Welcome to the Forum and Educational Boards of the International Messianic Community of Faith [IMCF]
Global News Interest => New Board => Topic started by: Rebbetzin on August 02, 2026, 11:27:51 AM
-
Hi everyone,
There’s a lot being said about the so called “settler violence” occurring in Judea and Samaria, but few mouthing off sentiments of hostility towards Israel as the one and only perpetrators of violence against the poor suffering Fakestinians are willfully ignoring the truth on the ground. Let’s read what those on the ground have to say about such condemned actions of a few and the deliberate acts by those other “settlers” who seek to erase any remnants of the Jewish people from the Land that YeHoVaH gave them AND who has brought them back, against all odds to reclaim what was theirs in the first place.
The Fakestinians are the real oppressors, not the Israelis, if we must use an outworn term and it is they who are the ones who oppress the people of Israel AND THEIR OWN PEOPLE, while the Israelis are nowhere near to be compared with true oppressors. They are indeed the oppressed since time immemorial. But, once again, everything up is down, everything right is left and woe to those who call evil good and good, evil.
“Colonial-Settler Inversion: The Foundation Of The “Palestinian” Narrative
“GABRIEL GORDON
“ISRAEL NEWS
“JULY 30, 2026
“Among the many libels hurled at Israel and the Jewish people since the time of the Soviet Union and particularly since October 7th, is that of “colonizer.” The Soviet Union prompted “Palestinian” narrative, which is so deeply entrenched in the Zeitgeist of today, relies on this libel as one of its central pillars. Israel/Jews/Zionists are construed as white colonial oppressors, while “Palestinians” are portrayed as their oppressed indigenous victims fighting for liberation. Yet since Israel and the Jewish people don’t meet the qualifications to be colonizers, as I have shown elsewhere, the Euro-Arab alliance must invert reality in order to perpetuate their narrative, accomplishing this through colonial-settler inversion. They do this firstly by defining the oppressor-oppressed binary according to the vested interests of colonial-oppressors. Then, secondly, by erasing and rewriting history detached from reality, and finally, thirdly by making suffering and the losing of wars the exclusive property of the oppressed.
“The first pillar of colonial-settler inversion used to build the “Palestinian” Arab narrative is in how they define oppressor and oppressed. To this point, Western and Islamic colonizers are so accustomed to the people they conquer not having any kind of sizable force that can rebut them, that to them, anyone with such a force must be a colonizer. Here the strong are defined as those who colonize, and the colonized are defined as the weak. This is how colonizers define the concepts of oppressor and oppressed, construing those they conquer as incapable, by definition, of taking back land and having any agency. This serves as a strategy to ensure that in the imagination of the colonized, decolonization is impossible. To this point, many indigenous peoples who have experienced colonization also assume, de facto, that to be indigenous and colonized equates to lacking a military force able to defend themselves and repel colonial forces. Thus, anyone who has a military force enabling them to decolonize and challenge their colonial oppressors must be colonizers themselves. Such a definition would define any indigenous tribe who was able to retake their ancestral homeland as colonial-settlers, and would subsequently define them as oppressors to the non-native population.
“This first pillar of colonial-settler inversion is conveniently applied to Israel, one of the most successful cases of decolonialism. Before the British and the Ottomans colonized Israel, the Arabs had historically been the colonial occupiers of Israel, coming from the Arabian Peninsula. Yet Arabs still occupy Jewish land, are still colonial-settlers, and have tried unsuccessfully to reoccupy all of Israel. Thus, Arab failure to recolonize and reoccupy all of Israel is seen, in light of their colonial definition of oppressor and oppressed, to make Arabs the oppressed rather than the oppressor. The question those who are supposedly decolonialists are not asking is why does colonial society get to define who is an oppressor and who is the oppressed? For once again, the people who are defining these categories, such as the West and Arabs, are themselves colonial-settlers.
