Isareli left to ISM: Photos of fence by LSM 9:10pm Tue Jul 29 '03 Freethe peeps asked if I post photos of the fence. Here is one add your comments Source file

LSM commnets on photo by LSM 9:12pm Tue Jul 29 '03 print comment This is a photo of the fence not far from Qalqilia. You can clearly see the Fence route (The road is the patrol road) the Fence separates between the olive grove (outside the fence) and the orange grove (inside the fence on Qalqilia side) Let me be clear. The fence should not be where it is. This picture was taken beyond the green line. If this is a discussion about a route I fully support moving the fence to the green line. But this is not what ISM wants. They do not want the fence since they object the notion of two states. In other words they object Israel right to exist. Bottom line about the Fence/wall terminology: You can see the fence, actually it is so faint you can almost not see it. Obviously there is no wall. (there only a wall in 3 short segments of the fence route - one of them a 1.5 mile streach ON THE GREEN LINE where Qalqilia border the trans-Israel higway. add your comments

One more thing by LSM 9:19pm Tue Jul 29 '03 print comment In this photo you can see a water passge under the fence (look for it - it is there) it let water flow from the outer side (the "Israeli" side of the fence) into the Qalqilia basin. Why is this important ? Because in ISM and pengon documents you will find all those lies about Israel trying to steal palestinian water. nonsense. Israel is only trying to get security and Sharon is using the genuine desire of Israelis for security to choose the route of the fence that suits him. add your comments

ISM is still not a mono-thought clique by freethepeeps 10:11pm Tue Jul 29 '03 print comment "But this is not what ISM wants. They do not want the fence since they object the notion of two states. In other words they object Israel right to exist." I think I made it clear that there is no ISM line beyond a committment to seeing an end of Occupation, and that my views on a one state solution do not reflect those of the entire International Solidarity Movement. Thank you for the picture, although I have to say that it does not give much idea of how high it is, what kind of buffer zone there is, and how much security in terms of soldiers there will be. add your comments

The road is a one lane by LSM 10:40pm Tue Jul 29 '03 print comment This should give you a prespective see also: http://www.seamzone.mod.gov.il add your comments

Nice link to more lies by John Veldhuis 10:34am Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment Nice link, Looking at the Operational Concept there is one lie again: a picture showing Israel is on one side of it, and the WestBank on the other... To my knowledge for the most part of the wall the WestBank is on both sides of it. Looking at the "route" part more lies appear, I'll only quote one: "Minimum disruption to the daily life of the populations residing on both sides of the "Seam Zone" will occur along its course in several forms: * Narrow agricultural passageways, dozens of which will be located along the route to enable farmers to continue cultivating their lands. * Passage for pedestrians and vehicles, at which inspections will take place to maintain security. * Crossing points, for transfer of goods across the central area and in the Jerusalem region." Then where was all the fuss about, where people had to be shot with rubber bullets by the Israeli Army? If Israel had done what it claims here, the gate would have been opened long time ago... add your comments

Here's a link for you by John Veldhuis 11:29am Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment http://www.gush-shalom.org/thewall/ add your comments

Maps and ISM Lies by Ben 2:10pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment According to the Gush Shalom map above detailing the path of the security fence, there is no wall around Nablus. Freethepeeps (writing as a member of the ISM) writes "I have spent about 6 months in Nablus, and the only parts I have seen are indeed 8 - 12m high walls." LSM responds that "The Fence is miles and miles AWAY from Nablus. Not sure what you have seen. I have toured many part of the Fence and it is a Fence (except is 3 short segments) Letג€™s call it what it is from now on: A Fence." Freethepeeps of the ISM is obviously lying. He hasn't seen any walls, he's nowhere near the fence's path. He's using the fact that he is on-site to spew all sorts of nonsense and accusations for the consumption of people who think he is working for peace in good faith. Is this the only time the ISM has lied, or are there other times? Someone needs to apologize for spreading lies. Either freethepeeps should come clean and admit he lied or the ISM must distance itself from the lies told in its name (the title of his post was "An ISMer responds.") Either way, the ISM's credibility is in doubt until someone steps forward. add your comments

