Thai worker killed in gun attack on Gaza Strip settlement

[Gimel]

A foreign worker from Thailand on Monday afternoon died of chest wounds sustained earlier in the day in a shooting attack on a greenhouse of the Kfar Darom settlement in the Gaza Strip.

The man was taken to Soroka Hospital in Be'er Sheva with a chest wound, after receiving emergency treatment at the scene.

IDF troops at the scene continued to exchange fire with the attacker, after the wounded man had been evacuated.

....

Palestinian sources said a group of militants had fired submachine guns and anti-tank missiles toward the greenhouses. They said Israel Defense Forces troops returned fire, hitting two Palestinian workers who live nearby.

Continued..

[idontwantaname]

1. get the settlements out of gaza.

and west bank while theyre at it.

[Gimel]

3. Does that demand

justify murder?

Gaza is disputed territory, and since there was no Palestinian rule over it when it was captured in the '67 war, the claims of occupation are rather mysterious. Let the Palestinians prove that they can handle security. Allowing terrorist to continue operating in this area is gross violation of any agreements, past, present or future.

[The Magistrate]

6. A Small Point, Ma'am

This "disputed territory" formula is not really a good one. There does not seem any real dispute in the question, certainly not one to which Israel is a party.

All the land in question outside the '49 cease-fire line that has become the de facto border of Israel is a portion of the Arab Zone set aside by the United Nations in the '47 Partition. Israel has a rough sort of "adverse possession" claim to portions of the original Arab Zone conquered in the '48 war, but has not a shadow of legal claim to the remaining portions of the Arab Zone. It does have a status of occuping power, having overrun that ground in the '67 war, which affords certain privileges and duties, but it has no legitimate claim to sovereignty there. Thus, it is very difficult to see what could be "disputed" about these territories, and what part Israel might have in such a dispute.

It is true there was no legitimate sovereignty exercised in Gaza, for instance, prior to its conquest by Israel in '67. Egyptian control of the place was a deliberately ambiguous form of military occupation at the time; certainly no recognized Arab Palestinian state organization had ever been declared there, or anywhere else. But there is no question that it was the intention of the United Nations in 1947 such a state organization be erected. In the absence of any such, probably the nearest thing to a legitimate authority would be the United Nations itself, as England has relinquished the Mandate it held, during its final stages, under U. N. auspices. But it seems unlikely that that is the party which the term "disputed territories" is meant to suggest a difficulty lies.

It seems to me the purpose really served by the term is to avoid saying something like a person who found a sum of currency resting on a park bench might say: "I saw it, there was nobody around who seemed attached to it, so it's mine!" But of course, a person who finds such a thing is supposed to contact a police officer, so that an enquiry into how it was lost and whose it is can be made, and may claim it for himself only once this has failed to establish the identity of the owner. It has been a very long time since nations were allowed to say any such thing concerning neighboring tracts of real estate....

[Gimel]

8. If Partition is a standard

It is evident that the Partition idea was actually only a concept whose details were never established.

If the conquest in '67 did anything it was to to establish a presense to prevent terrorists from using it as a base, which they do anyway. However, at least a presence allows Israel to establish some control there.

I feel that it is time to try another security arrangement, and hopefully terrorism will be reduced, although I doubt that it will be eliminated by withdrawal. That remains the unchallenged concept.

Israeli forces may have to re-enter at some time in the future. The settlers feel that they have a legitimate purpose for being there.

[idontwantaname]

9. Gimel, you refuse to acknowledge my point about "security"...

you say the settlers FEEL they have a legitimate purpose to live in the "occupied territories"...?

how about the palestinians who were kicked out of their homes, their farmland taken, their water unaccessable and their olive trees uprooted. what about them? they are not ALLOWED to visit the land their parents and grandparents use to live on. where they were born and raised.

could you show me an israeli jew born and raised in the area of the "occupied territories" before the UNs partitioning?

you ask sharon and he will tell you nobody was living on that land... but we all know this is not the case.

[Gimel]

10. I'm sure

could you show me an israeli jew born and raised in the area of the "occupied territories" before the UNs partitioning?

I'm sure there are many Jews born in what have been called "the territories". I'm not going to try and "show you" anyone, as they are not on display.

There were more than 300,000 Jews born in what are known as Muslim counties, forced to leave without their possessions before partition.

[idontwantaname]

11. do not lump "occupied territories" with "muslim countries"

[Gimel]

12. Humanitarian issues

There should be no difference for the humanitarian issues involved, however.

The settlements in Gaza were not displacing Palestinians. Do not confuse the building of the security fence in the West Bank with activity in Gaza.

[idontwantaname]

13. confusing indeed."Humanitarian issues"and security WALL.where are U going?

im sorry Gimel but what specific humanitarian issues are you referring to?

as far as gaza settlements go, who do you think occupied the land where the settlements now exist?

do you know what happens to palestinians who wish to look upon land/homes they grew up on/in, but are now "property" of the state of israel?

[Gimel]

14. Your issues

You posted about humanitarian issues that you itemized: "kicked out of their homes, their farmland taken..."

It's up to you to prove that these were done, and that no compensation was made for property. Some of the settlements about a quarter of them, were founded prior to 1948. Most were founded before 1967 and only a quarter were established prior to 1967. That means that there are grandparents who were born in the settlements.