“A concrete example of this point is Israel’s victory in the 1967 war, in which it reconquered the heart of the historic Jewish homeland. An unlikely victory, multiple Arab nations attacked Israel to wipe it off the map and to recolonize Jewish land. Despite all odds, Israel won, and the Arabs who started the war lost (a war which was undesired by Israel), and in this process Judea, Samaria, and Gaza came under direct Israeli control even while the Arab colonial-settlers remained living there. For so-called “moderates,” this historical event is often seen as the event in which Jews/Israel were transformed from victims into oppressors.
“But why does an indigenous population reconquering the heart of its own historic territory make that indigenous population into the oppressor and the colonial-settler into the victim? Particularly when that act of reconquering came as an act of self-defense in a war it did not start, but which was started by the colonial-settlers.
“If the Lakota tribe in modern day South Dakota were to declare the Rose Bud reservation as an independent sovereign state completely politically severed from the United States and then subsequently reconquered land that was historically Lakota land, let’s say the Black Hills, but that reconquered land was currently occupied by colonial-settlers, would that somehow make the Lakota the oppressor, and somehow transform the European colonial-settler into the victim? According to the first pillar of colonial-settler inversion, if it were applied consistently, it would make the Lakota into the colonizing oppressor, which is absurd.
“Yet is this not the colonial definition of oppressor and oppressed applied to Israel’s reconquering of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza? Does it not create a narrative in which the oppressed indigenous people are never allowed the agency to undo the wrong done to them? In other words, the notion that an indigenous people reconquering territory which is rightfully theirs somehow transforms them into oppressors, while it transforms the colonial-settlers into victims, is itself a tool of the colonialists, both Arabs and Europeans. By creating such definitions, colonizers create a situation in which the colonized can never win, and if the colonized do somehow win, the colonizers rewrite acts of justice to be acts of injustice, making themselves into victims in an attempt to reassert their colonial hegemony.
“Colonial-settler inversion shields the real colonizers from accusations of colonialism. Thus, the indigenous population of Jews coming back to Judea and Samaria are construed as “settlers,” and the non-indigenous population of Arabs is categorized as the “occupied.” Calling Judea, Samaria, and Gaza the “Occupied Palestinian Territories” is an act of this colonial-settler inversion, and as such it is an absurd act of injustice. It is the perpetuation of the notion that if you steal indigenous land, it is now yours, and if those indigenous people regain some kind of agency within their land which was stolen from them, those who stole the land are now considered the “occupied,” the wronged. Given whose land it historically is, Judea, Samaria, and Gaza should rather be called “Occupied Jewish Territories,” just as “American” land should be called “Occupied First Nation Territories.” The Palestinian narrative assumes and is built on this act of colonial-settler inversion, and we must recognize this and call it out for what it is: namely colonial anti-Zionism. The Palestinian narrative that claims victimhood, which claims to be oppressed, is built on a sort of inversion of victimhood from the European Christian and Islamic Arab traditions, in which the European Christian and Islamic Arab peoples persecuted Jews as their victims and yet construed Jews as their own persecutors. The unspoken mantra was the enemy of the Jew is the victim of the Jew. In a sense, the Palestinian narrative is a continuation of the historical inverting of the situation of the Jewish people through the centuries. Throughout this history in both Christian Europe and the Islamic world, Jews were construed as oppressors so that whoever their enemy was, their enemy was always seen to be their victim. Today’s “Palestinian” narrative is simply the continuation of this trope fed by streams of history and culture from Islam and Europe.
“Now, of course, this definition of oppressed and oppressor alone does not ensure the viability of colonial-settler inversion. In order for it to be a convincing narrative, the second aspect of colonial-settler inversion, which serves as the edifice of the “Palestinian” narrative, must be present, namely, the erasure and replacement of history. This is why the “Palestinian” narrative must erase Jewish indigeneity to the land of Israel, calling it “Palestine” instead of by its much older name “Israel”; it’s why it denies the Jewish Temple ever existed, or sometimes claims that today’s Jews are not the real Jews. Often this last type of historical revision is conducted by supersessionist “Palestinian” Arab Christians claiming they are the real Jews and “the Jews” or “Zionists” are actually Europeans with no historical connection to the land. It’s why Jewish history, its birth and sustained connection to the land of Israel, becomes erased and is replaced with a history of a “Palestinian” people who were supposedly always in the land, while either the Jews were never in the land, were briefly in the land as conquerors and then ousted, or again the “Palestinians” were the real Jews described in the Bible. This erasure and fabrication of history often draws on Christian replacement theology in which God’s covenant with Jews or the “old Israel” is revoked and transferred to a “new Israel.”