ISM in doubt by say it ain't so 3:30pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment True . I tend to listen to ISM accounts, and give them credibility, but this raises doubts. Are ya'll just creating truth to suit your politics? IF so, then you're doing exactly what corporate media and the Bushonauts do as well - telling lies to suit your agenda. Say it ain't so! If you are just using the supportive platform that Indy Media provides for your own evil designs, then we're all fucked aren't we. Means that this whole enterprise failed - We just created a new hegemony. You've got some explaining to do ISMer. Are you really just full of shit, or did you make some kind of explainable mistake. If you were in Nablus, and seeing walls that wern't there, keep that acid to yourself please. No need to spread more bad shit in the world. So cut it out! add your comments

He did not say that by John Veldhuis 4:22pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment "I have spent about 6 months in Nablus, and the only parts I have seen are indeed 8 - 12m high walls." It doesn't say at all that he saw those walls in or close to Nablus. As Qalqilya is near to Nablus, he might even have seen those walls, maybe when travelling to or from Nablus. You were all quite (too) happy to dissmiss the credibility of the whole of the ISM by misinterpreting the words of an (alleged) ISM Member. I hope freethepeeps makes an end to this misunderstanding. Nice try again, Ben! add your comments

Do you care abou the truth john by Ben 4:47pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment You are only making it worse, John. Who appointed you defense council for the ISM or for freethepeeps. How do you know what he meant? The simple reading of his line is that he saw these imaginary walls in Nablus. If there is a mistake, it is for them to solve, not you. You talk about things like you know what you are saying, like you have some insight into freethepeep's intention, when in reality your head is up your ass so deep I can't believe you could still breath that way. You are only proving that people will defend lies blindly if they are politically motivated enough. By the way, according to the handy little map you posted, which was invaluable for catching the lie in the first place, Nablus and Kalkilya are very far apart. Half the Wast Bank divides them. We can make all sorts of excuses for freethepeep's lies and distortions. We could say the walls he was seeing had nothing to do with the Israeli security fence. Maybe they were the walls to his house! That's about as likely as your stupid little excuse. I guess you are not concerned about the truth, but peace-oriented people are. You are proudly defending lies and distortions - just for political reasons. Someday you will look back on this episode in shame. add your comments

Fence or wall, it is not about security by Bryan Atinsky 4:48pm Wed Jul 30 '03 bryan@indymedia.org.il print comment Ben and others are merely arguing a largely semantic difference to avoid the deeper questions about the path and implications of the fence/wall. I have been to several parts of the fence/wall and it is true that part of it is a very solid wall of sevaral meters in height and most is a high electronic fence with razor wire on top army roads on either side and another set of razor wire on the outer sides of the roads. From one side of the razor-wire to the other must be 30 meters or so. It is not really that important whether the barrier in the middle is of concrete or steel mesh, as we are talking of the same result. We are talking about a 30 some meters wide barrier snaking deep over the green line and isolating villages, blocking villages from their farmland, uprooting trees and crops, etc. Whether it is is of concrete or steel mesh has nothing to do with its permanence. It could be made of only fence and be there for years or it could all be of concrete and be knocked down tommorow as so many Palestinan homes have been knocked down by the Israeli authorities. Perhaps it is more aesthetic for the villagers to be able to see their stolen fields through the fence...is that the difference? Stop obfuscating the real issues here by arguing fence or wall, it is Aparthied either way. Bryan add your comments

Bryan, you misunderstand by Ben 5:09pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment Bryan, While I disagree that it doesn't matter if you call it a fence or a wall, that isn't really what I am arguing here. I'm pointing out that freethepeeps writes as a member of the ISM and lies about what he sees. According to the map posted above, there is neither a fence nor a wall around Nablus. The ISM claims one of its functions is "witnessing" Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians. ISM members regularly write horrible things about Israel in their reports, many of which end up in newspapers or magazines and reach readers who take them for eyewitness accounts. But if freethepeeps is one of these witnesses and he is "witnessing" an 8-12 meter wall of concrete that isn't there, he is abusing the position of the ISM, and placing the whole organization's credibility on the line. Just like when you read a set of lies in a newspaper that goes uncorrected, you start to doubt the veracity of everything you read in that paper, the ISM or freethepeeps himself must admit the blatant lie he was caught making. I don't see what is so controversial about this. Why are ISM members allowed to lie when they report Israeli atrocities? Why don't you care about the truth? You are right in saying that the real debate should be about the wall's path. But that is assuming no one is making bold-faced lies about what is happening. The philosophical debate you propose should only take place among people who respect the truth and don't exploit the fact that they are in a place while others aren't. I don't see how a meaningful debate about anything could take place in an environment where people in Nablus are allowed to make lies that are then believed by fools in Holland, and then used as part of the debate to make other points. I would hope, Bryan, that your position at this website would compel you to take a stronger stand on this issue. Perhaps there is some sort of explanation. But as it stands, no one has come forward to clarify anything. Is this they type of thing you want happening on Indymedia? add your comments

