Military database released to Peace Now shows little land seized from Palestinians to build largest

[Shaktimaan]

In November, Peace Now claimed that 86 percent of Maaleh Adumim, a Jerusalem suburb of more than 30,000 residents, was built on private Palestinian land. After successfully petitioning the court to see the database, the group reported Wednesday that data show only 0.5% of the settlement is built on private land.

"The first report they released had major mistakes," said Capt. Zidki Maman, spokesman for the military department that administers the civil affairs of the West Bank, which Israel captured in 1967.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/14/africa/ME-GEN-Israel-Settlements.php

[Shaktimaan]

1. 86%. 0.5%. What's the dif, right?

:sarcasm:

[breakaleg]

2. I'd sure like to see a little proof. After all, it's in their best interests to lie and there is

no one stopping them from doing so.

[msmcghee]

3. It's also in Peace Now's interest to lie.

I would just note that there weren't many requests for proof around here when they released their damning report - that now seems likely to have been based on catastrophically wrong evidence.

[breakaleg]

4. I'm talking about the evidence. Who controls that? Who has the power to manipulate that?

That's what I'd like to see. I'm repeating myself and I wonder why you didn't understand my original post. Seems to be a habit.

[Shaktimaan]

6. Riiiight. No one knows the truth but you.

And you're just making it up on the spot. Works out perfectly.

[breakaleg]

8. Is there a point to this post? I can certainly tell you that I know what I mean when

I write something far better than you or msmgee, that's for damn certain.

[Shaktimaan]

9. The point is

to illustrate that you question something's validity based on whether or not it supports your version of reality. You believe a peace now report that says 86% of Maale Adumim is built on Palestinian land without question. Then when peace now rescinds the report, admitting that they were 15000% off, you start searching for the conspiracy.

You have your own ideas as to what's right and anything supporting it is accepted while anything refuting it is discarded, even when the source is the same.

I can certainly tell you that I know what I mean when I write something far better than you or msmgee, that's for damn certain.

Well, I'm glad at least one of us knows what you were trying to articulate there. I guess it's so much better than what I write it's beyond my even comprehending it.

[breakaleg]

10. Where exactly did I say that I believed the Peace Now report over the information

you posted in the OP? I would ask you to be specific in backing up your accusation.

If you can't comprehend my posts, then that's your issue. As much as I may disagree with the things you say, I can honestly say that I understand them. And that's not a credit to your writing but to my reading comprehension skills.

[Shaktimaan]

17. you're right.

you didn't specifically endorse this Peace Now report I referenced. I took your immediate questioning of the new data to mean that you favored the original report, which more strongly favored the Palestinian version of events. And I assumed that was also your reason for preferring it. But you never actually said that, so I apologize.

And that's not a credit to your writing but to my reading comprehension skills.

OK, that's pretty funny. Credit where it's due.

[Lurking Dem]

18. You believed the original report at the time.

Now you disbelieve this one or not? I'm confused.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=155802#156447

[breakaleg]

19. The other thread talks not just of this one "settlement", not neighborhood, but

of all of the settlements in the West Bank. This one deals with one settlement only.

[Shaktimaan]

21. You are so busted.

Sorry dude, you showed your ass on this one.

Where exactly did I say that I believed the Peace Now report over the information you posted in the OP

That earlier post was the Peace Now report mentioned here. It included Maaleh Adumim specifically as the worst example of land theft and it was called out with maps again in the thread by Englander. Even if this is the only error in that report, (doubtful) it's a huge error. Yet your first, instinctual reaction was to question it and voice suspicion of Israeli government dishonesty. While before your reaction was... what was it again?

Reading Olmert's casual words regarding this stealing of land disgusts me. Not only the fact that a "democracy" would steal it in the first place, but the fact they've decided they aren't giving it back and they will have to discuss the issue at some point. The nerve of these people!!

The nerve indeed. How dare they demand verification of this report. What could that possibly turn up, right Buddy?

I'm rescinding my aforementioned apology. I trusted what you said, assuming you didn't actually give preference to the Peace Now report from last year. Trust is a delicate butterfly, Breakaleg. How could you? If I can't trust the random folks at DemocraticUnderground, then who can I trust? *sigh*

[breakaleg]

22. How do you figure? Did you read what Olmert said in the NY Times peice?

That's what I was objecting to. Whether it's 86% of one settlement versus 5% of that one settlement and the overall number of all settlements drops from 40% to 36%, does it change much? And regardless of how much is private Palestinian land, ALL of it is stolen since Olmert has said he's not giving up any of the settlements.