[idontwantaname]

21. settlements

as for issues concerning the palestinians claims of land theft and/or destruction... i have many many hours of video documenting such things... both in gaza and the west bank.

if fact there is even some footage of a "proposed" map of both gaza and west bank and where they wish to have settlements. "In September 1977 Begin's minister of agriculture, Ariel Sharon, unveiled "A vision of Israel at Century's End," calling for the settlement of 2 million Jews in the occupied territories."

i will be more than willing to send you a copy so you may see for yourself.

the video even has Ariel Sharon and Ben Eliazer back in the 1980's. they refuse to acknowledge any means of compesation.

other films document house demolition wthout compensation, and the israeli state refusing palestinians requests to dig for drinking water... you know the settlers have nice lawns and pools right?

[Gimel]

22. Your videos

won't run in Israel. The current is 220. So a video is not the sum total of 55 years.

the video even has Ariel Sharon and Ben Eliazer back in the 1980's. they refuse to acknowledge any means of compesation.

Sharon was Defense Minister in the early 80's but wasn't a Prime Minister until three years ago, the year 2001. Ben Eleazar is in the Labor political party, and was the defense minister when there was a national unity government Sharon's first term.

Compensation for what? When? It is very vague, and I'll bet whoever made that video intended it to be so.

[idontwantaname]

24. censorship.

if they do not play in israel does that mean they are invalid?

funny isnt it. back int he 80s when sharon was only defense minister... he shouldve watch what he said.

COMPENSATION for collective punishment(house demolitions), well digging refusals, neglect and abuse of checkpoints... you name it.

i would like you to understand Gimel that i am not here to be difficult. these are legitimate cases. during the holocaust I wouldve been an activist to come to the aid of crimes against jewish people.

i would like you to realize this.

[Gimel]

27. All politicians

Talk big before they get into office.

It isn't censorship, only Israel has a different currency output, and is on the European system.

[idontwantaname]

7. not justifying anything...

however im sure you are aware that before suicide bombings and the first intifada israel acted in the same manner... selling gaza and westbank land to settlers and bulldozing homes in the name of security.

how would you react if you were them? honestly now.

[Gimel]

15. There are wrongs

I would not murder over property claims. You have no proof that there was any illicit confiscation of land.

You must also realize that the Palestinian population has more than doubled in Gaza over the past 40 years. The settlers remaining in Gaza are about 7,000. There has been more than 20% increase in the Palestinian population in the 5 years before the current Intifada began in 2000. This explosion in population has put great stress on their resources. Their need for expansion is the issue, not land consfiscation.

[idontwantaname]

19. i think you ought to LISTEN to what the palestinians issues are...

their need for expansion could be amongst a long list of issues.

you say the palestinian polulation has doubles in gaza over the past 40 years. what would you ASSUME the expansion rate of settlers over the past 40 years IN gaza?

NEXT, do you KNOW the consumption rate of resources(natural and/or import) of palestinian versus israeli settler, average per person in gaza?

you tell me who is putting the stress on resources.


--- dont confuse missle strikes with property claim issues.

[Gimel]

20. I have heard

The issues are not unknown to me. You as an American probably consume more than the Israeli settler also. You are just tranfering American guilt onto someone else.

Water consumption means responsibility for conservation, like water recycling and irrigation methods. The settlers are farmers and they produce. They produce and also provide employment.

I have some idea what the population of the settlers has been over few years in Gaza. There are population records. The population has increased only marginally over the past 5 years. Only about 500 persons have been added to the 6,337 who lived there in 1999. That is an increase of less than 10% in 5 years.

[idontwantaname]

23. my point... but not my only one.

im glad you are concerned with israels independent economic benifit and water conservation. have you always been an environmentalist?

you know the palestinians were once farmers too.
they HAD ancient olive trees which were HUGE. hundreds of years old. why do i emphasise HAD? because israel had ripped out and burried many of these trees beneath the sand.

why?

why?

why?

i am not concerned with the number of settlers as much as i am concerned with their amount of consumption of being in such small numbers.

i ask you to consider the rate of consumption per person.

this is gaza. not israel.

this land and its resources are withheld from the greater population.

[Gimel]

25. the trees

The only trees that have been uprooted near Gaza were for security, and as a result of attacks and terrorists using the trees as cover. That is sad, but the tactical decisions were made because of the conflict.

[idontwantaname]

26. well then...

we are all familiar with each other here on the I/P board.
we all know where Gimel stands on the issues...
i cannot say i have not tried... but i wont give up hope.

[Gimel]

28. Conservation

Yes, I've always participated in conservation when ever possible. Israeli crops were also destroyed by the drought. It was very serious, and the allotment to agriculture was reduced significantly.

[newyorican]

2. colonization hasn't payed in over 40 years...

pretty damn obvious...

[Gimel]

4. "over 40 years"

Not only is it 37 years since the "Six-day War" but the territory never belonged to a Palestinian state. Therefore the charge of "colonization" is rather dubious.

[Aidoneus]

5. that was not the start of the colonization

...

[Gimel]

16. If you're talking about

"colonization" you must be referring to conquered territory. That would be since the '67 war.

[Darranar]

17. That was the first time Israel ever conquered territory? n/t

[Darranar]

18. The territory was SUPPOSED to belong to a Palestinian state...

unfortunately, Jordan and Israel put an end to that.