Truth is very important to me by John Veldhuis 5:26pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment "Who appointed you defense council for the ISM or for freethepeeps. " Nobody. Should I have been? "How do you know what he meant" I don't, and neither do you. I hope he explains himself better. I think the 30 Km between Nablus and Qalqilya is not that far. (http://www.counterpunch.org/gwynne03152003.html) I think you're much too happy to be able to accuse someone (you obviously don't agree with) of lying, than to really consider what he might have wanted to say. He didn't literally say: When I was in Nablus I saw the big Apartheid Wall there. That is what you make of it. Too bad fools from Holland are sometimes what it takes to show the poisoning by zionist propagandists in Israel. add your comments

Still, move the argument to substantial issue by Bryan Atinsky 5:38pm Wed Jul 30 '03 bryan@indymedia.org.il print comment Ben, I understand your argument, but I think John point actually seems a bit more likely of a reading of the ISMer's statment. Can't know either way unless the guy happens to enter Indymedia and notices your question to clarify. But it is futile to carry out the argument on conjecture either way. I searched the archives and he wrote articles from back in Jan 2003, which say that he was in Nablus at the time. I know ISMers travel around the Occupied territories a lot, so it is very likely that he did see the wall he talks about at one point or another. Anyway, move on to more substantial issues about path and implications of the Apartheid-Electronic-Razor-wire-Fence, because this 'he said she said' is gettin' dull. Bryan add your comments

Move it to the green line by John Veldhuis 6:00pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment The picture makes me think of the former border between East- and West Germany, which by the way made me sick to my stomach as I drove along. Anyone claiming the Apartheid FenceWall should not be seen as an attempt to "establish (new) facts on the ground", and therefor as not political, should have his head examined. I still think Israeli civilians are as much entitled to security as Palestinian civilians, but this wall does not do it. Now it is like a shopkeeper that out of fear of shoplifting helds hostage the family of an alleged or even former shoplifter. A 'bit' out of proportion... add your comments

Pro-ISM Indymedia Strikes Agian by Ben 6:07pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment Thanks for your "understanding" Bryan. I also understand your deep connection to the ISM that blinds you to the truth when it doesn't fit your politics. I also see that you are bothered by this "insubstantial" discussion about being able to trust the people you debate with and argue in good faith. I understand you think these are worthless topics. If freethepeeps travels through the West Bank so much, I'm sure that he has seen many parts of the fence. So when he writes "I have spent about 6 months in Nablus, and the only parts I have seen are indeed 8 - 12m high walls," it really sounds like he hasn't seen much at all. You yourself said most of it is wire fencing. He made this comment in the midst of a discussion with LSM about the terms "wall" vs "fence" so his use of the term was not random. He also asks for pictures of the wire fence, suggesting he hasn't seen too much at all. I'm not the first to point out the fact that he lied in this case. LSM already did that, and freethepeeps has responded to her since and did not deny the charge. I only got on this when I looked at the Gush Shalom map and realized that the proof of the lie was right there in front of me. I didn't need to take LSM's word for it. More importantly, how does someone who lives far away and has no direct experience of the fence, Nablus, or anything, likely to understand his statement? Are you saying the most reasonable reading of his statement is that he lived in Nablus, which is unimportant except that it is in the West Bank, and that he travels and sees things, but only in the several miles where the fence is concrete? That is what you think he's saying? That is what you think everyone will think he's saying? I think he knew that most people reading his comment would not know that there is no fence in Nablus, and they would take him at his word. Are we really to believe "the only parts I have seen are indeed 8 - 12m high walls?" If ISMers are so sloppy with their facts that they could be misunderstood so easily (to Israel's detriment, of course) why should we believe a word any of them say? It's too bad, Bryan, that you don't show more concern about this issue. The most important asset of a news source is credibility. You are in danger of losing it here. add your comments