“This kind of revisionist history must ignore substantial archaeological consensus, as well as literary evidence, such as the fact that terms like “Palestinian” and “Palestine” never appear in the Bible, a collection of books that every scholar agrees was primarily written in Israel and in the Hebrew language, which is still spoken and written today in that very land.
“It must also ignore linguistic evidence such as the reality that Hebrew is an indigenous Canaanite dialect, whereas Arabic is indigenous to another land. Also in need of ignoring is the fact that when talking to Western audiences “Palestinians” claim they are descended from the Canaanites, but when not addressing Western audiences (and even sometimes while addressing the West) they claim they are Arabs from outside the land, claims which are backed up by the immigration records of the last 200 years; ignored too must be the historical reality that no one until the 1960s used the term “Palestinian” as an ethnic term. Until then it was only used as a geographical term.
“The third pillar of the colonial-settler inversion narrative is twofold; it is the assumption that those who lose wars are the oppressed and the allocation of suffering as the exclusive property of the oppressed. But recognizing the realities of colonialism does not suddenly mean that all those who lose wars are automatically the colonized, or good or oppressed. Despite this, there is a tendency among some to think that losing wars or battles somehow equates to being oppressed and good. Certainly some who lose wars are oppressed and good, but not all. That logic leads to some absurd conclusions: If the Nazis lose, does that suddenly make them the good guys and an oppressed people? No, the answer is no. Just because the Allies ended up having the stronger military does not automatically mean the Axis powers were the oppressed or the good guys.
“Yet whether or not someone ignores basic moral logic so they can answer yes to the above question, so that the Nazis suddenly are oppressed and good as a result of losing, one needs to admit that in the sense of existence, the situation “Palestinian” Arabs are in is a much more powerful position than the Nazis were. Namely, in the battle for existence, the Nazis were much less powerful than the Arabs. In the “all those defeated are oppressed/good” schema, the “Palestinian” Arabs fit that schema much less than the Nazis would. Because unlike the Nazis, the “Palestinian” Arabs have outlasted the Nazis by decades, whereas the Nazis were defeated in a mere 6 years of war, the “Palestinian” Arabs have continued to fight, not being finally and completely defeated after 78 years. By that logic, the Left would have to admit “Palestinian” Arabs are more powerful than Nazi Germany, not really defeated, and thus not oppressed and not good.
“What about suffering? Does it automatically place one on the right side of history? In other words, is suffering the exclusive property of the oppressed and colonized? The answer is no, and to this point, suffering also does not negate one’s colonial-settler status; rather, one might expect that in a decolonial situation that is somewhat successful, there indeed might be some suffering on the side of the colonial-settlers. This does not, however, turn the colonial-settlers into victims. Such a framing privileges the colonializer and disadvantages the colonized seeking to maintain the status quo. When decolonization achieves some success, colonial settlers may experience suffering. But that suffering does not result from decolonization itself, but from the settlers’ refusal to participate in the process, their insistence on remaining on land that is not theirs, and their determination to preserve the inferior status of the colonized people whose land they continue to occupy.
“Moreover, think about Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan during World War II; did they not suffer in the midst of their wars against their neighbors and against the Jewish people? Of course they did. But that suffering was brought on themselves through their own evil actions. Should sympathy for their suffering somehow erase the evil they were committing, the very evil that was the cause of their own suffering? Should such sympathy lead someone to side with Nazi Germany rather than Jews or the Allies? Of course not!
“If Arabs had either accepted a two-state solution and thus gotten an Arab colonial-settler state, there might have been less suffering on their part. If they had willingly participated in the process of decolonization, in the process of putting to right wrongs that they had done, and had willingly participated in that process through making amends and repartitions by going back to their own indigenous lands, in ending their colonial-settler occupation, or at the very least in recognizing their guest status in the land, there would have been, in all likelihood, a lot less suffering on their part. However, this isn’t a hypothetical since the two million Arab citizens of Israel today have indeed had a lot less suffering because their ancestors participated in Israel’s decolonial process rather than fighting it. Suffering is what happens when decolonization is resisted by the colonizers.