So, what exactly did I show? Not a lot.

Keep chasing your ass though. It's fun to watch.

[Shaktimaan]

23. OK.

So, what exactly did I show? Not a lot.

We are in agreement for once on this one. :rofl:

[Shaktimaan]

20. Now that's funny.

[Shaktimaan]

5. The report is where Peace Now

GETS their information. You accuse people of lying pretty quickly considering you couldn't even be bothered to google this item beforehand.


The Peace Now report did indicate, however, that contrary to numbers released by the movement in November, little private land was seized from Palestinians to build Ma'aleh Adumim, the largest settlement in the West Bank.

The new numbers are vastly smaller than numbers Peace Now issued in an earlier report based on leaked information.

The group claimed in November that 86 percent of Ma'aleh Adumim, which has more than 30,000 residents, was built on private Palestinian land. After successfully petitioning the court to see the database, the group reported Wednesday that data show only 0.5 percent of the settlement is built on private land.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/837695.html

[breakaleg]

7. What are you babbling about?

[eyl]

11. The original Peace Now report

was based on information leaked from the same database they petitioned the court to release. However, that original report, based on incomplete information, had major errors which became apparent upon the release of the actual database.

[breakaleg]

12. My question was, what does that have to do with my post? Nothing.

[eyl]

13. OK n/t

[Shaktimaan]

14. Here's what I don't think you're getting.

This report isn't something that was developed for outside release. It's the actual statistics taken by the government originally, from throughout the development of the settlements. Any information that Peace Now or any other group is based on this evidence because it is the official, validated information that the government itself uses when formulating policy.

They obtained it through the equivalent of a Freedom of Information Act. Since this isn't some government office putting out filtered stats for public consumption there's no reason to think it's been tampered with any more than data from any non-politicized event.

Look at it this way. The report still puts something like 30% of settlement land in the realm of private Palestinian real estate. WHY would the government lie to just reduce the amount a little? When they lie, they don't lie in a way that contradicts what they've been saying for the past 10 years. They lie in a way that covers their asses.

Besides, if Peace Now deems this a credible source for data, that says it probably is. Peace Now is hardly one to just buy the government line without verification.


After all, it's in their best interests to lie

It's not in their best interests to lie to themselves. That's who this report was for. THEM. That's why we know it's legit information, in so far as it's the most accurate data they were able to put together.

[breakaleg]

15. In post #1, you seemed to be implying that Peace Now is to fault for the huge

discrepancy. Now you are saying they aren't, that they get the info from the government.

My point was, let's see the raw data and not rely on the middlemen to interpret it for us. Nothing wrong with wanting just the straight facts is there? And yet I get attacked.

[Shaktimaan]

16. OK, here's what happened.

Peace Now originally put out a report saying that 86% of this settlement was built on owned land. They based this on data formulated solely from claims made by Palestinians without looking at whether any were discredited, whether land was purchased, who it was owned by previously, etc. They just took Palestinian claims straight and put out their report, which was widely publicized.

The government said that they were never contacted for information regarding this report. Peace Now was going to confirm their information by demanding the governments own surveys regarding the topic. We're talking about the raw information, who owned what land when, the whole complex shebang.

It's important because Peace Now had been claiming that the whole west bank settlement complex was something like 60% Palestinian owned. Turns out, when they take a look at the governments far more comprehensive records. (And there's no reason any of this would be falsified. That would be hurting itself ultimately, you can't run a country where groups have the ability to falsify real estate records on such a huge scale. They may GIVE out false reports, sure. But the original information is probably real.)

And that's what Peace Now obtained to formulate this new report. Problem was, many of their original assertions were WAY off base. But they're being honest about it and the truth is somewhere in between what they said originally and what the government said. I put it here because people have been referencing the original report a lot and it is important to realize that it is basically junk.

Peace Now is trying to blame the government for their error, in the way you mentioned. Who knows, honestly. My main point is that you can't trust ANY organization's "facts" or "numbers" if they have any kind of interest or even just a strongly held opinion in this horse race.

I jumped all over you because you immediately suspected the government of "lying." I've only ever seen you question one side of this conflict and your excuse has usually been something like, "because we know they lie. They've lied before." as though the government was an individual. You can look at the raw material, sans middleman, if you want. Just get ready for a long, long night. It's millions of pages of documentation. What Peace Now used was the government findings (I think) based on this data. It is the source info that the government uses internally. I believe Peace Now isn't altering the data. I just think they are quick to the draw without validating their info.