Yes Move it to the green line by LSM 6:10pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment I am more sick seeing dead bodies than from seeing a wall or a fence. Moving it to the green line is the right thing to do. This was my original question to ISM: Are you against the route of the fence or the idea of ANY fence. Or in otgher words: Do you recognize Israel right to exist ? add your comments

Probably no ISM stance on that by John Veldhuis 7:14pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment I am lucky not to have been confronted with dead bodies as much as you have. What made me sick then was the willingness to shoot or blow up people, for nothing more than wanting freedom. It is indirect, but "We call for immediate international intervention to protect the Palestinian people and ensure Israel's compliance with International Law." (http://www.palsolidarity.org, about ISM) is not exactly a call to remove Israel from the face of the earth. Maybe they just don't give a damn whether Israel exists or not. Also probably: it is no issue to them. The existance of Israel has become a fact of life on this planet. I do give a damn, as long as there are decent Isreali's counterbalancing the settler terrorists and their supporters. But then again, I'm no ISM-er. As long as there are Israeli settlements outside the green line I would refuse to go to Jerusalem and ride the bus. add your comments

If ISM was for peace by LSM 7:31pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment Riding a bus, this is a good idea. Can you envision ISM sending delegates to ride Jerusalem bus with a megaphobne and a sign: "I am an intenational. Do not commit war crimes on this bus" Of course the sign has to be in Arabic if it meant to stop thwe war crime of exploding a bus - but the ISM has "no postion" on this issue. Exploding buses and resturant is not in outer space. It is the heart of the conflict. add your comments

Really banal conversation here Benny by Bryan Atinsky 8:10pm Wed Jul 30 '03 bryan@indymedia.org.il print comment Ben, I am not in ISM, and not really one way or the other about them, but I have met some and know what type of actions they do, what type of places they go. My point is that instead of conjecturing whether or not you can interpret what he said one way or the other, to move beyond that issue to what I believe are more substantial issues about path and implications of the fence/wall. John IS correct when he says: "He didn't literally say: When I was in Nablus I saw the big Apartheid Wall there. That is what you make of it." One doesn't need to be in Jerusalem to understand that freethepeep's grammer was ambiguous. From my first statement I have clarified that from my knowledge, the majority of the barrier is an electric fence and razor wire structure...so you have no issue with me on this. And for you to continue to project definite meaning into the ambiguous statement is getting annoying. One can take it to mean that he was living in Nablus and at some point or other during the six months saw only parts of the barrier that were wall. or Your opinion that he was saying there is a high wall one can see from Nablus, which would be completely incorrect and he would know it and would probably know that it was easily verifiable by anyone, so he would have to be really stupid to have meant that. But we cannot know which of the two readings is correct unless we get a clarification, so I said go on with other issues instead. Which I still think is the best route. But you seem stuck Ben. So continue your arguement, but without me, I have a Master's thesis to write... add your comments

To Ben by HAHAHA 9:06pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment I understand your deep connection to Zionism which apparently keeps blindin' you to the truth when it doesn't exactly fit your politics. add your comments

to the self proclaimed leftists... by Yo 9:42pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment who the fuck cares if the wall is two inches to the left instead of five inches to the right. the wall is an abomination because it robs people of their livelihood in the name of security. you are denying people security by building a wall on their territory against international agreements and it is time zionism was held accountable for its mis-actions. it is time people stood up and said we will not achieve security by denying the basic living conditions to others living on the other side of the wall. it is time we grant them security in order to deserve it as well! add your comments

the consequence of the Apartheid wall by ... 10:55pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment Israelis have no more right to security than Palestinians do. For that reason the wall should be built on a location that is accepted by BOTH parties and their repected sponsors. If the wall is indeed for security than building it on others peoples property will endanger the very folks it intends to protect unless of course that is the original intention behind the wall,i.e securing and perpetuating the on going conflict as an excuse to continue confiscating their land. add your comments

h by jn 11:01pm Wed Jul 30 '03 print comment If the world advocated building a fence on Israeli property, seperating Jewish cities from one another ... most peace activists would be just as Adamant that the wall be built on the green line. Jews should not get away with actions gentiles would not be getting away with, add your comments