“Some might respond that if suffering is the result of decolonization, then we should simply refrain from doing it. Yet, suffering is an unavoidable part of life. To maintain the status quo of suffering, as it exists now in an unjust system, in order to avoid any future suffering created as a result of justice being implemented, is simply to privilege and prefer suffering that is a result of injustice, oppression, and colonization over and against suffering that is a result of justice, standing up to oppression, and decolonization. Since suffering is inevitable, we must either choose the suffering that comes from acting justly in truth, or we must choose the suffering that comes from continuing to choose injustice and falsehood. Which suffering do we prefer? That is what we must decide.
“Now there you have it: these three pillars we have briefly touched on come together to create colonial-settler inversion, forming the essence of the “Palestinian” narrative of victimhood. If we who are committed to reality are going to successfully go on the offense and unveil the evil they wish to hide, then we need to recognize that one of their biggest tools used in their propaganda and in their controlling of the narrative is this colonial-settler inversion. Until we do so, we will fail to deconstruct their propagandic narrative of lies.
https://israel365news.com/420071/colonial-settler-inversion-the-foundation-of-the-palestinian-narrative/
The brilliant Melanie Phillips has written extensively on this subject, here’s just her latest on the situation as it stands. Give her a follow, you won’t regret it. But if you’re moved to pay for a subscription, please remember us who brought it to you and who are in dire need of more financial supporters to keep this show on the road. Thanks a bunch 💐.
“The "Settler Violence" Libel
“Israelis living in the "West Bank" are being demonised as a strategy to dismember the Jewish state
“MELANIE PHILLIPS
“JUL 29, 2026
“This is how murderous Arab attacks against Jewish residents in the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, aka the “West Bank”, are being reframed as Jewish “settler violence” against Arabs by enemies of the Jewish people.
“Last Friday morning, a group of Jewish hikers walked into the village of Tel in Area B, an area under joint Israeli-Palestinian Authority security control and where Israelis aren’t allowed to enter without prior co-ordination, not having been cleared by the IDF to do so.
“According to accounts by Jewish community organisations and in the Israeli media, verified by video footage, they came under attack from Arabs throwing stones and swinging clubs, striking one hiker in the face. The hikers fired warning shots in the air and retreated towards Israeli-controlled Area C.
“One hour later, dozens of Arabs converged upon them from three directions. IDF soldiers arrived, the Arabs started shooting but, according to the hikers, the Israeli soldiers refused to open fire. Video footage shows them hesitating in an attempt to de-escalate. Only when an Arab wrestled a rifle from a civilian guard and shot dead (warning: distressing footage) an IDF soldier and a civilian guard did the IDF troops open fire, killing four Arabs.
“Unnamed defence officials have briefed that the hikers were irresponsibly provocative. This, they say, is a pattern of behaviour by such hikers around Judea and Samaria, in which they put Israeli troops in needless danger by expecting the IDF to rescue them if they get attacked.
“Maybe so. These are apparently members of a hiking group that regularly hikes around Judea and Samaria. It’s hard not to believe they don’t have a political motive in doing so by showing that they’re entitled to be in the land. Does one have to declare, though, that this doesn’t deserve a death sentence?
“The fact remains that they were attacked by Arabs and that two Israelis were murdered. Anyone who dismisses this as Zionist propaganda should look at the transparently implausible claims made about this incident by Dr Jihad Ramadan, a Tel resident and a former official of Fatah, who said:
“The settlers raided the village from several directions…They carried out a real massacre in front of cameras and the media…They use drones and unmanned aircraft from above to carry out attacks.
“This was one of a number of escalating attacks on Jews in these areas over a few days last week, followed by a series of revenge attacks by Jews.
“Last Saturday, Arab assailants attacked an off-duty Israeli soldier near Susya near Hebron in the Judean hills and seized his weapon. They struck the soldier in the head with a stone and he was taken to hospital in moderate condition. Four Arab terrorists were subsequently arrested.
