereign State right there and then – don’t blame Israel for the mistakes made by the Arabs back then.

Israel doesn’t need justification for the Palestinians right to their half. They gave that when they accepted the Partition in 1947-48 – they need justification for withdrawing from Occupied Territories and return to the borders of 1947-48 – which as far as I am concerned must be priority #1. Believe it or not, work and ideas are being done and discussed to that end – my Blog Entry from yesterday: Talking Torah in Lieu of Politics – Daniel Sieradski We need to re-draw the map, so that the Partition, instead of being patches here and there becomes two continuous “land-masses” with a corridor for each to have access to Jerusalem.

“Shifting the balance of power is probably the only way this situation will be resolved. To do this, the Palestinians could to take control of their future and declare peace without negotiating terms. Israel relies on Palestinian violence to justify ‘security zones’ of occupation, all raids inflicting casualties, road blocks, check point searches, sanctions and more. By unconditionally ending violence, all of these justifications are lost, and world opinion would sway on Israels response to this. World opinion would also sway on Israel’s ability to control certain armed settlers, and out of bounds settlements. This would appeal to them as a semi immediate gain in conditions and a long term gain in leverage. It’s a simple political strategy with good motivation that can be passed straight to the people, providing that elusive control governments lack in ending the violence.”

I agree.


Posted in Palestine, UN | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Who is an Illegal Combatant?

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on July 3, 2007


Avraham Stern

“The term unlawful combatant (also unlawful enemy combatant or unprivileged combatant/belligerent) denotes a person denied the privileges of prisoner of war (POW) designation, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions; one to whom protection is recognised as due is a lawful or privileged combatant.[1] Once a combatant is found by a competent tribunal to be an unlawful combatant, he or she (“he”) no longer has the rights and privileges accorded to a POW, but he retains all the rights any other civilian would have under municipal and international law in the same situation.[2]Article 5 of the GCIII states that the status of detainee may be determined by a “competent tribunal”. Until such time, he is to be treated as a prisoner of war.[3] After a “competent tribunal” has determined his status, the “Detaining Power” may choose to accord the detained unlawful combatant the rights and privileges of the POW, as described in the Third Geneva Convention, but is not required to do so. An unlawful combatant who is not a national of a neutral State, and who is not a national of a co-belligerent State, retains rights and privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention so that he must be “treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial”.[4]The phrase “unlawful combatant” does not appear in the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII).[1] However, Article 4 of GCIII does describe categories under which a person may be entitled to POW status; and there are other international treaties which deny lawful combatant status for mercenaries and children. In the United States, the Military Commissions Act codified the legal definition of this term, and invested the U.S. President with broad discretion to determine whether a person may be designated an unlawful enemy combatant. The assumption that such a category as unlawful combatant exists is not contradicted by the findings by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Celebici Judgment. The judgement quoted the 1958 ICRC commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention: Every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention. Furthermore, “There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law,”[5] because in the opinion of the ICRC “If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered ‘unlawful’ or ‘unprivileged’ combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action” From Wikipedia


Ultimately, who is a Freedom Fighter and who is a Terrorist/Illegal Combatant, from a moral perspective, is decided subjectively depending on from which perspective you are approaching the issue.From the point of view of International Law, any armed civilian or soldier in civilian garb caught behind enemy lines or in direct confrontation with enemy military is an Illegal Combatant.

In order to be considered a ‘soldier’ a civilian has to be visibly distinguished from the civilian population by some sort of marking. If this condition is met he/she is a soldier, and if captured shall be treated according to the Geneva Convention as a Prisoner of War.

This means that any civilian entering enemy territory carrying arms, explosives or in the process of aiding other civilians carrying arms or explosives is an illegal combatant, and may be shot on sight.

It also means that children (under the age of 18) who are caught either carrying weapons or armed with other implements and/or explosives to attack military personnel or civilians in enemy territory are illegal combatants and may be treated as such according to International Law. However, they are also considered Child Soldiers, as they are assumed to be commanded by their elders to carry out illegal military activity, and as such they should be treated with provisions made for their age.

Now, let’s look at Palestinian “Freedom Fighters“. According to International Law they are illegal combatants, as they wear no distinctive military mark that sets them apart from the civilian population. They are armed civilians engaging in warfare against a sovereign state, thus they are not covered by the provisions set out in the Geneva Convention, and cannot claim protection under it, so if they encounter enemy military they may either be shot on sight or captured and imprisoned, as illegal combatant. This is International Law.

