From: oueichek@ngulu (Ibaa Oueichek)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: BILL CLINTON ON ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:19:36 GMT
Organization: IMAG, University of Grenoble, France
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

horen@rs.com (Jonathan B. Horen) writes:
: In article 38582@imag.imag.fr, oueichek@ngulu (Ibaa Oueichek) writes:
: >horen@rs.com (Jonathan B. Horen) writes:
: >
: >  Excuse-me (this is not provokation, but a serious question) :
: >  How durable is this decision ?. i.e, did Israel issue a law against building
: >  new settlements ? (and i think it didn't concerne ALL sttlements, but i'll
: >  be more than happy if i'm wrong). Or is it a "verbal" decision which can be
: >  reversed at any moment ?.
: 
: There is an old saying: "Laws are made to be broken." In other words, just
: because a law exists, doesn't mean that it will be enforced, or that it will
: always be obeyed, or that it will not be rescinded. During the Prohibition-
: era in the US, alcohol (which was previously legal) was made illegal, the
: laws that made it illegal were openly disregarded, and eventually they were
: repealed.
: 
: So. Has Israel issued a law against building new settlements? No. Does it
: matter? Perhaps to some people, but laws (regardless of whether they are
: Divine, Divinely-inspired, or `just' man-made) are only words on stone/
: parchment/paper -- what counts is how/whether people follow them, or not.

  I think it matters. The reason behind my question is that i've read plenty of
  articles in serious newspapers (Le monde, Figaro, Hirald Tribune,..etc). And
  i don't feel comfortable with the whole stuff. I mean, it's really FUZZY, there
  are "strategic" settlements, and "economic" settlements. Some of them are
  "frozen", but can be resumed at any moment. A law clarifies things, it defines
  boundaries clearly. Maybe i'm too suspecious here, but is it too much to ask
  "the only democratic state in the mideast" to respect democratic institutions?.
  I thought deomcracy worked with Laws, not "verbal instructions". It's true that
  both of them a reversible, but it's more difficult in the first case, and a law
  voted by the Parliment reflects the will of people. 
  

: 
: [...]
: 
: >: >>Palestinian State.  The Palestinians should have the right -- as specified in
: >: >>the Camp David Accord -- to participate in the determination of their future.
: >: >>But they do no have the right to determine Israel's future.  For that reason,
: >: >>Bill Clinton opposes the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
: >: >
: >: >Did he really say that? I have never heard it. Why the Palestinians have no right
: >: >and Israel have right?
: >: 
: >: Because Jordan=Palestine.
: >
: >  Palestinians OWN the land where they live, they OWNED most of YOUR ISRAEL
: >  before 48. Palestine is Palestine, and Palestinians are going to have their
: >  right, you like it or not. You may shout  Jordan=Palestine all the day (the
: >  same as Mutlu shouting "Armenians killed 2.5 Turks in cold blood") it doesn't
: >  make it true.
: 
: If someone buys land from someone who stole the land, the "buying" is invalid
: (that is why, in most countries, before paying money for land, a house/building,
: or an apartment, the buyer has someone conduct a "title search", to prove that
: the seller has the right to sell the land/house/etc.)

  Who's this "someone who stole the land" ?. Do you mean that Palestinians bought
  the land from a thief ?. I doubt that the British gov will agree. After all,
  plenty of Palestinians expelled in 48 have official ownership titles signed from
  the British administration.
  Ah, you mean Romans stole the land from Jews, then came Arabs, then came
  Ottomans, then Jews came back to their land. Do you really believe that ?.
  After all, there were people there before Jews, certain Philistins, no ?.
  IN OUR TIME, Propriety is based on sale and purchase, not on G-D's convenant
  (and i'll not say a single word about territories that Jews purchased and paied).
  Israel's expropriation of Palestinians' land is just an act of theft, nothing
  more, nothing less.
: 
: As for "Palestine is Palestine" -- well, then let me say that Palestine=Israel,
: and that *your* (and the PLO's) "Palestinians" are no such thing. "Palestinians"
: are Israeli Jews. The people about to you (and others) are referring are
: "Jordanians" (and/or "Lebanese", "Syrians", "Iragis", etc.).			
: 
  We (Arabs) call them Palestinians. Those who have Israeli nationilty are by
  NO MEAN different than those who are refugees elsewhere. Most of them have 
  relatives among the diaspora, and the Palestinians who are in the diaspora
  will be back someday, sooner or later they'll be back. Let's hope you'll be
  wise enough to shake hands, otherwise we'll starve together.

: And please, neither I, nor you, sound *anything* like Mutlu.
 
  Ok, i admint that "shouting like Mutlut" was too harsh from me :-).
: 
:  +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
:  | Jonathan B. Horen      | I have three principles:                   |
:  | SysAdmin/TechWriter    |   NO to 2 million Palestinian citizens!    |
:  | email: j.horen@rs.com  |   NO to a Palestinian state!               |
:  | Tel:   (415) 856-8000  |   NO to a withdrawal to '67!               |
:  |                        |            -- Yitzhak Rabin, Israeli PM    |
:  +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

  BTW, are these three NO's as reversible as the "freezing" of settlements 
  building or not ?.

--
Sham(u) ya tha (s)seif(u) lam yaghib(i) | Ibaa Oueichek. oueichek@imag.imag.fr
    Ya jamal(al) majd(i) fi(l) kutub(i) | LABORATOIRE 	BULL-IMAG
Kablak(i) (t)tareekh(u) fi thulmaten    | Grenoble. 
    Baadak(i) staula ala (sh)shuhub(i)  |