“Last Thursday, one of the founders of a farm enterprise near Itamar, who went to help extinguish a fire that had been set in an arson attack, was attacked and seriously injured. On the same day, an Israeli was stabbed in the hand near the settlement of Ganin in the Menashe region. It was later discovered that the attacker was a Palestinian police officer.
“On Saturday night, seven Palestinian Arab suspects were arrested on suspicion of involvement in a violent incident near a farm in the Beitar Illit area. According to police, during a scuffle an Israeli citizen was attacked with a lance and was slightly injured.
“Eight days ago, around 30 buildings including family homes and businesses near Havat Gilad were destroyed in an enormous blaze that rapidly spread through dry scrubland. Residents said a burning object had been thrown from a passing car, following another suspected arson incident in the area the previous night, and that fireworks were launched from nearby Arab villages while fire-fighters battled the blaze.
“The police said the fires had started after a cigarette butt was thrown carelessly from a moving car, but they didn’t suspect a terrorist motive. This always sounded implausible; privately, however, the police reportedly say they do indeed suspect that this was a deliberate arson attack.
“The Israelis fear that the sharp uptick in Arab violence in these areas — which they battle daily, month in, month out — signals the intention to launch a fresh “intifada”, a large scale, sustained and co-ordinated terrorist campaign. On IDF radio, military correspondent Doron Kadosh reported a growing willingness by Arabs to confront Jews entering Arab villages. Over the weekend, the IDF and counter-terrorist police arrested dozens of Arabs.
“At the same time, there’s been a rising number of attacks on Arabs by Israelis. Over this period of a few days, there were at least five such incidents including arson attacks on mosques, the burning of Arab vehicles, and an attempted arson attack on an occupied home in the village of Beit Furik.
“In view of the fact that Jewish residents of these areas are under sustained and murderous onslaught, these can be seen primarily as revenge attacks. That doesn’t make them right or excusable. It may be the case, as is frequently alleged, that the influence of the ultra-nationalist policing minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has stayed police hands in dealing with these Israeli attackers, who should be arrested and prosecuted. What is inexcusable, however, is to describe this whole situation as “settler violence”.
“No-one denies there’s a problem of aggressive and unprovoked Israeli violence against Arabs in these areas. But it’s committed by a very small minority of mainly delinquent youths. The police estimate their number as being in the low hundreds. Even if there were as many as 1000 such individuals, that would still represent 0.2 per cent of the total Jewish population of around 500,000 in Judea and Samaria.
“And such attacks by Jews on Arabs in these territories are hugely overwhelmed by the number of Arab attacks on Jews. Last year, more than 1300 major terrorist attacks there by Arabs were thwarted. Fifty four terrorist attacks were successful, with 25 Israelis murdered and 197 injured. And there were thousands of smaller incidents including potentially deadly stone throwing, arson and laser attacks.
“After Central District Court Judge Ron Sulkin last week released from custody an Israeli farmer who had gone in pursuit of thieves who had stolen his herd, the judge said:
“We must also keep in our eyes the difficult, even unbearable reality experienced by the settlers in Judea and Samaria, with particular emphasis on farm residents: daily attacks on the roads, attempted infiltrations into communities and farms, harassment, agricultural theft, arson and fire. The settlers are dealing with a hostile population that frequently seeks their harm, to the point of taking their lives.
“A minor error in navigation [by a settler] could end in a lynch mob and severe injuries, up to loss of life. A simple drive home could end in a head injury from a large stone. Standing at a hitchhiking post could end in murder via gunfire from a passing car. Living in such a region under constant threat often requires settlers to be suspicious and strict in the decisiveness of their actions, in a manner that to someone living elsewhere might be perceived as blunt or even exaggerated. Their actions and responses must be examined, among other things, in light of this reality and not under laboratory conditions, under the breeze of an air conditioner and neon lighting. Of course, if anyone breaks the law, he must be brought to justice in any case.