This International Law is applicable to all Resistance Movements, be it Hamas, Hezbollah, IRA, ETA, the Tamil Tigers or the Sendero Luminoso.

The morality of the armed activities, the motives behind such activities or the actions of the sovereign state being attacked in this manner have no bearing on the legality of such armed activities.

We may find the struggle of the Palestinians, the Basques or the Tamil Tigers justified or justifiable by the conditions they are engaging in armed battle against, but that does not change their status under International Law.

Posted in Palestine, Terrorism | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Crap by any other name still stinks

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on June 23, 2007


paguinea-pigs.jpg“Gaza in the hands of Hamas, with masked militants sitting in the president’s chair; the West Bank on the edge; Israeli army camps hastily assembled in the Golan Heights; a spy satellite over Iran and Syria; war with Hezbollah a hair trigger away; a scandal-plagued political class facing a total loss of public faith.

At a glance, things aren’t going well for Israel. But here’s a puzzle: why, in the midst of such chaos and carnage, is the Israeli economy booming like it’s 1999, with a roaring stock market and growth rates nearing China’s?”

As if there’s something wrong with a growing economy…oh, but there is according to Naomi Klein, at least if it’s Israel’s – because the Academia is booming with intelligent, inventive and driven students that seem to be able to invent just about anything. It seems that it somehow eluded Klein that all scientists and businessmen have always tried to improve their local environment, not just Israelis.

Naomi Klein answers her own opening question at the end of her article:

“Since Israel began its policy of sealing off the occupied territories with checkpoints and walls, human rights activists have often compared Gaza and the West Bank to open-air prisons. But in researching the explosion of Israel’s homeland security sector, a topic I explore in greater detail in a forthcoming book (The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism), it strikes me that they are something else too: laboratories where the terrifying tools of our security states are being field-tested. Palestinians – whether living in the West Bank or what the Israeli politicians are already calling “Hamasistan” — are no longer just targets. They are guinea pigs.”

When the public is not buying the vocabulary of your propaganda – change the vocabulary. Preferably to something the refers to Nazi Germany by implication, and blame this alleged “industry” for the progress and success your “enemy”. That always works.

The Israelis are evil because they experiment on Palestinians like Hitler did on the Jews…</sardonic >

 

Posted in Israel, Palestine | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Peace Plan for the Middle East?

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on July 27, 2006


A friend asked me to, in one sentence explain what is needed by Israel and in this case Lebanon to avoid the erradication of the next generation.I wrote this down as a response to her:

“To answer your questions – I ‘ll give you one-liners I think is pertinent for a true and peaceful solution.

1. Israel needs to stop settling out-side the borders of 1948.

This includes removing the wall where it intrudes on Palestinian territory – if Israel wishes to let its border be marked by a Wall around all of Israel, for protection – that is its prerogative, it is also its prerogative to have check-points with whatever kind of control mechanisms it thinks necessary along said border – like any other country.

2. The Arabs, including the Palestinians, need to accept Israel within the borders of 1948. This includes stopping any violent actions against Israel as a Nation or Israeli civilians and military.

3. The International Community needs to take control of areas of religious contention.

That includes the entirety of Jerusalem and any other religious sites that are of significance to the Abrahamic Faiths. Those areas should NEVER be controlled by any of the parties to the conflict, Jewish, Muslim or Xian.

4. The Palestinians need to stop whining about pieces of land that were lost fair and square in the 1948 war.

This means concentrating on doing what the Jews have been doing for 100 years in the area – building a fertile country that can and will sustain their population.

5. The Arab Nations, rich with oil and loaded with money, need to stop spending their money on weapons to terrorist organizations.

This means starting to actively aid the Palestinians build a fertile Homeland within the Palestinian borders of 1948.

6. Mrs Arafat’s bank accounts need to be seized by International Law-Enforcement. That money need to be distributed to the Palestinians, as the money was originally meant for them.

Harsh? Yes. But it is a fact that The Arabs lost the war in 1948 – just like Finland lost Karelia and Petsamo in 1944. Israel was military on an equal footing with the Arabs at that time, or let’s say they were, not to embarrass the Arabs. The Arabs had every chance to expell the Jewish People – they failed. The division of the area in two parts, one Jewish and one Palestinian is a fact. The Arabs need to accept that. That is the only way there is ever going to be peace.”

Shalom!

Posted in Israel, Palestine | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: