My tent in the middle of the highway and the lies of the settlements

Image by DrewOtt via Flickr

Tailgating is a weird thing to do. It must be fun, but I just don’t get it. I prefer my party to be... well... more than 3 feet from my neighbor’s party. Perhaps I can also imagine a location nicer than a parking lot.

Israel has its own version of tailgating. It doesn’t have a fancy name (in general, barbecue is called Alla-Aish - and has nothing to do with the Arabic Alla or Aish. Actually, it literally means “on the fire”.) Anyhow, Alla-Aish often involves barbecuing on a traffic island by a highway.

Below - Alla-Aish from '69 and a more recent one.


I never got that either.

But sometime I enjoy imagining the following scenario. What would have happened if I had decided to build my home in the middle of the busiest highway in Israel? (for the Israeli reader, I usually think of the Halacha exit on Ayalon).
My day dreaming usually ends fairly quickly, realizing that I will soon find myself glued to a wheel of a track rotating at 65 mph.
But sometimes I think that perhaps the army will decide to protect me, build a wall around me, send hundreds of troops to make sure that violators do not disturb my privacy, and in general, making me feel very welcomed there, in my tent in the middle of the highway.

I often think that the settlers have the very same dream, only that no-one ever wakes them up.

In this post I do not argue whether Israel has the right over the west bank (for security, religious, historic, imperialist, or megalomanic reasons). Even if Israel has the right over the West Bank, I argue that the settlements are the dumbest thing ever (and pretty evil too).

The main highway in Israel, Ayalon highway, most certainly belongs to Israel. It is in the middle of Tel Aviv. Still, this does not give me the right to build my home there, since I put myself and my surrounding at risk. It is simply not reasonable. The biggest success of the settlements, in my view, is that somehow they were able to avoid the public discourse. In the Israeli public opinion, holding the occupied territories and building there settlements are the same thing. However, it is pretty simple to see that settlements impose nothing but risks, to everyone. Their existence kills people and kills the chance for peace.

Instead of giving the numbers or telling the stories, let me just share three videos with you. Kids, don’t try this at home. Actually, kids, don’t watch it. But grownups, you must watch these. It is our obligation as thinking people to know what is going on there. Not knowing lost its legitimacy after 1945.
The first is a story of a settler in Hebron.


The second is about Palestinians who try to harvest their olive trees, as instructed by the Israeli court and army. A story from the Israeli media.


The third goes back to the first family. This time a Palestinian kid tries to return home. Notice what the soldiers do, and how old the jewish terrorists are. I will probably not send my kids to their school.


These are only few examples. If you want to watch more, I recommend these two channels:
http://www.youtube.com/user/shovrim (operated by Breaking the Silence)
and
http://www.youtube.com/user/btselem (operated by B'Tselem)

Above all, the settlements are the main obstacle to the two states solution. As one of the settlers told reported Bob Simon on CBS’s 60 minutes: "I think that settlements prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in the land of Israel. This is the goal. And this is the reality."
I am sure most of you already watched the excellent CBS report, but in case you missed it, here it is:


The following two maps were taken from Peace Now and demonstrate the dimension of this phenomena. On the left - the west bank (in blue -settlements; in brown - Palesitinan territories). On the right - the road blocks. Notice that almost all of them (actually, all of them but 35) are not between Palestine and Israel, and are a direct outcome of the wish to protect settlements. These are the same roadblocks that prevent kids from going to school, farmers from working their lands, and pregnant women from reaching the hospitals on time.




Even if we assume that peace cannot be reached, a conclusion I object, Israel has no right or reason to maintain the settlements. This is an immoral sin and imposes a risk to everyone in the region.

To start realizing the effect of the settlements and road blocks, I recommend a movie by Avi Mograbi, and one blog by a member of Machsom Watch. Thanks, Nina, for finding this blog. This blog traveled from Israel to Indonesia and back for me to find it. A person could have never completed that journey.

The Blog - Hebrew and English.
The movie: Avenge but One of My Two Eyes, by Avi Mograbi.



The "funny" thing is that official Israeli report recognizes that 75% of the settlements have illegal building procedures, and still the state of Israel lies openly:
“Israel's actions relating to the use and allocation of land under its administration are all taken with strict regard to the rules and norms of international law...Although the Hague Regulations, in Article 52, permit the administering authority to requisition private property for reasons of military necessity, Israel does not requisition private land for the establishment of settlements, even where there is military justification.“

Gentleman, we have created a monster.

A Hanukkah Tale

The days are dark days in Israel. The so-called progressive Greeks are ruling the country, and their influence is everywhere: people eat Dolmathes, listen to Hadjidakis, and go to Toga parties every Friday.



The year is 167 B.C., exactly 2,176 years and two weeks ago.

Something is missing. The Jews living in Israel call it: Freedom. Simply put, they are not independent.

One of the elderly of Mode'in, a Jewish town, is a simple guy named Mattathias (or Ma-Tit-Ya-Hu). A very respected person, and a man of peace. But even he have had enough:

(apologies for the anachronistic English; a Hebrew version of the story can be found here, ch. 2, 1-26)

"6 He saw the evils being committed in Judah and Jerusalem, and said:7 Alas! Why was I born to see this, the ruin of my people, the ruin of the holy city, and to dwell there when it was given over to the enemy, the sanctuary given over to aliens? 8 Her temple has become like a man without honor" (The First Book of Maccabees, ch. 2).