“Yet this intolerable reality is being erased by the global humanitarian network, centred in the UN, NGOs and western media. Aided and abetted by left-wing, post-Zionist Israeli activist groups, they are turning Jewish victimisation into Jewish aggression — thus ramping up incitement to yet more Arab attacks. Honest Reporting notes:
“Since January 2026, outlets ran 984 stories on “settler violence” in the West Bank against only 9 articles on Palestinian attacks on Jewish civilians in the same territory, resulting in a 109:1 disparity. From international coverage alone, a glaringly lopsided picture is painted. One in which Jewish civilians living, or even merely visiting, anywhere in the West Bank are vigilantes, acting with impunity and attacking Palestinians.
“There is already a misleading narrative about “settler violence,” one built on casualty statistics that blur terrorists with civilians. But a deeper issue has now become apparent, whereby “settler violence” itself has become a permanent framework through which stories about and from the West Bank are told, independent of actual trends and attempts to curb the violence.
“Last weekend, the Sunday Times ran a long and disgraceful article by Christina Lamb quoting Arabs in these disputed territories who accused Israeli soldiers of committing atrocities against them and alleged constant terrorist attacks by Israeli “settlers”. Lamb, who suggested that the IDF were wantonly killing Arab infants and other entirely peaceful Arab civilians for no reason, quoted the radical activist groups B’Tselem and Peace Now who claimed the Israelis were intent upon ethnic cleansing. She made no mention whatsoever of any attacks by Arabs upon Jewish residents.
“The following morning, BBC Radio’s Today programme ran a very similar item (2 hours 38 mins in) interviewing Arabs in the territories claiming vicious attacks on them by rampaging bands of Israeli “settlers”. This was backed up by Melina Ansari of the “Occupied Palestinian Territory department” of Physicians for Human Rights Israel — which claims Israel is committing “genocide” in Gaza — who accused the Israelis of standing by as “thousands of communities” across the “West Bank” were fleeing this violence.
“When told that the Israeli military was talking about Arab incitement and an increase in “copycat” (sic) Arab attacks on Jews, Ansari acknowledged there was “incitement and support”; but then doubled down on her claim that the “settlers” were “drafted and armed by the State of Israel,” as if they were an aggressive militia rather than Jews armed to defend themselves against murderous attack.
“A report by the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, “The ‘Settler Violence’ Influence Warfare Campaign,” states:
“A closer look at the numbers, and at how the discourse has evolved, points to a systematic, well-funded, and co-ordinated campaign. This campaign originates with far-left organisations such as Yesh Din, B’Tselem and Breaking the Silence, funded by the European Union, individual European governments, and international foundations. They operate alongside the Palestinian Authority and its partners, as well as various UN bodies, which use the issue to advance an anti-Israel political agenda.
“The term “settler violence” did not emerge in a vacuum, nor is it the spontaneous result of local events. It reflects a constructed narrative that began to take shape more than two decades ago, alongside the escalation of Palestinian terrorism and the struggle over control in Judea and Samaria.
“As early as 2004–2006, in the years following Operation Defensive Shield when the IDF was confronting a peak wave of suicide bombings, foreign and Israeli anarchist activists began appearing at friction points. They did not come solely to “defend human rights,” but also to generate filmed provocations: orchestrated confrontations with IDF soldiers, incursions into restricted areas, and demonstrations recorded on video and rapidly disseminated to the international media.
“These activists, many of whom were affiliated with European and American anarchist groups, worked in coordination with Palestinian “popular committees”. Together, they produced dramatic imagery of a “violent occupation”— soldiers facing protesters, police confronting shepherds, “settlers” harassing farmers.
“The footage was one-sided and at times staged. Its purpose was clear: to recast the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria as a symbol of “systematic violence” and minority oppression, rather than as the realisation of historical rights or as a necessity to ensure security. During years when Palestinian terrorism claimed hundreds of Israeli lives, the campaign’s architects constructed an inverted narrative in which Jews were cast as aggressors and Palestinians as perpetual victims.
“The campaign gained significant momentum in the 2010s. Organizations such as Yesh Din, B’Tselem, and Breaking the Silence began producing annual reports in which virtually every incident — whether a dispute between shepherds, property damage, or even a hike by Israelis — was classified as “settler violence”. These reports, funded largely by the European Union, European governments (including Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany), and international foundations, were systematically distributed to international institutions, foreign journalists, and diplomats. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) became a central partner in disseminating the data, establishing a dedicated database under the heading “settler-related violence”.
