Israel effectively annexes Palestinian land near Jordan Valley

[bemildred]

Separation barrier route in Kibbutz Merav area changed leaving 1,500 dunams on Israeli side; may be first transfer of Palestinian-owned land to community on sovereign Israeli territory.

Israel carried out a de facto annexation of Palestinian land northeast of the Jordan Valley and given it to Kibbutz Merav. Merav, part of the Religious Kibbutz Movement, is about seven kilometers northwest of the parcel.

The route of the separation barrier in the area was changed so that the plot in question, about 1,500 dunams (375 acres), would be on the Israeli side.

Israel has previously built roads on and given Palestinian land in the West Bank to Jewish settlements, but this is thought to be the first instance of Palestinian-owned land being transferred to a community on sovereign Israeli territory.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-effectively-annexes-palestinian-land-near-jordan-valley-1.396225

[demosincebirth]

1. This is exactly why Israel is losing my support.

[Response]

2. Losing or lost? This is not a new thing.

[vminfla]

3. Haar'etz once again got the facts wrong and a media watchdog caught their error

The Land in question is already owned by a long term lease by Kibbutz Maaleh Gilboa and not arabs. Once again, a fake "occupation" scare.

[bemildred]

4. There are several problems with the story.

A lease is not ownership, but then neither is which side of the fence land is on ownership.

Nevertheless, why the fence route was changed deserves scrutiny.

[Response]

5. Curious

AP's Hadid would have been told that "the land in question has a long-term lease and actually belonged to neighboring Kibbutz Maaleh Gilboa (not Palestinians)for 25 years."

How did the other Kibbutz obtain the land and from whom?

[bemildred]

6. It would be interesting to know more about the lease. nt

[Little Tich]

7. Your link is to camera.org, which is a BS rightwing site.

The article, like all of the material on the site is false. Check your sources.

[vminfla]

8. Your reply is an ad hominem attack

Camera is a respected media watchdog group.

[Little Tich]

9. Your link is to a BS rightwing site. Camera. org is not respected by anyone. Check your sources.

[vminfla]

10. Got it. you mastered the ad hominem logical fallacy

You have no factual argument against the information, therefore you attack the messenger. We already established that you have no valid argument with your first use of the ad hominem. Repeating your logical fallacy does not improve it.

[Little Tich]

11. The article on camera.org erroneously reports that the disputed land in question lies in Israel.

This is false. The land is outside Israel, it's part of territories occupied by Israel since 1967. The factually correct article in Haaretz has a map that clearly indicates that the land is not located in Israel. Camera.org is and will always be wrong, the whole idea of the site and associates is to spread disinformation.

[vminfla]

13. The Land is Israeli owned

Stating that it is somehow arab, without any arab ownership, is disingenous and spreads disinformation.

[parkia00]

14. Maybe a better use of one's time is in order?

You will not get your message across. It's like throwing water on a duck. Some people will never accept that they made a mistake and are only interested in painting a picture where their side is good and everyone else is the problem. This is not the first time that "facts" from highly suspect news sources are given.

[TomClash]

19. Here's a fact - An Israeli Government spokesman disagrees

A spokesman for the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, Maj. Guy Inbar, confirmed that the property is in the West Bank and said, "Kibbutz Merav has been farming this land for decades."

This is from the very article Bemildred posted. Lease or no lease - the land is in Occupied Palestine.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

15. Camera is respected by many people, just not people themselves worthy of respect. N.T.

[TomClash]

18. On what planet would LT's response be considered an "ad hominem attack?"

Answer: None.

[shaayecanaan]

12. Arutz Sheva is completely full of shit, as usual

you only have to look at a map to realise their claim is completely untenable:-

http://maps.google.com.au/?ll=32.417936,35.493393&spn=0.154473,0.338173&t=h&z=12&vpsrc=6

The land that they claim is the subject of the lease (to the east of Bardale) is already being tilled by the Mehola settlement. It is nowhere near Maaleh Gilboa, which is in the opposite direction. I would also note that unlike Haaretz they have not bothered to offer a map of their claims.

[Crunchy Frog]

17. Ownership and occupied territory don't go together under international law.

[Crunchy Frog]

16. I think it's time for the Palestinians to shift their focus

from trying to attain statehood to acknowledging the de-facto annexation of the West Bank, and to demanding that their equal rights as citizens be recognized.

There's just no way that a viable Palestinian state is going to happen, and there's no way that Israel is going to manage to ethnically cleanse millions of people from "Judea and Samaria". There's only one route that's left open, and it's time for people to get serious about pushing for it.