Settlements

Response to Canadian Jewish News article of Dec 8th T 51 "Settlememts an impediment to Peace." Message bodyYou can take the man out of the CBC but you can't take
the CBC out of the man. Harry Schacter, an ex-CBC employee
is still spouting the CBC's pro-Palestinian rhetoric. He knows better.
He talks about settler attacks increasing but fails to say whether Palestinian
attacks have also increased. He also fails to mention whether the attacks
by Jews were defensive in nature and whether the attacks by Arabs were
drive-by shootings or terrorists attacks. Without knowing the reasons for the
attacks his statistics are anti-Israel and without any real substance. He also
says that 10,000 olive trees have been damaged or destroyed by his hated settlers.
How many of these trees were destroyed because the Arabs were using them as shields
for indescriminate attacks on the civilian Jewish population. How many of these were
cut down by the Arabs themselves to collect insurance and then blame the settllers
as has recently been proven by the photography unit (Tazpit) of The Legal Forum for the
Land of Israel.

Schacter also assumes that there is an occupation. A little reading of Grief or BenZimra
(both available at Amazon) would indicate that Judea and Samaria are Jewish territories
in international law by the San Remi Agreement. That land is at most disputed territory
and not "occupied" territory. For that reason, among others, the Fourth Geneva Convention does
not apply and the subsequent Conference of U.N. members, not including Israel, (a group that
has been consistently anti-Israel) is quite meaningless.

Schacter then refers to "extremist" settlers. If he had ever talked to any and visited them, as I
have, he would find them mostly to simply be ordinary Jews who wish to live in the heartland of ancient
Israel, including Shiloh which is a 2500 year old Jewish town, hardly a "new" settlement. Since he
mentions Gilo he should also know that that town is effectively a suburb of Jerusalem where most
Jews live, not for religious reasons, but because the real estate prices are cheaper.

Lastly and most importantly, Schacter suggests that if only the Jews would move their 500,000
Jews out of East Jerusalem and the West Bank there would be peace. Here he is just closing his
eyes to the nature of the Palestinians. When Israel became a nation in 1948 they did not claim the
West Bank and yet there was no peace. When Israel left Gaza there was no peace. The Palestinians
could have the land if they would let Jews live there in peace as the Arabs live in peace in Israel. But
no, a condition of peace has to be that the new country be Judenrein. Then the P.A. refuses
to eliminate the clause calling for the destruction of Israel from its Constitution, and when the Palestinians
are offerred 90% of what they ask for, they refuse it and start an intefada. Why Mr. Schacter is it necessary
for the Israeli government to warn Israelis against going near Arab villages if all the Arabs want is peace?
Why must the new state be Judenrein and why must the Arabs get 100% of what they want or refuse
to negotiate? No Harry Schacter, it is not the "Settlements" that are the obstruction to peace but
the anti-Semitism of the West Bank Arabs. It is easy to go with the flow of blaming Jews and Israel
for all the worlds problems, but it is not correct. For a Jew to repeat incorrect Arab arguments against
his own people is disgraceful.