Seeing this injustice was too much for Mattathias and his sons. The worst happened when "15 ...the king's officers who were enforcing the apostasy came to the city of Mode'in to make them offer sacrifice. 16 Many from Israel came to them; and Mattathias and his sons were assembled."

'Are they crazy?' wondered Mattathias, 'forcing us to work their gods?'. And then, to his greatest astonishment, "23 ...a Jew came forward in the sight of all to offer sacrifice upon the altar in Mode'in, according to the king's command."

Mattethias did not have to think twice. "24 When Mattathias saw it, be burned with zeal and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and killed him upon the altar. 25 At the same time he killed the king's officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and he tore down the altar."

So basically, one of the Israelis collaborated with the occupying regime. Mattathias, jealous to the Jewish God, hurried up and killed him, killed the soldier who was merely broadcasting the command, and destroyed what he could have.

T H E - E N D

Or is it? Does this ring a bell?
Many Palestinians collaborate with Israel. "Collaborators", they are called, or "Mashtapim" in Hebrew. When Palestinians reveal such collaborators, they simply kill them. This phenomena is more common than you may think. During the first Intifada (1987-1993), according to Palestinian resources, about a 1,000 were murdered by other Palestinians in the guilt of collaboration, Mattathias style (just to get some proportions, Israel killed about 1,100 Palestinians during the same period).

Actually, this is one of the main points Israelis use to show how un-democratic the Palestinians are.

What does this parallel to Hanukkah tell us? What is the lesson to be learned?
Does it justify the killing of brothers in the name of God?

Of course not.

For a while, I interpreted this story too literally. I hated Hanukah, just like I hate the killing of Palestinian collaborators. But then Naftali taught me an important lesson, and here it is: What this story comes to tell us is that living under occupation can make people do horrible things. It did it to Mattathias 2,000 years ago, and it does it to Palestinians now. When living under occupation, people learn to use excessive violence to resolve all problems.
Losing morality is only half of the damage that occupation causes. The other half is that it causes the occupier to loose its morality too. But this is for a different post.

Fun Trivia for Days of War: Who is the Following Organization?

Image via Wikipedia Question 1: Which terror organization am I?
Our mystery organization was a militant group that operated in Palestine/Israel in order to free the land that had been promised to its people by the lord.

It argued that only fighting and terror could free their land from the evil occupier. No person is immune, and every killing is justified. I think the picture is clear, but just to be sure, a couple of examples:

• It blew up a hotel (and killed 91 people).
• It attacked a settlement (and killed 110 civilians)
• After 3 of its members were killed by the ruling army, it kidnapped two soldiers (and executed them).

Hint - the photo on the top right is of its leader.
Okay, who is our mysterious organization?

1. The Hamas, of course, what is the question?
2. Hmmm... not Hamas? Perhaps the Fatah
3. I know, I know! it's Al-Qaeda!
4. All of the above, these guys can't be trusted.
   

Well, here is a slight surprise for you. The organization is actually a Jewish terror organization. It was called the Irgun, and it operated against the local Arab population and the British Army during the late 30s and 40s (before the establishment of Israel). Here is a summary of its ideology: "every Jew had the right to enter Palestine; only active retaliation would deter the Arabs and the British; only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state" (Howard Sachar: ''A History of the State of Israel, p. 265-266). Substiute 'Jew' for 'Muslim', and you get the instant version of the Hamas ideology.

The parallels are astonishing. A terror organization, attacks civilians, kidnaps soldiers, and all in the name of freedom and justice.

Lesson 1 - Israelis should at least understand where the Hamas is coming from. It is part of our (hi)story as well. We did the same 70 years ago. People under occupation do crazy stuff.

Question 2: How did the main Jewish establishment respond?
You may think that the Irgun was a tangent phenomena in the Zionist story. But it wasn't. Actually, the parallels are pretty striking also here. Today the Palestinians have the moderate PLO, and back then the Jewish population under the British had the Hagana. But look what the Israeli government had to say about the massacre in the village I mentioned above, 20 years later:
"In 1969, the Israeli Foreign Ministry published a pamphlet “Background Notes on Current Themes: Deir Yassin” in English denying that there had been a massacre at Deir Yassin, and calling the story "part of a package of fairy tales, for export and home consumption"." (all-knowing Wikipedia). Just to be clear about the facts: there is no doubt that the massacre took place. This is why the Israeli Foreign Minstery did not publish this in Hebrew. But it did deny it in English.

Lesson #2: We should be tolerant towards the Palestinian response to the Hamas terror attacks. In times of war, people are willing to tweak reality and justify the most horrible actions. This is part of our (hi)story as well. We did the same only 40 years ago.

Question 3: How did this whole fiasco end? Justice was made with the people in charge, right? After all, the famous Jewish moral is aImage via Wikipediabove all.
How can I put it gently... well... not exactly. The person who head the Irgun during the events mentioned above was Menachem Begin, the person and the legend.
Rings a bell? Begin was later elected to become the prime minster of Israel. It also did some good - Mr. Begin gave up 2/3 of the Israeli territory, the Sinai peninsula, in exchange for peace with Arabs.


View Larger Map

Lesson 3: It makes sense that a head of a terror organization is democratically elected to head a country. This is not a good enough reason to boycott him. What are we, in kindergarten? Talking to him may actually do some good. We should know it, since it is part of our (hi)story too. We did it only 30 years ago.


Arye Mekel, who used to be the Israel’s Consul General in New York, said the following (and I am sure he was not the first): “A people that does not know where it is coming from, does not know where it is going."
It is time we take a closer look at our deeds. Where ARE we going?