“This situation has worsened ever since. The Israeli organisation Regavim, which promotes and defends Israeli residency in the disputed territories, last year published a remarkable report showing how official statistics produced by the UN to record instances of “settler violence” are utterly bogus. Out of its total of 8,332 cases between 2016 and 2023, almost 7500 had nothing to do with violence by Israelis at all.
“The UN list included as “settler violence” cases of Palestinian Arabs who were injured or killed during terrorist acts that they themselves had initiated against Jews; peaceful visits by Jews to Temple Mount in Jerusalem; Jewish tourists visiting archaeological sites; traffic accidents; and complaints about “trespassing” by Jewish tourists or hikers that involved no violence or damage to property. It also included dozens of clear cases of Arab terrorist attacks against Jews.
“At the JNS security conference this year, Regavim’s international division director, Naomi Kahn, said:
“Ninety-five percent or more of the incidents that are reported as settler violence by the United Nations itself either didn’t involve settlers, didn’t involve violence, or didn’t happen in Judea and Samaria.
“Every time a non-Muslim visits Temple Mount on a peaceful and legal visit, she said, the UN categorises it as “storming al Aqsa” and includes it in its database of settler violence. When the State of Israel paves a road in Judea and Samaria for use by all residents regardless of nationality, the action is recorded as trespass and expropriation.
“The Regavim report describes how foreign activists arrive in Israel in an organised manner using tourist visas, as pilgrims, or as employees of organisations with valid entry permits. Together with local West Bank Arab activists and left-wing organisations, they intentionally inflame the situation through carefully orchestrated provocations or violent incidents. These provocations are all accompanied by carefully staged and meticulously edited documentation intended to produce false and exaggerated reports.
“The report states:
“In the South Hebron Hills, the dominant actors are typically Arab field operatives who direct Israeli and foreign activists to areas of friction. When they fail to incite a sufficiently violent and well-documented incident, they fabricate events or distort minor incidents. At times ,they even damage the property of local Arabs themselves and blame the settlers or the army.
“According to B’Tselem’s own data, every Palestinian they recorded as having been killed by civilians in Judea and Samaria in 2022 was in fact killed as a result of either an attack or attempted attack carried out by that individual or by another Palestinian.
“The UN “settler violence” statistics conflate Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria with Israelis living in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Israel. Apparently, they’re all “settlers”. Anti-Zionist Israeli NGOs like B’Tselem or Physicians for Human Rights, which feed the UN and western journalists with anti-Israel propaganda, explicitly equate “settler violence” against Arabs with Israeli “state violence” against Arabs.
“Regavim has now been sanctioned by the EU and UK on the grounds of punishing “settler violence”. It’s not hard to spot the real reason.
“The EU has been funding the building of illegal Arab settlements in Area C of the disputed territories, against the terms of the Oslo agreement under which only Israel can issue construction permits for this area. Tel Aviv University’s Begin-Sadat Centre has reported that the EU and individual European countries are funding continuous waves of illegal Palestinian settlement, which are being established without permits and often without even bothering to apply for them.
“The EU and UK, among others, are using the “settler violence” libel to demonise all 750,000 Jewish residents living in the disputed areas of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, including the Old City which houses the site of the ancient Jewish Temple. This is being done to erase the Jews’ legal and historic claim to these territories, push them out and replace them by Arab colonisers to create “facts on the ground” that make a Palestine state appear inescapable.
“Moreover, the falsehood that the disputed territories are “illegally occupied” would also apply by its own mendacious and ahistorical logic to the entire State of Israel. The EU and the British government have sanctioned Regavim to prevent their populations from understanding the monstrous project now under way to delegitimise and dismember Israel itself.
“The “settler violence” libel is now a strategic threat to the world’s only Jewish state.“
For links embedded in the article above please click on the link below.
https://melaniephillips.substack.com/p/the-settler-violence-libel
Love and Shalom,
Rebbetzin Glenys xo